DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Anti Islam rhetoric

The reason I jump in is because what you have said is simply not true.

The Jewish God and the Christian God are the same being. He is the God of the Bible, whether for Jew or Christian.

However, Allah is not God. Allah is a capricious god who does not even follow his own rules. he tells people how he expects them to live, but then that he will decide on no particular grounds who to give paradise to. God cannot abide sin or evil, yet Allah created evil. God plans, and Allah schemes. God has angels. Allah has angels and "jinn" (devils) doing his direct bidding. Christians believe that Jesus died on the cross, as a perfect sacrifice to wash away the sins of all who repent and follow Him, whereas the Koran says that Jesus was just a man, and dod not die on the cross at all, but rather that Allah caused some other man to look like Jesus, and to die in his place. (a concept absolutely abhorrent to Christians) There are tons of other differences, and if you were really interested, a simple internet search could reveal even more differences than these I came up with off the top of my head.

To say that God and Allah are the same is like saying that a BMW and a Yugo are the same car. You can say it, but it simply is not true.

I don't think anyone will mind if you leave your scabs alone and move on.

Meanwhile others will heal at their own rate I imagine.

sorry, same dude.

YTown, you all believe in the same God. The same one that Abraham prayed to. There's really no denying it.

I'm just so tired of the whole slavery whine and cry. Like OMG my great grandfather was treated poorly so thats my excuse to act like a numbskull and cry about the evil other races.

I have never owned a slave. My family has never owned a slave. We will never own slaves. If you think I have something to apologize for then don't hold your breath.

If you want to talk about the fact the first legal slave owner in America was a black man we can talk about that if you like. If you want to talk about the fact that the people that turned many Africans into slaves were black Africans because they had been doing so for thousands of years we can talk about that.

Of course, its not really much different today. In poor black neighborhoods a black child is 80% more likely to suffer a violent act from another African American that anyone else. That doesn't change when they get older but actually becomes more likely. I should apologize for that? Seriously?

It's still mostly black people hurting black people. Why? Because almost everyone else is seeing how they treat each other and don't want to be anywhere near you. It has nothing to do with the color of skin but instead this culture that glorifies violence and poor treatment of each other. It's a cultural thing not a skin color thing.

How can I say that? Because I have known many black people with good parents and many who actually were born in Africa(mostly Ghana) and they are good decent people I have great respect for. You don't hear them whining how the neighboring country went to war with them and enslaved thousands of their countrymen and sold them all over the world not just America.

I do feel sympathy that many African were made to suffer due to many African countries selling them off. It was a terrible thing that happened for thousands of years that has only ended in the past 200 years. Although some areas of Africa still practice slavery or worse many of the countries have thankfully evolved beyond it.

There are also certainly grievances to be had for how slaves were treated in general. Certainly the white Irish slaves were treated horribly too. Of course, not many want to hear about how white people were made into slaves too. Well they called them indentured servants but it was the same darn thing. Irish women would be kidnapped branded and then forced to be a whore to the point where if a woman had red hair the parents would dye it black so that their daughters would not get kidnapped. That still happens today by the way. It's just that they come from asia or russia now.

So yeah people back then and today still treat each other like $hit. I am not one of them. So NO, I am not sorry for something I didn't do. If you want to make your life better then make your kids learn something at school and freaking behave while there. There are no promises in our constitution of a happy life. Rather just a fair chance to pursue happiness. What you do to pursue that happiness is on you.

No, that simply is not true.

The Jews and Christians believe in the same God. The Muslims claim the Jewish God as their own, but then they assign all kinds of behaviors to Him that are contrary to what the Bible says. It is like taking a lamb, and making it a predator instead of an herbivore, making it grow white red hair instead of growing a wool coat, made it speak English, fly and breath underwater ...... oh, and making it also be bright blue and orange in color .... and insisting that it is still a lamb. You can insist that this is true, but is this creation a lamb?

