Don Lemon: 'White men' are biggest terror threat to US, and there is no travel ban on them

unsung
unsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
in A Moving Train
Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504


«134567

Comments

  • Go Beavers
    Go Beavers Posts: 9,618
    unsung said:
    Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504


    Because racism and racist statements exist in a context and you have to look at that context, both historical and present time. Just claiming it’s unfair to us poor white folks because if you switch white for black and it wouldn’t be accept doesn’t work. 

    It’s why it’s unacceptable for whites to use the n word. Context. 
  • lastexitlondon
    lastexitlondon Posts: 14,957
    For what it's worth nobody should use the N word. 


    this song is meant to be called i got shit,itshould be called i got shit tickets-hartford 06 -
  • HughFreakingDillon
    HughFreakingDillon Winnipeg Posts: 39,758
    unsung said:
    Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504


    I personally have no issue with anyone stating a fact.  
    By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.




  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,759
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    unsung said:
    Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504


    I personally have no issue with anyone stating a fact.  
    Exactly. If you substituted anything else it would be a lie, making it easy to presume it's a racially motivated statement, because why else would you lie about that? And that would be where the problem is.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • tempo_n_groove
    tempo_n_groove Posts: 41,599
    Mr Lemon is right and he is wrong.

    White Men are a danger to society as shown with the mass killings.

    As far as travel bans, I don't think white people are hijacking planes?  Have they started to do that now too?
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,880
    Well the "White ban" portion must have been thrown in for some reason but makes no sense.

    Cause it seems the biggest risk to US is the White far right male...but they are already here.  No traveling.  Meanwhile the biggest risk of foreign attack based on what we have seen is muslim male traveling to US and staying for a while.  White male = domestic.  Muslim male = non-domestic.  You can be concerned about both...no?


    hippiemom = goodness
  • bootlegger10
    bootlegger10 Posts: 16,263
    PJ_Soul said:
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    unsung said:
    Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504


    I personally have no issue with anyone stating a fact.  
    Exactly. If you substituted anything else it would be a lie, making it easy to presume it's a racially motivated statement, because why else would you lie about that? And that would be where the problem is.

    The arguments against generalizing a group (let say for Muslims) was that you can't generalize a large population for a small percentage of wrongdoers in that group.  Would not the same arguments that were used before apply in this case as well with white people? 
  • HughFreakingDillon
    HughFreakingDillon Winnipeg Posts: 39,758
    bootlegger10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    unsung said:
    Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504


    I personally have no issue with anyone stating a fact.  
    Exactly. If you substituted anything else it would be a lie, making it easy to presume it's a racially motivated statement, because why else would you lie about that? And that would be where the problem is.

    The arguments against generalizing a group (let say for Muslims) was that you can't generalize a large population for a small percentage of wrongdoers in that group.  Would not the same arguments that were used before apply in this case as well with white people? 
    yes. language does make a difference, and this is no exception. he should have been more careful in his verbiage. especially being in media, I'm surprised that he said it the way he did. saying it the way he did just further emboldens the "concern for the white race" mob. 
    By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.




  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,880
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    bootlegger10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    unsung said:
    Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504


    I personally have no issue with anyone stating a fact.  
    Exactly. If you substituted anything else it would be a lie, making it easy to presume it's a racially motivated statement, because why else would you lie about that? And that would be where the problem is.

    The arguments against generalizing a group (let say for Muslims) was that you can't generalize a large population for a small percentage of wrongdoers in that group.  Would not the same arguments that were used before apply in this case as well with white people? 
    yes. language does make a difference, and this is no exception. he should have been more careful in his verbiage. especially being in media, I'm surprised that he said it the way he did. saying it the way he did just further emboldens the "concern for the white race" mob. 
    You are forgetting the rule that none of this applies to USA as a whole and then within the USA to white males.  Free game.


    hippiemom = goodness
  • eddiec
    eddiec Posts: 3,962
    bootlegger10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    unsung said:
    Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504


    I personally have no issue with anyone stating a fact.  
    Exactly. If you substituted anything else it would be a lie, making it easy to presume it's a racially motivated statement, because why else would you lie about that? And that would be where the problem is.

    The arguments against generalizing a group (let say for Muslims) was that you can't generalize a large population for a small percentage of wrongdoers in that group.  Would not the same arguments that were used before apply in this case as well with white people? 
    I get what you're saying about making generalisations. But if the question was: Who is the biggest terror threat in the US? and you answer: White men. That's not a generalisation, it's just a fact, no?
  • Go Beavers
    Go Beavers Posts: 9,618
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    bootlegger10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    unsung said:
    Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504


    I personally have no issue with anyone stating a fact.  
    Exactly. If you substituted anything else it would be a lie, making it easy to presume it's a racially motivated statement, because why else would you lie about that? And that would be where the problem is.

