White Privilege

thoughtone · Apr 3, 2014

source: Prankthat

Texas Teen Kills 4 Gets No Jail Time; Same Judge Gives Black Teen 10 Years For 1 Punch

Ethan Couch, 16, is known to the world and newsmakers as the drunken teenager who caused a crash that killed four pedestrians in Tarrant County, Tex.

On June 15, 2013, he robbed Walmart and stole beer. He drank so much, his blood alcohol level registered at .24, roughly three times the legal limit. He plowed into the helpless victims – friends Breanna Mitchell, Hollie and Shelby Boyles and a local youth pastor who were helping the women, Brian Jennings – while “joy riding” with friends in a red 2012 Ford F-350 pick-up truck at a speed of 70 mph.

Two of his passengers were thrown from the vehicle, including Sergio E. Molina, who has been in a vegetative state since the night of the accident.

The reckless teen who has been driving since he was 13 was sentenced to only 10 years probation but no jail time because he suffers from affluenza. Not influenza commonly referred to as the flu, but affluenza, a pathological condition popularized by British psychologist Oliver James where one values material wealth over all else.

So you’re like this writer wondering how did they make this square peg fit so perfectly in this round affluenza hole?

They’ve concluded that Couch is the product of wealthy, privileged parents who never set limits for the boy.

Texas District Court Judge Jean Boyd ordered that Couch must enter into a private counseling center.

In March 2012, according to the Tarrant County Criminal District Attorney’s Office, Judge Boyd sentenced an unnamed black Fort Worth teen, 14, to 10 years in prison for punching Mark Gregory, 40.

“Just after 10 p.m. on October 6, the teen was riding in a
Cadillac with two friends when he suddenly jumped out of the vehicle in the 1700 block of Vaughn Avenue and punched Gregory, who was 5-foot-1 and weighed 106 pounds,” said the Tarrant County District Attorney’s Office in a statement. “Gregory’s head struck the pavement and he died two days later.”

The 14-year-old Fort Worth teen, who is not being identified because he was prosecuted as a juvenile, admitted on Jan. 5 that he committed delinquent conduct/manslaughter.

The 14-year-old Fort Worth teen was sentenced to 10 years by Judge Boyd for killing a stranger with a single unprovoked punch.

According to the site: The teen will begin serving his sentence at the Texas Juvenile Justice Department where he will undergo rehabilitation programs.

The teen could remain until his 19th birthday in TJJD, which is basically the prison for juveniles, but if he makes progress, department officials could recommend he be paroled back to the community.

Prior to his 19th birthday, if he hasn’t worked the program, department officials could ask the judge to transfer him to an adult prison to serve the remainder of his sentence.

A statement from the Tarrant County District Attorney’s Office says the boy and two friends hopped out of a car that night when they saw Gregory walking. The punch knocked the 106-pound Gregory down and he hit his head on the pavement. He died two days later

thoughtone · Apr 3, 2014

source: CNN

Du Pont heir convicted of raping daughter spared prison

<IFRAME height=234 src="http://www.cnn.com/video/api/embed.html#/video/crime/2014/03/31/jvm-bts-dupont-heir-sex-offender-no-prison.hln" frameBorder=0 width=416></IFRAME>

Though Robert H. Richards IV was convicted of rape, the wealthy heir to the du Pont family fortune was spared prison by a Delaware court in 2009 because he would "not fare well" behind bars, according to court documents CNN obtained Tuesday.

Richards is a great-grandson of the chemical magnate Irenee du Pont.

He received an eight-year prison sentence in 2009 for raping his toddler daughter, but the sentencing order signed by a Delaware judge said "defendant will not fare well" in prison and the eight years were suspended.

Richards was placed on eight years' probation and ordered to get treatment and register as a sex offender, the documents show. He was also prohibited from having contact with children under 16, including his own children.

The documents were never sealed, yet the ruling managed to go unnoticed until March, when Richards' former wife, Tracy Richards, filed a lawsuit in Delaware Superior Court on behalf of their children alleging "personal injuries arising from the childhood sexual abuse." The 11-page suit alleges that not only was their daughter abused, but Richards abused their son, too. The suit seeks unspecified monetary damages.

While he was convicted of raping his daughter, Richards has never been charged with sexually molesting his son, according to Jason Miller, a spokesman for the Delaware attorney general's office.

CNN tried repeatedly to reach Richards and Eugene Maurer, the attorney who represented him in 2009. Maurer is no longer representing Richards, his assistant told CNN on Wednesday. CNN asked if he had a comment; he has not offered one.

Attorney John C. Balaguer is representing Richards in the civil case, his assistant told CNN. Balaguer has not returned e-mails or voice mail messages CNN has left for him.

This week, after news of Richards' 2009 case came to light, many took to Twitter to criticize the judge in the case, saying that it echoed a recent Texas case in which a wealthy teenager driving drunk killed four people but received no jail time. Ethan Couch was sentenced last year to 10 years' probation.

A witness in Couch's case claimed the teenager was a victim of "affluenza" -- the product of wealthy, privileged parents who never set limits for the boy.

READ: Judge orders Texas teen to rehab for driving drunk, killing 4

Delaware's Judicial Code of Conduct prohibits Judge Jan R. Jurden from discussing the 2009 ruling with reporters, court spokeswoman Amy Quinlan told CNN.

But at least one member of the Delaware legal community came to Jurden's defense Tuesday.

"It's wrong to attribute (the 'defendant would not fare well' comment) to Judge Jurden," said Richard Kirk, a lawyer who is chairman of a Delaware State Bar Association committee that he says steps up to respond "when judges are criticized and unable to speak for themselves."

Kirk says the argument that Richards would not do well in prison could have been the recommendation of probation or parole officers. However, he said, "common sense suggests that it came from defense counsel."

As for the prosecutor's side, the attorney general's spokesman gave CNN a written statement.

"Cases of child sexual abuse are extremely complicated and difficult," it read. The objective is to "secure justice in every case to the best of its ability given the unique facts and circumstances presented in each case -- sometimes that results in a resolution that is less than what prosecutors would want," the statement read.

"In this particular case, the facts and circumstances made it unlikely that a conviction could be secured at trial. ...This resolution protected the victim and imposed conditions that would make it less likely the defendant could harm others."

thoughtone · Apr 3, 2014

Blame it on the inter city unemployed, unmarried, out of wedlock females.

