RMCommunityCalendar
Events happening today
-
ALL
DAY
24 March 2261
This event began 03/24/2025 and repeats every year forever
Groundbreaking for New York subway system 1900
The New York Rapid Transit Decision of 1900 (Katz)
Full Article
https://www.nycsubway.org/wiki/The_New_York_Rapid_Transit_Decision_of_1900_(Katz)
Excerpt
Construction of the first subway in New York City, the Interborough Rapid Transit underground railway or IRT, was officially begun on March 24, 1900 and completed, ahead of schedule, in late October, 1904.
RMCommunityCalendar 0 Comments · 0 Reviews
24 March 2261
This event began 03/24/2025 and repeats every year forever
Love McQueen, the stunts, the love of cars, that he put in each contract , resources for an orphanage home.
The Blob
The Magnificent Seven
a great interview with Eli Wallach about the magnificent seven
https://www.americanlegends.com/actors/eili wallach/index.html
The Magnificent Seven was produced by Walter Mirish and directed by John Sturges. An independent production, the film was released in 1961. Neither Sturges (1911-1992), nor his movie was the favorite of film school scholars or tribute directors who worship at the camera of Howard Hawks or Preston Sturges. Andrew Sarris wrote in The American Cinema: "Long before The Magnificent Seven, John Sturges seemed to be striving, albeit unconsciously, to become the American Kurosawa..."--the Japanese director whose movie, The Seven Samurai, inspired The Magnificent Seven. Sarris added: "Unfortunately, it is hard to remember why Sturges's career was ever considered meaningful." Sturges's movie, however, was an immediate hit with filmgoers who were stirred by the tale of the seven gunslingers and misfits who come to the aid of a poor Mexican village threatened by local bandits. Sturges chose two Broadway actors to play opposite leads: Yul Brynner was cast as Chris, the philosophical leader of the seven who at one point in the movie says, "Once you begin killing, you can't stop," and at another comments: "The graveyards are full of young boys who were very young and very proud." Eli Wallach, an Actors Studio veteran, played the brutal bandit Calvera. For the rest of the cast, Sturges assembled a group of then unknowns, some of whom had knocked about Hollywood for years playing off-beat parts: James Coburn, Brad Dexter, Charles Bronson. The director also recruited a young actor named Steve McQueen, whom he had spotted on television, and chose to play Vin, the boyish Tombstone gunman. The film's musical score was composed by Elmer Bernstein whose Coplandesque theme captured the bravery and idealism of the seven American samurai who set aside their own self-interest in a noble cause. This telephone interview appeared on American Legends in January 2005. Eli Wallach died in 2014 at 98. Known for his versatility and serious attention to his craft, Wallach appeared on Broadway in 1951 in Tennessee Williams's The Rose Tattoo and later patented his own version of a hard, rough "bad guy" in Westerns, including Sergio Leone's A Fistful of Dollars, and The Magnificent Seven which, with its great ensemble cast, has come to be regarded as a classic. Q: How did you get involved in the movie? A: I wish I knew. One day I was called in by John Sturges. He said, "We thought about you, and we want to cast you." I had seen The Seven Samurai and would have loved to play the crazy samurai, the role Mifume played in the Kurosawa film. It was brilliant. Q: Sturges chose Yul Brynner who was known for his Broadway roles as the lead. A: I knew Yul from New York when he was working in television as a director. Sturges told me, "We're thinking of you as the head bandit." I told Sturges that I had seen the Japanese film--and all I recalled was that the bandit wore an eyepatch and that all you saw was his horse's hoofs: he rides in, he rides out. Q: But you were cast as Calvera. A: I almost turned it down. Then I read the script carefully and I thought, Well, I'll play the part cause it's a terrific role. I went to Sturges and said, "In movie Westerns, you never see what the bandits do with the money. They hold up the trains, they steal the cattle, but you never see what they do with the money. I want to show how they spend it. I want to have silk shirts. I'm going to put in two gold teeth. I want a good horse, a wonderful saddle." Sturges said, "Okay. You got it." So I went to Mexico. We shot it on location there. I had no idea what the movie would turn out to be, but I got to see some wonderful young actors who were going to blossom into stars: Coburn, Bronson, McQueen. Q: Did the Mexican government cooperate? A: The Mexicans were furious with the Americans. There had been a movie called Vera Cruz with Burt Lancaster and Gary Cooper that had angered the Mexicans with the way they were depicted. They tore the seats out of the theater and threw them at the screen. So the government had a censor on the set. When he read the script, the censor asked Sturges, "Why do you have to send to America to bring back gunmen We have plenty of our own." Sturges said, "Fortunately, or unfortunately, the money is coming from Hollywood studios, so we have to use Americans." There was also a man on the set named Emilio Fernandez. He was a Mexican movie director who had done a number of movies in the 1940s with Delores Del Rio, including Maria Candelaria which celebrated Mexican folklore. He acted as a kind of adviser to Sturges to see that nothing "non-Mexican" happened. I got along very well with him. Q: John Sturges is dismissed by auteur critics as an action-adventure director, someone who did Escape from Fort Bravo and The Great Escape. What was it like to work with him? A: There was a lot of respect for Sturges on the set. He had a wonderful eye. I had about thirty or so bandits in my outfit. Sturges told me, "I want you and your gang to go riding in the morning before you come on the set." So we'd mount up early in the morning, at sunup, and ride for an hour and then come in all wet and dirty and ready to shoot. Q: Was there improvisation in shooting the film? A: No, except Steve McQueen, who was a very skillful movie actor, said, "Listen, I want to cut some of my dialogue. I don't want to talk too much. Acting in movies is really reacting, so I want to react to things." Sturges let him do it. Q: Did the actors compete with each other on camera? A: I once stood alongside the camera and watched the seven ride across the river. Each one did another little piece of business which they thought would cause you to remember them more. McQueen reached out and scooped up some water in his hat and put it on. Another turned and looked around at the next man--at the one behind him. All of them had odd little pieces of business. I thought it very interesting--wait till they meet me. Q: Did you have much interaction with the rest of the cast? A: Bronson was a loner. He kept to himself. I liked Robert Vaughn and James Coburn very much. Vaughn is a very intelligent guy. He wrote a book on blacklisting. Coburn was one of those quiet types which fit his character very well: silent but a knife thrower of great skill. The one I became quite friendly with was Brad Dexter. Of the seven no one can remember his name. I was also adopted by my Mexican gang, one of whom, Guillermo Kramer, was an architect and wonderful horseman. Q: Brad Dexter later acted with Sinatra and co-produced his movies. Both he and Horst Buchholz died in 2004. A: Buchholz played the romantic lead. That was a part I was interested in when I read the script. But Sturges told me, "We're bringing over a young German actor. He's going to play that." Buchholz was good. He rode beautifully. He brought to the role his German training and background. Q: Was there any sense that The Magnificent Seven was going to be a great movie? A: You can never predict the outcome of a movie. I did The Misfits with a great cast: Marilyn Monroe, Monty Clift, and Clark Gable. You'd think it was going to be a great show. The critics were not that happy because Monroe, Clift, and Gable were trying to destroy the mold the studio had put them in over the years. As for The Magnificent Seven, it has become a cult classic. I think it is one of the ten best Westerns ever made. (Background information for the interview was found in the following: Andrew Sarris, The American Cinema, New York, Da Capo Press ed., 1996; Neile McQueen Toffel, My Husband, My Friend, New York, Signet ed., 1986)
a book on blacklisting by Robert Vaughn
https://www.am*zon.com/Only-Victims-Study-Business-Blacklisting/dp/0879100818
The Great Escape
Article on the great escape- Bud Ekins did the motorcycle stunt but off camera, steve mcqueen and tim gibbes did it for fun
https://web.archive.org/web/20210309184609/https://www.hagerty.com/media/motorcycles/the-great-escape-was-steve-mcqueen-having-fun/
The Great Escape is how Steve McQueen outfoxed studio lawyers and kept having fun Priscilla Page 02 May 2019 At the threshold of Steve McQueen’s stardom, a studio attorney gave him just a day to make a life-altering decision: racing or acting. If McQueen were to become a true leading man, he’d have to play it safe and sacrifice the race track. “They gave me twenty-four hours to make up my mind,” McQueen recalled. “I took most of those twenty-four hours thinking about whether I wanted to go on racing, earning my money on the track, or whether I wanted to continue being an actor on the studio’s terms. It was a very tough decision for me to reach. Still, I had Neile and our two young children to consider, and that made the difference. I signed their paper.” With 1963’s The Great Escape, Steve McQueen established a career built on outfoxing his contract. He may have been unable to race for real, but he could still race in the movies. And The Great Escape was the first of such ruses — director John Sturges and McQueen “worked a hairy motorcycle chase” into the film for McQueen’s character Virgil Hilts, nicknamed the Cooler King due to the time he spent in solitary confinement. McQueen described it himself, “The idea was this Cooler King character makes good his escape by stealing a cycle, gets chased cross-country by German cyclists and loses them by jumping this big barbed-wire fence with this bike.” The bike jump in The Great Escape is legendary, but Sturges’ film is a masterpiece in its own right, based on the true story of Allied airmen’s daring escape via tunnels from Stalag Luft III during World War II. Though McQueen is ostensibly the star, the film belongs to its ensemble cast, a dream team of 1960s masculine icons and legendary actors that included James Garner, Charles Bronson, James Coburn, James Donald, Donald Pleasence, David McCallum, and Richard Attenborough. On its surface, The Great Escape seems to be a war film, but at its heart, it’s a heist movie flipped on its head: a group of specialists team up to make a plan with nothing but their ingenuity – though instead of breaking in, they’re breaking out of a German POW camp. It’s also the ultimate underdog story, a film about camaraderie, courage, self-sacrifice, and giving the enemy hell. The Great Escape brought together some of the most prominent gearheads of the 1960s, and by all accounts, the testosterone on the set was out of control. Charles Bronson started an affair with David McCallum’s wife Jill Ireland. Steve McQueen frequently fought for changes to the script, and even took issue with his rival James Garner wearing a more handsome outfit. Even Donald Pleasence brought his Jaguar with him to Germany. According to David McCallum, “Everyone drove like a maniac, including Donald Pleasence. [ . . . ] But Steve was the guy – mirroring the film, almost – who took the most risks and had the traffic police in awe of him. When he was pulled over they’d say, ‘Herr McQueen, good morning, we’re delighted that once again you’ve won the special prize,’ and cart him off to the jail. Once I asked him what he did in a crash. He told me you should aim for the smallest trees.” Tom Adams, who played RAF officer Dai Nimmo, put it plainly: “Steve McQueen was as mad as a hatter. He wrote off six or seven cars out there.” Though it may have made him difficult behind the scenes, McQueen channeled his reckless thrill-seeking, his penchant for getting locked up, and his love for bikes into his performance and character. Stuntman Bud Ekins was as essential to The Great Escape as Steve McQueen himself. McQueen met Ekins when he bought a Triumph motorcycle from him, started hanging out at Ekins’ shop, and as a result discovered desert racing. It was McQueen’s idea to fly Ekins out to Bavaria where they were shooting The Great Escape. “He said, ‘I’m going to Germany and I’m going to make a movie. Do you want to come over and double me? There’s some motorcycle work in it.’ I said, ‘Sure,’ and that was about it.” It would be the first of many films Ekins and McQueen made together. Bud Ekins prepared and choreographed the bulk of the chase, and McQueen did most of his own riding. McQueen was a better driver than many of the stuntmen playing Germans, so he put on an SS uniform for some of these scenes and chased himself. As Hilts, he rode a 1962 650cc Triumph TR6R. Production used four bikes total, modified to look like a WWII-era side-valve BMW with an olive paint job, old seat, and luggage rack. The studio’s insurers took issue with McQueen doing anything too dangerous, so Ekins doubled him for stunts where McQueen could have been hurt. Ekins also brought along Australian motocross champion Tim Gibbes, who played the Nazi officer who crashes after Hilts sets a wire trap in the road. Hilts steals Gibbes’ SS uniform and motorcycle and heads for Switzerland. On his way toward the border, he draws the unwanted attention of German officers who try asking questions that he can’t answer. Hilts kicks one of these officers off his bike and speeds away, with countless Nazis in pursuit. Though McQueen is famous for The Great Escape’s most famous stunt, it was Bud Ekins who performed it. McQueen explained, “I always felt a little guilty about that. A lot of people thought it was me making that jump, but I’ve never tried to hide the truth about it. I could handle the jump now, I’m sure. Back in ’62, I just didn’t have the savvy.” According to a few of his castmates, McQueen did have the savvy. John Leyton, aka Willie “The Tunnel King,” had his own story about palling around with McQueen, Coburn, and Bronson after the cameras stopped rolling. The men rode motorcycles together and they all managed to make the jump, aided by a ramp dug in the hill that Ekins had used as a launch pad. McQueen performed the stunt at least one other time, on camera, just to prove that he could, and Tim Gibbes did it for fun. According to second unit director Robert E. Relyea, McQueen, Ekins, and Gibbes were all filmed performing the stunt. Relyea wrote in his book Not So Quiet on the Set that he believes it could be any of these three men doing the stunt featured in the final cut, but most believe that it’s Bud Ekins on film. Ekins sped his way up and over the barbed-wire fence, jumped 12 feet high, and descended 65 feet at 60 mph. It only took one take for Bud Ekins to pull it off. Ekins said, “When I took off, I throttled right back and it was silent. You know, everything was just silent – the whole crew and everything was just silent. And then when I landed they cheered like crazy.” With Hilts surrounded on all sides by Nazis, this moment has the highest stakes imaginable, and though Hilts is ultimately captured, it is euphoric when he first makes it to the other side. The motorcycle jump is essential to The Great Escape’s legacy, a historic moment in moviemaking. It became an image seared into our collective memory, emblematic of liberation and the brief exultation of those who made it out of the prison camp. But their escape came at a cost, as the Gestapo executed the majority of the escapees. At the end of the film, Hendley asks Senior British Officer Ramsey (James Donald), “Do you think it was worth the price?” Ramsey responds, “It depends on your point of view.” Jack Lyon, a real RAF officer who’d been imprisoned at Stalag Luft III, believed the mission boosted morale at the camp, as the men felt they had a purpose, that they contributed something. Ramsey argues they succeeded in their mission: to mess up the works, and to get back at the enemy the hardest way they could.
The Cincinnati Kid
check out city college of new york alumni, edward g robinson in the ending of the film
The Thomas Crown Affair
song is Michel Legrand, windmills of your mind
the split screen effect was mastered in this film
Bullitt
a still, of McQueen riding, the head stuntman played the rival rider. McQueen tried to buy the car in the film but it is in a private collector's space
The Reivers
based on william faulkner's last book
Le Mans
the introduction, it is calm, really an advert for driving a car on a road in the woodlands
Papillon
made by https://alliedartists.com/ look at the other films they helped produce
The Solitary Confinement scenes in Papillon are stark
+
The Towering Inferno
The tower was designed by Doug Roberts in the film.
The tower was designed by Doug Roberts,
https://www.vaultofculture.com/vault/towering/glasstower
Tower-ing Fiction #9: Glass Tower, The Towering Inferno (1974) June 12, 2019 by Shawn Gilmore The Towering Inferno (dir. John Guillerman, 1974) is one of the Irwin Allen-produced disaster epics helped establish the modern blockbuster in terms of scale, stakes, and narrative setup. Without it, we wouldn’t have later films like Die Hard (dir. John McTiernan, 1988) or even Skyscraper (dir. Rawson Marshall Thurber, 2018), as previously covered in the Tower-ing Fiction series. And at its heart is the Glass Tower, a modern skyscraper, billed as “the tallest building in the world,” which of course will become the titular towering inferno, which will erupt over “a night of blazing suspense,” as promotional materials don’t attempt to hide. The plot of the film is fairly thin—architect Doug Roberts (Paul Newman) has returned to San Francisco for the dedication of the building he designed the builder, James Duncan (William Holden); an electrical fire breaks out on the 81st floor, likely because Duncan’s son-in-law cut corners; during the dedication ceremony itself, a full fire erupts, and fire chief Michael O’Hallorhan (Steve McQueen) is called in to try to rescue those trapped inside, many from the 135th floor Promenade Room, roof, offices, elevators, etc. The star-studded cast is populated by actors playing types (as named on the poster): Faye Dunaway as the Girlfriend, Fred Astaire as the Con-Man, Susan Blakely as the Wife, Richard Chamberlain as the Son-in-Law, Jennifer Jones as the Widow, OJ Simpson as the Security Man, Robert Vaughn as the Senator, and Robert Wagner as the Publicity Man. There is much fire, and yelling, and a few tests of wills, but the film focuses on moment-by-moment solutions to immediate danger—how will a cluster of our characters make it through the peril in front of them, and can they trust one another to do so? In the end, much of the fire is doused by blowing up roof-top water tanks, with O’Hallorhan’s ingenuity saving nearly all of those involved. ... From Prose to Screen The Towering Inferno was adapted from two fairly similar thrillers, The Tower (1973) by Richard Martin Stern and The Glass Inferno (1974) by Thomas N. Scortia and Frank M. Robinson. The Tower focuses on the grand opening of the World Tower Building in Lower Manhattan, built near the World Trade Center Towers (which had been completed in 1970 and 1971), and is billed as even taller, at 125 stories and 1,527’; the plot hinges on shortcuts in the electrical systems, a disgruntled sheet-metal worker with a bomb, which coupled sets off a fire that traps the important guests in the 125th floor Tower Room, some of whom are saved by a breeches buoy line secured to the nearby (and lower) North Tower of the World Trade Center. The Glass Inferno concerns itself with the “Glass House,” or more properly the National Curtainwall Building, which is some 66 stories tall an located in an unnamed American city; again, corners were cut in the construction of the tower, there are disgruntled employees, and a fire breaks out, and in this iteration, those remaining are saved from the penthouse Promenade Room by a combination of helicopter rescue and exploding water tanks to put out most of the fire. Warner Brothers bought the rights to The Tower and 20th Century Fox snagged The Glass Inferno, putting two similar films in to production. Allen convinced the two studios to jointly produce his film, splitting revenues, with domestic proceeds going to Fox and international to Warner Brothers. These parallel novels were then merged by Stirling Silliphant (who also wrote scripts for In the Heat of the Night (dir. Norman Jewison, 1967) and The Poseidon Adventure) in to one synthetic story, and copies of both novels were rolled out with film-specific branding. The two novels make their respective towers central characters. The Tower opens with a set of diegetic descriptions of the World Tower: It is the world’s tallest structure, and the most modern, an enduring tribute to man’s ingenuity, skill, and vision. It is a triumph of imagination. —GROVER FRAZEE at the World Tower dedication ceremonies. A monument to Mammon, product of man’s insatiable ego, an affront to the gods. That so much treasure should have been poured into the construction of this — this monstrosity while poverty, yes, and even hunger still stalk the land, is an abomination! There will be inevitable Divine retribution! —THE REVEREND JOE WILLIE THOMAS in a press interview. Which is then followed by an extended prologue, moving from the construction to the tower as a living thing: For one hundred and twenty-five floors, from street level to Tower Room, the building rose tall and clean and shining. […] By comparison with the twin masses of the nearby Trade Center, the building appeared slim, almost delicate, a thing of fragile-seeming grace and beauty. But eight subbasements beneath the street level its roots were anchored deep in the bedrock of the island; and its core and external skeleton, cunningly contrived, had the strength of laminated spring steel. […] Through its telephone, radio, and television systems operating at ground level, broadcasting through the atmosphere or via satellite, its sphere of communication was, quite simply, the earth. It could even communicate with itself, floor to floor, subbasement to gleaming tower. […] As the structure grew, its arteries, veins, nerves, and muscles were woven into the whole: miles of wiring, piping, utility ducting; cables and conduits; heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning ducts, intakes, and outlets—and always, always the monitoring systems and devices to oversee and control the building’s internal environment, its health, its life. Sensors to relay information on temperature, humidity, air flow and content; computers to assimilate the data, evaluate them, issue essential instructions for continuation or change. […] The building breathed, manipulated its internal systems, slept only as the human body sleeps: heart, lungs, cleansing organs functioning on automatic control, encephalic waves pulsing ceaselessly. […] Men had envisioned it, conceived it, and constructed it, sometimes almost lovingly, sometimes with near hatred, because, like all great projects, the building had early on developed a character of its own, and no man intimately associated with it could escape involvement. There is, it seems, a feedback. What man creates with his hands or his mind becomes a part of himself. And there, on this morning, the building stood, its uppermost tip catching the first rays of sunrise while the rest of the city still slept in shadow; and the thousands of men who had had a part in the building’s design and construction were going to remember this day forever. Later, in chapter 12, as the inferno rages, a character reflects that “the great shining World Tower she had visited so often during the years of its construction […] was crippled now, a helpless giant” and the people on the street gazing upon the tower, “like ghouls, spectators at a public execution lusting for more blood, more terror.” In the next chapter, an omniscient narrator characterizes the building a cursed: For some from the start it was one of those jobs you writhed in dreams about and awakened sweating. The sheer magnitude of the World Tower was frightening, but it was more, far more than that. The building taking shape seemed to develop a personality of its own, and that personality was malign. On a cold fall day a freak wind whipped through the huge empty space where the plaza would be, picked up a loose piece of corrugation, and scaled it as a boy might scale a flattened tin can. A workman named Bowers saw it coming, tried too late to duck, and was almost but not quite decapitated. The front tire of a partially off-loaded truck standing perfectly still suddenly blew out with sufficient force to shift the untied load of pipe, burying three men in a tangle of assorted fractures. On