<p>Amazing how twisted a liberal mind works. First you will resort to violence when verbal confrontation will have been response in kind.
Then the perpetrators
The white kid was in a coma, regained his eye only after 3 weeks. He might not have come of coma/lost his sights. Apparently you are willing to overlook that by giving a mild sentence. </p>
<p>You are still apologizing to criminals.</p>
<p>wow! 4of12 out did herself. Her earlier post said to convict the Jenna Six, but SUSPEND their sentence to reflect the prejudice. Who’s being not levelled ? The victim who darn near lost his life or the people who administer the beat ? I can hear the laughing across the hall when Jenna Six is released on suspended sentence.</p>
<p>get your facts straight; he was not in a coma; he was observed for a concussion. Sorry… big difference. He was released from the hospital after a couple of hours and attended a school-sponsored function.</p>
<p>Damn right I would give him a beating. Excuse me for that; I’m not a violent person, but if somebody said something like that to me it’s just asking for a beating.</p>
<p>No, I’m not apologizing to criminals. Is it apologizing to say that a thief only deserves a mild sentence because it is his first offence? No. Apology would be saying they did not commit a crime. They did. It’s just that, in the circumstances, it is frankly not that terrible a crime that they deserve to spend years and years in prison.</p>
<p>Now, the injuries of the white kid. A coma!? Are you just making things up now, or would you care to source that. Every source I’ve seen so far said he had a concussion and a swollen eye. That’s it. Saying he was in a coma is sensationalism, and saying he nearly lost his life is completely inaccurate (he was never even listed as in serious condition, and left hospital the same day - neither of which would EVER happen if someone were in legitimate danger of dying).</p>
<p>Lastly, one bone to pick:</p>
<p>Liberal mind? You just lost all credibility. I am more right wing economically than almost anyone you will ever meet, and am extremely libertarian with regards to social policy. Calling me a “liberal” not only shows that you have a serious disregard for how complicated politics really are, but are also apparently incapable of arguing without trying to pigeonhole my political thoughts, and using that as an ad hominem attack to try and de-legitimize me.</p>
<p>Nice try.</p>
<p>
Yes, but you left out an important fact – he was left unconscious after being hit in the back of his head. The attackers are not the kind of people I would champion as a heros the way Jessie Jackson, etc. are doing.</p>
<p>Uh huh, and…? Should I have described every aspect of the assault in detail in my refutation of edvest’s completely fabricated claim?</p>
<p>I know he was left unconscious, and so does everyone else.</p>
<p>Unconscious for a few minutes = “In a Coma”.</p>
<p>Treated and released from Hospital = “Darn near lost his life”.</p>
<p>…huuuummmm:rolleyes:</p>
<p>Is there a doctor in the house?</p>
<p>So, six boys jump this kid with the SUPPOSED intent to “murder” him, but somehow only manage to give him a mild concussion and a swollen eye? If so, they had all better mail in their “Bad A$$ Club” membership cards, lest they be laughed out of the next meeting.</p>
<p>Seriously, let’s talk about this case in its TOTALITY. It’s not merely about who beat up whom. It’s not only about the prior record of a single assailant. It’s not even about Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson. It’s about ALL the circumstances which lead up to the current conditions in Jena, LA. At bottom, this story is about glaring disparities in the way in which the players in this drama have been treated, both under the law and the spirit of what is right and moral.</p>