<IFRAME height=315 src="//www.youtube.com/embed/F4eQql4oPtU" frameBorder=0 width=420 allowfullscreen></IFRAME>

thoughtone · Apr 18, 2014

Greed · Apr 29, 2014

As ‘Punishment,’ Clippers Bigot Donald Sterling Could Make $1 Billion

As ‘Punishment,’ Clippers Bigot Donald Sterling Could Make $1 Billion
The NBA will likely suspend L.A. Clippers owner over his racist remarks and ‘encourage’ him to sell the team—and it’s not inconceivable the sale will earn him a $988 million profit.

muckraker10021 · Apr 30, 2014

Original Post APRIL 2011

Donald Trump's personal experience with questionable Ivy League admittance standards
The prospective candidate accuses the president of being unqualified for the Ivy Leagues -- like his son-in-law was

<img src="http://i.min.us/inyg2I.jpg" width="320" height="240" />
Donald Trump, daughter & son-in-law

http://Trump-A$$$$$firmative-Action/salon.com

by Alex Pareene | April 2011

Donald Trump added a blatantly race-baiting component to his already racially charged campaign against Barack Obama's Americanness this week when he claimed -- based on things he's "heard" -- that Obama was a "terrible student" who got into Columbia and then Harvard based solely on affirmative action:
<blockquote>
"How does a bad student go to Columbia and then to Harvard? I'm thinking about it, I'm certainly looking into it. Let him show his records," he said, without providing backup for his claim.
<br>Trump added, "I have friends who have smart sons with great marks, great boards, great everything and they can't get into Harvard."
</blockquote>
Leaving aside the fact that Obama, who went on to graduate Harvard Law magna cum laude, seems like he was probably a very good student, Mr. Trump might need a refresher course in how unqualified people actually <em>do</em> manage to get into the prestigious Ivy League Universities .
<br>Let us take, as an example, the story of a student so obviously unqualified, so transparently unworthy, that a book was written about what his admittance into Harvard said about the sorry behavior of supposedly elite colleges.
<br><SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00"><b>That student -- that dull, below-average student who somehow made his way into Harvard -- was Donald Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner</b></span>.
<br><SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00"><b>Kushner's father, real estate developer Charles Kushner, bought Jared his Harvard acceptance. It cost him $2.5 million. (Kushner later went to jail for tax evasion and witness tampering, so it was also, technically, <em>dirty money</em> that bought Trump's daughter's husband's entry into the Ivy League.)</b></span>
<br>Wall Street Journal education writer Daniel Golden's book "The Price of Admission" explores the Kushner donation at length. An official at Kushner's (expensive, private) high school told the author: "There was no way anybody in . . . the school thought he would on the merits get into Harvard. His GPA did not warrant it, his SAT scores did not warrant it. We thought, for sure, there was no way this was going to happen."
<br>But it did.
<br>And that is how things <em>actually</em> work at "elite" schools.

<hr noshade color="#ff0000" size="8"></hr>

READ: Barack Obama and the Jim Crow Media the Return of the ****** Breakers

BUY THE BOOK

thoughtone · Apr 30, 2014

muckraker10021 said:
Original Post APRIL 2011

Donald Trump's personal experience with questionable Ivy League admittance standards

Has Affirmative Action Run its Course ?

QueEx · May 3, 2014

thoughtone said:
Has Affirmative Action Run its Course ?

thoughtone · May 4, 2014

source: Buzz Feed

17 Deplorable Examples Of White Privilege

And this isn’t even the tip of the iceberg.

1. Because of white privilege, you’ll never have to worry about becoming the victim of law enforcement officers.

Think about Jonathan Ferrell, Amadou Diallo, even Oscar Grant. It isn’t a coincidence that hundreds of incidents like these have been happening for years.

2. Thankfully, you’ll never have to know what it feels like to see your teenage son’s death being mocked.

Yes, that is someone dressed as Trayvon Martin. Yes, you’re looking at someone in blackface. In 2013.

3. Because of white privilege, you’ll never have to inform your children of the harsh realities of systemic racism.

4. White privilege means you can be articulate and well spoken without people being “surprised.”

5. Because of white privilege, you’ll never know what it’s like to have the following statistic looming over your head.

According to this report , one-third of black men will go to prison at least once in their lifetime.

6. You can wear and act however you’d like without being labeled a thug, low life, gangster, etc.

Everyone wants to “act black,” but no one truly wants to be black.

7. White privilege allows you to speak on any particular subject without being the sole representative for your entire race.

White privilege allows you to believe that all people of color think alike and share similar views.

8. White privilege means no one questions why you got that really great job; it’s assumed you were just highly qualified.

Also, it means that you got into that prestigious university based on merit, not because a certain quota had to be filled.

9. White privilege means not having to worry about your hair, skin color, or cultural accessories as the reason you didn’t get a job.

People of color must assimilate every.single.day. It’s hard to break free of the ways of the dominant hegemony and forge your own path.

10. White privilege means you don’t have to worry about being monitored in a store just because the hue of your skin is a bit darker than most.

People of color are seen as leery and untrustworthy.

11. Having white privilege means people will never label you a terrorist.

12. White privilege means not being affected by negative stereotypes that have been perpetuated and ingrained so much into American society that people believe them to be fact.

Black men are angry, primitive beasts with insatiable sexual appetites.

13. White privilege means you never have to explain why cultural appropriation is a bad thing.

14. White privilege means not having to worry about being stopped and frisked.

15. If you benefit from white privilege, you’ll never be told to “get over slavery.”

Ironic, isn’t it?

16. White privilege means that you’re never just your own person.

For example, Nicki Minaj is often referred to as the “black Lady Gaga.” I guess black people can’t be quirky or eccentric.

17. Benefitting from white privilege means you can walk the Earth unaware of your color.

People of color don’t have such a luxury.

thoughtone · May 14, 2014

source: Atlanta Black Star

5 Things White Women Do That Black Women Can’t Get Away With

Black Women Are Not Permitted to Use Violence in Self-Defense

Defenders of ”Stand Your Ground” laws often cite a woman’s right to shoot her attacker or rapist as a rationale for broader gun regulations. This is especially the case since the fatal shootings of Black teenagers Trayvon Martin and Jordan Davis in Florida cast the “Stand Your Ground” laws under public scrutiny.