That is what was done with the creation of Allah. Muhammad started out with the Jewish/Christian God, but then completely changed His character and nature. "Al Llah" means, in Arabic. "The God" ...... and that is how Muslims see their god, but it is absolutely NOT the same God that Christians and Jews worship.

I mean, I can claim to be an NFL player, but lacking all of the most important Physical characteristics of an NFL player, would anyone believe it? I could even have myself written into a book on NFL history, but would that make me an NFL player? Of course not. Neither is Allah the Christian/Jewish God.

It's our responsibility to acknowledge the past, and try to make the world just a bit better than it was the day before.

you're talking to somebody who's straight from the source.

Allah is nothing but an arabic word for God.

i told you for the third time already, christians in the middle east ,YOUR religion, still call God Allah when they're speaking Arabic.

I simply can not be any more clear than that.

you want to talk about changing character and all this nonsense, you simply look around at all these different denominations of christianity as proof of your own flawed logic.

oh yea, your analogies not only do not work, they're terrible, Most kickers in the NFL lack any physical traits of NFL players, but guess what? they're still NFL players.

the FACT is both religion comes from Abraham, which is worship the SAME God. ONE God.

there you go closing your ears going "lalalalalala" again.

*Sigh* You are not listening to what I said. I actually addressed what Al Llah means in Arabic.

Just because someone claims something does not make it true. I can claim that I am Robert Downey Jr, and that I am also Iron Man, but that will not make it true.

Muslims claim that they worship the same God as Jews and Christians, but they have changed the very character of their god, so that he is not identifiable in almost any way, except by claims that he is the same God.

The very nature of God/Jehovah and Allah are in direct contrast to one another. I cannot be both completely White and completely Black at the same time. The character of God is such that He hates sin, and cannot abide it in any form ........ but Allah supposedly created sin. God does not lie, (a sin) but Allah can, and does lie.

If you do a very minor amount of research on the subject, you will uncover dozens of other differences between God and Allah. However, you appear to have made up your mind, and will not do so, so it is worthless to continue this discussion, You have decided that you are right, even though the evidence, outside of Muslim claims, is contrary to your position.

The only factor that says that Allah is God, the same being as Jews and Christians worship, is Muslim claims that they are the same. That alone does not make it so.

Different denominations either follow the Bible, or they do not. I disagree with denominations that take what the Bible says and twist and pervert it. I have heard that there are even some so called churches that teach Jesus, but not His death and resurrection. A church cannot be a Christian church if the reject that aspect of Christ.

Again, a church can teach anything, but we have the record, the Bible, to always go back to and check whether a teaching is Biblical or not. There are enough different manuscripts dating back to the 1st century that allow us to check the accuracy of the Bible. In fact, some of the older books of the Bible go back a lot earlier.

Islam rewrote some of the Jewish books of the Torah, and stories of Jewish history, claiming, for example, that Abraham was a Muslim. There was never any claim that this was the case prior to Islam's beginnings, (4th or 5th AD century forward) yet this is their claims.

Study the differences and they are so stark that they are unmistakable. Ignore them, and you can pretend that God and Allah are the same, but pretending does not make it so.

What hard evidence, outside of faith, shows which branch of the Abrahamic religions got it right?

I'm curious where this outcry is over slavery? In this thread all I can find is anecdotal evidence that Swish was making some equivalence on. And in the real world? I don't hear folks going on about slavery this/slavery that. Maybe on some random facets of the internet but... there's alot of weird stuff on the internet



Who, Anthony Johnson? There were slaves more than a decade before he got John Casor as a slave. The first documented slave belonged to Hugh Gwyn, a white man. Besides, this is all anecdotal and unrelated. Pointing out the few white slaves is trying to minimize race in discussion of American slavery. It would be like saying the Nazis first killed Germans when they rose to power so really the Holocaust had nothing to do with the Jews being Jewish.



