can you forgive a friend if he or she is racist, for example?
the 2nd coming of christ
friends of either of them for a while and then it comes out they
were racist but so far they had not been too obvious and maybe
even hid it from view. Can you suddenly overlook their racism and
say continue to be their friend? Or do you now treat them
differently because they're a racist asshole, or whatever? What do
you think is more important, friendship or being true to an ideal
of being tolerant of others of different race or creed? Are blacks
your friends? Let's assume they're not, that Imus and Richards
were your true friends. So why should you be sticking up for total
strangers just because someone was biggoted or racist towards
them... Shouldn't you stick up for your racist friends instead?
--
``Could it be that ... political theater is being staged, very much like the wrestling matches on TV, with the so-called neoconservatives and their so-called enemies, such as Pat Buchanan, loudly making public statements intended to convince the opponents of US foreign policy actions that these actions are the fault of 'the Jews'?'' --Jared Israel/Emperor's Clothes
Tani Jantsang ©
"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:4627aeac...@news.sysmatrix.net...
> Take for instance Michael Richards or Imus. Say you've been
> friends of either of them for a while and then it comes out they
> were racist but so far they had not been too obvious and maybe
> even hid it from view.
These days, no one is racist for no valid reasons. As Dinesh DeSouza (He's
from India) and so many others have pointed out - most of the racism that
exists today is due to a LOT of familiarity with people that behave in such
a way, that it might be "rational discrimination" to simply avoid them.
The racism is not random or non specific. I don't even call it racism. I
call it realism, rationalism. A person might not have felt that way
forever; far from it - 99% of them didn't feel that way at all - but things
happened, real things. And those real things when they are repeated and
predictable and happen a lot - build up. People's attitudes toward things
change - and they SHOULD change because NOTHING remains in stasis.
A person that remains in stasis due to some misplaced "ideal" is as fanatic
a zealot as any fundies out there. He's lobotomized against the hard bricks
of reality out there.
Can you suddenly overlook their racism and
> say continue to be their friend?
If you were their friend to begin with, you might know WHAT changed their
attitude toward other specific races, or one specific race. After all, I
never met a person that was racist against everyone. I've met plenty of
people that YOU might call racists - but I call very rational people who
have LEARNED from the University of Hard Knocks - and they learned well.
These are people that don't let something as silly as "idealism" cloud their
view of REALITY. Reality is that hard brick that hits you and knocks you
down.
Or do you now treat them
> differently because they're a racist asshole, or whatever?
You are right there assuming that the person you call "racist" is an
asshole. Perhaps the person is not an asshole. Perhaps, instead, the
people that caused him to become racist toward them were supreme assholes.
This is the case with every single person I run into that feels a certain
way toward one group of people (that is, they do not feel that way toward
all the various other races out there; they feel that toward only one race -
due to the university of hard knocks).
What do
> you think is more important, friendship or being true to an ideal
> of being tolerant of others of different race or creed?
You can not be tolerant toward intolerance. You can not be kindly to people
that interpret your kindness as weakiness. Idealism is pipe dreams. Hmm, I
thought you were a satanist. oh well. Idealism is identical to religion -
the only difference is that there are no deities in idealism. Idealism is
not realism. Social realism!
If you even have to ask that kind of question, I suggest that you stop
trying to make friends - because you don't know what a friend is. What you
might only know is how to look for clones of yourself. Those are not
friends. Those are just yes-men. People change. Real events in real life
make them change. When they fail to change when change is absolutely
justified by any reasonable measure, they get neurotic. When they begin to
deny the reality around them - then they are psychotic.
Are blacks
> your friends? Let's assume they're not, that Imus and Richards
> were your true friends. So why should you be sticking up for total
> strangers just because someone was biggoted or racist towards
> them... Shouldn't you stick up for your racist friends instead?
That paragraph makes no sense. The issue with Imus is freedom of speech. I
want to now see every single black movie and record producer subjected to
the same crucifixion - and their movies and songs banned. If not, then I'd
like to hear talk show hosts on AM radio play snippets of black rap songs
where language like that is used. And not bleep it out. He shouldn't have
referred to successful basketball players are whores. That was wrong.
Really wrong. But they ARE nappy headed and they damned well know it
whenever they look in a mirror. If someone called me a curly red head it
would be true. What do these girls feel when they hear black rap songs
saying a hell of a lot worse about women in general? Point is, I don't
care. I don't care at all. I don't think the banning of free speech, or
punishing people for speaking freely is a good thing to happen in the USA.
And for whom is this happening. Oh yes, for what Ambrose Bierce called THE
American political problem. I don't think anyone is worth banning free
speech.
>
> --
>
> ``Could it be that ... political theater is being staged, very much like
> the wrestling matches on TV, with the so-called neoconservatives and their
> so-called enemies, such as Pat Buchanan, loudly making public statements
> intended to convince the opponents of US foreign policy actions that these
> actions are the fault of 'the Jews'?'' --Jared Israel/Emperor's Clothes
That's about the most paranoid conspiracy theory I've heard in ages.
>
>
>
the 2nd coming of christ
<tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>Hmm, I
>thought you were a satanist.
yeah, i'm even in the Satanic Reds, just like you.
> oh well. Idealism is identical to religion -
>the only difference is that there are no deities in idealism. Idealism is
>not realism. Social realism!
>
>If you even have to ask that kind of question, I suggest that you stop
>trying to make friends - because you don't know what a friend is. What you
>might only know is how to look for clones of yourself. Those are not
>friends. Those are just yes-men. People change. Real events in real life
>make them change. When they fail to change when change is absolutely
>justified by any reasonable measure, they get neurotic. When they begin to
>deny the reality around them - then they are psychotic.
>
>Are blacks
>> your friends? Let's assume they're not, that Imus and Richards
>> were your true friends. So why should you be sticking up for total
>> strangers just because someone was biggoted or racist towards
>> them... Shouldn't you stick up for your racist friends instead?
>
>That paragraph makes no sense. The issue with Imus is freedom of speech. I
>want to now see every single black movie and record producer subjected to
>the same crucifixion - and their movies and songs banned. If not, then I'd
>like to hear talk show hosts on AM radio play snippets of black rap songs
>where language like that is used. And not bleep it out. He shouldn't have
>referred to successful basketball players are whores. That was wrong.
>Really wrong. But they ARE nappy headed and they damned well know it
>whenever they look in a mirror. If someone called me a curly red head it
>would be true.
i think they were upset that it was a white calling them ho's.
like only their cute black boyfriends can call them that, not some
old white freak, get my drift? maybe if he had the normal anglo
saxon word 'whore' he might have gotten away with it, but he was
trying to be too intimate, using the common language of young
blacks and all that...like almost trying to be one of them and
they couldn't handle the intrusion. it was a violation of their
racism. I see racism on all sides, not just the Imus side.
>What do these girls feel when they hear black rap songs
>saying a hell of a lot worse about women in general?
like i said, if you're black it's considered simply cultural and
it is understood, just like calling each other nigga. but god
forbid the day a white calls a black a nigga, like Kramer.
> Point is, I don't
>care. I don't care at all. I don't think the banning of free speech, or
>punishing people for speaking freely is a good thing to happen in the USA.
you just gotta let blacks have their own cultural things that are
just theirs and not try to be a part of it or ridicule it or
whatever. just don't bring it up. you are white, you like country
music. there is no need to talk like a rapper. maybe if he had
rappers on his show or whatever, then i might see a chance...
>And for whom is this happening. Oh yes, for what Ambrose Bierce called THE
>American political problem. I don't think anyone is worth banning free
>speech.
censorship has been around forever... it's nothing new...
octinomos
Tani Jantsang ©
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 03:23:17 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>
>>Hmm, I
>>thought you were a satanist.
>
> yeah, i'm even in the Satanic Reds, just like you.
HAA! well, that goes to show that I'm certainly not too familiar with every
member. We have a LOT these days - and most of them are offline. Well
then - HI THERE Comrade! In the SR, we definitely agree to disagree
because of the politics - and the fact that people from all over the world
are in it. If you are not in the egroup (most are not, btw) then I can tell
you that some slightly unkind words passed between one Comrade in Denmark
and one in Indonesia - a Moslem SR. But that smoothed out. Anyway...
I disagree. I think it's highly insulting for ANYONE to call them whores -
that is what ho means. They are NOT whores. It's demeaning - hell, it's
slander. What's more, you do realize that "the day" was robbed from those
girls? Their glory was robbed by the entire thing, not by Imus because I'm
sure they didn't even listen to him and wouldn't have known anything about
it if someone didn't make a BIG hubbub about it. But a BIG hubbub was
made - and that robbed their day. They had a beautiful victory. You can
say that my curly red hair, especially when it's BIG, is like BOZO. That's
OK. Heh, lol, IT IS TRUE. When I had long hair, the length of it made it
pretty straight, save at the ends where it curled like I liked it. Red hair
is usually pretty THICK hair. When it's short, it's curly. So I have had
in my life people calling it Bozo if they were trying really hard to be
mean. It never bothered me - I even thought it was funny because it was
obviously true - and that oddly enough tended to make people that wanted to
be mean, start to like me, want to make friends with me. I mean as a kid.
I liked Bozo! So saying "HEY, Bozo" was good in my opinion. Flame top.
Hey red. After the old original movie "Bride of Frankenstein" came out, I
used to grab my thick curls and pull them up and say SEE, I'm Bride of
Frankenstein and everyone thought it was FUNNY - me too. I can still do
that, btw :) My hair is short again. I even thought calling kids with
glasses "hey, 4 eyes" was hilariously funny. It's not slander. It's FUNNY.
What people on here (in that other org, you know, them and their freaking
spaniels) tend to do is SLANDER - and there is nothing funny about it. They
are mealy mouthed, extremely petty shits - and they'll never change, either.
They can't change - I can see that they can not change. And for some
reason, Satanism tends to call out to way too many of that type of person.
SR doesn't call out to that type of person at all. But back to that other:
You know, as I told ONE kid that got hurt by being called "4 eyes," he can
either laugh because it IS really funny, or he can choose to be hurt. That
kid never thought of it that way. LOL. But whore is another thing.
Calling them whore was WRONG - and anyone calling them that is fucked up.
They are sports champs. Not whores.
maybe if he had the normal anglo
> saxon word 'whore' he might have gotten away with it,
He could be sued for slander, 2nd. Those girls are NOT hos. Ho is just
plain English slang for whore. Blacks are not the only people that say the
word like that. oh hell, "Ebonics" is just ENGLISH slang. When I had a PT
job doing surveys for doctors, like the BIG one on asthma, or for the DMV
and other, political polls too, very often blacks from up north in inner
cities thought I was black - they said due to my accent. They talk a LOT
like I talk now - they no longer talk like people from down south. We can't
hear each other talking - but if you know Dave from the SR, he called me up
once and left a message and I didn't understand ONE WORD he said. He's from
Wales. But when he writes - oh, it's perfectly clear. I wonder if he'd
understand me speaking over a phone. I doubt it. He sent me a tape his
friend made, I understood maybe one word from each sentence, it took me a
while to realize the OY was I. or Eye. It was like another language. I
have NO trouble understanding blacks - they talk a lot like me, the same
accent.
but he was
> trying to be too intimate, using the common language of young
> blacks and all that...like almost trying to be one of them and
> they couldn't handle the intrusion.
Nah, that's rubbish. Blacks no longer want to be seen as PEOPLE, the whole
civil rights thing. They want people to see them as BLACK - and that shit
is addressed by Allen Bloom. Gone are the days where they WANT equal
treatment and to be judged as people. Those days are gone. That is
primarily what sets so many people that are non-black against them now -
that plus their behavior. Black women shouldn't put up with the shit - and
Bill Cosby and Juan Wilson have had ENOUGH of it, Wilson wrote a book about
it. Whores and bitches. Is that what black women are? NO, they aren't.
Most of them aren't. There was even a show where the young white kid had
all black friends, and he ended up saying "I'm down with dat" just like his
friends said it. Once day, he said "yo ma nigga" and oh oh, trouble.
Advice from another person in the show: stop hanging around with black
people. That's the only solution. You can't live life watching over
yourself like Big Brother, like the Christian fundies want to watch every P
and Q lest they SIN or something. That's the definition of HELL, not of
life. If I get angry and say AH BA FANGOOL, no one Italian gets mad at me.
