|
|
 |
|
Getting On : All My Politics
Nation of Zombies | from jolifam77 - Friday, June 22, 2007
accessed 2570 times I'm posting this article from a news station in Knoxville, TN, an interview with the parents of a young couple savagely tortured and murdered. The point is to show how weird things are in this country, where a mother of a son who is brutally murdered will say, in addressing some protesters of this black-on-white crime, "I don't think Chris would've been impressed with it or would've liked it. In fact, I think he might have been embarrassed by it."
She should be crying out for blood, not meekly pondering the racial rammifications of this crime personally affecting her. All the parents should be f-ing nuts. I leave one community of zombies to enter another.What happened to the human race n the sixties? What has the human race become since then? Reminds me of the movie the "Revenge of the Body Snatchers" where the human race is being taken over, one by one being turned into zombies. Or the old version of the Time Machine, where the Morlochs prey at night on the pacified, stupified Eloy (modern day Whites). This is modern day America folks, where if your child is slaughtered at night, you are expected to keep your cool for the television, and not rock the boat. Meanwhile the media ignores attrocities like this every day. And we wonder why we're afraid to leave our homes at night.
This is not civilization, this a sheep corral, we're being tamed for the slaughter. With some 800,000 incidents a year of black-on-white crime, all but ignored by the media, the question is, who's card will come up next, yours?
Article:
Knoxville (WVLT) -- The parents of Christopher Newsom and Channon Christian are responding to the racially motivated rallies.
Volunteer TV's Kim Bedford sat down with them and found some differing opinions all around. Chris Newsom's room is exactly how he left it the day he left for his date with girlfriend Channon Christian.
if (self['plpm'] && plpm['Mid-Story Ad']) document.write('');if (self['plpm'] && plpm['Mid-Story Ad']){ document.write(plpm['Mid-Story Ad']);} else { if(self['plurp'] && plurp['97']){} else {document.write(''); } }if (self['plpm'] && plpm['Mid-Story Ad']) document.write('');
The brutally murdered young couple is at the center of the rallies.
"I don't see the purpose of the rallies," said Mary Newsom. "I don't think Chris would've been impressed with it or would've liked it. In fact, I think he might have been embarrassed by it."
Chris' mother, Mary, says the protesters are doing much more harm than good, but her husband, Hugh, disagrees.
"I don't object to their right to assemble and project their cause," said Hugh Newsom. "I think they feel they're doing it for Chris and Channon."
Hugh says he is, however, upset with the groups not having all of their facts straight.
"The police and District Attorney's Office have assured me that there was no parts missing from either body," Hugh said, "they have distorted that."
The Newsom's do agree that Chris and Channon's murder was as torturous as it was because of the color of their skin.
"Would they have done that to a black couple?" Hugh asked. "I don't think so."
"With all the things they did to them, what else could you call it but hate," said Mary.
But Channon Christian's father, Gary, says it wasn't about race.
"I think any kind of crime like that's a hate crime," said Gary Christian. Was it racial? No, I don't think so."
Gary says he doesn't like his daughter's pictures posted all over for the protesters personal agenda.
"I don't like anybody using my daughter," Gary said. "Everybody go home, Get this court over with. Let the people pay for what they did."
Whatever happens, the Newsom's say they just want their son to be honored.
"We love you Chris," the parents said.
The Newsom's say they, like the protesters, don't understand why the murder has not received national attention.
Mr. Christian tells us the protesters came to Channon's grave site recently and wants them to know that they better not enter onto the private property again.
http://www.volunteertv.com/home/headlines/8036687.html |
|
|
|
|
Reader's comments on this article Add a new comment on this article |  from jolifam67
Monday, July 09, 2007 - 20:13
(Agree/Disagree?)
I would add that if I were the parent of one of these young persons savagely tortured and killed by these humanoid creatures, I would hold vigil outside the courthouse until the creatures be brought and hanged. I would go without food. I would even sacrifice my life to see these subhuman monsters die without further ado. The notion that these creatures have any rights at all is beyond me. There should be a quick raise of hands in the face of overwhelming evidence. The creatures should be brought outside and hanged instantly. End of discussion.
(reply to this comment)
| | | |  From jolifam67
Friday, July 13, 2007, 08:20
(Agree/Disagree?)
The likelihood of that is far lower. And my anger is directed not only at the culprits but on the system that allows this type of savagery to occur, and does little to prevent or stop it. In the third world, this type of heinous crime is commonplace. That it is becoming more common here, is evidence that we turning into a third world country.(reply to this comment) |
| | from steam
Sunday, July 08, 2007 - 12:45
(Agree/Disagree?)
This Jolifam guy grew up in "God's Endtime Elite" a very "special and superior" group as did we all. Unfortunately some people require membership in a "special and superior group" to feel good about themselves. So no longer being able to believe the first group has legitimate claim to the title, another must be found. I resisted commenting on here for a long time because pretty much every time this fellow writes anything it is inflammatory nonsense and he gets to stir up a bunch of reaction which I am sure pleases him greatly. I am reading a book called "An Ancestors Tale" by evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, and it says nothing at all about racism. But the obvious scientific conclusion from reading the evidence, when being applied to racism would be that it makes no sense at all. Jolifam, rather than basing assumptions on the personal experiences you have had, and the way you processed them. Please instead seek a solid scientific basis rooted in our genetic structure as a foundation for your conclusions.
