Jena Six

[Sickle of Justice]

I don't know much about this, but it seems to me like Antifa-style action at it's best.

Heres the story:
In the (small, mostly white) louisiana town of Jena, a new kid at their high school sat under a a tree which white students had claimed for there own, pissing off a bunch of racists. the next day a bunch of nooses were hanging from the tree, inferring a KKK like response to the kids mistake.

The school deemed the act a prank, and gave the boys responsible an in-school suspension.

Racial tensions rose and the state did nothing to punish the "pranksters", despite the fact that their act was of near terroristic nature.

about a year later a group of six black students confronted one of the perpetrators, a fight broke out, and the group beat the racist unconcious.

they've all been charged with attempted murder, but a protest movement has sprung up to have the charges dropped.


As I said, this seems like classic antifa stuff. Racists appear, threaten violence, state does nothing, so those threatened take matters into there own hands.

Bizzarely, many people I’ve talked to claim that the Jena Six were somehow racist.

Any thoughts?

[bootleg42]

Old news, we've talked about it here many times a long time ago but yes, those black students are heroes. White racist U.S. fucks treated them like shit and they, in turn, fucked them up. Well done.

Also the reactions I've been getting from the petty bourgeoisie white people in college here in the U.S. is that those blacks are somewhat racist as well. I can't believe it.

At least here in the inner city, the black students are seen as the "good guys".

[blackstone]

Originally posted by bootleg42@September 21, 2007 12:51 pm
Old news, we've talked about it here many times a long time ago but yes, those black students are heroes. White racist U.S. fucks treated them like shit and they, in turn, fucked them up. Well done.

Also the reactions I've been getting from the petty bourgeoisie white people in college here in the U.S. is that those blacks are somewhat racist as well. I can't believe it.

At least here in the inner city, the black students are seen as the "good guys".

Why can't you believe it? It doesn't surprise me the least.

I support the Jena 6 fully and hope this is the tipping point for us African Americans.

[bootleg42]

I do to. The African-United Statian community really needs to get active here. They need to "show their muscle" so to speak and they need to empower themselves (which is what they're doing). This way the African-United Statian community can then eliminate the reactionary petty bourgeoisie within their own community (the Al Sharpton's and Cornell West's of the world) and advance, hopefully, to communist movements "from the bottom-up".

Also it's not THAT shocking to me that the white college petty bourgeoisie would think that the black student were also somewhat racist but for some it comes as a shock because some of those same student are part of the stupid "liberal democrats" who supported the firing of Don Imus when he made those racist remarks on the air but yet now see these heroic black students as "somewhat racist". I'm not white nor am I a part of those college students culture but unfortunally I go to school with them so I hear all this.

[blackstone]

What in the world is an African-United Statian?

[bootleg42]

Well when I refer to people from only the United States, I don't like to call them "Americans" because that is ethnocentric. Canada, Venezuela, Bolivia, Chile, etc are all also part of America. So when I refer to people from the United States only, I call them United Statians.

Hence, since I'm refering to the people of African decent in the United States, I'll use the term "African-United Statian".

[Red October]

Originally posted by bootleg42@September 21, 2007 02:54 pm
Well when I refer to people from only the United States, I don't like to call them "Americans" because that is ethnocentric. Canada, Venezuela, Bolivia, Chile, etc are all also part of America. So when I refer to people from the United States only, I call them United Statians.

Hence, since I'm refering to the people of African decent in the United States, I'll use the term "African-United Statian".

That's pretty ridiculous. Technically Bolivia, Honduras, Canada, etc are all in "The Americas", but It's way simpler to just called people from the United States of America "Americans". There's no need to be so politically correct on an issue like this.

[A Suvorov]

Q: What color was the boy who was attacked?
A: White

Q: What color were the Gang of Six who attacked him?
A: Black

Q: If the situation were reversed (ie, if it were a white boy who sat under the tree, and blacks had placed nooses in the tree, and a YEAR later a gang of six white boys beat down a single black kid over the incident) would the black community be as outraged and protesting in defense of the white boys?
A: NO

This whole incident is being used in so many WRONG ways by all parties involved; unfortunately the facts are that 1) the issue was already dealt with by the authorities- if the public had a beef with them they should have taken it to whoever decided the course of action THEN, not a year later, 2) regardless of what happened, it in no way gives the Gang of Six free license to beat down anyone, and 3) the Gang of Six all need to be dealt with under the RULE OF LAW, not under MOB RULES.

If it was such an issue when the noose incident took place A YEAR AGO, why wasn't the community up in arms then? It seems like they only care because the Gang of Six got caught and now they are doing everything they can to keep from taking responsibility for their actions.