It's a comfortable feeling, it's enjoyable when you can hang with people and
speek 100% freely.
it was a violation of their
> racism. I see racism on all sides, not just the Imus side.
Blacks today are the most racist and race conscious people on the planet -
and EVERYONE ELSE is freaking sick of it. I'm having a great conversation
with this guy outside the video store, me and other people there. He's a
Mason. We are chatting with him for HOURS and it's people chatting, people
to people. THEN he brings up slavery out of the blue, he says "you know,
Africans had slaves and sold them first." I turned around and walked away -
and so did the other people that were chatting with him. It was like: OH,
all of a sudden we NOTICED "OH, you are black!, sorry, but I didn't notice."
Imus is a shock jock, he says stuff like that about everyone.
>
>>What do these girls feel when they hear black rap songs
>>saying a hell of a lot worse about women in general?
>
> like i said, if you're black it's considered simply cultural and
> it is understood, just like calling each other nigga.
OH no, Cosby and Wilson don't tolerate it, they have had enough of it. If
you ask me - and this is pretty deep here - it's cultural ONLY in that it's
an extension of SLAVE culture, 2nd. SLAVE culture. The style of dress is
PRISON culture, and more - it's the style of dress people in prison wear if
they are being punked by stronger prisoners! Even Dion Sanders spoke out
against it. So that's what that is, a combination of slave and prison
culture.
but god
> forbid the day a white calls a black a nigga, like Kramer.
Not just a white. Anyone non-black. 2nd, it's no longer white and non
white. Today it's black and non black - that is the reality of it. I'm
associating with people offline. Ok, I think I vaguely know that friend S
from the beach is Italian and - something else, I forgot what else. I
think, she cooks Italian food a lot. She uses Italian expressions for the
food, like "shkarol" instead of escarole. This is not important. L feeds
the damned birds when it's illegal to do that, but I forgot what her
ethnicity is. She's a snow bird :) Who cares? It's a total non-issue. I
find out that J, the motorcycle beach guy is JAPANESE. HUH! Wow, talking
to him close up and personal for so long and if I ever thought about his
ethnicity I'd have guessed him to be Irish or Polish. JAPANESE? I thought
he was joking. See, he said something in Japanese and I asked "how did you
learn to speak it" - he was surprised. He thought we all "KNEW" he was
Japanese. Uh - no. No one knew. His hair is light from the sun, btw.
Meanwhile, all that time he thought I was Hispanic. And so what! We all
spoke English to each other. Prior to that coming up due to him being able
to speak it, no one cared, no one even asked. It was a non issue. It's
still a non issue.
>
>> Point is, I don't
>>care. I don't care at all. I don't think the banning of free speech, or
>>punishing people for speaking freely is a good thing to happen in the USA.
>
> you just gotta let blacks have their own cultural things that are
> just theirs and not try to be a part of it or ridicule it or
> whatever. just don't bring it up. you are white, you like country
> music. there is no need to talk like a rapper. maybe if he had
> rappers on his show or whatever, then i might see a chance...
I'm not white, strictly speaking, and well, NOW I do like some country
music - the really old style Western Bluegrass banjo/guitar stuff. My
cousin downloaded TONS of it in midi and made mp3s out of it. Kept
INSISTING I listen to it. I did. I loved it. Phantom of the Opry, LMAO,
bluegrass hillbilly style. It's PRE-country stuff - and yeah, it's great.
Anyway.... If this is the case with blacks and the language they speak
which EVERYONE ELSE CAN HEAR, then give them their own nation and let them
segregate themselves. The fact is, 2nd, LOTS of people say "badda bing."
LOTS of people say OY, including me - I picked it up because I pick up
language from people - from Jewish friends at the beach. Mashugena and
doo-zee-pats (they both mean the same thing, one is Jewish, one is Italian).
Hey matey. I have said YO to people "YO 2nd" long before any black even
knew what that meant - I picked that up from Masons in the family (IOH,
pronounced YO, as a greeting, stands for Isis/Osiris/Horus). I still say
it - I don't think about it, I speak from my heart, 2nd. I refuse to walk
on thin ice in life. That's Orwellian. I also pick up curse words and I
have to try to STOP doing that - it really really bothers a LOT of people.
Lots of white people LISTEN to black rap - lots do. They are going to pick
that up. If blacks don't like it, they can either stop making it or they
can completely segregate themselves. LOTS, and I mean LOTS LOTS of white
people listen to black gangsta rap. Everytime I hear it blasting from cars,
I look and I see white people in the cars. Every single time. It's black
gangsta rap and anyone can by CDs of it. It's for sale to anyone, 2nd.
Lots of Hispanics and illegals I guess?, blast this cantina music - it's
exactly the same music that I listen to in clubs I go to, to dance. I love
it. I brought Hispanics to the German American Club - and they said "hey,
they are playing Hispanic music." Well, if the band SANG the songs, the
words would have been in German - that night, a guy was playing and he just
plays, no singing. Same songs! And they see all these people dancing to
it, Hispanic dances. Oh, but ask anyone at the club "no, that's a German
dance!" Same dances. I hear it and well, it's Russian music! LOL. Is
that Polka Russian, Hispanic or German? Yes: that's the answer!
The point is that NO ONE ELSE seems to give a shit if an Irish bloke says
"badda bing" or "ba fangool." No one Hispanic gives a shit if someone says
"hey, hefe." Italians don't care if blacks pick that up and say it. Blacks
clearly do not want to be part of THIS society - and they don't want anyone
non black being part of THEIR society, not even picking up their slang when
they say it where everyone can hear it, where people WILL pick it up.
Solution: segregation. Can they refuse to cell black rap CDs to anyone
that's not black? Can they? If they were segregated into their own nation,
they could. Can I go out and buy a Jihadi rap CD? No. I can't. But they
do exist. I have heard some of that. It's like gangsta rap, only it's
Islamic Jihadi.
>
>>And for whom is this happening. Oh yes, for what Ambrose Bierce called
>>THE
>>American political problem. I don't think anyone is worth banning free
>>speech.
>
> censorship has been around forever... it's nothing new...
Well, people are going to fight that. LOTS are going to fight it.
While I'm here, let me state clearly what I think you believe, what you are
getting from that Israeli website:
Ok, first of all, who and what the neocons are was very well known back in
1991 or 1992 - what they advocated is also in writing, there is no disputing
that - and that they got that with BIG OKs from people like Sharon is a
fact, it can't be disputed. It's in writing, 2nd. It got leaked to the
press back in the early 90s - and no, I don't have a copy, sorry, but the
neocons never denied any of it. So then, going from there, the "war" being
the "Wolfowitz Pearl war" and not the Bush war - they are saying that the
Christian Fascists just went along with taking down Saddam - and they must
have known what I posted right on here, that if they take Saddam down,
that's going to leave that area open and very dangerous - UNLESS more
regimes are taken down over there. So what they are saying is that the
Christian Fascists LET THEM have their way with Saddam - KNOWING what I knew
would happen - and they are saying that the Christisn Fascists did that on
purpose. And surely enough, the only people TO blame for Saddam being taken
out would be those same Jews, AND Israelis, that advocated it. The
Christian right was against it - IN WRITING.
OK - now, there is written proof of the facts I told you, Sharon, Wolfowitz,
Pearl and taking down Saddam. But the rest of it is presuming that someone
can read the minds and motives of people - people that WENT ALONG with the
neocon/Israeli plan.
Well, they can't read minds. IF the Christian Fascists really, in truth,
had a very long and far sighted plan to do this, then they are cosmically
diabolical indeed! But that's assuming anyone can "know" the inner motives
of people. The paper trail doesn't support that at all. One reason why I
doubt that these Christians are that diabolically intelligent is due to what
happened on here, on alt.satanism. I PREDICED every god damned thing that
would happen due to taking down Saddam. And the "best minds in satanism"
called me a kook, a nut, and said I was wrong. They resorted to name
calling, not debate. One of them even made a stupid poster with Saddam's
picture and my picture in it. That one is a cop now - fancy that! HA.
Another of them asked me why I liked Saddam - and all in all, everything
they had to say was still rooted in their pettiness and stupidity. Well,
HA! I was 100% right. I regard those "best minds in satanism" as just a
bunch of Christians: not too cunning, like the rest of their simpleton
breed. There is one thing I 100% agree with Jews on. Those people are
CATTLE. They are STUPID.
It is just too well known WHO pushed for open borders and "diversity" in
European countries, including England. Now, in England, the holocaust will
no longer be taught to school children because the many Moslems in England
are offended by it. So that's what I call the Big Backfire. All the while
the holocaust was being shoved down the throats of English children, I was
wondering why the slaughter of the Celts was not being taught instead, or
the Norman invasion. Why shove the holocaust down their throats? What
about Stalin's willing executions (no doubt who they were, that's also
something NOT to be disputed, 2nd).
Jews are of no special importance to me. Jews should not BE of special
importance to Christian societies, either. What Jews did to subvert these
societies can't be denied - not anymore. It's something that can't even BE
denied - and yes, they did it because of how Christians, especially
Catholics (before the Protestent reformation) treated them before and after
the Enlightenment. I can see why they did it - and it WAS diabolically
cunning and foresighted - but not ENOUGH foresighted.
Jews can well blame Christian Fascists for all of it - but the paper trail
leads right back to them, the Wolfowitz/Pearl war, the PC diversity bullshit
in European countries (NOT in Asian countries....) - and so forth. I'm not
especially a keeper of such documentation, but it's there to be seen if you
really want to see it.
By blaming Christians and calling them Fascists, do they intend to try to
guilt them into making even MORE war over there (which IS what the Wolfowitz
Pearl plan actually called for)? It calls for total American hegemony in
the middle east, 2nd. Well, is America going to do that? HOW? With a
draft? Europe has been against it from the get go. The American people are
more and more against it - or they say "just kill them all, bomb them all
and then come home." - and these politicians best listen to the people if
they know what's good for them. European countries certainly are against
it - and while the neocons can call Europe an old man - Europe is fast
becoming a very young, very virile MOSLEM man. Imo, these pushers of
diversity didn't see far enough into the future - and now it's backfiring
BIG time. The paper trail is there to prove what I said. What they are
saying is pure hypothesis, as if they can read minds. But I see exactly
what it is. It's one more attempt to GUILT the simpleton Christians into
pushing for the US hegemony that the Wolfowitz/Pearl plan called for. You
know, you can only play that guilt game so far - and then it turns around
and you get: another Hitler. This time, "Hitler" will be a Moslem.
Morning Star
> Take for instance Michael Richards or Imus. Say you've been
> friends of either of them for a while and then it comes out they
> were racist but so far they had not been too obvious and maybe
> even hid it from view. Can you suddenly overlook their racism and
> say continue to be their friend? Or do you now treat them
> differently because they're a racist asshole, or whatever?
Half y friends are racist. That's thier business, not mine, just as long as
they don't push it down my throat.
>What do
> you think is more important, friendship or being true to an ideal
> of being tolerant of others of different race or creed?
By being tolerent to other racists you have to be intolerent to racists? How
ironic is that? How come it's shitty to hate one culture but not another?
>Are blacks
> your friends?
Remember those racist friends I was telling you about? Half of them are
black. some hate indians, others hate whites. I know a couple of indians who
hate the chinese, Me, I'm Irish and I hate the fucking English. Racism is
wherever you go, so if you dodged everyone for being racist you would be
lonely.
Morning Star
"Tani Jantsang ©" <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote in message
news:FmWVh.6591$3P3....@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> I'll answer this.
>
Me too. :)
Tani Jantsang ©
"Morning Star" <luc...@mega.com> wrote in message
news:DcbWh.4804$VT3....@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "Tani Jantsang ©" <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote in message
> news:FmWVh.6591$3P3....@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>> I'll answer this.
>>
>
> Me too. :)
LOL, what did you write? I don't see a thing. LOL
Morning Star
"Tani Jantsang ©" <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote in message
>
> "Morning Star" <luc...@mega.com> wrote in message
> news:DcbWh.4804$VT3....@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>>
>> "Tani Jantsang ©" <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote in message
>> news:FmWVh.6591$3P3....@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>> I'll answer this.
>>>
>>
>> Me too. :)
>
> LOL, what did you write? I don't see a thing. LOL
:"Second coming" was giving the impression that he sees all racism as whites
versus blacks where whites are always the agressors and blacks are always
the victums. I was pointing out that racism comes in all shapes and sizes.
