info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Blacks do not like to be called "African-Americans"
2 views
Skip to first unread message
Planet Visitor II
Feb 6, 2012, 12:29:58 AM2/6/12
to
Of course Moon Loon insists that there are no Black Americans. He feels much too
superior to those who are not of his color, insisting that they can only call themselves
and we can only call them what he DEMANDS they be called -- "afro-caribean" (sic).
See --
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2012/02/04/national/a101235S38.DTL
Quote --
The labels used to describe Americans of African descent mark the movement of a
people from the slave house to the White House. Today, many are resisting this
progression by holding on to a name from the past: "black."
For this group — some descended from U.S. slaves, some immigrants with a separate
history — "African-American" is not the sign of progress hailed when the term was
popularized in the late 1980s. Instead, it's a misleading connection to a distant culture.
The debate has waxed and waned since African-American went mainstream, and gained
new significance after the son of a black Kenyan and a white American moved into the White
House. President Barack Obama's identity has been contested from all sides, renewing
questions that have followed millions of darker Americans:
What are you? Where are you from? And how do you fit into this country?
"I prefer to be called black," said Shawn Smith, an accountant from Houston. "How I really
feel is, I'm American."
"I don't like African-American. It denotes something else to me than who I am," said
Smith, whose parents are from Mississippi and North Carolina. "I can't recall any of them
telling me anything about Africa. They told me a whole lot about where they grew up in
Macomb County and Shelby, N.C."
Gibre George, an entrepreneur from Miami, started a Facebook page called "Don't Call
Me African-American" on a whim. It now has about 300 "likes."
"We respect our African heritage, but that term is not really us," George said. "We're
several generations down the line. If anyone were to ship us back to Africa, we'd be like
fish out of water."
"It just doesn't sit well with a younger generation of black people," continued George, who
is 38. "Africa was a long time ago. Are we always going to be tethered to Africa? Spiritually
I'm American. When the war starts, I'm fighting for America."
Joan Morgan, a writer born in Jamaica who moved to New York City as a girl, remembers
the first time she publicly corrected someone about the term: at a book signing, when she
was introduced as African-American and her family members in the front rows were appalled
and hurt.
"That act of calling me African-American completely erased their history and the sacrifice
and contributions it took to make me an author," said Morgan, a longtime U.S. citizen who
calls herself Black-Caribbean American. (Some insist Black should be capitalized.)
She said people struggle with the fact that black people have multiple ethnicities because it
challenges America's original black-white classifications. In her view, forcing everyone into
a name meant for descendants of American slaves distorts the nature of the contributions
of immigrants like her black countrymen Marcus Garvey and Claude McKay.
Morgan acknowledges that her homeland of Jamaica is populated by the descendants of
African slaves. "But I am not African, and Africans are not African-American," she said.
In Latin, a forerunner of the English language, the color black is "niger." In 1619, the first
African captives in America were described as "negars," which became the epithet still
used by some today.
The Spanish word "negro" means black. That was the label applied by white Americans for
centuries.
The word black also was given many pejorative connotations — a black mood, a blackened
reputation, a black heart. "Colored" seemed better, until the civil rights movement insisted
on Negro, with a capital N.
Then, in the 1960s, "black" came back — as an expression of pride, a strategy to defy
oppression.
"Every time black had been mentioned since slavery, it was bad," says Mary Frances Berry,
a University of Pennsylvania history professor and former chair of the U.S. Commission on
Civil Rights. Reclaiming the word "was a grass-roots move, and it was oppositional. It was
like, `In your face.'"
Afro-American was briefly in vogue in the 1970s, and lingers today in the names of some
newspapers and university departments. But it was soon overshadowed by African-American,
which first sprouted among the black intelligentsia.
The Rev. Jesse Jackson is widely credited with taking African-American mainstream in
1988, before his second presidential run.
Berry remembers being at a 1988 gathering of civil rights groups organized by Jackson in
Chicago when Ramona Edelin, then president of the National Urban Coalition, urged those
assembled to declare that black people should be called African-American.
Edelin says today that there was no intent to exclude people born in other countries, or to
eliminate the use of black: "It was an attempt to start a cultural offensive, because we
were clearly at that time always on the defensive."
"We said, this is kind of a compromise term," she continued. "There are those among us
who don't want to be referred to as African. And there also those among us who don't want
to be referred to as American. This was a way of bridging divisions among us or in our
ideologies so we can move forward as a group."
Jackson, who at the time may have been the most-quoted black man in America, followed
through with the plan.
"Every ethnic group in this country has a reference to some land base, some historical,
cultural base," Jackson told reporters at the time. "African-Americans have hit that level
of cultural maturity."
The effect was immediate. "Back in those days we didn't talk about things going viral, but
that's what you would say today. It was quite remarkable," said the columnist Clarence Page,
then a reporter. "It was kind of like when Black Power first came in the `60s, there was all
kinds of buzz among black folks and white folks about whether or not I like this."
Page liked it — he still uses it interchangeably with black — and sees an advantage to
changing names.
"If we couldn't control anything else, at least we could control what people call us," Page
said. "That's the most fundamental right any human being has, over what other people call
you. (African-American) had a lot of psychic value from that point of view."
It also has historical value, said Irv Randolph, managing editor of the Philadelphia Tribune,
a black newspaper that uses both terms: "It's a historical fact that we are people of African
descent."
"African-American embraces where we came from and where we are now," he said. "We are
Americans, no doubt about that. But to deny where we came from doesn't make any sense to
me."
Jackson agrees about such denial. "It shows a willful ignorance of our roots, our heritage and
our lineage," he said Tuesday. "A fruit without a root is dying."
He observed that the history of how captives were brought here from Africa is unchangeable,
and that Senegal is almost as close to New York as Los Angeles.
"If a chicken is born in the oven," Jackson said, "that doesn't make it a biscuit."
Today, 24 years after Jackson popularized African-American, it's unclear what term is preferred
by the community. A series of Gallup polls from 1991 to 2007 showed no strong consensus for
either black or African-American. In a January 2011 NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, 42 percent of
respondents said they preferred black, 35 percent said African-American, 13 percent said it
doesn't make any difference, and 7 percent chose "some other term."
Meanwhile, a record number of black people in America — almost 1 in 10 — were born
abroad, according to census figures.
Tomi Obaro is one of them. Her Nigerian-born parents brought her to America from England as
a girl, and she became a citizen last year. Although she is literally African-American, the University
of Chicago senior says the label implies she is descended from slaves. It also feels vague and
liberal to her.
"It just sort of screams this political correctness," Obaro said. She and her black friends rarely
use it to refer to themselves, only when they're speaking in "proper company."
"Or it's a word that people who aren't black use to describe black people," she said.
Or it's a political tool. In a Senate race against Obama in 2004, Alan Keyes implied that Obama
could not claim to share Keyes'"African-American heritage" because Keyes' ancestors were
slaves. During the Democratic presidential primary, some Hillary Clinton supporters made the
same charge.
Last year, Herman Cain, then a Republican presidential candidate, sought to contrast his roots
in the Jim Crow south with Obama's history, and he shunned the label African-American in
favor of "American black conservative." Rush Limbaugh mocked Obama as a "halfrican-American."
Then there are some white Americans who were born in Africa.
Paulo Seriodo is a U.S. citizen born in Mozambique to parents from Portugal. In 2009 he
filed a lawsuit against his medical school, which he said suspended him after a dispute
with black classmates over whether Seriodo could call himself African-American.
"It doesn't matter if I'm from Africa, and they are not!" Seriodo wrote at the time. "They
are not allowing me to be African-American!"
And so the saga of names continues.
"I think it's still evolving," said Edelin, the activist who helped popularize African-American.
"I'm content, for now, with African and American."
"But," she added, "that's not to say that it won't change again."
Unquote
Online:
Joan Morgan: http://bit.ly/AsiuNw
Planet Visitor II
superior to those who are not of his color, insisting that they can only call themselves
and we can only call them what he DEMANDS they be called -- "afro-caribean" (sic).
See --
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2012/02/04/national/a101235S38.DTL
Quote --
The labels used to describe Americans of African descent mark the movement of a
people from the slave house to the White House. Today, many are resisting this
progression by holding on to a name from the past: "black."
For this group — some descended from U.S. slaves, some immigrants with a separate
history — "African-American" is not the sign of progress hailed when the term was
popularized in the late 1980s. Instead, it's a misleading connection to a distant culture.
