Story Comments
Posted by: hyperbola 1 year, 8 months ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
Neutral
hyperbola1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Tuskegee Syphilis Study remains an ignominious milestone in the intertwined histories of race and medical science in U.S. society. Initiated in 1932, this tragic 40-year long public health project resulted in almost 400 impoverished and unwitting African American men in Macon County, Ala., being left untreated for syphilis. Researchers wanted to observe how the disease progressed differently in blacks in its late stages and to examine its devastating effects with postmortem dissection.
A fresh account of the Tuskegee study, including new information about the internal politics of the panel charged by the Department of Health, Education and Welfare with investigating it in 1972, lies at the center of Harriet A. Washington's courageous and poignant book. The balance of Medical Apartheid reveals, with arresting detail, that this scandal was neither the first chapter nor the last in the exploitation of black subjects in U.S. medical research.
Reply-
Neutral
hyperbola1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Tuskegee was, in the author's words, "the longest and most infamous â;; but hardly the worst â;; experimental abuse of African Americans. It has been eclipsed in both numbers and egregiousness by other abusive medical studies."
Although medical experimentation with human subjects has historically involved vulnerable groups, including children, the poor and the institutionalized, Washington enumerates how black Americans have disproportionately borne the burden of the most invasive, inhumane and perilous medical investigations, from the era of slavery to the present day.
..Among those outraged by Wright's suggestion that the US government could have been involved in the creation of HIV, I imagine few could counter his suspicions with any factual information about the real origins of the virus. How many of the pundits could even explain what a retrovirus is, let alone where this particular one came from?
Reply-
Neutral
hyperbola1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Whether Wright's suspicions are baseless, in the light of Tuskegee, the fact that he has them should be neither shocking nor terribly surprising.
2. Wright's views on Louis Farrakhan:
â;¦ how many other African-Americans or European-Americans do you know that can get one million people together on the mall? He is one of the most important voices in the 20th and 21st century. That's what I think about him.
I've said, as I said on Bill Moyers, when Louis Farrakhan speaks, it's like E.F. Hutton speaks, all black America listens. Whether they agree with him or not, they listen.
Now, I am not going to put down Louis Farrakhan anymore than Mandela would put down Fidel Castro. Do you remember that Ted Koppel show, where Ted wanted Mandela to put down Castro because Castro was our enemy? And he said, "You don't tell me who my enemies are. You don't tell me who my friends are."
Reply-
Neutral
hyperbola1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Louis Farrakhan is not my enemy. He did not put me in chains. He did not put me in slavery.
Suppose Wright made the observation: William F. Buckley was one the most important voices in America. Would anyone have said that he was praising Buckley? Or would they have merely recognized the obvious: that he was drawing attention to the extent of Buckley's influence?
Is Wright correct in saying that when Farrakhan speaks, black Americans â;; whether they agree with him or not â;; listen?
As someone who is not a black American, I don't know, but neither I imagine do most of those white pundits who repeated the claim that Wright had "praised" Farrakhan.
3. Terrorism and the US:
You cannot do terrorism on other people and expect it never to come back on you.
Reply-
Neutral
hyperbola1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
For seven years, public discourse in America has conspired to sustain the notion that the term "terrorism" has an unambiguous and objective meaning. Although in theory it is possible that we could all agree on what terrorism is, in practice it has become the prerogative of the US government to determine what are admissible and inadmissible applications of the term. "Terrorism" has become a proprietary brand and the US government holds the copyright.
On April 30, 2008, five Tomahawk cruise missiles were launched from a U.S. naval vessel off the Horn of Africa, aimed the town of Dusa Marreb in central Somalia. According to the Washington Post, the strike "leveled a house belonging to the reclusive leader, Aden Hashi Ayro, who was inside at the time with at least one of his top commanders, according to his followers." Aryo is accused of having ties to al Qaeda. A witness said he counted 16 bodies around the crater where the missile(s) had exploded.
Reply-
Neutral
hyperbola1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
On February 29, 2008, the US government granted itself legal authority to blow up Aryo and those in his vicinity by designating the group to which they belong, Al-Shabaab, as a terrorist organization.
Although the Pentagon cannot confirm the number or identities of all the people killed in the missile strike, anyone who would have the audacity to refer to a military action such as this, as an act of "terrorism" is sure to be denounced. Among respectable commentators, the act itself is just as sure to receive little if any comment. Somalia is a lawless state; America's role in contributing to that lawlessness is a subject supposedly of no interest or concern to the American people.
http://warincontext.org/2008/05/02/campaign-08-...
Reply-
Neutral
aceofspades11 year, 8 months ago
-
Neutral
hyperbola1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Fortunately zionist racists are becoming ever more irrelevant in america. Israelis will welcome their end in our country. Of course, we will also have to root out the zionists in the democratic party.
For Israel's Sake, Moderate American Jews Must Find Their Voice
Religion â;; Radical zionist political associations have embraced the most right-wing figures of American politics from Rick Santorum and Trent Lott to Tom DeLay and George Bush - all in the guise of being "pro-Israel." Enough. These extremists don't speak for me or the majority of American jews and they endanger Israel.
http://religion.propeller.com/story/2008/05/03/...
Reply-
Neutral
aceofspades11 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hyp - your anti-Zionist rants are political, so rant on, but very often you cross-over into being an overt anti-Semitic.
Since you appear to admit to being Jewish , you must really have problems with being such, & if you are male perhaps a foreskin reconstruction would be in order.
Reply-
-
-
ranchhandComment removed: Retracted by user
-
Neutral
hyperbola1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Oh both political and moral Ace. You support crimes against humanity by religious sects?
Zionism versus Judaism
Religion â;; Zionists have managed to unforgivably drag judaism's name through the mud for more than 60 years. Zionism might be a racist, supremacist ideology - but Judaism is most definitely not. The more Jews who make this distinction, the better: both for security of their fellow Jews, as well as to end zionist crimes against Palestinians.
http://religion.propeller.com/story/2008/04/15/...
Mechanisms of Zionist Denial
Religion â;; An Israeli professor dicusses the mechanisms of denial used in Israel, America and around the world to cover up zionist crimes against humanity.
http://religion.propeller.com/story/2008/05/01/...
Reply-
Neutral
hyperbola1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Jewish Palestinian speaks out against 'apartheid state'
Religion â;; His duty, he says, is the same of all persons' worldwide--to mobilize against war crimes perpetrated by governments in citizens' own names. "Not in my name," Davis cries out--a closed hand gesticulating his affront. "Not in my name as an individual and citizen." He raises his voice as loud as he is able to shout. "Not in my name".
http://religion.propeller.com/story/2008/05/02/...
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Global_WarmerComment removed: Abusive1 Reply
-
-
-
-
loading ...
tehranchik
cushi
2sidestoeverything
Leemck02
Candida
mesodude
tanglang
KvilleTX
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.