DescentBB

Posted: **Thu Sep 22, 2005 3:09 pm**

Well, I'm really in the mood to talk about crack and AIDS. I personally believe that Reagan threw these into the inner city culture to destroy the black community from it's roots up to promote white right wing agendas. How about you?

bitches.

Posted: **Thu Sep 22, 2005 3:25 pm**

I think that is far fetched and you never mentioned personal responsibility at all. So yea, bad argument.

Posted: **Thu Sep 22, 2005 3:49 pm**

Readjust your tin foil hat there Silver! It's letting your brain escape!

Posted: **Thu Sep 22, 2005 3:54 pm**

Baiter.

Posted: **Thu Sep 22, 2005 3:58 pm**

There's just something about crack & AIDS that gets my buggy going.

/me adjusts his tinfoil helmet

Posted: **Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:19 pm**

Palzon wrote:Baiter.

Or Master Baiter?

Posted: **Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:34 pm**

heh and I figured this place still supported the idea of discussing unconventional ideas. my bad.

Posted: **Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:37 pm**

Nice one woody!!!

......sigh!!! Remember when there used to be Mods around here....sorry i'm reminiscing...

Posted: **Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:39 pm**

Ferno wrote:heh and I figured this place still supported the idea of discussing unconventional ideas. my bad.

Good point. Refer to previous post.

Posted: **Thu Sep 22, 2005 5:18 pm**

Ferno wrote:heh and I figured this place still supported the idea of discussing unconventional ideas. my bad.

I think we just support logic a bit more.

Posted: **Thu Sep 22, 2005 6:08 pm**

Ferno wrote:heh and I figured this place still supported the idea of discussing unconventional ideas. my bad.

Ideas that have merit yes. Anyone that thinks Reagan was behind blacks getting hooked on crack or coming down with aids should whack off as they are excessively whacked by mental constrainment.

No offense Silver.

Posted: **Thu Sep 22, 2005 6:28 pm**

Ferno wrote:heh and I figured this place still supported the idea of discussing unconventional ideas. my bad.

I do believe in "conspiracy theories" to an extent. But what silver suggested was way too kooky for even me.

I believe that the CIA used opium profits in Laos to fight a secret illegal war against the communists just like the French did before the US got into the war.

Simply because I know Hmong people, they were used to fight the communists and continue to be violently persecuted in south East Asia. I've seen bullet wounds and scarring in some of the elders with my own eyes... and the promises made to them were not kept.

I think Ronald Reagans administration was one of the most corrupt in the history of America. Not because I think he had a plan to force feed unprotected sex and rock cocaine to the inner-city but because the ENTIRE government at that time worded ketchup as a "vegetable serving" for public school nutrition charts to pay for a stock of MX missiles.

That's bloody corrupt if you ask me, ketchup?

I really don't believe he was trying to ruin the inner city, I just believe he didn't care. Itâ??s not proactive behavior, if anything it's neglect.

While neglect may not be pretty we are living in a somewhat capitalist economy... personal behavior is paramount to your success. You have to go get it.

Ya happy now ferns?

Posted: **Thu Sep 22, 2005 7:51 pm**

TheCope: re: the ketchup

Posted: **Thu Sep 22, 2005 10:10 pm**

A few years ago I found a diagram that illustrated how Reagan was responsible for gangsta rap. I wish I saved it, because it was classic.

I think that Reagan is responsible for some of the devastation crack caused because of choices he made, or choices that were made on his behalf. Vicariously winning a civil war in Central America was considered important enough to allow cheap cocaine to flood into the country. That the cheap cocaine worked it's way into crack was most likely unintentional. Unintended consequences doesn't really abrogate Reagan's responsibility, though.

I personally believe that Reagan threw [crack] into the inner city culture to destroy the black community from it's roots up to promote white right wing agendas.

I technically agree with that, except for the "to destroy the black community" part. The black community was devastated, but I've never seen any evidence that it was planned that way.

Posted: **Thu Sep 22, 2005 10:21 pm**

Ferno wants us to entertain different lines of thinking.

What can you produce about south East Asia dcrazy with your google fists? My Hmong friends didn't get dicked by America? Or at least the CIA? Yea right. Just look on the Internet you will find the answer! Fat ass bs way out... bloody scientists in a lab never having to leave their safe home. Yea right.

I find it interesting; every government has jacked its citizens in many ways... and you Internet folk just type ★■◆● into your library for it to speak for you.

Ferno turned a blanket clown subject into an interesting topic. We might as well vent and consider the possibilities. Or, maybe read another diatribe by an experience-less baby to the world.

The sky is yellow in my world.

Posted: **Thu Sep 22, 2005 10:27 pm**

TheCope wrote:I really don't believe he was trying to ruin the inner city, I just believe he didn't care. Itâ??s not proactive behavior, if anything it's neglect.

