Farrakhan is at it again!

[bones_IV]

Nation of Islam chief Minister Louis Farrakhan has expanded on his theory that New Orleans’ levees were blown up during Hurricane Katrina, announcing Friday that divers working on the levee break have found evidence of explosives.

Seems to me that this guy just doesn’t seem to get it.
Link

{moderator’s note. Fixed title. Title must match news article}

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Farrakhan predicted that when New Orleans is rebuilt, it will be “a white city. It will be rebuilt to the exclusion of the poor who have been dispersed all over the country,” he said.

I am assuming that he is basing his conclusion that NO will be rebuilt as a white city on the reality that black were among those evacuated. And that, for some reason, they will not return. I would like to know what that reason is.

Two weeks ago, the firebrand Muslim leader announced that he’d uncovered the levee plot. “I heard from a very reliable source who saw a 25 foot deep crater under the levee breach,” Farrakhan explained during a stop in Charleston, South Carolina. “It may have been blown up to destroy the black part of town and keep the white part dry.”

The white part. More black people were evacuated than white people overall. Many of those black people left before the city flooded.

Also if the levee was blown up when Katrina hit, but the levee still ‘overtopped’ when Rita hit why would people have wasted explosives the first time when the levee was just going to ‘overtop’ anyway.

For that matter, what was the logistics of getting the explosives in place given very little time between the announcement of Katrina and the certainty that Katrina was heading directly for New Orleans?

Is it likely that the federal government would risk placing the explosives there well in advance given the possibility that they could explode by accident in the total absence of a hurricane and thus stimulate an investigation?

If this gentleman is so concerned about white people taking over the ‘prime real estate’ located in the lowlands, then is he proposing the creation of a black city there or at any other location? What is the intended outcome of his comments? Thoughts?

 

[geezerbob]

Hasn’t his organization in years past accused the government of causing AIDS and sickle cell anemia as parts of a plot to wipe out the black populace? To him, everything bad seems to be whitey’s fault and is part of a conspiracy.

 

[Jay74]

It’s sad that he seems to see everything through race-tinted lenses.

He certainly has the right to express his opinions, even if they are absurd. Sad thing is, he is doing great harm to the very people he intends to speak for. That’s part of the price we pay for freedom in this country–having to defend people’s legal right to say damaging things, while at the same time speaking out against those very things.

I hope he has a change of heart.

 

[Franze]

Many times I ask, why the goverment don´t ilegalize this organisation and cut the ways for financing, they´re anti-semites, pro-terrorists and other things.

 

[bones_IV]

Franze:

Many times I ask, why the goverment don´t ilegalize this organisation and cut the ways for financing, they´re anti-semites, pro-terrorists and other things.

They definately should. Why is it though that they won’t? An

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

Franze:

Many times I ask, why the goverment don´t ilegalize this organisation and cut the ways for financing, they´re anti-semites, pro-terrorists and other things.

In the U.S., you can’t make something illegal just because they disagree with you no matter how absurd it is. That’s the price we pay for freedom though. Also, it is good to have these groups out in the open. Who knows what they are capable of if they were silenced? It would just legitimize them even more (in their eyes, and the eyes of their followers). When would it end when we started banning organizations? Eventually when the left has the presidency again, some would definitely love to outlaw the Catholic Church.

 

[bones_IV]

Semper Fi:

In the U.S., you can’t make something illegal just because they disagree with you no matter how absurd it is.

I think your a little confused. Just because its legal doesn’t mean that we should be silent about it. To be silent about this nationalist party is our approval of it.

That’s the price we pay for freedom though. Also, it is good to have these groups out in the open.

I don’t see how any good would come in allowing these groups to continue their unacceptable level of violence. Do you realize these same people have criticized the Pope? Or did I just miss that?

Who knows what they are capable of if they were silenced? It would just legitimize them even more (in their eyes, and the eyes of their followers).

Have you ever heard of rocking the boat?

When would it end when we started banning organizations?

Talking in circles are we?
Semper Fi:

Eventually when the left has the presidency again, some would definitely love to outlaw the Catholic Church.