Jena 6

You probably know the general details of the Jena 6...6 black students tried as adults (totalling 100 yrs jailtime btw them), for a fight that was sparked when the white kids hung nooses under a favorite tree for the white kids to gather. The white kids involved weren't tried for anything (to put it very briefly).

I am listening to DemocracyNow! program, and this snippet was interesting:

AMY GOODMAN: One vocal critic of Thursday's protest was David Duke, a Louisiana resident, former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. In 1991, white residents of Jena overwhelmingly voted for David Duke when he ran for Louisiana governor. DAVID DUKE: This is David Duke, and this is the David Duke internet web radio broadcast, broadcasting to the entire world with news and information of vital importance to Europeans and people of European descent, no matter where they may live around the world. Today, I have an important program. Today, the city of Jena, Louisiana is being besieged. It's being invaded by thousands of thugs, demanding that a specific black criminal be let out of jail -- he and his cohorts who committed a vicious hate crime against a white student in that city. The people of Jena, the people of Louisiana, and I, are not racist. We simply want justice to be done. We understand that white people in America have lost our basic civil rights. Whites are now deprived of human rights by racial discrimination in jobs, promotions, scholarships, college admittance, and in many other programs. More importantly, whites are increasingly victims of black racial violence and hate crimes. AMY GOODMAN: You've been listening to an excerpt of a radio program by David Duke, the former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. Reverend Al Sharpton, your response? REV. AL SHARPTON: Well, I think, clearly, anyone that was the Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan, to say that he is not a racist and that those that think his way are not racist, is so absurd it doesn't even -- is not even worthy of a reply from me or comment from me. Obviously, David Duke and that whole kind of person is the problem here. You have a Klan mentality that does not feel that the white students should be in any way penalized for the violence that happened, that they perpetrated on these black students, that anything should happen to those that hung the noose. They clearly have no problem with having a tree in a public schoolyard that only whites could sit under. Let us not forget, race was brought into this when you had a tree only for white students. And when a black student sat under the tree after questioning that, that was responded to by hangman nooses. Race did not come into this from six black students two, three months later. Race did not come into this by those of us that came here for the last several months or the tens of thousands yesterday. It was brought in by the tree and the hangman noose. And for them to try to in any way change the facts only shows the typical demagoguery the Klan has always played to try to whip up elements in the white community that are not already with them and may not understand the facts. AMY GOODMAN: Reverend Sharpton, I spoke with Kelly Barker, Justin Barker's mother. Justin Barker is the young white man who was beaten up, the white student, in the Jena schoolyard. She is manager at the Super Wal-Mart in town in Jena. I then talked with her and her husband David Barker on the phone. They were very upset about people saying "Free the Jena Six." They were saying, "Should they get no punishment for beating up our son?" Your response to that? REV. AL SHARPTON: The response is very simple. Mychal Bell has done ten months in jail as an adult, that even the Louisiana courts are saying he should not have been tried with. I think that, one, no one ever said that we condone schoolyard fights, but that's what it was. And the punishment should have been a schoolyard fight. Had these young men been dealt with in juvenile court in a regular proceeding for juveniles like any other juvenile, including the white student that pulled the gun, the shotgun at the school, and the white student that beat up, I believe it was young Mr. Bailey at the party, I don't think there would have ever been an issue, local or national. What I think she is not mindful of is that is not the case. It is the imbalance of justice, the imbalance of the charges, that raised the outcry. So I think that if she had said, "Yes, they should be punished, but he's done ten months in jail as an adult, and even the courts disagree," I think she would have more credibility. But to have a young man still sitting in jail ten months later in adult jail and to act like there's been no punishment, I think, takes a lot of credibility away from their kind of outrage that somebody is not paying for a fight in the schoolyard with their son. No one does not in any way condone her son or any other son being beaten up, but we don't condone Bailey getting beaten up at a party. We don't condone young black students being confronted with a shotgun. And we don't condone black students told you can't sit under a tree or we're going to hang lynch signs or lynch symbols up on that tree.

Thoughts?

Its okay, the culprit that started this whole thing has been punished. Justice has been served, the tree has been cut down.