The debate has waxed and waned since African-American went mainstream, and gained
new significance after the son of a black Kenyan and a white American moved into the White
House. President Barack Obama's identity has been contested from all sides, renewing
questions that have followed millions of darker Americans:
What are you? Where are you from? And how do you fit into this country?
"I prefer to be called black," said Shawn Smith, an accountant from Houston. "How I really
feel is, I'm American."
"I don't like African-American. It denotes something else to me than who I am," said
Smith, whose parents are from Mississippi and North Carolina. "I can't recall any of them
telling me anything about Africa. They told me a whole lot about where they grew up in
Macomb County and Shelby, N.C."
Gibre George, an entrepreneur from Miami, started a Facebook page called "Don't Call
Me African-American" on a whim. It now has about 300 "likes."
"We respect our African heritage, but that term is not really us," George said. "We're
several generations down the line. If anyone were to ship us back to Africa, we'd be like
fish out of water."
"It just doesn't sit well with a younger generation of black people," continued George, who
is 38. "Africa was a long time ago. Are we always going to be tethered to Africa? Spiritually
I'm American. When the war starts, I'm fighting for America."
Joan Morgan, a writer born in Jamaica who moved to New York City as a girl, remembers
the first time she publicly corrected someone about the term: at a book signing, when she
was introduced as African-American and her family members in the front rows were appalled
and hurt.
"That act of calling me African-American completely erased their history and the sacrifice
and contributions it took to make me an author," said Morgan, a longtime U.S. citizen who
calls herself Black-Caribbean American. (Some insist Black should be capitalized.)
She said people struggle with the fact that black people have multiple ethnicities because it
challenges America's original black-white classifications. In her view, forcing everyone into
a name meant for descendants of American slaves distorts the nature of the contributions
of immigrants like her black countrymen Marcus Garvey and Claude McKay.
Morgan acknowledges that her homeland of Jamaica is populated by the descendants of
African slaves. "But I am not African, and Africans are not African-American," she said.
In Latin, a forerunner of the English language, the color black is "niger." In 1619, the first
African captives in America were described as "negars," which became the epithet still
used by some today.
The Spanish word "negro" means black. That was the label applied by white Americans for
centuries.
The word black also was given many pejorative connotations — a black mood, a blackened
reputation, a black heart. "Colored" seemed better, until the civil rights movement insisted
on Negro, with a capital N.
Then, in the 1960s, "black" came back — as an expression of pride, a strategy to defy
oppression.
"Every time black had been mentioned since slavery, it was bad," says Mary Frances Berry,
a University of Pennsylvania history professor and former chair of the U.S. Commission on
Civil Rights. Reclaiming the word "was a grass-roots move, and it was oppositional. It was
like, `In your face.'"
Afro-American was briefly in vogue in the 1970s, and lingers today in the names of some
newspapers and university departments. But it was soon overshadowed by African-American,
which first sprouted among the black intelligentsia.
The Rev. Jesse Jackson is widely credited with taking African-American mainstream in
1988, before his second presidential run.
Berry remembers being at a 1988 gathering of civil rights groups organized by Jackson in
Chicago when Ramona Edelin, then president of the National Urban Coalition, urged those
assembled to declare that black people should be called African-American.
Edelin says today that there was no intent to exclude people born in other countries, or to
eliminate the use of black: "It was an attempt to start a cultural offensive, because we
were clearly at that time always on the defensive."
"We said, this is kind of a compromise term," she continued. "There are those among us
who don't want to be referred to as African. And there also those among us who don't want
to be referred to as American. This was a way of bridging divisions among us or in our
ideologies so we can move forward as a group."
Jackson, who at the time may have been the most-quoted black man in America, followed
through with the plan.
"Every ethnic group in this country has a reference to some land base, some historical,
cultural base," Jackson told reporters at the time. "African-Americans have hit that level
of cultural maturity."
The effect was immediate. "Back in those days we didn't talk about things going viral, but
that's what you would say today. It was quite remarkable," said the columnist Clarence Page,
then a reporter. "It was kind of like when Black Power first came in the `60s, there was all
kinds of buzz among black folks and white folks about whether or not I like this."
Page liked it — he still uses it interchangeably with black — and sees an advantage to
changing names.
"If we couldn't control anything else, at least we could control what people call us," Page
said. "That's the most fundamental right any human being has, over what other people call
you. (African-American) had a lot of psychic value from that point of view."
It also has historical value, said Irv Randolph, managing editor of the Philadelphia Tribune,
a black newspaper that uses both terms: "It's a historical fact that we are people of African
descent."
"African-American embraces where we came from and where we are now," he said. "We are
Americans, no doubt about that. But to deny where we came from doesn't make any sense to
me."
Jackson agrees about such denial. "It shows a willful ignorance of our roots, our heritage and
our lineage," he said Tuesday. "A fruit without a root is dying."
He observed that the history of how captives were brought here from Africa is unchangeable,
and that Senegal is almost as close to New York as Los Angeles.
"If a chicken is born in the oven," Jackson said, "that doesn't make it a biscuit."
Today, 24 years after Jackson popularized African-American, it's unclear what term is preferred
by the community. A series of Gallup polls from 1991 to 2007 showed no strong consensus for
either black or African-American. In a January 2011 NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, 42 percent of
respondents said they preferred black, 35 percent said African-American, 13 percent said it
doesn't make any difference, and 7 percent chose "some other term."
Meanwhile, a record number of black people in America — almost 1 in 10 — were born
abroad, according to census figures.
Tomi Obaro is one of them. Her Nigerian-born parents brought her to America from England as
a girl, and she became a citizen last year. Although she is literally African-American, the University
of Chicago senior says the label implies she is descended from slaves. It also feels vague and
liberal to her.
"It just sort of screams this political correctness," Obaro said. She and her black friends rarely
use it to refer to themselves, only when they're speaking in "proper company."
"Or it's a word that people who aren't black use to describe black people," she said.
Or it's a political tool. In a Senate race against Obama in 2004, Alan Keyes implied that Obama
could not claim to share Keyes'"African-American heritage" because Keyes' ancestors were
slaves. During the Democratic presidential primary, some Hillary Clinton supporters made the
same charge.
Last year, Herman Cain, then a Republican presidential candidate, sought to contrast his roots
in the Jim Crow south with Obama's history, and he shunned the label African-American in
favor of "American black conservative." Rush Limbaugh mocked Obama as a "halfrican-American."
Then there are some white Americans who were born in Africa.
Paulo Seriodo is a U.S. citizen born in Mozambique to parents from Portugal. In 2009 he
filed a lawsuit against his medical school, which he said suspended him after a dispute
with black classmates over whether Seriodo could call himself African-American.
"It doesn't matter if I'm from Africa, and they are not!" Seriodo wrote at the time. "They
are not allowing me to be African-American!"
And so the saga of names continues.
"I think it's still evolving," said Edelin, the activist who helped popularize African-American.
"I'm content, for now, with African and American."
"But," she added, "that's not to say that it won't change again."
Unquote
Online:
Joan Morgan: http://bit.ly/AsiuNw
Planet Visitor II
Moon Shine
Feb 6, 2012, 5:37:49 AM2/6/12
to
"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
news:79pui7tt4b7qp9mdc...@4ax.com...
> Of course Moon Loon
Your obsession with me is flattering, sir.
Of course, one needs only watch American programs on television to notice
that African Americans do not object to said title.
--
J
> See --
> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2012/02/04/national/a101235S38.DTL
>
> Quote --
> The labels used to describe Americans of African descent mark the movement
> of a
> people from the slave house to the White House. Today, many are resisting
> this
> progression by holding on to a name from the past: "black."
>
> separate
> history - "African-American" is not the sign of progress hailed when the
> a blackened
> reputation, a black heart. "Colored" seemed better, until the civil rights
> movement insisted
> on Negro, with a capital N.
>
> Then, in the 1960s, "black" came back - as an expression of pride, a
> reputation, a black heart. "Colored" seemed better, until the civil rights
> movement insisted
> on Negro, with a capital N.
>
Earl Evleth
Feb 6, 2012, 8:35:06 AM2/6/12
to
On 6/02/12 6:29, in article 79pui7tt4b7qp9mdc...@4ax.com,
"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote:
> Of course Moon Loon insists that there are no Black Americans.
And like the sucker you are you rise to the bait!
> Of course Moon Loon insists that there are no Black Americans.