(reply to this comment)
| From jolifam67
Tuesday, July 17, 2007, 22:46
(Agree/Disagree?)
Came across this website which I found interesting: http://www.biblelife.org/brainwashing.htm
Of course I don't agree with everything, but I do agree that the way evolution and things like nutrition are taught in schools and universities today are bordering on fanaticism. It seems the entire world doesn't have a clue about the real meaning of science based on replicatable experiments and laws of nature. Instead people constantly jump to "obvious scientific conclusions" upon reading some bogus write-up that *sounds* scientific enough, but actually bears no relation to established laws of nature.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | From jolifam67
Wednesday, July 11, 2007, 08:13
(Agree/Disagree?)
"Once we recognize that we have all descended from the same human ancestors, it gets harder to clearly define where one race ends and the next begins. "
That's where subjectivity and consensus come into play.
"You cannot simply use the hue of ones skin or even the country of birth to descriminate [sic] since culture has much more to do with ones behaviour than race, strictly speaking."
Begging the question. This presupposes achieving culture as the motivation for discrimination.(reply to this comment) |
| | From J_P
Wednesday, July 11, 2007, 15:47
(Agree/Disagree?)
1. Sure, unless you actually want to find the truth or at least base your argument on something real. Just because the majority think something is true it does not make it so.
2. I am not talking about achieving culture in and of itself, I am talking about the cultural differences that usually make groups of people stand out from each other. If you discriminate solely on the color of skin, there is nothing I can say to you that will convince you otherwise. If it is based on behaviour relating to the culture one was raised in (strongly co-related to race, but not the same thing), and the actions of that culture have a negative moral impact on a particular society, then it is something tangible that if changed, should remove the discrimination.(reply to this comment) |
| | From jolifam67
Wednesday, July 11, 2007, 18:19
(Agree/Disagree?)
1. Whatever.
2. I discriminate based on the whole person--including skin color which is a giveaway for what race a person belongs to. Culture means nothing in and of itself to me. Because I know that culture is just the end result of a long process of experimentation on the part of the people of a location. I believe in Excellence, and I seek it out. For example: the ballet, compare it to African free-style dance. Choosing one over the other might be said to be a matter of taste. I don't trust taste as such. I have to look deeper. I know that Europeans are more intelligent than Africans. The by-products of intelligence--work-ethic, morality, quality--must then be taken into consideration. I appreciate these things. By the same token, I don't think nurturing appreciation of African art is worthwhile, though many a liberal goes through great effort to garner appreciation for it. I think it's stupid. Why waste time on inferior cultures, which again are inferior by virtue of the fact that they are the by-products of peoples of lesser intelligence. It's the chain effect of ascribing value to a thing. Once westerners willingly chose to discount race, they were forced to deal with the logical consequences of this decision, i.e. that since race is meaningles, the products of race--culture (e.g. art)--are all to be judged of equal value, which is absurd. (reply to this comment) |
| | From rainy
Friday, July 13, 2007, 02:37
 (Agree/Disagree?)
This comment shows your ignorance.
I walk into an aboriginal art gallery and am absolutely stunned by the beauty. One of Earth's oldest and most primitive races produces such intricate and incredibly meaningful art from the products naturally found in the Australian outback. And have you heard the didgeridoo? It sounds like it's coming from surround-sound speakers even in a huge open plain. The sound is absolutely incredible. They see things we don't in the earth. They've just evolved a different way. Respect to all is wisdom.(reply to this comment) |
| | From J_P
Wednesday, July 11, 2007, 20:02
(Agree/Disagree?)
Judging a collective groups intelligence is different from judging an individuals intellectual capacity. The groups collective intelligence is based on their upbringing (culture) and their capacity is not at all determined by race.
I couldnt care less about taste in an argument like this (art or anything), but what is universal is the moral impact of their cultural upbringing. My morals, I am strictly refering to how actions work to reduce suffering or the inverse.(reply to this comment) |
| | From jolifam67
Wednesday, July 11, 2007, 20:22
(Agree/Disagree?)
I'm not talking about the "collective." I'm talking about the commonality which is the genes. An extended family is just that--an extended family. Each individual is not so much an individual as an offshoot of the rest in his extended family. And you're wrong--capacity for many things Is determined by race, at an individual level, and at a collective level, when individuals are grouped by genetic relatedness.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From jolifam67
Thursday, July 12, 2007, 05:33
(Agree/Disagree?)
The fact is thorough scientific exploration into these matters needs government sponsorship, and governments nowadays refuse to sponsor things like "IQ studies." And any other facts that make their way out through alternative means of funding and what-have-you are suppressed and/or ridiculed by the Jewish-controlled global media. So as for "backing," your right, I don't have much backing these days, blame on the big Jewish global traders. They own the media and through it they discourage vehemently any sort of racial solidarity that goes against their agenda, or that they feel is threatening.
You don't want multiculturism in your country you say. Well doesn't it anger you that the media refuses to acknowledge your opinion and does everything in its power to force multiculturism on you whether you like it or not? And your government just goes along with it?(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From jolifam67
Sunday, July 08, 2007, 19:38
 (Agree/Disagree?)