    The arguments against generalizing a group (let say for Muslims) was that you can't generalize a large population for a small percentage of wrongdoers in that group.  Would not the same arguments that were used before apply in this case as well with white people? 
    yes. language does make a difference, and this is no exception. he should have been more careful in his verbiage. especially being in media, I'm surprised that he said it the way he did. saying it the way he did just further emboldens the "concern for the white race" mob. 
    That was the point that would have been impactful, instead he strayed from the rational side of his mind and now right wingers will have another day of blaming the media for being divisive. 
  • HughFreakingDillon
    HughFreakingDillon Winnipeg Posts: 39,758
    edited October 2018
    eddiec said:
    bootlegger10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    unsung said:
    Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504


    I personally have no issue with anyone stating a fact.  
    Exactly. If you substituted anything else it would be a lie, making it easy to presume it's a racially motivated statement, because why else would you lie about that? And that would be where the problem is.

    The arguments against generalizing a group (let say for Muslims) was that you can't generalize a large population for a small percentage of wrongdoers in that group.  Would not the same arguments that were used before apply in this case as well with white people? 
    I get what you're saying about making generalisations. But if the question was: Who is the biggest terror threat in the US? and you answer: White men. That's not a generalisation, it's just a fact, no?
    on the other side of the coin, if you ask the question, "who is responsible for most low level crime and violence in the US?". the short answer would start a fucking riot, whether it's true or not. that's the problem, it's a singular quesiton with a multi-faceted answer. answering it singularly is irresponsible, especially for someone in the media, and especially for a black man who should know better. 

    edit: and when I say "for a black man who should know better", before anyone jumps down my gullet, I mean he's probably been on the receiving end of those same types of generalizations, so it's in that context I mean he should know better. both as a professional journalist and also from personal experience. 
    Post edited by HughFreakingDillon on
    By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.




  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,759
    bootlegger10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    unsung said:
    Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504


    I personally have no issue with anyone stating a fact.  
    Exactly. If you substituted anything else it would be a lie, making it easy to presume it's a racially motivated statement, because why else would you lie about that? And that would be where the problem is.

    The arguments against generalizing a group (let say for Muslims) was that you can't generalize a large population for a small percentage of wrongdoers in that group.  Would not the same arguments that were used before apply in this case as well with white people? 
    Who assumed that Lemon meant all white men?
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • HughFreakingDillon
    HughFreakingDillon Winnipeg Posts: 39,758
    PJ_Soul said:
    bootlegger10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    unsung said:
    Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504


    I personally have no issue with anyone stating a fact.  
    Exactly. If you substituted anything else it would be a lie, making it easy to presume it's a racially motivated statement, because why else would you lie about that? And that would be where the problem is.

    The arguments against generalizing a group (let say for Muslims) was that you can't generalize a large population for a small percentage of wrongdoers in that group.  Would not the same arguments that were used before apply in this case as well with white people? 
    Who assumed that Lemon meant all white men?
    "We have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right, and we have to start doing something about them."

    the problem here is how it was worded. He doesn't quantify it as "SOME" white men, he just says "white men", and then saying "most of them....". that can easily be manipulated by fox news and the like as demonizing the entire group of white men in america to rile up their supporters. 

    it's just really irresponsible editorializing. 
    By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.




  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,759
    edited October 2018
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    bootlegger10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    unsung said:
    Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504


    I personally have no issue with anyone stating a fact.  
    Exactly. If you substituted anything else it would be a lie, making it easy to presume it's a racially motivated statement, because why else would you lie about that? And that would be where the problem is.

    The arguments against generalizing a group (let say for Muslims) was that you can't generalize a large population for a small percentage of wrongdoers in that group.  Would not the same arguments that were used before apply in this case as well with white people? 
    Who assumed that Lemon meant all white men?
    "We have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right, and we have to start doing something about them."

    the problem here is how it was worded. He doesn't quantify it as "SOME" white men, he just says "white men", and then saying "most of them....". that can easily be manipulated by fox news and the like as demonizing the entire group of white men in america to rile up their supporters. 

    it's just really irresponsible editorializing. 
    I don't think it is, at least not for those who understand how language and communication works. I think it was very clear what he meant.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Go Beavers
    Go Beavers Posts: 9,618
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    eddiec said:
    bootlegger10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    unsung said:
    Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504


    I personally have no issue with anyone stating a fact.  
    Exactly. If you substituted anything else it would be a lie, making it easy to presume it's a racially motivated statement, because why else would you lie about that? And that would be where the problem is.

