Social Question

Cruiser's avatar

A ninth grader was arrested for bringing to school what appeared to be a bomb, did the school act responsibly or did they discriminate?

Asked by Cruiser (40421points) September 17th, 2015

The boy made a digital clock at home and brought it to school to show his engineering class teacher. While in English class the clock alarm went off and the teacher thought it was a bomb device. The Principal called the police and they arrested him. The school says it was acting responsibly and protecting the school students and faculty. The boy is Muslim. What get’s me is a comment made by one of the police who came to the school….

“They took him to a room where four other officers were waiting. When he entered, one officer leaned back in his chair and said, “That’s who I thought it was,” Mohamed told MSNBC.”

Was the school and or the police discriminating this young boy? Will he now be recruited my MIT or ISIS?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

85 Answers

rojo's avatar

I think the calling of the police could be justified but the arrest was bullshit.

From what I understand the kid is smart and not known as a troublemaker. He has brought several other projects to school in the past.

stanleybmanly's avatar

There are several things about this incident that I find curious, beginning with the warning from the engineering teacher about not showing the clock to other faculty.

ragingloli's avatar

It did not appear to be a bomb.
Dumb, racist teachers just assumed it was, because they do not seem to know that a bomb needs explosive material to work, and think that all muslims are terrorists.

stanleybmanly's avatar

It isn’t the English teacher’s suspicion that the clock was a bomb that I find weird. It’s that she didn’t evacuate the class, pull the fire alarm etc. And the cops? All in all, I bet there are hundreds of false alarms daily in a country conditioned to live in fear and suspicion. And of course, once again, it’s Texas.
Things worked out swell for the kid, who’s going to the White House, a few days of celebrity and probably a pile of money in scholarships. And all of it while living out every kid’s fantasy of humiliating his school and it’s staff and the cops as well. Life can be sweet!

zenvelo's avatar

In a state where white kids are encouraged to open carry weapons, this whole thing was blatant. This School District was already on warning for “being too Islam.”

Yes, it was blatantly discriminatory. I called the school yesterday and told them the Principal needs to make an apology and to stand up for his students.

Cruiser's avatar

@stanleybmanly That was my initial reaction as well. I heard on the radio today that from the pictures of the ‘device’ it looks like the farthest thing from a representation of a clock and with the case and wires sticking out it truly did look like a bomb type device. The kid was invited to bring it to science day at the white house, let’s see if it makes it past Secret Service.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

It was both, safety propped up by illogical paranoia.

dappled_leaves's avatar

@Cruiser “it looks like the farthest thing from a representation of a clock ”

Well, sure, it does look like the farthest thing from a representation of an analog clock. He built a digital clock. Of course it has wires and electronic gadgetry. Don’t we regularly lament the inability of kids these days to even read an analog clock? Why would we expect what he built to look like that?

The implication when I read comments like yours appears to be that he should have expected everyone to be suspicious – that he invited trouble with the design. He’s just a kid with a nerdy project. I don’t think he should be afraid to want to share that. Maybe that’s not what you were getting at, but I’ve heard it several times today from other people.

Cruiser's avatar

@dappled_leaves I implied no such thing and it is sad to read your imagination is so easliy swayed in that direction. I have 2 kids and both have at times made it very clear they did not think things through. Except for a few bad apples most kids are well intentioned and do not yet live in the paranoid world the media pundits have fabricated. And it does not surprise me that a Muslim boy in an Islamaphobe country does not see himself as a stereotyped threat. He appears to be a great kid that suffered the overreaction of a society that are damned if they do and damned if they don’t do things our paranoid over PC society now demands this “See It, Hear It, Report It” of teachers, police and even parents.

obvinate's avatar

Depends how you look at it. Given the history of similar events, it could be seen as acting responsibly. A 7-year-old white kid was suspended because he chewed a pop tart in the shape of a gun. Scary stuff. Another 7-year-old white kid was suspended and handed over to police because of his gun drawing. One white kid was suspended and handed over to police because he pointed his finger in the shape of a gun. Another white kid was suspended because he wore an American flag t-shirt. Much more examples of this from rings from lord of the rings to leafs that look like drugs to nerf toy guns

Seems like an equal response across the boards. The only difference is Ahmed was invited to the white house by race baiting obama.

dappled_leaves's avatar

@Cruiser “I implied no such thing and it is sad to read your imagination is so easliy swayed in that direction. ”

Hmm. I don’t think it’s fair to impugn my imagination, when I did say that I’d heard this spin from others and I acknowledged directly that it may not be what you were saying. I don’t know how I could have made that more clear.

ibstubro's avatar

I’m with @rojo:
“I think the calling of the police could be justified but the arrest was bullshit.”