I'm probably more in touch with my genetic structure then you will ever be my friend. While you're reading books and being brainwashed by Liberal ideologies (Science so called), I'm getting a dose of the real world, relating what I know with what I see and drawing my conclusions. Instinct. It's a very primitive disposition, but possibly more real than 10,000 pages of modern philosophical or biased scienctific writing. I think therefore I am. I don't need an evolutionary biologist to define me or appraise me. Evolutionary biology has its worth. But I'm not a slave to the implications of some writer, nor to your interpretations of his writing.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Scent of a Woman
Wednesday, July 11, 2007, 18:33
(Agree/Disagree?)
Hoo-Hah! I love it: So-called "science" as a "liberal ideology." ROFLMAO! Would you know the difference between so-called science and real science if either of these strange creatures were to bite you in the ass?
A conscience is well formed when its judgments proceed from wisdom and prudence. There is neither wisdom nor prudence in "a very primitive disposition" that is quick to dismiss the implications of evolutionary biology as little more than "modern philosophy" and "liberal ideology".
"Relating what I know to what I see" is the fundamental distinction between knowledge based on scientific method and the conclusions of philosophical speculation and political ideology. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From Scent of a Woman
Thursday, July 12, 2007, 10:15
(Agree/Disagree?)
Prima facie knowledge = the sun appears to orbit the earth. It's obvious to any observer from the way it crosses the sky every day that the sun moves in relation to a fixed earther. In addition, God (the ultimate authority) says this is so in the Biblical account of creation. Read the Bible or cite case law if you're looking to support your prima facie knowledge.
Scientific knowledge = there's a mathematical model that explains and predicts the movement of the earth around the sun with great precision. This model is not obvious until you test a set of theory-based hypotheses concerning the motion of bodies in space. Read Mathematica Principia and then you can test for yourself whether the knowledge of a heliocentric planetary system is accurate.
There's balancing these two approaches. One is scientific method and the other is belief about the nature of things.
Since you appear to have failed your high school proficiency tests in science, but nevertheless have high verbal skills in philophicial argumentation, I'll help you out here: When you're talking about knowledge that pertains to the social sciences, e.g., the phenomenon called "race," what you call prima facie knowledge is known as the face validity of a construct. However, face validity is not in and of itself enough to reliably test the adequacy of a socially constructed concept like "race," which is in fact only an idea with quantifiable, physical correlates, but not a true, physical phenomenon like genomes and DNA. In other words, you can't study race in a laboratory with a microscope like you can study and identify genetic markers to test theories of evolutionary biology. To study race, you have to look inside the human mind at perceptions, beliefs, and values. This can be done scientifically, but you have to get way beyond face validity in order to measure beliefs and perceptions accurately enough to build a statistical model that will hold up under the scruitiny of peer--people who exist for no other purpose but to shoot your research conclusions full of holes. After these kernels of knowledge about society and human behavior have been challenged, tested and retested, they get a scientific imprimature. That doesn't mean they're still not subject to debate and revision, only that a given set of facts have reached a certain level of reliability.
Perception is reality, but whose perception and whose reality do I tend to trust? Obviously, those based on scientific method. Why? Because scientific method allows me to prove or disprove a thing for myself. I don't have to take someone else's word for it, nor am I easily swayed by a logically convincing argument, e.g., a political or religious ideology. That's because scientific method allows me to correct the distortions of perception. Even if race appears to be obvious on the face of things, I am able to see that it's just a socially constructed idea that has as much to do with my beliefs and values as it does with the objective qualities I perceive in other human beings.
Kind of like you calling me a moron. It says a lot more about who you are than who I am.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From jolifam67
Thursday, July 12, 2007, 15:04
(Agree/Disagree?)
All good and well. But you can say the same thing just about anything: Aids from HIV, Cure for Cancer, elements of the theory of Evolution. None have been scientifically proven, but we take some for granted, some we wait and see. IQ is very measureable and very well correlated to race. Race itself is of course a generalization. But even there, go into any forensics lab, and they will tell you how easy it is to classify skeletal remains into racial categories. Of course, there's grey area. A mixed race individual or borderline race like the Ainu of Japan are a little harder to classify. But that doesn't mean it ain't there.
Moreover, you assume I'm referring to race in a sociological or cultural sense, when in fact I'm not. I'm referring to physical qualities that are easily discernible, if a little difficult to quantify under a microscope on population wide basis, obviously. The Nazis as well as the US Government knew the difficulty of categorizing by race, and so they made arbitrary boundaries (e.g. 1/16 jew=jew=nonwhite). (And the Jews themselves have all kinds of rules for deciding who's Jewish.) Sometimes when science fails, policy makers have no choice but to draw lines somewhere. Race does exist, but as a gradient in places. In those places arbitrary decisions have to be made unfortunately--if, that is, you are in favor of that sort of thing, eugenics, a safe society, etc..(reply to this comment) |
| | From Scent of a Woman
Thursday, July 12, 2007, 20:29
(Agree/Disagree?)
Are you saying a causal relationship between HIV and AIDS has NOT been scientifically established? Am I reading you correctly here? If that's what you mean, why not support your political position and prove your point by exchanging body fluids with someone who has HIV? Don't just talk the talk--walk the walk of your beliefs about the inadequacy of scientific knowledge.
Science has not failed with regard to understanding the relationship between genotypes and phenotypes, even if these distinctions are inconvenient truths that challenge the propositions of a political ideology. "The internally coded, inheritable information, or genotype, carried by all living organisms, holds the critical instructions that are used and interpreted by the cellular machinary of the cells to produce the outward, physical manifestation, or phenotype of the organism."
