What if Bush’s election caused black men to arm themselves for taking back the U.S.

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Apr 25, 2002
15,044
157
0
#1
Tolerance of white militias exemplifies racial double standard

By Courtland Milloy
Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Imagine that the inauguration of President George W. Bush had sparked an explosive rise in African American militia groups. Suppose thousands of heavily armed black men began gathering at training camps in wooded areas throughout the country, devising military tactics for "taking back their country" after what they believed was an electoral coup.

Do you think Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney would have reacted to a black militaristic buildup as coolly as President Obama has to the phenomenal growth of white militias?

Since Obama took office last year, the number of white militias has shot up from about 170 to more than 500, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors extremist groups in the United States. Armed with enough firepower to take on a police department, some of these groups are honing their sniper skills using photographs of Obama for target practice.

They cling to the delusion that the nation's first black president is somehow a subversive working for Muslim extremists, and they aim to bring him down.

"If the people we saw running around armed to the teeth were black, I think their organizations would be destroyed in a matter of hours," Mark Potok, director of the Southern Poverty Law Center's Intelligence Project, told me. "If people saw on their TV screens photos of black militia members shooting at images of a white president, I don't think they would last."

No kidding.

This racial disparity comes to mind whenever I see militia leaders carping about government "tyranny" while enjoying the special privileges that come with being white. One such group, the Southeast Michigan Volunteer Militia, was featured in a documentary, "The Rise of the New Right," that aired last week on MSNBC and was narrated by Chris Matthews, the host of "Hardball."

"Five areas that we focus on are crime, disaster, invasion, tyranny and terrorism," said Michael Lackomar, a spokesman for the militia group. "All five of those cover threats that would interrupt our ways of life."

He's worried about terrorism? It's terrifying just to see his militia lurking behind trees, dressed in camouflage and wielding who-knows-what military armament picked up at some gun and ammo show.

What's even more astounding is that Lackomar's group has links to the Hutaree militia, another Michigan-based group, whose members were arrested by the FBI in March and charged with plotting to kill a police officer and then slaughter scores more by setting off a bomb at the funeral.

The Hutaree's intent, according to federal law enforcement officials, was to trigger an uprising against the federal government. Lackomar's militia was among the groups that helped Hutaree members, unwittingly or not, hone their shooting skills in preparation for the assault.

And yet the southeastern Michigan militia continues to operate with impunity, as if it were some latter-day Army of the Potomac.

Let's say then-Vice President Cheney found out that a black militia group had ties to a terrorist organization seeking to levy war against the United States. Say hello to Guantanamo.

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled, in effect, that you can go to prison for trying to hold a peace talk with groups deemed to be foreign terrorist organizations. But if the group is a home-grown white terrorist organization, it's apparently okay not just to associate with them but also to offer them military training as they plot against the country.

Maybe Obama is just being savvy by not coming down hard on the militia. As Potok said, "There's a huge amount of anger, and what we are really lacking at this moment is a kind of spark." In an apparent attempt to defuse the tension, Obama does such things as supporting a U.S. Supreme Court decision crippling D.C.'s gun control law and then signs a bill that allows visitors to national parks to carry guns.

Still, gun advocates keep him in their sights. They show up outside presidential town hall meetings brandishing firearms. When a young black man, identified only as Chris, showed up at one such event with a rifle strapped to his back, white protesters cited him as proof that race had nothing to do with their contempt for Obama.

But they missed the point.

Had the black rifleman showed for, say, Ronald Reagan's "states' rights" speech in Philadelphia, Miss., back in 1980, they might still be dredging the Pearl River for his remains.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy.../06/22/AR2010062204792.html?wpisrc=nl_cuzhead
 
Feb 7, 2006
6,794
229
0
37
#3
You don't need a what if, cointelpro, The BPP, Martin, Medgar, Malcolm X already showed you what happens when negros get uppity with the gov.
 
Nov 24, 2003
6,307
3,639
113
#4
Too much propaganda and hyperbole for me.

Sure you can find specific examples of militias that are organized solely on the basis of racism, but that in no way means they are all that way in general.

1 - Spotlight fallacy - Just because they media tends to cover white militias, doesn't mean all militias are inherently white.

2 - Red Herring fallacy - The militias don't like the President because they believe he is intruding on their social freedoms. Diverting the discussion to one of racism and arguing that the militias don't like the president because he is black is a guise to discredit the militias real motivations and discounts that these militias would be shooting at targets of Brian Moore if he happened to be president.

3 - Straw Man Fallacy - Militias don't like intrusive government; The figurehead of that intrusive government it black, therefore the militias must be racist
 
Feb 7, 2006
6,794
229
0
37
#6
Too much propaganda and hyperbole for me.

Sure you can find specific examples of militias that are organized solely on the basis of racism, but that in no way means they are all that way in general.

1 - Spotlight fallacy - Just because they media tends to cover white militias, doesn't mean all militias are inherently white.

2 - Red Herring fallacy - The militias don't like the President because they believe he is intruding on their social freedoms. Diverting the discussion to one of racism and arguing that the militias don't like the president because he is black is a guise to discredit the militias real motivations and discounts that these militias would be shooting at targets of Brian Moore if he happened to be president.

3 - Straw Man Fallacy - Militias don't like intrusive government; The figurehead of that intrusive government it black, therefore the militias must be racist
One of the things they highlighted is how the number of groups multiplied after Obama entered the white house. Now every fallacy you say the article utilizes I say the militias utilize along with the tea baggers to seem more legit.
 
