How the Media Fell for A Racism Sham

Post Reply New Topic

Look at the environment in Utah/Brigham Young....98% of the parents slavishly believe their doctrine....their doctrine is anti-black....the schools and University is predominately white (just look at the BYU crowd).

Read the article I posted and watch the videos from TYT.

There is irrevocable video proof of two girls in the crowd shouting something at Richardson just as she was about to serve. There also appears to be an altercation a split second afterward in the crowd suggesting what was said was innapropriate. In the article one of the Duke girls who was benched did eventually hear the slur after not quite hearing it the 1st and 2nd time.

Despite your claim the team didn't believe her they infact did support/believe her when they approach Olmstead (the BYU coach), The coach did not dispute the story but brushed it off saying: "what am I supposed to do"

BYU came up with weird story that that kept changing - the person was identified but then it turned out to be two boys and their father and the boys were not from BYU. But quite clearly the two people shouting at Richardson were a) girls and b) part of the BYU cheer squad not the general admission

There is also the outstanding issue of Richardson getting threatened by a male outside which required a police presence, The idea that a teenage girl and her team would make all this up when you also have the video evidence, the actions of the BYU coach (who BTW has gone underground) plus BYU conducting their own investigation makes this smell of a cover up.

So the investigation in the article Dox shared was not thorough, either.

But it also can't be said that what you showed was irrefutable proof.

And MY problem is that BOTH SIDES ran with positions without looking at the other alternatives. The article Dox posted took the BYU journalism team's investigation as fact without wondering if they had cause to be biased, and the mainstream media took the accusation as fact without wondering if there could be another explanation.

And now political opponents BOTH think they have evidence of something they don't, and are ready to go to the mat over it. Can you imagine what life is like right now for both the young volleyball player and the young attendee at the game? Both have a large segment of the country condemning them without a trial.

What distresses me is that we, as a society, let things like this happen all the time.

I don't think, btw, that Dox wanted to throw the young volleyball player under the bus as much as he wanted to make a point about "woke" society running headlong into these stories because it makes them feel like they are doing something about racism, while it actually ends up doing more harm than good. I realize that is a poor summary of what Dox has been trying to convey, but it is a variation I find worth considering. When accusations are made publicly, it exposes both the accuser and the accused to the crazies, and someone innocent WILL get hurt, with no one involved finding real justice.

I'm not going to delve into the issues between Mormons and the black community. I'm under the impression it is something the church and its leaders continue to work through, and want to resolve in an inclusive way. There are Black Later Day Saints now, that piece I feel I know. And I know the question was something a Mormon friend of mine was grappling with back in the 1970's. We can't forget that churches are created and led by human beings, and human beings are very good at messing things up. I've seen both good and bad come from people practicing the Mormon faith, much the same as I've seen with most churches. I see the goal as helping a church overcome its troubled past, while preserving the facets that allow grace to flourish. Of course, unlike most members here, I do consider myself a person of faith.

With respect to the issue at hand, I accept that the BYU student journalists will have had reason to lean in the direction of support for the crowd and student in the crowd. I think that is a fair assumption for anyone reviewing the situation to make, just as it is fair to assume the aunt and the father may have been overly passionate in stating the young Duke player's case.

Yes, it was plenty thorough, all of the garbage cyberdad is posting is from before the article I used as the source dropped, and it's all just taking the original accuser's word at face value, along with some motivated reasoning involving facial expressions and the crowd.

You shouldn't use words and terms you don't understand, as virtually every word in those two sentences is a lie.



This is also a lie. From your own link:



Underlined the relevant parts for you. No corroboration, only the one girl claims to have heard a slur.

Seriously, click through to the original piece I linked in the OP, there is no equivalence here, none at all, and if anything the BYU administration was too quick to accept the original claim at face value, hence their later exoneration of the hastily banned fan.

One of the things that drives me nuts about internet news and commentary, is that the date posted is not always obvious. Drives me absolutely nuts.

And there you have it. It's precisely attitudes like yours which is why people who are the victims of racial vilification from white crowds at professional and school sporting events (and there's literally hundreds of examples of this on the internet) don't come forward. And when they are brave enough to take a stand (like Richardson) they face people like you who automatically take the position they lied or they are trouble makers or they are woke.

!	magz wrote:
	Gentlemen, discuss the topic, not each other.

Was there a witness out of all those people to corroborate the the accusation?

If there are people, they have not gone public with it.

Did Holmen who said an "egregious" thing was said, actually hear it? If so, he has not gone public with it. No public corroboration.
"Duke Players are disappointed". Are they? Duke University says so, I think so, but no Duke player has publically said this. No public corroboration.


Repeating what I said earlier in the thread

^The above is quite pertinent to the topic.

It was “heckling.”

It’s true that, mostly, they don’t mean the crap they spew forth, and that they’re trying to screw with the opponent’s head.

Many athletes, like Jackie Robinson, had to endure racist heckling.

Athletes, in order to succeed, have to be able to endure heckling.

There comes a point where the heckling goes too far, like hazing goes too far. One has to draw the line somewhere.

While we haven't been able to establish that the heckling was racist in nature, I want to say one thing:

Racist heckling is NOT ok. Should a fan mean it or not, it has the potential to hit too close to home for the recipient. Most heckling clearly isn't based in any reality (your mama eats X, etc), but racist terms DO have an historical basis in reality. Today's athletes shouldn't HAVE to put up with what Jackie Robinson did. The racist taunts of the past weren't just random heckling; they carried actual hate; fans didn't believe Jackie Robinson had a right to be there playing. We're supposed to be better than that now.

So, no, just because it's heckling, does not make it OK to use racist language.