When you look at variation in human genotypes, you'll see as much difference within a phenotype as between phenotypes. So what accounts for the apparent differences between phenotypes? The expression of a phenotypical distinction (what is socially constructed as "race") associates closely with cultural status, language, history, kinship patterns, geographic migration, and economic status. Race is a political construct that has little to do with true genetic variation in a human population, and everything to do with social, political, historical, and economic (environmental) factors.
IQ is also highly correlated with poverty. In the U.S., poverty is highly correlated with race. So which came first, the chicken or the egg? Is it poverty or race that is the most reliable predictor of IQ? And have you looked at the legitimate scientific question of how standardized intelligence tests are culturally and linguistically biased?
If I supported eugenics, I'd advocate for sterilizing people in religious cults. There's an obvious correlation between religious extremism and violence. We could seriously reduce the incidence of child abuse if society prevented religious whack-mutts from breeding. Fortunately for you, nobody has seen fit to make me the Fuhrer or we wouldn't be having this discussion. (reply to this comment) |
| | From jolifam67
Monday, July 16, 2007, 04:25
(Agree/Disagree?)
I can't do justice on this pile of bullshit. You want to stand on a cloud of self-denial and say there's no such thing as race? Tell that to your prehistoric ancestors who consistently chose lighter skinned mates and fought and killed rival darker skinned tribes in a fight for racial survival which boils down to self-preservation--i.e. preservation of your genome. The essence of evolution is racial competition. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From jolifam67
Friday, July 13, 2007, 08:38
(Agree/Disagree?)
Frankly I prefer (and so do most people in the world as judging by immigration preferences and trends) the "social, political, historical, and economic" qualities of the West.
So now what DID come first? the chicken or the egg? The "social, political, historical, and economic" qualities of the West. Or the genetic differences that underly the (what we consider to be) important phenotypic differences between the races as we have come to define them?
I say it doesn't really matter. It is what is at this point. Trying to deconstruct race is a meaningless exercise valuable only to self-proclaimed ultra-intellectuals who try to get above the things that are important to every-day man. At the end of the day, the majority/most powerful decide the political framework/boundaries of what is acceptable, etc. I'll bet you hope you can chew the ear off someone who's powerful enough to dictate your will over the will of the people. That's precisely the Jewish strategy. Perhaps you are Jewish, which would explain your disingenuous argument.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | from Phoenixkidd
Monday, July 02, 2007 - 12:50
(Agree/Disagree?)
Our country is getting worse when it comes to stuff like this!
There have been a number of brutal kidnaps and murder this last week in Phoenix. The last one is a niece of a co-worker here and there's been a fund set up for her. She was beaten and burned by her own friends from school!! the motive is still unclear...What were those kids thinking? and what of their parents?
We've become a nation absolutely obsolved from any kind of moral responsibility, even for ourselves and our children. IT's just so sad.
(reply to this comment)
| From jolifam67
Wednesday, July 04, 2007, 15:45
(Agree/Disagree?)
"sad." how about infuriating? was this the murder? http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0628gr-murderfollow0628-ON.html
Third-world savages let loose on the American population. The carnage is here; you won't hear about it because the media is complicit in the genocide. That's why murders like this don't receive widespread attention. People never put two and two together; never realize that sending their daughter to a public school with a bunch of third-world savages is playing the death lottery. This used to be a white-run safe-to-live-in country, now it's media-run, special-interest run, semite-run; and consequently about as safe as the cannibal-filled jungles of Africa. Your safety is not in the media's best interest. Down with the media.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From Samuel
Wednesday, July 04, 2007, 16:39
(Agree/Disagree?)
Down with the media, eh? I say down with racist comments like yours! Unless you know something I don't, names like Nicolas Castillo and Todd Hoke don't exactly strike me as third world to begin with. But even if they are, referring to all people from the third world as "savages" is beyond ignorance! I say the "savages" are the racists and people of extreme prejudice in this country. They're the ones who are screwing it up for all of us. (reply to this comment) |
| | From jolifam67
Friday, July 20, 2007, 05:32
(Agree/Disagree?)
The tone of this comment is typical and reflects the general tone of most TV-brainwashed, emasculated, girly-bitchy Westerners.
So...you don't care that these native savages are slaughtering your own kin and racial kindred? Picking them off one by one, when they least expect it? You still love them and consider them equal. My, how very Christian of you!
It appears We will suffer the fate Catholic, third-world, Latin America--at best...Haiti/Rhodesia, at worst.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From Samuel
Friday, July 20, 2007, 06:35
(Agree/Disagree?)
What are you on, Jolifam? TV is what feeds stereotypes. They make you think Arabs are terrorists, Italians are loud and smoke, Latinos are violent gang mebers and drug dealers, Russians are arms dealers, Eastern Europeans are all gypsies, and black people like marijuana and fried chicken. Okay, so they don't actually call them "savages", I guess even TV producers have standards.
But don't think TV is the reason behind the kind of tolerance we have in our society. I prefer to think it is because we are becoming more evolved, more diverse. Diversity is a good thing, it shows that you have more in common with the other person than you thought. You already have something in common with them. You don't like "third world" people, and "third world" people generally don't like people who are racist against them. See? You do have something in common. Oh, and they probably consider people like you "savages".