BINGO!

"Intentional" is the only thing I'd add...

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 12:04 am**

I never said anything about Laos. I'm just saying that the ketchup story is another example of spin.

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:06 am**

DCrazy wrote:I never said anything about Laos. I'm just saying that the ketchup story is another example of spin.

So money that would have been spent on vegetables for school children didn't get diverted to pay for MX missiles?

What example of spin? The "article" didn't mention the missiles at all.

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:45 am**

Because the plan never went through.

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 8:40 am**

If Reagans cowboys didn't provide an additional conduit for the white stuff to be smuggled in some other group of money hungry cowboys would have, because the real 'cause' of the influx of the drug is the demand for it.

So, although Reagan may share some blame for creating a particular group that smuggled the drug to raise cash, I seriously doubt his cowboys had any impact on the volume of drugs brought in. The borders are far too open and the profit margins far, far, too great for the product to not make it's way into the country.

The coke flows in at the rate of consumption...period.

And as far as a political reason for creating a drugged out culture in the inner city, that's crazy! The problems of the inner city work against the conservatives. The demagoguery of the plight of the poor people builds power for the democrats.
Maxine Waters is a prime example and it's no wonder she's a big proponent of the myth that republicans created the drug/ghetto problem. She's the only congressman I've ever heard propose that inner city black youth should be exempt from drug prosecution because it's the only income opportunity the white devil has given them!! How's that for a method of gaining votes from, and at the same time absolving of responsibility a group of drug dealing, whoring, gang banging constituency?!? She is the worst kind of pimp the world has ever seen!!! That kind of leadership has done more harm to the black inner city than all Reagans guns for hostages ever could have.

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:06 am**

"So, although Reagan may share some blame for creating a particular group that smuggled the drug to raise cash, I seriously doubt his cowboys had any impact on the volume of drugs brought in."

The majority of cocaine smuggling going on had nothing to do with Reagan or geopolitical goals. Reagan doesn't bare responsibility for that. But he does bare responsibility for the smuggling that occurred in support of his central america policy. Unfortunately, this smuggling supplied LA's biggest crack dealer with cheap coke. Would this dealer have gotten coke from elsewhere? Perhaps, but it didn't happen that way.

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:35 am**

Ummm...not to burst a bubble but weren't inner city poverty and "get-toes" in existance long before the Contra issue? Heard a interesting stat. Black poverty has fallen from about 66% of the black population to
25%. I think the black liberals want to promot a steriotype of all blacks living in poverty just so they can maintain their position of power. Let us also remember there is white rural poor and latino poor. Funny how all we hear about is black poverty.

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:40 am**

woodchip wrote:I think the black liberals want to promote a stereotype of all blacks living in poverty just so they can maintain their position of power.

I truly hate to agree with you Woody but you hit the nail on the head. Another reason I am a disgruntled democrat. It's not only the black liberals though, it's also the white liberals that have their hand in the honey pot too.

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:50 am**

Iceman wrote:
woodchip wrote:I think the black liberals want to promote a stereotype of all blacks living in poverty just so they can maintain their position of power.
I truly hate to agree with you Woody but you hit the nail on the head. Another reason I am a disgruntled democrat. It's not only the black liberals though, it's also the white liberals that have their hand in the honey pot too.

Quite right Ice. For 40 years the white Dems controlled black votes thru the use of the welfare system. Now as more of the black population becomes mid and upper class they have no need to be controlled by anyone. By entering these social classes, blacks have in essence finally broke the chains of bondage and are not beholden to anyone.

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 11:19 am**

"not to burst a bubble but weren't inner city poverty and "get-toes" in existance long before the Contra issue?"

Ummm, yes? It can hardly be said that Reagan's Contra policy caused caused all inner-city poverty and "get-toes." It indirectly exasperated the situation in a key location at a crucial time, Los Angeles at the beginning of the crack boom.

The crack sold by the Bloods and Crips was supplied by Rick Ross. Rick Ross got his cocaine cheaper than anyone else, from a guy named Blandon. Blandon was a Nicaraguan exile, who was brought into the drug smuggling business for the express intent of funding the Contra army to retake his country. This was done with a level of complicity on the part of our government. We knew it was going on, and we turned a blind eye, because the goal of a right wing government controlling Nicaragua was considered more important.

Would Rick Ross have gotten cocaine from somewhere else if he didn't get it from Blandon? Probably. But he didn't, because Blandon was there with the cheap coke. Blandon was there with the coke as a result of Reagan's covert support for the Contra's.

Of course, if ideological necessity compells one to blame Democrats, blame the Democrats in Congress that stripped Reagan's funding of the Contra's. If they didn't halt that funding, alternate sources of funding wouldn't have been as aggressively sought.