David

Cool. According to David Duke, I'm not white. Now it's Official!

What I like is the Al Sharpton and Jesse "Strongarm" Jackson don't seem to learn from Tawanna Brawley, the Duke LaCrosse fiasco, etc. The Jena 6 thing has been pretty wildly misportrayed by the media. But some of the news orgs are now beginning to catch up with the actual facts, Compare this article with the emotional attempt to start more needless hatemongering in Neil's post:

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/col...ry/284511.html

Note that the writer is Black, BTW. Why wasn't Michael Bell's two prior criminal assault records mentioned by the mainstream liberal press and why is that factor never mentioned by Sharpton and Jackson. I think we're about to see the same sort of sudden silence that overcame the liberal lynch mobs when the facts actually started coming out in the Duke Lacrosse fabrication. Note that the woman who brought the false charges in Duke got off scott-free.

Mike

David Skaggs wrote: Its okay, the culprit that started this whole thing has been punished. Justice has been served, the tree has been cut down. David

Oh, but I beg to differ. The culprit that started this (ie, the prosecutor) is still at large, and trying to ruin the lives of six black youths.

Not content with overreaching his office, he went down to the school with armed police guards and threatened to end the black students' lives, "with the stroke of a pen."

Only someone who thinks that it's OK to charge black students with attempted murder, while letting white students walk, would think that "justice is being served."

Neil Mick wrote: Oh, but I beg to differ. The culprit that started this (ie, the prosecutor) is still at large, and trying to ruin the lives of six black youths. Not content with overreaching his office, he went down to the school with armed police guards and threatened to end the black students' lives, "with the stroke of a pen."

Yeah, the problem with the "stroke of the pen" comment is that it only comes as something hearsay. The prior assault convictions by the poor languishing Mr. Bell happen to be a matter of record... yet you want to blame some white person on hearsay and somehow correlate the attack on the white kid to a conflict that apparently happened several weeks before. There is conflict in a lot of these rural schools... daily... the is studiously not reported by the media. I'd bet, since I know what goes on in a number of rural schools, that there has been a conflict going on for quite some time and it's not one-sidedly "the white guys". Or "the Jews". Or "Bush". Or "the U.S.". This constant blame directed at the usual liberal enemies gets a little old.

Mike Sigman

The liberals mourn for their victims, the conservatives mourn for their victims, but who mourns for the tree?

David

David Skaggs wrote: The liberals mourn for their victims, the conservatives mourn for their victims,

"Victims?" What Conservative "victims?"

but who mourns for the tree? David

Ah, I suspect you're being glib. But, funny you mentioned it...I was mourning the tree. I kept thinking what a nice tree it was, and why'd they have to cut it down?

On this side of the Atlantic we do not have nearly enough information to get a clear idea

We understand that

a) Some black kids sat under a tree
b) Following this nooses were hung from the tree
c) The perpertrators were suspended
d) 6 black kids attacked a white kid.

However it's what we don't know that worries me. Firstly we don't know if there were any white on black attacks that were disregarded or treated by the school internally. If they were whether they were eqivalent.

We don't know whether the charges were disproportionate to the offence

We don't know why the DA decided to get involved - was it the number of attackers, the colour of thier skin - the publicity he would get, the record of the attacker/s

Without this information all we have is a lot of sound and fury.

David Skaggs wrote: The liberals mourn for their victims, the conservatives mourn for their victims, but who mourns for the tree? David

Cutting down a tree as if it was somehow a part of the human problem, is as daft dousing the flames on a burning cross. It does nothing to address the underlying issues of racism.

Treeism at its very worst

regards,

Mark

David Chalk wrote: On this side of the Atlantic we do not have nearly enough information to get a clear idea We understand that a) Some black kids sat under a tree b) Following this nooses were hung from the tree c) The perpertrators were suspended d) 6 black kids attacked a white kid. However it's what we don't know that worries me. Firstly we don't know if there were any white on black attacks that were disregarded or treated by the school internally. If they were whether they were eqivalent. We don't know whether the charges were disproportionate to the offence We don't know why the DA decided to get involved - was it the number of attackers, the colour of thier skin - the publicity he would get, the record of the attacker/s Without this information all we have is a lot of sound and fury.

