University of West Georgia has made great efforts to cover up and remove all videos involving Damiyr Davis and "acclaimed debater", Miguel Feliciano, after a video went viral of them advocating for white genocide. Only a few videos remain of the same clip which were salvaged before being removed:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RC-Cqkq6zWc
Here is one video on youtube that screen captures a preview video of Miguel debating on the same topic, in a different setting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HiE2a8Ye_8
President of UGA claims that these are just debating methods and the white kids from Harvard brought up the topic of race first. (I'll post the supposed letter from the president below). The school has not released the unedited video.
Here is the twitter account of Damiyr Davis, one of the debaters and a image of some of his tweets.
http://i.imgur.com/rEq1Ghl.png
https://twitter.com/LovetheSupreme
Evidently something is going on. The college and the students need to explain themselves and the media needs to get off their arses and cover this story.
>For what it is worth, I sent an email to the president of the University of West Georgia, the school where the two black debaters were studying. His response, in my opinion, is worth sharing so you get the entire context.
Dear Mr. Davis,
I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to email me directly concerning the posting of this video clip. We understand the concern surrounding a video posted this week that includes comments made by two former University of West Georgia debate students. While these students participated in a nationally sanctioned debate event in 2012 representing UWG, their comments, or the comments made in any debate, do not reflect the University’s views or values.
We take diversity and inclusion very seriously. We work hard every day to ensure our students, faculty and staff from all backgrounds feel welcome and valued. Our top priority remains fostering the safest learning environment we can in which students can learn, grow and achieve.
As part of that commitment, UWG will not tolerate or allow comments or behavior that incite prejudice or violence against any individual or group. Any student who engages in such behavior will be investigated under the university’s student code of conduct, resulting in appropriate sanctions.
Comments made during debate training or debate events or theater rehearsals are rare exceptions to this policy. College debate programs operate in a manner similar to laboratories, where events like those depicted in the video are closely controlled and monitored. One team presents a position and the other responds, often using extreme arguments to show that a particular point is illogical.
>>67900164
Fuck those guys for real, but what's the problem here? What motivation would the university have to either promote or condemn them?
In the case of the 2012 video, the debate centered on energy policy. The first team argued that white people embracing the location of wind turbines in their neighborhoods would be a way to address criticism that racism is inherent in the movement of white populations from urban areas. The former UWG students countered that argument by claiming that the extreme would not be for white people to locate themselves near wind turbines, but rather for white people to sacrifice themselves to remove racism altogether. The purpose of the statement was to show the absurdity of their opponents’ position.
Unfortunately, the purposefully-edited video posted this week does not capture the complete discussion. It includes less than a minute and a half of a debate that lasted more than an hour and a half. It does not show that the first team injected the element of racism. Ultimately, it focuses solely on the extreme points used by one of the UWG students to counter an argument in a sanctioned debate. When taken out of the context of a competition in which one team commonly uses extreme rhetoric to argue against an opponent’s extreme rhetoric, the scenes from the video are shocking. The fact that the debate was not halted and authorities were not notified shows the controlled environment in which the comments were made.
Again, the students’ comments included in the video do not reflect the values of our university. They do not represent beliefs or doctrines we teach to students.
I sincerely hope that by providing the context in which this video is depicted helps restore your faith in our university and in future generations of leaders.
Sincerely,
Kyle Marrero
>>67900317
That's the issue here; why did the school go to such great lengths to take down all the videos?
>>67900164
Of course the media won't, When you combine the idea of white people with the idea of genocide white people start thinking about all sorts of things that some people do not want them to think about.
College-aged racist children are irrelevant.
>>67900451
Really? Because college aged racist and their professors in the early 1900's did a pretty damn good job at convincing America that Asians were trash. You can thank them for the Immigration act of 1924:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924
College aged kids and their professors have more sway than you think.
>>67900337
Sound's like they are trying to protect the kids being attacked or threatened for having a debate where you are appointed a side to defend. Good job by the school!
>>67900164
Bump
>>67900399
Do they normally release footage of all debates?
>>67902003
The videos were all available until the first video I posted went viral. Then the school deleted them all.
>>67901576
You really defending this shit? If there's no issue, they shouldn't have deleted the videos.
Those comments said by any other group people about any group of people would get those students kicked out of school, or at the very least LOSE THE DEBATE. How these morons won is beyond me, who the fuck is judging these things?
>>67903428
lol this is how black kids debate nowadays.
And remember, Miguel is "acclaimed". Top in his school.
It's really fuckin pathetic.
Sounds more like an asthma attack than a logical point.
when i was in the UK (studying engineering), we had a class in which we had to debate. your side was pre determined, and so were your team mates.
in my case we had to defend the right of family members to pull the plug on loved ones who were in coma. since it's costly, the hospital could be treating other people, etc etc
we didn't have a stroke on stage like these people, but my point is maybe something similar is going on. an exercise in debating, some people just take it too seriously, and the topic is maybe too controversial.
Apparently the topic was sustainable energy but I'm not sure if that's accurate or not.