What is your point here? Whites commit crime against whites in the same 80% ratio:

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/cri...fender_2013.xls

Crimes tend to be committed in the area the criminal lives. And the 2010 census shows us that we are still very racially segregated in America. These maps do a good job showing just how prevalent it is:

http://www.wired.com/2013/08/how-segregated-is-your-city-this-eye-opening-map-shows-you/



The reason we don't bring up the Irish folks much is it's a nonfactor today. There is no basis that Irish people have sociological disadvantages today for being Irish. Being black or asian? A stronger case can be made.

That wasn't the debate. The debate was whether or not the Islamic "Allah" is the same God as the God of Abraham, David, and Jesus.

As to your question, there is a ton of archeological evidence that people in the Bible existed, many who "scholars" said did not exist ..... in places "experts" said never existed ...... and that many "experts" said were merely mythological, and never actually existed.

The Jewish and Christian religions are the same until the time of Jesus, so they share the same foundation. (including the archeological evidence) Then they split. Christians believe that Jesus was the Messiah, and with the number of Old Testament prophesies fulfilled in Jesus, it is hard to argue that He was not. Christianity (and Judaism, at least prior to the time of Christ) adds to its evidential foundation with each passing year, and with the bias against Christianity that many hold, especially in the Middle east, that is incredible. Today, using satellite technology, we can see many structures that have been buried under centuries of sand. However, getting permission to dig these sites is all but impossible in many cases. The governments of the region do not want any more evidence supporting the Jewish and Christian religions. It would be extremely interesting to see what could be dug up if archeologists could have unfettered access to the Middle East, with modern technology leading the way to new discoveries.

So, what evidence is there regarding Islamic claims? What archeological evidence, outside of the Koran, is there that any of Islam's rewriting of Jewish history is accurate? Where are their claims verified in any way whatsoever? If Islam was accurate, and there was physical evidence, don't you think that it would be trumpeted by the powers that be in the Middle East? Why aren't they digging up every site they can find to prove the truthfulness of their religion to the world?

I believe that I know the answer .... but you'll have to decide for yourself.

Cmon man the race card is played constantly all over the media and on this forum. Gimme a break.

I stated the first LEGAL slave owner. Until that case slavery was not legally recognized in America. You're still missing the point that it was not only white people who owned slaves but black people too.

Yes, white people kill white people but it doesn't change my point that it's mostly black people that are hurting black people and not the white man that is so vilified. That was an interesting link but I found it very disturbing that they only identified 55% of the murderers. 45% of murders are unsolved?!!!

The reason they dont bring up the fact of Irish slavery is that slave owners were far more cruel to irish slaves because they were cheaper due to the King of England forcing massive amounts of irish into slavery.

There were more white Irish slaves in America than African slaves. Thats right MORE. MUCH MORE. By the time of the civil war came though it was not the case. Why? Because most of them had been mistreated so bad they were dead. It was an active genocide.

The reason you don't hear much about it is because their descendants are mostly murdered and dead. Them some tough social situations to be sure. But hey they had white skin so it doesn't matter how they were treated right? Go to Ireland and tell them they don't have social disadvantages and see what they tell you...

The differences of today is that the Irish who lived through stopped bi***ing about it and fought to improve their life while not making excuses to sit on their bum sucking their thumb. The problem that many black people face is the self defeatist attitude that the past justifies giving up on life and striving for a better life.

No one holds you back in this world except for yourself.

When people stop whining and crying and just get their arse back to work life improves. When one generation lives to improve life for the next generation it improves for everyone.

A good book to read on this subject if anyone cares is:

White Cargo: The Forgotten History of Britain's White Slaves in America

It's almost as bad those who whine and cry that their being oppressed because they're Christian.

what

"Just because someone claims something does not make it true. I can claim that I am Robert Downey Jr, and that I am also Iron Man, but that will not make it true."

yet here you are making the claim that christianity is the one true religion, and that everyone else religion is false.

this is typically the part where i say you're full of it, but you already knew that a couple months ago.

then on top of that, you can't even apply your own logic to your own religion, BECAUSE there's different denominations of your religion.

hell, right here on this board, you and the other hardcores can't even agree on biblical talk because y'all are interpreting it differently, yet you got the nerve to say other people are wrong?