Worse yet, the fingerprinting and not allowing him to call his parents.

I don’t see that race really had anything to do with it. If he’d been white, the English teacher’s first thought would no doubt have been, “Columbine” or, perhaps, “Sandy Hook”.

stanleybmanly's avatar

Yes indeed, if the kid has a criminal record behind this pile o crap, he should sue the hell out of the police department. I’m sure lawyers are chasing him anyway. This is one of those things that’s just too lopsided to be believed. There’s gotta be more to this than we’re being told. In this chain of events involving this many people, how can it be possible (even in Texas) that EVERYONE following the engineering instructor is obtuse. I mean the English teacher, the principal, the cops on the scene, the cops and their superiors at the station. and not one soul had the sense to say “Oh, it’s a clock. Well never mind” And the kid didn’t say “Wait a minute, talk to my engineering teacher”. What is it? Do they think the kid perpetrated a bomb hoax?

rojo's avatar

This is not something I came up with but things to consider:

They didn’t evacuate the school, like you do when there is a bomb.
They didn’t call the bomb squad, like you do when there is a bomb.
They didn’t get as far away from him as possible, like you do when there is a bomb.
They put him, AND THE CLOCK, in an office, not like you do when there is a bomb.
They waited WITH HIM for the police to arrive, not like you do when there is a bomb.
The police put the clock in the car with themselves, not like you do when there is a bomb.
Then they took pictures of it, not like you do when there is a bomb.

They NEVER thought he had a bomb.

obvinate's avatar

That is why he was arrested for a bomb hoax. Police knew it wasn’t a bomb. Only the english teacher thought it was a bomb. The engineering teacher didn’t think it was a bomb but he did warn the kid ‘I would advise you not to show any other teachers. During the kid’s interview, he said i didn’t lock it to make it seem like a threat which means he knew it could be construed as a bomb. He just overestimated a layman’s ability to make the distinction.

stanleybmanly's avatar

So the working theory is that the kid deliberately constructed the clock to resemble a bomb?

Cruiser's avatar

@dappled_leaves Back peddling is best served for politicians assuming you are not one….
“The implication when I read comments like yours appears to be that he should have expected everyone to be suspicious” Is more like a direct accusation. Whatever….

dappled_leaves's avatar

@Cruiser Yes. Keep reading.

Or don’t. Whatever.

ibstubro's avatar

^^^What I notice most?

Neither of you jellies have a GA as of this writing, @Cruiser & @dappled_leaves.

The ‘Faction’ days have passed.
Hallelujah!
Respond to the question, not the inflammatory response?

jca's avatar

@obvinate: “Race baiting Obama?”

cazzie's avatar

Did they evacuate the school? No. Did they call the bomb squad? No. Did the arrest the boy and transport him and his clock in the same vehicle? Yes. There was never a threat made. This was racist pure and simple. If i was a student there I’d serve up the teacher a pie ala ‘The Help’. And they would eat it because I’m a Sweet little white girl and the wouldn’t have me profiled.

Inara27's avatar

It is not a hoax unless a threat was made or that the clock was claimed to be a bomb or part of a bomb. The kid claimed it was a clock. Period.

Might as well say that his mobile was part of a remote detonator.

Cruiser's avatar

After watching the Police Chief give a speech about their “official” response to this kids experiment….apparently they have a law on the books that makes possession of a “hoax bomb” a criminal offense and used this hoax bomb as the excuse for their seemingly extreme reaction. I said “oh bullshit” about 4 times while listening to his speech and when he started in with his statements of their relationship with the Muslim community and how he was going to meet with them to discuss this boys arrest. To me him actually addressing the Muslim community only strengthens the argument that racism played a big role in how this all went down. IMO I think more needs to be done than to have a feel good meeting with leaders of the Muslim community….I really feel there should be disciplinary actions of those officers involved in the arrest and a thorough review of how the school teachers and principal handled this matter.

In the end it seems this is the best thing that could have ever happened to a young man like him as he is not only going to meet the President, Zuckerberg…he will get a full ride to MIT and a whole host of other perks and opportunities. I admire this kids composure through this media circus.

obvinate's avatar

@jca “Race baiting Obama?”