Planet Visitor II
Feb 6, 2012, 12:09:06 PM2/6/12
to
you supporting his comments that Martin Luther King Jr., was a "racist." See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_is_a_racist.txt
Tell me, Earl... do you believe there are "Black Americans"? Just a yes or no
will suffice. But then when has it ever sufficed given your hubris?? See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Earl_and_Moon_Loon.jpg
Planet Visitor II
Planet Visitor II
Feb 6, 2012, 12:09:19 PM2/6/12
to
On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 10:37:49 -0000, "Moon Shine" <not...@eatbm.moc> wrote:
PV has the last word.
>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>news:79pui7tt4b7qp9mdc...@4ax.com...
>> Of course Moon Loon
>Your obsession with me is flattering, sir.
Don't flatter yourself, shit-for-brains. It's more my intention to
expose your racism, than anything else.
>Of course, one needs only watch American programs on television to notice
>that African Americans do not object to said title.
And yet, the article I posted argues exactly that many Blacks do object to
said title, and an enormous number object to being called "afro-caribean,"
if they have never laid eye or had any relative ever lay eyes on the
"caribean" (sic). Black Americans are just that... it avoids all implications
of slavery, which is brought back by the use of "African" as if that is where
they belong rather than being "American." Just as "Whites" carries a
particular significance as to race, given that "caucasian" would argue
that humans indigenous to Norway, Sweden and Finland, to name just a
few locations, are not part of the human race.
BTW -- My next comment if you respond (as you are pathetically obsessed
with doing in each and every comment I post) to this comment will not be
as PV. Suck it up, you fucking lunatic. Proof that you're a racist --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_is_a_racist.txt
Planet Visitor II
PV has the last word.
>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>news:79pui7tt4b7qp9mdc...@4ax.com...
>> Of course Moon Loon
>Your obsession with me is flattering, sir.
expose your racism, than anything else.
>Of course, one needs only watch American programs on television to notice
>that African Americans do not object to said title.
said title, and an enormous number object to being called "afro-caribean,"
if they have never laid eye or had any relative ever lay eyes on the
"caribean" (sic). Black Americans are just that... it avoids all implications
of slavery, which is brought back by the use of "African" as if that is where
they belong rather than being "American." Just as "Whites" carries a
particular significance as to race, given that "caucasian" would argue
that humans indigenous to Norway, Sweden and Finland, to name just a
few locations, are not part of the human race.
BTW -- My next comment if you respond (as you are pathetically obsessed
with doing in each and every comment I post) to this comment will not be
as PV. Suck it up, you fucking lunatic. Proof that you're a racist --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_is_a_racist.txt
Planet Visitor II
Earl Evleth
Feb 6, 2012, 12:27:03 PM2/6/12
to
On 6/02/12 18:09, in article k720j75lv7sbba0t8...@4ax.com,
the real you.
"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote:
>> And like the sucker you are you rise to the bait!
>
> So you consider his racism to be bait.
With you, yes. But you are condemne to be a sucker, it is
>> And like the sucker you are you rise to the bait!
>
> So you consider his racism to be bait.
the real you.
Planet Visitor II
Feb 6, 2012, 1:10:07 PM2/6/12
to
comments that Martin Luther King Jr., was a "racist." See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_is_a_racist.txt
I haven't seen you deny it, or even take issue with him for that absurd
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_is_a_racist.txt
and racist comment, so I can only presume you agree with it, bait or
otherwise. If it walks like a duck... and quacks like a duck... what is one
supposed to see... a normal human being? Get outta here...
Thus, you continue to suck up to a racist who insist that Martin Luther King
Jr., was a "racist." I notice that you clipped the question in case your
answer might embarrass both you and your racist friend. Here it is again --
this time don't consider it "bait," but proof of your own racism, in your
refusal to confront Moon Loon. The question still is --
Earl Evleth
Feb 6, 2012, 1:36:21 PM2/6/12
to
On 6/02/12 19:10, in article hd50j7hcpb8dbfilc...@4ax.com,
I used the term "Blacks". As a member of NAACP I don't use
the expression "coloreds" or "colored people" which at one
time meant Black Americans. However the organization's name
is now archaic but that is for Blacks to deal with.
The US has now a number of immigrant Africans and I sometimes
refer to them as "African Americans" and for native more Blacks
as Afro-Americans. People in that group tend to identify themselves
with the Country they came from, Black Americans descended from
the slaves often do know where they came from and even if they
do they don't identify that closely with that country. My ancestors
came from Devon but I have never been there and don't have a desire
to, I don't identify with people there.
Obviously problem in using the term African Americans are
those populations not Black having live in Africa.
I don't spend a lot of time thinking about this.
"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote:
> Tell me, Earl... do you believe there are "Black Americans"?
Whatever people want to call themselves is ok with me.
> Tell me, Earl... do you believe there are "Black Americans"?
I used the term "Blacks". As a member of NAACP I don't use
the expression "coloreds" or "colored people" which at one
time meant Black Americans. However the organization's name
is now archaic but that is for Blacks to deal with.
The US has now a number of immigrant Africans and I sometimes
refer to them as "African Americans" and for native more Blacks
as Afro-Americans. People in that group tend to identify themselves
with the Country they came from, Black Americans descended from
the slaves often do know where they came from and even if they
do they don't identify that closely with that country. My ancestors
came from Devon but I have never been there and don't have a desire
to, I don't identify with people there.
Obviously problem in using the term African Americans are
those populations not Black having live in Africa.
I don't spend a lot of time thinking about this.
Moon Shine
Feb 6, 2012, 2:26:15 PM2/6/12
to
news:k920j7t0gq2mk9js5...@4ax.com...
the last word, sir. Just becasue you don't read it doesn't mean it wasn't
posted, sir.
>
>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>>news:79pui7tt4b7qp9mdc...@4ax.com...
>>> Of course Moon Loon
>>Your obsession with me is flattering, sir.
>
> Don't flatter yourself,
No, sir. I've already told you that you flatter me.
>It's more my intention to
> expose your racism, than anything else.
We've been through this so. you have no interest in racial politics as you
have shown by your absense of response to PJ and Jigsaw, sir.
>
>>Of course, one needs only watch American programs on television to notice
>>that African Americans do not object to said title.
>
> And yet, the article I posted argues exactly that many Blacks do object to
> said title, and an enormous number object to being called "afro-caribean,"
> if they have never laid eye or had any relative ever lay eyes on the
> "caribean" (sic). Black Americans are just that... it avoids all
> implications
> of slavery, which is brought back by the use of "African" as if that is
> where
> they belong rather than being "American." Just as "Whites" carries a
> particular significance as to race, given that "caucasian" would argue
> that humans indigenous to Norway, Sweden and Finland, to name just a
> few locations, are not part of the human race.
Unless the author of the document asked every afro-caribbean if they
objected to the term thhen your article is worthless, sir. Afro caribbeans
are indivuduals sir and can decide for themselves whether they find it
offensive, sir.Like most people, they find being told what to find offensive
as patronizing and offfensive, sir.
>
> BTW -- My next comment if you respond (as you are pathetically obsessed
> with doing in each and every comment I post)
Another lie from you, sir. I ignore most of your comments. I wonder how long
you spent looking to find a single article which infers that afro-caribbean
as offensive, sir. You would spend half the time finding ones that infer the
term, "black" as offensive, sir.
--
J
> On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 10:37:49 -0000, "Moon Shine" <not...@eatbm.moc> wrote:
>
> PV has the last word.
No, sir. if you decide not to aswer my post then it's definately me who had
>
> PV has the last word.
the last word, sir. Just becasue you don't read it doesn't mean it wasn't
posted, sir.
>
>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>>news:79pui7tt4b7qp9mdc...@4ax.com...
>>> Of course Moon Loon
>>Your obsession with me is flattering, sir.
>
> Don't flatter yourself,
>It's more my intention to
> expose your racism, than anything else.
have shown by your absense of response to PJ and Jigsaw, sir.
>
>>Of course, one needs only watch American programs on television to notice
>>that African Americans do not object to said title.
>
> And yet, the article I posted argues exactly that many Blacks do object to
> said title, and an enormous number object to being called "afro-caribean,"
> if they have never laid eye or had any relative ever lay eyes on the
> "caribean" (sic). Black Americans are just that... it avoids all
> implications
> of slavery, which is brought back by the use of "African" as if that is
> where
> they belong rather than being "American." Just as "Whites" carries a
> particular significance as to race, given that "caucasian" would argue
> that humans indigenous to Norway, Sweden and Finland, to name just a
> few locations, are not part of the human race.
objected to the term thhen your article is worthless, sir. Afro caribbeans
are indivuduals sir and can decide for themselves whether they find it
offensive, sir.Like most people, they find being told what to find offensive
as patronizing and offfensive, sir.