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 12:14 pm**

Vander wrote:....Of course, if ideological necessity compells one to blame Democrats, blame the Democrats in Congress that stripped Reagan's funding of the Contra's. If they didn't halt that funding, alternate sources of funding wouldn't have been as aggressively sought.

Or blame Reagan for not fighting congress' unconstitutional methods of stopping the funding..the Boland ammendment wasn't challeneged by the Reagan administration for political reasons not because they couldn't win the case in the supreme court.
The congress has no authority to stop the president from executing his foriegn policy the way they did but the Reaganista's didn't want to fight that battle publically because it would have been a public relations nightmare being associated with the gory details of the struggle going on down there.

Heh! Just another politician doing something half assed and bailing out to let the little people pick up the mess.

Regardless though, the crack problem in the ghetto is not the result of Reagans boys, at best it looks like he caused them to be able to buy at a discount for a while...but they were going to smoke the ★■◆● regardless. A CIA plot to enslave the black man with drugs?! Not hardly.
However playing the race card by spreading that story sure did buy the lefty's some constituents and perpetuated the rationalization that the criminals are not responsible for their choices.

'It was rich whitey who hooked your brothers and sisters on the crack pipe so he could keep you down'
Just how f@^#ing stupid do people have to be?!?

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 12:28 pm**

Clinton got head! Clinton lied!

Look, the Hindenburg!

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 12:42 pm**

Palzon wrote: Look, the Hindenburg!

Stop demeaning Monica that way or Roidy will get in a tizzy

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 1:14 pm**

Will, re: "how stupid can some people be"

Have a look at a paper called 'Why smart people believe dumb(stupid) things'

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 1:18 pm**

"The congress has no authority to stop the president from executing his foriegn policy"

But Congress does hold the purse strings of the Federal Government. The President can't just go to war without the consent of Congress, which is what Reagan did when he ordered direct CIA intervention without bothering to notify Congressional Intelligence committees.

"at best it looks like he caused them to be able to buy at a discount for a while"

This is the whole point. "For a while" occurred during the four or five years in which the crack boom really took off. "Them" describes the biggest crack dealer in the epicenter of the crack boom. This single case is at the heart of the crack epidemic.

Rick Ross didn't invent crack. He just had access to a seemingly unending supply of very cheap cocaine. Turning cocaine into crack made it vastly more addictive, and accessible to a huge new low income market. It was a perfect storm, if you will.

"A CIA plot to enslave the black man with drugs?!"

I don't claim to speak for the entire left. I know there are a lot of people who purpetuate the myth that there was some CIA plot against black America. My aim of participating in this thread is to shoot this "CIA plot" claim dead. There's simply no direct evidence to support a plot against black America. There is circumstantial evidence, but that evidence has alternate, more plausible interpretation. To be certain, there was a level of criminal indifference at the consequences of our actions, but that doesn't mean the consequences were the goal.

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 1:56 pm**

I love how my attempts at pissing people off create serious, enjoyable, historical, and fully entertaining political debates.

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 2:01 pm**

Troll!

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 2:15 pm**

Troll?

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:18 pm**

Palzon wrote:Baiter.

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:44 pm**

woodchip wrote:
Palzon wrote:Baiter.
Or Master Baiter?

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:45 pm**

i do believe we have come full circle-jerk

too may puns for one sentence? FU!

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2005 4:15 pm**

Baiter???
Too many puns for one sentence? FJ!

Posted: **Sat Sep 24, 2005 9:27 pm**

SilverFJ wrote:Troll?

In the context of the Internet, a troll is a person who posts inflammatory messages intended to cause a disruption in discourse. The word is also often used to describe such messages.

Posted: **Sat Sep 24, 2005 9:50 pm**

yet that does not cover topics.

Posted: **Sat Sep 24, 2005 9:57 pm**

(removes edit-addition to previous comment... opting to cut-paste it into a new post)

trolling is so old hat thesedays, sometimes it's fun to try to steer a trolling topic into a most mutually interesting and enjoyable topic of conversation.
this is what we have done here.

SilverFJ wrote:I love how my attempts at pissing people off create serious, enjoyable, historical, and fully entertaining political debates

not quite. your attempts at pissing people off are seen instantly, almost instictively, as what they are. most people know howto handle trolling behavour, this is why no-one got pissed off. you probabaly should be warned - trolling behaviour will generally get you disciplined (read: banned) on most places on the internet. most people simply don't have the patience.

however, here at the DBB it can on occasion get a little boring

. so we may sometimes play with wanna-be trolls for a while - poking and studying them. who knows exactly why. it sometimes seems even PARENTAL, like we are patiently guiding and manipulating the "children of descent" in the honourable way of "how to not be an asshat online".

i guess as far as forums go the DBB is quite mature.

DescentBB

Crack & AIDS

Crack & AIDS