another cold fall day a fire started in a subbasement, spread through piled lumber, and trapped two men in a tunnel. They were rescued alive—just. Paul Simmons was standing outside the building, talking with one of his foremen, when Pete Janowski walked off the steel at floor 65. The Doppler effect accentuated the man’s screams until they ended abruptly with a sickening thunk that Paul, not ten feet away, would never forget. And finally, near the end of the novel, in chapter 30, when speculating on motivations of Connor, the bomber, we learn that: “[…] the World Tower building was the last real job he had. He was fired. There’s a connection, but maybe you have to be loony to see it. I don’t know. All I know are the facts.” In a vague kind of way it made sense. All three men felt it. The Establishment had killed Connors’s wife, hadn’t it? The World Tower building was the brand-new shining symbol of the Establishment, wasn’t it? Well? So, the World Tower, man’s creation (and mirror of himself) is both malign and the Man, the inferno of the novel a kind of public execution, spurred on by one man’s rage at its symbolic stakes. The Glass Inferno (1974) opens with teasing advertising copy: The snow that began falling on Thanksgiving Eve added an extra magic to the spectacular new sixty-six-story high rise known as the Glass House. It dominated the city skyline: the latest triumph of modern architecture and engineering. But unnoticed, deep within it, a tiny spark grew until it became an inferno that changed the lives of the hundreds who worked or lived in the building—as well as the architect who designed it, the contractors who built it, the newsman who first warned of its dangers, and the firemen compelled to risk their lives because of another’s man’s greed and misjudgment. A gripping story of fire in a modem high rise, The Glass Inferno is an unforgettable novel of men and women caught in crisis, their heroism and cowardice, their unforgivable weaknesses and surprising strengths. As much fact as fiction, this is the revealing account of a holocaust that no fire department anywhere is equipped to fight. A novel, as uncomfortably close to the city cliff dweller as tomorrow’s headlines, gives us a frightening insight into the new skyscrapers that march across the urban and suburban skyline—the towering apartment houses and business complexes that experts have dubbed “fire traps in the sky.” Lacking the more overt symbolism of The Tower, the Glass House is described in the first chapter as a “tower etched against the dark clouds”: Sixty-six stories of gold-tinted glass panels and gold-anodized aluminum. The location on the north side of the financial district had been selected so there would be no buildings for several blocks around that could challenge it. There had been no compromise on the size of the site itself—the plazas on each side of the building were spacious and inviting, you didn’t feel crowded as you strolled across them to the building’s entrance. Sixty-six stories—thirty commercial and office floors and thirty-six of apartment floors—straight up with no setbacks. On the southern exposure, a sheer wall marked the utility core and served as a golden backdrop for the scenic elevator to the Promenade Room at the top. […] the most popular postcards in the local drugstores were those of the Glass House at night. It had become a symbol of the city. The Glass House is a less audacious structure, described in chapter 31 as just “one of the tallest” high rises in the city, with similar construction problems as possible dangers, such as the “chimney effect” that would exacerbate a mid-building raging fire. Building the Glass Tower The Towering Inferno, along with its Allen-produced precursor The Poseidon Adventure (dir. Ronald Neame, 1972) and later films like Jaws (dir. Steven Spielberg, 1975) and Star Wars (dir. George Lucas, 1977) helped establish the modern conception of the blockbuster film, specifically in their publicity, merchandising, and the narrative of production used to pitch the films themselves. So, The Towering Inferno was not only the top-grossing film of 1974 (and was nominated for a Best Picture Oscar), but was also promoted by highlighting the story of its production, specifically how its special effects were achieved, including extensive documentation of the model-making for the film’s two main towers. Below are some of the variety of production materials that came out in relation to the film, sourced from a variety of fan sites, including The Towering Inferno Archive and The Towering Inferno Memorabilia Archive. ...
Here are some storyboards
Here are some parodies
Parodies And, as with other major blockbusters, The Towering Inferno received some light ribbing from parody magazines. Prominent among these was the six-page “The Towering Infernal,” in Cracked #126 (August 1975), with original art by John Severin: And the eight-page “The Towering Sterno” in Mad #177 (September 1975), written by Dick De Bartolo, with art by Mort Drucker:
An Enemy of the People
Steve McQueen plays a man from a town who finds out a local business enterprise is sickening and makes it public against the towns desires
Trailer
Original Five Act Play bu Henrik Ibsen
https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/2446/pg2446-images.html
Steve McQueen stunts
Thomas Crown Affair/ The Great Escape/Bullitt/Papillon/Thomas Crown Affair
Below is missed roles, very interesting the movies he passed up, he would have been even bigger. but the movies he passed on made others careers.
MISSED ROLES
uniform resource locator
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_McQueen#Missed_roles
content
McQueen was offered the lead male role in Breakfast at Tiffany's, but was unable to accept due to his Wanted: Dead or Alive contract (the role went to George Peppard). He turned down parts in Ocean's 11, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (his attorneys and agents could not agree with Paul Newman's attorneys and agents on top billing),The Driver,Apocalypse Now, California Split, Dirty Harry, A Bridge Too Far, The French Connection (he did not want to do another cop film), Close Encounters of the Third Kind and Sorcerer. According to director John Frankenheimer and actor James Garner in bonus interviews for the DVD of the film Grand Prix, McQueen was Frankenheimer's first choice for the lead role of American Formula One race car driver Pete Aron. Frankenheimer was unable to meet with McQueen to offer him the role, so he sent Edward Lewis, his business partner and the producer of Grand Prix. McQueen and Lewis instantly clashed, the meeting was a disaster, and the role went to Garner. Later, in an interview, Garner said: Oh, McQueen. Crazy McQueen. McQueen and I got along pretty good. McQueen looked at me kind of like an older brother, and he didn't want to have much to do with me, till he got in trouble, then he'd call. He knew he could trust me to tell him just what I thought. A lot of people wouldn't do that. And then we had... it wasn't a falling out... as I did Grand Prix, Steve was originally slated to do that movie, but he couldn't get along with Frankenheimer. So that lasted about thirty minutes, and Steve was out, and I was in. And Steve went over to do Sand Pebbles, which went about a year longer than they wanted to go. Big production, spent a lot of money and stayed over in [Taiwan] too long. So, when I got the part in Grand Prix, I called him, in Taiwan. and I said, "Steve, I want to tell you, before you hear it from somebody else, that I'm going to do Grand Prix." Well, there was about a twenty dollar silence there, on the telephone. He didn't know what to say, and finally said "Oh, that's great, great, I'm glad to hear it." Because, he planned to do Le Mans, which was another title at the time, but we were going to be out, and Grand Prix released before he ever even got to that film. But he said, "Great, great, well, I'm glad to hear it; that's good. You know, if anybody's gonna do it, I'm glad, you're doin' it." He didn't talk to me for about a year and half, and we were next-door neighbors, so it did get to him a little bit. Finally, his son, Chad, made him take him to go see Grand Prix. And from that time on, we were talking again. But Steve was a wild kid. He didn't know where he wanted to be or what he wanted to do. Director Steven Spielberg said McQueen was his first choice for the character of Roy Neary in Close Encounters of the Third Kind. According to Spielberg in a documentary on the film's DVD release, Spielberg met him at a bar, where McQueen drank beer after beer. Before leaving, McQueen told Spielberg that he could not accept the role because he was unable to cry on cue. Spielberg offered to take the crying scene out of the story, but McQueen demurred, saying that it was the best scene in the script. The role eventually went to Richard Dreyfuss. William Friedkin wanted to cast McQueen as the lead in the action thriller film Sorcerer (1977). Sorcerer was to be filmed primarily on location in the Dominican Republic, but McQueen did not want to be separated from Ali MacGraw for the duration of the shoot. McQueen then asked Friedkin to let MacGraw act as a producer, so she could be present during principal photography. Friedkin would not agree to this condition, and cast Roy Scheider instead of McQueen. Friedkin later remarked that not casting McQueen hurt the film's performance at the box-office. Spy novelist Jeremy Duns revealed that McQueen was considered for the lead role in a film adaptation of The Diamond Smugglers, written by James Bond creator Ian Fleming. McQueen would play John Blaize, a secret agent gone undercover to infiltrate a diamond-smuggling ring in South Africa. There were complications with the project, which was eventually shelved, although a 1964 screenplay does exist. McQueen and Barbra Streisand were tentatively cast in The Gauntlet (1977), but the pair could not get along and both withdrew from the project—though according to one biographer, they had briefly dated in 1971. The lead roles were filled by Clint Eastwood and Sondra Locke. McQueen expressed interest in the Rambo character in First Blood when David Morrell's novel appeared in 1972, but the producers rejected him because of his age. He was offered the title role in The Bodyguard (to star Diana Ross) when it was proposed in 1976, but the film did not reach production until years after McQueen's death; the film eventually starred Kevin Costner and Whitney Houston in 1992. Quigley Down Under was in development as early as 1974, with McQueen in consideration for the lead, but by the time production began in 1980, McQueen was ill. The project was scrapped until a decade later, when Tom Selleck starred. McQueen was offered the lead in Raise the Titanic, but felt the script was flat. He was under contract to Irwin Allen after appearing in The Towering Inferno and offered a part in a sequel in 1980, which he turned down. The film was scrapped and Newman was brought in by Allen to make When Time Ran Out, which was a box-office bomb. McQueen died shortly after passing on The Towering Inferno 2.
RMCommunityCalendar 0 Comments · 0 Reviews
24 March 2261
This event began 03/24/2026 and repeats every year forever
THIS IS MY INITIAL REACTION TO A MULTILOG
@Pioneer1
First to delete false claims. Television + Univision are not latin american owned, in the same BET which is owned by Skydance is not Black american owned. I could ask why a black person in modern times, seeks to create a false impotency in speaking on the black populace in the usa compared to other non white european populaces. but i will not. The USA is white european owned circa ninety percent.
In February 2020, Searchlight Capital Partners and ForgeLight acquired a 64% majority stake in Univision, with Televisa keeping their 36% minority stake.
Searchlight was founded by Eric Zinterhofer , Oliver Haarmann , Erol Uzumeri
Forgelight I don't know who they are, but they do not sound latin american.
NBCUniversal owns Telemundo completely, NBCUniversal is not latino.
So your decision to knock down the black populace using another non white european populace is false.
@ProfD
OWN , the oprah winfrey network is not black owned.
Warner Bros. Discovery Global Linear Networks (95%)
Harpo Productions (5%)
Skydance owns Warner Bros. , Skydance is not black. Oprah WInfrey owns five percent of the OWN Network.
Bounce TV is owned by the Scripps Network, Scripps is white. Jonathan KAtz founded Bounce, he is white.
I knew Magic Johnson didn't own magic johnson theaters anymore, why didn't you profd?