>
> BTW -- My next comment if you respond (as you are pathetically obsessed
> with doing in each and every comment I post)
you spent looking to find a single article which infers that afro-caribbean
as offensive, sir. You would spend half the time finding ones that infer the
term, "black" as offensive, sir.
--
J
Moon Shine
Feb 6, 2012, 4:16:15 PM2/6/12
to
"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
news:k720j75lv7sbba0t8...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:35:06 +0100, Earl Evleth <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>
>>On 6/02/12 6:29, in article 79pui7tt4b7qp9mdc...@4ax.com,
>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Of course Moon Loon insists that there are no Black Americans.
>>
>>And like the sucker you are you rise to the bait!
>
> So you consider his racism to be bait. Which only goes a long way toward
> you supporting his comments that Martin Luther King Jr., was a "racist."
> See --
> http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_is_a_racist.txt
His obsession with me is awesome. OF course, calling Martin Luthor king a
>
>>On 6/02/12 6:29, in article 79pui7tt4b7qp9mdc...@4ax.com,
>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Of course Moon Loon insists that there are no Black Americans.
>>
>>And like the sucker you are you rise to the bait!
>
> So you consider his racism to be bait. Which only goes a long way toward
> you supporting his comments that Martin Luther King Jr., was a "racist."
> See --
> http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_is_a_racist.txt
racist isn't in itself a racist remark by any definition of the word.
However, I have no memory of directly calling him a racist. I think i might
have used a predicate if (..) then sort of thing, As for Mr PV's web page,
his cites are inreferenced so there's not proof that i made the comment in
it or any context there so that page is as worthless as he is. However it's
all a smoke screen so he can cover his real motives. He is of course,
fooling no-one.
The above as addressed to Earl, Mr PV, so you have nothing to say on it.
.....
--
J
Planet Visitor II
Feb 7, 2012, 1:23:12 AM2/7/12
to
On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 21:16:15 -0000, "Moon Shine" <not...@eatbm.moc> wrote:
>
>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>news:k720j75lv7sbba0t8...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:35:06 +0100, Earl Evleth <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>>
>>>On 6/02/12 6:29, in article 79pui7tt4b7qp9mdc...@4ax.com,
>>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Of course Moon Loon insists that there are no Black Americans.
>>>
>>>And like the sucker you are you rise to the bait!
>>
>> So you consider his racism to be bait. Which only goes a long way toward
>> you supporting his comments that Martin Luther King Jr., was a "racist."
>> See --
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_is_a_racist.txt
>
>His obsession with me is awesome. OF course, calling Martin Luthor king a
>racist isn't in itself a racist remark by any definition of the word.
And there you go again. By calling MLK a "racist," you toe the party line
>
>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>news:k720j75lv7sbba0t8...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:35:06 +0100, Earl Evleth <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>>
>>>On 6/02/12 6:29, in article 79pui7tt4b7qp9mdc...@4ax.com,
>>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Of course Moon Loon insists that there are no Black Americans.
>>>
>>>And like the sucker you are you rise to the bait!
>>
>> So you consider his racism to be bait. Which only goes a long way toward
>> you supporting his comments that Martin Luther King Jr., was a "racist."
>> See --
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_is_a_racist.txt
>
>His obsession with me is awesome. OF course, calling Martin Luthor king a
>racist isn't in itself a racist remark by any definition of the word.
of White Power groups. White Power groups are by definition "racists." I'd
like to see you argue that White Power groups do not have a racist doctrine.
I'd like to argue that all members of White Power groups are not racists.
You are essentially in agreement with White Power doctrine. If you are in
agreement with the doctrine of terrorism you essentially support terrorism.
If you are in agreement with the doctrine of White Power you are essentially
in support of racism. If you are in support of racism you are a racist.
>However, I have no memory of directly calling him a racist.
racist." His words -- "it is not in your memory if you did not experience or
witness it first hand." And here he admits his racism "is not in his memory."
> I think
That would be a first, you fucking lunatic.
>i might
>have used a predicate if (..) then sort of thing, As for Mr PV's web page,
>his cites are inreferenced so there's not proof that i made the comment in
>it or any context there so that page is as worthless as he is. However it's
>all a smoke screen so he can cover his real motives. He is of course,
>fooling no-one.
>
>The above as addressed to Earl, Mr PV, so you have nothing to say on it.
to Earl, yet it appears you believe you are posting to Earl's comment which
only goes to prove you're a confused fucking lunatic.
BTW -- The proof is quite clear and direct that you've called MLK a "racist"
more than a dozen times. Here's the proof in your own words, shit-for-brains:
=====================================
1) "You have proven yourself and MLK racist, sir." According
to him I did so by daring to praise MLK in 2011.
2) "YOU and MLK are racist." Calling me racist because I am aligned
and support the views of MLK. In his crazy little mixed up world,
that means anyone who supports the views of MLK is a racist.
He's just accused 95% of Americans and Europeans of being
racists.
3) "Your dictionaries have proved you and MLK racist, sir." He
means the English dictionaries. Can you imagine using the
English dictionaries to call MLK a racist. Forget about me...
he's a moron, and can't affect me. It's his attack on MLK
that disturbs me.
4) "The dictionaries you love so much condemn both you and MLK
racists" Referring again to the English dictionaries. I expect next
he'll be calling the English dictionaries... racist.
5) "if Martin Luther King practiced the racist act of affirmative
action then he is a racist." Looks like that means you're a
racist according to him, John.
6) "if Martin Luther King supported preferential treatment based on
ethnicity then that is racism " That's calling a lot of people,
"racists."
7) "you branded MLK a racist, sir." Almost hideous in a bold lie.
Insisting that the English dictionaries I offered were responsible
for him calling MLK a racist. Why would "I" brand MLK a racist,
when this began with my tribute, and the entire following
argument rests upon him have called MLK a racist? Apparently
he sees me as the Devil, and uses the excuse that "the devil
made me do it."
Now we turn to his excuses, because I called him a racist for
opposing affirmative action for Black Americans, and for calling
MLK a racist. I also said that his views were aligned with the
views of the Aryan Nation Brotherhood. And as far as I can
determine the views of pee-eye-ell about affirmative action
and MLK are exactly the same as the views of the Aryan
Nation Brotherhood. His comments --
8) "This does not imply that everyone who considers MLK to be
a racist is a member of the Aryan Nation brotherhood, sir"
But his views are the same.
9) "Just because Aryan Nation brotherhood beleive (sic) MLK
was a racist, does not mean that anyone who believes
MLK a racist is aligned with the policies of Aryan Nation
brotherhood." But it does mean exactly that. See above.
But now it appears you're defending the Aryan Nation
Brotherhood.
10) "Please explain how claiming that MLK was a racist makes me
a racist, sir." Rather obviously admitting he called MLK a
racist. No longer concerned about that... he needs to
defend his own character, and he knows he cannot.
11) "You never succeeded an explain which legal definition of
"racist" includes "calling Martin Luther King Jr a racist" or which
definition has a clause which prevents an act being racist when
Martin Luther King Jr practices it, sir." Admitting he called
MLK a racist, but arguing that the English dictionaries do not
define exactly the words "calling MLK a racist, is a racist act."
12 ) "As for MLK, calling him a racist does not fit into any of your
dictionaries definitions of a racist remark, sir." Again admitting
it, and again using the dictionary as "permission" for him to
do so.
13) "We are still waiting for you to explain how calling Martin
Luther King Jr., a "racist," is a racist comment, sir" Again
admitting it, and using the same excuse.
14) "Please show me an official dictionary that has under the
definition of racist "one who labels Martin Luther King a racist", sir."
Again admitting it, and using the same excuse.
15) "Show me where an official dictionary defines calling MLK
a racist, as a racist act, sir" Same old story... same old admission
of having called MLK a racist.
16) "So you are quite happy with the knowledge that have proved
that MLK was a racist?" Who knows what he's lying about now...
because there simply is no such proof. But he tries to imply that
I was the one having provided this imaginary proof he's invented.
17) "You are on record as supporting affirmative action. Q.E.D.
You are a racist, sir." Okay... this one's only about me. But by
implication he calls every person who supports affirmative action,
a racist. If you support affirmative action to bring equality to
Blacks in the U.S., then he has accused YOU of being a racist.