There's a lot you don't know, but in your synopsis of what you "know" you neglect to mention the lead perpetrator had a criminal history of physical attacks. You "knew" that be don't seem to want to discuss that side of it.

There was some long-standing alienation between the white and black students. You don't know why that was. Could have been race. Could have been behavior. Who knows? We know that civically, blacks did not respond to jury summonses in this case and probably that's not the first time. Maybe they choose to sit under their own figurative tree and not participate in the community.

I know that if Jena's school system follows the testing patterns of the vast majority of schools in the US, there is a disparity between the scholarship accomplishments of the blacks and whites.... that has to have an effect on relationships.

I say dig into the "Jena 6" debacle.... but equally dig into all the pertinent aspects and let the light shine on everyone. That's equality.

FWIW

Mike

David Chalk wrote: On this side of the Atlantic we do not have nearly enough information to get a clear idea We understand that

Hi David,

Let me fill in some of the holes, hopefully give a better perspective.

The Jena 6 story barely received any media attention at all, until DemocracyNow! ran a feature on it, on July 6. After that, national and international media started to take notice.

a) Some black kids sat under a tree

This tree was a meeting-place for the white students at the High School in the mostly-white town of Jena (the tree was known as the "White Tree.") The black students asked the principal if they could also be allowed to sit under the tree. The principal gave his affirmation.

The next day,

b) Following this nooses were hung from the tree

The police decided that it was "a harmless prank," and the students involved were given 3-days' suspension by the superintendent, overruling the initial expulsion ruling by the principal.

The FBI also apparently ran an investigation but found no cause for charging anyone with a hate-crime.

c) The perpertrators were suspended

The next day after that, black football players organized a peaceful protest under the tree. The school freaked, called the cops: and in comes Reed Walters, the local DA, accompanied by armed police escort. He says to the black students: "I can eliminate your lives with a stroke of this pen."

On November 30th, a wing of the High School burnt down. Blacks assumed it was whites; and whites assumed it was blacks. Tensions mounted.

NPR has a good accounting of what followed:

Wade Goodwyn wrote: The next night, 16-year-old Robert Bailey and a few black friends tried to enter a party attended mostly by whites. When Bailey got inside, he was attacked and beaten. The next day, tensions escalated at a local convenience store. Bailey exchanged words with a white student who had been at the party. The white boy ran back to his truck and pulled out a pistol grip shotgun. Bailey ran after him and wrestled him for the gun. After some scuffling, Bailey and his friends took the gun away and brought it home. Bailey was eventually charged with theft of a firearm, second-degree robbery and disturbing the peace. The white student who pulled the weapon was not charged at all. The following Monday, Dec.4, a white student named Justin Barker was loudly bragging to friends in the school hallway that Robert Bailey had been whipped by a white man on Friday night. When Barker walked into the courtyard, he was attacked by a group of black students. The first punch knocked Barker out and he was kicked several times in the head. But the injuries turned out to be superficial. Barker was examined by doctors and released; he went out to a social function (a HS ring meeting) later that evening. Six black students were arrested and charged with aggravated assault. But District Attorney Reed Walters increased the charges to attempted second-degree murder. That provoked a storm of black outrage.

The black students were also expelled from the High School after an initial investigation by the school district. At the disciplinary hearing, the school board was not allowed to review the findings of the investigation before they voted to uphold the expulsion of the six. The school board’s lawyer, advising the Board? The very same Reed Walters, DA, pushing the charges for murder.

http://www.democracynow.org/article..../09/19/1621212

DN! wrote: BILLY FOWLER: The first meeting that I, as a school board member, sat in on was the appeal hearing of the Jena Six. We were listening -- or we were told at this meeting that we couldn't ask any probing questions about what had happened, because the charges had been filed, and it would violate some legal matter somehow. I’m not sure. And all we could do was ask the boys, “Were your rights violated in any manner?” And all we could do was vote on what we were told. And at that point, we didn't know a whole lot, so we voted to uphold what they had done prior. AMY GOODMAN: And that was that they should be expelled? BILLY FOWLER: Right. AMY GOODMAN: And you didn't talk to the boys? BILLY FOWLER: No. Well, we couldn't ask them anything. AMY GOODMAN: Because? BILLY FOWLER: Because we were told that it would violate the law. DAVID GOODMAN: By the District Attorney? BILLY FOWLER: Right. DAVID GOODMAN: And the District Attorney was acting in what capacity at that meeting? BILLY FOWLER: He was acting as the lawyer for the school board.