While the chain still bears Johnson's name, he is no longer actively involved in the management committee, strategic planning, operations, or public relations.
It is part of the Lows cineplex entertainment company.
Now TVOne is black owned, from a black woman in the washington DC area I think.
Originally launched as a joint venture with Comcast, Urban One would acquire the former's stake in 2015. So it started as a joint venture like OWN but is completely black owned now.
SO, of the media enterprises mentioned in this post only one is black owned. only one is not white european owned.
Now, can TV One do better? all firms can, from a raw accounting perspective. But, TV One is doing great in my view. Considering the entertainment industry in the USA is very conglomerated now. The existence of TV One is really against the grain. That is why magic johnson , oprah and others all sold their shares to big firms gobbling.
As I said, Netflix was given a favor by Skydance, who now owns paramount + warner bros + discovery and whatever else those firms gobbled before.
NEtflix wanted globally known intellectual properties, but I argue adding all that debt would had been a mistake and skydance will have a lot of internal manipulation with all they own now.
@admin
so many people are tired of commercials, but here is the big problem, subscription is a terrible business model for publicly traded entertainment firms. the problem with subscription as nassr al khaleefi, ceo of beinsports said, I paraphrase, the only way to make continual monetary growth is to add on subscribers but the global economy has a limit on how much growth can exist in that way, while a free app with commercials, the same like network television but with apps, can grow continually because with quality content you can raise the advertising fees overtime. But trying to do both is going to lose out over time, no one wants to pay for a service with commercials.
REFERRAL
https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12614-netflix-the-new-segregation-in-entertainment/#findComment-80870
POST URL
PRIOR EDITION
https://aalbc.com/tc/events/event/676-economic-corner-38-03102026/
NEXT EDITION
?
COMMENTARY
@Pioneer1
I comprehend your frustration, like james Forten 250 years ago, you have embraced the usa and both of you show a desire to compete side the other people in the usa financially, while in the legal confines. Thus your desire to suggest impotency , not to stymie but to inspire through negative critique. I get it. but be easy. patience is a virtue.
03242026
https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12614-netflix-the-new-segregation-in-entertainment/#findComment-80874
osted just now
@ProfD
I have never underestimated, you said and I quote
On 3/23/2026 at 6:02 AM, ProfD said:
if Magic Johnson is still in that business.
you used the word IF right, that means you don't know or are unsure... that isn't me underestimating and I think anyone would evenly ask, why didn't you know.
1 hour ago, ProfD said:
The point I was making is that Black folks do have outlets &/or some level of influence over them.
I didn't refute that point, which also was pioneer's point, but I cleared up the falsities that either one of you alluded.
1 hour ago, ProfD said:
There's nothing to prevent Black folks from investing in more platforms if there is a real desire to do so.
There's nothing, that isn't true. Most black people in the usa are still near the financial level their enslaved forebears were, which is by design by whites, not an accident by white planning and an honest financial position not an excuse. White people didn't get rich absent criminal activities, so it is a financial insult to suggest black people can blossom in majority with less opportunity and yes, taking land and enslaving other and cheating others are financial opportunities that matter.
Fiscal poverty is powerful. What does desire have to do with anything?
I go back to James Forten, again, black man, living at the time of george washington, business owner.
Yes, Profd, business owner, white people certified. But, the larger black populace, has always been a different financia reality than the blacks with money. And as this community has already made established, blacks with money couldn't even push to make sure they only sent people to historical black colleges so...
are blacks with money not investing in the black populace to their utmost? yes.
But, the gap between the black 1% and the black 99% has always been the widest fiscal gap of any populace in the usa.
to restate, the gap between the nonblack 1%(whether female/latino/christian / other) and the non black 99% is smaller than the gap between the black 1% and the black 99%.
1 hour ago, ProfD said:
TV One is but one an example. Tyler Perry owns a whole movie production set-up in Georgia.
yes and he sold his prior studio to a white latino.
1 hour ago, ProfD said:
I'm never going to be defeated into believing Black folks cannot afford to establish anything of benefit &/or importance to us.
I am glad, in my own mind, I am not trying to bring down any black person's hope BUT when it comes to money , when it comes to the USA , the reality is, we blacks have a lying problem. this very post started with a false financial evaluation pioneer, which you didn't even point out.
Are black people in the usa today, circa 2026, financially better than anytime in the past, on average or the whole? the answer is yes.
But, black people have always been limited to legal civil financial growth by the non blacks. Again NYC, irish/italians/white jews/chinese/white latinos all to this day each not only commit more financial crimes than black people but have protection from law enforcement for said crimes. Black people are the penultimate, nearest above the least, criminal plus least illegal actors in the usa, the first is the native american whose financial position is the worst of any group in the usa.
White jews and italians burned down the entire bronx, to get insurance money and yet, to this day, you still have black people talking about how, black people can't Where was the cops while the bronx was burning? oh right, the cops are the cousins to the italian and white jewish landowners.
the biggest financial crime black people had was the numbers and we had to give the italian mob a cut of that.
the italian mob which financed the golden gate bridge, through the bank of america, formerly the bank of italy, was able to earn financial fortunes over crimes covering the entire shipping industry/construction industry/gambling industry... the irish/ the white jews/the white latino/ the white asian ala chinese all did and do likewise.
I never see the NYPD who always seem interested in hording around congregations of unarmed black children find their way to stopping any crimes from the non black so... that is how nonblack populaces financially grow.
They don't admit it. But it is the truth, it is the truth to how the usa works.
Black people will never get law enforcement in the usa which is not black and moreover has tons of self hating blacks in it in modernity , to cover for any financial crimes. That cover is how others have afforded the ability to truly grow financially.
1 hour ago, ProfD said:
Black development in any industry is a matter of desire & will. The resources exist.
no profd, in the usa , white development in any industry has always been a matter of financial growth through criminal means. White people didnt just desire and will, they were allowed to act criminally, which is a big deal in a country that purports to be against illegal activity.
Black people can't will or desire through phenotypical bias. That is the point of phenotypical bias.
03252026
https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12614-netflix-the-new-segregation-in-entertainment/#findComment-80884
osted just now
@ProfD
16 hours ago, ProfD said:
FBA/AfroAmericans have come a long way between slavery & the present. Especially compared to Black folks who have lived in their own countries over the same period of time.
That is a large suggestion... I don't know... 100% your correct that the condition of 99% of black people in the usa 1865 who were completely enslaved, which means financially whites made sure said black percentage had, no money, no bank account, no inheritance, no knowledge of fiscal concerns like a contract or ledger ; educationally means [not through laziness but white power], no ability to read, no ability to write, no knowledge of their forebears, no knowledge of their populaces intricacies[enslaved black people were born enslaved, they didn't know about haiti a land made by DOSers, abyssinia the only part of africa not a european colony, the larger DOS populaces in south america, knowledge of monrovia or freetown, in modernity yes, a black person can say what we know but 1865 most black people in the usa didn't have any knowledge of black people outside of their slave quarter, they didn't know of the gens de colour of new orleans unless they were actually from new orleans which wasn't most black people by a large distance in the usa] ; Culturally, what we grow or are growing to, means [ through white power again]: no direction[and this is huge, again in modernity black people talk about american alot, but in 1865 our forebears weren't american. they wanted to be free yes, but they didn't associate freedom with the usa. this is something we tend to miss today. Our forebears in 1865 didn't want to be president, didn't want fight with whites, didn't want to live with whites, so the fact that a majority of us in the usa do now, means black people made choices BUT they made choices absent all the things in this paragraph i wrote, which are influential. Hell, I argue, most black people at the end of the war between the states, when the usa's modern midwestern/western states were all still territories should had moved en mass to canada. And I know that Frederick Douglass opposed Harriet Tubman because tubman wanted black people to go all the way up north to canada but frederick douglass, very statian, was looking to his individual benefit and knew that whites in the usa have always disliked the idea of Black DOSers leaving this country with hateful hearts in mass for obvious reasons. But Tubman was correct, the better culture for black people circa 1865 was in canada rather than the usa, canada 1865 isn't the canada of today. Canada in 1865 is very much a country place, hard to live but a place black dosers from the usa could had made a home, yes nothing is easy, but it was the better choice and absent all the things mentioned we were able to be manipulated by black individuals or the white populist to make foolish/dysfunctional choices]
So, yes, the Black DOS populace today has definitely grown from the conditions of 1865, look at this very forum. Modern Black people are like Common's character in the movie Alice and Alice in the film Alice is like black people of 1865. They would be shocked at us on alot of levels based on their life experiences.
BUT, the way or style of growth of DOSers has a lot of negative aspects that don't come from DOSers but the environment.
I argue, that black DOSers lost more than we ever gained from 1865 to today. Rosewood the black financial capitol of florida, white people commited crimes, no one white to jail or a court room, black people in florida have never recovered. Greenwood, the black financial capitol of oklahoma, white people committed crimes, no one white to jail or a court room, black people in oklahoma never recovered. Faubourg treme, an educational capitol of black people in the usa , was assaulted by whites cut up, burned down, never recovered. Madame CJ Walker yes, fiscally wealthy but NYC did everything in its power to diminish black financial growth , including burning harlem, driving black people into prison with made up charges... I think black people today love to look on the bright side but the honest side is the better place. This goes back to frederick douglass side harriet tubman. Douglass felt that going through all these hurdles was a positive and Tubman was correct, lets get away from this place, so we can live in peace. from 1865 to 2026 we as a people have daily, not yearly or monthly but daily had to deal with white abuse, what is so valuable about that?
That white abuse... the white men who killed malcolm's father never went to jail, no one knows who they are... going through these white hurdles from 1865 in the usa makes Black DOSers fools.
So... yes Black DOSers have come a long way, but was it a wise way, was it an honest way, was it a black way... or was it a liars way, was it a fool's way, was it the white mans chosen way for us?
And is the path the white man laid for us better in comparison to a path we laid for ourselves.
Many black people will argue that the immigration to the usa is a sign of usa greatness, but I always counter with a simple truth, the usa makes the rest of the world poor.
The usa had stolen/kidnapped/murdered many leaders of haiti from toussaint louverture to a recent president, acts that the usa would call an act of war but somehow when the usa does it, it isn't an act of war... stole haiti's gold which again, the usa would call an act of war but... the hit list of countries the usa has done similar too: killed/stole/destroyed is very long
Mexico/Nicaragua/China/Japan/Vietnam/Korea/Afghanistan/Libya/Iraq/Iran/Congo/Germany/Argentina/Brasil/Chile/Phillipines/Cuba/The palestinean protectorate of the british empire/Uganda/Ghana/Canada
Building from the ground up is easy when you have land you can steal like First peoples of the american continet, when you have enslaved other human beings, like Black DOSer forebears... when you have the country who destroyed yours completely, provide the rich people who led the wars against said country so that you and the rest of the poor don't oppose said country, like Germany/Japan/France/Italy.....I can't think of any government in modern human history that actually built from the ground up and became a world leader or fiscally potent.
