|
|
Post by Wanderer0101 on Nov 9, 2015 17:32:47 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2015 17:51:56 GMT
AGREED.....However let's give tit-for-tat.
We give you one college president served up nice and fancy on a platter and in exchange,
you submit the resignations (along with all college scholarships), of ALL 30+ members of
the football team who participated in this boycott. Sounds like a fairly good trade-off;
although, in my estimation, our side still got taken to cleaners with what amounts to extortion,
with no criminal prosecution for the offenders. Bet that would open some eyes for the future....
|
|
|
|
Post by Jolly on Nov 11, 2015 13:21:53 GMT
Can anybody give me a concrete reason why the President and Chancellor should have resigned?
|
|
|
|
Post by Txsteader on Nov 11, 2015 13:39:18 GMT
AGREED.....However let's give tit-for-tat. We give you one college president served up nice and fancy on a platter and in exchange, you submit the resignations (along with all college scholarships), of ALL 30+ members of the football team who participated in this boycott. Sounds like a fairly good trade-off; although, in my estimation, our side still got taken to cleaners with what amounts to extortion, with no criminal prosecution for the offenders. Bet that would open some eyes for the future.... That deserves a big 'Amen!'. |
|
|
|
Post by Ozarks Tom on Nov 11, 2015 13:42:45 GMT
This is just the beginning. Look for the same thing all over the country now that a precedent has been set. These groups have tasted blood, and they're thirsty.
|
|
|
|
Post by whereiwant2b on Nov 11, 2015 14:22:50 GMT
It could not have gone otherwise. Black activists claimed that the University was not doing enough to end racism. So what was the possible positions the University could take? They couldn't say there was no racism. Of course there's always racism. Could the University point out what they actually did to prevent such incidents? No because they only did normal policing. That only left them to say either they were sorry for not taking action or that there was nothing they should do. And what was the chance they would ever say that there was nothing they should do?
As long as the activists were willing to, well, take action and academa is so invested in their own self righteousness, this was the only possible result. The tail is determined to wag the dog and the dog can't control it so the dog will be wagged.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2015 14:47:21 GMT
Can anybody give me a concrete reason why the President and Chancellor should have resigned? They are GUILTY. Guilty of being educated, white, and male. We don't need to investigate the charges of fecal writings or other outrageous behaviors. (Has anyone seen ANY documentation on that? Bueller? Bueller?...) I have long maintained that Mizzou is the State of MO's largest and most effective indoctrination center. This only proves it. BTW, a journalism prof resigned today. Got caught trying to speak the truth. In that part of the state, that's a hangin' offense. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2015 15:11:19 GMT
This is just the beginning. Look for the same thing all over the country now that a precedent has been set. These groups have tasted blood, and they're thirsty. I find myself back in Chicago, 1968, with my dad telling us to stay away from the windows, b/c they had no idea how far north on Clark Street the rioters were going to come. It's tearing me up that my daughter is up there, and that she is probably being all "PC" and "demonstrating" with those hoodlums. She was raised better than that, she is old enough to know better (29), she's a flippin' Air Force veteran... But I couldn't keep the world out... |
|
|
|
Post by whereiwant2b on Nov 11, 2015 15:15:26 GMT
This comes from the attitude that there are classes of victims and victimizers. Well, everyone is a victim and a victimizer themselves. The point should be to offer protection where it is appropriate to all equally. There should be no protected classes where it is assumed they are victims. And no one should get a break from their own victimizing because they claim to be a victim.
A difficult standard but the only one that doesn't lead to ever widening hosility.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wanderer0101 on Nov 11, 2015 15:25:00 GMT
I keep thinking about mob rule, which is what this is. It only works for minorities when the majorities forego the idea of mob rule. If they decide they've had enough of having their shins kicked it won't go well for the minorities.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2015 15:25:57 GMT
It could not have gone otherwise. Black activists claimed that the University was not doing enough to end racism. So what was the possible positions the University could take? They couldn't say there was no racism. Of course there's always racism. Could the University point out what they actually did to prevent such incidents? No because they only did normal policing. That only left them to say either they were sorry for not taking action or that there was nothing they should do. And what was the chance they would ever say that there was nothing they should do? As long as the activists were willing to, well, take action and academa is so invested in their own self righteousness, this was the only possible result. The tail is determined to wag the dog and the dog can't control it so the dog will be wagged. Wait. If I follow you correctly, you're saying that the administration IS guilty of the accusations? Is there any proof of the accusations? Was there a formal charge? Did anyone follow the very clear University procedures for this? What I see is a situation where accusations were made, no time given to investigate nor prove/disprove the allegations, and then everyone's demanding the administrations' heads on pikes. Did I miss something here? |
|
|
|
Post by whereiwant2b on Nov 11, 2015 15:38:29 GMT
It could not have gone otherwise. Black activists claimed that the University was not doing enough to end racism. So what was the possible positions the University could take? They couldn't say there was no racism. Of course there's always racism. Could the University point out what they actually did to prevent such incidents? No because they only did normal policing. That only left them to say either they were sorry for not taking action or that there was nothing they should do. And what was the chance they would ever say that there was nothing they should do? As long as the activists were willing to, well, take action and academa is so invested in their own self righteousness, this was the only possible result. The tail is determined to wag the dog and the dog can't control it so the dog will be wagged. Wait. If I follow you correctly, you're saying that the administration IS guilty of the accusations? Is there any proof of the accusations? Was there a formal charge? Did anyone follow the very clear University procedures for this? What I see is a situation where accusations were made, no time given to investigate nor prove/disprove the allegations, and then everyone's demanding the administrations' heads on pikes. Did I miss something here? If you agree with the activists that the University had an obligation to do something and did nothing, then yes, there was fault. If you disagree, saying the University was not obligated to do something, then no, there was no fault. I suspect that the truth was closer to the activists demanded impossibilities and became angry with the University for not aligning with them. I suspect that there was some selective deafness to the strident demands. And some validity to the demands. And that the selective deafness had to do with the tone of the demands. This woukd be the typical scenario. But there is also a duty of the University to stand up against bullying- by minorities too. And that the ganging up by black activists with media attention is nothing more than power tripping. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2015 16:35:18 GMT
I'm saying that the University had/has an obligation to 1.) verify allegations, 2.) investigate those allegations, and 3.) respond accordingly and appropriately.
I agree that there is supreme power tripping and, considering what happened in the StL 'burbs, I'd bet dollars to donuts that there are outsiders involved.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jolly on Nov 11, 2015 17:42:24 GMT
Didn't I hear that Soros eventually spent $20M on Ferguson and the Black Lives Matter Movement?
Wonder if some of his money is currently wandering around the campus?
|
|
|
|
Post by whereiwant2b on Nov 11, 2015 18:01:04 GMT
I always wonder about who actually funds the activists and such that wander around. I know who pays- everyone who works but who funds? I imagine that laundered government grants do some of it.
|
|