<p>Does even one of the people on this thread who only seems fixated upon the beating of one student, and the prior record of one of his assailants, have serious problems with the fact that Jena, Louisiana’s school district tolerated the presence of a “Whites Only” tree for years on the grounds of one of its schools? Do they think it only coincidental that nooses were hung from its branches ONLY after a new black student (one who apparently hadn’t yet learned his place) showed the temerity to want to stand beneath its shade? Do they view the presence of these nooses as only a “school yard prank”, and not indicative of the intent to send a clear and historically malicious message to a certain segment of the school’s population? Do they believe that it is only coincidental, that the police and District Attorney were summoned to “address” the student body ONLY after members of the population for whom that message was targeted, staged a silent protest under the “Whites Only” tree? Do they not find it disturbing that the school and district administration never saw fit to attempt to heal the ever growing racial divide in their midst? To encourage tolerance and mutual respect? To declare that a “Whites Only” tree was not only immoral, but would NOT be tolerated? Does no one think it peculiar that the DA’s threat to make someone’s “life disappear with a stroke of his pen” was only made good against the assailants of the white student, but not against the ones who assaulted the black student? The black student’s assailants were never so much as charged with disturbing the peace, much less “attempted murder”. You don’t have a problem with the apparent disparity, Evest1? Razorsharp, you said: “The real story is that many African Americans are so busy looking for racial discrimination that they are willing to support a bunch of thugs if it means they get to scream racism.” That’s the “REAL STORY”, huh?—the black students at Jena High were just looking for racism where none existed? If you REALLY believe that, there’s not much point in me attempting to engage you in rational discussion. It was “thugs” who beat the white kid—but not the black one? Really?:rolleyes: And those good ole’ boys from the Rodeo Team really didn’t mean no harm, right?;)</p>
<p>I thank God that the white student didn’t receive any lasting physical damage from the beating he received. Even if he did mouth off, and say something hateful or inappropriate, it does not excuse what the 6 black boys did in response. Violence is rarely the answer. (Do I need to repeat that, or is someone going to accuse me of condoning this boy’s beating somewhere further along in this discussion?) </p>
<p>By the same token, I will NOT pretend that those boys were treated fairly, or that the black students of Jena High have been treated as social and political equals—because it just ain’t so!</p>
<p>Unbelievable.<br>
Anyone who blows off a concussion has never had one. My son has (not from a beating though). Once you’ve been concussed, you are many times over more at risk for future head injuries. Long lasting effects include inability to think straight, attention problems, headaches, inability to do work, take tests… Many students who have suffered even relatively minor concussions find themselves unable to perform academically for quite some time. The situation is compounded because on the surface, it seems like they are perfectly healthy and healed. Most people don’t even associate the LD-type conditions that can last anywhere from 3 months to a year, to the actual concussion. All you elite students out there who wouldn’t mind having your skulls kicked in- no big deal. Hope you never suffer a head or orbital injury. BTW, eyes are important too. Karma.</p>
<p>Poetsheart…re: post #67…I agree entirely what the issues really are in this case. That doesn’t condone assaulting someone but the entire case and situation has been wholly unjust.</p>
<p>"Louisiana’s school district tolerated the presence of a “Whites Only” tree for years on the grounds of one of its schools? "</p>
<p>Did the school district consciously “tolerate” this, or was it something that they really weren’t aware of, or felt no need to get involved ? I know that at most schools kids self segregate. Self segregation is not always a racial thing. Athletes stick together, cheerleaders stick together, and the band kids hang out. Schools have stoners, geeks, etc. Self segregation was very blatant at my son’s high school and I see it at my daughter’s high school. </p>
<p>At what point should the school district get involved?</p>
<p>Self segregation is not limited to high school kids either. Interesting perspective below by an African American author.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.timeout.com/newyork/artic...ck-segregation[/url]”>http://www.timeout.com/newyork/artic...ck-segregation</a></p>
<p>If link doesn’t open, you can probably google “self segregation” and find it. There are actually a few articles on the subject of self segregation.</p>
<p>Time Out New York / Issue 621 : August 23, 2007 - August 29, 2007
Race and culture
Bring back segregation!