Evil knows no race, no gender, no nationality. I understand that you care about your country and you don't want to see it go down the tubes, but I think you're definitely going about it the wrong way. (reply to this comment) |
| | From jolifam67
Friday, July 20, 2007, 16:43
(Agree/Disagree?)
I don't own a jew-box. Haven't really watched TV for 10 years. Absolutely none for the last three. But every time I see a TV blaring and glaring when passing by or pick up the a magazine or newspaper, I instantly recognize the liberal propaganda. For example, at the dental office today, I look down and see a Time magazine on the rack. The front cover says in huge letters, "Immigration. Why amnesty makes sense." Then, on the top left, shows a mean-looking Putin, saying "The Big Chill With Russia--Beyond Putin's tough talk." At that moment, I tossed the Time article back. Didn't want to open it, lest I feel like puking. This is unadulterated propaganda that you are forced to imbibe if you want the news easy. This is virtual preaching--and having lived a the totalitarian life for 20 years where I was preached at daily whether subtly or not so subtly, I can recognize preachy moralizing when I see it. The Time magazine and every other goddamn newspaper is telling us that we better let the fucking terdskins come in and walk all over us, because it's the right thing to do--and if you speak out, you will be demonized and/or your house destroyed in minority rioting. The media and the Jews who own it don't give a shit about keeping America and the West safe and clean from the third world vermin. They love mixing blacks and whites up, and it just tickles them to death to see Whites terrified. The media is not your friend, it is a tool of those in power, always has been. I pull up BBC on the internet, every fucking article has to do with some minority issue or middle-eastern issue. It's not about whites any more. There's not a white history month, or a "European heritage month," like there is for every other fucking nationality in the book in this country. If you say you are proud of being white, you are instantly labeled a skin-head.... Now, Putin is a good man, and Russia is coming out of the doldrums after a century-long oppression of Jewish communisim. They know what it's like to be under jewish tyranny, so they're not buying it, Putin's not buying the Western liberal media garbage, so the media of course tries to demonize and destroy him, same with Iran, same with any one else the Jews and the media don't like or feel threatened by. As for stereotypes, I've developed my opinions independently thank you very much. Lived in Puerto Rico for four years. I don't have to watch a movie or read Cross and a Switchblade to know that Puerto Ricans are violent. They have a whole newspaper that is printed in symbolic red that just highlights the violent crimes of the day. The crime scene there is prolific. Brazil's newspapers are daily filled with heinous crimes that would scare the shit out of the average American. Don't even want to start on African crime rates. This is the objective truth. I don't need a movie to paint the picture any clearer. I've seen it up front and personal. I've seen the misery on the Indian subcontinent. Today, I got panhandled by an Indian national for the first time right here in the USA. We're importing poverty, like Lou Dobbs said. We're being cheated out of our own destinies. And like the good priests brainwashed into thinking suffering is good for them, we've all succumbed to the notion that diversity, no matter how painful, is for our good. It's our country's new religion. But it's not my religion.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | From jolifam67
Saturday, July 21, 2007, 02:09
(Agree/Disagree?)
Sure I glean out the facts of current events here and there (with quite a bit of effort stripping out the spin the media plays on everything). But for the most part, the mainstream media has lost credibility with me. Most of it's worthless entertainment anyways...think CNN and how it can spend hours a day on nothing but celebrity gossip, e.g. the recent Paris Hilton watch? Our most ubiquitous news source can and has been reduced to pure tabloid...similarly it's a prime avenue for character assassination (as was the case with Imus). In other words, most of the news today, being nothing sensational garbage, does not benefit me in the least, and therefore I refuse to waste time reading newspapers, watching news programs, or reading online news articles except for scanning the headlines, just enough so that I'm aware in case an earthquake, nuclear strike, or riot is imminent. Other than that, reading an entire newspaper from front to back is a complete waste of time. You're better off spending your precious brain energy studying e.g. mathematical proofs, i.e. things that can be verified independently. At least in the field of mathematics, or chemistry for example, you know you aren't being fooled by some predator media corporation fabricating reams and reams of propaganda daily to keep the masses all nice, pacified, tax-paying, and toeing the line, on the standard one-way path to infertility, dissatisfaction, emotional frustration, drugs, debt, isolation, and worst of all complete political and ideological surrender--that hopeless, vegetative, couch-potato state that so characterizes Americans these days.
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | From Samuel
Friday, July 20, 2007, 17:05
(Agree/Disagree?)
Of course not, Nick. People that smoke pot are crazed pot heads! We discussed this in chat, remember?
I do not believe any of those sterotypes, because I have seen good natured people of all nations, cultures, races, gender, and sexual "orientations". I don't think most people believe the Hollywood stereotypes, but I think I made my point to Jolifam that TV does not make people weak through teaching diversity. Mankind does not become weaker thorugh practicing diversity, but they become stronger by coming together.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From Samuel
Saturday, July 21, 2007, 05:29
(Agree/Disagree?)
Yeah, but if people open their eyes and realize that the majority of people of any particular race, gender, creed, are good natured people, then they may want to come together and put their heads together for the common good, and that means you don't HAVE to FORCE a melting pot, it comes together naturally.
I will say it again: Evil knows no race, no gender, no nationality.(reply to this comment) |
| | From jolifam67
Saturday, July 21, 2007, 10:34
(Agree/Disagree?)