If you're Jewish, and I spray paint a swastika on your driveway does that IN ANY WAY give you a legal RIGHT to assault me, or do ANYTHING to me, other than in self-defense from mortal danger? No, of course it doesn't- but you DO have the right to take me to court for redress UNDER THE LAW. Same principle.

The Gang of Six should be tried according to the law by a fair and impartial judge who cannot be swayed by cheap theatrics and political posturing.

It's got nothing to do with fascism (I doubt if the white boys involved even know what fascism IS, even if it were applicable in this case) or antifa action, or whatever the catchphrise of the day is. It's got nothing to do with politics, even. It's a very simple case of assault on the one white kid by the Gang of Six, pure and simple. Let me put it this way- if that were YOUR kid that got beat down, how would you feel if you were his parent? Would you (the parent) praise the Gang of Six for taking matters into their own hands, or would you be howling for justice in the courts? I think everyone already knows the answer to that, and no amount of ideological posturing is going to erase the simple truth of the event.

[bootleg42]

Originally posted by A Suvorov@September 22, 2007 02:37 am
the Gang of Six all need to be dealt with under the RULE OF LAW, not under MOB RULES.

..........................I don't know............dare I say you might be restricted very soon.

[A Suvorov]

And why would that be? For insisting on the Rule of Law instead of Mob Rule? If I'm to be silenced because of that, then I have seriously misjudged the temper of this forum- aren't we SUPPOSED to be all about justice and equality for all? Or has it degenerated into a classic case of 'some are more equal than others'?

I could care less about the skin color or racial extraction of anyone involved- regardless of any causative factors, it still boils down to a simple case of assault. But, the assault itself aside, look at the underlying motif of the attack: SIX on ONE. Is that a case of a single guy looking for random 'payback'- or was it a cool, calculated action taken by the Gang of Six, perpetrated secure in the knowledge they would have a whole community leap to their defense and thus escape personal responsibility?

[Faux Real]

Originally posted by A Suvorov@September 21, 2007 07:37 pm
Q: What color was the boy who was attacked?
A: White

Q: What color were the Gang of Six who attacked him?
A: Black

Q: If the situation were reversed (ie, if it were a white boy who sat under the tree, and blacks had placed nooses in the tree, and a YEAR later a gang of six white boys beat down a single black kid over the incident) would the black community be as outraged and protesting in defense of the white boys?
A: NO

Extended answer: No, because the white community would have lynched the boys by then.

This whole incident is being used in so many WRONG ways by all parties involved; unfortunately the facts are that 1) the issue was already dealt with by the authorities- if the public had a beef with them they should have taken it to whoever decided the course of action THEN, not a year later

Unjustly and unlawfully. You agree with the sentences?

The African-American community in that town constitutes of only 15% of the population. They would not have the support to deal with it had they not received, at last, the media attention the kids deserve.

2) regardless of what happened, it in no way gives the Gang of Six free license to beat down anyone, and 3) the Gang of Six all need to be dealt with under the RULE OF LAW, not under MOB RULES.

ROFL, violence in the name of defense isn't justified? That noose represents an enormous threat, not to mention the verbal slander they receive. If it was left up to the Rule of Law, these kids would be left to die in prison, so don't give me that bullshit. The Rule of Law is not on their side, get that through your head. Action by the oppressed community is needed and gladly they have been acting accordingly.

If it was such an issue when the noose incident took place A YEAR AGO, why wasn't the community up in arms then? It seems like they only care because the Gang of Six got caught and now they are doing everything they can to keep from taking responsibility for their actions.

The mass media never reported on it during its initial stages, it had to get leaked through the internet and the likes of programs of Democracy Now!. This was obviously going to portray the town in a negative light, and tried to hide by any means. Now it's not the case, as the public has finally gotten to hear the story of the G6.

If you're Jewish, and I spray paint a swastika on your driveway does that IN ANY WAY give you a legal RIGHT to assault me, or do ANYTHING to me, other than in self-defense from mortal danger? No, of course it doesn't- but you DO have the right to take me to court for redress UNDER THE LAW. Same principle.

Again, the law is not on their side.

They didn't assault anyone, you got the story distorted yourself. How are some high school students not going to go at it should they become involved in such an inevitable conflict? How is a shoe a deadly weapon?

The Gang of Six should be tried according to the law by a fair and impartial judge who cannot be swayed by cheap theatrics and political posturing.

The Law is not going to be fair and impartial in that district.

It's got nothing to do with fascism

Racism and xenophobia have nothing to do with fascism?

