Yeah, back in the old days people felt connected. Family would often cover debts when a parent passed away, sometimes friends would even cover a debt when someone else passed away. Today it's just me me me pure selfishness, I feel nothing for no one. You're one of those and it's certainly your right to made the world a shittier place.
Greenwood Massacre aka Tulsa Race Riots - 1921
- Thread starter hanimmal
- Start date
- Status
hanimmal
Well-Known Member
https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2021/06/26/tulsa-massacre-body-found-bullet/
Forensic scientists and archaeologists investigating a mass grave near the site of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre have unearthed skeletal remains, including that of a Black man with multiple gunshot wounds to his head and shoulder, officials announced Friday.
The remains were initially found in October, when authorities were excavating the Black section of Oaklawn Cemetery as part of the investigation into a search for mass graves that may be connected to the massacre. But they were left in the ground until city officials received permission from a judge to exhume them for forensic analysis.
In June, after the excavation was resumed, scientists discovered 35 coffins in the unmarked mass grave. The remains of 19 people were taken to a science lab on-site, not far from the mass grave. So far, officials said, they have completed preliminary analysis on nine of those human remains.
“Five of those nine were juveniles,” said Phoebe Stubblefield, the lead forensic anthropologist working on the investigation. “The remaining four are adults. One was an older female. The others were adults who range in age from 30s to their 40s.”
Stubblefield said the analysis has also looked for clues of race. “Ancestry so far, when we can detect it, has been of African descent,” Stubblefield said. “We are looking for features … determining ancestry by the shape of the skull.”
She said one set of the remains examined was that of a Black man who was buried in a plain casket in a section of the city-owned cemetery set aside for indigent residents.
Stubblefield told reporters during a news conference Friday that one man had a bullet still lodged in his left shoulder area.
“He does have associated trauma,” she said. “He has multiple projectile wounds.”
The complete analysis of the remains found in the mass grave may take several weeks. “We still have details to work out on the other males that we did exhume,” Stubblefield said.
In Tulsa, solemn remembrances of a century-old race massacre by survivors and descendants
Last July, Tulsa officials began digging for mass graves. The first “test excavation” ended without finding human remains, but the city expanded its search. On June 1, the 100th anniversary of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre, the city expanded its search for mass graves in Oaklawn, and a new pit was excavated in another section of the cemetery.
The devastation of the Tulsa Race Massacre
Historians believe that as many as 300 Black people were killed during the massacre. Thirty-five square blocks of Greenwood were destroyed by fire. More than 1,250 homes, churches, schools, businesses, a hospital and a library were destroyed. Massacre survivors reported seeing bodies tossed into mass graves, into the muddy Arkansas River or loaded onto trucks or trains, making a tally the fatalities difficult.
No White person was ever arrested for the violence. For decades after the massacre, according to historians, city officials and leaders orchestrated a coverup to try to hide the massacre. The massacre was left out of textbooks in Oklahoma, removed from library records and few people talked about it.
In 2018, Tulsa Mayor G.T. Bynum (R), reopened a city investigation of potential mass graves after a Washington Post story detailed the unresolved questions from an earlier investigation, which did not include a search for mass graves.
and who gets to decide?
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
You do, that's what consent means. You own yourself and your justly acquired property. Others own themselves and their justly acquired property.
That doesn't mean people can't cooperate as long as all parties are in agreement.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
You don't need "everyone to agree" , all you need to do is understand if you have the right to do something or not.
If it involves another person and/or their property and you have suggestions they don't like and told you "no thanks", as long as they are leaving you and your property alone, you get to leave them alone. That's how peace is maintained.
Your way, "majority decides" is how gang rape is decided. No means no, bird brain.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
That's not an argument.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
The reason why I like individual rights is, it helps to affirm equality, since every individual has rights the same as everyone else.
Since that is true, a majority can't have any more right than any of the individuals within it. Logic and math for the win.
A majority can and DID make a thing inherently wrong, slavery, legal. That's what you're defending. Good luck.
Slavery, hard and soft, is what you get when you insist on a majority being able to OVERRIDE individual rights, which are a kind of property right.