The issue isn't "evil" per se. For me, it's quality of life. I see no evidence any where that shows that race mixing and mongrelization produce societies having a high quality of life.
Also, your "Kumbaya" ideas with a communist bent may sound innocent and good, but in the end it never works. Ethnic strife always prevails eventually, it's written in the DNA.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From Samuel
Thursday, July 05, 2007, 05:02
 (Agree/Disagree?)
They are screwing up our chances of living in peace with one another. Racism and extreme prejeudice is what is standing between us and an enlightened tolerant society. Liberals do not control every word that is written in the press, haven't you ever heard of Human Events or the New York Post? What about the Wall Street Journal? Then there's online: Conservapedia (Conservative answer to Wikipedia), WorldNetDaily, RightMarch.com if you like activism. Bill O'Reilley is at the top of the charts, (although I still can't memorize how to spell his name) :) And if you turn on the right station, you can hear all the Conservatives you want on your way to work! So don't give me that "Liberals control the press" line.
Okay, now what I agree with you on. Affirmative action. In my opinion, race or gender should not be a factor at all in hiring, promotion, college acceptance. You know what should be a factor? Merit, and the ability to do the job. Why would you want to base your decisions on anything else?
We are not being invaded by Mexicans. A lot of foreigners are coming into the county illegally. They should not be here. In my opinion, if an illegal immigrant is arrested for breaking the law here, they should be deported as soon as their jail term expires. And maybe a watch list to prevent them from entering the country again, huh?
If Mexico is so terrible and third world, why is it that so many Americans want to go there on vacation? Why is Cancun one of the primary Spring Break destinations?(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | From scorpion
Saturday, July 21, 2007, 03:17
(Agree/Disagree?)
nicely said!! mexicans are dirty worms that deserve nothing more then there mud huts and tacos which they call food. whithout any immigrants there wouldnt be as much crime as there is today in america. all the biggest gangs and organised crime groups over there are mostly made up of stupid fucks that come from 3rd world countries.they come here and become greedy when they see all the money they have never seen before in there shit countys cause there presidents a undereducated dumb fuk, and will do anything for a buck. take the coke boom around 1970~1987 for example, almost all of the crime lords were, colombian, mexican, or cuban.all the white boys were merly pawns in the game, or to busy watching saturday night fever. take niggers for example, what do they do best in there country? dance around like idiots, make weird noises, rape each other, and kill people. what do they do in america? same shit just americanized. see my point? same with mexicans what do they do best in there country? make tacos, smell like shit, build mud huts, and think they are the best race in the world. same shit in america just americanized. what right do they have to go to america and pollute it? just leave the white land for the white crackheads is all im saying. less crime, pretty aids free hookers, and peacefull crackheads. (reply to this comment) |
| | From AndyH
Thursday, July 05, 2007, 08:20
(Agree/Disagree?)
Right on, Samuel.
It has always blown my mind how the liberals say the right controls the media, and the conservatives say the left control the media. How can be in control of something and not be aware of it?
I think Jolifam would be wise to consider that it is market forces, not some fantastical racist conspiracy, that results in the immigration situation. Labor is like any other product, cost effectiveness is the number one factor. But God forbid we should blame white business owners for putting the bottom line first, brown people are just so much easier targets.
This country has a unique historical trend: When the inhabitants don't take full advantage of it, immigrants come in and change the landscape. We are all immigrants, which I always perceive this anti-Mexican-immigrant sentiment to be motivated purely by racism. After all, what else besides their race separates them from us?
Still, it is amusing to watch these extreme conservatives cling to their dying ideologies. Old dinosaurs overdue for extinction, running blindly and angrily through a new world they don't understand. (reply to this comment) |
| | From GetReal
Thursday, July 05, 2007, 23:11
(Agree/Disagree?)
OMFG you are a fucking genius Andy. I'm going to register 5 more accounts so i can give this comment thumbs up 5 times.I definitely think the whole world should do away with primitive racist concepts like border control and offer citizenship upon entry to all. yyyyeeeeeeeeeeehhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaa !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! let freedom reign . There is absolutely no difference between Americans ( not just whites BTW) and Mexicans , other then language , education , job skills , family wealth and respect for our laws.I just hope that when whites are the minority in this country and it will happen before your life is over they grant whites as many rights whites gave them. I doubt they will.After all we started if by slaughtering Indians right.(reply to this comment) |
| | From scorpion
Saturday, July 21, 2007, 03:39
(Agree/Disagree?)
the strong will always kick the shit out of the weak. its natures cycle. if there was no food chain, we'd all be eating each other. it takes power to control people. not love.fear is greater then courage, its alot easier to fear someone then to go up against them. if everyone was created equal, there would be no such thing as law and order, everyone would be killing each other to gain more for themselves. thats why it takes people that have superiour abilities to defeat the bitches and show them whos boss.once that is done, they are able to maintain control and because now the bitches will listen to them, think about it, if the americans never took out the indians, america would still be a 3rd world country with teepee's instead of high rises and houses, fur trades instead of the stockexchange, everyone would be getting drunk and high, and everyone would be named after some kind of animal.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | From AndyH
Friday, July 06, 2007, 08:10
(Agree/Disagree?)