(I doubt if the white boys involved even know what fascism IS, even if it were applicable in this case)

You don't need to know what fascism is to take part in it, that's exactly what racism is part of.

or antifa action, or whatever the catchphrise of the day is. It's got nothing to do with politics, even.

Idiocy at its finest.

It's a very simple case of assault on the one white kid by the Gang of Six, pure and simple.

Who provoked them?

Let me put it this way- if that were YOUR kid that got beat down, how would you feel if you were his parent?

My kid would have deserved that should she/he partake in unapologizing racism.

Would you (the parent) praise the Gang of Six for taking matters into their own hands, or would you be howling for justice in the courts?

The law is not on their side!

I think everyone already knows the answer to that, and no amount of ideological posturing is going to erase the simple truth of the event.

Especially not yours.

And why would that be? For insisting on the Rule of Law instead of Mob Rule? If I'm to be silenced because of that, then I have seriously misjudged the temper of this forum- aren't we SUPPOSED to be all about justice and equality for all? Or has it degenerated into a classic case of 'some are more equal than others'?

There is no justice and equality for all, pure Americanized propaganda. That's the very problem at hand you fool.

We don't live in a post-capitalist society.

I could care less about the skin color or racial extraction of anyone involved- regardless of any causative factors, it still boils down to a simple case of assault. But, the assault itself aside, look at the underlying motif of the attack: SIX on ONE. Is that a case of a single guy looking for random 'payback'- or was it a cool, calculated action taken by the Gang of Six, perpetrated secure in the knowledge they would have a whole community leap to their defense and thus escape personal responsibility?

You don't care about the restrictive/racist conditions they were in that gave way to their 'assault'? How absurd.

[bootleg42]

Yea, someone restrict A Suvorov. Just by reading his/her comments, it's clear that he/she needs to be restricted.

[LSD]

So to summarize: racist kid does racist shit, black kids get pissed, black kids beat up racist kid.

Sound familiar to anyone? Sound maybe kinda maybe like the racial violence you see all over the south? Or all over the country? Or all over the world???

There is absolutely nothing new in this story other than that the media's making a whole mess of it. But the people involved were reacting to the very same pressures in the very same ways as in every other racial conflict for past thirty years.

The story here isn't one of justice denied or hatred unbridled, it's one of teenage angst and a poor community.

These kids have so little to hold on to that they make up invisible rules, like special "race trees" where only "white" children can play and when "black" children go to the "white" tree, the "white" kids get get angry and they put up symbols that their parents told them make the "blacks" angry.

It's all so tragically childish, and yet so ultimately brutal. ...and meanwhile the media is so incredibly eager to fan the flames.

And in the end, that's why this will explode, not because it's unique, not because it's particularly distressing, but because it's captured the right kind of primetime tonality. The state is right, the colors are right, even the setting is right (who doesn't love a good school violence story).

The business is called entertainment.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

That's pretty ridiculous. Technically Bolivia, Honduras, Canada, etc are all in "The Americas", but It's way simpler to just called people from the United States of America "Americans". There's no need to be so politically correct on an issue like this.

Why isn't there?

Even if you just want to be factually correct, instead of politically correct (and btw, criticism of political correctness usually comes from the right), you have to recognize that "American" isn't the proper term for folks in the U.S.

Americans are all of the people from the tip of Canada to the tip of Argentina. They all live in the Americas.

[dso79]

about a year later a group of six black students confronted one of the perpetrators, a fight broke out, and the group beat the racist unconcious.

Was that kid really a racist? He was not involved in the noose-incident as far as I know, all he allegedly did was taunt one of the black kids.

[A Suvorov]

With regard to the reply from revOlt:

Re: 'Violence in the name of defense (being justified)'- hmmm...let's see...a year after the fact, the Gang of Six feels threatened by one kid- he must have been some bad-a** kid to make six guys feel threatened to the point where they felt they were in mortal danger.

Again, I return to the point of all of this- by equating 'justice' with Mob Rule you take away the underpinning of our very society- it is the LAW which we accept as the governing factor, not whatever the Mob declares to be 'right'. I have no argument that our legal system is somewhat flawed at times, but I'd much rather be tried for a crime under the law than by whatever group shouts the loudest.

I also ask, does the white kid who was beaten deserve protection and justice under the law? If not, then you openly advocate th eviolation of his personal civil rights and Mob Rule. If so, the the converse of that is naturally that the Gang of Six be held LIABLE under the law for their crime.

Re: 'How is a shoe a deadly weapon?'- it becomes a deadly weapon the minute it is applied forcefully and repeatedly to someone's head, especially when the victim is already unconcious and quite unable to defend himself, THAT'S WHEN. I can't believe you even tried that argument.