Ya. You see any of the white kids being invited to the white house after having the same experience as Ahmed? Nope.

jca's avatar

@obvinate: Did any of the white kids make such an invention as this kid? From your information above, they did other stuff like chewing pop tarts into the shape of a gun. Is that worthy of a trip to the White House?

obvinate's avatar

He wasn’t invited because of his invention. Historically, the white house invited kids who were exceptional and offered something unique. A clock, which the kid himself said wasn’t anything special is certainly not a white house worthy invitation. The kid was invited because it scores points for obama and the democrats with the muslim community. At most, you can say he was invited for experiencing injustice which again reaffirms the race-baiting.

Obama has been race-baiting since Trayvon/Zimmerman and all related news stories that followed since, except when whites were being killed by non-whites. In white injustice cases he remains silent. No public opinions/outcries/side-taking and no private phone calls. Just recently he remained silent again when a white girl (Kathryn Steinle) was killed by an illegal mexican.

Inara27's avatar

@obvinate, Was Kathyryn killed because she was white? No, she was killed due to a criminal action by another person. Sanchez was a convicted felon and not eligible to be in the US, so yes he should not have been in the country, but then again we have plenty of convicted felons who are citizens that also are murdering others.

The real issue here is that the kid was singled out due to his background and family. Clear-cut discrimination. Ms. Steinle was killed by a common criminal for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

flutherother's avatar

It wasn’t a bomb and it wasn’t even a hoax but it was a Muslim.

obvinate's avatar

@Inara27

Was trayvon killed because he was black? No. Didn’t stop obama from baiting.

Was Eric garner killed because he was black? Nope. Didn’t stop obama from baiting.

Was Michael Brown killed because he was black? Nope. Didn’t stop obama from baiting.

Freddie Gray? .....

Obviously, these black folks were killed because they had it coming, hence the not guilty verdicts, or in your words, wrong place, wrong time. This isn’t the point. The point is race-baiting obama didn’t say a word, didn’t phone call anyone when the same thing was happening to white victims.

It can’t be discrimination after the kid and the engineering teacher were aware that the clock can be construed as a bomb. The kid self-defeated himself and the teacher reaffirmed it.

zenvelo's avatar

@obvinate Trayvon Martin WAS killed because he was black. His “not belonging ” in the neighborhood was the reason George Zimmerman approached him.

Eric Garner was being treated the way he was because he was black. So was Michael Brown, when the cop started to hassle for walking while black. So was Freddie Gray.

And the President isn’t race baiting, he is reacting to an overarching racist tendency of the police forces in this country. And the President invited Ahmed because of his inventiveness.

If you don’t see the racism in this, you are in deep denial of the structural racism in this country and especially in Texas.

jca's avatar

@obvinate: Trayvon Martin had it coming? He was walking through a white neighborhood to get home. He was doing nothing but walking and some gung-ho cop wanna-be (Zimmerman) decided to confront him.

Cruiser's avatar

@jca…I am not suggesting that Treyvon had anything coming but I will say this unfortunate confrontation that resulted in Treyvon losing his life serves as a stark testament to the racially divided distrust that still pervades between many black and white communities. That said….things could have and should have turned out much differently….and accordingly to one eye witness it appears it was all up to Treyvon Martin on how things would turn out and he apparently chose a violent path…

“The only eyewitness to the end of the confrontation stated that Martin was on top of Zimmerman and punching him, while Zimmerman was yelling for help. This witness, who identified himself as “John”, stated that “the guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, ‘Help! Help!’ and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911”.[114] He went on to say that when he got upstairs and looked down, “the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point.”

jca's avatar

@Cruiser: I know there have been so many debates, here and elsewhere, about the Trayvon issue. I remember here on Fluther, when it occurred, one thread had over 100 responses. I just go back to that there was really no need for Zim to even get out of his car for someone who was doing nothing but walking.

ragingloli's avatar

Trayvon was “standing his ground”.
But I guess only white people are allowed to do that.

Cruiser's avatar

@jca That is the gist of my last comment. So what that Zimmerman confronted this kid…Zimmerman would not have had a reason to be on a neighborhood watch patrol had not other miscreants not committed crimes in that neighborhood. I got confronted by control freak neighbors/park rangers/cops many times when I was a teenager and not once did I take a cop down and slam his/her head on the pavement. A thought like that would never cross my mind as my parents raised me to respect the law and take ownership over my actions good or bad.