I really hope you're as pissed off as you sound and I've managed to get under your skin that must. Excuse for pointing out the inevitable. I'm going to be on the sidelines laughing my ass off and waving the mexican flag while you fucking squirm and watch it happen. So go ahead and piss and moan about it. It's hilarious. (reply to this comment) |
| | From GetReal
Friday, July 06, 2007, 10:57
(Agree/Disagree?)
Isn't that cute white boy wants to be a Mexican , how could i be upset about that.
Its funny that you would use the word inevitable to describe our fucked up, broken down immigration system . IMO nothing that is bad for America will inevitably happen here .Quite simply economic ruin is what will happen if the status quo continues .No more social security , no more unemployment benefits , double or triple the number of poor in America sucking the welfare system dry and as a result much much higher taxes .But that's probably what you want cause your a liberal right?
Don't worry, the inevitable loss of majority status doesn't bother me , the end of the American way of life does though and people are waking up to it so there is still hope.
(reply to this comment) |
| | From AndyH
Friday, July 06, 2007, 12:18
(Agree/Disagree?)
I agree with you on this, the status quo will continue and economic ruin will take place. And I do wish I was Mexican, but that's not important. Or maybe Brazilian, yeah, that would be bitchin.
I'm not really a liberal, I suppose I am compared to you, but you'd probably be more fair to the Liberals by classifying me as something else. How about: Fiercely Anti-American? Just an idea. (reply to this comment) |
| | From GetReal
Friday, July 06, 2007, 13:01
(Agree/Disagree?)
lol . At least you can see the storm coming , but why are content to just sit and watch while this great country goes to shit.O thats right cause you hate America you want to see the united states of Mexico . My bad , I thought it was simply ignorance.
Seriously whats so great about Mexico ? Who in their right mind would wish poverty on his nation no matter how unsatisfied with the way things are. The Mexicans blame their poverty on America , but at least they don't want it .You are pretty fucking stupid if thats what you want .A couple decades down the road when an ass like AL Sharpton can run for president and win on a platform of racism disguised as reparations or affirmative action you may think differently . Or maybe not that would be the ultimate wet dream for an America hating liberal like you.
(reply to this comment) |
| | From AndyH
Friday, July 06, 2007, 13:39
(Agree/Disagree?)
It isn't so much a question of what I want, it's a question of of what is going to happen and how hard I'm going to laugh when it does. Oh, and how many fifty cent donkey meat tacos I can eat before I hurl.
Repeat after me: Queria tres tacos con carne de burro. Queria conocer chicas bonitas, y tomar tequila barato. !Viva los estados unidos! (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | From GetReal
Friday, July 06, 2007, 14:02
(Agree/Disagree?)
two things for you to choke on before you laugh your burritos out. Dead amnesty plan and the minute men . Never in recent history has anti immigrant feeling been so high and not because of racism it all about economics my friend.If some one like you can see the harm this bullshit will cause imagine some one who actually cares about this country ( there are still quite a few ) .My prediction is the immigrant invasion will ultimately fail and will be replaced with a sensible immigration plan that gives fair access to all who wish to come here not just the Mexicans.
(reply to this comment) |
| | From AndyH
Friday, July 06, 2007, 14:27
(Agree/Disagree?)
I'll hold my breath, but I don't believe either of things will make a difference. But good luck to you.
Meanwhile, I'm forming the "Beef up the Border plan", which involves putting a carne asada stand every mile along the border. I think my plan will enjoy more sucess, because minute men are angry rednecks with big guns and little dicks, and Carne Asada is DELICIOUS! (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From jolifam67
Thursday, July 05, 2007, 11:18
(Agree/Disagree?)
Actually, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, George Bush and all the supposed "Conservatives" are NOT in fact conservative; they're liberals PRETENDING to be conservative. If they were truly conservative they would show some interest in keeping the U.S.A. white, peaceful, and prosperous. But instead, they're cowards and sell-outs. There isn't one voice out there significant enough to be heard on any mainstream news outlet who really stands up for White people. And that's the truth. Throw all your labels about racism and whatever. Fact is, this country was built by Whites for Whites, as reflected through its immigration laws up untill the last half the last century, when all of a sudden as if by some inspiration from God, everyone decides that the color of one's skin makes absolutely no difference at all on how that person will behave in and benefit our society. That's the point I'm trying to make. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | From placebo
Thursday, July 05, 2007, 16:26
(Agree/Disagree?)
As much of a low-life as I may be, I think you know very well the difference between being conservative and being racist.Moreover, your comment about about how whites built your country is a gross insult to the millions of immigrants of multiple nationalities who built large parts of your infrastructure. Chinese who built your railroads being one example.
lastly, how many Americans are really "white" nowadays anyhow?(reply to this comment) |
| | From jolifam67
Thursday, July 05, 2007, 20:47
(Agree/Disagree?)
ok low-life, if I must respond, Conservative: no-one really knows what it truly means these days because it's meaning has been twisted and abused by opportunistic politicians to no-end. That's why they're not even referred to as "conservatives" any more by many a cynic, who chooses to call them neo-cons, kahnservatives, or republicunts. In my opinion the spirit of conservatism as it was originally termed, is embracing of what is familiar, staying true to your roots, etc. I don't know, but if that means sticking to your own kind and keeping things familiar, i.e. white, to the exclusion of hoards of brown invaders--an implied requirement of such a doctrine (of conservatism), then in strict terms, yeah, you could equate conservatism with racism. And by the way, being enlightened (I took Ethics 101 and understand the arbitrariness of moral values), the usual connotations associated with the term "racist" are not any longer hard wired into my brain. So don't try to scare me with that trigger word. I guess that goes for Samuel mostly.