d. The injustice of the rulings (the charges have since been mostly reduced, with appeals going back and forth. Reed Walters has vowed to prosecute "to the fullest extent of the law") brought forth a massive rally (actually, 2 rallies) of 40-60,000 people.

David Chalk wrote: However it's what we don't know that worries me. Firstly we don't know if there were any white on black attacks that were disregarded or treated by the school internally. If they were whether they were eqivalent. We don't know whether the charges were disproportionate to the offence We don't know why the DA decided to get involved - was it the number of attackers, the colour of thier skin - the publicity he would get, the record of the attacker/s Without this information all we have is a lot of sound and fury.

I hope that that info filled in some of the blanks.

There's a little more to it, unfortunately. There's the sad, hateful responses by the bigots in this country.

You have the usual anti-black screeds by notorious bigots like David Duke, quoted in the OP.

You ALSO have ugliness popping up like this...

Protestors Encounter Unthinkable Gesture

After the Jena 6 rally, a group of about 200 from Nashville were in nearby Alexandria, Louisiana, less than 40 miles southwest of Jena, waiting for their bus to come back home when two white teenagers in a red truck pulled up slowly, passing the crowd of Nashvillians. The truck had two nooses hanging from the back of it. The group from Nashville said they think the teens were trying to intimidate them, driving by a few more times

and this...

FBI Reviewing Anti-Jena 6 Web Page

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — The FBI is reviewing a white supremacist Web site that purports to list the addresses of five of the six black teenagers accused of beating a white student in Jena and "essentially called for their lynching," an agency spokeswoman said Saturday. Sheila Thorne, an agent in the FBI's New Orleans office, said authorities were reviewing whether the site breaks any federal laws. She said the FBI had "gathered intelligence on the matter," but declined to further explain how the agency got involved. CNN first reported Friday about the Web site, which features a swastika, frequent use of racial slurs, a mailing address in Roanoke, Va., and phone numbers purportedly for some of the teens' families "in case anyone wants to deliver justice." That page is dated Thursday.

Here's my take on the situation. The massive rally showed that the injustice of the Jena 6 resonates with the incipient racism all across the US. African American's know it; and it seems that the KKK and other hate-groups sense it, as well. Hopefully, the excitement generated by the rallies will transform into real, positive change.

Regarding the case itself: this case, IMO, is a schematic of how racism works within this country. You have a DA who adopts a muscular, draconian policy where he has no actual authority.

He had no right to come into that school and threaten the students with ending their lives.

On the night of the hearing, he should have recused himself and not tried to influence the school board, the way he did...it was clearcut "conflict of interest."

Coupled with the the DA's racism and abuse of power, you have the compliance of much of the school district and the police. It's hard to say how far the compliance went (were they willing accomplices? Or were they like Budd Fowler, who assumed that the DA "must know what he's doing," and was presumably intimidated by Walters' office?

The Jena 6 should have been disciplined, possibly brought up on misdemeanor charges: but even the courts are tossing out the DA's grandstanding attempts.

All the other events (the beating at the party; the white kid pulling a shotgun; etc) should all be taken into account with the hanging of those nooses. IMO, there is a definite one-sidedness to the charges levelled by the DA and the police.

Black students get attempted murder, while white students get, at most, a 3-day suspension? SOMEONE in a high position in Jena is willfully ignoring cause and effect, here. Interesting, how the few whites interviewed in Jena see no problem, while all the blacks see the one-sided justice as plain as day.

It reminds me of an incident that occurred when I worked in a Summer Camp (a lifetime ago). The City boasted a huge, innercity park, with a well-maintained Summer Camp. Most of the students were from poor, innercity families, and black.