However, Marissa Alexander of Florida is facing a possible 60-year sentence for reportedly “standing her ground,” even though no one was hurt in the incident. Alexander says she fired a warning shot at her abusive husband, but according to a new analysis of FBI homicide data, her race may be a reason why she has not been granted equal protection under the law.

The analysis, prepared by the Urban Institute of Washington, D.C., was based on national data of homicide cases that were found “justifiable” on the grounds that deadly force was appropriate.

Among cases nationwide where a woman killed an adult man, white women who killed Black men were most likely to be declared justified in 13.5 percent of the cases, the data found. By contrast, just 2.6 percent of white women who killed white men, and 5.7 percent of Black women who killed Black men were found to be justified.

Leaking a Sex Tape Doesn’t Work Well For Black Women

Back in the 1980s, legendary actress, beauty queen, and NFL Today’s first Black female presenter Jayne Kennedy, found herself embroiled in one of the first celebrity sex tape scandals. The reportedly stolen VHS of Kennedy and her then-husband Leon Isaac Kennedy nosedived the sports broadcaster’s career and she disappeared into obscurity.

Rapper Eve recruited the FBI after she found herself in the middle of a career-threatening scandal involving a sex tape with her then-boyfriend Steve J. Eve says the leaker attempted to blackmail her for a large sum of cash. She called the incident “hurtful,” said the controversy left her scarred, and noted “sex tapes weren’t ‘hot’ like that” a decade ago.

In 2010, actor Laurence Fishburne’s daughter, Montana, declared she was entering the porn business to help make a name for herself. She found out the hard way that the same rewards of clothing and perfume lines, TV shows, and millions of dollars bestowed upon celebrities Kim Kardashian, Pam Anderson, Paris Hilton, and other white women was not available for her. Fishburne only earned $60,000 for her efforts, received no profit from the sales of her popular tape, and today cautions young women against going into the business.

Love & Hip Hop Atlanta star Mimi Faust also released a “hardcore” sex tape with her boyfriend Nikko Smith. It remains to be seen if she will become an exception.

White Women’s Sexuality is Celebrated While Black Women’s Sexuality is Presented as Limited — not Respectable or Wholesome

Dr. Carolyn West, Associate Professor of Psychology at the University of Washington, argues in her 2008 article, “Mammy, Jezebel, Sapphire, and their homegirls: Developing an ‘oppositional gaze’ toward the images of Black women,“ that the portrayal of Black women as promiscuous Jezebels throughout slavery and the Jim Crow era served as justification for the long-time sexual exploitation of them by white men.

West says the Jezebel caricatures depicting the stereotype of Black female hypersexuality can be seen on everyday items from that time period, including ashtrays, postcards, sheet music, fishing lures and drinking glasses, all depicting naked or scantily dressed Black women, lacking modesty and sexual restraint. For example, a metal nutcracker (circa 1930s) depicts a topless Black woman. The nut is placed under her skirt, in her crotch, and crushed. “Items like this one reflected and shaped white attitudes toward Black female sexuality,” said West.

Today, the Jezebel archetype, now referred to as a hooch, freak, chickenhead, or ho, can be seen gyrating in rap videos and appearing as prostitutes or mistresses on television and film. These frequent and persistent mass-media portrayals of Black female sexual indiscretion reinforce negative stereotypes of all Black women, while the white female population is free from the sexual behavior of a few being projected onto the whole.

White Women Are at Liberty to Explore the Full Range Of Womanhood, While Black Women Are Criticized When Motherhood and Marriage Are Prioritized

Stereotypes about Black women being promiscuous, procreating irresponsibly, and unfit for motherhood are perpetuated by a media that routinely presents disparaging images and narratives about Black mothers while rarely, if ever, presenting positive views.

That’s why the feminist response to first lady Michele Obama’s decision to be “mom-in-chief” is not surprising. In a Politico article by Michelle Cottle, entitled ”Leaning Out: How Michelle Obama became a feminist nightmare,” she quoted several feminists who were disgruntled over Obama’s choice to focus on raising her daughters and issues such as child obesity and education, instead of more politically hot-button concerns, such as abortion.

One columnist Leslie Morgan Steiner, author of Mommy Wars, asked “Are fashion and body-toning tips all we can expect from one of the most highly educated first ladies in history?”

Steiner continued: “I for one have seen enough of her upper appendages and her designer clothes, and read enough bland dogma on home-grown vegetables and aerobic exercise, to last me several lifetimes.”

Super pop star Beyonce recently came under fire and essentially had her feminist card revoked, for using “Mrs. Carter” - her husband Jay-Z’s surname – in the title of her world tour.

“There is almost something subversive about waiting until the strongest moment of your career, which is where Beyonce finds herself now, to do away with the infamous glossy mononym in favor of a second name your own husband doesn’t even use,” wrote Rosie Swash of the Guardian.

Black Women Are Not Expected to be Emotionally Vulnerable

Black women’s resilience dates back to the dawn of humanity and it was called upon during the painful history of enslavement and racial oppression, where they were subjected to abuse, violation and exploitation. Black women learned to survive dehumanizing conditions by becoming skilled in the balancing act of appeasing her slave master by complying with his demands, while still making sacrifices to meet the needs of those who were dependent upon her.

Researchers have suggested that the cultural expectation of fortitude in African-American women fuels the myth of the “strong Black woman,” which compels her to push for unrealistic levels of self-sacrifice, self-denial and ensuing emotional distress. White women have not had to bear this cultural burden.

Dana Stringer argues in her EURweb article, “Hidden Dangers of Being A ‘Strong Black Woman,” that because Black women are not permitted to be transparent about their personal suffering, the internalizing of pain, disappointment and unmet needs have greatly contributed to the “anxiety, stress, fatigue, anger, uptightness, irritability, insomnia, overeating, addiction, shame, guilt and depression” that so many of them suffer. This poses on of the greatest threats to their health and overall quality of life.”

thoughtone · May 15, 2014

source: Media Matters

Fox's Bill O'Reilly Falsely Claims Harvard Requiring Class On White Privilege, Calls It "Inherently Racist"

Fox News host Bill O'Reilly falsely claimed that a new required freshman orientation session at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government would be a required course on white privilege. Despite the fact that the session doesn't focus exclusively on race, O'Reilly used it as an excuse to attack the concept of white privilege.