once again, i'm going off of facts, hell, off of YOUR religious leaders, and you're going off feelings. i can tell you get defensive every time you read "muslim".

this is funny stuff. trying to tell other people the character of God when christianity can't even agree on the same stuff.

damn, so i'm sitting on my thumbs now?

thanks bro.

you're using nothing BUT the bible as your "claims"


on top of that, how you try to sit here and make the claim that jewish and christianity are the same religion, when you're VERY definition of God and jesus doesn't match jewish religion?

here's what the jewish religion says about Jesus:

The belief that Jesus is God, the Son of God, or a person of the Trinity, is incompatible with Jewish theology. Jews believe Jesus did not fulfill messianic prophecies that establish the criteria for the coming of the messiah.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaism%27s_view_of_Jesus
_______

and i can list a crap ton of other sources that says the same thing.

that RIGHT THERE completely invalidates anything you posted.

you're confusing yourself while trying to convince us that your correct. stop it.

The race card is not the same as slavery, so I fail to see the equivalence. I don't see MSNBC or CNN writing articles about systemic slavery. We talk alot about race in this country but we have to. Poverty rates are insane for black people compared to white. Almost 30% of all blacks are impoverished compared to 10% of whites. On that statistic alone you cannot sit on the sideline and say that race has no bearing in this country.



Your legal slave owner story simply isn't true. You are relying on a civil court case to establish origin. Read up on John Punch. He was black, and committed a crime with 2 white men. The two white men got indentured sentences but the black man was sentenced to permanent loss of freedom. It establishes the first documented slave in America, and also sets precedent in regards to skin color.

As for me missing the point, I got your point loud and clear. It's merely anecdotal. You are also denoting equivalence between permanent loss of freedom to indentured servitude. You are, quite literally, equalizing a 10 year sentence with life without parole.



But people aren't vilifying white on black violent crime. People are vilifying the cops overreaching power. People are vilifying the segregation into "white/black/hispanic" communities, etc. Thats why the Black crime rate is so misleading. It makes it sound like blacks are just naturally more violent.

As for murder identifications I guess the cops consider blacks a touch above prostitutes then.



You are comparing indentured servitude and chattel slavery. Indentured servitude was 4-8 years usually. chattel slavery meant you and your children were slaves, forever. Irish people weren't permanent slaves. African slaves only became free when they died.

Indentured servants were treated very poorly, but your statement of them being treated 'far more cruel' than slaves requires some evidence. Were they treated badly? Absolutely. But so were slaves.

The reason you didn't hear about Irish servants during the civil war is all the debts were paid long before that time. If all of the indentured servants "died off" we'd have had no america. 2/3rds of all colonials were indentured servants getting off the boat.



This is all speculative and to be honest, worrisome. Irish descendants make above the median income as an ethnic group, so there is no evidence to suggest class/race linked discrimination.



So you're saying if the poor just worked harder they wouldn't be poor? Come on. Many firefighters live near the poverty line and I challenge anyone to claim they don't work hard risking their lives.



I'm sure it's an interesting read but it leaves out several key distinctions of the slave trade as I mentioned above.

It's hard to talk about discrimination with Razor. He once said he faced discrimination by going on welfare. Good job on cleaning up his historical inaccuracies.

You can't discuss discrimination when you get mad at anyone with an opinion different than your own.

Who said I'm mad?

Also, you can't discuss discrimination unless you are educated by a Mexican Gardener who you pay 13k a year.

Thank you for confirming my previous statement with a perfect example. Classic.

Just jokes, man.

Yea, yea. Try to calm yourself, no one is discussing discrimination here. Deep breaths, let the hate ease.

Pro Tip: Read Razor's posts. Talks of "No one is holding you back." implies that someone is claiming discrimination, or, better yet, playing the race card.

Also, still not mad, still no hate lol

I wouldn't doubt he faced some discrimination. We tend to treat people on welfare pretty terribly.