Once in awhile, a white kid would sign up for the Camp for a few weeks. Anyway, this one kid was clearly uncomfortable with his newfound campmates. He came from a trendy, upscale surburban neighborhood.

So one day the kids were all playing some boardgame and a question arose as to the rules. Up till that point they were a group of kids who had a friendly disagreement. No group of kids were in total concensus on how to resolve the dispute.

Suddenly, the white kid got frustrated, stood up and yelled, "YOU'RE ALL N****RS!!" Instantly, the group of individuals all stood up as one and were clearly set to pummel the little brat into jelly if I hadn't intervened.

Something about being called that particular term resonated in them all. It was outrageous, and they all simultaneoously felt the same anger at being called that epithet.

Where did that rage originate? I think that we all know the answer...those kids certainly did. No one had to talk about it: they all knew what to do...to lash out against such a hateful word.

The black community feels the injustice, in their collective gut. This is why there was such a large, committed rally in Jena. I'm very glad that the rally was peaceful (notice, tho, how racists like David Duke try to turn the rally into some sort of attack.)

David Duke wrote: Today, the city of Jena, Louisiana is being besieged. It's being invaded by thousands of thugs, demanding that a specific black criminal be let out of jail -- he and his cohorts who committed a vicious hate crime against a white student in that city.

(Funny, how a schoolyard fight that went too far is a "hate crime," while nooses, white-on-black violence, and threats with shotguns aren't)

Where is even the elementary statement about Bell's prior criminal convictions in any of the stories you've told or pointed to, Neil? You don't really care about the truth, I take it, so you don't notice when it's missing? How many other facts are missing from your one-sided tale from 2 liberal sources (other than yourself)?

Mike Sigman

Mike Sigman wrote: Where is even the elementary statement about Bell's prior criminal convictions in any of the stories you've told or pointed to, Neil? You don't really care about the truth, I take it, so you don't notice when it's missing? How many other facts are missing from your one-sided tale from 2 liberal sources (other than yourself)? Mike Sigman

Perhaps he has you on ignore and can not see your comments in order to respond?

Hunter Lonsberry wrote: Perhaps he has you on ignore and can not see your comments in order to respond?

Well, of course... that's what he did in the past until he found out that it was making a fool of him. In this case, Neil has asserted that the prosecutor is the "culprit", based on hearsay and uncorroborated statements from the same media that haven't mentioned that the "all white" jury was "all white" because blacks didn't bother to show up for jury duty and that the poor imprisoned youth had a prior criminal convictions for assault. NPR and "Democracy Now" don't mind lying a little bit in order to enhance any story. Used to be that one of the best all-around sources for factual news was the Christian Science Monitor, but that's changed, too. The best we can do is print as many of the facts that we can and show who is lying by omission and skew.

One of the interesting things to watch in the last 5 or so years is how massively disrupted the storyline has been among traditionally-liberal journalists (anyone who has been to a college with a journalism school knows that they are mostly radical Left.... often the most leftist place on campus). The reason for that has been the internet.

There's probably a lot more to the story than we're all getting, but the Kansas City Star article pretty much makes Neil's version of the story look like a deliberately-concocted lie which much of the mainstream media is buying into, just as they did the Duke Lacrosse story and the Tawanna Brawley story. I'd suggest that already it looks bad for some of the liberal media and it's going to get worse. Beating someone unconscious isn't "justified"; it's illegal. If everyone wants to set up their own exceptions to the law, please let the rest of us know so that we can play at anarchy, too.

Mike

Hunter Lonsberry wrote: Perhaps he has you on ignore and can not see your comments in order to respond?

No, that's not it. It's just that I'm at a loss as to how to respond, with respect. You know, it sometimes may not seem like it, but I take Jun's admonitions to respect each other, very seriously.