I do not personally know Treyvon or George but testimony recorded about both’s past and history shines a very bright light on Treyvon being the one who ultimately made the fateful choice on how their encounter will take shape. I am sure he did not intend for his own actions to result in his death.

ragingloli's avatar

@Cruiser
And Zimmerman has a recent history of threatening other people with guns, including his girlfriend.
That tells me alot about what happened during the Trayvon murder.

jca's avatar

@ragingloli and @Cruiser: I believe Zim’s girlfriend (one of them that he ended up in court about) was pregnant. Nice guy.

Cruiser's avatar

@ragingloli Zimmermans recent history has no relevant bearing on what happened that day. You would need to present evidence of prior altercations to Treyvon being shot by Zimmerman and I am dead sure that prosecuting attorneys scoured his past for that kind of damning evidence. @jca….What does Zim’s GF being pregnant have to do with this discussion?

ragingloli's avatar

@Cruiser
It is relevant.
It tells me what kind of man he is.
It tells me how he treats other people he does not like.
It tells me that in the Trayvon standoff, he is the one most likely to have been the aggressor.

jca's avatar

@Cruiser: To me, domestic violence (which is never acceptable) is particularly heinous when committed against someone who is pregnant.

I’m sorry I mentioned Zim and Trayvon, because the whole topic had been debated to death already.

cazzie's avatar

Obama has run out of fucks to give with all these accusations. Being a person of colour, I’m pretty sure he could relate very much to what happened to the young boy and had some very personal sympathy for him. It wasn’t to ‘race bait’. If he was baiting anyone is was the ignorant asses. He is supporting science and technology and giving the finger to ignorance and profiling, because he can. He’s the fucking president still and he doesn’t have to run for another office, ever.

Cruiser's avatar

@ragingloli It may or may not be relevant as again I do not personally know George now or his past. But what I do know is the media is not kind and will do and say anything to elicit ratings. And George Zimmerman since that fateful day has been red meat in a lions den for the media and I think anyone in those shoe’s would be forever changed and tested night and day by the blood thirsty media just waiting for George, you or I to screw up. Did the limelight change George into a violent man??? Again I do not know his past but to ASSume this is not how I will view this event. Assumptions and conjecture is not solid ground.

@jca I do see how it is easy to knit these 2 event together as both shine a very right light on how racially polarized we as a country still are.

Adirondackwannabe's avatar

Well Sarah P said he was asking for it. Pffftt.

obvinate's avatar

@zenvelo , @jca

Your apologetic arguments are meaningless at this point because the evidence was presenting to the juries and they were all found not guilty. No evidence of racism and that means they had it coming. That is what not guilty means – no wrongdoing.

But that isn’t the point, is it? The point is obama opened his big mouth because he only thinks black lives matter. Case and points. When whitey gets gunned down, he is silent. Also, obama was talking shit way before the facts were presented. In each case he commented on, he was proven wrong by the jury.

As for Ahmed, from what I’m seeing in the latest news, he is a fraud. A curious engineer exposed Ahmed by showing that he not only did not invent the clock but he didn’t build it either. He took apart a Radio shack clock from the 1980s which can be bought on ebay, removed the component inside and transferred it to the case that he bought. link for details. Certainly not white house worthy.

Adirondackwannabe's avatar

@obvinate Well run with that.Follow you republican buddies all you want.

jca's avatar

@obvinate: People are found not guilty by juries and yet may still actually, in reality, be guilty. People are found guilty by juries and yet may still actually, in reality, be not guilty. Evidence is presented or omitted by attorneys or not allowed by judges and that can sway things either way.

Remember the OJ trial? Was he guilty or not guilty? If you polled the country at the time, I’d bet it could have gone either way. Why do you think he was made to pay after the civil trial?

The American justice system is not perfect. Yes, legally, the person who is found not guilty is not guilty, but that doesn’t mean they actually are.

cazzie's avatar

@obvinate I don’t think I’ll align my morality to the outcomes of US court cases, thanks. It does NOT mean that there wasn’t racism. How you come to that conclusion truly baffles me.

obvinate's avatar

@jca

Who cares what the masses think? We have courtrooms where things are done rationally with evidence. OJ was made to pay after the civil trial because he was guilty of some wrongdoing, but not guilty when it came to murder. It is really that simple.