:D
Tani Jantsang ©
>
> "the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:4627aeac...@news.sysmatrix.net...
>> Take for instance Michael Richards or Imus. Say you've been
>> friends of either of them for a while and then it comes out they
>> were racist but so far they had not been too obvious and maybe
>> even hid it from view. Can you suddenly overlook their racism and
>> say continue to be their friend? Or do you now treat them
>> differently because they're a racist asshole, or whatever?
Imus didn't even say anything racist. He called those basketball stars
WHORES. That's slander. I can't even see HOW what he said is racist.
It's not. But it was mean to call them whores. And then the whole mess
that came from it - it ruined their day - and it was their day.
Tani Jantsang ©
>
> "Tani Jantsang ©" <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote in message
> news:J5gWh.23812$PL.2...@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>
>> "Morning Star" <luc...@mega.com> wrote in message
>> news:DcbWh.4804$VT3....@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>>>
>>> "Tani Jantsang ©" <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote in message
>>> news:FmWVh.6591$3P3....@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>>> I'll answer this.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Me too. :)
>>
>> LOL, what did you write? I don't see a thing. LOL
>
> :"Second coming" was giving the impression that he sees all racism as
> whites versus blacks where whites are always the agressors and blacks are
> always the victums. I was pointing out that racism comes in all shapes and
> sizes. :D
Well, I don't care about the past. My personal experience and the
experiences of many many people I know of many ethnic groups: they are
almost victims OR ARE victims - blacks are the aggressors. That's just the
university of hard knocks and I can't deny my experiences or eyes. That
they are racist in intention is perfectly clear because they hurl abusive
language that is clearly nothing but racist. The FBI stats back that up -
but I don't give a shit about that. I don't care about the past. I don't
care that Germans and my people fought and slaughtered each other. I don't
care about ANY of that. No German ever bothered ME. That's what I know.
the 2nd coming of christ
<tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>
>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:4628d9cd....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 03:23:17 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
>> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Hmm, I
>>>thought you were a satanist.
>>
>> yeah, i'm even in the Satanic Reds, just like you.
>
>HAA! well, that goes to show that I'm certainly not too familiar with every
>member.
Yeah, me neither…
>We have a LOT these days - and most of them are offline.
Weird. I didn't know. I thought it was just the yahoo group and
that was it.
> Well
>then - HI THERE Comrade! In the SR, we definitely agree to disagree
>because of the politics - and the fact that people from all over the world
>are in it.
I'm from Mexico originally, but am a permanent resident in the
U.S. and served in the military (USMC) and everything. Luckily it
was before Iraq, though.
> If you are not in the egroup (most are not, btw) then I can tell
>you that some slightly unkind words passed between one Comrade in Denmark
>and one in Indonesia - a Moslem SR. But that smoothed out. Anyway...
glad the situation improved, for what it's worth…
>>
>>> oh well. Idealism is identical to religion -
>>>the only difference is that there are no deities in idealism. Idealism is
>>>not realism. Social realism!
You're right. It's not based on reality, that's why it's
"ideological". It's what you are shooting for, so to speak. If you
got there it would cease to be ideological.
I still think what Imus did was more a 'mocking' of the hip-hop
culture in general by showing how stupid the language of gangsta
rappers is. What's hip about calling women a bunch of ho's.
Nothing. Imus was impersonating a rapper as it were and mimicking
him in a mocking fashion, and that's why the black chicks were
enraged. But I tend to see things in totally weird ways
differently than anyone else so I can understand if you think I'm
psycho or whatever. It wouldn't be the first time. The way I see
it, it was sort of blasphemous (eg: desecrating the lingo) of
Imus, as it were, to use the black's street language without being
real about it-without being a street person himself or even
respectful of the street. Imus is all about country and respecting
country and western, not about respecting hip-hop or the streets.
I don't think I'm wording it right, any way… all I'm saying is
people might find it difficult to publicly admit to be more upset
over a mocking of hip-hop lingo than the fact someone called a
bunch of young women ho's. The masses would probably not be smart
enough to see into the deeper layers and would just focus on the
insult as an end in itself rather than a tool in making a larger
comment about the culture as a whole, so that's where the
mainstream media might focus, also.
> You can
>say that my curly red hair, especially when it's BIG, is like BOZO. That's
>OK. Heh, lol, IT IS TRUE. When I had long hair, the length of it made it
>pretty straight, save at the ends where it curled like I liked it. Red hair
>is usually pretty THICK hair. When it's short, it's curly. So I have had
>in my life people calling it Bozo if they were trying really hard to be
>mean. It never bothered me - I even thought it was funny because it was
>obviously true - and that oddly enough tended to make people that wanted to
>be mean, start to like me, want to make friends with me. I mean as a kid.
>I liked Bozo! So saying "HEY, Bozo" was good in my opinion. Flame top.
>Hey red. After the old original movie "Bride of Frankenstein" came out, I
>used to grab my thick curls and pull them up and say SEE, I'm Bride of
>Frankenstein and everyone thought it was FUNNY - me too. I can still do
>that, btw :) My hair is short again. I even thought calling kids with
>glasses "hey, 4 eyes" was hilariously funny.
Weird.
> It's not slander. It's FUNNY.
I suppose.
>What people on here (in that other org, you know, them and their freaking
>spaniels) tend to do is SLANDER - and there is nothing funny about it. They
>are mealy mouthed, extremely petty shits - and they'll never change, either.
>They can't change - I can see that they can not change. And for some
>reason, Satanism tends to call out to way too many of that type of person.
>SR doesn't call out to that type of person at all. But back to that other:
>You know, as I told ONE kid that got hurt by being called "4 eyes," he can
>either laugh because it IS really funny, or he can choose to be hurt. That
>kid never thought of it that way. LOL. But whore is another thing.
>Calling them whore was WRONG - and anyone calling them that is fucked up.
>They are sports champs. Not whores.
Even if they 'were' whores, I don't see that it's anybody's
business. Like you said, they should lighten up and laugh about
it.
>
>but he was
>> trying to be too intimate, using the common language of young
>> blacks and all that...like almost trying to be one of them and
>> they couldn't handle the intrusion.
>
>Nah, that's rubbish. Blacks no longer want to be seen as PEOPLE, the whole
>civil rights thing. They want people to see them as BLACK - and that shit
>is addressed by Allen Bloom. Gone are the days where they WANT equal
>treatment and to be judged as people. Those days are gone. That is
>primarily what sets so many people that are non-black against them now -
>that plus their behavior. Black women shouldn't put up with the shit - and
>Bill Cosby and Juan Wilson have had ENOUGH of it, Wilson wrote a book about
>it. Whores and bitches. Is that what black women are? NO, they aren't.
that's the whole point Imus was making. If Imus had meant it as an
insult he would have called them 'whores' the regular way. He
called them ho's to make fun of hip-hop in general, like mocking
it. Like Borat might do.
>Most of them aren't. There was even a show where the young white kid had
>all black friends, and he ended up saying "I'm down with dat" just like his
>friends said it. Once day, he said "yo ma nigga" and oh oh, trouble.
Heh heh… I wanted to say that to a black friend one time but
thought about it for a little while and decided, nah I better not…
it could be taken the wrong way… but I'll be damned if they don't
say that to each other every other sentence, it's freaking
ridiculous. Just like calling women ho's, it's so common place as
to be insignificant insofar as shock value is concerned. It's only
shocking when whites try to act 'too' black. Somewhat black is
o.k. just up to a point, though... Basically you gotta draw the
line at where they start calling each other nigga and ho, that's
just for them to do, not for other races also. Don't ask me why
but cultures have stuff that they want to themselves and it is
sacred to them, no matter how stupid it may seem to us. We have to
just leave it alone and don't try to ridicule it or understand it.
>Advice from another person in the show: stop hanging around with black
>people. That's the only solution. You can't live life watching over
>yourself like Big Brother, like the Christian fundies want to watch every P
>and Q lest they SIN or something. That's the definition of HELL, not of
>life. If I get angry and say AH BA FANGOOL, no one Italian gets mad at me.
>It's a comfortable feeling, it's enjoyable when you can hang with people and
>speek 100% freely.
Yeah. I'm sure it must happen somewhere where blacks do let whites
say that because the whites there are so much like blacks
culturally or what not, but it's probably rare. Like eminem might
get away saying it to snoop, for example. There are exceptions to
every rule, obviously.
I hear ya…
>>
>>> Point is, I don't
>>>care. I don't care at all. I don't think the banning of free speech, or
>>>punishing people for speaking freely is a good thing to happen in the USA.
Censorship is nothing new.
>>
>> you just gotta let blacks have their own cultural things that are
>> just theirs and not try to be a part of it or ridicule it or
>> whatever. just don't bring it up. you are white, you like country
>> music. there is no need to talk like a rapper. maybe if he had
>> rappers on his show or whatever, then i might see a chance...
>
>I'm not white, strictly speaking, and well, NOW I do like some country
>music - the really old style Western Bluegrass banjo/guitar stuff.
I was talking about Imus. Sorry for the confusion.
Morning Star
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 03:23:17 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>
>>Hmm, I
>>thought you were a satanist.
>
> yeah, i'm even in the Satanic Reds, just like you.
I think I scored one point short.
Morning Star
"Tani Jantsang ©" <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote in message
Rock'n'roll sis. I hate the English, not because they are racist against my
kind but because they are a bunch of ignorant wankers. Mind you there are
one or two I quite like. :)
Tani Jantsang ©
>
> "the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:4628d9cd....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 03:23:17 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
>> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Hmm, I
>>>thought you were a satanist.
>>
>> yeah, i'm even in the Satanic Reds, just like you.
>
> I think I scored one point short.
LOL - which one? It kinda blows me away some of who we have in that org.
Morning Star
"Tani Jantsang ©" <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote in message
>
> "Morning Star" <luc...@mega.com> wrote in message
> news:1qIWh.2136$V7....@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net...
>>
>> "the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>> news:4628d9cd....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 03:23:17 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
>>> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hmm, I
>>>>thought you were a satanist.
>>>
>>> yeah, i'm even in the Satanic Reds, just like you.
>>
>> I think I scored one point short.
>
> LOL - which one? It kinda blows me away some of who we have in that org.
Blown if i can remember TBH but i think it was an important one.
Tani Jantsang ©
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:51:14 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>news:4628d9cd....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 03:23:17 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
>>> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hmm, I
>>>>thought you were a satanist.
>>>
>>> yeah, i'm even in the Satanic Reds, just like you.
>>
>>HAA! well, that goes to show that I'm certainly not too familiar with
>>every
>>member.
>
> Yeah, me neither…
>
>>We have a LOT these days - and most of them are offline.
>
> Weird. I didn't know. I thought it was just the yahoo group and
> that was it.
No, hardly. 90% of them are offline people - really offline. Even the ones
in the egroup, only a few people talk - and they talk about anything.
Economy convo going on right now.
>
>> Well
>>then - HI THERE Comrade! In the SR, we definitely agree to disagree
>>because of the politics - and the fact that people from all over the world
>>are in it.
>
> I'm from Mexico originally, but am a permanent resident in the
> U.S. and served in the military (USMC) and everything. Luckily it
> was before Iraq, though.
You bet you're lucky.
>
>> If you are not in the egroup (most are not, btw) then I can tell
>>you that some slightly unkind words passed between one Comrade in Denmark
>>and one in Indonesia - a Moslem SR. But that smoothed out. Anyway...
>
> glad the situation improved, for what it's worth…
Well, it was about the Danes making that cartoon. It's not like they mocked
out Osamma. They mocked out Mohammed and well, imo that was over the top.
It was a discussion, not a fight, but it was a pretty strong discussion
between a Dane and a Moslem.
I don't think so. Nappy headed is not gangster talk. Ho is. Ho means
whore. That's wrong. Those girls had their day taken from them due to all
the hubbub.
What's hip about calling women a bunch of ho's.
> Nothing. Imus was impersonating a rapper as it were and mimicking
> him in a mocking fashion, and that's why the black chicks were
> enraged.
I don't think the girls were enraged at all, they probably don't even listen
to Imus. It was Sharpton that made all the fuss over it. There are a lot
more serious things he should be making a fuss over, ya know? Like - the
economy. The bullshit war. All that?