On May 14, O'Reilly hosted Fox contributors Rev. Jacques Degraff and Stuart Varney to discuss what he falsely claimed would be a "required course" on white privilege at Harvard. After Degraff outlined what the term meant, O'Reilly said "I'm going to have to exempt myself" from having white privilege. He also attacked the orientation program as "inherently racist" for focusing on skin color:

<iframe class="video-embed" src="http://mediamatters.org/embed/static/clips/2014/05/14/35267/fnc-factor-20140514" allowfullscreen="" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" height="360" width="480"></iframe>

In fact, the session isn't exclusively about white privilege. HKS Speak Out, the organization which pushed for the orientation session, asked for a "mandatory power and privilege training that examines components of race, gender, socioeconomic class, sexual orientation, ability, religion, international status, and power differentials for every incoming HKS student starting August 2014."

New York magazine, which reported on this, defines privilege as "a catchall term for the perks an individual enjoys in society because of his race, gender, or class." It also explained that the course O'Reilly attacks is actually an orientation program whose structure has yet to be decided upon:

"We're at one of the most powerful institutions in the world, yet we never critically examine power and privilege and what it means to have access to this power," says Reetu Mody, a first-year masters student in public policy and a campus activist. "We're excited to have the administration on board for training all Harvard Kennedy School first years."

[...]

HKS Speak Out is still deciding what the content of the orientation program will be. "The substance of the training, while still under discussion, is to prepare students to understand the broad impact of identity on their decision-making and to engage them in constructive tools for dialogue," Mody says.

thoughtone · May 16, 2014

ansatsusha_gouki · May 16, 2014

yall should of made this thread in the main forum....

Dannyblueyes · May 16, 2014

thoughtone said:
1. Because of white privilege, you’ll never have to worry about becoming the victim of law enforcement officers.

2. Thankfully, you’ll never have to know what it feels like to see your teenage son’s death being mocked.

3. Because of white privilege, you’ll never have to inform your children of the harsh realities of systemic racism.

4. White privilege means you can be articulate and well spoken without people being “surprised.”

5. Because of white privilege, you’ll never know what it’s like to have the following statistic looming over your head.

6. You can wear and act however you’d like without being labeled a thug, low life, gangster, etc.

7. White privilege allows you to speak on any particular subject without being the sole representative for your entire race.

8. White privilege means no one questions why you got that really great job; it’s assumed you were just highly qualified.

9. White privilege means not having to worry about your hair, skin color, or cultural accessories as the reason you didn’t get a job.

10. White privilege means you don’t have to worry about being monitored in a store just because the hue of your skin is a bit darker than most.

11. Having white privilege means people will never label you a terrorist.

12. White privilege means not being affected by negative stereotypes that have been perpetuated and ingrained so much into American society that people believe them to be fact.

13. White privilege means you never have to explain why cultural appropriation is a bad thing.

14. White privilege means not having to worry about being stopped and frisked.

15. If you benefit from white privilege, you’ll never be told to “get over slavery.”

16. White privilege means that you’re never just your own person.

17. Benefitting from white privilege means you can walk the Earth unaware of your color.

none of these things are privileges. If you were a Chinese person living in China you could go through life with these same expectations. Same goes for an Indian living in India, a Filipino living in the Philippines and so forth.

Lets just call so-called white privilege what it really is. The complete lack of basic human dignity for every other American. Yes, we get fucked with too, just with a little more grease.

It's as if someone owed us each $100 but instead gives you $30 and me $50. You think that I got the extra money because I'm privileged. I think I got it because I outworked you. Both of us fight each other completely oblivious to the fact that we're both getting ripped off by the same people.

The myth of white privilege is just a classic divide and conquer technique that has worked since reconstruction. Unless we learn to put it aside and fight together we're both fucked.

thoughtone · May 16, 2014

Dannyblueyes said:
It's as if someone owed us each $100 but instead gives you $30 and me $50. You think that I got the extra money because I'm privileged. I think I got it because I outworked you. Both of us fight each other completely oblivious to the fact that we're both getting ripped off by the same people.

You see the world in a fucked up way!

RUDY RAYYY MO · May 16, 2014

Bump, should be made a sticky

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

thoughtone · May 16, 2014

Dannyblueyes said:
The myth of white privilege is just a classic divide and conquer technique that has worked since reconstruction.

Since Reconstruction!

All of a sudden after emancipation there was no white privilege. It's all a myth.

You need to study reconstruction apologist!

Dannyblueyes · May 16, 2014

thoughtone said:
Since Reconstruction!

All of a sudden after emancipation there was no white privilege. It's all a myth.

You need to study reconstruction apologist!

you completely ignored the whole point. In no way did I make any effort to deny the suffering and injustice black americans have been subjected to since and before slavery. I bring up reconstruction specifically because this was a turning point where black and white people had to compete for jobs for the planter elite class (a.k.a. former slave masters).

Both groups should have come together and realized that they were being fucked. One of the reason this didn't happen was because blacks were given just enough to live while white folks were given enough to live plus a few extras. Blacks blamed the extras on so-called white privilege, white people felt they deserved the extras because of so-called white superiority. Both ignored the fact that their boss was still living in a Greek columned mansion off of their collective hard work while they were still living in shacks.

Now I'll admit that my opinion is a little unorthodox, perhaps even controversial, but how does it make me an apologist? While we're on the subject, can you tell me one of your 17 points of so-called 'white privilege' that isn't a basic human right that should be afforded to everyone on the planet?

thoughtone · May 16, 2014

Dannyblueyes said:
you completely ignored the whole point. In no way did I make any effort to deny the suffering and injustice black americans have been subjected to since and before slavery. I bring up reconstruction specifically because this was a turning point where black and white people had to compete for jobs for the planter elite class (a.k.a. former slave masters).

Both groups should have come together and realized that they were being fucked. One of the reason this didn't happen was because blacks were given just enough to live while white folks were given enough to live plus a few extras. Blacks blamed the extras on so-called white privilege, white people felt they deserved the extras because of so-called white superiority. Both ignored the fact that their boss was still living in a Greek columned mansion off of their collective hard work while they were still living in shacks.

Now I'll admit that my opinion is a little unorthodox, perhaps even controversial, but how does it make me an apologist? While we're on the subject, can you tell me one of your 17 points of so-called 'white privilege' that isn't a basic human right that should be afforded to everyone on the planet?

You base your agruemrnt is based on the obvious. Racaism is a tool to maintain class. Poor whites could rise out of their circumstance, Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson were "poor white trash". The enjoyed white privilege.