USA had stolen land and enslaved labor, the best of everything to grow.
China got the entire global manufacturing industry as a gift by the usa to separate them from russia in the cold war
Russia as the Union of Soviet Socialist republics used the end of the second european imperial war to grow their influence and control, the usa had aided them at he begining of said war cause the usa couldn't beat germany+ japan alone. And the USSR was trying to reclaim the lands of the russian empire which were larger.
Japan made to rubble by the usa was given a legendary welfare check by the usa so they wouldn't join the ussr.
Germany,made to rubble by the usa completely, in its west side, was given a legendary welfare check by the usa so they wouldn't join the ussr.
France made to rubble by war, all sides, was given a legendary welfare check by the usa so they wouldn't join the ussr.
India was given money by the usa + ussr to picka side , in the end, india didn't pick either and still hasn't, and still does business with both. thus india didn't get what china got from the usa for distancing from russia but still gets some with russia+ china as neighbors and the usa afraid of having three public opponents of the usa representing half of humanities populace together as neighbors.
Brasil like the usa had stolen land + enslaved labor, the best of everything to grow and did all the immigration patterns of the usa as well.
England... do I have to say this was the country that once boasted the sun never set on its empire, extracting all sorts of wealth from everywhere.
ISrael, stole the land from england lived in by the palestinean, the palestinean protectore, but were financed militarilly and governmentally by the usa in perpetuity.
Not one government mentioned above built from the ground up on their own, with no massive criminal activity.
So, yeah , Nigeria/Haiti/Jamaica/Guyana/Ghana/Ethiopia/ Sri lanka/ Madagascar many countries full of black people immigrate to the usa but the usa has committed successful acts of war against those countries... What would the usa be if its leaders were constantly removed/killed, it resources constantly ripped, if other countries were vulturing.
So Black DOSers whose forebears were literally enslaved to the whites of the european colonies and then the usa made from them, are living in the country as allies to the whites who have literally undermined every single black country in humanity...
So... I don't know. I think hundreds of years from now, someone will be able to look back and truly compare black populaces around the world and see who has grown more or less. But currently, Brasil/USA/South Africa/India/Nigeria all have black one percents, very wealthy, all have a majority fiscally poor black 99%. All have been enslaved in one form or another to whites in said country. The only variance I can think of is that in the USA's/Brasil's/India's of the world , unlike the Nigeria's/HAiti's/South Africa's the black populaces have hurt themselves to settle non blacks in usa/brasil/india are all the same, have been terrible to black people but blacks in each country has made a choice to coexist to whites who to be blunt, have never stopped terrorizing them... who is the fool, the terrorist or the one who keeps living next to the terrorist?
16 hours ago, ProfD said:
The fact that Tyler Perry who wasn't born wealthy has been able to amass a fortune significant enough to buy studios is an accomplishment.
I concur, it is a financial accomplishment, For the record I never said he didn't accomplish, i stated to whom he sold his prior stuido
16 hours ago, ProfD said:
I'm glad so many FBA/AfroAmericans who were not born wealthy have been able to make a lot of money here in the USA.
yeah me too, could had been way better... what would greenville in tulsa be, rosewood in florida be, and so many other places if white people didn't burn whole black communities down to the ground and kill black people who had committed no crime whatsoever.
Black people are always free to let the revenge go... BUT financially, the past can not be let go because financially, the past matters.
When whites like the nypd round up black people inequally per the law, that is a financial attack on the black populace.
Let's be blunt, a show once existed about a white woman selling marijuana in some town outside a city, commonly called a suburb , more correctly an exourb. it is n't under but outside.. Anyway, while in nyc the nypd is rounding up marijuana dealers while never seeming able to find cocaine dealers, the nypd finds cocaine but no cocaine dealers. These are financial attacks. Black people talk about money so much but don't calculate the financial loss/hit/negative black people go through with white interactions.
When white states in the south placed trash bin areas next to black towns making black people sick with its fumes, that is a financial cost. Not just healthcost.
I am happy for black folk who financially get through white terror, but white terror is still here and it has a huge financial cost that we blacks need to start admitting.
03/26/2026
https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12614-netflix-the-new-segregation-in-entertainment/#findComment-80907
osted just now
@ProfD
23 hours ago, ProfD said:
FBA/ADO/AfroAmericans do not have an ancestral homeland to which we can return.
FBA/ADO/AfroAmericans were born here in the USA.
Over 400 years, FBA/ADO/AfroAmericans have made the *best of* a bad situation, America's original sin *slavery* .
In the present, when FBA/ADO/AfroAmericans look back over the past couple hundred years, we have made progress in our homeland, the country that enslaved our forebearers.
Expand
what determines an ancestral homeland?
I am not saying your wrong, or I am not saying a black person whose forebears were enslaved from africa by whites can't say a locale whites shipped them to can't be considered a homeland if they choose, but the choices are still open
I give three examples
1) all black peoples enslaved from africa whether they went to the american continent or the asian continent or the european continent have one thing in common, their african ancestry is continental. I have said in this forum before, if anywhere in africa is my hmeland it is the literal continent itself because my forebears who were enslaved come from all over. Often when people immigrate freely, they may call themselves, european/asian/african/south american, but in truth they mean a specific local in a continent. right? but fr DOSers we have to mean, by way of how enslavement worked, the continent of africa itself and considering descended of enslaved people were sent everywhere outside africa, not merely the american continent, a continental ancestry suits all of us whatever countries our forebears were enslaved in. Black People like you or me exist in brasil in india , what shared history heritage/what we carry do we have? that our forebears were all enslaved from africa by whites/ various whites. so I think a continental ancestry , not a local in a continent is historically unquestionable, even if it is also unique among human groups. But, that is fate for you
2)I do think the seas itself is a valid homeland in its own way. the one thing that unites all descneded of enslaved people from africa is that most of our forebears died on the ships to wherever, again not just the usa but all the places, so the sea is where most of our forebears... or at least where most of mine are buried. You have said in the past that because those who died on the boat didn't have issue they are not but I oppose that view. because many black dos lineages have died through the centuries because of white terror anywhere, it is uneven to not include all the people enslaved on the boat , some of whom were definitely genetically related to those who survived. Again, not an common place but the DOS experience is not common . Yes, slavery is throughout all human history, but the mechanics of pan white enslavement to pan blacks in the period of the continental slave trades had unique forms. that were never seen before or since.
3) this is two queries to your position.
I)I want clarification to where you stand to places outside the usa that have black dosers. Brasil has to be first on the list as no place in the american continent has more black DOSers than brasil. Brasil had dosers before the usa, so what you are saying is black dosers in brasil's homeland is brasil? what about black dosers in india, india had DOSers before Brasil did by white muslims, so what you are saying is black dosers in india's homeland is india?
II) concerning the time, you mention the centuries black dosers have been in a country, in this case usa, as warranting its labeling as a homeland, but is your position that it applies to all DOSers in a particular country whether they view it or not or is it optional? For me, and many other dosers, i want to be the first in my bloodline to choose a homeland, i think that had value. I don't care how long my bloodline has been in the usa, this for me is not my choice or the choice of my forebears. I think having the choice of making a homeland for yourself is one of the gifts DOS forebears gave all DOSers , we don't have to have any allegiance to any of these countries: usa/brasil/india because our forebears never did. It is the freedom to choose. As long as me or any in my bloodline is in the usa, it is a continuation of white peoples desires, not the desires of my own people. I can't call my homeland on what whites desired. And no, I don't think the fiscal reality or impotency of my forebears in not being able to go wherever they want should be held against them.
So I conclude with I think your position is true but as an optional. not a definitive. and that is key.
23 hours ago, ProfD said:
Still, that should not prevent people from staying in their home countries & rebuilding it. Giving up & running to the colonizers house doesn't make sense either.
based on that logic didn't white europeans themselves do that ? it wasn't like ireland was rich, or itlay when the italian hordes came in was rich. And the english who came were from the poor parts of england, they weren't the relatives of the queen fand kings of england. so... outside the native american, who was murdered by immigrants, all other peoples in the usa are immigrants, but only DOSers are immigrants who were forced here, all other immigrants ran from poverty , did they not? You say giving up and running to the colonizers house but lets be more pure, giving up and running away in general , does that make sense?
cause the original white european immigrants ran away from their poverty in europe and didn't choose to make any european country better...
The whole usa outside two peoples is built on people who were fiscally poor and ran away from it.
23 hours ago, ProfD said:
Where else can or should FBA/ADO/AfroAmericans go to live if the USA is their birthplace?
I have said it before, DOSers anywhere are free to choose. that is the gift, we are not bound, until we choose to be and present that truth to the next generation, each has to make their choice a heritage, And I feel most black DOSers have never done that, and it isn't up to black dosers to apply our desires to each other, i argue, we should honor each other by leaving it open.
But, to DOSers born in the USA, specifically, the only place I can think of that we all should consider based on heritage, our history, is Monrovia, not liberia, but monrovia. yes, black DOSers born in the usa settled in many places outside the usa, black dosers leave the usa every year, for many other lands, to become their homelands, even though we don't seem to know that as a people. But, I think we have a responsibility to Monrovia , as it was started by Black DOSers specifically from the USA. Now can all black dosers born in the usa move to monrovia:) no, but i do think we owe it to ourselves to do better there in some fashion.
23 hours ago, ProfD said:
IMO, it does not take that long. We can see the progress or lack thereof around the planet. We know the reasons for it too.
Those who are willing to go to war; kill & destroy ultimately enjoy the rewards of it.
even enough, for me it isn't about wealth or wars, but the condition of freedom. Black groups in every country in humanity have a fiscally wealthy person, but that isn't enough for me to rank or relate the various black groups, the condition of freedom is what i am looking for and i see little variance in that in any country. I can't think of any black populace in a country that isn't a wealthy black 1% aside a fiscally poor black 99%, usa/brasil/india/south africa/jamaica, what differs the black populaces in any of the countries. in terms of collective freedom. I say nothing. but in the future, will be seen.
23 hours ago, ProfD said:
There's a difference between bringing a terrorist into one's country & becoming a subject versus being born in the same country with the terrorist.
I am a little confused by the part, bringing a terrorist into one's country , we are talking about DOSers, and in india/brasil/usa and many other countries, like a jamaica DOSers have been born side the terrorist whites.
23 hours ago, ProfD said:
oney comes & goes.
Even the most honest, astute, savvy, intelligent investors have amassed & lost & regained fortunes.
Most successful people fail a lot before they strike it big.
The way one chooses to rebound from loss or failure makes a difference.
Sitting on the bench crying, grumbling & complaining won't lead to success.
Expand
I only have one question, are black people in general allowed to admit we have been financially abused?