But I tend to see things in totally weird ways
> differently than anyone else so I can understand if you think I'm
> psycho or whatever. It wouldn't be the first time. The way I see
> it, it was sort of blasphemous (eg: desecrating the lingo) of
> Imus, as it were, to use the black's street language without being
> real about it-without being a street person himself or even
> respectful of the street. Imus is all about country and respecting
> country and western, not about respecting hip-hop or the streets.
I never heard Imus's show - and know nothing about the man! LOL.
> I don't think I'm wording it right, any way… all I'm saying is
> people might find it difficult to publicly admit to be more upset
> over a mocking of hip-hop lingo than the fact someone called a
> bunch of young women ho's. The masses would probably not be smart
> enough to see into the deeper layers and would just focus on the
> insult as an end in itself rather than a tool in making a larger
> comment about the culture as a whole, so that's where the
> mainstream media might focus, also.
The problem is that everyone can listen to hip hop - and people do pick up
slang and language. If they want to NOT let anyone hear it, then they'd
have to segregate the music. They can't have it both ways. The only hip
hop I heard that I liked - (is it hip hop?) is Buttons by the Pussy Cat
Dolls. Nice song, sounds middle eastern.
I don't think that the statements Borat is actually making against Khazakh
culture are funny at all. He's NOT a Khazakh - so whatever he does
"pretending to be a Khazakh" reflects ON the Khazakhs. Khazakhs are
Moslems, btw. Khazakhs aren't hear to speak up for themselves - or if they
are, there aren't many of them here.
>
>>Most of them aren't. There was even a show where the young white kid had
>>all black friends, and he ended up saying "I'm down with dat" just like
>>his
>>friends said it. Once day, he said "yo ma nigga" and oh oh, trouble.
>
> Heh heh… I wanted to say that to a black friend one time but
> thought about it for a little while and decided, nah I better not…
But you had to censor your speach, think about it. The show was about a
kid, a pre-teen kid - and kids pick up everything. I can't remember the
name of it - it was that show about people living in a trailor that travel
the country, it was a take off from "Touched By An Angel." That show.
People speak from their heart spontaneously - and anything or anyone that
can STOP you from doing that (on your own time) is evil, simple as that -
EVIL. Free speech means nothing if people can't speak freely from their
hearts and say what's on their minds. Of course, heh, I just did that in
some other STUPID freaking conversation elsewhere - and of course, a few
extremely sensitive pc bastards not only jumped down my throat - but are now
doing the predictable thing: MAKING ACCUSATIONS. It's just so god damned
typical. If any one of them lived for about 10 years where I used to live,
experienced some hellish shit on a daily basis, since these people are
white, they'd probably have joined the damned KKK by now. But nope, they
never figure that - they are just SO above that all, they'd love to believe
that bullshit. I'd like to force such people to live where I used to live.
> it could be taken the wrong way… but I'll be damned if they don't
> say that to each other every other sentence, it's freaking
> ridiculous. Just like calling women ho's, it's so common place as
> to be insignificant insofar as shock value is concerned. It's only
> shocking when whites try to act 'too' black.
Well, I don't associate with anyone that "acts black" because in the
parlance of the blacks "acting black" means acting like an asocial monster,
a menace to society, a loser in school. Any black kid that studies hard is
picked on, bullied and accused of "acting white." Now - Cosby doesn't act
that way, neither does Clarence Thomas. Oh, but they are accused of "acting
white." Well, which white? Do they act Italian or Irish or German or what?
So just WHO is deciding what is acting black or not? Who? Obviously NOT
someone with the best interests of the blacks in mind - that's really
obvious. But then again, I don't dare, I no longer care - I want nothing to
do with any of it. Gangsta culture is LOSER culture, it's JAIL culture.
It's a "LOKA" out there, I'm not in it. I have no wish to be in it. I
don't care what they do - so long as they do not ever mess with me. If
their women tolerate being called ho - then that's their business, but I
don't hear that kind of language or GO where that kind of language is
spoken. That's just the way it is - my choice.
Somewhat black is
> o.k. just up to a point, though... Basically you gotta draw the
> line at where they start calling each other nigga and ho, that's
> just for them to do, not for other races also. Don't ask me why
> but cultures have stuff that they want to themselves and it is
> sacred to them, no matter how stupid it may seem to us. We have to
> just leave it alone and don't try to ridicule it or understand it.
I don't go where I would even hear that kind of talk - and for me, that's
really really easy! I don't know ANYONE that talks like that. The closest
I come to hearing it is on some comedy show on cable, a Spike Lee movie or
something. And that's not even something I normally watch (there has to be
NOTHING on, and I have to be home for some reason).
>
>>Advice from another person in the show: stop hanging around with black
>>people. That's the only solution. You can't live life watching over
>>yourself like Big Brother, like the Christian fundies want to watch every
>>P
>>and Q lest they SIN or something. That's the definition of HELL, not of
>>life. If I get angry and say AH BA FANGOOL, no one Italian gets mad at
>>me.
>>It's a comfortable feeling, it's enjoyable when you can hang with people
>>and
>>speek 100% freely.
>
> Yeah. I'm sure it must happen somewhere where blacks do let whites
> say that because the whites there are so much like blacks
> culturally or what not, but it's probably rare. Like eminem might
> get away saying it to snoop, for example. There are exceptions to
> every rule, obviously.
I don't listen to that music. I don't like it. I didn't even know WHO
eminem was until someone suggested I watch 8 mile - some movie. It was not
exactly my cup of tea. I like - LOST and sci fi.
>
I didn't say anything else.
Douglas
Tani Jantsang © wrote:
> "the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:462b4df9....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>
>>On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:51:14 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
>><tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>>news:4628d9cd....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 03:23:17 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
>>>><tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hmm, I
>>>>>thought you were a satanist.
>>>>
>>>>yeah, i'm even in the Satanic Reds, just like you.
>>>
>>>HAA! well, that goes to show that I'm certainly not too familiar with
>>>every
>>>member.
>>
>>Yeah, me neither…
>>
>>
>>>We have a LOT these days - and most of them are offline.
>>
>>Weird. I didn't know. I thought it was just the yahoo group and
>>that was it.
>
>
> No, hardly. 90% of them are offline people - really offline.
So the majority have not made it into the technological age...
or is it that they just can't figure out a computer or the
internet? Doesn't sound like the sharpest group of people
if they still rely on mostly ancient technology to communicate.
-Douglas
seon ferguson
"Douglas" <missm...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:46304E6...@cox.net...
educated Liberals.
Tani Jantsang ©
"seon ferguson" <se...@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:46305f0e$0$17253$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
they are online, oh, then SR must be just an online org. Fact is, most of
them are offline - so then oh, they must be non technological.
Tired stupid silly little tactics.
seon ferguson
"Tani Jantsang Š" <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote in message
news:PE2Yh.8747$3P3....@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "seon ferguson" <se...@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
> news:46305f0e$0$17253$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>
>> "Douglas" <missm...@cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:46304E6...@cox.net...
>>>
>>>
>>> Tani Jantsang Š wrote:
>>>> "the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:462b4df9....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>>>
>>>>><tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:4628d9cd....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>><tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Hmm, I
>>>>>>>>thought you were a satanist.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>yeah, i'm even in the Satanic Reds, just like you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>HAA! well, that goes to show that I'm certainly not too familiar with
>>>>>>every
>>>>>>member.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>We have a LOT these days - and most of them are offline.
>>>>>
>>>>>Weird. I didn't know. I thought it was just the yahoo group and
>>>>>that was it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, hardly. 90% of them are offline people - really offline.
>>>
>>> So the majority have not made it into the technological age...
>>> or is it that they just can't figure out a computer or the
>>> internet? Doesn't sound like the sharpest group of people
>>> if they still rely on mostly ancient technology to communicate.
>>>
>> Maybe there just dumb red necks, which is why most people online are
>> college educated Liberals.
> They have lives. But you can see how this anti SR bullshit plays out. If
> they are online, oh, then SR must be just an online org. Fact is, most of
> them are offline - so then oh, they must be non technological.
>
> Tired stupid silly little tactics.
>
Sorry that was mean but come on there has to be something wrong with you if
you still support Lord Bush after the stuff that has gone on.
whyzard
> "Douglas" <missmyyo...@cox.net> wrote in message
>
> news:46304E6...@cox.net...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Tani Jantsang © wrote:
> >>news:462b4df9....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>
> >>>On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:51:14 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
> >>><tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>news:4628d9cd....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>
> >>>>>On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 03:23:17 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
> >>>>><tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>Hmm, I
> >>>>>>thought you were a satanist.
>
> >>>>>yeah, i'm even in the Satanic Reds, just like you.
>
> >>>>HAA! well, that goes to show that I'm certainly not too familiar with
> >>>>every
> >>>>member.
>
>
> >>>>We have a LOT these days - and most of them are offline.
>
> >>>Weird. I didn't know. I thought it was just the yahoo group and
> >>>that was it.
>
> >> No, hardly. 90% of them are offline people - really offline.
>
> > So the majority have not made it into the technological age...
> > or is it that they just can't figure out a computer or the
> > internet? Doesn't sound like the sharpest group of people
> > if they still rely on mostly ancient technology to communicate.
>
> Maybe there just dumb red necks, which is why most people online are college
>
> - Show quoted text -
the conservatives are on their way out of office
the liberals are gonna be taking the reigns of the sled of government
now
the jokes are gonna be shifting to the left
get with the times or you're gonna sound like an old kook
try my new word
mediacrats
and their world mediacracy
the tv has done more to poison the world than any religion or creed
ever has
i just discovered that extremist conservatives are not christian
fundamentalists
all my jokes in the past are using the wrong words
they will make no sense to anyone beyond the traditional bi centennial
semantic shifting of word values
wasted all my leaving jokes with the wrong word symbols
i'm gonna get those mediacrats for all my wasted time
whyzard
> "seon ferguson" <s...@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
>
> news:46305f0e$0$17253$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Douglas" <missmyyo...@cox.net> wrote in message
> >news:46304E6...@cox.net...
>
> >> Tani Jantsang © wrote:
> >>>news:462b4df9....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>
> >>>>On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:51:14 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
> >>>><tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>news:4628d9cd....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>
> >>>>>>On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 03:23:17 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
> >>>>>><tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>Hmm, I
> >>>>>>>thought you were a satanist.
>
> >>>>>>yeah, i'm even in the Satanic Reds, just like you.
>
> >>>>>HAA! well, that goes to show that I'm certainly not too familiar with
> >>>>>every
> >>>>>member.
>
>
> >>>>>We have a LOT these days - and most of them are offline.
>
> >>>>Weird. I didn't know. I thought it was just the yahoo group and
> >>>>that was it.
>
> >>> No, hardly. 90% of them are offline people - really offline.
>
> >> So the majority have not made it into the technological age...
> >> or is it that they just can't figure out a computer or the
> >> internet? Doesn't sound like the sharpest group of people
> >> if they still rely on mostly ancient technology to communicate.
>
> > Maybe there just dumb red necks, which is why most people online are
> > college educated Liberals.
>
> They have lives. But you can see how this anti SR bullshit plays out. If
> they are online, oh, then SR must be just an online org. Fact is, most of
> them are offline - so then oh, they must be non technological.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
i used to wonder too why conservatives are never on the internet
just realized its cause they have jobs that conserve their lives
i'm quitting the occult and all that mystic love mumbo jumbo and using
my powers of mind to get a real job now
do something useful like electronics or chemistry or something
i'm sick of living like a bum
do something useful for society
like make better analogs of crystal meth or better electronic bong
vaporizers
maybe go back into computer programming
or start up my old physics studies
working at macdonalds for 20 years is getting old
see you guys at work tomorrow
Tani Jantsang ©
I'm totally against the Iraqi war - and was against the whole thing when his
daddy did it the first time around, that stupid fuck.
seon ferguson
"Tani Jantsang ©" <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote in message
news:8zfYh.1258$296...@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "seon ferguson" <se...@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
> news:46313d64$0$17221$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>
>>>
>>> "seon ferguson" <se...@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
>>> news:46305f0e$0$17253$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>>>
>>>> "Douglas" <missm...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:46304E6...@cox.net...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tani Jantsang © wrote:
>>>>>> "the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in
>>>>>> message news:462b4df9....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>><tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>message
>>>>>>>>news:4628d9cd....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>>>>>>>
seon ferguson
"whyzard" <why...@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1177633679....@c18g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
Yep the democrats are going to win soon, it’s a pity it will still be a 2
party system. They have a chance to make America a better place like it once
was.