Why weren't the native Americans enslaved?

Why were Africans the only ones that were subject to slavery from birth to death and why was anyone labeled "negro" if they had any traceable ancestry from Africa, no matter if they had more European ancestry than African?

You can talk about what poor whites and Black should do, the answer is whites aren't doing it. They continually vote against their better interests. Poor whites in Kentucky are benefiting from Obamacare, yet they refused to vote for him.

If you don't understand what white privilege is then start at the beginning of this thread and read all my posts.

Dannyblueyes · May 17, 2014

thoughtone said:
You base your agruemrnt is based on the obvious. Racaism is a tool to maintain class. Poor whites could rise out of their circumstance, Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson were "poor white trash". The enjoyed white privilege.

Why weren't the native Americans enslaved?

Why were Africans the only ones that were subject to slavery from birth to death and why was anyone labeled "negro" if they had any traceable ancestry from Africa, no matter if they had more European ancestry than African?

You can talk about what poor whites and Black should do, the answer is whites aren't doing it. They continually vote against their better interests. Poor whites in Kentucky are benefiting from Obamacare, yet they refused to vote for him.

If you don't understand what white privilege is then start at the beginning of this thread and read all my posts.

When you speak of white privilege I believe you are talking about that advantages I an other white people get simply for being European in America. I agree that those advantages are painfully real. My only argument is that they are not privileges but basic human rights that everyone should enjoy.

I also agree that white people do act against our own interests just to impose this ridiculous racial separation. It's why I tell other white people that we should be in favor of reparations. After all, if black people get broken off with money it opens the door for us to get money too. Instead whites bitch and moan about how 'unfair' it is instead of seeing the huge opportunity involved.

Occasionally 'poor white trash' does break the mold and become successful. Likewise a poor black person will occasionally 'pull themselves up by their bootstraps' and become a millionaire. Trouble is that the white power elite is doing more to broaden this gap every day. In 2014 a man like Andrew Jackson could not get away with being president any more than he could get away with getting fucked up at the inauguration.

As for you other points. Native Americans weren't enslaved because they couldn't be. How can you enslave someone in their own country when they know the land better than you do? They will escape in ways you could never find them. They also had nations, armies, and long range communication systems in place long before the first European boats ever arrived. You might win a war against a people like that, but forget about putting them in chains.

Black people were subject to slavery from birth to death because the American economy depended on having a permanent underclass that was easy to identify.

sammyjax · May 17, 2014

Dannyblueyes said:
you completely ignored the whole point. In no way did I make any effort to deny the suffering and injustice black americans have been subjected to since and before slavery. I bring up reconstruction specifically because this was a turning point where black and white people had to compete for jobs for the planter elite class (a.k.a. former slave masters).

Both groups should have come together and realized that they were being fucked. One of the reason this didn't happen was because blacks were given just enough to live while white folks were given enough to live plus a few extras. Blacks blamed the extras on so-called white privilege, white people felt they deserved the extras because of so-called white superiority. Both ignored the fact that their boss was still living in a Greek columned mansion off of their collective hard work while they were still living in shacks.

Now I'll admit that my opinion is a little unorthodox, perhaps even controversial, but how does it make me an apologist? While we're on the subject, can you tell me one of your 17 points of so-called 'white privilege' that isn't a basic human right that should be afforded to everyone on the planet?

you been here a long time without much bullshit but you right on the edge of fuckin up.

you keep saying so called white privilege, that bullshit right there is why the shit can't be fixed. you can't even say it without calling it 'so called'. you muhfuckas can not just be honest about what is going on without spreading some part of the blame around.

in your lil explanation, you make it sound like we are where we are because blacks were a lil at fault and whites were a lil at fault and if we would both just see that the rich man was fucking both of us we would be okay.

don't gloss over or omit the biggest factor homeboy: WHITE PEOPLE FUCKING HATE US. you can say all of you don't, and I believe that, but most of you do. because the ones that ain't in the klan ain't out there throwing water on burning crosses.

you trivialize the fuck out of the REAL difference in black and white existence in america with that $30/$50 shit. white people fucking kill us REGULARLY RIGHT FUCKING NOW. that ain't no $20 diffefrence. and the fact that you would even try to say that the struggle of a poor white and a poor white are comparable bolsters my point that white peopple do not have a fucking clue, and honestly, y'all don't want to.

we could get over it if we both woke up, gtfoh, we can get over it when white folks take the fuckin knife all the way out.

largebillsonlyplease · May 17, 2014

sammyjax said:
we could get over it if we both woke up, gtfoh, we can get over it when white folks take the fuckin knife all the way out.

If white people simply left us alone our entire culture would flourish. They don't even have to help, just stop fucking with us and intruding and trying to regulate and trying to stay on top of everything we're doing and trying to splinter any and all progress we make.

if they just left us the fuck alone.. like starting now if they left us alone, by 2020 we'd run this fucking country.

and they know it.

Dannyblueyes · May 17, 2014

sammyjax said:
you been here a long time without much bullshit but you right on the edge of fuckin up.

you keep saying so called white privilege, that bullshit right there is why the shit can't be fixed. you can't even say it without calling it 'so called'. you muhfuckas can not just be honest about what is going on without spreading some part of the blame around.

in your lil explanation, you make it sound like we are where we are because blacks were a lil at fault and whites were a lil at fault and if we would both just see that the rich man was fucking both of us we would be okay.

don't gloss over or omit the biggest factor homeboy: WHITE PEOPLE FUCKING HATE US. you can say all of you don't, and I believe that, but most of you do. because the ones that ain't in the klan ain't out there throwing water on burning crosses.

you trivialize the fuck out of the REAL difference in black and white existence in america with that $30/$50 shit. white people fucking kill us REGULARLY RIGHT FUCKING NOW. that ain't no $20 diffefrence. and the fact that you would even try to say that the struggle of a poor white and a poor white are comparable bolsters my point that white peopple do not have a fucking clue, and honestly, y'all don't want to.

we could get over it if we both woke up, gtfoh, we can get over it when white folks take the fuckin knife all the way out.

I don't feel that black people are at fault in any way. I just feel that looking at it as white privilege instead of a denial of black human rights is the wrong way to approach the problem.