And finally, you have posted that you KNOW of the unequal rights
that Blacks have to suffer from -- your words -- "You are referring
to the equal rights that do not exist, sir?"
You KNOW there are not equal rights between Blacks and Whites,
yet you OPPOSE any actions which might bring about such equal
rights. And then you wonder why I call you a racist.
Any reply to THIS comment by you will result in my replying to you as
deconstructing Moon Loon.
Planet Visitor II
>.....
Moon Shine
Feb 7, 2012, 5:53:42 AM2/7/12
to
"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> was caught hook, line and
sinker.
> On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 21:16:15 -0000, "Moon Shine" <not...@eatbm.moc> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>>news:k720j75lv7sbba0t8...@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:35:06 +0100, Earl Evleth <evl...@wanadoo.fr>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 6/02/12 6:29, in article 79pui7tt4b7qp9mdc...@4ax.com,
>>>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Of course Moon Loon insists that there are no Black Americans.
>>>>
>>>>And like the sucker you are you rise to the bait!
>>>
>>> So you consider his racism to be bait. Which only goes a long way
>>> toward
>>> you supporting his comments that Martin Luther King Jr., was a "racist."
>>> See --
>>> http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_is_a_racist.txt
>>
>>His obsession with me is awesome. OF course, calling Martin Luthor king a
>>racist isn't in itself a racist remark by any definition of the word.
>
> And there you go again.
My comment was addressed to Earl, sir.
>
>>
>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>>news:k720j75lv7sbba0t8...@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:35:06 +0100, Earl Evleth <evl...@wanadoo.fr>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 6/02/12 6:29, in article 79pui7tt4b7qp9mdc...@4ax.com,
>>>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Of course Moon Loon insists that there are no Black Americans.
>>>>
>>>>And like the sucker you are you rise to the bait!
>>>
>>> So you consider his racism to be bait. Which only goes a long way
>>> toward
>>> you supporting his comments that Martin Luther King Jr., was a "racist."
>>> See --
>>> http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_is_a_racist.txt
>>
>>His obsession with me is awesome. OF course, calling Martin Luthor king a
>>racist isn't in itself a racist remark by any definition of the word.
>
> And there you go again.
--
J
>
>>.....
Planet Visitor II
Feb 8, 2012, 1:28:17 AM2/8/12
to
On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 19:36:21 +0100, Earl Evleth <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>On 6/02/12 19:10, in article hd50j7hcpb8dbfilc...@4ax.com,
>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote:
>
>> Tell me, Earl... do you believe there are "Black Americans"?
>
>Whatever people want to call themselves is ok with me.
>
>I used the term "Blacks". As a member of NAACP I don't use
That isn't what I asked. I didn't ask what those "people" in question
>On 6/02/12 19:10, in article hd50j7hcpb8dbfilc...@4ax.com,
>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote:
>
>> Tell me, Earl... do you believe there are "Black Americans"?
>
>Whatever people want to call themselves is ok with me.
>
>I used the term "Blacks". As a member of NAACP I don't use
want to call themselves, but if YOU believe that there are "Black
Americans." It's quite a different question and there was no need
for your rambling personal anecdotal yet again, such as where "your
people" (as you call them to differentiate between those you apparently
consider NOT "your people"), came from. Or what your personal
desires are about revisiting where "your people" came from. You
are simply unable to grasp how 1950s you sound with your feeble
attempts to so carefully tread this vast gap you see between Blacks
and Whites, while remaining absolutely condescending toward Blacks.
But I never expect a straight answer from you, and I was not disappointed
this time in seeing your record of connecting together abstruse words
that lack the sine qua non of a sensible argument is still intact, along with
more of your moribund personal anecdotes.
>the expression "coloreds" or "colored people" which at one
>time meant Black Americans. However the organization's name
>is now archaic but that is for Blacks to deal with.
>
>The US has now a number of immigrant Africans and I sometimes
>refer to them as "African Americans" and for native more Blacks
>as Afro-Americans. People in that group tend to identify themselves
>with the Country they came from, Black Americans descended from
>the slaves often do know where they came from and even if they
>do they don't identify that closely with that country. My ancestors
>came from Devon but I have never been there and don't have a desire
>to, I don't identify with people there.
>
>Obviously problem in using the term African Americans are
>those populations not Black having live in Africa.
>
>I don't spend a lot of time thinking about this.
you DO believe there are "Black Americans." You just remember them
with names from the 50s. So why the big need for personal anecdotes,
when a simple "yes," was all that was necessary?? Considering it
only made you look worse. Seriously, Earl, I know that in your heart you
are not really that inclined in a negative direction when it comes to
Black Americans... but you just can't shake off that 50s racial mentality
when you start rambling, my good friend. You are the perfect example
of someone who needs to follow the rule of KISS.
Planet Visitor II
Planet Visitor II
Feb 8, 2012, 1:47:48 AM2/8/12
to
On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 19:26:15 -0000, "Moon Shine" <not...@eatbm.moc> "there are no black
people" wrote:
>
>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>news:k920j7t0gq2mk9js5...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 10:37:49 -0000, "Moon Shine" <not...@eatbm.moc> wrote:
>>
>> PV has the last word.
>
>No. if you decide not to aswer my post then it's definately me who had
people" wrote:
>
>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>news:k920j7t0gq2mk9js5...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 10:37:49 -0000, "Moon Shine" <not...@eatbm.moc> wrote:
>>
>> PV has the last word.
>
>the last word. Just becasue you don't read it doesn't mean it wasn't
>posted.
Remember gentle reader, before you go any further in Moon Loon's deception
that he is on record as stating quite specifically the words "there are no black
people." His words can be found at --
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/5724b7a2c5c0159c
"Just because you don't read it doesn't mean it wasn't posted." Your own
argument will give me the last word, when I wish to exercise that last
word, shit-for-brains.
I planned on using it here, but your continued racist comments just made
it easy for me to further expose you. Next time... I'll take advantage of
that _last word_.
>>
>>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>>>news:79pui7tt4b7qp9mdc...@4ax.com...
>>>> Of course Moon Loon
>>
>> Don't flatter yourself,
>
>No. I've already told you that you flatter me.
>
ROTFLMAO. More of your fascist raving, trying to TELL me what I said.
I'd rather slit my wrists than even think about flattering a Holocaust denier,
your Jew-hating lunatic. See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_has_denied_the_Holocaust.txt
You are not qualified to "tell" me anything, you fucking lunatic.
>>It's more my intention to expose your racism, than anything else.
>
>We've been through this so. you have no interest in racial politics as you
That would only show your own racism, since there is no record of you
confronting either PJ or Jigsaw. It's a silly argument, because we are
what we SHOW OURSELVES to be, rather than spending all our time
believing we can expose EVERY person for every fault in the world. My
time in AADP is limited, so I concentrate on the worst of the worst offenders...
namely at this particular point in time -- YOU!! If that bothers you, as it
certainly seems to do, that's why I do it.
My plan... my devotion... my purpose... my objective... my aim... my target...
and my ultimate end is to expose YOU for every evil you embrace as your
own. The every evil that you embrace, that threatens the very fabric of
humanity and the metaphysical property of sentience that humans feel in
respect and care for others of our species. Every evil loosed upon mankind
as Pandora's curiosity brought her to open that box... the every evil that
you embrace.
Proof??? Holy Moly, Long Ranger.... there's a ton of it!!!
All within your own words. I've only scratched the surface with what I've
listed. The evils you embrace are so extensive than I could not possibly
list all of them. But this evidence I have shown in these three URLs will
have to suffice for now --
The proof that you are a racist --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_is_a_racist.txt
The proof that you are a fascist --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_is_a_fascist.txt
The proof that you are a Holocaust denier and someone who hates the Jews --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_has_denied_the_Holocaust.txt
>>>Of course, one needs only watch American programs on television to notice
>>>that African Americans do not object to said title.
>>
>> And yet, the article I posted argues exactly that many Blacks do object to
>> said title, and an enormous number object to being called "afro-caribean,"
>> if they have never laid eye or had any relative ever lay eyes on the
>> "caribean" (sic). Black Americans are just that... it avoids all
>> implications of slavery, which is brought back by the use of "African" as if that is
>> where they belong rather than being "American." Just as "Whites" carries a
>> particular significance as to race, given that "caucasian" would argue
>> that humans indigenous to Norway, Sweden and Finland, to name just a
>> few locations, are not part of the human race.