Tani Jantsang ©
>
> "Tani Jantsang Š" <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote in message
>>
>> "seon ferguson" <se...@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
>> news:46313d64$0$17221$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "seon ferguson" <se...@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
>>>> news:46305f0e$0$17253$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Douglas" <missm...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:46304E6...@cox.net...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tani Jantsang Š wrote:
>>>>>>> "the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in
>>>>>>> message news:462b4df9....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>><tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>message
>>>>>>>>>news:4628d9cd....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>>>>>>>>
what I think tends to change as things in society change....). I got
trashed by most satanists on here after 9/11 because I was ranting against
the stupid bastard in the white house, especially when he invented bullshit
for another war against Saddam. I called his daddy a war criminal for what
he did the first time. No use. All the "free thinkers" ganged up with the
stupid fuck satanists and flamed the shit out of me, tried to bully me to
change my mind, even tried to reason with me or find out WHY I'd be on
Saddam's side. Like, what the FUCK was that? That was the kooks. And they
call me a kook? HA! And all the rancor - not aimed at the war or political
sides, but aimed at me personally, as if I had the power to start or stop a
war. Stupid fucking shits. I'm not a liberal - at least about some stuff.
And I'm very liberal on other stuff. It all depends. I HATE the neocons.
I hate political correctness - it's tyranny. It's also a pack of lies, like
Orwellian newsspeak.
the 2nd coming of christ
<tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>
>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:462b4df9....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:51:14 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
>> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>>news:4628d9cd....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>>> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 03:23:17 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
>>>> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Hmm, I
>>>>>thought you were a satanist.
>>>>
>>>> yeah, i'm even in the Satanic Reds, just like you.
>>>
>>>HAA! well, that goes to show that I'm certainly not too familiar with
>>>every
>>>member.
>>
>> Yeah, me neither…
>>
>>>We have a LOT these days - and most of them are offline.
>>
>> Weird. I didn't know. I thought it was just the yahoo group and
>> that was it.
>
>No, hardly. 90% of them are offline people - really offline. Even the ones
>in the egroup, only a few people talk - and they talk about anything.
>Economy convo going on right now.
cool. i mean, i don't really know what it means to be a member,
other than i can participate in the egroup...
>Well, it was about the Danes making that cartoon. It's not like they mocked
>out Osamma. They mocked out Mohammed and well, imo that was over the top.
>It was a discussion, not a fight, but it was a pretty strong discussion
>between a Dane and a Moslem.
so it should still be posted in the egroup?
>> I still think what Imus did was more a 'mocking' of the hip-hop
>> culture in general by showing how stupid the language of gangsta
>> rappers is.
>
>I don't think so. Nappy headed is not gangster talk. Ho is. Ho means
>whore. That's wrong. Those girls had their day taken from them due to all
>the hubbub.
yeah, but to be fair, maybe some of them 'were' ho's. but people
still shouldn't call someone that, even if it's true. it's just
none of anyone's business...(except of the wives of the customers,
i suppose)...
>
>What's hip about calling women a bunch of ho's.
>> Nothing. Imus was impersonating a rapper as it were and mimicking
>> him in a mocking fashion, and that's why the black chicks were
>> enraged.
>
>I don't think the girls were enraged at all, they probably don't even listen
>to Imus. It was Sharpton that made all the fuss over it. There are a lot
>more serious things he should be making a fuss over, ya know? Like - the
>economy. The bullshit war. All that?
he should stick to preaching and keep that shit out of
politics...and out of public schools.
>
>But I tend to see things in totally weird ways
>> differently than anyone else so I can understand if you think I'm
>> psycho or whatever. It wouldn't be the first time. The way I see
>> it, it was sort of blasphemous (eg: desecrating the lingo) of
>> Imus, as it were, to use the black's street language without being
>> real about it-without being a street person himself or even
>> respectful of the street. Imus is all about country and respecting
>> country and western, not about respecting hip-hop or the streets.
>
>I never heard Imus's show - and know nothing about the man! LOL.
He makes a big deal about how he was a huge cokehead (like back in
the 80s or whatever) but of course has cleaned up his act and has
a ranch where kids that are sick go like in groups to look at
horses, or whatever they do. The irony is that Gonzales is still
there and Imus is gone, but they were making fun of Gonzales being
fired on the Imus show, like it was a fact. They had like a skit.
>I don't think that the statements Borat is actually making against Khazakh
>culture are funny at all. He's NOT a Khazakh - so whatever he does
>"pretending to be a Khazakh" reflects ON the Khazakhs.
I don't know... I thought it was somewhat funny...
>Khazakhs are
>Moslems, btw. Khazakhs aren't hear to speak up for themselves - or if they
>are, there aren't many of them here.
>>
>>>Most of them aren't. There was even a show where the young white kid had
>>>all black friends, and he ended up saying "I'm down with dat" just like
>>>his
>>>friends said it. Once day, he said "yo ma nigga" and oh oh, trouble.
>>
>> Heh heh… I wanted to say that to a black friend one time but
>> thought about it for a little while and decided, nah I better not…
>
>But you had to censor your speach, think about it. The show was about a
>kid, a pre-teen kid - and kids pick up everything. I can't remember the
>name of it - it was that show about people living in a trailor that travel
>the country, it was a take off from "Touched By An Angel." That show.
>People speak from their heart spontaneously - and anything or anyone that
>can STOP you from doing that (on your own time) is evil, simple as that -
>EVIL. Free speech means nothing if people can't speak freely from their
>hearts and say what's on their minds.
Didn't you say it was insensitive to publish the danish cartoons
of muhammed? or did i misunderstand (exact quote: ``They mocked
out Mohammed and well, imo that was over the top. ''), because
then you seem to be contradicting yourself. EG: Saying
self-censorship is bad while at the same time the Danish should
have censored themselves...
Tani Jantsang ©
> On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 02:21:59 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>news:462b4df9....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:51:14 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
>>> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>>
>>No, hardly. 90% of them are offline people - really offline. Even the
>>ones
>>in the egroup, only a few people talk - and they talk about anything.
>>Economy convo going on right now.
>
> cool. i mean, i don't really know what it means to be a member,
> other than i can participate in the egroup...
Hmm, well, that's not good. The egroup hardly ever talks about anything
even related to SR these days. What it means to be a member is spelled out
in the "Are you a Satanic Red" and what you can do - it's in the faq and so
forth. It's pretty clear.
>
>
>>Well, it was about the Danes making that cartoon. It's not like they
>>mocked
>>out Osamma. They mocked out Mohammed and well, imo that was over the top.
>>It was a discussion, not a fight, but it was a pretty strong discussion
>>between a Dane and a Moslem.
>
> so it should still be posted in the egroup?
Well, as I said - people chat about everything and anything - sometimes
there is nothing in there except computer info talk, LOL. It's just an
egroup - nothing more.
>
>
> Didn't you say it was insensitive to publish the danish cartoons
> of muhammed? or did i misunderstand (exact quote: ``They mocked
> out Mohammed and well, imo that was over the top. ''), because
> then you seem to be contradicting yourself. EG: Saying
> self-censorship is bad while at the same time the Danish should
> have censored themselves...
Well, the problem is that it was insensitive, tho I wasn't aiming at
insensitive. In fact, it amounted to a declaration of "let's fight, make
war." Forget insensitive. Heh. How could they not have known this? Some
feminists or something put up Virgin Mary in a bathing suit. They were
surprised to be almost attacked by Latino Catholics? They should have
expected it. The Danish should have made the cartoons, and aimed the
mockery at the proper target, Osamma - not Mohammed. It's like if you
attack Christian fundies. Not all christians are like that, but if you go
attacking JESUS? Hey, what the fuck is that? It's crazy. It's asking for
trouble, big trouble. The target that fit the cartoon was Osamma, not
Mohammed.
the 2nd coming of christ
<tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>> Didn't you say it was insensitive to publish the danish cartoons
>> of muhammed? or did i misunderstand (exact quote: ``They mocked
>> out Mohammed and well, imo that was over the top. ''), because
>> then you seem to be contradicting yourself. EG: Saying
>> self-censorship is bad while at the same time the Danish should
>> have censored themselves...
>
>Well, the problem is that it was insensitive, tho I wasn't aiming at
>insensitive. In fact, it amounted to a declaration of "let's fight, make
>war." Forget insensitive. Heh. How could they not have known this? Some
>feminists or something put up Virgin Mary in a bathing suit. They were
>surprised to be almost attacked by Latino Catholics?
so i should likewise be sensitive to my black friend and not say
'yo ma nigga' to him... are we on the same page?
the 2nd coming of christ
<luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>>> I think I scored one point short.
>>
>> LOL - which one? It kinda blows me away some of who we have in that org.
>
>Blown if i can remember TBH but i think it was an important one.
are you saying that there was one item that you didn't agree with
when they said 'you have to agree with all these' or however they
word it?
the 2nd coming of christ
<luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>
>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:4627aeac...@news.sysmatrix.net...
>> Take for instance Michael Richards or Imus. Say you've been
>> friends of either of them for a while and then it comes out they
>> were racist but so far they had not been too obvious and maybe
>> even hid it from view. Can you suddenly overlook their racism and
>> say continue to be their friend? Or do you now treat them
>> differently because they're a racist asshole, or whatever?
>
>Half y friends are racist. That's thier business, not mine, just as long as
>they don't push it down my throat.
it still must rub off on you to some extent. it's in every action
they perform since it's at their core level, affecting most every
thing else.
>
>>What do
>> you think is more important, friendship or being true to an ideal
>> of being tolerant of others of different race or creed?
>
>By being tolerent to other racists you have to be intolerent to racists? How
>ironic is that? How come it's shitty to hate one culture but not another?
i'll assume you meant 'by being tolerant to other _races_' so what
you said makes sense. the answer is: yes, to be tolerant would
exclude those who are intolerant, so it's a matter of choosing one
over the other, diversity or uniformity.
>
>>Are blacks
>> your friends?
>
>Remember those racist friends I was telling you about? Half of them are
>black. some hate indians, others hate whites. I know a couple of indians who
>hate the chinese, Me, I'm Irish and I hate the fucking English. Racism is
>wherever you go, so if you dodged everyone for being racist you would be
>lonely.
maybe loneliness would be preferred to friendship with those
types...
the 2nd coming of christ
<luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>
>"Tani Jantsang Š" <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote in message
>news:J5gWh.23812$PL.2...@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>
>> "Morning Star" <luc...@mega.com> wrote in message
>> news:DcbWh.4804$VT3....@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>>>
>>> "Tani Jantsang Š" <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote in message
>>> news:FmWVh.6591$3P3....@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>>> I'll answer this.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Me too. :)
>>
>> LOL, what did you write? I don't see a thing. LOL
>
>:"Second coming" was giving the impression that he sees all racism as whites
>versus blacks where whites are always the agressors and blacks are always
>the victums. I was pointing out that racism comes in all shapes and sizes.
>:D
i'm already aware of that. you are correct that we are here
addressing the fact of being racist, regardless of who is doing
it. i don't know where the idea to use white vs black as the
example came from but it's only one application of many. oh yeah,
because that's what happened to be readily available as far as
recent media stories, eg: kramer and imus. and they were both
about white vs black. if the story had been about some other type
of racism , i would have talked about that too... i don't prduce
the news... capice?
Morning Star
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 13:31:19 GMT, "Morning Star"
> <luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>
>>>> I think I scored one point short.
>>>
>>> LOL - which one? It kinda blows me away some of who we have in that
>>> org.
>>
>>Blown if i can remember TBH but i think it was an important one.
>
> are you saying that there was one item that you didn't agree with
> when they said 'you have to agree with all these' or however they
> word it?
TBH. I don't know what the "pass" mark is but I fell short of 100%
Morning Star
>>news:J5gWh.23812$PL.2...@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>>
>>> "Morning Star" <luc...@mega.com> wrote in message
>>> news:DcbWh.4804$VT3....@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>>>>
>>>> news:FmWVh.6591$3P3....@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>>>> I'll answer this.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Me too. :)
>>>
>>> LOL, what did you write? I don't see a thing. LOL
>>
>>:"Second coming" was giving the impression that he sees all racism as
>>whites
>>versus blacks where whites are always the agressors and blacks are always
>>the victums. I was pointing out that racism comes in all shapes and sizes.