The failure to unite lies almost completely with white hatred of black and not the other way around. Then again, I've seen some of the most ardent white racists change their ways when they woke up to a common struggle. Unfortunately, when you come at it with a white privilege angle it automatically puts most whites on the defensive which usually makes things worse.

White advantages are born in. There is no way for any us to reject it short of peeling off our skin and hair. Fighting for black human rights on the other hand, is something that we can do and NEED to make an immediate priority. Whatever shit black people have been through white people are about to go through too because it's perpetrated by the same people.

White people fell for the sub prime mortgage scam because we ignored redlining when black people suffered under it. We failed to notice that our wages went up 5x while the cost of living increased 10-15x because we were so busy fighting against affirmative action for the last 50 years. If things continue this way it's my guess that the prison industrial complex will bite us in the ass next.

muckraker10021 · May 22, 2014

thoughtone said:
Since Reconstruction!

All of a sudden after emancipation there was no white privilege. It's all a myth.

You need to study reconstruction apologist!

Wow!
The OP really needs to learn the extremely short history of the United States of America. All of the barbaric depravity embodied by the thousands of Blacks lynched by white mobs recounted in the book below happened after Reconstruction. Spend a few pennies and get the actual book. You will read actual newspaper accounts which detail the reality that Black men were lynched not only because of some alleged sexual exploits with a white women, but because the white man heard that oil was discovered on that Black mans property.

<blink>GO TO</blink><img src="http://vector.me/files/images/2/9/296230/pointing_finger_preview" width="100"> ~~ 100 YEARS OF LYNCHING - by Ralph Ginzburg ~~

<blink>GO TO</blink><img src="http://vector.me/files/images/2/9/296230/pointing_finger_preview" width="100"> ~~ 100 YEARS OF LYNCHING - by Ralph Ginzburg ~~

thoughtone · May 22, 2014

Dannyblueyes said:
When you speak of white privilege I believe you are talking about that advantages I an other white people get simply for being European in America. I agree that those advantages are painfully real. My only argument is that they are not privileges but basic human rights that everyone should enjoy.

I also agree that white people do act against our own interests just to impose this ridiculous racial separation. It's why I tell other white people that we should be in favor of reparations. After all, if black people get broken off with money it opens the door for us to get money too. Instead whites bitch and moan about how 'unfair' it is instead of seeing the huge opportunity involved.

Occasionally 'poor white trash' does break the mold and become successful. Likewise a poor black person will occasionally 'pull themselves up by their bootstraps' and become a millionaire. Trouble is that the white power elite is doing more to broaden this gap every day. In 2014 a man like Andrew Jackson could not get away with being president any more than he could get away with getting fucked up at the inauguration.

As for you other points. Native Americans weren't enslaved because they couldn't be. How can you enslave someone in their own country when they know the land better than you do? They will escape in ways you could never find them. They also had nations, armies, and long range communication systems in place long before the first European boats ever arrived. You might win a war against a people like that, but forget about putting them in chains.

Black people were subject to slavery from birth to death because the American economy depended on having a permanent underclass that was easy to identify.

When you speak of white privilege I believe you are talking about that advantages

Don't believe what I say, read what I say. I am fully capable of concisely expressing myself. I am expressing facts, not beliefs.

My only argument is that they are not privileges but basic human rights that everyone should enjoy.

To be more exactly, I should have titled this thread, white male privilege. White males have gotten away with sexism as well as racism. Black males are wholly guilty of sexism too, BGOL is based on it, but white males have enshrined it in to the history of the United States. One of the most devastating cultures in western history, raping Black women, justifying it as doing as they please with their "property" and calling it "growing slaves". This was the law of the land for 200 plus years.

One of the issues you fail to grasp is to distinguish between economic advantages, which is the goal of the economic exploitation of America's history and the personal, generational and psychological devastation of white privilege. Poor whites have risen to higher levels of influence in a racist society, but if the don't they still receive advantages over "Black" folks of any station.

Take Cliven Bundy, the current government freeloader refusing to pay the way below market value fees for his livestock grazing. Could any "Black" person point guns at federal officers without being killed on site? Is Bundy's behavior a civil or human right? Should anyone be allow to circumvent the law? Is this a privilege whites enjoy?

Yes, whites are given the benefit of the doubt. Despite 400 years of utter terrorism on those of African descent, any perceived comments construed as racism by a "Black" person is deemed just as racist as a so called racist comment by a white. As if there is a historically equivalent context.

Native Americans weren't enslaved because they couldn't be. How can you enslave someone in their own country when they know the land better than you do?

Do you know the history of the colonization of Africa? Did those people "know" their land?

Black people were subject to slavery from birth to death because the American economy depended on having a permanent underclass that was easy to identify.

So how do you explain the so called "1 drop rule" used to permanently disenfranchise those whole look "white", but could trace their ancestry to just one person of African descent. Could they be "easy to identify"?

Dannyblueyes WATCH!

Slavery by Another Name. Watch!

Dannyblueyes · May 24, 2014

thoughtone said:
Don't believe what I say, read what I say. I am fully capable of concisely expressing myself. I am expressing facts, not beliefs.

To be more exactly, I should have titled this thread, white male privilege. White males have gotten away with sexism as well as racism. Black males are wholly guilty of sexism too, BGOL is based on it, but white males have enshrined it in to the history of the United States. One of the most devastating cultures in western history, raping Black women, justifying it as doing as they please with their "property" and calling it "growing slaves". This was the law of the land for 200 plus years.

One of the issues you fail to grasp is to distinguish between economic advantages, which is the goal of the economic exploitation of America's history and the personal, generational and psychological devastation of white privilege. Poor whites have risen to higher levels of influence in a racist society, but if the don't they still receive advantages over "Black" folks of any station.

Take Cliven Bundy, the current government freeloader refusing to pay the way below market value fees for his livestock grazing. Could any "Black" person point guns at federal officers without being killed on site? Is Bundy's behavior a civil or human right? Should anyone be allow to circumvent the law? Is this a privilege whites enjoy?

Yes, whites are given the benefit of the doubt. Despite 400 years of utter terrorism on those of African descent, any perceived comments construed as racism by a "Black" person is deemed just as racist as a so called racist comment by a white. As if there is a historically equivalent context.

Do you know the history of the colonization of Africa? Did those people "know" their land?

So how do you explain the so called "1 drop rule" used to permanently disenfranchise those whole look "white", but could trace their ancestry to just one person of African descent. Could they be "easy to identify"?

