And so the next time I read an article by a WHITE person complaining about something I'm supposed to keep that in mind when I consider whether that makes their arguments legitimate or not, eh? So now the color of a person's skin can be a 'conflict of interest'. Does this mean that men should only write articles about female issues and women confine themselves to only male issues, otherwise their position might be discounted as a possible 'conflict of interest'.
And besides, if you actually read the article you will see that the writer was NOT talking so much about what the picture depicted as happening back in the 50's, but rather about what this picture and the recent stories surrounding it being put on display is the White House, was causing in terms of commentary from so-called average Americans. The article was about the existence of racists attitudes in our society which are still lying just below the surface (as we have just experienced here ourselves) but when allowed to be shown in an anonymous manner (sort of like on some message board somewhere) that these latent views and hatred is easily exposed. THAT'S WHAT THIS ARTICLE WAS REALLY ABOUT, not the "crimes" of the last century, but the fact that the hatred and racism which led to those crimes is still alive and well in America today (as we have all just been exposed to).
Based on the last line of your reply it's quite obvious that you're so blinded by your own personal views that you can't see what was really being said by Mr. Sawyer in what he was ACTUALLY writing about and that my 'editorial comment' just reinforced it. But then we have YOUR comments, which did more to confirm exactly what TODAY'S real problem is than anything that I could have written in a one line response. So in some ways we have YOU to thank for providing the TRUE one line commentary which brings home the relevancy of Mr. Sawyer's article much better than my weak attempt... "Yup. I figured as much."
| 