>>:D
>
> i'm already aware of that. you are correct that we are here
> addressing the fact of being racist, regardless of who is doing
> it. i don't know where the idea to use white vs black as the
> example came from but it's only one application of many. oh yeah,
> because that's what happened to be readily available as far as
> recent media stories, eg: kramer and imus. and they were both
> about white vs black. if the story had been about some other type
> of racism , i would have talked about that too... i don't prduce
> the news... capice?
LOL. "Capice"? I don't speak Latin. Shame really, it's a beautiful language.
Your wording gave the impression that you saw it as whites versus blacks.
Morning Star
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 22:32:42 GMT, "Morning Star"
> <luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>news:4627aeac...@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>> Take for instance Michael Richards or Imus. Say you've been
>>> friends of either of them for a while and then it comes out they
>>> were racist but so far they had not been too obvious and maybe
>>> even hid it from view. Can you suddenly overlook their racism and
>>> say continue to be their friend? Or do you now treat them
>>> differently because they're a racist asshole, or whatever?
>>
>>Half y friends are racist. That's thier business, not mine, just as long
>>as
>>they don't push it down my throat.
>
> it still must rub off on you to some extent.
Why must it?
>it's in every action
> they perform since it's at their core level, affecting most every
> thing else.
It's not actions, it's words. They just roll of my back and I don't take any
notice.
>
>>
>>>What do
>>> you think is more important, friendship or being true to an ideal
>>> of being tolerant of others of different race or creed?
>>
>>By being tolerent to other racists you have to be intolerent to racists?
>>How
>>ironic is that? How come it's shitty to hate one culture but not another?
>
> i'll assume you meant 'by being tolerant to other _races_' so what
> you said makes sense. the answer is: yes, to be tolerant would
> exclude those who are intolerant, so it's a matter of choosing one
> over the other, diversity or uniformity.
>
I choose not to choose but in a real life situation? Who knows?
>>
>>>Are blacks
>>> your friends?
>>
>>Remember those racist friends I was telling you about? Half of them are
>>black. some hate indians, others hate whites. I know a couple of indians
>>who
>>hate the chinese, Me, I'm Irish and I hate the fucking English. Racism is
>>wherever you go, so if you dodged everyone for being racist you would be
>>lonely.
>
> maybe loneliness would be preferred to friendship with those
> types...
"Those types". they are people too.
the 2nd coming of christ
<luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>
>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:4637475a...@news.sysmatrix.net...
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 13:31:19 GMT, "Morning Star"
>> <luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> I think I scored one point short.
>>>>
>>>> LOL - which one? It kinda blows me away some of who we have in that
>>>> org.
>>>
>>>Blown if i can remember TBH but i think it was an important one.
>>
>> are you saying that there was one item that you didn't agree with
>> when they said 'you have to agree with all these' or however they
>> word it?
>
>TBH. I don't know what the "pass" mark is but I fell short of 100%
well, i don't recall going through any testing, just being asked,
'do you agree with all these' and i looked at the list, and i
agreed with all of it, so i joined... maybe they do it differently
with different people...or maybe i was high and made the whole
thing up, who knows... ;>
the 2nd coming of christ
<luc...@mega.com> wrote:
not really, i see the main battle as individualism vs
collectivism. collectivism is traditionalism, patriarchy, war and
commerce, rule of law, etc... individualist is anarchy,
free-thought, liberalism, feminism, communism, peace, etc...
you may be saying 'but i thought communism was collectivist'. and
you would be right to some extent, but insofar as it's considered
a fringe element of our society, t would still considered it to be
an example of independent thinking. eg: arriving at unpopular
ideas through analysis of information rather than merely obtaining
it via propagandist means such as mass commercial media that
always paint a rosy picture.
it's almost like white vs black brothers... the group operating as
a unit being white and the independent thinker who represents
diversity seen as a black spot on an otherwise perfect sun of
collectivist/fascist light.
to me America has always represented the rebellious rather than
the lawful spirit. but you may arrive at your own conclusions.
octinomos
Morning Star
> On Wed, 02 May 2007 14:21:10 GMT, "Morning Star"
> <luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>news:4637475a...@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 13:31:19 GMT, "Morning Star"
>>> <luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> I think I scored one point short.
>>>>>
>>>>> LOL - which one? It kinda blows me away some of who we have in that
>>>>> org.
>>>>
>>>>Blown if i can remember TBH but i think it was an important one.
>>>
>>> are you saying that there was one item that you didn't agree with
>>> when they said 'you have to agree with all these' or however they
>>> word it?
>>
>>TBH. I don't know what the "pass" mark is but I fell short of 100%
>
> well, i don't recall going through any testing, just being asked,
> 'do you agree with all these' and i looked at the list, and i
> agreed with all of it, so i joined... maybe they do it differently
> with different people...or maybe i was high and made the whole
> thing up, who knows... ;>
If you did then it was a group hallucination. :)
the 2nd coming of christ
<luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>
>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:463748ad...@news.sysmatrix.net...
>> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 22:32:42 GMT, "Morning Star"
>> <luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>>news:4627aeac...@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>>> Take for instance Michael Richards or Imus. Say you've been
>>>> friends of either of them for a while and then it comes out they
>>>> were racist but so far they had not been too obvious and maybe
>>>> even hid it from view. Can you suddenly overlook their racism and
>>>> say continue to be their friend? Or do you now treat them
>>>> differently because they're a racist asshole, or whatever?
>>>
>>>Half y friends are racist. That's thier business, not mine, just as long
>>>as
>>>they don't push it down my throat.
>>
>> it still must rub off on you to some extent.
>
>Why must it?
a natural byproduct of social interaction.
>
>>it's in every action
>> they perform since it's at their core level, affecting most every
>> thing else.
>
>It's not actions, it's words. They just roll of my back and I don't take any
>notice.
it must also be in their actions, but it's more subtle and harder
to detect.
>>
>>>
>>>>What do
>>>> you think is more important, friendship or being true to an ideal
>>>> of being tolerant of others of different race or creed?
>>>
>>>By being tolerent to other racists you have to be intolerent to racists?
>>>How
>>>ironic is that? How come it's shitty to hate one culture but not another?
>>
>> i'll assume you meant 'by being tolerant to other _races_' so what
>> you said makes sense. the answer is: yes, to be tolerant would
>> exclude those who are intolerant, so it's a matter of choosing one
>> over the other, diversity or uniformity.
>>
>
>I choose not to choose but in a real life situation? Who knows?
i mean, i'll be polite if i happen to cross paths or whatever with
anybody unless they start shit with me personally, but i won't be
trying to go out of my way to be with this person, if i know
they're just a racist asshole, know what i mean? i want to get
along with all races or even religious creeds, really. i don't
favor christianity over islam or judaism over christianity or any
of that. they're all mumbo jumbo to me, but have their place.
>
>>>
>>>>Are blacks
>>>> your friends?
>>>
>>>Remember those racist friends I was telling you about? Half of them are
>>>black. some hate indians, others hate whites. I know a couple of indians
>>>who
>>>hate the chinese, Me, I'm Irish and I hate the fucking English. Racism is
>>>wherever you go, so if you dodged everyone for being racist you would be
>>>lonely.
>>
>> maybe loneliness would be preferred to friendship with those
>> types...
>
>"Those types". they are people too.
who knows, they could just be the walking dead...
Morning Star
You like labels. :)
.
>
> you may be saying 'but i thought communism was collectivist'.
No. I would say that collectivism encompasses more than just communism.
>and
> you would be right to some extent, but insofar as it's considered
> a fringe element of our society, t would still considered it to be
> an example of independent thinking. eg: arriving at unpopular
> ideas through analysis of information rather than merely obtaining
> it via propagandist means such as mass commercial media that
> always paint a rosy picture.
Not when it's propoganda against the other side.
>
> it's almost like white vs black brothers... the group operating as
> a unit being white and the independent thinker who represents
> diversity seen as a black spot on an otherwise perfect sun of
> collectivist/fascist light.
>
Facism is far from perfect. It has its faults but no'one is allowed to
complain about them. ;)
> to me America has always represented the rebellious rather than
> the lawful spirit. but you may arrive at your own conclusions.
America represents the arrogant child that thinks it's the head of the
household.
Morning Star
> On Wed, 02 May 2007 14:27:25 GMT, "Morning Star"
> <luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>news:463748ad...@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 22:32:42 GMT, "Morning Star"
>>> <luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:4627aeac...@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>>>> Take for instance Michael Richards or Imus. Say you've been
>>>>> friends of either of them for a while and then it comes out they
>>>>> were racist but so far they had not been too obvious and maybe
>>>>> even hid it from view. Can you suddenly overlook their racism and
>>>>> say continue to be their friend? Or do you now treat them
>>>>> differently because they're a racist asshole, or whatever?
>>>>
>>>>Half y friends are racist. That's thier business, not mine, just as long
>>>>as
>>>>they don't push it down my throat.
>>>
>>> it still must rub off on you to some extent.
>>
>>Why must it?
>
> a natural byproduct of social interaction.
>
Not always.
>>
>>>it's in every action
>>> they perform since it's at their core level, affecting most every
>>> thing else.
>>
>>It's not actions, it's words. They just roll of my back and I don't take
>>any
>>notice.
>
> it must also be in their actions, but it's more subtle and harder
> to detect.
>
Unless you count thier words as actions then not really.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>What do
>>>>> you think is more important, friendship or being true to an ideal
>>>>> of being tolerant of others of different race or creed?
>>>>
>>>>By being tolerent to other racists you have to be intolerent to racists?
>>>>How
>>>>ironic is that? How come it's shitty to hate one culture but not
>>>>another?
>>>
>>> i'll assume you meant 'by being tolerant to other _races_' so what
>>> you said makes sense. the answer is: yes, to be tolerant would
>>> exclude those who are intolerant, so it's a matter of choosing one
>>> over the other, diversity or uniformity.
>>>
>>
>>I choose not to choose but in a real life situation? Who knows?
>
> i mean, i'll be polite if i happen to cross paths or whatever with
> anybody unless they start shit with me personally, but i won't be
> trying to go out of my way to be with this person, if i know
> they're just a racist asshole, know what i mean? i want to get
> along with all races or even religious creeds, really. i don't
> favor christianity over islam or judaism over christianity or any
> of that. they're all mumbo jumbo to me, but have their place.
You would know. You're the one nailed up to a tree for saying how great it
would be to be nice to people for a change. BTW did those nail holes ever
heal up?
>
>>
>>>>
>>>>>Are blacks
>>>>> your friends?
>>>>
>>>>Remember those racist friends I was telling you about? Half of them are
>>>>black. some hate indians, others hate whites. I know a couple of indians
>>>>who
>>>>hate the chinese, Me, I'm Irish and I hate the fucking English. Racism
>>>>is
>>>>wherever you go, so if you dodged everyone for being racist you would be
>>>>lonely.
>>>
>>> maybe loneliness would be preferred to friendship with those
>>> types...
>>
>>"Those types". they are people too.
>
> who knows, they could just be the walking dead...
No. that's me.
the 2nd coming of christ
<luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>
>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:4638e89e....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>> On Wed, 02 May 2007 14:27:25 GMT, "Morning Star"
>> <luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>>news:463748ad...@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>>> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 22:32:42 GMT, "Morning Star"
>>>> <luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:4627aeac...@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>>>>> Take for instance Michael Richards or Imus. Say you've been
>>>>>> friends of either of them for a while and then it comes out they
>>>>>> were racist but so far they had not been too obvious and maybe
>>>>>> even hid it from view. Can you suddenly overlook their racism and
>>>>>> say continue to be their friend? Or do you now treat them
>>>>>> differently because they're a racist asshole, or whatever?
>>>>>
>>>>>Half y friends are racist. That's thier business, not mine, just as long
>>>>>as
>>>>>they don't push it down my throat.
>>>>
>>>> it still must rub off on you to some extent.
>>>
>>>Why must it?
>>
>> a natural byproduct of social interaction.
>>
>
>Not always.
that's good to know...
>
>>>
>>>>it's in every action
>>>> they perform since it's at their core level, affecting most every
>>>> thing else.