Dannyblueyes WATCH!

Slavery by Another Name. Watch!

I fully agree that white people, especially men, have born in advantages over black people. Similarly, people who can walk have an advantage over paraplegics; however, walking is not a privilege either.

The feds backed off on Cliven Bundy because they didn't want to get slaughtered by an armed militia, not because they were giving him a pass. That being said, every person regardless of their race should enjoy the same freedom to exercise the second amendment and start a similar armed militia. When I speak to older black people in Oakland many of them remind me that the reason police brutality isn't a lot worse than it is was because of the Black Panthers rolling down the streets with shotguns.

White people should fight for black people to have the ability to form gun clubs and armed neighborhood watch groups without being labeled as gangs or criminals.

The one drop rule wasn't put into place until after slavery ended. Other southern states did it as a way to prevent a similar Plessy vs Ferguson case in their own states. Northern States did it as a part of the eugenics movement.

Yes, Africans new their land just as well as Native American's new theirs. However kidnapping or killing people on their land is one thing. imprisoning them for forced labor for decades is another.

thoughtone · May 24, 2014

Dannyblueyes said:
I fully agree that white people, especially men, have born in advantages over black people. Similarly, people who can walk have an advantage over paraplegics; however, walking is not a privilege either.

The feds backed off on Cliven Bundy because they didn't want to get slaughtered by an armed militia, not because they were giving him a pass. That being said, every person regardless of their race should enjoy the same freedom to exercise the second amendment and start a similar armed militia. When I speak to older black people in Oakland many of them remind me that the reason police brutality isn't a lot worse than it is was because of the Black Panthers rolling down the streets with shotguns.

White people should fight for black people to have the ability to form gun clubs and armed neighborhood watch groups without being labeled as gangs or criminals.

The one drop rule wasn't put into place until after slavery ended. Other southern states did it as a way to prevent a similar Plessy vs Ferguson case in their own states. Northern States did it as a part of the eugenics movement.

Yes, Africans new their land just as well as Native American's new theirs. However kidnapping or killing people on their land is one thing. imprisoning them for forced labor for decades is another.

The feds backed off on Cliven Bundy because they didn't want to get slaughtered by an armed militia, not because they were giving him a pass.

So why haven't they pursued him since then? He is still breaking the law.

The one drop rule wasn't put into place until after slavery ended.

So why was American slavery imposed on people if they had any trace of so called "African blood"? Why were so called "Blacks", the product of the white slave owner raping "Black" women, being less than "half" so called "Black" still subject to perpetual bondage?

Yes, Africans new their land just as well as Native American's new theirs. However kidnapping or killing people on their land is one thing. imprisoning them for forced labor for decades is another.

It is? The British did this in India.

Dannyblueyes · May 25, 2014

thoughtone said:
So why haven't they pursued him since then? He is still breaking the law.

So why was American slavery imposed on people if they had any trace of so called "African blood"? Why were so called "Blacks", the product of the white slave owner raping "Black" women, being less than "half" so called "Black" still subject to perpetual bondage?

It is? The British did this in India.

I don't know enough about the Cliven Bundy case to be able to comment on why the government STILL hasn't fully gone after him. I think it's safe to say that if I or any other white male had pulled a similar stunt we would have been killed though.

For your other questions. Early America followed the British common law which stated that a person inherited their race from their mother regardless of their father's race. In French common law the opposite was true which is why many half black runaway slaves escaped to Louisiana.

It's worth mentioning that Thomas Jefferson, who had many so-called quadroon children with Sally Hemming, allowed two of his sons to 'escape'. Both of these sons blended into white society even though everybody would have known their racial history.

You bring up a good point about India. All I can fathom is that either Indian slavery wasn't nearly as brutal as Black American slavery or it required the continued military involvement of the greatest army on earth. At any rate, Britain eventually abolished slavery across the board in all o f its colonies because it was too expensive and dangerous to maintain.

thoughtone · May 26, 2014

Dannyblueyes said:
I don't know enough about the Cliven Bundy case to be able to comment on why the government STILL hasn't fully gone after him. I think it's safe to say that if I or any other white male had pulled a similar stunt we would have been killed though.

For your other questions. Early America followed the British common law which stated that a person inherited their race from their mother regardless of their father's race. In French common law the opposite was true which is why many half black runaway slaves escaped to Louisiana.

It's worth mentioning that Thomas Jefferson, who had many so-called quadroon children with Sally Hemming, allowed two of his sons to 'escape'. Both of these sons blended into white society even though everybody would have known their racial history.

You bring up a good point about India. All I can fathom is that either Indian slavery wasn't nearly as brutal as Black American slavery or it required the continued military involvement of the greatest army on earth. At any rate, Britain eventually abolished slavery across the board in all o f its colonies because it was too expensive and dangerous to maintain.

I don't know enough about the Cliven Bundy case to be able to comment ...

But you did comment above on it. Safe to say whites with guns, freedom, Blacks with guns, killers. What happened in LA this weekend?

For your other questions. Early America followed the British common law which stated that a person inherited their race from their mother regardless of their father's race. In French common law the opposite was true which is why many half black runaway slaves escaped to Louisiana.

I don't understand this explanation. The French and British were Europeans slave holders. Their laws didn't apply to Africans. They were deemed to have no rights.

So called "mixed" people, for lack of a better word "escaped" to Louisiana because, the enslaved Haitians wee going to exact justice on them. Haiti was the second nation to have a revolution. Haitian ex slaves never wanted slavery to return to their nation, something Napoleon tried to re-impose. The so called "mixed" people were part of the problem, hence they high tailed it out of Haiti. Today the Dominican Republic's racial animus is a result of this. To be sure white privilege exists in all of the New World slave holding areas.

It's worth mentioning that Thomas Jefferson, who had many so-called quadroon children with Sally Hemming, allowed two of his sons to 'escape'. Both of these sons blended into white society even though everybody would have known their racial history.

He wasn't the only one. Before you start holding Jefferson up as some benevolent slave owner, I suggest you read this:

The Dark Side of Thomas Jefferson
A new portrait of the founding father challenges the long-held perception of Thomas Jefferson as a benevolent slaveholder

Britain eventually abolished slavery across the board

Wonderful! They should get points for this? They caused it. This illustrates the absurdity of false equivalents. The European terrorized Africans, then they stopped it. And get this straight, nothing was given to "Black" folk. Whites didn't just wake up and decide that they were going to stop terrorizing. "Black" folk forced them to!