Nov 24, 2003
6,307
3,639
113
#7
One of the things they highlighted is how the number of groups multiplied after Obama entered the white house.
Right but is that because he is Black or because he advocates a more intrusive government presence?

Look I concede that there are SOME militias out there that oppose Obama simply because he is Black, but I think that fact is being distorted and used as propaganda in attempt to discredit ALL militias.

What ever happened to being able to dislike a black person for something other than being black?

Now every fallacy you say the article utilizes I say the militias utilize along with the tea baggers to seem more legit.
In what way?



PS - When do you think Firefox spell checker is gonna recognize Obama is not a misspelled word lol?
 
Sep 24, 2002
2,016
3
0
41
#9
ignorance is bliss so 98% of the population are happy as fuck huh.

instead of u kiddies worrying about white vs black
u need to be worrying bout Rich vs poor.

u really think the old white rich powerful man gives a shit if ur poor ass is black or white? NO. keep your narrow minded thoughts to yourself if you actually think YOU have it hard
oo and im sry this has to be said. there as just as many if not MORE racist black males than there are white males. hell most of the racist honkeys are old men. all i see is white man keeping me down, white man wants to start race war , white man vs shit all the damn time and the ones typing the title/topic to be a racist oriented thing aint the white man.they are a dying kind.

outta place as this post is it still belongs in here. people need to wake the fuck up
 
Sep 24, 2002
2,016
3
0
41
#11
*sigh......
nice try kiddo....
all your posts are derogatory, negative and ignorant constantly running your "mouth"
trolls like you get no more food. begone peasant

waits for emma to post/and prop u though lol
 
Aug 19, 2004
391
77
0
#12
One of the things they highlighted is how the number of groups multiplied after Obama entered the white house. Now every fallacy you say the article utilizes I say the militias utilize along with the tea baggers to seem more legit.
Wasn't part of that because Obama is a supporter of gun control and his "people cling to guns and religion" quote?

Also, didn't the same thing happen when Bill Clinton took office?
 
May 20, 2006
2,240
10
0
62
#14
Black people STAY strapped up......

we just don't go out in the woods and waste bullets shooting at targets.......


If any of these "so-called" militias attempt to hurt a hair on President Obamas head....


smh.... there will be hell to pay across this great country called The United States of America.......

The MLK riots won't be able to compare to the civil unrest that will explode if any harm comes to President Obama.
 
Feb 7, 2006
6,794
229
0
37
#16
Wasn't part of that because Obama is a supporter of gun control and his "people cling to guns and religion" quote?

Also, didn't the same thing happen when Bill Clinton took office?
We've seen many white presidents and so on say and act out in ways that irk the extreme right in N. America over the years, but if we analyze history we see that many of these militia racist white groups swell the most when there is some kind of black/immigrant movement on their freedoms and rights. KKK after the abolishment of slavery, racist white groups in the 60's during the civil rights movements, now again that Obama is president. How come they don't act out in nearly the same aggression they do when the culprit is white?

Rich poor means shit, racism has developed into it's own major problem in N. America and we haven't dealt with it since the 1st pilgrims got here. THere won't be any unity on class lines if we don't really sit down and mash it out. Hell we still have fuckers who hate catholics.

My friend recently went to a tea bagger protest and pretended like he was one of them. He was going all out with this shit, so this teabagger dude noticed him and told him he liked his spirit and wanted him to join his group. He gave my friend a card and told him to think about it, when my friend finally looked at the card it was a KKK card lololol. cool story, breh...thought I might share.
 
Aug 19, 2004
391
77
0
#17
We've seen many white presidents and so on say and act out in ways that irk the extreme right in N. America over the years, but if we analyze history we see that many of these militia racist white groups swell the most when there is some kind of black/immigrant movement on their freedoms and rights. KKK after the abolishment of slavery, racist white groups in the 60's during the civil rights movements, now again that Obama is president. How come they don't act out in nearly the same aggression they do when the culprit is white?
I can't speak on the other events, but when Bill Clinton took office the same thing happened, and he was white.

I could be wrong but it seemed like militias were considered a big threat during the Clinton Administration. You had Waco and then the Oklahoma city bombing.



My friend recently went to a tea bagger protest and pretended like he was one of them. He was going all out with this shit, so this teabagger dude noticed him and told him he liked his spirit and wanted him to join his group. He gave my friend a card and told him to think about it, when my friend finally looked at the card it was a KKK card lololol. cool story, breh...thought I might share.
And there were terrorist sympathizers mixed in with the anti-war/Bush protests. Should we just generalize all groups?

When we had the anti-war protests, people accused them of being anti-American and terrorist sympathizers.

Now we have the tea party protests and people accuse them of being anti-American and racists.

Besides, I could be wrong but aren't the Democrats in control of congress and the Whitehouse?
What's stopping the government from going after (white) militias now?

And do you all feel the same way about Black Panthers and other groups, the way you do about militias?
 

fillyacup

Rest In Free SoCo
Sep 27, 2004
31,995
11,252
113
24
#18
it really is rich vs poor. and what the rich is rather push white vs black then rich vs poor. they need dumb fucks to listen to sarah palin, limbaugh, and that other fucking idiot glen beck
 
Jun 10, 2002
763
102
0
45
#20
its not really a case of black vs white no more that shit is long gone, its more us vs them. the rich vs the poor, the have vs the have-nots. when some of these stupid motherfuckers wake up and realize that. the sooner things can change.