INDIANS ARE NOT ASIANS
Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit
Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
Hulk
You must be from the confused-asians category, right 3.6 feeter ?
Spider
What is your problem? Did you last girlfriend ditch you for a person of Indian
decent? My deepest sympathies. But judging from your letter, I think your
grilfriend made the right decision in leaving a stupid, arsehole bastard that
you are.
Never heard of anything as stupid as your assertion that Indians are not Asian.
But then, if you look at a map of Asia you just might notice that geographically
most of Asia is not Chinese (or in your case Mongoloid). Ithink it would be
quite correct for me to assert that you are not Asian because you are too
stupid.
Spider
Spider
Datuk Harimau
On Sat, 10 May 1997 15:24:18 -0700, "Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby
Mit" <I...@home.playing> wrote:
>Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
>Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
>SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
>Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
>As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
>Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
>Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
>NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
>like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
>They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
cakap putar belit :)
Datuk Harimau
Morochi
On Sat, 10 May 1997 15:24:18 -0700, "Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit"
<I...@home.playing> wrote:
I am a morocha, shall I call myself as a Asian Morochi
The Kalogian
In <3374F5...@home.playing> "Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit"
<I...@home.playing> writes:
>
>Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
>Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
>SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
>Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
>As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
>Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
>Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
>NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
>like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
>They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hey, you're confusing me now ... but I think you got a point.
Yes, how come we don't call Mexicans as Americans or Canadians,
Guatemalans, Columbians, Brazilians as Americans? They are all
in the Americas. Why is it when we say "Americans" we only mean
U.S. citizens? Can anyone verify this?
Pat Herley
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_01BC86D8.7EFE8A80
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Well, go back to Asia, you
ASIAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!
Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit <I...@home.playing> wrote in article
<3374F5...@home.playing>...
> Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
>
------=_NextPart_000_01BC86D8.7EFE8A80
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html><head></head><BODY bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF"><p><font size=3D2 =
color=3D"#000000" face=3D"Arial">Well, go back to Asia, you =
ASIAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!=
!!!!!!!!!!<br><br><br><br>Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit <<font =
color=3D"#0000FF"><u>I...@home.playing</u><font color=3D"#000000">> =
wrote in article <<font =
color=3D"#0000FF"><u>3374F5...@home.playing</u><font =
color=3D"#000000">>...<br>> Just because India is in Asia does not =
mean that<br>> Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY =
ARE<br>> SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as<br>> =
Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.<br>> As one =
would use the term American-Indians in the US,<br>> Indians from Asia =
should ALWAYS be identified as<br>> Asian-Indians, not just Asian. =
THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!<br>> NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black =
Indians look nothing<br>> like me. That is because they are not =
ASIANS!!!!!!!<br>> They are =
INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111<br>> </p>
</font></font></font></font></font></body></html>
------=_NextPart_000_01BC86D8.7EFE8A80--
Jason Stokes
On Sat, 10 May 1997 15:24:18 -0700, Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit <I...@home.playing> wrote:
>Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
>Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
>SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
>Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
>As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
>Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
>Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
>NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
>like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
>They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
Awww shucks! Them funny-looking Orientals all look same to me, boy! Y'all
quieten down now...
Indians are black?
--
Jason Stokes: j.stokes @ bohm.anu.edu.au
The Greased Cougar from the Planet Big Bollocks
"Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit" <I...@home.playing> writes:
>Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
>Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
>SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
>Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Hang on, I thought only whitey could be racist.
Let It Be
Pat Herley wrote:
>
> Well, go back to Asia, you
> ASIAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit <I...@home.playing> wrote in article
> <3374F5...@home.playing>...
> > Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> > SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> > Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> > Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> > Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> > NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> > like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> > They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
> >
Now that i read it, i am beginnning to believe what they say about
the Japs. They are just bunch of outcast prisoners from China, being
put into some islands to prevent them from causing more troubles.
Jam
You idiot. Indians are as Asian as you are. I doubt they are as racist as
you though. Technically speaking, Indians are actually Aryan, but they
inhabit the Asian sub-continent which makes them Asian. Your definition is
as stupid as saying African-Americans are not American because they look
nothing like the other inhabitants of that continent, mainly Native
Americans and Euro-Americans. Or Aborigines are not Australians because
they look nothing like European descended Australians. Cut your racist
shit, you silly little man. I
Ganesh
On Sat, 10 May 1997 15:24:18 -0700, "Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby
Mit" <I...@home.playing> wrote:
>Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
>Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
>SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
>Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
>As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
>Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
>Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
>NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
>like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
>They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
May all our problems in life be so trivial.
Now do you feel better after getting that off your chest? Have a Bex,
a cup of tea and a good lay down, it will all be better in the
morning.
Cheers,
PaulW
When replying by Email remove the "X" from my address.
Prataman
"Pat Herley" <phe...@silas.cc.monash.edu.au> wrote:
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
>------=_NextPart_000_01BC86D8.7EFE8A80
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>ASIAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>!!!!!!!
>
>
>
><3374F5...@home.playing>...
>> Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
>> Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
>> SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
>> Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
>> As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
>> Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
>> Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
>> NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
>> like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
>> They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
>>
>Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
><html><head></head><BODY bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF"><p><font size=3D2 =
>color=3D"#000000" face=3D"Arial">Well, go back to Asia, you =
>ASIAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!=
>!!!!!!!!!!<br><br><br><br>Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit <<font =
>color=3D"#0000FF"><u>I...@home.playing</u><font color=3D"#000000">> =
>wrote in article <<font =
>color=3D"#0000FF"><u>3374F5...@home.playing</u><font =
>color=3D"#000000">>...<br>> Just because India is in Asia does not =
>mean that<br>> Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY =
>ARE<br>> SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as<br>> =
>Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.<br>> As one =
>would use the term American-Indians in the US,<br>> Indians from Asia =
>should ALWAYS be identified as<br>> Asian-Indians, not just Asian. =
>THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!<br>> NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black =
>Indians look nothing<br>> like me. That is because they are not =
>ASIANS!!!!!!!<br>> They are =
>INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111<br>> </p>
></font></font></font></font></font></body></html>
>------=_NextPart_000_01BC86D8.7EFE8A80--
>
Well looks like you are disapointed with your father who was an INDIAN.
Ask your mother why she got hooked up with "those black Indians" I
reiterate that you should go back to Asia from where you came from. You
are not wanted here.
Yoon Jae Lee
Whoever posted the orginal article:
Hulk wrote:
>
> You must be from the confused-asians category, right 3.6 feeter ?
>
> >
> > Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> > Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> > SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> > Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> > As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> > Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> > Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> > NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> > like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> > They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
are considered Asians. So are Isrealis, Iraqis, Pakistani, etc.
--
**********************************************************************
Yoon Jae Lee Conductor and Pianist of the 21st Century
"Take the A train, a great song and great advice!"
**********************************************************************
Doan
Ganesh wrote:
>
> On Sat, 10 May 1997 15:24:18 -0700, "Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby
> Mit" <I...@home.playing> wrote:
>
> >Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> >Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> >SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> >Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> >As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> >Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> >Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> >NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> >like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> >They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
>
>
> Now do you feel better after getting that off your chest? Have a Bex,
> a cup of tea and a good lay down, it will all be better in the
> morning.
>
> Cheers,
>
> PaulW
>
> When replying by Email remove the "X" from my address.
Okay, I suppose you're right b'cos Indians don't talk like us. They talk
walk, (inparticular) eat and smell like CURRY.
I don't mean to be rude but it is simply the FACT.
See Ya.
Spanish Taster
Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit wrote:
>
> Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
Another bigot who dwells in the SCS domain. Do you really think your
comments stand here, or are you just plain confused?
Kiasubazi
On Sat, 10 May 1997 15:24:18 -0700, "Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit"
<I...@home.playing> wrote:
(deleted)
Hi, my name is Kisubazi I am an Asian Jipuneizi
LSY
Geographically speaking, all countries which are located in the Asian
continent belong to "Asia". People who originate from these countries
rightfully are called Asians in the general sense. To be more precise,
they should be called by their country of origins eg Indians from India,
Japanese from Japan, Chinese from China, Malaysians from Malaysia,
Singaporeans from Singapore.
Mitoshi Matsushita should be happy not to look like an Indian because he is
a Japanese. This is because Asian is a general term for people from Asia,
which is made up of people from many diverse cultural and ethnic groups.
For that matter, some "Indians" are as fair as Matsushita or his
countrymen.
--
LSY
Wei Zheng
In article <3375026b...@news.indigo.ie>, pri...@non.necere (Datuk Harimau) writes:
|> On Sat, 10 May 1997 15:24:18 -0700, "Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby
|> Mit" <I...@home.playing> wrote:
|>
|> >Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
|> >SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
|> >Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
|> >As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
|> >Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
|> >Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
|> >NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
|> >like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
|> >They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
|>
"white people" (sorry for the lack of more proper term, but you know what i mean)
that cross the pass from middle east to the india subcontinent tens of thousand
years ago. that's why their features are closer to the white people than to the
other asians even though they have darker complexion. the same article also
maintains that the darker complexion is due to the accumulation of the "tanning
effect". now, i don't know how accurate this is, but i think it is pretty
interesting. if this is true, i think they are more likely remote cousins of
arabians.
i didn't know the term "asian" refers to any race.
Wilfred
Quite so. After all, don't forget that India is known as "the Africa of
the East".
Spanish Taster <nl...@avenge.com> wrote in article
<3375A4...@avenge.com>...
> Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit wrote:
> >
> > Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> > Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> > SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> > Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> > As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> > Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> > Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> > NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> > like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> > They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
>
>
The Kalogian
Wait a minute ....
Supposing we reword the Subject Title from "INDIANS
ARE NOT ASIANS" to "MEXICANS ARE NOT AMERICANS" will
it offend anybody?
Mexico is also in American continent.
Don't flame me ... am just asking.
FB/
Wilfred
Quite so. After all, India is known as "the Africa of the east".
Sri Param Eswaran
I hope you know what you are talking about. Thank god they are yellow. It
is nice to know how little you mind is, and how much you know you culture
and religious believes, and where it originated from May your god bless
you. May you love yourself and learn to Mankind.
Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit <I...@home.playing> wrote in article
<3374F5...@home.playing>...
Michael Laderman
On Sat, 10 May 1997 15:24:18 -0700, "Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby
Mit" <I...@home.playing> wrote:
>Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
>Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
>SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
>Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
>As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
>Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
>Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
>NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
>like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
>They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
If I were an idiot, I'd be embarassed to post a message for the whole
world to see how stupid I am!
Have you looked at a globe lately? Asia is a continent, you know. The
people living there are called "Asians". It doesn't matter if you
don't like their skin color or facial features, they're still
"Asians". In the case of India, that won't change until the Indian
Plate separates once again from the Asian Plate at some time in the
faraway geological future, but human beings probably won't exist then.
So deal with it! And why don't you acquire a capacity to be embarassed
by your stupidity while you're at it, and shut up?
M.L.
George Sweeney
Anyone has a right to choose what they shall be called.
Shall we revive the never-ending Asian vs. Oriental battle?
I am half Irish, half Finnish by heritage, I choose to call myself
American.
Ramu
D
> > May all our problems in life be so trivial.
> >
> > Now do you feel better after getting that off your chest? Have a Bex,
> > a cup of tea and a good lay down, it will all be better in the
> > morning.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > PaulW
> >
> > When replying by Email remove the "X" from my address.
>
> Okay, I suppose you're right b'cos Indians don't talk like us. They talk
> walk, (inparticular) eat and smell like CURRY.
>
> I don't mean to be rude but it is simply the FACT.
>
> See Ya.
smell talk walk like curry so says baby Doan.I agree.But let me ask you
baby, have you met every Indian on this planet? If and most likly not,I
think you better eat your words or give a time and place in Singapore so
that I can meet explain you more clearly.Thanks
zorror
Pat Herley wrote:
>
> Well, go back to Asia, you
> ASIAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> <3374F5...@home.playing>...
> > Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> > Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> > SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> > Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> > As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> > Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> > Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> > NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> > like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> > They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
> >
They dropped you on your head when you were born. where are you from???
zorror
Pat Herley wrote:
>
> Well, go back to Asia, you
> ASIAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
article
> <3374F5...@home.playing>...
> > Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> > Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> > SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> > Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> > As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> > Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> > Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> > NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> > like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> > They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
> >
You fucked up son of a bitch, you are a.k.a baby Mit it
proves it. They dropped you on your head when you were born.
a course so it explains.Heheheheheh I pity you baby
zorror
Pat Herley wrote:
>
> Well, go back to Asia, you
> ASIAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit <I...@home.playing> wrote in
article
> <3374F5...@home.playing>...
You fucked up son of a bitch, you are a.k.a baby Mit it
zorror
Pat Herley wrote:
>
> Well, go back to Asia, you
> ASIAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit <I...@home.playing> wrote in
article
> <3374F5...@home.playing>...
> > Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> > SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> > Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> > As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> > Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> > Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> > NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> > like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> > They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
> >
zorror
Michael Laderman wrote:
Quo vadis ?
The most stupid threat yet ?
--
Quo vadis ?
-----------------------------------------
mailto:gt4...@prism.gatech.edu
http://www.vietnamedia.com/e&n
-----------------------------------------
rod speed
Jason Stokes <j.st...@OUT-DAMNED-SPAM.bohm.anu.edu.au> wrote in article
<5l35nd$mal$1...@clarion.carno.net.au>...
> Indians are black?
Some of them are, particularly the Tamils, very black.
rod speed
Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit <I...@home.playing> wrote in article
<3374F5...@home.playing>...
> Just because India is in Asia does not mean that Indians are Asians.
Fraid so.
> THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA.
Fraid not. Using that mindlessly silly line of argument chinese arent asians either.
> To identify Indians as Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
Quite possibly, but then lots of asians would say that about the
chinese too. And say it in spades about the japanese too. Your
past behaviour has something to do with that presumably.
> As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
Plenty of us have more sense.
> Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as Asian-Indians, not just Asian.
By a very small minority, sure. Who cares ?
> THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!! NOT ASIANS.
Crap.
> I am Asian.
Ah, now the truth is starting to come out. Yet another asian bigot. Japanese by the looks of it.
> Those black Indians look nothing like me.
They are presumably very grateful they dont.
> That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
Fraid so.
> They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
That too.
Kenneth Phan
On Sun, 11 May 1997, zorror wrote:
> Michael Laderman wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 10 May 1997 15:24:18 -0700, "Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby
> > Mit" <I...@home.playing> wrote:
> >
> > >Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> > >Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> > >SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> > >Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> > >As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> > >Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> > >Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> > >NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> > >like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> > >They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
> >
>
> You fucked up son of a bitch, you are a.k.a baby Mit it
> proves it. They dropped you on your head when you were born.
> where are you from??? Some indian should have ripped you off in
> a course so it explains.Heheheheheh I pity you baby
>
>
Whoa! One really pissed off paki!
zorror
Pat Herley wrote:
>
> Well, go back to Asia, you
>
> Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit <I...@home.playing> wrote in
article
> <3374F5...@home.playing>...
Adrian Planinc
In article <3374F5...@home.playing>, "Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit" <I...@home.playing> says:
>
>Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
>Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
>SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
>Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
>As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
>Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
>Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
>NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
>like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
>They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
Yes,
What you are saying is that people need to be less
encompassing in their classification of culture.
That is something I have been saying for ages!
I would even go as far as to say that the term ASIAN
doesn't mean anything. People should be only classified by
what individual country they come from, otherwise we end up
with confusion and misrepresentation.
To say that Indians and East Asians are the same really
is totally innacurate.
Adrian
Keesuan
Jason Stokes wrote:
>
> On Sat, 10 May 1997 15:24:18 -0700, Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit <I...@home.playing> wrote:
> >Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> >Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> >SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> >Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> >As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> >Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> >Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> >NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> >like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> >They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
>
> quieten down now...
>
> Indians are black?
>
> --
> Jason Stokes: j.stokes @ bohm.anu.edu.au
You are like a frog in a shit-hole, so..... ignorant. Are you white,
colorless or bleached ?????
Incidentally I am a Chinese and I consider Asian Indians as Asians
and close brothers.
Marek Wiechula and Sheila Plant
The Kalogian wrote:
>
> In <3374F5...@home.playing> "Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit"
> <I...@home.playing> writes:
> >
> >Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> >Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> >SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> >Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> >As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> >Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> >Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> >NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> >like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> >They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
>
>
> Hey, you're confusing me now ... but I think you got a point.
>
> Yes, how come we don't call Mexicans as Americans or Canadians,
> Guatemalans, Columbians, Brazilians as Americans? They are all
> in the Americas. Why is it when we say "Americans" we only mean
> U.S. citizens? Can anyone verify this?
As a Canadian I don't particularly like being called
an American, but hey, I'm not going to get too
upset about it. I think 'Americans' are called "americans'
because it is part of their name (US of America). I
consider myself North American, as in the continent, but
not American.
OK?
Sheila
Ramu
message that we are living for the future.
Ramu
Let me explain a bit more for those who still dont understand.
Lets say that race is smelly or yellow or black or purple or white.
Going by the number of people migrating all around the world,there is a
very strong chance that you or your someone would end up with that
particular race.
Oh one more thing.No race is greater or smaller than the other.Look at
the person I am when you talk to me and not at the race in which I was
born in.
Oh god give me a beer.No give me a Non Alcoholic beer!!!
Samedi
Doan wrote:
>
> Ganesh wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 10 May 1997 15:24:18 -0700, "Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby
> > Mit" <I...@home.playing> wrote:
> >
> > >Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> > >Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> > >SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> > >Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> > >As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> > >Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> > >Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> > >NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> > >like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> > >They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
> >
> >
> > Now do you feel better after getting that off your chest? Have a Bex,
> > a cup of tea and a good lay down, it will all be better in the
> > morning.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > PaulW
> >
> > When replying by Email remove the "X" from my address.
>
> Okay, I suppose you're right b'cos Indians don't talk like us. They talk
Which us. Don't presume to speak for anybody but yourself.
> walk, (inparticular) eat and smell like CURRY.
>
> I don't mean to be rude but it is simply the FACT.
>
> See Ya.
Wouldn't know a fact if it bit your arse. It depends on where in India
you come from. India has a very rich culinary tradition, like much of
asia. Some foods are hot and spicy, some are not. Most people from
different cultures have a different, often distinctive, smell. This is
simply a part of lifes rich tapestry.
Samedi
Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit wrote:
>
> Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11
Racist geek. If Indian is in asia then they are asians. they might also
be Indians, would we then have to differentiate caste, religion and
other differences. As for asians, in your racist view must we now state
the country of origin, ancestral affiliation, spoken language. Get a
brain.
Samedi
Yoon Jae Lee wrote:
>
> Whoever posted the orginal article:
> Hulk wrote:
> >
> > You must be from the confused-asians category, right 3.6 feeter ?
> >
> > Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit wrote:
> > >
> > > Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> > > Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> > > SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> > > Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> > > As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> > > Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> > > Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> > > NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> > > like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> Of course Indians are ASians. THey are on the Asian continent so they
> are considered Asians. So are Isrealis, Iraqis, Pakistani, etc.
> --
Good on you! Although Israel is often considered as a part of Europe,by
affiliation. Play it again Yoon Jae Lee.
> **********************************************************************
> Yoon Jae Lee Conductor and Pianist of the 21st Century
> "Take the A train, a great song and great advice!"
> **********************************************************************
Samedi
South American, Central American, native American, or North American.
The South American is certainly quite correct, since mexico is
considered to be a part of the continent of South America.
Prem Thomas
Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit(I...@home.playing) wrote:
>
> Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA.
I suggest you start playing with something else, or perhaps even get out
a bit!
Prem
mailto:pre...@qed.net
Prem Thomas
Wilfred wrote:
>
> Quite so. After all, India is known as "the Africa of the east".
To whom, exactly? After all, your level of awareness is showcased by the
fact that you posted identical messages 8 minutes apart. I thought
Valium without a prescription was illegal in Singapore.
Prem
mailto:pre...@qed.net
Steve Sundberg
Wei Zheng (zh...@physics.sunysb.edu) wrote:
: |>
: i forgot where i read this, but an article suggests that indians are really
: "white people" (sorry for the lack of more proper term, but you know what i mean)
: that cross the pass from middle east to the india subcontinent tens of thousand
: years ago. that's why their features are closer to the white people than to the
: other asians even though they have darker complexion.
I don't know about that. Asian Indians come in a wide spectrum of
browns-- from very dark to light. I know of more than a couple who were
mistaken for African-Americans in the US. In fact, there's an Asian
Indian local TV reporter who could pass for Colin Powell's sister... or
vice-versa. ;)
--
| dee...@mm.com
Cholera avoids me like the plague. | 7361...@compuserve.com
| http://www.mm.com/user/deejay/
Marc L
> Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit <I...@home.playing> wrote in article
> <3374F5...@home.playing>...
> > Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> > Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> > As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> > Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> > Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> > NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> > like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> > They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
> >
Have you seen a world map before? I mean a real map, may be you should
look
at one again and see where India is in the map ?
Yoon Jae Lee
Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit wrote:
>
> Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
Superman
"rod speed" <rsp...@dragnet.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit <I...@home.playing> wrote in article
><3374F5...@home.playing>...
>
>
>> THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA.
>
>
>
>chinese too. And say it in spades about the japanese too. Your
>past behaviour has something to do with that presumably.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> I am Asian.
>
>Ah, now the truth is starting to come out. Yet another asian bigot. Japanese by the looks of it.
>
>
>
>
>
>> They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
>
>That too.
I don't want to be put in the same category with a yellow
Michael Laderman
>> >Wouldn't think so. Americans are usually called that, often qualified by
>> >South American, Central American, native American, or North American.
>> >The South American is certainly quite correct, since mexico is
>> >considered to be a part of the continent of South America.
>>
>> How's that again? Mexico is most definitely part of NORTH AMERICA.
>>
>> M.L.
>
>Nope, in financial groupings, and political groupings the mexicans
>themselves have tended to link themselves with south american countries,
>until very recently. In terms of geographic continents, mexico is, I
>agree, part of north america.
Now you're splitting hairs, but "Latin America" and "South America"
are _not_ the same. Just ask any Mexican which continent s/he belongs
to. But I think we should end this discussion NOW, because it must be
of VERY LITTLE INTEREST to most if not all the newsgroups which this
has been crossposted to. Apologies to you all.
Michael Laderman
ho chi minh SATAN
THIS IS REALLY FUNNY, YOUR LOGIC DOES NOT SEEM RIGHT WITH ME !!
INDIA IS PART OF ASIA, SO THEY MUST BE REGARDING AS ASIANS, WHOELSE
THEY'LL BE ?? COMMON MAN, GROW UP WILL YA ??
Subject:
INDIANS ARE NOT ASIANS
Date:
Sat, 10 May 1997 15:24:18 -0700
From:
"Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit" <I...@home.playing>
Organization:
PANASONIC, TECHNICS http://www.panasonic.com
Newsgroups:
soc.culture.singapore, soc.culture.asean,
soc.culture.asian, soc.culture.asian.american, soc.culture.china,
soc.culture.filipino, soc.culture.india,
soc.culture.indian, soc.culture.hongkong, soc.culture.indonesia,
soc.culture.japan, soc.culture.korean,
soc.culture.malaysia, soc.culture.vietnamese, soc.culture.taiwan,
soc.culture.thai, soc.culture.australian, aus.politics
Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
classique
On 12 May 1997 06:22:57 GMT, Superman <kia...@hotmail.com> wrote:
What a bunch of silly arguments. A simple reference check using a
dictionary would have made clear the correct answer. Asia is a
continent whose land mass includes India which is a country. It is
therefore correct to say any group of people within Asia as Asian,
hence Filipinos, Chinese, Indians, etc. are all Asians.
Prem Thomas
The Kalogian wrote:
>
>
>
> So, why is it that it's okay to say "MEXICANS ARE NOT
> AMERICANS" while saying "INDIANS ARE NOT ASIANS" is not okay?
>
> Base on this, (the above statement) why is it everybody
> got upset when the guy said that "INDIANS ARE NOT ASIANS"?
>
> Is it because the statement "INDIANS ARE NOT ASIANS" is
> POLITICALLY INCORRECT while "MEXICANS ARE NOT AMERICANS" is
> POLITICALLY CORRECT"?
>
> Situation is the same, except one is Indian while the other
> is Mexican!
You're wrong about that. If anyone were to say the Mexicans or the
Canadians were North Americans(the continent being the common factor),
there would be little dissent. The U.S. of A. commonly refers to itself
as America, and it's people as Americans. OTOH, neither China nor Japan
or Korea or Singapore refers to themselves as "Asia" and it figures
nowhere in their official names. That is the essential flaw of your
argument above.
Prem
mailto:pre...@qed.net
Samedi
Anh Nhan wrote:
>
> Samedi <foha...@splatozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> <...>
> >Wouldn't think so. Americans are usually called that, often qualified by
> >South American, Central American, native American, or North American.
> >The South American is certainly quite correct, since mexico is
> >considered to be a part of the continent of South America.
>
> America, but does NAFTA mean anything ?
Yep! But. mainly that the big US companies get to use a lot of cheap
labour, without hassle from immigration.
Sandeep
with racist asians like this, who needs whites. man where are you from??
The Greased Cougar from the Planet Big Bollocks
<alta...@silas.cc.monash.edu.au> wrote in article
<5l38o2$h...@silas.cc.monash.edu.au>...
> "Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit" <I...@home.playing> writes:
>
> >Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> >Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> >SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> >Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Hang on, I thought only whitey could be racist.
>
Ramu
UWAH, roy speed you very lucky because I dont know you what race. If I
know, I taruk u left, right ,centre,top,bottom ,middle until you forget
you own colour and never want to touch your pc again.
Eddy Karmana
This guy's email address is I...@home.playing. Personally, I think the message is
nothing but a flame-bait. And unfortunately, people ate it up, which is what
he/she wanted in the first place.
Just ignore it, please. Don't waste your energy responding to trash - not worth
it, don't you think??
Cheers!
=CaS=
> > Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit <I...@home.playing> wrote in article
> > <3374F5...@home.playing>...
> > > Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> > > Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> > > SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> > > Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
Peter Mackay
In article <3374F5...@home.playing>,
"Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit" <I...@home.playing> wrote:
> Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
So there are no Asians at all, then?
Just Asian Indians, Asian Japanese, Asian Chinese, Asian Malays, Asian
Russians and so on. Ooops, forgot about the Asian Chinese Hong Kongese.
~ m
u U Cheers!
\|
|> -Peter Mackay
/ \ pete...@netinfo.com.au
_\ /_
Peter Mackay
In article <5l4f3a$h...@sjx-ixn3.ix.netcom.com>,
fbl...@ix.netcom.com(The Kalogian) wrote:
>
> Wait a minute ....
>
> Supposing we reword the Subject Title from "INDIANS
> ARE NOT ASIANS" to "MEXICANS ARE NOT AMERICANS" will
> it offend anybody?
>
> Mexico is also in American continent.
>
> Don't flame me ... am just asking.
These are citizens of the United States of Mexico you are talking about,
not the US of America.
rod speed
Wei Zheng <zh...@physics.sunysb.edu> wrote in article <5l3604$le8$1...@abel.ic.sunysb.edu>...
> i forgot where i read this, but an article suggests that indians are really
> "white people" (sorry for the lack of more proper term, but you know what i mean)
There is quite a bit of truth in that.
> that cross the pass from middle east to the
> india subcontinent tens of thousand years ago.
Well, certainly invaded from the north. Very well documented
historically. Much of this is well within the historical record with India.
> that's why their features are closer to the white people than to the other asians
Yes.
> even though they have darker complexion.
This is more complicated and varys in a quite pronounced way down thru the country
with the ones that arent particularly dark at all being more common in the north etc.
> the same article also maintains that the darker complexion
> is due to the accumulation of the "tanning effect".
Its nothing like that simple. Some of the blackest people on earth like the Tamils
and Bouganvillians are indeed roughly on the equator, but there are also some
quite light colored groups as well. Tho its certainly true that there is a considerable
tendency for those in the equatorial regions to be darker than those at the higher
latitudes. Its got nothing do with any accumulation of tanning tho. Evolution doesnt
work like that. That is effectively Lamarkism which has been proven to be a complete dud.
> now, i don't know how accurate this is,
The invasion stuff is accurate, the skin color/tanning is a dud.
> but i think it is pretty interesting. if this is true, i think
> they are more likely remote cousins of arabians.
In fact its more northerly than that.
> i didn't know the term "asian" refers to any race.
True.
Paul Kekai Manansala
In article <5l8j9i$f...@news.asu.edu>,
shr...@imap1.asu.edu wrote:
>
> c.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.vietnamese,soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.thai,soc.culture.australian,aus.politics
>Followup-To: soc.culture.singapore,soc.culture.asean,soc.culture.asian,soc.culture.asian.american,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.filipino,soc.culture.india,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.hongkong,soc.culture.indonesia,soc.culture.japan,soc.culture.korean,s
>
>
> c.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.vietnamese,soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.thai,soc.culture.australian,aus.politics
>References: <3374F5...@home.playing>
>Distribution:
>Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit (I...@home.playing) wrote:
>: Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
>: Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
>: SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
>: Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
>: As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
>: Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
>: Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
>: NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
>: like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
>: They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
>
>making u flame, he is achieving his goals), I will try to educate u
>about some aspects of Race and evolution....
>
>
>It is true that all the races originated in Africa; some of them like
>the Negroid and the pro-Arabian race stayed in Africa itslef while
>most of the other races including your Mongoloid race moved out
>of Africa.Even the pro-Arabian(because Arabs are themselves a mixture)
>race moved out slightly but they stayed closest to Africa.
>
>India is a strong mixture of races.The prominent ones are the
>Aryan and Dravidian races.Now what is Aryan?They were peoples
>who came from the Caucusus in Central Asia and to the closest
>description that u can understand, let me tell u that they are
>most akin to the earlier Greeks and Romans.Okay, what is Dravidian then?
>It is the most ignored type of race generally because ignorant people
>associate it with Negroid race due to its dark colour.The
>interesting thing is Dravidians are dark but they have Caucasian
>features.That is why u will find even a darker Indian(say Brown)
>to be closer to Europeans in facial features.
Not all people in India have "Caucasian" features. There are
very large numbers who don't have such features together with
their dark skin. In fact, in anthropological terms the Indians
on average are mesorrhine and slightly prognathic just like
Mongoloids or Mulattos.
Some modern genetic studies have shown a very close relationship
between some Dravidians and African Negroids. Recent articles
in scholarly journals using mtDNA and Y chromosome analysis
have shown Indians are very closely related to East Asians.
In probably the most thorough global Y chromosome study yet,
in the March 1997 issue of _Genetics_, Indians are classified
along with Southeast Asians due to both having a strong
predominance (100% of sample) of YAP haplotype 1, and very
similar features on the DYS19 allele. They completely
lacked YAP haplotype 4, which was characteristic of European
populations. The sample also lacked any YAP haplotype
4 which showed up in 20% of Iranians, although some new
info sugggests that at least some of this haplotype is found
in India.
Y chromosomes show one's paternal inheritance, while mtDNA
shows maternal inheritance.
Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala
Michael Laderman
On Mon, 12 May 1997 05:20:44 +0930, Samedi
<foha...@splatozemail.com.au> wrote:
>The Kalogian wrote:
>>
>> Wait a minute ....
>>
>> Supposing we reword the Subject Title from "INDIANS
>> ARE NOT ASIANS" to "MEXICANS ARE NOT AMERICANS" will
>> it offend anybody?
>>
>> Mexico is also in American continent.
>>
>> Don't flame me ... am just asking.
>>
>> FB/
>>
>>
>Wouldn't think so. Americans are usually called that, often qualified by
>South American, Central American, native American, or North American.
>The South American is certainly quite correct, since mexico is
>considered to be a part of the continent of South America.
How's that again? Mexico is most definitely part of NORTH AMERICA.
M.L.
The Kalogian
In <33760F...@sprintmail.com> Patrick <lgui...@sprintmail.com>
writes:
>Samedi wrote:
>>
>> The Kalogian wrote:
>> >
>> > Wait a minute ....
>> >
>> > Supposing we reword the Subject Title from "INDIANS
>> > ARE NOT ASIANS" to "MEXICANS ARE NOT AMERICANS" will
>> > it offend anybody?
>> >
>> > Mexico is also in American continent.
>> >
>> > Don't flame me ... am just asking.
>> >
>> > FB/
>> >
>> >
>> Wouldn't think so. Americans are usually called that, often
qualified by
>> South American, Central American, native American, or North
American.
>> The South American is certainly quite correct, since mexico is
>> considered to be a part of the continent of South America.
>
Central
>America, and it *is* considered to be part of North America.
> As for the top post... there do seem to be a lot of Mexicans who
>would take offense to that. Although people from the USA frequently
call
>themselves (ourselves) "Americans", Canadians and Mexicans can also
>claim to be Americans, and for that matter, anyone from the Americas
can
>claim that. Its just the Canadians and Mexicans that seem to be the
most
>anal when I say that "I'm American."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's what I think!
So, why is it that it's okay to say "MEXICANS ARE NOT
AMERICANS" while saying "INDIANS ARE NOT ASIANS" is not okay?
Base on this, (the above statement) why is it everybody
got upset when the guy said that "INDIANS ARE NOT ASIANS"?
Is it because the statement "INDIANS ARE NOT ASIANS" is
POLITICALLY INCORRECT while "MEXICANS ARE NOT AMERICANS" is
POLITICALLY CORRECT"?
Situation is the same, except one is Indian while the other
is Mexican!
Another situation: Heard of the term "African-American"?
Usually this connotes Black Americans. Think about it:
South Africa is also in Africa and there are Whities there,
how come the statement doesn't apply to them. Khadafi is
also in Africa, so is Tunisia and Egypt, but the term
doesn't apply to them! Why not call "African-Americans" as
"BLACK AFRICAN-AMERICANS" instead to be specific?
Who decides the political correctness?
Hey, don't flame me. I am just pointing it out.
FB/
shr...@imap1.asu.edu
c.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.vietnamese,soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.thai,soc.culture.australian,aus.politics
Followup-To: soc.culture.singapore,soc.culture.asean,soc.culture.asian,soc.culture.asian.american,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.filipino,soc.culture.india,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.hongkong,soc.culture.indonesia,soc.culture.japan,soc.culture.korean,s
c.culture.malaysia,soc.culture.vietnamese,soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.thai,soc.culture.australian,aus.politics
References: <3374F5...@home.playing>
Distribution:
Most of the Indians u see daily are of the Brown type ie. Mixtures
of Aryan(white) and Dravidian(black).Remeber your primary school lessons
which said that a mixure
of white and black produces Brown.Okay, enuf said.
And BTW, these Dravidians have been there in India since 5000 years itself.
Soooo, Indians are as Asian as u can get geographically.(I don't know
what is Asian in the racial sense;perhaps there is nothing like Asian
in the racial sense).
Bye,
Shridhar----a true Dravido-Aryan.
hari001
Adrian Planinc wrote:
>
> In article <3374F5...@home.playing>, "Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit" <I...@home.playing> says:
> >
> >Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> >Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> >SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> >Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> >As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> >Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> >Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> >NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> >like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> >They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
>
American Indians are totally different from India Indians.
What black Indians are you talking of? Do you know that the majority of
India Indians are much fairer than you..or have you forgotten that
in the last 3 years as many Indians were choosen to be the top or
runner up Miss World or Miss Universe??
..so Mr. Filthy mouth think and know your facts before you talk.
Wilfred
Mexicans should more aptly be called "Latin Americans" rather than
"Americans".
The Kalogian <fbl...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<5l4f3a$h...@sjx-ixn3.ix.netcom.com>...
Indian
Hey, rice ball,
Wake up ! The term Asian as applied to rice balls like you was coined by
the white man to differentiate you from 'them'. It was not meant as an
honorific.
Even though I am a fair-skinned north Indian, I would rather be known as
"an Indian" than "an Asian", because the term Asian as used by the
whites and other races who resent "asians" in the west and Pacific Rim
countries like Australia and New Zealand, often has derogatory
implications. The term "Asian" is linked to racist connotations of
"yellow-skin", "short, myopic, flat-nosed, japs, chinese", "rice-ball"
etc, etc (white man's terms, not mine, but the last one definitely
applicable to you).
But then, what would a short-sighted racist rice ball like you know,
huh.
A "Fair" Indian.
Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby(this is the operative title) Mit gurgled
and puked:
Nurbula
Wally wrote:
>
> Do you just love it????
> Wind them up and piont them at each other and suddenly their forgotten
> their political correctness and are screaming racial taunts at each
> other. Go for it fellows, I'm sure you are both right, keep it up.
Why is it so difficult ? By definition Indians are Aisans. By the way,
it was the Japanese who tried to break away from Asian and become
European; bloody shame !!!
lchow
The Kalogian (fbl...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: Wait a minute ....
: Supposing we reword the Subject Title from "INDIANS
: ARE NOT ASIANS" to "MEXICANS ARE NOT AMERICANS" will
: it offend anybody?
:
: Mexico is also in American continent.
: Don't flame me ... am just asking.
You know, if you're making a statement...you would be correct.
Mexicans are Mexicans and they ARE NOT Americans!
Americans are white or fair skinned. Mexicans are brown to dark skinned.
Many are light today, due to intermarriage. Maybe Mexicans are ashamed to
be called Mexican and they prefer to be called Caucasian! Though, I don't
think that is the case.
Ian Johnson
--------------534FAF6BE3458E3FB8E158A6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Nurbula wrote:
> Wally wrote:
> >
> > ......... suddenly their forgotten
> > their political correctness and are screaming racial taunts at
> each
> > other. ..........
>
> > >Hey, rice ball,
> >
>
> > >.................Even though I am a fair-skinned north Indian, I
> would rather be known as
> > >"an Indian" than "an Asian", ............
>
> > >Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby(this is the operative title) Mit
> gurgled
> > >and puked:
> > >>
> > >> Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> > >> Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> > >> SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. .................
> ............By definition Indians are Aisans..........
How could it matter where you come from or what colour you are? If for
purposes (other than yours) you need to differentiate:
Physical geographically : India is regarded as a subcontinent. If you
are being liberal thats an entity in its own right if not its part of
the asian continent.
Geographically: India makes up the largest part of South Asia, you could
call its people south asian if that had any possible use.
Culturally: Indians are Indians, Indians, Indians , Indians (with
enormous variety)
Racially: Indians are Caucasian.(a liberal view of the sub-racial groups
would'nt see that as Asian. It does'nt make them European either unless
they live there.)
Indians are Indians
Chinese are chinese
AustralASIANS can be each of those (and others but hardly more)
Regards
Ian Johnson RAIA
Hobart
--------------534FAF6BE3458E3FB8E158A6
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML><BODY>
Nurbula wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>Wally wrote:
<BR><I>></I>
<BR><I>> ......... suddenly their forgotten</I>
<BR><I>> their political correctness and are screaming racial taunts at each</I>
<BR><I>> other. ..........</I>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<I></I>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE><I></I>
<BR><I>> >Hey, rice ball,</I>
<BR><I>></I>
<BR><I></I>
<BR><I>> >.................Even though I am a fair-skinned north Indian, I
would rather be known as</I>
<BR><I>> >"an Indian" than "an Asian", ............</I>
<BR><I></I>
<BR><I>> >Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby(this is the operative title) Mit gurgled</I>
<BR><I>> >and puked:</I>
<BR><I>> >></I>
<BR><I>> >> Just because India is in Asia does not mean that</I>
<BR><I>> >> Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE</I>
<BR><I>> >> SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. .................</I>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>............By definition Indians are Aisans..........
</BLOCKQUOTE>
How could it matter where you come from or what colour you are? If for
purposes (other than yours) you need to differentiate:
<BR>
<BR>Physical geographically : India is regarded as a subcontinent. If you are
being liberal thats an entity in its own right if not its part of the asian
continent.
<BR>
<BR>Geographically: India makes up the largest part of South Asia, you could
call its people south asian if that had any possible use.
<BR>
<BR>Culturally: Indians are Indians, Indians, Indians , Indians (with enormous
variety)
<BR>
<BR>Racially: Indians are Caucasian.(a liberal view of the sub-racial groups
would'nt see that as Asian. It does'nt make them European either unless
they live there.)
<BR>
<BR>Indians are Indians
<BR>
<BR>Chinese are chinese
<BR>
<BR>AustralASIANS can be each of those (and others but hardly more)
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>Regards
<BR>
<BR>Ian Johnson RAIA
<BR>Hobart
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>
--------------534FAF6BE3458E3FB8E158A6--
Imran
danG! let define the word asian...but to do that lets pin down the scope
of Asia first....
Because of its vast size and diverse character, Asia is divided for
convenience into five major realms. These are as follows: Asia of the
former Soviet Union, including Siberia, western Central Asia, and the
Caucasus; East Asia, including China, Mongolia, Korea, and Japan; Southeast
Asia, including Burma, Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, Malaysia,
Singapore, Indonesia, Brunei, and the Philippines; South Asia, including
India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, and Bhutan; and Southwest
Asia, including Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Israel,
Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the other states of the Arabian Peninsula. The
continent may also be divided into two cultural realms: that which is Asian
in culture (East Asia, Southeast Asia, and South Asia) and that which is
not (Asia of the former Soviet Union, and Southwest Asia).
Unless they dont teach you geography in japan, u should know that asians
are natives of Asia.
SO like it or not, whether you are an indian, chinese, arab, jew, japanese,
mongolian, indonesians, malay, pakistani, filipino, bruneian, thai,
laotian, vietnamese, korean or even siberian..YOU ARE AN ASIAN! You have no
right to reserve the word asian for yourself.
The world's already screwed up..dont make it more confusing.
Imran
Yoon Jae Lee <kla...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<3376A9...@earthlink.net>...
> Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit wrote:
> >
> > Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> > Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> > SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> > Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> > As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> > Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> > Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> > NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> > like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> > They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
Ganesh
On Tue, 13 May 1997 15:47:10 -0700, Indian <s26...@sp.ac.sg> wrote:
>Hey, rice ball,
>
>Wake up ! The term Asian as applied to rice balls like you was coined by
>
>the white man to differentiate you from 'them'. It was not meant as an
>
>honorific.
>
>Even though I am a fair-skinned north Indian,
Snip
>
>A "Fair" Indian.
>
If it's only the white man who is racist then why do you make a point
of mentioning that you are "fair".
Come on,we all know just how racist Indians can be, albeit towards
each other. Just have a look at the matrimonials which advertise for
"wheatish" or fair skinned spouses! How many times have you heard the
whispering that so and so will never get a good match because they are
so dark.
I suggest you get over the holier than thou complex about the white
man and look in our own back yard before pointing the finger at
anyone.
Next time you might even have the confidence to post as "An Indian"
instead of "A Fair Indian"
Ganesh
When replying by Email remove the "X" from my address.
Michael Laderman
On Wed, 14 May 1997 16:50:53 +1000, Ian Johnson
<JA...@h130.aone.net.au> wrote:
[snip]
>Racially: Indians are Caucasian.
[snip]
That's a meaningless remark. Races are cultural constructs and have no
basis in objective fact. Just ask any anthropologist. Scientists
haven't believed in the objective existence of races since at least
the 1950s.
Michael Laderman
On 14 May 1997 07:48:29 GMT, lc...@lava.net (lchow) wrote:
[snip]
> Every country in the world has some of every race, that does not
>make the US now Africa does it?
[snip]
Once again: race is a purely cultural construct and has no basis in
objective, scientific fact. If you do a survey of attitudes towards
race, you'll see that it's defined differently in different countries.
In the U.S., for example, traditionally race has been defined based on
skin color virtually to the exclusion of anything else. And the
standard has traditionally been that a drop of "black blood" made you
black. In South Africa, on the other hand, people of "mixed race" are
considered as "coloreds". It should take no leap of imagination to
understand that most American blacks (and indeed many who now are
considered white) would be considered "colored" in South Africa.
Just stick to geography. If you want to argue that Eurasia shouldn't
be separated into Europe and Asia, so that the British and the Chinese
should both be described as Eurasians, that's a valid argument. If you
want to argue that the Indian subcontinent is not part of Asia, that's
a little harder, I think. And then there's always the question of
whether offshore islands like Japan are to be included. Some British
have never really considered themselves European by virtue of the fact
that they live on islands offshore.
But quit with all these "race" arguments. Race is an invidious
category and we should recognize it for the falsehood it is.
Michael Laderman
P.S. In a geographical sense, Mexicans ARE fully as American as U.S.
citizens are. Period, end of story.
George Sweeney
It's very sad to see all the racism this thread has unearthed!!
Mike
The Kalogian <fbl...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<5l4f3a$h...@sjx-ixn3.ix.netcom.com>...
>
>
> Wait a minute ....
>
> Supposing we reword the Subject Title from "INDIANS
> ARE NOT ASIANS" to "MEXICANS ARE NOT AMERICANS" will
> it offend anybody?
>
> Mexico is also in American continent.
>
> Don't flame me ... am just asking.
>
Indians are suddenly NOT Asians because Indians are hard working, honest,
well integrated people who conduct themselves well, do not throw vegetables
during demonstrationsm do not smash other property during demonstrations,
in fact do no demonstrate often. They use their BRAIN to put forward
arguments!
On top of it Indians value democracy very much!
In consequence you can't accept Indians as Asians because they don't go
on the rampage and attempt to destroy other peoples' democratic rights
and democratcy itself so Australian activists can't accept them as Asians.
I guess Malaysians and Indonesians aren't Asians either because they
behave well, they conduct themselves like HUMANS.
Apparently the real Asians are only some vegetable throwing lunatics who
smash
things in demonstrations and attempt to destroy democracy in Australia even
if these people are white John Lennon glasses wearing people with ponytails
with names like McInley e.t.c. and some people of Asian descent their
own home countries are happy to be rid of too. This notion MUST be brought
forward by the activists because how should they otherwise win their little
war?
Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit
lchow wrote:
>
> Samedi (foha...@splatozemail.com.au) wrote:
> : Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit wrote:
> : >
> : > India is not in Asia, it is called South Asia.
> : > Indians are Indians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. Would they
> : > want to be Asians, seeing what an Asian is? The answer
> : > is NO. Indians DON'T LIKE Asians...Indians are
> : > SIMPLY INDIANS. To identify Indians as
> : > Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ASIANS.
>
> : Racist geek. If Indian is in asia then they are asians. they might also
> : be Indians, would we then have to differentiate caste, religion and
> : other differences. As for asians, in your racist view must we now state
> : the country of origin, ancestral affiliation, spoken language. Get a
> : brain.
>
> As you say, Indians have a caste system. They are another country,
> different from China, Japan, and Korea.
>
> NO SELF-RESPECTING indian would want to be called an Asian...knowing that
> being Asian means to be Chinese, Japanese, or Korean.
>
> By the way the comments made by Mits were not racist comments, but merely
> a decent sentiment in Asia. We fully support Australians and White
> Americans in their economic struggles throughout the world.
>
> Mitoshi Matsushita
What did you hope to accomplish by putting my name
at the end of your article? Are you trying to pretend
you're me?
Fan Li TAI
While cycling on the InfoBahn on Thu, 15 May 1997 03:37:48 +0930, I saw <foha...@splatozemail.com.au> scrawling:
>lchow wrote:
>>
>> Samedi (foha...@splatozemail.com.au) wrote:
>> : Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit wrote:
>> : >
>> : > India is not in Asia, it is called South Asia.
>> : > Indians are Indians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. Would they
>> : > want to be Asians, seeing what an Asian is? The answer
>> : > is NO. Indians DON'T LIKE Asians...Indians are
>> : > SIMPLY INDIANS. To identify Indians as
>> : > Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ASIANS.
The original poster obviously cannot think. India is part of
Asia. So, Indians are Asians. Japan is part of the Orient. So,
the Japanese are Orientals. QED.
--
-Tai [procmail testing in progress]
There are no significant bugs in MS products that customers want fixed.
So saith the Gates. *Hiroshima '45 Tschernobyl '86 Windows '95* -news
http://math-www.uni-paderborn.de/~axel/blacklist.html * I do not buy from
http://spam.abuse.net/spam * Unsolicited Commer-
http://www.microcult.com/ * cial Email/spams
Manu Dube
: shr...@imap1.asu.edu wrote:
: : Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit (I...@home.playing) wrote:
: : : Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
: : : NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
: : : like me.
Well ... we do have some indians who look ...pale yellow like you.
How about them? :)
sanjay roy
Gosh! what is this! the chinks on the offensive!
Probably, it is high time the eyes were done to get a better perspective.
regards,
s.roy
"Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit" <I...@home.playing> wrote:
>lchow wrote:
>>
>> Samedi (foha...@splatozemail.com.au) wrote:
>> : Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit wrote:
>> : >
>> : > India is not in Asia, it is called South Asia.
>> : > Indians are Indians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. Would they
>> : > want to be Asians, seeing what an Asian is? The answer
>> : > is NO. Indians DON'T LIKE Asians...Indians are
>> : > SIMPLY INDIANS. To identify Indians as
>> : > Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ASIANS.
>>
Dryfus
"Mike" <spac...@hunterlink.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>Indians are suddenly NOT Asians because Indians are hard working, honest,
>well integrated people who conduct themselves well, do not throw vegetables
>during demonstrationsm do not smash other property during demonstrations,
>in fact do no demonstrate often. They use their BRAIN to put forward
>arguments!
haha. Yeah, right. And that's why they also kill each other off because
of stupid religion. How many times have we heard about the violent
clashes between Sikhs, Hindus, Muslims? And they only condemn a person
to life of squalor just because they had the misfortune of being born
to a low class. Need I say more?
>On top of it Indians value democracy very much!
>
That's why they assasinate their candidates before they can win.
Old Democracy still very immature. Last time I heard, Democracy is
not unique to India in Asia.
>In consequence you can't accept Indians as Asians because they don't go
>on the rampage and attempt to destroy other peoples' democratic rights
>and democratcy itself so Australian activists can't accept them as Asians.
>
Read my points above.
>I guess Malaysians and Indonesians aren't Asians either because they
>behave well, they conduct themselves like HUMANS.
>
You say Indonesia? Gee well, just ask the hundreds of thousands of East
Timorese who were murdered by the Indonesians. Yeah HUMANS, HUMAN BUTCHERS.
Malaysia? Just ask all those Rain Forest natives whom the Malaysian
government is creating an environment of racial genocide. I'm sure those
dying native people will say how the Malaysians are conducting themselves
well.
>Apparently the real Asians are only some vegetable throwing lunatics who
>smash
>things in demonstrations and attempt to destroy democracy in Australia even
But most of those people are whites! Don't blame others for what whites
do.
>if these people are white John Lennon glasses wearing people with ponytails
>with names like McInley e.t.c. and some people of Asian descent their
>own home countries are happy to be rid of too. This notion MUST be brought
>forward by the activists because how should they otherwise win their little
>war?
>
Doesn't even make any sense.
>
Babar Rasheed Khan
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Kenneth Phan wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 11 May 1997, zorror wrote:
>
> > Michael Laderman wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 10 May 1997 15:24:18 -0700, "Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby
> > > Mit" <I...@home.playing> wrote:
> > >
> > > >Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> > > >Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> > > >SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> > > >Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> > > >As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> > > >Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> > > >Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> > > >NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> > > >like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> > > >They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
> > >
> >
> > You fucked up son of a bitch, you are a.k.a baby Mit it
> > proves it. They dropped you on your head when you were born.
> > where are you from??? Some indian should have ripped you off in
> > a course so it explains.Heheheheheh I pity you baby
> >
> >
> Whoa! One really pissed off paki!
>
Oh oh, now white boy wants a piece of the pie too!
>
Kiki
This Mitoshi guy could be a white man in disguise. he he he. :)
Sandeep wrote:
>
> with racist asians like this, who needs whites. man where are you from??
>
> The Greased Cougar from the Planet Big Bollocks
> <alta...@silas.cc.monash.edu.au> wrote in article
> <5l38o2$h...@silas.cc.monash.edu.au>...
> > "Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit" <I...@home.playing> writes:
> >
> > >Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> > >Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> > >SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> > >Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > Hang on, I thought only whitey could be racist.
> >
Samedi
lchow wrote:
>
> Samedi (foha...@splatozemail.com.au) wrote:
> : Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby Mit wrote:
> : >
> : > India is not in Asia, it is called South Asia.
> : > Indians are Indians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. Would they
> : > want to be Asians, seeing what an Asian is? The answer
> : > is NO. Indians DON'T LIKE Asians...Indians are
> : > SIMPLY INDIANS. To identify Indians as
> : > Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ASIANS.
>
> : Racist geek. If Indian is in asia then they are asians. they might also
> : be Indians, would we then have to differentiate caste, religion and
> : other differences. As for asians, in your racist view must we now state
> : the country of origin, ancestral affiliation, spoken language. Get a
> : brain.
>
> As you say, Indians have a caste system. They are another country,
> different from China, Japan, and Korea.
>
> NO SELF-RESPECTING indian would want to be called an Asian...knowing that
> being Asian means to be Chinese, Japanese, or Korean.
>
> By the way the comments made by Mits were not racist comments, but merely
> a decent sentiment in Asia. We fully support Australians and White
> Americans in their economic struggles throughout the world.
>
> Mitoshi Matsushita
China etc. All people from that continent are collectively refered to as
asian.
Yoon Jae Lee
lchow wrote:
>
> The Kalogian (fbl...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>
> : Wait a minute ....
>
> : Supposing we reword the Subject Title from "INDIANS
> : ARE NOT ASIANS" to "MEXICANS ARE NOT AMERICANS" will
> : it offend anybody?
> :
> : Mexico is also in American continent.
>
> : Don't flame me ... am just asking.
>
> Mexicans are Mexicans and they ARE NOT Americans!
> Americans are white or fair skinned. Mexicans are brown to dark skinned.
> Many are light today, due to intermarriage. Maybe Mexicans are ashamed to
> be called Mexican and they prefer to be called Caucasian! Though, I don't
> think that is the case.
I was perhaps thinking all peoples from the Asian continent are Asian
but the terms seems to be a bit too general. I dunno. Whatever!!
--
**********************************************************************
Yoon Jae Lee Conductor and Pianist of the 21st Century
"Take the A train, a great song and great advice!"
**********************************************************************
Indian
Samedi wrote:
>
> Doan wrote:
> >
Somebody Smelly wrote :
> > Okay, I suppose you're right b'cos Indians don't talk like us. They talk
> > walk, (inparticular) eat and smell like CURRY. I don't mean to be rude but it is >> simply the FACT.
> > See Ya.
>
SO WHAT ? Lots of Orientals smell like garlic and have bad breath, does
that mean all people of Oriental races smell the same ?
Same with Indians, not all eat hot curries, so not all smell of curry.
Check your so-called "facts" before you spout your prejudices in public.
Yuk Chan
c.culture.ma
Followup-To: soc.culture.singapore,soc.culture.asean,soc.culture.asian,soc.culture.asian.american,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.filipino,soc.culture.india,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.hongkong,soc.culture.indonesia,soc.culture.japan,soc.culture.korean,s
References: <3374F5...@home.playing> <5l2rtf$e...@metro.usyd.edu.au>
Distribution: inet
Spider (ma...@asia.su.edu.au) wrote:
: What is your problem? Did you last girlfriend ditch you for a person of Indian
: decent? My deepest sympathies. But judging from your letter, I think your
: grilfriend made the right decision in leaving a stupid, arsehole bastard that
: you are.
: Never heard of anything as stupid as your assertion that Indians are not Asian.
: But then, if you look at a map of Asia you just might notice that geographically
: most of Asia is not Chinese (or in your case Mongoloid). Ithink it would be
: quite correct for me to assert that you are not Asian because you are too
: stupid.
: Spider
Hey, he is Japanese. Don't pull us Chinese in this mess. OK?
Jase
Wow.. since there have been so many threads to this header, thought
I'd join in the train so I don't get left out :)
I'll revert back to the original topic of Indians not being Asians.
If the original writer (whoever he/she is) feels so strongly about
Indians not being Asians, by all means, he/she can be whatever he/she
wants.
However, my stand is that India is part of Asia and as such, Indians
are Asians. I may be wrong though, you never know with world politics
these days. Besides, what's wrong with being Asian ? It's not like
it's a curse.
J.
Vk
I am married to an Australian of Indian descent and I'm happy to inform
you that the only curry you could possibly smell in my house comes from
the chicken at dinner time!!!
Damn racist!!!
Vk
Wayne Lee
------------------------------------------------
C:\>dir *.exe
WAYNE EXE 722093187 1/7/97 0:00:00
C:\>wayne
File not found or disk error.
Abort, Retry, Fail?
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Doan wrote:
> Ganesh wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 10 May 1997 15:24:18 -0700, "Mitoshi Matsushita a.k.a. Baby
> > Mit" <I...@home.playing> wrote:
> >
> > >Just because India is in Asia does not mean that
> > >Indians are Asians. THEY ARE NOT ASIANS. THEY ARE
> > >SIMPLY INDIANS FROM ASIA. To identify Indians as
> > >Asians would be incorrect and insulting to ALL ASIANS.
> > >As one would use the term American-Indians in the US,
> > >Indians from Asia should ALWAYS be identified as
> > >Asian-Indians, not just Asian. THEY ARE ASIAN INDIANS!!!
> > >NOT ASIANS. I am Asian. Those black Indians look nothing
> > >like me. That is because they are not ASIANS!!!!!!!
> > >They are INDIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
> >
> > May all our problems in life be so trivial.
> >
> > Now do you feel better after getting that off your chest? Have a Bex,
> > a cup of tea and a good lay down, it will all be better in the
> > morning.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > PaulW
> >
> > When replying by Email remove the "X" from my address.
>
> Okay, I suppose you're right b'cos Indians don't talk like us. They talk
> walk, (inparticular) eat and smell like CURRY.
>
> I don't mean to be rude but it is simply the FACT.
>
> See Ya.
>
>
Hey Doan, F**K YOU!! Your mother should be ashame to produce crap like
you. Please don't tell me you're chinese as well, you degraded us.
Wayne. Bristol UK
Vk
While studying in Spain and France I learned that there were 5
continents; Europe, Asia, America, Africa and Oceania. Back then, India
was part of Asia.
Then I immigrated to the US where I learned that there were 7
continents; Europe, Asia, N. America, S. America, Africa, Greenland and
Australia. Back then, India was still part of Asia.
If Indians do not consider themselves Asians is solely based on culture,
language and race. So, why not stop the thread here, and move on to
Australian topics.
I hope Atlantis does not become a continent when I immigrate to
Australia. :-)
By the way, can anyone point me in the right direction on where to
retrieve good info on Darwin and the Northern Territory? (Been to
Perth, Fremantle, Sydney and Albany)
Aussies, be proud of your country, ...it sure beats the ones I lived in.
Fan Li TAI
While cycling on the InfoBahn on Thu, 15 May 1997 13:38:48 -0500, I saw <vall...@australiamail.com> scrawling:
>While studying in Spain and France I learned that there were 5
>continents; Europe, Asia, America, Africa and Oceania. Back then, India
>was part of Asia.
>Then I immigrated to the US where I learned that there were 7
>continents; Europe, Asia, N. America, S. America, Africa, Greenland and
>Australia. Back then, India was still part of Asia.
I'm afraid you're still wrong :) The 7 continents are (in
no particular order): North and South America, Europe, Asia, Africa,
Australia and Antartica. Greenland was never considered a continent.
Australia is alternatively called Oceania sometimes.
India was considered a sub-continent because geologic
evidence says it it was moving around and rammed into Asia, causing
the Himalayas, becoming part of Asia then. All this before there
were humans, of course, so it shouldn't matter to us :)
To the fool who originally started this thread. Use your
brain. Asians are the people who live in Asia. People from Asia
are Asians, just as people like you are anal. Now, go flush your
self away for crossposting the hell out of this thread. And
for trolling.
Michael Laderman
On Thu, 15 May 1997 17:39:06 -0700, Indian <s26...@sp.ac.sg> wrote:
>Wrong there, pal. Mexico is in Central America, which is the isthmus
>joining North and South America. Historically, though, Mexico was once
>part of North and Central America as California and Texas states used to
>belong to Mexico until annexed by the US.
We're splitting hairs a bit here, but the one who's wrong is you. All
of Mexico except for the very southernmost part is part of North
America, not part of the isthmus of Central America. Check out your
atlas again.
M.L.
Michael Laderman
On Thu, 15 May 1997 13:38:48 -0500, Vk <vall...@australiamail.com>
wrote:
>While studying in Spain and France I learned that there were 5
>continents; Europe, Asia, America, Africa and Oceania. Back then, India
>was part of Asia.
>Then I immigrated to the US where I learned that there were 7
>continents; Europe, Asia, N. America, S. America, Africa, Greenland and
>Australia. Back then, India was still part of Asia.
[snip]
What happened to Antarctica? :)
Michael Laderman
On Thu, 15 May 1997 17:48:44 -0700, Indian <s26...@sp.ac.sg> wrote:
[snip]
>Same with Indians, not all eat hot curries, so not all smell of curry.
[snip]
Besides, what's so bad about smelling of curry, anyway? :)
Michael Laderman, curry lover
Vk
I would like to make a correction.
Greenland is not a continent, I should've said Anctartica.
Oooops!
jerry
On 14 May 1997, lchow wrote:
> The Kalogian (fbl...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>
>
> : Wait a minute ....
>
> : Supposing we reword the Subject Title from "INDIANS
> : ARE NOT ASIANS" to "MEXICANS ARE NOT AMERICANS" will
> : it offend anybody?
> :
> : Mexico is also in American continent.
>
> : Don't flame me ... am just asking.
>
>
> You know, if you're making a statement...you would be correct.
> Mexicans are Mexicans and they ARE NOT Americans!
> Americans are white or fair skinned. Mexicans are brown to dark skinned.
> Many are light today, due to intermarriage. Maybe Mexicans are ashamed to
> be called Mexican and they prefer to be called Caucasian! Though, I don't
> think that is the case.
>
> Where did u get all this crap from???? Although the majority of
Mexicans and a greater part of South and Central America consist of people
who are of mixed race.. many are also direct descendants from European
immigrants. Thay are not ashamed to be called Mexican or whatever maybe
their country of origin. Geographically Mexicans are North Americans,
culturally they are Latin Americans.... Unlike many people that I know who
live in this country and call themselves italian, irish, Chinese americans
etc Latinos are proud of who they are and do not try to impress others
by calling themselves spanish native americans etc.
Cheers,