Jun Akiyama wrote: I'll be honest and say that the manner in which people are posting here in the Open Discussions forum, especially in the political threads, has been very disappointing. The conduct I see repeated day after day, post after post, really makes me shake my head. Where is your respect? Where is your dignity? Stop stooping to baiting each other with snide little personal comments. Discuss the issues, not the persons and personalities involved in the discussions. If you can't conduct respectful, mature discussions here on AikiWeb, please do me a favor and take your discussions elsewhere. I'm really getting tired of it all, folks. -- Jun

(I quoted Jun here as a reminder: since he clearly is addressing most of the people who respond in these sort of topics)

I really, really would like to respond respectfully in this thread: but how do you respond to someone who's accused you of fostering hatemongering; of lying, or not caring about the truth; of being a fool (all within this thread)...even before you get one word in, in response?? How DO you do that...?

All I want to do here is have a friendly conversation. Some people may agree with my perspectives...some disagree. That's your right. But there comes a time in the dialogue when the arguments start to take a personal bite to them. When that time occurs, I say it's time to back down, to reflect. It might EVEN be time to just shrug and say oh well: a friendly dialogue is impossible, under these conditions. Time to move on. In the meantime, I share Jun's sentiment...enough is enough.

I would like to see a lively exchange of ideas, even should the debates get a trifle heated. But the tone of these chats has to change.

Some information from another source:
http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/7170510

Well worth reading the whole article. This is just an excerpt.

Jason Whitlock wrote: Before I go any further, let me state this: The prosecutor should've never charged these boys with attempted murder. The entire school board should be replaced for stopping the noose-hanging kids from being expelled. OK, having said that, much of the mainstream reporting on this story has been misleading, irresponsible and inflammatory. No one mentions that Mychal Bell's clueless public defender was black. No one mentions that there were no black jurors because of the 50 people who responded to the more than 100 summons, none were black. No one mentions that Bell was already on probation for battery relating to a Christmas day incident in 2005. No one mentions that Bell was adjudicated (convicted) of two other violent crimes in 2006 and one charge of criminal damage to property. No one mentions that Bell's father acknowledged he moved back to Louisiana in February (after seven years in Dallas) to supervise his son because of the "Jena Six" mess. No one mentions that Bell starred on the Jena High football team while constantly jeopardizing/violating his seemingly flimsy probation. This was all talked about in open court during a bond hearing for Bell, and a newspaper in Alexandria, La., wrote about it. Just about everybody else has pretty much ignored the "other side" of the story. Including the fact that not one witness — black or white, and there were 40 statements taken — connected the jumping/beatdown of the white student (Dec. 4) to the noose incident (Sept. 1). No one mentions that a black U.S. Attorney, Donald Washington, investigated the "Jena Six" case and held a town-hall meeting explaining that there was no evidence connecting the jumping/beatdown to the noose incident. Only after the prosecutor overreacted (or tired of letting Bell and others skate once the successful football season was over; Bell wasn't the only football star charged) did the "Jena Six" blame the attack on the nooses and the white shade tree.

Excellent point, Marks. Jason Whitlock is the same writer who did the other article I pointed to. I notice Mark is able to bring out more of the facts without stooping to calling the "white D.A." a "culprit" or calling anyone an "alcoholic", or whatever. I really think that it's possible to discuss things, even on AikiWeb, without villifying someone and simply examining the facts.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

Found another article and all I can say is wow. Talk about a completely different view than what was given in the media. Again, well worth reading the whole article.

http://www.authorsden.com/visit/view...17296&id=32967

Some excerpts:

Eddie Thompson wrote: The actions of the three white students who hung the nooses demonstrate prejudice and bigotry. However, they were not just given "two days suspension" as reported by national news agencies. After first being expelled, then upon appeal, being allowed to re-enter the school system, they were sent to an alternative school, off-campus, for an extended period of time. They underwent investigations by Federal and Sate authorities. They were given psychological evaluations. Even when they were eventually allowed back on campus they were not allowed to be a part of the general population for weeks.

Eddie Thompson wrote: The speech given by Reed Walters that included the now infamous statement "I can end your life with the stroke of a pen" was not given to a group of black students. It was given during a speech to the entire student body in an assembly called by the school's principal to calm a community that was pulling their children out of school because there were two fights one day with racial overtones. Two girls, one white and one black fought. Another student was taken to the emergency room to receive stitches.