>
>Unless the author of the document asked every afro-caribbean if they
>are indivuduals and can decide for themselves whether they find it
>offensive,.Like most people, they find being told what to find offensive
>as patronizing and offfensive.
Remember your words --> "There are NO black people." How much more offensive
could you possibly be? See your words --
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/5724b7a2c5c0159c
You're the one insisting that they CANNOT call themselves "Blacks." Do try to
keep your argument free of your constant lies. My point has always been that
"Black" is a quite appropriate term for "Black Americans." Obviously if someone
wants to call themselves "afro-caribean" (sic) I'm not opposed to them
doing so. Blacks call each other names that would be racially defamatory if
used by a White, but Blacks use those words to take away the power that
racists have in using such words. And I am certainly not opposed to Blacks
doing so, if it helps in even the slightest in taking away the power of those
words that racist Whites use to insult Blacks. When someone White uses
those same racially defamatory words toward someone who is Black there
is no question that the intention is to assert some power over that Black,
which is blatant racism.
However, an American Black who calls himself "afro-caribean" (sic) is
somewhat announcing he disowns the belief he is American. Since he's
not really a citizen of any Caribbean (notice correct spelling) nation.
Your argument is that someone who is Black and French, needs to call
himself "afro-caribean" (sic), and cannot call himself "Afro-French," if
he is a French citizen but has roots in a nation such as the Côte d'Ivoire.
You're the one opposed to ANY Black calling themselves "Black Americans,"
even though the English language clearly defines it. Many Blacks would
find someone calling them an "afro-caribean" (sic) or an "African American"
to be offensive. That was the point of the article I offered. You take issue
with them being offended. You insist Blacks should just suck it up, because
YOU'VE decided in your racist demands that they can NOT call themselves "Black
Americans," since you insist there are no such humans, and "Black" is not
related to a human being, but ONLY a color on a color chart. Remember
your words AGAIN --> "There are NO black people." How much more offensive
could you possibly be? See your words --
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/5724b7a2c5c0159c
So who is making fascist and racist demands upon those Black Americans
as to what they can consider themselves to be?
>> BTW -- My next comment if you respond (as you are pathetically obsessed
>> with doing in each and every comment I post)
>
>you spent looking to find a single article which infers that afro-caribbean
>as offensive. You would spend half the time finding ones that infer the
>term, "black" as offensive.
That's supposed to be YOUR job, shit-for-brains. But the thing is you've
probably already spent days looking for one like that, and all you can find
are links to White Power groups, proving again exactly where you belong.
And I could find 100 that insist they consider themselves to be "Black
Americans," for every White Power group claiming that "Black" is offensive.
But I digress. I wanted to use "deconstructing Moon Loon" as my response,
but your ignorance and continued expressions of your racism made it just
too enticing to not respond one last time as PV in this comment.
My use of deconstructing Moon Loon, you silly shit, only signifies that I've
grown tired of pounding each and every one of your shriveled-up arguments
into dust.
It only means I've grown tired of dealing with your manifest lies,
your Machiavellian deceit, the hebephrenic cacophony of your hatreds,
your shameful fraud and smear tactics, your nefarious racism, your
insipid hyperbole, your defamatory slanders, your blighted fears, your
fulsome hubris and amour propre belief that you the alpha and omega,
your craven scheming, your degenerate character, your frenzied
harangues in denial of the Holocaust, your painfully obvious
immorality, your sociopathic sickness, your disgraceful hedonism, your
oily hypocrisy, your smarmy use of tautology,your feckless ignorance,
your emetic demagoguery, your contemptuous sophistry, your wanton
destruction of ethics, your abstruse and picayune arguments, your
scornful xenophobia, your bilious denial of logic and the abstract,
your scatophagous affection for cockroaches, your morbid and baneful
belief that killing in self-defense is murder, your tendentious
defense of U.S. murderers who should be no concern of yours as they
represent no danger to you but do to others, your vacuous use of tu
quoque, your "puerile" harangues, your acute catachresis showing your
inability to deal with the English language and its definitions, your
mentally unbalanced belief in your "Aryan superiority," and those
Bible-thumping psychotic demonstrations of your belief that you are
either God, himself, or personally talk to your private God all the
time.
It is not because you've won anything. But that I've grown
tired of listening to your bullshit, over and over.... repeating the
very same bullshit, over and over. Of course, given your
belief in your "Aryan superiority," you will undoubtedly claim
it as "a white flag of surrender" on my part. But nothing would
be further from the truth. I do have better things to do than
show you for the shit-for-brains poster that you are, in your
Holocaust denial, and your racism. I've been putting them off
because you are so obnoxious, so paedomorphic, so lacking of
any empathy, or sympathy for other humans, and so pathetically
ignorant of life in general, that every moral fiber in my being
feels it necessary to expose your hate for humanity and your
abject ignorance. So as I grow tired of pounding your
arguments into dust you know what it means to be exposed
for what you are.. an ignorant, willful mindless fucking lunatic..
Planet Visitor II
deconstructing Moon Loon
Feb 8, 2012, 1:49:13 AM2/8/12
to
On Tue, 7 Feb 2012 10:53:42 -0000, "Moon Shine" <not...@eatbm.moc> wrote:
PV gets the last word .... AGAIN!!
Your fascist roots are showing as my comment was addressed to you, shit-for-brains. See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_is_a_fascist.txt
As this particulat comment is addressed to you --
Quote --
you are a fucking lunatic.
End quote --
Now about those facts in your own words proving that you're a racist...
deconstructing Moon Loon (the fucking lunatic)
PV gets the last word .... AGAIN!!
>> And there you go again. By calling MLK a "racist," you toe the party line
>> of White Power groups. White Power groups are by definition "racists." I'd
>> like to see you argue that White Power groups do not have a racist doctrine.
>> I'd like to argue that all members of White Power groups are not racists.
>> You are essentially in agreement with White Power doctrine. If you are in
>> agreement with the doctrine of terrorism you essentially support terrorism.
>> If you are in agreement with the doctrine of White Power you are essentially
>> in support of racism. If you are in support of racism you are a racist.
>>
>>>However, I have no memory of directly calling him a racist.
>>
>> ROTFLMAO. Poor Moon Loon now ADMITS that he is an " experienced first hand
>> racist." His words -- "it is not in your memory if you did not experience or
>> witness it first hand." And here he admits his racism "is not in his memory."
>
>My comment was addressed to Earl.
>> of White Power groups. White Power groups are by definition "racists." I'd
>> like to see you argue that White Power groups do not have a racist doctrine.
>> I'd like to argue that all members of White Power groups are not racists.
>> You are essentially in agreement with White Power doctrine. If you are in
>> agreement with the doctrine of terrorism you essentially support terrorism.
>> If you are in agreement with the doctrine of White Power you are essentially
>> in support of racism. If you are in support of racism you are a racist.
>>
>>>However, I have no memory of directly calling him a racist.
>>
>> ROTFLMAO. Poor Moon Loon now ADMITS that he is an " experienced first hand
>> racist." His words -- "it is not in your memory if you did not experience or
>> witness it first hand." And here he admits his racism "is not in his memory."
>
Your fascist roots are showing as my comment was addressed to you, shit-for-brains. See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_is_a_fascist.txt
As this particulat comment is addressed to you --
Quote --
you are a fucking lunatic.
End quote --
Now about those facts in your own words proving that you're a racist...
deconstructing Moon Loon (the fucking lunatic)
Earl Evleth
Feb 8, 2012, 3:30:25 AM2/8/12
to
On 8/02/12 7:28, in article 5n44j71g6ddvde42i...@4ax.com,
I use the term Blacks as it the mode these days which of course
applies to a number of people having different skin pigmentation
who use the term "Blacks". However what is the definition in terms
of color of Black? We used to coll native American Indians "redmen".
Were they red in color?
Even in physics "black" is hard to define experimentally. A black
body is supposed to absorb all incoming radiation at 100%.
It is also supposed to emit perfectly, a block body radiation defined
by Plank's Law. But reality is different and nothing is perfect.
To start with part of the radiation striking a success if reflected.
Basically reality is different than theory, and in terms of definition
you are searching for a perfect answer. It does not exist in your case
because you are fishing, not searching for an answer but looking for
an argument.
"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote:
> I didn't ask what those "people" in question
> want to call themselves, but if YOU believe that there are "Black
> Americans."
I answered that. To be clear there is a diversity of skin hues.
