Blacks suing corporate USA for $1.4 trillion!

[kunta]

if slavery was legal at the time then why should they be sue'd for following the norms at the time, i guess japanese americans can sue for lost pay while internment camps...even though it was wrong, no pmt should be made

 

[Warik]

Perhaps a better solution would be for these companies to agree to set up college/scholarship fund for African-American students.

I have an even better solution.

It would be better if these companies OF THEIR OWN FREE WILL WITH NO COERCION OR LEGAL REQUIREMENT set up college/scholarship funds for ANY students for ACADEMIC merit.

-Warik

 

[Warik]

there was a thread a few months back about this very topic. i argued blacks should sue slave owning corporations that benefitted from slavery.

cudos to them, and i hope the blacks win.

So you think that people should be held responsible for doing things that are in accordance with the law?

You started driving when you were 16, right? Well, what if next week a big law is passed that requires all drivers to be of age 18 before operating a motor vehicle. Guess what, you're going to jail. Why? Because you drove several years ago when you were 16. Oh, but it was legal then? Too bad... the law has changed now and you are held accountable for legal things you did years ago.

Give me a break. The defendants in this lawsuit have committed no crimes.

-Warik

 

[KAYNE]

How about we use that .01% of that money to send those who don't like it here back to Africa?

I've since filed suit against both the Holy Roman empire and von Bismarck in order go recoup damages due to my family's northern eurppean heritage.

MATT......YOURE MY HERO!!!


KAYNE

 

[Frackal]

It is becoming harder to find validity in the black american's claims as time goes on, this is nothing but a pure grab for money....it will certainly taint my views on the community in general.

 

[bigguns7]

Good point. But isn't there some kind of time limit during which you must sue? Like if I slip and fall in a grocery store (you know, since I haven't been walking for almost my ENTIRE LIFE like most other people and I'm prone to falling for no reason), don't I have to sue some time before, say, my 50th birthday?

-Warik

Yeah I think the statute of limitations on torts is 3 years in most states, but that won't matter in this case. Think of the tobacco lawsuits. These people are suing for damages done to them when they smoked 40 years ago, and they are winning.

 

[Code]

America (corporate or not) does not owe anything, financial or otherwise to Black America.

Because there IS NO BLACK AMERICA! There is only America. Creating this type of lawsuit will set back the clock on the progress African-American. Because it will only further define the line between blacks and whites in America.

Now if they can prove that; A.) every benefactor of the lawsuit actually had ancestors enslaved, and B.) the act of slavery on their ancestors have adversely affected their lives financially.

Then maybe, just maybe some form of compensation can be given out.

 

[buddy28]

So you think that people should be held responsible for doing things that are in accordance with the law?

You started driving when you were 16, right? Well, what if next week a big law is passed that requires all drivers to be of age 18 before operating a motor vehicle. Guess what, you're going to jail. Why? Because you drove several years ago when you were 16. Oh, but it was legal then? Too bad... the law has changed now and you are held accountable for legal things you did years ago.

Give me a break. The defendants in this lawsuit have committed no crimes.

-Warik

The Declaration of Independance directly opposes *any* law which condoned domestic slavery.

Warik, it doesnt matter if the *people* who benefitted from slavery are still alive. A corporation is considered a legal enitity which transcends the life of it serving officers. Therefore, the entity can be held liable for past actions, regardless of the mortal status of the officers in question. Same too for any government.

Dont beleive me. Then tell me why the North American public are recieving massive payouts from Tobacco firms for deceased victims of smoking?? When legal precendence is unclear, governing morality will prevail.

The corporations deserve to pay a fuck load. Why not?? Because the people who made the decision to enslave blacks are dead?? Well guess what. Your government indirectly condened the use of corporate slavery by not intervening when they had the chance. Despite the sincerity and princibles which inspried the drawing of the Declaration, the lives sacrificed in the American Revolution to confirm the documents legality were eventually made trivial by the corrupt aspirations of the succeeding government.

Which begs the question. Is the declaration of Independance a legally binding document? Most would argue it is because it *officially* declares seperation between United States colonies and ancestral Great Britan. Hopefully, RyanH and the other Law buffs can help us out on that one. But I suppose youll argue the only intended recognized statute is that of seperation from Britan, not equality for all men. Sometimes its more important to do the right thing, then to do the legal thing.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness...."

Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton
[Column 2]
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton
[Column 3]
Massachusetts:
John Hancock
Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton
[Column 4]
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean
[Column 5]
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark
[Column 6]
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton

 

[studcj]

Should there be black only scholarships? Sure, as long as there are an equal amount for every other race in the nation. (hispanic, white,asian..you get the point)

The ones I feel sorry for are blacks who will get labeled as "gimmie gimmies", even though they had nothing to do with this whole idea,don't support it, and have earned their way through life.


Don't the corporations owe anything specifically to the black community?....NO, AND THEY DON'T OWE ANYTHING TO ANY OTHER RACE EITHER.

 

[HumorMe]

After reading about this story, it occured to me that the solution would be to pay the money back to these people in the form of $1.4 million Confederate dollars.

Makes sense to me plus it will make "cents" for them.