I even agree that in the general sense, indentured servitude is slavery. Peonage is slavery too. I'm not sure if Razorthorns is aware of the ramifications of his logical generalization. If he was, he would realize that he is claiming that slavery did not end in the United States until World War 2, when peonage laws were enforced in the south.

There are articles written about how peonage was very threatening to black free men during the time of reconstruction. Was it literally state sponsored slavery? No. But it is a bit sketchy that vagrancy convictions went up during cotton picking season. In 1903 a girl was sold into peonage by her own father at two years old in South Dakota.

More information on this can be found in many places. Here is one that I just pulled off Google:

http://www.newsweek.com/book-american-slavery-continued-until-1941-93231

Not sure why people think a football forum conversation is worth getting mad over.

It takes a lot for me to think anybody on here is angry.

Good advice, perhaps it will calm CHS.

There are some that aren't of course. If you have a job or are at least looking for one then it obviously didn't apply to you.

Still I have had several black employees who did nothing but look for some obscure way after another to find insult in anything said to them. I've had plenty of good ones too but there are enough of the ones who only want to play victim instead of finding ways to succeed that it can be very tiring to deal with it. Needless to say I never kept whiners around very long.

I have heard that many Congressmen have adopted policies that keep them from being alone with their female staffers. The idea is to avoid the appearance of “impropriety,” but those female staffers say the policies are hurting their professional advancement and their ability to do their jobs.

I guess they don't want to find themselves in a situation where it is her word against his, with his career on the line.

It's so obvious that anything that isn't blacks suffering is demeaned in your eyes. Irish indentured servants were never freed. maybe 1 out of 10,000. They used indentured service as a mean to commit genocide. It was so appalling that they started to urge the forced changed over to negroe slaves because they got treated much better by owners.

"Although the Africans and Irish were housed together and were the property of the planter owners, the Africans received much better treatment, food and housing. In the British West Indies the planters routinely tortured white slaves for any infraction. Owners would hang Irish slaves by their hands and set their hands or feet afire as a means of punishment. To end this barbarity, Colonel William Brayne wrote to English authorities in 1656 urging the importation of Negro slaves on the grounds that, “as the planters would have to pay much more for them, they would have an interest in preserving their lives, which was wanting in the case of (Irish)….” many of whom, he charged, were killed by overwork and cruel treatment. African Negroes cost generally about 20 to 50 pounds Sterling, compared to 900 pounds of cotton (about 5 pounds Sterling) for an Irish. They were also more durable in the hot climate, and caused fewer problems. The biggest bonus with the Africans though, was they were NOT Catholic, and any heathen pagan was better than an Irish Papist."

If your firefighters are poor then your city is weird or just a poor city. Most firefighters make $40,000 or more per year. That isn't poor in my books. It's underpaid for the great work they do but it's not poor.

I'm going to say it again. Black people are not being held back by racism. They are being held back by a culture of poverty. Until the black community changes as a whole to stop looking for excuses to fail and instead starts pushing themselves to improve themselves like its life and death thing won't change for them.

I find it funny you say a book that you refuse to read has wrong information. Closed mind anyone?

I disagree in that I think there is a racial component that is holding some black people from achieving as much as they could.. I also agree with the second part, that the way to change it is not through complaining, rioting, or legislation...

The first black President and first lady was supposed to change a lot of things... and recently the FLOTUS went to Tuskegee University to deliver the commencement address and basically told the bright eyed and optimistic college graduates that they are victims and they always will be victims.

Her speech included this...

“The road ahead is not going to be easy. It never is, especially for folks like you and me. We’ve both felt the sting of those daily slights throughout our entire lives. The folks who crossed the street in fear of their safety, the clerks who kept a close eye on us in all those department stores. The people at formal events who assumed we were the help. And those who have questioned our intelligence, our honesty, even our love of this country, and I know that these little indignities are obviously nothing compared to what folks across the country are dealing with every single day. Those nagging worries about whether you’re going to get stopped or pulled over for absolutely no reason. The fear that your job application will be overlooked because of the way your name sounds.”