Mark Murray wrote: Found another article and all I can say is wow. Talk about a completely different view than what was given in the media. Again, well worth reading the whole article.

Ah, and here's a comment that supports a suspicion I've had from the very beginning, since I went to a fairly rough high school myself:

The “Jena Six” have repeatedly been held up as heroes by much of the race-based community and called “innocent students” by the national media. Some of these students have reputations in Jena for intimidating and sometimes beating other students. They have vandalized and destroyed both school property and community property. Some of the Jena Six have been involved in crimes not only in LaSalle Parish but also in surrounding parishes. For the most part, coaches and other adults have prevented them from being held accountable for the reign of terror they have presided over in Jena. Despite intervention by adults wanting to give them chances due their athletic potential, most of the Jena Six have extensive juvenile records. Yet their parents keep insisting that their children have never been in trouble before. These boys did not receive prejudicial treatment but received preferential treatment until things got out of hand.

So none of this was mentioned but a dignified public prosecutor was smeared as a "culprit".

Mike

[quote=Mark Murray;190380]Found another article and all I can say is wow. Talk about a completely different view than what was given in the media. Again, well worth reading the whole article.

http://www.authorsden.com/visit/view...17296&id=32967
QUOTE]

A few more excerpts:

_____________________________________

There has never been an "all white tree" at Jena High School. Although whites traditionally sit under that tree, whites and blacks traditionally sit in other areas as well. Since integration, there has never been forced segregation on the campus.

There were two nooses, not three.

The actions of the three white students who hung the nooses demonstrate prejudice and bigotry. However, they were not just given "two days suspension" as reported by national news agencies. After first being expelled, then upon appeal, being allowed to re-enter the school system, they were sent to an alternative school, off-campus, for an extended period of time. They underwent investigations by Federal and Sate authorities. They were given psychological evaluations. Even when they were eventually allowed back on campus they were not allowed to be a part of the general population for weeks.

No black children demonstrated the days after the noose incident, as reported by CNN--with the possible exception of an uncorroborated report by one of the "Jena Six" who claims that black students gathered under the tree in a form of protest. This event was not witnessed by any school officials. Therefore, Reed Walters did not come to the school to break it up and send the black students back to class, stating that he could "end their life with a stroke of the pen." In fact, to this day, there has been no demonstration by the black population of Jena, neither at school or anyplace else, except for the family of the Jena Six and protesters from other cities.

The speech given by Reed Walters that included the now infamous statement "I can end your life with the stroke of a pen" was not given to a group of black students. It was given during a speech to the entire student body in an assembly called by the school's principal to calm a community that was pulling their children out of school because there were two fights one day with racial overtones. Two girls, one white and one black fought. Another student was taken to the emergency room to receive stitches.

The national news media has not mentioned a single time that there was an FBI investigation into the hanging of the nooses and the conduct of Reed Walters that concluded there was no criminal activity or "hate crime" involved. The report is available to the media, along with court records and sworn testimony, none of which has been reported.

There was no "fight" on December 4, 2006 at Jena High School, as the national media continues to characterize the event in question. Six students attacked a single student who was immediately knocked unconscious. According to sworn testimony, they stomped him, as he lay "lifeless" upon the ground.

...the white student attacked, was not the first white student targeted by these black students. Others had been informed they were going to be beaten, but stayed away from school and out of sight until they felt safe.

CNN reported that there were "obviously no witnesses to the fight." In fact, over thirty eyewitnesses, students and teachers, were questioned immediately following the attack, all of who implicated one or more of the black students arrested in the case. In fact, some of the accused black students did not stop stomping Barker until they were pulled away from him by some of the teachers, according to testimony given in the trial of Mychal Bell.

The media continues ...insinuating that his injuries were not very severe. The Barkers, by no means a wealthy family, face medical bills already over $12,000 from the emergency room visit. ...Justin Barker was advised to remain hospitalized but decided he would not let the event keep him from participating in the once-in-a-lifetime, traditional Ring Ceremony at First Baptist Church in Jena, where class rings are presented to the upcoming senior class.

This was not a fight. This process was taken out of the hands of school officials when the ambulance was called to bring Justin Barker to the hospital for the attack. Both the appearance of the ambulance and Barker's visit to the emergency room requires an investigation by law enforcement.