Dannyblueyes · May 27, 2014

thoughtone said:
But you did comment above on it. Safe to say whites with guns, freedom, Blacks with guns, killers. What happened in LA this weekend?

I don't understand this explanation. The French and British were Europeans slave holders. Their laws didn't apply to Africans. They were deemed to have no rights.

So called "mixed" people, for lack of a better word "escaped" to Louisiana because, the enslaved Haitians wee going to exact justice on them. Haiti was the second nation to have a revolution. Haitian ex slaves never wanted slavery to return to their nation, something Napoleon tried to re-impose. The so called "mixed" people were part of the problem, hence they high tailed it out of Haiti. Today the Dominican Republic's racial animus is a result of this. To be sure white privilege exists in all of the New World slave holding areas.

He wasn't the only one. Before you start holding Jefferson up as some benevolent slave owner, I suggest you read this:

The Dark Side of Thomas Jefferson
A new portrait of the founding father challenges the long-held perception of Thomas Jefferson as a benevolent slaveholder

Wonderful! They should get points for this? They caused it. This illustrates the absurdity of false equivalents. The European terrorized Africans, then they stopped it. And get this straight, nothing was given to "Black" folk. Whites didn't just wake up and decide that they were going to stop terrorizing. "Black" folk forced them to!

I never implied that thomas jefferson was a 'benevolent slave holder' (a complete oxymoron BTW). I only mentioned the example of his sons to point out that during slavery the one drop rule didn't apply across the board the way it did after.

Likewise, I'm not giving the British any props either. I clearly said that they ended slavery because it was too expensive and dangerous to maintain. The only way that could have happened was from the direct resistance of Africans and other enslaved peoples.

And no, it wasn't just the Haitians that escaped to Louisiana. Mixed black people from other parts of America did too. If you had a white father then Louisiana law considered you white. It didn't matter where you were from. This is why the differences between English and French common law mattered to Africans.

As for Cliven Bundy, do you really think that just ANY white person could get away with it? David Koresh certainly couldn't.

thoughtone · May 28, 2014

Dannyblueyes said:
I never implied that thomas jefferson was a 'benevolent slave holder' (a complete oxymoron BTW). I only mentioned the example of his sons to point out that during slavery the one drop rule didn't apply across the board the way it did after.

Likewise, I'm not giving the British any props either. I clearly said that they ended slavery because it was too expensive and dangerous to maintain. The only way that could have happened was from the direct resistance of Africans and other enslaved peoples.

And no, it wasn't just the Haitians that escaped to Louisiana. Mixed black people from other parts of America did too. If you had a white father then Louisiana law considered you white. It didn't matter where you were from. This is why the differences between English and French common law mattered to Africans.

As for Cliven Bundy, do you really think that just ANY white person could get away with it? David Koresh certainly couldn't.

I never implied that thomas jefferson was a 'benevolent slave holder' (a complete oxymoron BTW). I only mentioned the example of his sons to point out that during slavery the one drop rule didn't apply across the board the way it did after.

Wrong!

If you had any traceable so called "Black" lineage, you were by default, bound to slavery. Many "Black" folk that so called passed for "white" kept their history to themselves for fear of being put in to bondage Even if you were a so called Free Negro, freed by a rare slave owner or in some jurisdictions, purchasing your own freedom, you had to carry documentation indicating that you were free.

And no, it wasn't just the Haitians that escaped to Louisiana. Mixed black people from other parts of America did too. If you had a white father then Louisiana law considered you white. It didn't matter where you were from. This is why the differences between English and French common law mattered to Africans.

You have to admit that this has to sound ridiculous even to yourself. I'm sure there were more than Hatians migrating to Louisiana, a one time French territory. French Canadians to name one. But to New Orleans, the facts are that the "darker skin" Hatians had a revolution in Haiti and the whites and so called mixed people that promoted that slave culture had gotten killed or run off. Most went to New Orleans many went to other French colonies in the Caribbean or back to France. Having a white father meant nothing during slavery since virtually all of the mixed slaves had "Black" fathers. Rape of their "property was the norm, common place and accepted. Why do you think over 30% of so called African Americans have some European lineage. Actually if you consider the Americans that have roots in the United States before 1890, the percentage goes up.

As for Cliven Bundy, do you really think that just ANY white person could get away with it? David Koresh certainly couldn't.

Come on. Koresh did get away with it. The Feds waited for 51 days for that child molester to come out. He incinerated himself and those people.

I still contend, that if it were a "Black" person or group, the law would have performed summary execution way earlier.

Dannyblueyes · May 29, 2014

If what I'm saying sounds so ridiculous then why weren't the mixed Haitians that promoted slave culture put in chains the moment that they reached the shores of new Orleans? For that matter, why would they be pro-slavery in the first place?,

Records show that of the few black people that owned slaves virtually all of them were mixed and lived in Louisiana. These are not coincidences.

As for Koresh, since when is enduring a 51 day armed standoff qualify as getting away with anything

stretchwallz · May 29, 2014

Great thread... Bump I will return !

thoughtone · Sep 4, 2014

thoughtone · Sep 4, 2014

</div>

<div id="article">
<div class="textPlugin">
<p style="text-align: center;">Watch the entire documentary <em><strong>Slavery by Another Name</strong></em><br />and "Making of" the documentary special.</p>
</div><div align="center">
<iframe id="partnerPlayer" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" style="width: 512px; height: 288px;" src="http://video.pbs.org/widget/partnerplayer/2176766758/?w=512&h=288&chapterbar=true&autoplay=false&embed=false"></iframe>
</div>

<div class="coveVideo alignmid" style="width:512px;" >

White Privilege

Rising Star

Rising Star

Rising Star

Rising Star

Star

Superstar *****

Rising Star

Rising Star

Rising Star

Rising Star

Rising Star

Rising Star

Land of the Heartless

Aka Illegal Danny

Rising Star

Rising Star

Rising Star

Aka Illegal Danny

Rising Star

Aka Illegal Danny

Grand Puba of Science

Large

Aka Illegal Danny

Superstar *****

Rising Star

Aka Illegal Danny

Rising Star

Aka Illegal Danny

Rising Star

Aka Illegal Danny

Rising Star

Aka Illegal Danny

Superstar ***

Rising Star

Rising Star