Booker T. Washington, who founded the university at which she was speaking, said this in 1911...

"There is another class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs — partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs."

Booker T. Washington was far more advanced in his approach to racism in 1911 than Michelle Obama is in 2015... she is exactly what he was talking about.

It's not demeaning, it's building equivalence. Irish indentured servant slaves were physically punished, unable to marry, had to endure years of tough labor for their freedom, and many were kidnapped by the crown to help with their "Irish Problem." But Irish people were not your property forever. Their term of service was limited to a number of years. Historians have argued that indentured slaves had it better than those who came here on their own dime. After serving their sentence they got land, a years supply of crop, and new clothes.

I'll need to see a source that back ups your claim that less than 0.01% of slaves made it to their end of their service. That statistic sounds so wild that it should just pop up on Google but... I find nothing?



Where is this from? Who are you quoting? I found a forum post here:

http://www.raceandhistory.com/cgi-bin/forum/webbbs_config.pl?md=read;id=1638

And even in the replies people ask for sources as they are writing a dissertation. But the guy died so none are available.

The bottom line is that unless there is evidence to the contrary, statements about the irish having it worse than the africans are anecdotal. Also the price is not equivalent for value: African slaves were forever, Irish slaves were for 4-8 years.



He lives in a city with a median income of 66k. We don't make the rules we just live in them. I just think the generalization that the poor are poor because they don't work hard is just that: a generalization. There are lazy poor as there are working poor.



Institutional Racism is real and the stats back it up. Police profile blacks and latinos much higher than whites for traffic stops. When the NYPD stops a car, 80% are black and latino. Whites and Blacks use drugs at the same rate but Blacks are arrested at 2-11 times the rate according to Human Rights Watch.

Probably the most damaging statistic in the face that "racism isn't real in America" is that black offenders get 10% longer sentences than whites for the SAME CRIME. This is from the USSC.



I didn't make my statement in a bubble. I read two book reviews including one from the NY Times. Both reviews were positive. But they both mention that a key facet in the book is that the authors refer to slavery as including indentured servants, chattel slaves, peons, etc. And I agree! But you're using the general definition to support your position of equivalence between chattel slaves and indentured servants. The equivalence is simply not there. You claim irish slaves had it much worse yet all the pictures we see is of black slaves with whip scars all over their back. If this is whitewashing our past as you claim, why would we not whitewash ALL of our slave owning past? It's all an abomination.

Almost 55% of the people living in NYC are black or latino.. poorer neighborhoods are predominantly populated by blacks and latinos... poorer neighborhoods have more crime... poorer neighborhoods are always saying they need more of a police presence to deter this crime.... so if the cops are being asked to have a bigger presence in the areas of crime, which have a disproportionate number of black and latino people, doesn't it stand to reason that the number of people the police stop would be disproportionately black and latino?


I agree with you.

There absolutely is direct correlation to crime and income level. We are also still a highly segregated country, concentrating black/white/asian/hispanic into their own groups that live together. So that, coupled with the fact that 9% of whites are poor compared to 27% of blacks, you will have more African Americans being monitored than Caucasian.

Here's the bottom line: Ferguson and Baltimore aren't existing in a bubble. And until change is made, it will continue to go on and get worse and worse. I don't agree with rioting but don't see a way we can continue the status quo of African Americans being twice as likely to be unemployed than whites and expect race relations to improve. I don't see how the wealth gap between whites and blacks can stay as it is and expect African Americans to "stop whining." Did you know whites have tripled wealth in the last 25 years as compared to blacks? People think this stuff just goes away on its own but that's being naive. Revolutions are founded on the backs of the oppressed, from the overtaxed patriots in America to Bolsheviks rejecting totalitarianism in Russia. Do you think the colonies was all peaceful protests before the revolution? The Sons of Liberty intimidated tax collectors in direct threat to the Crown. We had the liberty and pine tree riots.