Therefore, to say someone is guilty even though they were found innocent is a meaningless statement since they cannot actually prove the racist activity/motivation. It is one of the hardest things you can prove.

@cazzie

If, ifs and buts were candies and nuts we would all have a merry christmas. I don’t have my tinfoil hat on, sorry.

Inara27's avatar

Legal evidence and fact can be completely different. Fact may be excluded from evidence for any number of legal reasons ranging from the quality of your barrister, to violations of a suspect’s rights.

As an example, if a police officer beats a confession out of a suspect, it is automatically (rightfully so) excluded from evidence, even if in reality it is factually correct.

cazzie's avatar

When I was much younger I said something like what you are saying and a judge I knew asked me ‘what colour is the sky in your world.’

obvinate's avatar

@Inara27

See my previous answer to cazzie.

@cazzie

That is an odd response from a judge considering that I have a friend who is a very successful lawyer from suing defamers. You know, the ones who go around falsely accusing people of being racist which causes reputational damage, financial harm and psychological harm.

Cruiser's avatar

@obvinate I am not trying to be nit picky but That is what not guilty means – no wrongdoing. is not entirely true. Not guilty often means botched police/detective procedures and or a lousy prosecution. OJ Simpson comes to mind. Not guilty but hardly innocent of any wrong doing.

obvinate's avatar

Does that make the accusations any less meaningless? I think not. The burden of proof simply shifts to proving police/detectives botched procedures or the prosecutor was lousy.

These baseless accusation claims can be played all day and they’re, but they’re not productive. Alex Jones does this the best for the tinfoil-hat crowd – 4 million+.

cazzie's avatar

I had to google who Alex Jones was. Same boat as that other nutcase on the radio in the US… What is even sadder that these people exist, is that they have such a large audience. People are dumb. People there must be really dumb.

Cruiser's avatar

@obvinate That is my whole point! Accusations are meaningless absent sufficient proof to back them up. And on the other hand many obviously guilty people have gotten away with murder by the virtue of a not guilty verdict.

obvinate's avatar

Maybe I’m missing something in your point. How can you say a person (let say OJ Simpson) is “obviously guilty” if the jury determined that the evidence was insufficient to prove he murdered someone? By the very point you’re trying to make, in the case of oj, the accusation of murder (which went to trial) was a meaningless accusation because of the insufficient evidence, hence the not guilty verdict. To say, now, or even immediately after the trial, that OJ is “obviously guilty” would be fallacious. Based on your point, he is obviously not guilty, since the jury found the evidence for his accusation of murder to be insufficient.

rojo's avatar

You are correct @obvinate guilt cannot be determined based on insufficient evidence but by the same logic insufficient evidence does not prove innocence. Now we have a right to the presumption of innocence but that is not the same as being innocent.

Inara27's avatar

The point that you are missing is that the LEGAL evidence was insufficient, but the real evidence may say he’s guilty. The system was designed to fail so that guilty people might be declared innocent, rather than the innocent found guilty. Of course there are plenty of cases where the latter failure occurred.

Adirondackwannabe's avatar

@obvinate Have you ever set on a jury? The rule is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It’s a rough call, but if you are called, it’s something you have to deal with.

jca's avatar

Who here used the words ”obviously guilty” in reference to OJ?

obvinate's avatar

@rojo

But that renders conversation about it meaningless/unproductive – not to be taken seriously, and if there is a continuation of accusations of murder after a not guilty verdict, it becomes a defamation issue if damages can be proven.

@Inara27

What “real evidence” is outside of the courtroom? How would you know?

obvinate's avatar

@jca

Cruiser is implying it in his answer.

obvinate's avatar

@Adirondackwannabe

I get called to jury duty around every 10 years, but I never make it far enough to sit at the trial. After a line of questioning, the lawyers always dismiss me during the selection period.

rojo's avatar

@obvinate No body else seems to have seen it, so perhaps the evidence that @Cruiser is making such an implication is insufficient for you to make such a supposition.

rojo's avatar

I know how you feel, I think that I have been on a single jury in all the years of going to jury duty (probably has something to do with my stand on jury nullification).