Re: 'They didn't assault anyone'- So what exactly happened to the kid at the hands of the Gang of Six? I'm sure he must have tripped and hit his face repeatedly, causing all that facial damage- and it must have been from a fair height to have caused him to have a cranial hemmorhage and bleed from his ears! I'm sure the Gang of Six was diligently trying to help him to keep him from harm.

ASSAULT is what this whole issue SHOULD be about, instead of the inevitable playing of The Race Card. I don't deny there are some racial problems in Jena- we have them all over the South- but the color of one's skin does not exempt them from equal protection- or equal treatment- under the law. If the situation were reversed, I'd be advocating for the prosecution of the then-white Gang of Six, just the same as I advocate for the prosecution of the present crime(s).

--

I won't go into any more detailed instances; I'll simply chalk up the bulk of these statements to Internet Bravado- it's easy enough to say 'if my kid were being racist he deserves to be beaten by six guys' but I'll bet if it happened for real your tune would change *real* quick.

In short, yes our legal system is flawed- yes it's got issues, especially in the South- but until it's fixed it IS the law and we are bound as citizens to obey it until it is changed or repealed. Our disagreeing with it does not give us the right to ignore the law. I don't like it, either, but that's just the way it is. Running afoul of the law is what gives our movement (in general) a bad name sometimes- if you're going to ever get it to something more favorable, CHANGE THE LAW. But don't don't think you have the right to break it until then.

[Comrade Rage]

Solidarity with the Jena Six. I didn't attend any of the marches down there, is there any kind of show of support I could do?

[dez]

In my country (brazil) we have substituted the word Americano for Estadounidense, basically over the argumentation bootleg presented us.
It's not about being politically correct, it's about not considering a single country representative of an entire continent.

you take away the underpinning of our very society-

And what is so sacred about the foundation of your society?

it is the LAW which we accept as the governing factor, not whatever the Mob declares to be 'right'

Laws are a social contract.
Theorically, whatever the "mob" thought to be right should be the law.

Re: 'How is a shoe a deadly weapon?'- it becomes a deadly weapon the minute it is applied forcefully and repeatedly to someone's head, especially when the victim is already unconcious and quite unable to defend himself, THAT'S WHEN. I can't believe you even tried that argument.

I didn't think the 6-1 proportion was fair.
They should have gotten one stronger guy and filmed it.
Moar pain, youtube fun for the rest of us




Look, there are no "ifs" when you are talking about facts, there is "was".
Violence may not be the best way to change public opinion regarding "racial issues", i believe the way to go is education. But to get there, there has to be comotion and for there to be comotion, someone has got to do something. Draw attention.
The simple fact that the previous incident became known, this brutality is a little more acceptable.
And some terror to the racists.
h34r:

BTW, these guys had no connection whatsoever with any leftist movement.
Hence their disrespect to the law doesn't hurt leftist movement's images at all.



Oh, and could you consider the possibility that a lot in the law system exists to maintain you in a certain pattern of behavior, that interests to the lawmakers, and that certain pattern of behavior may not be the progressive stance to take?
And if it's not the progressive stance, will you still maintain it to "abide by the law"?

[A Suvorov]

I maintain that while, regrettably, much of our legal is flawed is it STILL our legal system. One cannot simply ignore it on their own whim and obey this law but not that one.

The Gang of Six KNEW what they were doing, they KNEW it was against the law, they KNEW they were beating this poor kid to near death- but yet they expect to be exempt from punishment for their actions? Even IF they have a *moral* leg to stand on, they have no *legal* leg to stand on.

Until the laws are changed, they are still the law- like it or not. Just because you think you should be allowed to drive at 90 mph doesn't mean you can do so just because you *want* to- why then, should you think you can get away with beating a kid half to death just because you *want* to?

The point I'm trying to make in all of this is that the issue of the Gang of Six, while having its beginnings in racial issues, has crossed into being a *criminal* issue quite apart from anything else. The braying of the mob outside the courthouse (or wherever) should have no bearing whatsoever on the facts of the case.

While I am repulsed by the actions of the guilty parties for their part in displaying the nooses, their actions in no way excuse the beating of the one kid by the Gang of Six.

[Red Heretic]

Just as a side note before I try to take on some of the racist shit I've seen in this thread, I would like to ask...

Did anyone else notice that Suvorov's reference to the "Gang of Six" and "Mob Rule" were almost directly transposed from the counter-revolutionaries and revisionists in the cultural revolution in China? This is like textbook revisionist shit poured on top a heaping pile of fucking white cracker Sean Hannity style racism that ignores the oppression of Black people and talks about reactions to racism as if they were racism themselves.