Middle class Americans better HOPE these actions stay race based because if the lower class in this country sheds racial bias and joins together, there is a risk of revolt. I doubt any revolution in this country will leave us as free as we are now. The upper class will just leave the country and take their overseas money with them, and the middle class will be expected to share their earnings with the poor to make it more balanced. You'd be visited by Commissar Cletus and Commissar Jamal so people can live in your house because no one needs a house as big as you have. You'd be expected to share your groceries too. Even if you are a proud socialist, if you are middle class this would happen too, because you only "talked" socialist, but you benefited from the free markets just like all the other rich people (rich now being above poverty because all the 1%ers left)

But "we" don't do that.. people typically choose to do that themselves..

Gage, I assume you've heard of this story, curious to get your reaction.....

DUKE PROFESSOR MAKES CONTROVERSIAL COMMENTS ABOUT RACE IN NEW YORK TIMES
WTVD By Elaina Athans
Monday, May 18, 2015 09:32AM

DURHAM (WTVD) -- Duke University and its students are taking strong stance on a professor's controversial comments regarding race in a national publication.

Students feel Professor Jerry Hough was disrespectful and insensitive when he left a comment on a New York Times editorial when he made references to "the blacks" and "the Asians." The Times piece was about racism and the Baltimore Riots.

"He represents the whole school in that one comment and that's not a good image for the school," said Duke student Virginue Marchand. "It's really inappropriate."

"You kind of want to be cautious, to make sure you don't offend anyone," said Duke student Xavi Ramos.

Hough, who is listed as a political science professor on Duke's website, also made comparisons to minority groups in America.

In one paragraph he wrote, "Every Asian student has a very simple old American first name that symbolizes their desire for integration. Virtually every black has a strange new name that symbolizes their lack of desire for integration."

The University is responding and issued a statement.

"The comments were noxious, offensive, and have no place in civil discourse," said Duke Vice President for Public Affairs and Government Affairs Michael Schoenfeld. "Duke University has a deeply-held commitment to inclusiveness grounded in respect for all, and we encourage our community to speak out when they feel that those ideals are challenged or undermined, as they were in this case."

In April, the university vowed they wouldn't allow racial intolerance. A noose was found hanging in a tree. An unnamed undergraduate student was sanctioned.

"Especially with everything that happened recently, you have to make sure you're very careful with everything," said Ramos.

"Given the big deal that it made, it's probably not the best idea to write that not even a month later," said Marchand.

ABC11 tried to speak with Hough in person about the comments, but he would only correspond through email, in which he said the following:

"Martin Luther King was my hero and I was a big proponent of all the measures taken at the time, including Affirmative Action. But the degree of integration is not what I expected, and it is time to ask why and to change our approach. I am, of course, strongly against the toleration of racial discrimination. I do not know what racial intolerance means in modern code words and hesitate to comment on that specific comment.

"The issue is whether my comments were largely accurate. In writing me, no one has said I was wrong, just racist. The question is whether I was right or what the nuanced story is since anything in a paragraph is too simple.

"I am strongly against the obsession with "sensitivity." The more we have emphasized sensitivity in recent years, the worse race relations have become. I think that is not an accident. I know that the 60 years since the Montgomery bus boycott is a long time, and things must be changed. The Japanese and other Asians did not obsess with the concentration camps and the fact they were linked with blacks as "colored." They pushed ahead and achieved. Coach K did not obsess with all the Polish jokes about Polish stupidity. He pushed ahead and achieved. And by his achievement and visibility, he has played a huge role in destroying stereotypes about Poles. Many blacks have done that too, but no one says they have done as well on the average as the Asians. In my opinion, the time has come to stop talking incessantly about race relations in general terms as the President and activists have advocated, but talk about how the Asians and Poles got ahead--and to copy their approach. I don't see why that is insensitive or racist."

Hough also told ABC11 that he is on leave now.

The university would not comment on the professor's future at the school. A spokesperson said they will not comment on personnel matters.

Hough's Full Comments in the New York Times

This editorial is what is wrong. The Democrats are an alliance of Westchester and Harlem, of Montgomery County and intercity Baltimore. Westchester and Montgomery get a Citigroup asset stimulus policy that triples the market. The blacks get a decline in wages after inflation.