If I have a house and white terror has taken the house, in your opinion, am I allowed to mention it or is mentioning that financial truth crying?
If I have a parent sent to jail falsely or unevenly by whites, in your opinion, am I allowed to mention it or is mentioning that financial truth grumbling?
I do believe in creating, in nationalism, I like doing, but I like telling the truth and unfortunately, truths for black DOSers tend to be negative, I will apologize for fate, but that is the truth. Our personal histories tend to face financial obstacles, which I feel need to be said , I argue we DOSers have spent far too long being quiet.
Again, Pioneer talks about the law alot, but lets call it like it is, the quantity of financial crimes against black people that has gne to court int he usa is less than one percent per year, that is a lot money taken from us. Maybe you will call that complaining but.. I rather it said than not.
23 hours ago, ProfD said:
Many Black folks have figured out how to navigate white terror in order to win. Easy...no. Doable...absolutely.
You are 100% correct, but the absolute truth requires an addition , winning is based on how they define winning and black DOSers don't define winning the same way. I shouldn't have to go into history for you to know this.
@admin
7 hours ago, admin said:
You can also raise the subscription price.
you know already that raising the price of a good already diminishes those who can afford it, and like the ferrari brand or apple brand shows in the automotive or electronics industries, the higher priced items do have markets but they always lose volume. and reach a volume wall,which is a point of stagnation which the publicly traded environment hates. cause speculation/things to look at that don't have a constant increaseable factor lose their market viability.
7 hours ago, admin said:
Period, 'nuff said.
So you and profd believe a homeless black man can get a house based on will and desire... hmmmm ok,
03272026
https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12614-netflix-the-new-segregation-in-entertainment/#findComment-80931
osted just now
@ProfD
5 hours ago, ProfD said:
'm sure you understand the context. But, I'll indulge...
By every means necessary, the colonizers left Europe and *built* countries like the USA & Australia.
That's very different from leaving an *under-developed* home country to struggle in another country.
Especially running to a predominantly *white* country that is keeping a boot on the neck of one's *homeland*
Expand
well... I see,
When you speak about leaving an under developed home country to struggle in another country, i think of the conquistador i think of the white european imperial era through france/spain/portugal/netherlands
Of the european powers, the only one that built countries as you said were the english, it wasn't really the common way. all the others only wanted to extract resources and leave a set of mixed breeds to manage things to funnel money into whatever european center country. Spain and france and portugal famously had to pay white women to go while the english... was able to et whole communities to go.
In the end of the day, the english didn't do it for the building of countries. The english pushed their colonies to be pan white, multiwhite, individualist, not to become the usa or canada or austrailia one day, but to be a haven to make money. Remember the english colonies were not profitable in the international market compared to any of the others. the money in the english colonies was actually in the english colonies spending money.
BEcause the english colonies actually invited hordes of white europeans they were given a financial status, that the non white european majority populaces in the non english colonies couldn't get, so the first industry of the usa was as a market place, not because it was special but because it became the first true white european country outsdie europe. Essentailly english goods had a controlled marketplace for tea/furniture and other english content. That was the financial purpose of the usa. its external traffic was not its main finanial agenda. for england.
5 hours ago, ProfD said:
What is preventing Black folks from either building up their home countries &/or taking over other lands?
well first, for DOSers if you don't view a country as your home country then their is nothing to build up. Again some blacks liek james forten, start business fight and die , having chose the usa as ther home but then they ask questions like you to other black people who havent decided the usa is their home.
You use the word prevention but you have to first view the usa as your home, brasil as you rhome, india as your home... before you can act like it is .
Black pople are descended of enslaved folk, i argue in our heart, we aren't interested in being black versions of white europeans. yes, cases exist but on average, we have a vengeanful desire but not a enslavement desire.
5 hours ago, ProfD said:
Jamaica was Black before white folks showed up & colonized it.
yes the caribs are black native americans, like the negrito black asians.
5 hours ago, ProfD said:
What are Black folks willing to do these things other than cry, grumble & complain?
As a very young person, I was taught that as a male being weak (cry, grumble, complain, lack of self-defense, etc.) doesn't solve anything. Being able to take action & handle bizness is everything. It works.
Non verbal action always speaks louder than words. But I get the logic, if you focus on building no matter how many times another burns your house down, you may never realize that you need to stop building where you are cause the place you are is crap.
5 hours ago, ProfD said:
No need to go into a history lesson. We know what produces winners & losers. The question is what is one willing to do in order to *win*.
no the first question s what is the definition of winning because the definition of winning dictates what is needed to win, and not all definitions of winning are the same, especially for DOSer. One black person can say they have won and mean nothing to another black person cause they dont share the same meaning of winning.
5 hours ago, ProfD said:
This Black man was a drug addict & homeless at one point in his life. He's rich now. Anything is possible.
I didn't question possibility, i said the pwoer of will and desire, this one instance doesnt prove will and desire, it proves circumstance,
@Pioneer1
18 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:
Do you suggest that we compete with others, illegally?
I suggest we, meaning black people anywhere on earth, each discover or learn who we are as individuals and who we want to be as part of black groups and then relate that to wherever we live. Yes, it isn't as simple as all others in humanity, but it gives us a freedom of identity.
Black DOSers who embrace the usa as their home. need to accept the truth of fiscal capitalism when it comes to legal or illegal financial activity. The great fort nes in fiscal capitalism come in majority through criminal activity.whether that criminal activity is legally noted or not. Second to comprehend the financial limits of being in a multiracial scoiety where all races are free to grow, it means financial control over others is always going to be limited long term
03272026
https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12614-netflix-the-new-segregation-in-entertainment/#findComment-80941
osted just now
@ProfD
27 minutes ago, ProfD said:
I'm sure you can see the difference between leaving one's home country & squatting in another country; to produce nothing & make zero contribution to it. What is the accomplishment?
I remember listening to an immigrant to the usa, who is homeless, a mexican or mesitzo from somewhere in latin america. He flat out said, his goal was to get in the usa... so for many immigrants, not all, but many they win by merely being in the usa, as the accomplishment, even if they are only squatting. And that is their choice but there you have it, to answer the question of accomplishment.
This is why comparing wins is hard, because one person's win is not another person's win.
27 minutes ago, ProfD said:
Right. Those individuals need to find a country that will accept them & to which they can relocate to produce & contribute to building & making it better.
Yes... with the addition that again, some people leave with no need to make the destination country better, as muc has the destination country has what they are looking for. When you look at israel, many jews go to israel to simply be among jews, it is not to be rich or produce as you say or "make it better" as much as the environment is satisfactory for them, the win is the move , but moving takes time, it isn't magic. And you can't force it through hard work. my forebears worked very hard and often got nothing of what they wanted because hard work still requires opportunity and if you don't opportunity, you don't. and without violence, peace blockades some forms of opportunity.
27 minutes ago, ProfD said:
There's no shortage of successful Black people who have overcome seemingly insurmountable hurdles in order to *win*.
yes with the addition that the quantity of black people getting what they want, I will call that successful, is far less based on non black potency because blacks are abused at no fault of their own by whites. When competition isn't even, when it has criminal actions that is highly manipulative, especially in the financial realm.
I know you see the USA as a place that allows any individual to succeed but I don't think that is financially true. To rephrase, negative unmerited blockades or abuses are applied to people in the usa which means individuals don't have the ability to succeed. Athletes are the best examples. A black baseball played , playing today admitted in the players journal, if it wasn't for my community in some area of florida, placing themselves in debt he wouldn't had made it as a baseball player. That is not an environment for all to succeed, that is called an environment of failure.
27 minutes ago, ProfD said:
Not sure what that has to do with putting in the effort to *win*. It has been done several times over already past to present.
and this is the key variance, in your mind, effort overcomes environment. The numbers show, effort never overcomes environment. A negative financial environment defined as an environment designed to hinder financial positive movement, succeeds in majority in the usa historically, all phenotypes. IT isn't that effort overcame environment as much as environment, which in the financial sense is a human construct can not be designed perfectly/a complete work, and the environment ALLOWS a percentage of those in it to succeed which happens. You and others think it is effort overcoming the negativities of the environment when in truth it is the system merely allowing success for a minority. Which is the USA way.
0327/2026
https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12614-netflix-the-new-segregation-in-entertainment/#findComment-80943
osted just now
@ProfD
44 minutes ago, ProfD said:
Those types of immigrants are making it worse for others as these white folks are trying to kick them out of the USA.
but the issue we are discussing is what people deem as wins, what is accomplishment? is accomplishment what you say it , what i say it is? I argue the definition to wins or accomplishments changes twixt individuals or groups and so it is challenging to apply standards of wins/accomplishment between individuals or groups.
and to the point you raised, not all white folks are trying to kick them out... this goes back to Monrovia ... many whites did support blacks leaving but most supported blacks staying in the usa in perpetuity as enslaved, so much so making the happy slave myth to make themselves feel better
44 minutes ago, ProfD said:
Seems selfish to go somewhere else & offer nothing.
In the same way that you do not like liars, I'm not fond of *takers* i.e. people who do not add &/or offer nothing to the situation &/or environment.
even point. I comprehend your viewpoint 100% the problem for the usa is it was founded by takers, if you consider the native american heritages and cultures, the usa was founded by takers, who adding nothing positive to what was in existence.. so the usa has a heritage of willing immigrants mostly adding nothing except negativities, with only a minority adding positives to the current situation. Chaos starters
44 minutes ago, ProfD said:
I doubt those people merely show up to drain the resources & live off the sweat equity of others.
if you look at the settlers in palestinean lands, that is all they do... they don't grow anything, they definitely don't add to peace so...
When israel first started it had a huge zionist movement, but I argue, that the majority of white jews or even jews in humanity where anti zionist from a personal level, meaning they support the existence of israel but never want to live there. I shared in this forum somewhere the reform jewish numbers. most jews are not orthodox are not looking to go to israel. but many give money/ support to keep it afloat. so... the people who tend to go there ... are a rarer type.
Israel has many issues but again, it was started chaotically, so I don't see why it having a chaotic life isn't expected.
44 minutes ago, ProfD said:
Anything can be accomplished through desire & will & effort.
nature says nothing is ever totally true
44 minutes ago, ProfD said:
Clearly, we live in different parts of the USA.
true and to that end, that is also the problem , the usa isn't a small town, it is a country of three hundred and fifty million people who are in dissimilar environments.
A solid thirty percent of black people in the usa and I argue fifty percent of Black DOSers live in small black towns where their financial life is very challenging from non black influences. I don't live in that exact environment and yet their are the financially affluent black regions of Los Angeles or NYC or Atlanta where everyone black is millionaire or better. so... yes, the us has different places , different financial environments , always has, and they don't relate.
So when the usa is spoken of in one way, because a person lives in one particular place is that reflective of the usa? no, it is reflective of a particular place in the usa. That is not the same.