> I didn't ask what those "people" in question
> want to call themselves, but if YOU believe that there are "Black
> Americans."
I use the term Blacks as it the mode these days which of course
applies to a number of people having different skin pigmentation
who use the term "Blacks". However what is the definition in terms
of color of Black? We used to coll native American Indians "redmen".
Were they red in color?
Even in physics "black" is hard to define experimentally. A black
body is supposed to absorb all incoming radiation at 100%.
It is also supposed to emit perfectly, a block body radiation defined
by Plank's Law. But reality is different and nothing is perfect.
To start with part of the radiation striking a success if reflected.
Basically reality is different than theory, and in terms of definition
you are searching for a perfect answer. It does not exist in your case
because you are fishing, not searching for an answer but looking for
an argument.
Moon Shine
Feb 8, 2012, 6:18:11 AM2/8/12
to
news:8g54j71hdposank7u...@4ax.com...
assuming he's refferring to Earl as I suspect he's the only one whom still
reads us.
>>>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:79pui7tt4b7qp9mdc...@4ax.com...
>>>>> Of course Moon Loon
>>>>Your obsession with me is flattering.
>>>
>>> Don't flatter yourself,
>>
>>No. I've already told you that you flatter me.
>>
>
> ROTFLMAO. More of your fascist raving
How is it fascist raving, sir. I was flattered by your obsession, therefore
you flatter me. Would you prefer it written in crayon, sir?
>>>It's more my intention to expose your racism, than anything else.
>>
>>We've been through this so. you have no interest in racial politics as you
>>have shown by your absense of response to PJ and Jigsaw.
>
> That would only show your own racism,
No, sir. It shows yours.
>>>>Of course, one needs only watch American programs on television to
>>>>notice
>>>>that African Americans do not object to said title.
>>>
>>> And yet, the article I posted argues exactly that many Blacks do object
>>> to
>>> said title, and an enormous number object to being called
>>> "afro-caribean,"
>>> if they have never laid eye or had any relative ever lay eyes on the
>>> "caribean" (sic). Black Americans are just that... it avoids all
>>> implications of slavery, which is brought back by the use of "African"
>>> as if that is
>>> where they belong rather than being "American." Just as "Whites"
>>> carries a
>>> particular significance as to race, given that "caucasian" would argue
>>> that humans indigenous to Norway, Sweden and Finland, to name just a
>>> few locations, are not part of the human race.
>>
>>Unless the author of the document asked every afro-caribbean if they
>>objected to the term thhen your article is worthless. Afro caribbeans
>>are indivuduals and can decide for themselves whether they find it
>>offensive,.Like most people, they find being told what to find offensive
>>as patronizing and offfensive.
>
> Remember your words
So did this author ask "Every" afro-caribbean, sir?
>>> BTW -- My next comment if you respond (as you are pathetically obsessed
>>> with doing in each and every comment I post)
>>
>>Another lie from you. I ignore most of your comments. I wonder how long
>>you spent looking to find a single article which infers that
>>afro-caribbean
>>as offensive. You would spend half the time finding ones that infer the
>>term, "black" as offensive.
>
> That's supposed to be YOUR job,
No, sir. You wanted the proof, it is your job to find it. I'm not doing your
job for you.
--
J
> On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 19:26:15 -0000, "Moon Shine" <not...@eatbm.moc> "there
> are no black
> people" wrote:
>
>>
>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>>news:k920j7t0gq2mk9js5...@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 10:37:49 -0000, "Moon Shine" <not...@eatbm.moc>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> PV has the last word.
>>
>>No. if you decide not to aswer my post then it's definately me who had
>>the last word. Just becasue you don't read it doesn't mean it wasn't
>>posted.
>
> Remember gentle reader
When Mr PV has no argument he makes a note to the "gentle reader" I'm
> are no black
> people" wrote:
>
>>
>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>>news:k920j7t0gq2mk9js5...@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 10:37:49 -0000, "Moon Shine" <not...@eatbm.moc>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> PV has the last word.
>>
>>No. if you decide not to aswer my post then it's definately me who had
>>the last word. Just becasue you don't read it doesn't mean it wasn't
>>posted.
>
> Remember gentle reader
assuming he's refferring to Earl as I suspect he's the only one whom still
reads us.
>>>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:79pui7tt4b7qp9mdc...@4ax.com...
>>>>> Of course Moon Loon
>>>>Your obsession with me is flattering.
>>>
>>> Don't flatter yourself,
>>
>>No. I've already told you that you flatter me.
>>
>
> ROTFLMAO. More of your fascist raving
you flatter me. Would you prefer it written in crayon, sir?
>>>It's more my intention to expose your racism, than anything else.
>>
>>We've been through this so. you have no interest in racial politics as you
>>have shown by your absense of response to PJ and Jigsaw.
>
> That would only show your own racism,
>>>>Of course, one needs only watch American programs on television to
>>>>notice
>>>>that African Americans do not object to said title.
>>>
>>> And yet, the article I posted argues exactly that many Blacks do object
>>> to
>>> said title, and an enormous number object to being called
>>> "afro-caribean,"
>>> if they have never laid eye or had any relative ever lay eyes on the
>>> "caribean" (sic). Black Americans are just that... it avoids all
>>> implications of slavery, which is brought back by the use of "African"
>>> as if that is
>>> where they belong rather than being "American." Just as "Whites"
>>> carries a
>>> particular significance as to race, given that "caucasian" would argue
>>> that humans indigenous to Norway, Sweden and Finland, to name just a
>>> few locations, are not part of the human race.
>>
>>Unless the author of the document asked every afro-caribbean if they
>>objected to the term thhen your article is worthless. Afro caribbeans
>>are indivuduals and can decide for themselves whether they find it
>>offensive,.Like most people, they find being told what to find offensive
>>as patronizing and offfensive.
>
> Remember your words
>>> BTW -- My next comment if you respond (as you are pathetically obsessed
>>> with doing in each and every comment I post)
>>
>>Another lie from you. I ignore most of your comments. I wonder how long
>>you spent looking to find a single article which infers that
>>afro-caribbean
>>as offensive. You would spend half the time finding ones that infer the
>>term, "black" as offensive.
>
> That's supposed to be YOUR job,
job for you.
--
J
deconstructing Moon Loon
Feb 8, 2012, 2:45:36 PM2/8/12
to
On Wed, 8 Feb 2012 11:18:11 -0000, "Moon Shine" <not...@eatbm.moc> wrote:
PV has the last word.
>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>news:8g54j71hdposank7u...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 19:26:15 -0000, "Moon Shine" <not...@eatbm.moc> "there
>> are no black
>> people" wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>>>news:k920j7t0gq2mk9js5...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 10:37:49 -0000, "Moon Shine" <not...@eatbm.moc>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> PV has the last word.
>>>
>>>No. if you decide not to aswer my post then it's definately me who had
>>>the last word. Just becasue you don't read it doesn't mean it wasn't
>>>posted.
>>
PV has the last word.
>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>news:8g54j71hdposank7u...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 19:26:15 -0000, "Moon Shine" <not...@eatbm.moc> "there
>> are no black
>> people" wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>>>news:k920j7t0gq2mk9js5...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 10:37:49 -0000, "Moon Shine" <not...@eatbm.moc>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> PV has the last word.
>>>
>>>No. if you decide not to aswer my post then it's definately me who had
>>>the last word. Just becasue you don't read it doesn't mean it wasn't
>>>posted.
>>
>> Remember gentle reader, before you go any further in Moon Loon's deception
>>that he is on record as stating quite specifically the words "there are no black
>>people." His words can be found at --
>>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/5724b7a2c5c0159c
>>
>>"Just because you don't read it doesn't mean it wasn't posted." Your own
>>argument will give me the last word, when I wish to exercise that last
>>word, shit-for-brains.
>>
>>I planned on using it here, but your continued racist comments just made
>>it easy for me to further expose you. Next time... I'll take advantage of
>>that _last word_.
>
>>that he is on record as stating quite specifically the words "there are no black
>>people." His words can be found at --
>>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/5724b7a2c5c0159c
>>
>>"Just because you don't read it doesn't mean it wasn't posted." Your own
>>argument will give me the last word, when I wish to exercise that last
>>word, shit-for-brains.
>>
>>I planned on using it here, but your continued racist comments just made
>>it easy for me to further expose you. Next time... I'll take advantage of
>>that _last word_.
>
>When Mr PV has no argument he makes a note to the "gentle reader" I'm
>assuming he's refferring to Earl as I suspect he's the only one whom still
>reads us.