    The arguments against generalizing a group (let say for Muslims) was that you can't generalize a large population for a small percentage of wrongdoers in that group.  Would not the same arguments that were used before apply in this case as well with white people? 
    I get what you're saying about making generalisations. But if the question was: Who is the biggest terror threat in the US? and you answer: White men. That's not a generalisation, it's just a fact, no?
    on the other side of the coin, if you ask the question, "who is responsible for most low level crime and violence in the US?". the short answer would start a fucking riot, whether it's true or not. that's the problem, it's a singular quesiton with a multi-faceted answer. answering it singularly is irresponsible, especially for someone in the media, and especially for a black man who should know better. 

    edit: and when I say "for a black man who should know better", before anyone jumps down my gullet, I mean he's probably been on the receiving end of those same types of generalizations, so it's in that context I mean he should know better. both as a professional journalist and also from personal experience. 
    I disagree. The higher crime rate amongst blacks is often brought up in the media. 

  • Lerxst1992
    Lerxst1992 Posts: 8,085
    unsung said:
    Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504




    Was this a dump n run or did you actually was the article where it's pointed out, statistically...

    from the Nation Institute’s Investigative Fund and the Center for Investigative Reporting’s Reveal, there were nearly twice as many terrorist incidents by right-wing extremists (the majority of whom are white) as by Islamic extremists in the U.S. from 2008 to 2018.
  • HughFreakingDillon
    HughFreakingDillon Winnipeg Posts: 39,758
    PJ_Soul said:
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    bootlegger10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    unsung said:
    Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504


    I personally have no issue with anyone stating a fact.  
    Exactly. If you substituted anything else it would be a lie, making it easy to presume it's a racially motivated statement, because why else would you lie about that? And that would be where the problem is.

    The arguments against generalizing a group (let say for Muslims) was that you can't generalize a large population for a small percentage of wrongdoers in that group.  Would not the same arguments that were used before apply in this case as well with white people? 
    Who assumed that Lemon meant all white men?
    "We have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right, and we have to start doing something about them."

    the problem here is how it was worded. He doesn't quantify it as "SOME" white men, he just says "white men", and then saying "most of them....". that can easily be manipulated by fox news and the like as demonizing the entire group of white men in america to rile up their supporters. 

    it's just really irresponsible editorializing. 
    I don't think it is, at least not for those who understand how language and communication works. I think it was very clear what he meant.
    uh, I understand fully how language and communication work. it is clear to us what he meant, but it is just generalized enough that it can easily be twisted. 
    By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.




  • HughFreakingDillon
    HughFreakingDillon Winnipeg Posts: 39,758
    Go Beavers said:
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    eddiec said:
    bootlegger10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    unsung said:
    Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504


    I personally have no issue with anyone stating a fact.  
    Exactly. If you substituted anything else it would be a lie, making it easy to presume it's a racially motivated statement, because why else would you lie about that? And that would be where the problem is.

    The arguments against generalizing a group (let say for Muslims) was that you can't generalize a large population for a small percentage of wrongdoers in that group.  Would not the same arguments that were used before apply in this case as well with white people? 
    I get what you're saying about making generalisations. But if the question was: Who is the biggest terror threat in the US? and you answer: White men. That's not a generalisation, it's just a fact, no?
    on the other side of the coin, if you ask the question, "who is responsible for most low level crime and violence in the US?". the short answer would start a fucking riot, whether it's true or not. that's the problem, it's a singular quesiton with a multi-faceted answer. answering it singularly is irresponsible, especially for someone in the media, and especially for a black man who should know better. 

    edit: and when I say "for a black man who should know better", before anyone jumps down my gullet, I mean he's probably been on the receiving end of those same types of generalizations, so it's in that context I mean he should know better. both as a professional journalist and also from personal experience. 
    I disagree. The higher crime rate amongst blacks is often brought up in the media. 

    so what are you disagreeing with exactly?
    By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.




  • Lerxst1992
    Lerxst1992 Posts: 8,085
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    bootlegger10 said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    HughFreakingDillon said:
    unsung said:
    Substitute white with anything else and see how that works out for him.  Lemme guess, not racist, right?


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don-lemon-biggest-terror-threat-in-this-country-is-white-men_us_5bd9aeeae4b0da7bfc15c504


    I personally have no issue with anyone stating a fact.  
    Exactly. If you substituted anything else it would be a lie, making it easy to presume it's a racially motivated statement, because why else would you lie about that? And that would be where the problem is.

    The arguments against generalizing a group (let say for Muslims) was that you can't generalize a large population for a small percentage of wrongdoers in that group.  Would not the same arguments that were used before apply in this case as well with white people? 
    Who assumed that Lemon meant all white men?
    "We have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right, and we have to start doing something about them."

    the problem here is how it was worded. He doesn't quantify it as "SOME" white men, he just says "white men", and then saying "most of them....". that can easily be manipulated by fox news and the like as demonizing the entire group of white men in america to rile up their supporters. 

    it's just really irresponsible editorializing. 


    One side gets to reap whatever lies and BS it wants, the other cites statistically supported fact and that side are the bad guys. He said threat. He was referring to which demographic group is most responsible. It was clear and supported by facts

    .

Categories