44 minutes ago, ProfD said:
Many of us taught to accept the fact that life is not fair. However, despite the negative obstacles that life will put in your way, do not allow it to impede the effort of pressing towards the mark of the high calling.
Again, I do not see anything positive coming out of those who cry/grumble/complain about how life is not fair in one way or several.
These conditions existed before we were born. Especially for those of you who believe in procreation regardless of the circumstances.
So, here we are born into an unfair existence & left to figure this sh8t out during our time on the planet.
Some people find a way to *win* while others wallow in pond of misery or despair or hopelessness.
Expand
Ahh yes and that is a very statian turn of phrase.
you see, life is even, life is beautiful. nature is even, nature is beautiful.
And, life isn't fair/white nor is it schartz/black, nature as well isn't fair or schwartz.
Human beings manipulate life into uneveness. manipulate life into being fair or schwartz.
IT isn't life that brings negative or positive obstacles in humans lives, it is other humans.
Those who confuse human actions as life is the great dysfunction, this goes back to NAt Turner, Jean JAcques Dessalines, the IRA, what they are saying is Blacks folks problems aren't life but whites or Irish peoples problems aren't life but English.
Kill the whites, kill the english and life becomes its natural neutral state.
The problem is humans are not fools inside, they can tell themselves that life isn't even, but they know the truth is life is even, it is other humans making their lives uneven that they need to change and the best way to do that isn't to play games with the humans that are making their lives uneven but to kill those humans making their lives uneven , and in face with that truth, many humans lament, the lie they were raised with.
I have seen this , as a tutor, I have seen black parents say such things with my own eyes and I have refuted them to black children in their presence.
It isn't life that is hard, your not broke/you don't have opportunities or resources because nature/earth/life used ocean water and made a huge tide and grabbed our forebears off the land and carried our forebears in a bubble to other lands. Your challenges are white made, not life made.
Existence is always even, always beautiful and never white/fair nor black/schwartz
So admit the humans that are truly behind your woes which your parents know is true, but are lying to you because they themselves have never faced the true source of their own woes, which is whites.
And I will defend the pond of helplessness. It is no accident that the IRA was only three hundred people , it is no accident that Black DOSers in what became Haiti alone made a country for DOSers in the American continent.
The helpness comes because of another truth, all humans know humans are the ones that make life imabalnced, it is never life itself, life is always trying to reach balance. Life is never trying to be white or black or uneven in any way. So that means some humans have to be taken out but most don't have the courage for that. And this is what Zen meant. People think Zen means the person who does nothing amidst the chaos but misses that isn't Zen, what Zen says is that any action is acceptible in nature. What this means isn't that one must exist within chaos, what it means is any action, no matter how violent isn't a sin, isn't a negative, isn't anything to be afraid of.
And that wisdom is what most parents,,, sadfully, don't convey to their children or are too afraid to face themselves.
03272026
https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12614-netflix-the-new-segregation-in-entertainment/#findComment-80945
osted just now
@ProfD
4 hours ago, ProfD said:
Do you believe the takers improved the country or merely lived off that which was already developed?
The USA has undergone a major transformation over these past several hundred years & counting.
based on the first peoples heritage, lifestyle , the answer is no. but white europeans publicly admitted they came to destroy the native american no to improve anything concerning the native american so... life is balance, a country started by takers is itself took.
White immigration is older than the usa, like so many things about the usa , the usa's birth didn't start any oof it. that immigration heritage didn't start in 1776 but started in 1492. The blood feud between whites and blacks didn't start in 1776 but started in 1492.
Yes the usa has technology had many eras from 1776 to 2026. But, in terms of the people, the heritage, the culture, the usa is in my mind, only a little different than the white european colonies. Again JAmes Forten was a black man who owned a business in the english colonies and afterward with the creation of the usa but the black 1% has always existed. So... the meat and potatoes of the usa are older than the usa.
4 hours ago, ProfD said:
All types of buildings & businesses will spring up once the investors get a foothold.
a foothold, what stopped them these past fifty odd years, what defines a foothold?
and who are these investors exactly?
4 hours ago, ProfD said:
what are you going to about it?
How are you going to deal with the humans responsible for the unfair conditions?
well, did one white man enslave black people or did white people enslave black people.
From my reading of history this was group activities not singular individuals so... The question is what are blacks going to do and if very few blacks are willing to come together and do then their resides the reason for the , pool or negativity. Not all problems are individual based. One person can't handle the humans responsible.
And for the record, just to make sure in case any read this, i never said my plans to the future include mass genocide. My point is that many black people want that, but they don't have the courage for that. And I will not criminalize them because many people don't have the stomach for killing. And soldiers will tell you, with all the training and sergeants yelling and speeches, many soldiers are cowards. In movie land, every soldier is looking to fight but anyone who knows anything about war knows all armies are full of cowards, masquerading behind a gun. So, I will not chagrin unarmed black people from not having the courage to be violent, again the ira was only 300 people in an island with millions of irish, i am not expecting a mass violent uprising from black dosers in the usa, nor do I plan for that, but I am also honest enogh to admit many black people quietly, hate whites and this country , and it is a strong heritage, which leads to a desire to not involve in this country or with its whites. And sadly, it also leads to a potent place of despair.
4 hours ago, ProfD said:
Exactly. What is the alternative if one is too cowardly to take out the enemy?
many alternatives or other paths, as DOSers are the proof
1) Not all DOSers view whites of the usa as the enemy, again James forten. So your question misses the blacks who don't view whites as the enemy in the first place, and infinite paths come from this.
2) To those too cowardly, for whatever reason [and many reasons exists for not killing, not merely fear of killing] infinite paths exist, the following are some.
I) live peacefully with the enemy. and this takes many forms, as DOSers show.
II) find a land absent the enemy, and this can take you anywhere, as DOSers show.
4 hours ago, ProfD said:
As humans, parents do whatever it take to shield/protect their children from the realities of this existence while also encouraging them to overcome it.
Humans have been dancing this tango for thousands of years. Nothing new under the sun.
Well , some parents care for their children wisely, not all. and some parents don't care for their children wisely. As an artists, someone in an art community one said that Disney is needed for kids to have something positive. We were discussing the lack of complex relations in disney stories. and, thinking on a thought i had communicating with you about the USA having only two aspects of itself 1) splitting from the english empire 2) the perception of usa eternity. I realize thinking on parents in the usa, I was incorrect. 2 ) is media weapons. The USA has a level of media unlike any country. The declaration of independence is an advertisement to a fake product. But when I extend beyond that I see, the firms or peoples of the USA are also heavy media folk.
The daughters of the american revolution worked to get a fals emedia narrative as truth, to this day, many people of all phenotypes still adhere to the pfaux history that the daughters of the american revolution created. But it extends to many.
Immigrant parents. How many immigrant parents have i heard say, they love the usa. A lie. They don't love the usa, they were desperate for financial betterment and went to the best place to get it with the least effort.
Black DOSers, if I hear one more black doser talk about forebears wanting to be Statian of the usa, i will eat my own gizzard. Another lie. And the funny thing is , any research into black art 1865 proves black people were very anti usa + white . but headed by the damn black church, this myth of desired americanism came about so much so that most black people in the usa today, act in concert to that lie.
And thus to Disney, Disney comprehended the majority of people in the usa, the customers, like to lie and lie to others and be lied to, and the internet proves this. the internet as it is today is a usa creation and it proves the character of the majority in the usa gardless of phenotype/gender or any racial category.
The fables that disney took came from germany, a country that has its many biases but tends to actually be more honest. From martin luther who couldn't stand the commercialization of the medici popes, the nazis who never said they were interested in world peace or making peace, the nazis for all of their violence or criminal behavior never lied about their intentions to others. they lied to themselves about their own infallicy, and it is interesting how the whites of the usa was the nazis primary mimick of style, learn lies from the biggest liar, but the nazi's still retained a level of german honesty.
So yeah, thank you profd, the usa has two elements from itself
1) breaking away from england
2) media weaponry culture
but the individualism/fiscal capitalism/multiracialism/immigration/regional infighting heritages or cultures were actually started by the english in the colonial era, not of the usa. and I argue haven't changed much since then.
Technology changing is a human thing, that has nothing to do with any country, that is human.
03/29/2026
https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/12614-netflix-the-new-segregation-in-entertainment/#findComment-81010
osted just now
@ProfD
On 3/27/2026 at 8:03 PM, ProfD said:
As it relates to Palestine & more specifically the Gaza Strip, I believe it will look like Dubai in the future.
The architects have already drawn up the blueprints. Investors are lining up to get a piece of the action.
The USA & Israel are working out the deals.
Well... in the future if you go far ahead enough all places have another golden time plus a feces time, that is why of life.
If you mean within fifty years , I don't think so.
But I am glad you have this insider information that seems to be unknown to many people black or non black, so use it to gain fiscal wealth.
On 3/27/2026 at 8:03 PM, ProfD said:
i just don't see too much energy poured into mission either in action or rhetoric.
There have been a few instances where groups of Black folks have attacked white folks but historically, past to present, far more Black folks have been killed by white folks than vice versa.
well yes, especially in the last five hundred years, again, humanity has been around a while, so I resist speaking on all of human history, i prefer some temporal domains on any issue
On 3/27/2026 at 8:03 PM, ProfD said:
White people do. They are human killing machines directly & indirectly. History proves it.
Right now, the USA & Israel are dropping bombs on Iran. What is the death toll?
in my read of history most whites don't either. most humans simply do not,at least in my read of human history.
I don't know the number of iranians murdered by usa +israel in the last two years, i know it is high, and i know that the seeds of great negativity are being born of it that will become something one day
On 3/27/2026 at 8:03 PM, ProfD said:
Black people can buy weapons & learn how to use them if they have the desire & will to do so.
i repeat many soldiers on battlefields, with the most deadly weapons, trained every day, being shot at, are unable to use weapons, the presence of a weapon in your hands plus daily training plus your personal life threatened still doesn't equal automatic will to use weapons.
On 3/27/2026 at 8:03 PM, ProfD said:
Similar to the person in an abusive relationship. They *h8te* being mistreated but won't fight back or kill the abuser. They stick around for 1) any benefits & 2) hoping & praying the abuse will stop.
the biggest problem in your allusion is the dysfunctional relationship between individuals and groups.
The individual in an abusive relationship side another individual has a great difference between a group in an abusive relationship side another group.
When George Stinney was unevenly incarcerated by white law enforcers, chaoticly and violently mobbed by white citizens, George Stinney's parents couldn't simply raise an army from the black populace.
The black populace as a group isn't getting benefits, nor is the black populace as a group hoping and praying the abuse will stop, the black populace as a group doesn't have a group mechanism.
A woman running from a man is not the same as a group of people running from another. Remember, in any two groups interaction you have individual interactions in all ways. During the time of George Stinney some black killed whites. It is about the mechanics of the group.
And to that end, the black populace of the usa has had various internal mechanics, but at the moment, the black populace of the usa has arguably the weakest internal mechanics, but based on black individuals who have chosen to influence the larger group that way.
And the non black, specifically old white populace has the same problem today. The reality is, in the 1900s the white populace in the usa became internally multiracial, like the black. So the 2026 white populace has a more complex internal mechanics than in 1960s, or mid nineteen hundreds or earlier and many whites in the usa, especially the old whites, are having problems comprehending the change in internal mechanics of the white populace, cause it was never like this before.
On 3/27/2026 at 8:03 PM, ProfD said:
Over the past 200 years counting, the USA has produced the most innovation & technological changes that have been replicated around the planet.
the usa produced the most innovation , I don't know about that.
the first satellite was russian/soviet
the first system to have a human being in space was russian soviet
the first integrated computer was english
the fastest submarine is russian/soviet , using liquid metal heated by the engine
the fastest torpedo is soviet using supercavitation
the only domestic use of nuclear power engines is russian/soviet- these are ships that break ice circa north pole
the first rockets or jet fighters are german
the earliest airships or dirigibles are french/german
the best dam building is from russia/soviets
the mapping of the genome was an international effort, it wasn't one country
first printed circuit boards were german
first electronic watch was swiss
the first electronic watch with peizoelectric was nippon/japan
we all know about benz from germany and the single stroke engine, his poor wife.
Everyone knows the usa never produced better weapons than germany during the second white european imperial war, but the usa , like china which is interesting historically, are both big copiers and mass producers.
Innovation, new things, the usa isn't a big new things country.Other countries tend to do that more during the usa's two hundred and fifty years. Most technologies their source isn't the usa.
The usa did make the television. But the one innovation the usa did make that truly warrants note, through ford, was the assembly line. And it is interesting cause the concept of the assembly line is about the goal of mass production. An assembly line can have a bunch of human beings with torches, but the key to technological changes, polishings, is the assembly line pushes mass production which is truly usa and something that china has grabbed onto as a concept in light of the usa. Crafting from ancient times was never a mass produced idea, the idea is to make something efficient, long lasting, but the assembly line idea busted through that concept. In parallel, when I look at soviet russia, arguably the problem with soviet russia is that it truly adopted the german technological heritage from the weimar district of efficient innovation, the ancient human heritage of quality craft. The usa created the modern culture of hype schools, the ivy leagues. In the usa you say you go to a school or work for a firm and the hype of that is superior to the quality of a place. In germany , demerit is real, failure leads to demerit. but in the usa, one can exist above demerit. You see this with Schrumpft, he epitomizes that statian heritage in government. Wheras in germany in weimar, the idea was effectiveness. As I said to you before, the usa's greatest two aspects is : one break away from the british and two, the culture of advertisement from the declaration of independence through the radio, the usa didn't create radio, through television, through the internet [the usa did create the protocols used by most today, but not the internet itself, the internet is really a web of webs of various protocols made by various groups or organizations, the usa through its advertising skill got most to fall in line to it] the usa is a master of selling ideas, not the truth, but selling ideas, getting people to buy into them, prosyletization [ which I can't stand but there you have it] .
If you look deep alot of technologies were not from the usa but the usa mass manufactured, that fiscal capitalistic power made sure the usa profited financially from it, but that ins't innovation. Just because someone makes money off a thing doesn't mean they thought of it.
And to black folks, people will say george washington carver was american but Percy Julian proves black engineers in days past didn't see themselves as american, not honestly. You say things in public, but do you really believe. As james baldwin said, very honestly, which is rare for most in the public eye, I paraphrase, his father never hurt whites one bit, but his father hated whites to the pit of his soul.
We talk about black parenting and why it was so harsh but black parents weren't happy. I think we as descendents of black parents of mid to late eighteen hundreds to mid nineteen hundreds , as per the usa's influence, have created an advertisement campaign to ourselves, lying about our forebears to make our choices seem better.
@Pioneer1
On 3/28/2026 at 11:19 AM, Pioneer1 said:
Hmmmm.......
Interesting exchange between you two.
Sometimes it's pleasant to just sit back and READ the points of view of others.
glad you are enjoying yourself
@Mel Hopkins
On 3/28/2026 at 11:44 AM, Mel Hopkins said:
We have black owned radio stations and cathy hughes' urbanone network. Better for the imagine. Bump the boob tube!
On 3/23/2026 at 4:56 AM, Pioneer1 said:
It's getting to the point that every time I see an article about a new Black television show, I start skimming over the words until I see "Netflix" in the article because I know that's where I'll have to go if I want to see it.
Also you can stream TubiTV. A lot of our creative work, films, tv series, documentaries are airlng on Tubi and the creators also get paid. (I don't know how much though) you don't need to sign in either all you need is a browser and internet connection. BUT Tubi is owned by Rupert Murdoch.
Expand
have you seen this? I am going to apply, working on my screenplay will you take part?
if not at least share
https://aalbc.com/tc/events/event/668-tubi-x-blacklist-horror-initiative-2026-challenge-final-day/
@Pioneer1
On 3/28/2026 at 12:11 PM, Pioneer1 said:
My greater point is.........
We can EXPAND our options without CANCELLING some of them out.
We should be on the internet and social media...no doubt.
But we should STILL keep and have our news papers, radio shows, and broadcast television stations to reach that older or less tech savy audience.
yeah , good financial pint, but financially, you have to embrace the truth that no poor peoples ever did anything in the usa.
here is the problem, from 1865 to 1980 the Jim crow era, you had a change in the culture of the wealthy, the gilded age was late 1800s , and i argue for blacks the gilded age was early 1900s with madame cj walker, what do most fiscally wealthy people have in common from late 1800s to 1920s... by the time of the first white european imperial war the body of wealthy people in the usa went through a huge change. alot of the fiscally poor people, black or non black or other , in the late 1800s actually grew up fiscally poor, so when they chose to help they were serious because they were actually poor at one time in their life, but their children and grandchildren weren't them. and after what carnegie did, many of the children of the gilded, engineered wealth and money making to be a very inherited things. If you look at most wealthy people today in the black populace for example, it is like whites, mostly inheritors. In the 1960s black people with money were mostly people born financially poor who made it rich but now, inheritors is ninety percent like with all demographics or peoples in the usa,
What is my point?
The people with money in a community are always the financial leaders and in absence it is tough.
I can take nyc, the financial center of white jews/irish/italians and all three have their mobs to thank for everything. what are mobs ? financially wealthy organizations involved in illegal activities, run by people mostly grew up poor. When the italians/white jews/irish folk wanted to go legal they still used illegal money to make it happen.
So, you need the big money folk. To that end, everyday I see black millionaires and billionaires investing in white enterprises. they are not blind, they know the black populace has needs, so if they are unwilling to use their money to support he black populace, then they simply are.
Again, how many black people from the 1960s to today paid for a black person to go to a non historical black college?
that is arguably billions of dollars mostly given to non black colleges? black colleges are arguably the oldest non religious /secular black organizations in the united states of america, so... no excuse for lack of heritage.
I comprehend your greater point but you need to really eye the black fiscal wealthy for that lacking. And if for no other reason, fiscal honesty.
that jewish art gallery, where you get your money from, the loans, the local bank? feces,you had some rich white jew help you, through the synagoge.
that italian construction company, where you get the commissions? on merit, feces, you had connections with your cousin in the mob.
I don't think any shame exist getting help, but for some reason, maybe @ProfD can answer, people in the usa have a huge problem being honest when it comes to who helped them out financially. They seem ashamed to say it is a mob or a financial friend in some form? why be ashamed? the usa has never been place where the public way leads to anything.
Women in the usa who have big houses and sent all their kids to school talk about how they worked hard... you got a financial stipend from a man who abused you worth millions of dollars. You married a billionaire forty years your senior. I am not criminalizing, but too many in the usa who have wealth are very ashamed of their history of financial transactions.
How many black people started businesses with fbi/cia money? when they gave them cash to sell out black people and they used that to start businesses, support their kids? why can't they say? what are they ashamed of?
whites in the usa who got money from their great uncle who runs a private prison which has been in operation since the late 1800s, a family treasure. not paying encarcerated people while they took all the money and skimmed for road building.
If more people in the usa would admit the truth of their financial transactions especially in financing, that would push people to embrace fiscally wealthy people being responsible for not investing in things. Stop telling fiscally poor people about their pennies.
@Mel Hopkins
On 3/28/2026 at 12:15 PM, Mel Hopkins said:
We can too! That is still our medium. But I get your point, we don't have the other media. Heck we barely have newspapers!
every group barely has newspapers, should black people be that financially other? again, in NYC, i see lot of newspaper gravesites. is it up to blacks to go against financial trends in a country where we are not the majority populace?
@Pioneer1
On 3/28/2026 at 12:20 PM, Pioneer1 said:
Which is crazy because back in the 50s and 60s not only did every Black community have it's own paper but nearly every Black highschool had it's own Black newspaper.
You didn't need a Scripts Howard back then.
Black students were learning journalism (among other skills and trades) BEFORE they graduated from Highschool.
Expand
It isn't crazy, why do you say it is crazy?
every fiscal firm has numerical realities. paper cost money, reporters cost money [cost of living/extra wage/competitive wage influence], shipping newspapers cost money. Can you get advertising for your newspaper? the village voice is gone, that was a public newspaper, the reason was simple, it was unaffordable, even with adveritisng the adult /erotic/similar stuff, they couldn't afford their cost of operation.
Your saying its crazy black people don't have newspapers like clearly if I started a newspaper right now in debt, the debt would be covered in a month.
I think newspapers are a negative business.
First,the two methods of getting money are thin now: subscriptions + advertisements.
Subscriptions are tough cause across the demographic board in the usa, so not just black people, people don't read long form. or paper based communication. many newspapers have tried online but again, a website isn't free to host, a website cost money to maintain and overtime only increase.
Advertising is tough cause advertisers have metrics, in the past or today, they know what people aren't viewing/being influenced by, so why should a firm advertise.
Look at the amsterdam news in NYC. it is fortunate. It has a black wealthy populace in NYC, specifically manhattan that is old, has a heritage of support for the amsterdam news. Most black newspapers don't have a fiscally wealthy black minority in the black populace of the city they are in like the Amsterdam News.
And I know you well enough that you always want to fall on the fiscally poor only using black newspapers to keep them alive but... I can't tell what would reading the amsterdam news really give back to the fiscal black poor of nyc if they were to each invest per month or two weeks into the amsterdam news.
RMCommunityCalendar 0 Comments · 0 Reviews
24 March 2261
This event began 03/24/2026 and repeats every year forever
CONTENT
Let's imagine you are the president of the USA in the future and the congress has made a law concerning immigration, that you want to sign immediately after you see it.
What will that law be?
REFERRAL
COMMENTS
RMCommunityCalendar 0 Comments · 0 Reviews