You know that "assuming" means _making an ass of yourself_. And needless
>assuming he's refferring to Earl as I suspect he's the only one whom still
>reads us.
to say, you do a very good job of it.
>>>>>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:79pui7tt4b7qp9mdc...@4ax.com...
>>>>>> Of course Moon Loon
>>>>>Your obsession with me is flattering.
>>>>
>>>> Don't flatter yourself,
>>>
>>>No. I've already told you that you flatter me.
>>>
>>
>>I'd rather slit my wrists than even think about flattering a Holocaust denier,
>>your Jew-hating lunatic. See --
>>http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_has_denied_the_Holocaust.txt
>>
>>You are not qualified to "tell" me anything, you fucking lunatic.
>
>How is it fascist raving.
>>your Jew-hating lunatic. See --
>>http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_has_denied_the_Holocaust.txt
>>
>>You are not qualified to "tell" me anything, you fucking lunatic.
>
Is there a question there? We both know how it is fascist raving. The
difference is you deny it, when it is obvious to both of us.
>I was flattered by your obsession, therefore
I suspect that's how all your comments are written, since your mommie
keeps all sharp instruments away from you. Remember the last time
you ran with the scissors.
>>>>It's more my intention to expose your racism, than anything else.
>>>
>>>We've been through this so. you have no interest in racial politics as you
>>>have shown by your absense of response to PJ and Jigsaw.
>>
>>confronting either PJ or Jigsaw. It's a silly argument, because we are
>>what we SHOW OURSELVES to be, rather than spending all our time
>>believing we can expose EVERY person for every fault in the world. My
>>time in AADP is limited, so I concentrate on the worst of the worst offenders...
>>namely at this particular point in time -- YOU!! If that bothers you, as it
>>certainly seems to do, that's why I do it.
>>
>>My plan... my devotion... my purpose... my objective... my aim... my target...
>>and my ultimate end is to expose YOU for every evil you embrace as your
>>own. The every evil that you embrace, that threatens the very fabric of
>>humanity and the metaphysical property of sentience that humans feel in
>>respect and care for others of our species. Every evil loosed upon mankind
>>as Pandora's curiosity brought her to open that box... the every evil that
>>you embrace.
>
>No. It shows yours.
>>what we SHOW OURSELVES to be, rather than spending all our time
>>believing we can expose EVERY person for every fault in the world. My
>>time in AADP is limited, so I concentrate on the worst of the worst offenders...
>>namely at this particular point in time -- YOU!! If that bothers you, as it
>>certainly seems to do, that's why I do it.
>>
>>My plan... my devotion... my purpose... my objective... my aim... my target...
>>and my ultimate end is to expose YOU for every evil you embrace as your
>>own. The every evil that you embrace, that threatens the very fabric of
>>humanity and the metaphysical property of sentience that humans feel in
>>respect and care for others of our species. Every evil loosed upon mankind
>>as Pandora's curiosity brought her to open that box... the every evil that
>>you embrace.
>
Then why have you been clipping the proof of your racism, and trying to
pin it on me without the slightest proof? Here is that proof again, shit-for-brains --
Proof??? Holy Moly, Long Ranger.... there's a ton of it!!!
All within your own words. I've only scratched the surface with what I've
listed. The evils you embrace are so extensive than I could not possibly
list all of them. But this evidence I have shown in these three URLs will
have to suffice for now --
The proof that you are a racist --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_is_a_racist.txt
The proof that you are a fascist --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_is_a_fascist.txt
The proof that you are a Holocaust denier and someone who hates the Jews --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Proof_that_Moon_Loon_has_denied_the_Holocaust.txt
>>>>>Of course, one needs only watch American programs on television to
>>>>>notice that African Americans do not object to said title.
>>>>
>>>> And yet, the article I posted argues exactly that many Blacks do object
>>>> to said title, and an enormous number object to being called "afro-caribean,"
>>>> if they have never laid eye or had any relative ever lay eyes on the
>>>> "caribean" (sic). Black Americans are just that... it avoids all
>>>> implications of slavery, which is brought back by the use of "African"
>>>> as if that is where they belong rather than being "American." Just as "Whites"
>>>> carries a particular significance as to race, given that "caucasian" would argue
>>>> that humans indigenous to Norway, Sweden and Finland, to name just a
>>>> few locations, are not part of the human race.
>>>
>>>Unless the author of the document asked every afro-caribbean if they
>>>objected to the term thhen your article is worthless. Afro caribbeans
>>>are indivuduals and can decide for themselves whether they find it
>>>offensive,.Like most people, they find being told what to find offensive
>>>as patronizing and offfensive.
>>
>>>>>notice that African Americans do not object to said title.
>>>>
>>>> And yet, the article I posted argues exactly that many Blacks do object
>>>> to said title, and an enormous number object to being called "afro-caribean,"
>>>> if they have never laid eye or had any relative ever lay eyes on the
>>>> "caribean" (sic). Black Americans are just that... it avoids all
>>>> implications of slavery, which is brought back by the use of "African"
>>>> as if that is where they belong rather than being "American." Just as "Whites"
>>>> carries a particular significance as to race, given that "caucasian" would argue
>>>> that humans indigenous to Norway, Sweden and Finland, to name just a
>>>> few locations, are not part of the human race.
>>>
>>>Unless the author of the document asked every afro-caribbean if they
>>>objected to the term thhen your article is worthless. Afro caribbeans
>>>are indivuduals and can decide for themselves whether they find it
>>>offensive,.Like most people, they find being told what to find offensive
>>>as patronizing and offfensive.
>>
>
Aside from the fact you've finally learned how to spell "Caribbean," there is no need
to ask "Every" Black, since the contrary is in evidence. You should not call someone
who is NOT "afro-Caribbean," an "afro-Caribbean." Because they are NOT
"afro-Caribbean." But there is nothing wrong with any "afro-Caribbean" or anyone
else referring to that "afro-Caribbean" as a Black. Because that "afro-Caribbean"
IS BLACK. Chee... but you are a fucking lunatic.
>>>> BTW -- My next comment if you respond (as you are pathetically obsessed
>>>> with doing in each and every comment I post)
>>>
>>>Another lie from you. I ignore most of your comments. I wonder how long
>>>you spent looking to find a single article which infers that afro-caribbean
>>>as offensive. You would spend half the time finding ones that infer the
>>>term, "black" as offensive.
>>
>> That's supposed to be YOUR job, shit-for-brains. But the thing is you've
>>probably already spent days looking for one like that, and all you can find
>>are links to White Power groups, proving again exactly where you belong.
>>And I could find 100 that insist they consider themselves to be "Black
>>Americans," for every White Power group claiming that "Black" is offensive.
>
>No. You wanted the proof, it is your job to find it. I'm not doing your
>>probably already spent days looking for one like that, and all you can find
>>are links to White Power groups, proving again exactly where you belong.
>>And I could find 100 that insist they consider themselves to be "Black
>>Americans," for every White Power group claiming that "Black" is offensive.
>
>job for you.
The proof is self-evident to anyone other than a fucking lunatic.
PROOF --
1) All "afro-Caribbeans" are Blacks
+
2) Not all Blacks are "afro-Caribbeans."
I don't expect you to get it, since after all we have already shown you are a fucking
lunatic... but clearly those who are not your fellow lunatics should grasp this
logic quite readily.
Planet Visitor II
Feb 8, 2012, 3:20:44 PM2/8/12
to
On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 09:30:25 +0100, Earl Evleth <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>On 8/02/12 7:28, in article 5n44j71g6ddvde42i...@4ax.com,
>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote:
>
>> I didn't ask what those "people" in question
>> want to call themselves, but if YOU believe that there are "Black
>> Americans."
>
>I answered that.
And I noted that you had. So what's your problem, my good friend?
>On 8/02/12 7:28, in article 5n44j71g6ddvde42i...@4ax.com,
>"Planet Visitor II" <na...@nosuchserver.com> wrote:
>
>> I didn't ask what those "people" in question
>> want to call themselves, but if YOU believe that there are "Black
>> Americans."
>
>I answered that.
Afraid that I've cut a bit too close to the bone about your feelings for
Black women, that you referred to as "a black mama riding up in her
Caddy to collect her payments making perhaps $8000 a week from
multiple collection"?
Remind me again... was that multiple collection about being a drug dealer
or ripping off the government, since you have such a low opinion of Black
women?
<clip excuses>
Planet Visitor II
0 new messages