>>>
>>>It's not actions, it's words. They just roll of my back and I don't take
>>>any
>>>notice.
>>
>> it must also be in their actions, but it's more subtle and harder
>> to detect.
>>
>
>Unless you count thier words as actions then not really.
if they just talk the talk but don't walk the walk, i guess not...
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>What do
>>>>>> you think is more important, friendship or being true to an ideal
>>>>>> of being tolerant of others of different race or creed?
>>>>>
>>>>>By being tolerent to other racists you have to be intolerent to racists?
>>>>>How
>>>>>ironic is that? How come it's shitty to hate one culture but not
>>>>>another?
>>>>
>>>> i'll assume you meant 'by being tolerant to other _races_' so what
>>>> you said makes sense. the answer is: yes, to be tolerant would
>>>> exclude those who are intolerant, so it's a matter of choosing one
>>>> over the other, diversity or uniformity.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I choose not to choose but in a real life situation? Who knows?
>>
>> i mean, i'll be polite if i happen to cross paths or whatever with
>> anybody unless they start shit with me personally, but i won't be
>> trying to go out of my way to be with this person, if i know
>> they're just a racist asshole, know what i mean? i want to get
>> along with all races or even religious creeds, really. i don't
>> favor christianity over islam or judaism over christianity or any
>> of that. they're all mumbo jumbo to me, but have their place.
>
>You would know. You're the one nailed up to a tree for saying how great it
>would be to be nice to people for a change. BTW did those nail holes ever
>heal up?
i just don't want it to rub off on me, in case it might...
as far as nails go, i don't have a vivid recollection of that
incarnation the way you suggest... i know as much about it as
anyone else...
>
>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Are blacks
>>>>>> your friends?
>>>>>
>>>>>Remember those racist friends I was telling you about? Half of them are
>>>>>black. some hate indians, others hate whites. I know a couple of indians
>>>>>who
>>>>>hate the chinese, Me, I'm Irish and I hate the fucking English. Racism
>>>>>is
>>>>>wherever you go, so if you dodged everyone for being racist you would be
>>>>>lonely.
>>>>
>>>> maybe loneliness would be preferred to friendship with those
>>>> types...
>>>
>>>"Those types". they are people too.
>>
>> who knows, they could just be the walking dead...
>
>No. that's me.
oh, my bad...
Morning Star
>>You would know. You're the one nailed up to a tree for saying how great it
>>would be to be nice to people for a change. BTW did those nail holes ever
>>heal up?
>
> i just don't want it to rub off on me, in case it might...
>
> as far as nails go, i don't have a vivid recollection of that
> incarnation the way you suggest... i know as much about it as
> anyone else...
>
I think I would remember if some bastards nailed me up.
the 2nd coming of christ
<luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>
>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:463a79da....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>> On Thu, 03 May 2007 15:24:53 GMT, "Morning Star"
>> <luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>
>>>You would know. You're the one nailed up to a tree for saying how great it
>>>would be to be nice to people for a change. BTW did those nail holes ever
>>>heal up?
>>
>> i just don't want it to rub off on me, in case it might...
>>
>> as far as nails go, i don't have a vivid recollection of that
>> incarnation the way you suggest... i know as much about it as
>> anyone else...
>>
>
>I think I would remember if some bastards nailed me up.
reincarnation don't work like that...
the 2nd coming of christ
<luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>> to me America has always represented the rebellious rather than
>> the lawful spirit. but you may arrive at your own conclusions.
>
>America represents the arrogant child that thinks it's the head of the
>household.
america is eddy hazkel...
Morning Star
> On Fri, 04 May 2007 00:36:49 GMT, "Morning Star"
> <luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>news:463a79da....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>> On Thu, 03 May 2007 15:24:53 GMT, "Morning Star"
>>> <luc...@mega.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>You would know. You're the one nailed up to a tree for saying how great
>>>>it
>>>>would be to be nice to people for a change. BTW did those nail holes
>>>>ever
>>>>heal up?
>>>
>>> i just don't want it to rub off on me, in case it might...
>>>
>>> as far as nails go, i don't have a vivid recollection of that
>>> incarnation the way you suggest... i know as much about it as
>>> anyone else...
>>>
>>
>>I think I would remember if some bastards nailed me up.
>
> reincarnation don't work like that...
It does with some. In my last life I was an orange.
Tani Jantsang ©
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 20:49:06 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>
>>> Didn't you say it was insensitive to publish the danish cartoons
>>> of muhammed? or did i misunderstand (exact quote: ``They mocked
>>> out Mohammed and well, imo that was over the top. ''), because
>>> then you seem to be contradicting yourself. EG: Saying
>>> self-censorship is bad while at the same time the Danish should
>>> have censored themselves...
>>
>>Well, the problem is that it was insensitive, tho I wasn't aiming at
>>insensitive. In fact, it amounted to a declaration of "let's fight, make
>>war." Forget insensitive. Heh. How could they not have known this?
>>Some
>>feminists or something put up Virgin Mary in a bathing suit. They were
>>surprised to be almost attacked by Latino Catholics?
>
> so i should likewise be sensitive to my black friend and not say
> 'yo ma nigga' to him... are we on the same page?
If you want to say it, you have or should have the freedom of speech to say
it - but UNDERSTAND that your friend might beat you up. HE needs to
understand that if HE goes around with yo ma nigga and nigga this and nigga
that, that you just might pick up on that slang and say it. Ok, you could
charge him with assault and battery. If he was smart, he would just tell
you what he thinks about it - or curse you out or something. Understand
that it MIGHT lead to a fight. HE needs to understand that people pick up
on language. When I was a kid, all the "colored" folks used to say "YALL"
all the time - and they had an accent. I had no idea, at the time, that
this was typical white southern talk. Y'all is southern. Obviously, blacks
picked up on that - and when they came up north, they all said it. No one
else up north ever said "yall."
The Danes, in making a cartoon about Mohammed instead of Osamma - were
asking for a fight. When asking for a fight that is THAT big - the Danes
should have thought about it before they mocked out the wrong Moslem.
People can protest all they want about something - that's free speech too.
But the moment they start to BAN free speech, then there is a very slippery
slope. Free speech is free speech. Period. But, if I call a person a
whore, I can expect that woman to maybe hit me? Try to fight with me? Sure
thing. And if it hurts her in anyway that costs her money, she COULD sue me
for slander. The point I'm making is that people should THINK before the
blab.
I used to think that some of the shit I saw on here as flames were deadly
serious - so damned serious that when I saw them, I went to the police! The
police also thought it was serious. Sooner or later, a person gets the idea
that this is normal, it's called flaming and no one ever got really hurt
from any of it. Ok. I also know that in person, these people wouldn't have
the balls to say shit to me - and if they did, in person, there WOULD have
been violence. Absolutely. I don't go around talking to people like that -
I don't go busting into people's party or where they are hanging anywhere,
and start shit with them. I just don't do that - never did.
One of the first ruinations of the 1st amendment was that shit about the hit
man, some book. because some asshole followed the instructions in the book
to be a hitman. Well, heh, obviously, the instructions SUCKED because he
got caught. The fucking assholes sued the publisher - and it was the FIRST
TIME that the 1st amendment got wrecked. Another example is when they sued
that Aryan guy because something he wrote inspired total strangers in
another state to beat up a guy. That's a clear violation of 1st amendment,
it's on the way to Orwellian shit.
And BOTH parties do it, Dems and Reps. They BOTH suck so bad that I might
not vote. The Christians have their 1st amendment issues and so do the
freaking pc assholes. BOTH suck.
the 2nd coming of christ
<tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
i don't really have a black friend. it was just hypothetical.
basically it comes down to how well you know the person, the way i
see it. if you're really close, he should understand you mean it
affectionately. if he doesn't, then he's got insecurity problems.
>Understand
>that it MIGHT lead to a fight. HE needs to understand that people pick up
>on language. When I was a kid, all the "colored" folks used to say "YALL"
>all the time - and they had an accent. I had no idea, at the time, that
>this was typical white southern talk. Y'all is southern. Obviously, blacks
>picked up on that - and when they came up north, they all said it. No one
>else up north ever said "yall."
that was one of my points with imus. he didn't really have the
street-cred to be talking like that. he never has rappers on his
show, just country singers. Imus has no reason to be picking up
hip-hop lingo. He did it mockingly as if to ridicule hip-hoppers.
>
>The Danes, in making a cartoon about Mohammed instead of Osamma - were
>asking for a fight. When asking for a fight that is THAT big - the Danes
>should have thought about it before they mocked out the wrong Moslem.
oh please... muhammed was a pedophile for god's sake. what would
you have to do to offend him, say he liked older women?
>
>People can protest all they want about something - that's free speech too.
>But the moment they start to BAN free speech, then there is a very slippery
>slope. Free speech is free speech. Period.
exactly. neither the muslims nor the blacks have a right to be
offended at speech alone. the nun should not have been killed over
the pope's comments and imus should not have been fired...
>But, if I call a person a
>whore, I can expect that woman to maybe hit me? Try to fight with me? Sure
>thing. And if it hurts her in anyway that costs her money, she COULD sue me
>for slander. The point I'm making is that people should THINK before the
>blab.
people need to learn to chill and not take everything so
personally...
>One of the first ruinations of the 1st amendment was that shit about the hit
>man, some book. because some asshole followed the instructions in the book
>to be a hitman. Well, heh, obviously, the instructions SUCKED because he
>got caught. The fucking assholes sued the publisher - and it was the FIRST
>TIME that the 1st amendment got wrecked. Another example is when they sued
>that Aryan guy because something he wrote inspired total strangers in
>another state to beat up a guy. That's a clear violation of 1st amendment,
>it's on the way to Orwellian shit.
>
>And BOTH parties do it, Dems and Reps. They BOTH suck so bad that I might
>not vote. The Christians have their 1st amendment issues and so do the
>freaking pc assholes. BOTH suck.
yeah but tancredo doesn't even believe in evolution. what the hell
does he believe in then, adam and eve?
Tani Jantsang ©
Look, I'm back to saying what I said up front to begin with. I don't CLICK
with anyone that (and this is very easy to pick up) has to be treated with
kid gloves, that has to be spoken to and OH, gotta be careful NOT to say
this or that. I can't be bothered with that kind of big brother bullshit.
I speak from my HEART - always. Unless I'm on a job being paid NOT to do
that, because that's just not the thing to do on a job. Where I happen to
go, to hang out and enjoy myself, it just so happens that blacks do not go
there. That's just the way it is - and it's fine with me and everyone else
there. Everyone is very comfortable. Peace prevails.
>
>>Understand
>>that it MIGHT lead to a fight. HE needs to understand that people pick up
>>on language. When I was a kid, all the "colored" folks used to say "YALL"
>>all the time - and they had an accent. I had no idea, at the time, that
>>this was typical white southern talk. Y'all is southern. Obviously,
>>blacks
>>picked up on that - and when they came up north, they all said it. No one
>>else up north ever said "yall."
>
> that was one of my points with imus. he didn't really have the
> street-cred to be talking like that. he never has rappers on his
> show, just country singers. Imus has no reason to be picking up
> hip-hop lingo. He did it mockingly as if to ridicule hip-hoppers.
Nappy headed is not street rap talk. It's what a lot of non-blacks call
black people's hair. Nappy. Or Kinky hair. Kinky means something else
these days - but it used to mean kinky, like "having kinks." Understand,
that's an English word.
>
>>
>>The Danes, in making a cartoon about Mohammed instead of Osamma - were
>>asking for a fight. When asking for a fight that is THAT big - the Danes
>>should have thought about it before they mocked out the wrong Moslem.
>
> oh please... muhammed was a pedophile for god's sake. what would
> you have to do to offend him, say he liked older women?
A PEDOPHILE? OMG. LOL. People married very young in those days -
everywhere. They also matured a lot younger - everywhere.
>
>>
>>People can protest all they want about something - that's free speech too.
>>But the moment they start to BAN free speech, then there is a very
>>slippery
>>slope. Free speech is free speech. Period.
>
> exactly. neither the muslims nor the blacks have a right to be
> offended at speech alone. the nun should not have been killed over
> the pope's comments and imus should not have been fired...
I agree - killing the Nun kinda proved the Pope's point. The Pope should
not have apologized. Western people need to grasp something - those people
in the mid east are NOT going to look at apologies as something good or
noble. They are going to see it as worthy to be stepped on, as cowardice.