Cruiser's avatar

@obvinate I a not sure if you are being oblivious or obstinate or both. I watched the entire OJ circus and he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and everyone knew this based on witness accounts and evidence collected at the scene. He got off on technicalities of mishandling of the evidence and crime scene and other dumb ass fuck ups by the LAPD that allowed his attorneys to get him off the hook.

obvinate's avatar

Haha. How much alcohol did you have to drink when you were viewing it? The glove alone casts a great deal of doubt. Not only did the glove not fit him (and no it wasn’t because it was soaked in blood, after clotting, blood is like syrup, doesn’t manipulate leather like water ,whereas leather shrinks when soaked in water and then heat dried) the glove had no cuts in it even though the prosecutor claimed blood on the scene was the result of cuts on his middle finger.

See? I can role play a lawyer too.

It must be a huge ass conspiracy. You and “everyone” knew he was guilty except all the jurors and me, apparently.

We can go back and forth all day like this just like with any other case, and this back

cazzie's avatar

@obvinate is under the impression that everyone who is found guilty under the US justice system is, of course, guilty and anyone found not guilty is, of course innocent of the crime because that is how the system works. He wants to believe that so badly, he isn’t listening. Does anyone here want to put some extra effort into popping his idealistic bubble? I don’t think I have the heart.

jca's avatar

I’ll pop his bubble later, when I am at work and have more time. I’ll google the organization that Barry Scheck works for, and founded, where they use DNA evidence to free up people who are on Death Row or in jail for a long time but are actually not guilty.

Cruiser's avatar

@Well @obvinate You would be an epic fail as a lawyer then. If OJ was truly not guilty as you allege, then why in his civil trial when the prosecuting attorney was allowed to show a picture of OJ wearing the Bruno Magli shoes that he denied ever owning which were the same style shoes that left bloody foot prints at the murder scene? That crucial bit of evidence is what got him a guilty verdict and got Nicoles kids over $12 million in survivors restitution and the survivors families another 33 million. They don’t award out that kind of coin unless the jurors felt he was very guilty of that crime.

obvinate's avatar

@cazzie

Not sure why would think that. These days they release prisoners all the time after DNA testing which wasn’t available back at their trial. Even in the OJ case, he wa found guilty in the civil trial, so I’m well aware people can still be guilty after a not guilty verdict or visa versa. The point I’m driving home is that until that happens, the decision is final. That is why I laugh at all this black lives matter crap because there hasn’t been any reemerging evidence to show that in all these popular trials, racism and unjustified “brutality” was involved. Just like now with Ahmed and accusations of discrimination/profiling. What a joke. I’ll believe it when you can reshow this imaginary evidence and get the teacher and cops in trouble for wrongdoing, until then, you’re just a different flavor of Alex Jones, harping the racist conspiracy.

obvinate's avatar

@jca

Right, exactly. See my answer to cazzie.

obvinate's avatar

@Cruiser

See response to cazzie.

jca's avatar

Barry Scheck’s organization, The Innocence Project: http://www.innocenceproject.org/

@obvinate: ”Until that happens, the decision is final.” The decision may be final, but that doesn’t make the decision correct.

obvinate's avatar

Yes, I wrote about that already, but until he is released because of new DNA evidence, why would I bother listening to someone’s outcries of innocence? When they’re released, which they’re, I can see that they were truly innocent. The outcries of innocence have no leg to stand on until the DNA testing is available.

I can make the same arguments about the illegality of gay marriage in the recent supreme court ruling that legalized gay marriage. Does anyone care? No. They respond in a similar fashion. “The supreme court ruled for it. It is final.” – “Law of the land.”

cazzie's avatar

@obvinate I’m am so glad to hear that racism and discrimination no longer exist in the US. (see.. I just don’t have the heart to pop that little sweet, vile bubble)

obvinate's avatar

It does. It is called affirmative action and it is legal.

cazzie's avatar

We have a Neo N among us? Awww… poor sad white man, can’t catch a fair break with all this unfairness around.

obvinate's avatar

Mention the racism in affirmative action and you’re a Neo N. Haha. Another racist conspiracy?

Huh? White man can’t catch a break? I thought it was whitey who has the “white privilege”? Evil, rich, powerful whitey oppressing minorities? Make up your mind.

cazzie's avatar

I will never sympathize with you. Facts and history.

cazzie's avatar

Seems we are really getting to know each other here, aren’t we, @obvinate . You would equate civil rights that have been accepted in most of the world with the unjust judgement of a criminal court case. That is interesting.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther