 | | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) You, my friend, are wrong. Making generalizations based upon skin color is the very definition of racism, no matter what the race. -John (22 years ago, 7-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) So... Sickle cell anemia is racist. Giving birth to same-race children by same-race parents is racist Tendency toward sunburn is racist The greater incidence of lactose-intolerance among Asian ethnicities is racist The physiologic adaptations (...) (22 years ago, 7-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) Scott is guilty of many sins, too many to list actually, but that particular observation (that historically, it's went better for you if you're white and well off than if you're not) wasn't racist, per se. If it were, why then, pointing out (...) (22 years ago, 7-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) Did you not once say all Palestinians were terrorists? Scott A (22 years ago, 8-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) Very few of us are perfect Larry. Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 8-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) I got pulled over for DWB once! Well, okay, all they could see was my passenger, but the fix-it ticket was for a problem they couldn't see when they turned on their lights. Oh no! Now I'm racist too! Bruce Black Irish (22 years ago, 8-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) See? Now this mentality of people, whether police or not, to automatically suspect people just 'cause they're black is the racist part. This is what makes *me* 'mad enuf to puke' Pointing out that DWB's happen is *not* racist--pointing out (...) (22 years ago, 8-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) No, no and NO! That is what *you* heard me say, even after me having explained my position numerous times. What I said (and I'm typing slowly so you can keep up here) is that anyone who *supports* terrorists are as culpable as the terrorists (...) (22 years ago, 8-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) Such as the terrorist act of laying waste to two whole cities, for example? Dave! (22 years ago, 8-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) I don't know to what you are referring, but I would say such as the terrorist act of laying waste to two whole *buildings*, yes. -John (22 years ago, 8-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) DAVID!!! THE POINT BEING MADE *REALLY* IS THAT IT IS THE *RICH* WHO HAVE THE EASIER RIDE!!! It doesn't matter about their skin color!! Black millionares skate just as easily as white ones!! Sometimes better! Ask OJ. -John (22 years ago, 8-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) I know where you're going, Dave! Don't go there! No one wants to rehash THAT one! Plus LFB would be annoyed he missed it! (you've got me humming "I think I'm turning Japanese" already so knock it off!) ++Lar (22 years ago, 8-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) (22 years ago, 8-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) (whoops) Skate, yes. As easily? No. DWB *is* a real problem whether you admit it or not. (22 years ago, 8-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) Well, my knowledge of WWII history isn't as solid as it could be, so instead I was referring to: "Then the LORD rained on Sodom and Gomor'rah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven; and he overthrew those cities, and all the valley, (...) (22 years ago, 8-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) Somehow DWB has become the example here, which wasn't the initial assertion. Initially, Scott asserted that success in America is somehow assured if your skin color was a particular shade. DWB is an issue of profiling, to which I have mixed (...) (22 years ago, 8-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) So who trained OBL? Who funded terrorists in central America? Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 10-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) Nope. I inferred that white folks have more "freedoms". That view is not "class warfare". That view is not “racism”. It’s a fact. When I was in Seattle a couple of months ago I notices 2 things: 1. Beggars tended to be black [and there was a (...) (22 years ago, 10-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) Interesting question / answer session: Q: Does Iraq have nuclear weapons capability? A: Probably (or close anyway), but not enough information. Q: Assuming they do, would they be prepared to use it in a war if they thought it justified? A: (...) (22 years ago, 10-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) Well, you inferred wrongly. They have the same "freedoms" everyone else has. There is one law for everyone. (...) Give me an example of an American law that grants whites more freedoms than blacks. (...) Sounds like an economic issue to me as (...) (22 years ago, 11-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) Now ask: Q: Whose reasoning for use of nuclear weapons do you trust more-- Iraq or the US? A: ? -John (22 years ago, 11-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
John, You are being obtuse again. Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 11-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) Squirm. Please provide examples if you can of US laws that limit freedoms according to race. -John (22 years ago, 11-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) I never said there are "US laws that limit freedoms according to race". Did I? It is you who are squirming by avoiding the point - despite the fact that it has been made by more than just me. Shut-up or Put-up. Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 11-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) You: I inferred that white folks have more "freedoms". Well, what are they? -John (22 years ago, 11-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) More of them have the "freedom" to go on holiday in Edinburgh [Scotland] than do non-whites. ;) Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 11-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) And for the third time, I assert that you are speaking about economics, not race. But you have managed to bury my original objection to your initial post with a barrage of obfuscation. Well done. -John (22 years ago, 11-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) When the economics are driven by race and an undercurrent of societal racism (not in every single person, but as a demonstrable trend in cultural character), then the economics are a symptom of the underlying racism. The fact that you, along (...) (22 years ago, 11-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) You don't think they are linked? Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 11-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) In what way are they *SPECIFICALLY* linked. -John (22 years ago, 11-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) Well, since I've publically stated I think their reasoning in WWII was nothing short of terrorism anyway (lets not go there again), I'd have to say "neither", especially with dubya at the helm. Here's another question: Do you think that (...) (22 years ago, 11-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) Herein lies the real problem. You hit it right on the head with that question, Rosco. I am somewhat in favor of blasting violent people with violent retaliation, but I do fear that to some extent such activity can breed future violence. Many (...) (22 years ago, 11-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) I tell you, the word "terrorism" gets so over/misused. The purpose of terrorism is to evoke fear in a GP for the purpose of swaying opinion. We dropped the bombs on Japan to bring about a quick end to the war (that *they* started BTW), not to (...) (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) I'm asking you john why you think non-whites in the USA are genetically predisposed to have disproportionately less economic freedom. Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) Actually, the bomb was dropped to scare the Japanese, thus ending the war. I don't see that as terrorism, though - terrorism implies a much more prolonged chain of events than a couple weeks in August '45. Terrorism is ETA in Spain, IRA in (...) (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) The two atomic bomb raids were not the only US bomb raids on Japan during the second world war. US low level incendiary bomb raids started much earlier. The aim of the night time bomb raids were the civillian population, which largely lived in (...) (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) I know that. I was referring to the use of the two bombs as part of a larger conflict - they were not a terrorist act themselves, IMHO. (...) It is not terrorism, but it is close. The name for it is "total war", a concept that was born in the (...) (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) And I think that war is hell, and that when you're in a *war*, that it truly is an 'us and them' scenario. There is no denying that the 'politic', the 'intelligencia' and the 'people' have to be 'on-side' in order to fight and maintain a war (...) (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) Are you serious?? I have been *trying* to point out to you that, not only is such a spurious allogation not true, but *IT IS RACIST*. I never once made such a claim. Are you still beating your wife? -John (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) Not going to speak for Scott, but I took his meaning as: If we do a poll, we will find out that the *majority* of black people make a lot less money and live in disadvantagious areas of the US than the *majority* of white people. Since you, (...) (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) Not the believe like us or die variety. That may be been en vogue 100s of years ago for Christianity, but Christianity grew out of those dark times, and continues to change with time (although the basic message is the same). Islam has no (...) (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) Okay, but so what? Statistically, one group will *have* to make more than the other group-- what is the point? The point is that there are haves and havenots-- why introduce race into the equation? How does that ultimately matter? And what (...) (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) Islam is not "Believe or die", nor it ever was. Neither was Christianity. Yet, both religions were used as pretexts by loonies - that is inevitable! (...) I have a hard time believing Allah wrote the Khoran. Somehow I tend to follow a more (...) (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
|
(...) nothing (...) "neither", (...) here. Thanks for not going there again. (...) Where did I mention muslims? ROSCO (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) How did blacks get into the "less money" hole? Are you honestly trying to sweep slavery, racism, Jim Crow laws, blocking of access to education, discrimination in the workplace under the rug? If you pretend that this didn't happen, then you (...) (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) *Are* all blacks in the "less money" hole? Why not? Why are millions well off, dispite all of the things you mentioned? I am not trying to sweep all of those things under the rug; I am calling for people who use such arguments as excuses to (...) (22 years ago, 13-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) Why not? Why are millions well (...) You choose to dodge my question, so I'll ignore yours for the moment. Are you claiming that blacks haven't been put into a difficult position in the first place due to factors mentioned above? You may ask (...) (22 years ago, 13-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Buses & Beggers [Re: Vote against/for...]
|
|
(...) Not at all. Blacks *did* have serious civil rights issues. Most of the country has been able to get beyond simple racism. Today many blacks face many social and economic problems (as does everyone else!)-- but to continually blame racism is (...) (22 years ago, 13-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