National news organizations, which continue to call it a "fight," suggest that there was no reason to involve the District Attorney's office. If a young female student had been raped in a bathroom on campus, the school officials would do all the investigations required under their policy, but they would also report the crime to law enforcement. Criminals, adults or students, are not allowed to rape or assault students with impunity simply because it happened on a high school campus.

The "Jena Six" have repeatedly been held up as heroes by much of the race-based community and called "innocent students" by the national media. Some of these students have reputations in Jena for intimidating and sometimes beating other students. They have vandalized and destroyed both school property and community property. Some of the Jena Six have been involved in crimes not only in LaSalle Parish but also in surrounding parishes. For the most part, coaches and other adults have prevented them from being held accountable for the reign of terror they have presided over in Jena. Despite intervention by adults wanting to give them chances due their athletic potential, most of the Jena Six have extensive juvenile records. Yet their parents keep insisting that their children have never been in trouble before. These boys did not receive prejudicial treatment but received preferential treatment until things got out of hand.

The entire black community of Jena is not being heard in this controversy, just the parents, relatives, and close friends of the Jena Six. The black community of Jena has not been involved in the protests and demonstrations called by national race-based organizations. Some state and national race crusaders have chastised them for not "rising up" with the parents to force law enforcement to "free the Jena Six." Many do agree that the charges seem wrong, but they also know the criminal history of the boys referred to as the "Jena Six." It is their neighborhood these boys have terrorized. Not even all of the parents claim that these boys should be set free with no consequence for their actions. One of the parents was interviewed, saying that the boys should suffer the fair punishment for their actions. He suggested that simple battery would be an acceptable charge. With one exception, the local black pastors do not support the demonstrations. They have been openly criticized for their lack of cooperation with the national race crusaders. One of them counseled the "Jena Six" families to not stir controversy for controversy's sake. The black pastor was openly condemned by a local radio personality sympathetic to the cause of the black parents. The rhetoric grew so intense that the black pastor was referred to as Reed Walter's "house Negro" on the local radio talk show. The pastor is consistently accused on this show of working in cooperation with Reed Walters in a plot to undermine the "Jena Six."

___________________________________________

Suffice it to say when Al Sharpton is involved, ninety percent of the content will be racially inflamatory fabrication for Sharpton's benefit. Likewise many of the supporters, who tell the lies and omit the truth, are trying to polish their own image (or self-image) as fair-minded people, when they are really racists.

In hopes for the truth.

David

I think this is a good example of what happens when the main stream media starts out ingoring a story. We are left to bloggers and more biased forms of reporting to fill in the blanks.

I think we should also be clear that asking for a fuller picture of the story (as Mike has) does not necessarily mean supporting the racism in that community. While I personally believe the prosecuter is way out of line, and the judicial system there is racially biased, I also think the points Mike raises are good ones.

The African American community cannot be so sensitive toward questions of race that real and serious problems of youth discipline in our own community can go ignored. We cannot afford such a lapse...and Al Sharpton is not helping that situation.

Best,
Ron

Ron Tisdale wrote: The African American community cannot be so sensitive toward questions of race that real and serious problems of youth discipline in our own community can go ignored. We cannot afford such a lapse...and Al Sharpton is not helping that situation.

When the local black pastors are villified by people like Sharpton and radio rabble rousers, that should be noticed, but the national media have done us a big disservice by playing only the politically acceptable side.

Best to you.

David

Neil Mick wrote: "Victims?" What Conservative "victims?"

Any kid who has to worry about being hurt when they go to school is a victim, regardless of their race or political leanings. Any kid who has to deal with stupid racists instead of spending their time getting an education is being victimized.
The principal's decision to expel the noose hangers should have stuck; The superintendent had no business cutting it down to suspension.

Ron Tisdale wrote: I think this is a good example of what happens when the main stream media starts out ingoring a story. We are left to bloggers and more biased forms of reporting to fill in the blanks.

Sorry Ron, but your suggestion that the main stream media is less bias than a blogger or anybody else, is to me, a bit comical.