By Patrice Evans, a.k.a. the Assimilated Negro</p>
<p>I thought people associated with Princeton are intelligent. I guess not everyone.</p>
<p>A concussion is a serious injury, and if a teenager is then reinjured in, for instance, a contact sport, can lead to bleeding of the brain.</p>
<p>Where was the universal outrage when 4 teenagers were shot and 3 of them killed in Newark recently? Was it because it was hispanic/black on black crime that people from all over the US did not march on Newark? I know that the incident received a lot of publicity, but nothing like these young men, who brutally beat up a boy for what apprears to be no direct provocation except their own general angst and anger. The outrage is that they are being defended politically for assaulting someone.</p>
<p>The message should be how to solve things nonviolently, not fueling the fires of this kind of violence. They are thugs.</p>
<p>Clearly it wasn’t ‘self’ segregation sokkermom. Nooses and beatings were the consequence of violating turf. And I don’t think anyone did that to them’self’. I call that intimidation, not free will.</p>
<p>To everyone -</p>
<p>Look, I’ve lived in Louisiana for large part of my adult life… and had more than a handful of audit clients in Alexandria and the sparsely populated parishes surrounding that town. Most of these audit clients were parish school boards…and I lived in these towns for months at a time while completing audit field work. You don’t even know what you speak of re: attitudes unless you have actually been there. These towns are tiny and isolated…and everyone knows everyone’s business. No…I don’t think there is a chance that the school wasn’t aware that the ‘whites only’ tree was the ‘whites only’ tree. No…it wasn’t self-segregation. And no…white kids who beat up a black kid would not have been charged with attempted murder. (Are you KIDDING me?? White MEN who beat up a black juvenile weren’t even punished.)</p>
<p>I get a sick feeling when I see people selectively focus on certain angles of the case to the exclusion of others based on what? The White Team vs. The Black Team? This case is about more the crime of one black kid…and no one here has suggested he go unpunished. But many here refuse, I mean REFUSE, to address the unfair treatment he rec’d by the system in that town. And when we have topics like this, I can always predict who those ‘many’ will be. </p>
<p>Honestly, do you think you have to be black to try to see and understand what blacks are feeling about this case? And do you think blacks are the only people outraged at the disparity based on race in the educational, law enforcement and judicial systems in Jena Louisiana?</p>
<p>razor - I use the term bias rather than racism in the OJ case because I believe the jurors were not necessarily ‘racist’ (that is…hated people of another race) as much as they were sympathetic to a OJ because of their bias in favor of someone of their own race. And btw, the verdict sickened me. I remember hearing it as I was driving someplace and I actually had to pull over because I was so upset. But I don’t think I could look at any of those jurors and say they ‘hated’ whites. </p>
<p>It’s a fine line. You use the term you like…and I use the term I think is most accurate.</p>
<p>Black children simply prefer not to sit under the only shade on a school yard that sees 90-100 degree temperatures a large part of the year? Why hang nooses to keep them away then?</p>
<p>edvest1: And now, you have truly brought this debate down to an elementary school level.</p>
<p>“Oh yeah? Well YOU’RE STUPID!”</p>
<p>Congratulations. I thought most people who post on the parent cafe are capable of making an argument, and when they lose the debate, conceding graciously instead of resorting to pointless name calling to try and scrounge out some kind of last word. Apparently not.</p>
<p>I think we all agree that they should be charged for assault, but attempted murder?. A group of white kids beat up a black boy and they get nothing and a group of black kids beat up a white kid and they get attempted murder. You have to be racist not to see this injustice.</p>
<p>I very glad I don’t live in Jena. My town is not perfect, but the DA can’t tell me that he can end my life with a pen.</p>
<p>The problem now is that some black “activists” are comparing these students to civil rights workers who were killed while trying to register black voters in the South. That is really not a good comparison. What these black students did per beating up a white student is not justifiable and only a bad example for others. </p>
<p>The npr article did not fully describe the first incident at the party very well, when the black student was allegedly beat up by white students. Was it a comparable incident?</p>
<p>Quote: “Bail for the Jena 6 was set at between $70,000 and $138,000. All but Bell posted bond. The judge had refused to lower his $90,000 bail, citing Bell’s criminal record, which includes four juvenile offenses – two simple battery charges among them.”</p>
<p>The confusing thing is that Bell has such as extensive record and is 17 years old and now may be tried as a juvenile, according to one article quoted here. Where I live, it is routine for 17 year olds with prior records to be tried as adults. (This is a Northern liberal state with a lot of crime.) Hopefully someone with that kind of record will be in jail for awhile, as he obviously has a pattern of criminal behavior.</p>
<p>Also, is it routine for a man such as Bell with so many prior arrests and convictions to attend as regular high school, as opposed to one for juvenile offenders? Was he on probation for his priors?</p>
<p>collegialmom - no… there will not be national attention to the Newark case because unlike Jena, there isn’t a pattern that can be factually traced back that illustrates institutional racism… from the school board, to the superintendent, to the district attorney, to an all-white jury (by the way - which included a high school friend of the victim’s father). I know where I live, if I was summoned to jury duty and indicated that I had a connection to the victim, I’d be rejected so quick people’s heads would spin. Why didn’t that happen in Jena? Our system around here would not allow that to happen. That’s why the Newark case won’t get the same attention.</p>