You try to make it binary in that you can only see the bad things the majority has done and you willfully ignore the other side. So, slavery isn't at all what I'm defending, because I believe in merit, which means I like the good things the majority has done and dislike the bad things the majority has done. That's normally not a difficult concept to comprehend, yet here we are.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
If you separate the ends from the means, you can justify any result. How convenient.
If it tramples rights to achieve the good, I think there might me another way. To proceed to a perceived "good" while ignoring others rights sort of cancels out the good you hope to achieve. I sure hope you don't force your ideas on your friends, why would you support that?
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
You should be able to drive as fast as the agreement you made with the owners of the road says you can.
It's important to try to keep your agreements and not to try to make others agreements for them, especially when they are being otherwise peaceful.
I'm an excellent driver by the way.
Sounds like a great idea. For each section of road within each district of each county, we can hire a team of ten thousand investigators to dig through 90 years of sales/property/income tax records to see which specific people have paid for the road, which won't be easy because there are plenty of visitors from around the world, but don't worry we'll track them down.
Then we'll have to come up with some sort of system to assign a "weight" for a certain amount spent, because it's not really fair for someone that's contributed $1 to have the same input as someone that's contributed $1,000,000 dollars, but don't worry we'll get that figured out.
But we should probably look through the historical records to make sure all land acquired wasn't taken forcibly from someone else, which is going to be a little bit of a problem since the entire nation was stolen from the Indians who were peacefully minding their own business, but don't worry, we'll make sure all the land is returned to its rightful owners and then hopefully come to a new agreement to reacquire the land, and if we can't find alternative routes, don't worry, we can sort that out somehow.
Then, once the ownership of the road and land is situated, we can take a vote on what the speed limit should be for each respective section, which of course we're going to need to make sure, as you've said, that "all parties are in agreement", which I just know in my heart that it won't be a problem at all.
No, but really though, it's an awesome idea. Very practical, grounded, and just rooted in the real world, so...well done on that.
Then we'll have to come up with some sort of system to assign a "weight" for a certain amount spent, because it's not really fair for someone that's contributed $1 to have the same input as someone that's contributed $1,000,000 dollars, but don't worry we'll get that figured out.
But we should probably look through the historical records to make sure all land acquired wasn't taken forcibly from someone else, which is going to be a little bit of a problem since the entire nation was stolen from the Indians who were peacefully minding their own business, but don't worry, we'll make sure all the land is returned to its rightful owners and then hopefully come to a new agreement to reacquire the land, and if we can't find alternative routes, don't worry, we can sort that out somehow.
Then, once the ownership of the road and land is situated, we can take a vote on what the speed limit should be for each respective section, which of course we're going to need to make sure, as you've said, that "all parties are in agreement", which I just know in my heart that it won't be a problem at all.
No, but really though, it's an awesome idea. Very practical, grounded, and just rooted in the real world, so...well done on that.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Or you could simply pay the owners of a given road, when you use it, like when you go to a grocery store and buy the things you put in your cart, but not be forced to pay for the cheetohs others have put in their cart. That seems to work pretty well.
that's why Congress works poorly together.
Righties complained when teams went with trophies for all, especially little kids..now the Rightie complains only they deserve the trophy. ummmm now 30 years later i can tell you, we did it for you because you're such sore sports and losers; we wanted your children to know sportsmanship not one upmanship.
I'm not going to type it again, but the reply you quoted is what I'd use to reply to this. Maybe you didn't infer the obvious, but... Who owns the roads? We can't go back in time, so we have our entire nation's worth of infrastructure to transition into the hands of the correct owners. Now start at the top of the post you quoted and tell me your plan.
Congress is just us, so we work poorly together. I think it may be the downside of the US's unique diversity, a country without thousands of years of evolving together. Which, I know we like to think of diversity as a universal positive, but it does come with some challenges. All of our unique past experiences create unique visions for the future. It may be why some other nations area bit more unified. New Zealand parliament passed a semi-auto gun ban with one dissenting vote. That's such a foreign concept to me.
I do think you're about about the way we tried to build confidence in kids. Righties seem to have their own effed up take on it, like the recent video of that little girl talking to the board of supervisors. We're creating monsters. As George Carlin says, "garbage in, garbage out".
- Status