They instinctively feel that way. Why didn't a bunch of Christians kill a
Mullah?
>
>>But, if I call a person a
>>whore, I can expect that woman to maybe hit me? Try to fight with me?
>>Sure
>>thing. And if it hurts her in anyway that costs her money, she COULD sue
>>me
>>for slander. The point I'm making is that people should THINK before the
>>blab.
>
> people need to learn to chill and not take everything so
> personally...
People need to know when they are provoking a fight - it has nothing to do
with chilling.
>
>>One of the first ruinations of the 1st amendment was that shit about the
>>hit
>>man, some book. because some asshole followed the instructions in the
>>book
>>to be a hitman. Well, heh, obviously, the instructions SUCKED because he
>>got caught. The fucking assholes sued the publisher - and it was the
>>FIRST
>>TIME that the 1st amendment got wrecked. Another example is when they
>>sued
>>that Aryan guy because something he wrote inspired total strangers in
>>another state to beat up a guy. That's a clear violation of 1st
>>amendment,
>>it's on the way to Orwellian shit.
>>
>>And BOTH parties do it, Dems and Reps. They BOTH suck so bad that I might
>>not vote. The Christians have their 1st amendment issues and so do the
>>freaking pc assholes. BOTH suck.
>
> yeah but tancredo doesn't even believe in evolution. what the hell
> does he believe in then, adam and eve?
Tancredo? He's strong on immigration and we seriously need someone STRONG
on immigration, someone who, like Eisenhower, can round up the illegals and
get them out of here (Eisenhower did that "Operation Wetback") - that's the
only thing he has going for him that I heard. I don't know what he believes
(FOR REAL) religiously - but they are courting the evangelical vote. I
heard all the republicans the other night and they are kissing Israel's ass,
as if we MUST, by all means, hold that place up as if it's special - all due
to some stupid Biblical bullshit. I'm against ANYONE that's in favor of
keeping up that stupid war.
There is real evolution - and then there is the bullshit that the left
pushes down everyone's throat - that has very little to do with evolution -
because to really talk about evolution - you have to be TOTALLY POLITICALLY
INCORRECT!!!!
the 2nd coming of christ
<tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>A PEDOPHILE? OMG. LOL. People married very young in those days -
>everywhere. They also matured a lot younger - everywhere.
54 year old screwing a 9 year old is pedophilia, in my book.
>>
>>>
>>>People can protest all they want about something - that's free speech too.
>>>But the moment they start to BAN free speech, then there is a very
>>>slippery
>>>slope. Free speech is free speech. Period.
>>
>> exactly. neither the muslims nor the blacks have a right to be
>> offended at speech alone. the nun should not have been killed over
>> the pope's comments and imus should not have been fired...
>
>I agree - killing the Nun kinda proved the Pope's point. The Pope should
>not have apologized. Western people need to grasp something - those people
>in the mid east are NOT going to look at apologies as something good or
>noble. They are going to see it as worthy to be stepped on, as cowardice.
>They instinctively feel that way. Why didn't a bunch of Christians kill a
>Mullah?
they don't have the concept of 'jihad'.
>> yeah but tancredo doesn't even believe in evolution. what the hell
>> does he believe in then, adam and eve?
>
>Tancredo? He's strong on immigration and we seriously need someone STRONG
>on immigration, someone who, like Eisenhower, can round up the illegals and
>get them out of here ...
i dream too, sometimes...
Tani Jantsang ©
> On Sun, 06 May 2007 03:14:29 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>
>>A PEDOPHILE? OMG. LOL. People married very young in those days -
>>everywhere. They also matured a lot younger - everywhere.
>
>
> 54 year old screwing a 9 year old is pedophilia, in my book.
Well, that's just it: in your book, by today's standards. Everyone back in
those days used to have arranged marriages - and they married very young,
when a girl bled, she was considered a woman - fertile. The human race heh,
managed to keep going just fine by doing things that way for a very very
very very long time. Only in very modern times is childhood delayed so that
I see 18 year olds behaving like 8 year olds.
>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>People can protest all they want about something - that's free speech
>>>>too.
>>>>But the moment they start to BAN free speech, then there is a very
>>>>slippery
>>>>slope. Free speech is free speech. Period.
>>>
>>> exactly. neither the muslims nor the blacks have a right to be
>>> offended at speech alone. the nun should not have been killed over
>>> the pope's comments and imus should not have been fired...
>>
>>I agree - killing the Nun kinda proved the Pope's point. The Pope should
>>not have apologized. Western people need to grasp something - those
>>people
>>in the mid east are NOT going to look at apologies as something good or
>>noble. They are going to see it as worthy to be stepped on, as cowardice.
>>They instinctively feel that way. Why didn't a bunch of Christians kill a
>>Mullah?
>
> they don't have the concept of 'jihad'.
They used to. Remember the Crusades? That was Jihad. Holy War.
>
>>> yeah but tancredo doesn't even believe in evolution. what the hell
>>> does he believe in then, adam and eve?
>>
>>Tancredo? He's strong on immigration and we seriously need someone STRONG
>>on immigration, someone who, like Eisenhower, can round up the illegals
>>and
>>get them out of here ...
>
> i dream too, sometimes...
Oh, heh, it could be done. In fact, a lot of things COULD be done. It
would be really easy too, with the technology we have. Hell, a few years
back the Mauritanians did it - and it was brutal as hell the way they did
it. The "world" didn't say boo about it. China does it too - and doesn't
give a shit what the world thinks or says.
the 2nd coming of christ
<tjs...@SPAMpost.com>, the pedophilia apologist wrote:
>
>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:463d7da8....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>> On Sun, 06 May 2007 03:14:29 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
>> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>>
>>>A PEDOPHILE?
>> 54 year old screwing a 9 year old is pedophilia, in my book.
>
>Well, that's just it: in your book
obviously not in yours... thank god for that, because you hate
jews while i don't. so, i would not want our books to be similar.
octinomos
Tani Jantsang ©
> On Sun, 13 May 2007 03:29:16 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com>, the pedophilia apologist wrote:
>
>>
>>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>news:463d7da8....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>> On Sun, 06 May 2007 03:14:29 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
>>> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>A PEDOPHILE?
>
>>> 54 year old screwing a 9 year old is pedophilia, in my book.
>>
>>Well, that's just it: in your book
>
> obviously not in yours... thank god for that, because you hate
> jews while i don't. so, i would not want our books to be similar.
Excuse me? I hate Jews? I did not hate Jeff or Morris - nor do I hate any
of the Jews I'm pretty tight with right now that AGREE with me regarding
Israel. These are Americans first - Jews is religious for them and they are
religious people. I like the Jewish Task Force and have a friend in it. I
liked Reb Kehane, too, he was no nonsense. I do not hate Jews. I hate the
dumbfuck Christian MORONS that persecuted them in the past in Europe - which
has caused Jews to react so much in the 20th century (AGAINST their OWN self
interest, by the way - that is how it's turning out!). I asked you before:
Don't put words in my mouth. I'm against supporting ISRAEL - OR any OTHER
country. America never made permanent alliances with anyone - and that was
back when America was strong and great. We have no freaking business
supporting Taiwan either. That's bullshit. If China takes back what used
to be part of China, what are we gonna make war with CHINA? Nuclear war?
People all over the world, in every single culture, used to marry young like
that. Very young - arranged marriages. That was the norm of the times and
people DID grow up a LOT earlier than they do today. People were captains
of sailing vessels that sailed around the world, when they were 15 or 16
years old. They were MEN, not little boys. By the way, Buchanin, a person
in the recent USSR, used to get love letters from the woman that later
became his wife. She was TEN when she wrote the letters and was so in love
with him. HE saw her as a child at that time, 10 years old. But later, she
became a woman that still loved him, he married her when she was 16. Again,
this was considered the norm. And the STD epidemic in Naple Junior High
School down here, recently, is proof that girls that age ARE having sex.
Why try to deny it? Those girls are HORNY - and that's biology.
The American people, the majority of us, DO NOT want war or to be in this
phony war. Hell, Ron Paul got the highest poll vote after the debates (rep
debates). The American people, me included, have nothing against
immigrants - LEGAL ones. Not law breakers. You know, everyone thinks "Oh,
Mexicans" when illegal immigration comes up. Oh? What about the RUSSIAN
MAFIA here illegally? These are extremely dangerous and ruthless people -
and they are nothing like the good old Italian Mafia. What about terrorists
that come in thru the Mexican border - millions of "other than Mexicans" are
here. The homeland security is just ONE MORE big joke. Oh, but the phony
department created jobs, ha ha ha.
the 2nd coming of christ
<tjs...@SPAMpost.com> still defending pedophilia, wrote:
>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:4646ab91....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>> On Sun, 13 May 2007 03:29:16 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
>> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com>, the pedophilia apologist wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>>news:463d7da8....@news.sysmatrix.net...
>>>> On Sun, 06 May 2007 03:14:29 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
>>>> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>A PEDOPHILE?
>>
>>>> 54 year old screwing a 9 year old is pedophilia, in my book.
>>>
>>>Well, that's just it: in your book
>>
>> obviously not in yours... thank god for that, because you hate
>> jews while i don't. so, i would not want our books to be similar.
>
>Excuse me? I hate Jews? I did not hate Jeff or Morris - nor do I hate any
>of the Jews I'm pretty tight with right now that AGREE with me regarding
>Israel.
self-haters...
> I'm against supporting ISRAEL - OR any OTHER
>country.
whoop there it is...
> America never made permanent alliances with anyone - and that was
>back when America was strong and great.
and blacks hung upside down with pitchforks up their asses...
> We have no freaking business
>supporting Taiwan either. That's bullshit. If China takes back what used
>to be part of China, what are we gonna make war with CHINA? Nuclear war?
>
>People all over the world, in every single culture, used to marry young like
>that. Very young - arranged marriages. That was the norm of the times and
>people DID grow up a LOT earlier than they do today. People were captains
>of sailing vessels that sailed around the world, when they were 15 or 16
>years old. They were MEN, not little boys.
we're talking about a 54 year old fucking a 9 year old. Sorry but
there is nothing you will ever tell me which makes it right or
cultural or any bullshit like you're attempting to do...
it's fucking immoral, pathetic, sick, perverted and disgusting...
the more you defend it the worse you look...
octinomos
> By the way, Buchanin, a person
>in the recent USSR, used to get love letters from the woman that later
>became his wife. She was TEN when she wrote the letters and was so in love
>with him. HE saw her as a child at that time, 10 years old. But later, she
>became a woman that still loved him, he married her when she was 16. Again,
>this was considered the norm. And the STD epidemic in Naple Junior High
>School down here, recently, is proof that girls that age ARE having sex.
>Why try to deny it? Those girls are HORNY - and that's biology.
>
>The American people, the majority of us, DO NOT want war or to be in this
>phony war. Hell, Ron Paul got the highest poll vote after the debates (rep
>debates). The American people, me included, have nothing against
>immigrants - LEGAL ones. Not law breakers. You know, everyone thinks "Oh,
>Mexicans" when illegal immigration comes up. Oh? What about the RUSSIAN
>MAFIA here illegally? These are extremely dangerous and ruthless people -
>and they are nothing like the good old Italian Mafia. What about terrorists
>that come in thru the Mexican border - millions of "other than Mexicans" are
>here. The homeland security is just ONE MORE big joke. Oh, but the phony
>department created jobs, ha ha ha.
--
Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer
Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer
"Tani Jantsang ©" <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
> "the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:4646ab91....@news.sysmatrix.net...
> > On Sun, 13 May 2007 03:29:16 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
> > <tjs...@SPAMpost.com>, the pedophilia apologist wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>"the 2nd coming of christ" <jesuc...@netscape.net> wrote in message
> >>news:463d7da8....@news.sysmatrix.net...
> >>> On Sun, 06 May 2007 03:14:29 GMT, "Tani Jantsang ©"
> >>> <tjs...@SPAMpost.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>A PEDOPHILE?
> >
> >>> 54 year old screwing a 9 year old is pedophilia, in my book.
> >>
> >>Well, that's just it: in your book
> >
> > obviously not in yours... thank god for that, because you hate
> > jews while i don't. so, i would not want our books to be similar.
>
> Excuse me? I hate Jews?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.satanism/msg/8a5c12580fdff7ac