But the blacks get symbolic recognition in an utterly incompetent mayor who handled this so badly from beginning to end that her resignation would be demanded if she were white. The blacks get awful editorials like this that tell them to feel sorry for themselves.

In 1965 the Asians were discriminated against as least as badly as blacks. That was reflected in the word "colored." The racism against what even Eleanor Roosevelt called the yellow races was at least as bad.

So where are the editorials that say racism doomed the Asian-Americans. They didn't feel sorry for themselves, but worked doubly hard.

I am a professor at Duke University. Every Asian student has a very simple old American first name that symbolizes their desire for integration. Virtually every black has a strange new name that symbolizes their lack of desire for integration. The amount of Asian-white dating is enormous and so surely will be the intermarriage. Black-white dating is almost non-existent because of the ostracism by blacks of anyone who dates a white.

It was appropriate that a Chinese design won the competition for the Martin Luther King state. King helped them overcome. The blacks followed Malcolm X.

ABC

I disagree with all of this post.

From the statement on segregation (many prefer to live with their own kind) being forced or guided to the rich leaving the country because of a revolution of the poor.(they would never get along more than a few days).

The rich would not leave their assets, they would fund one group to fight the other or both groups to fight each other.

Typically yes. But if you're poor you live in whatever neighborhood is available to you. If you have some money you have much more flexibility.

Take gentrification for example. In the city of Austin TX race is basically split along I-35. Either you were reasonably ok financially and lived west of I35 or poor and lived east. Not surprisingly the west side was mostly white and the east side mostly black and hispanic. In the last 10 years or so Austin has exploded in population and migrants from around the country need places to live. So middle class families start moving into the poorer neighborhoods and start to gentrify it up. Poorer families currently there can stay; but it quickly becomes expensive: local property taxes go up, cost effective stores get replaced with trendy expensive stores, etc. In more extreme cases such as NYC eminent domain is used to reshape the area.

Austin actually planned out where to put their minorities in the 1928 master plan. While it was made illegal later the city is still highly segregated along the interstate.

http://www.undoingracismaustin.org/racism-in-austin/1929-master-plan-before-and-after/



I haven't read it prior to you bringing it up, but I have now. I'm concerned for our education system. We create safe spaces for kids so they don't have to hear dissenting opinions. You can't discuss things that may be uncomfortable like racism, sexism, abortion, etc. unless it's within a very specific point of view. I thought college was supposed to challenge ones world view not try to narrow it even further. I may not agree with the guy on his opinions on race but the Duke VP makes him sound like a damn KKK regular...

I don't think our race relations are great, but he is implying that our race relations in America were at some point good. Race relations were terrible at the time he's saying it was "good." I suppose the only time race relations was good in this country was before the first european colonists arrived in Virginia. since then we've had indentured servitude, slavery, peonage, black codes, hiring discrimination, and that's just the stuff that was LEGAL BY LAW, carrying us up to somewhere in the 1960s. Just because we have more racially tolerant laws doesn't mean we have racially tolerant people.

Gage, it came from a report during colonial times. It was republished in the book I recommended you read. You will not find easy access to those records either because they don't want those things known. Ask most Irish and they are happy to enlighten you. I am of mostly Irish and Swedish descent myself.

They most definately have tons of family trees to prove that indentured irish were forced to get pregnant or make pregnant african slaves. It is a fact most irish slaves were murdered rather than let them go free with the FULL blessing of Cromwell. Most of the children never made it to the age of freedom and it was done deliberately as an act of genocide.

It is also interesting to note the US was one of the countries with the fewest slaves of that time period. There were way more slaves in france and great Britain. Check it out.

http://slavevoyages.org/tast/assessment/estimates.faces?yearFrom=1501&yearTo=1866

---------------------------

I come from the projects so I know what it is to be looked at like I am trash. I know that nothing changes till you decide to do something about it instead crying about it as an excuse not to improve yourself.