As for the immigrants who "built large parts" of America, yeah, that's like saying the Columbia space shuttle was built by the riveter. (reply to this comment) |
| | From placebo
Friday, July 06, 2007, 08:10
(Agree/Disagree?)
Well I'll spell it out to you then. A racist is someone who discriminates someone not by their actions or merits but rather by their colour of skin or ethnic heritage.
I'll agree with you that connontations are neither here nor there.What is it that you're actually advocating though? Tougher immigration laws or do you want segregation back?
I'm sorry if I was quick in using that "trigger word",but please make your stance clear and not just rave on about "brown hoardes".
Lastly,you know that that space shuttle analogy is neither here nor there.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | From jolifam67
Friday, July 06, 2007, 20:00
(Agree/Disagree?)
Amazing. The liberal media has sure pulled a number on you folks. One day you'll wake up. But like the poor white farmers in Rhodesia, it'll be too late. At least I won't feel sorry for you then. Pathetic fucks. You've been warned.
I will tell you this much. Every race on earth cares about its own. All that is except for the white race, which strangely staggers on its way to willful suicide. It's an aweful site.
Miscegenation is racial suicide. Diversity is death.
As for me I prepare for the third world. Thankfully, I already know what it's like from years of first hand experience. (reply to this comment) |
| | From GetReal
Friday, July 06, 2007, 20:25
(Agree/Disagree?)
Gee with an advocate like you it’s a wonder there hasn't been an solution to the immigration problem already. That is a genocidal solution. Diversity is death, wow. You’re an embarrassment to the white race. Ideas like yours are exactly what is causing the Zimbabwe catastrophe. Racism is the scourge of humanity not the solution. Racial diversity is a fact get used to it. For every example of communal racial strife there are 20 that show the benefits living in peace with your fellow man. Take care my friend ,get educated get lost.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From jolifam67
Saturday, July 07, 2007, 10:53
(Agree/Disagree?)
You're a fanatic. The blessings of Diversity is a myth. Wake up. Every diverse country, e.g. Brazil, India, Mexico, etc., is third-world, crime-ridden, disease-ridden, and a misery to live in. And that, sorry to say, is what America is turning into. It shouldn't be that hard to understand this.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Jules
Saturday, July 07, 2007, 18:43
(Agree/Disagree?)
Um, you are forgetting about Canada. We have a very diverse population, especially in the major cities. Toronto, where I live is 60% non-Caucasian now and is a fabulous city. I love living here and the only complaint I have is the weather. I am proud of our values, our diversity and our acceptance. This is a wonderful country that I am very proud to call home. We are hardly "third-world, crime-ridden, disease-ridden, and a misery to live in". If you do really believe your own rantings, you need to get out a bit more and turn off Fox News every now and then.
It annoys me no end when the same people who go on and on about immigrants are the same people who think that climate change is a myth. Over the next few decades millions of people will be displaced due to climate change and global warming and guess whose doorstep they will wind up on. If you think refugees are an issue now, just wait.
I admit I haven't read this whole thread and I am sure other people have mentioned this to you already, but you do realise that all Caucasians in North America are immigrants, right? What was done to the native populations of the Americas by our ancestors is beyond the pale and if anyone has the right to go on about things being taken from them by immigrants, it is Native Americans.
For anyone to get up in arms because people in other countries think that the "give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free" credo might still be respected and valued by those who ancestors fought and bled for those values and rights, is not something I understand.
I don't know how many refugees or immigrants you know, and I don't know what you understand of the immense courage and strength it takes to leave an oppressive regime, crippling poverty or a place where there is no hope, but frankly, given our shared background, you might have a clue if you think about it for a minute.
I don’t at all subscribe to the “other people had it worse so we should all just suck it up” philosophy, but really, even despite our own upbringing, most of us did win the lottery in some regards by just being born to parents from the different cultures we were. There are millions of third world families who gave their children better upbringings than we had, parents that loved their children and were there for them, but after we left the group, in terms of nationality and opportunity, I think we are lucky in terms of being able to get an education, to succeed financially and/or to take time to recover, and that’s all it is, is luck.
I know you lived in third world countries and I understand that the poverty, pain and suffering of these people is so overwhelming that one does just shut down at some point. The brutality and low value on human life is also shocking, but remember when we (Europe and North America) were at this stage of survival, we did the same things, and sometimes even worse and often much past this point as well. Remember why they are there as well. Europe in particular raped and pillaged these countries without shame or apologies.
There has never been a more complete genocidal attempt than the Nazi’s in WWII and they were as “civilized” as it got then. Extremely efficient, organized, methodical and yet in it’s essence, as barbaric as the Tutsis and Hutus in Rwanda.
Perhaps one day we will all recognize that we all share this planet. We are all literally in the same boat. I do think though that it might take extreme climate change for you to realize this. One country’s economic and/or political best interests will not seem so important then. I ask only one thing. When global warming takes off and Canada is a paradise, can we please get your fence specs? We are open to immigrants, but Americans like you flooding our border is something we might put our beers down for and actually be annoyed about. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | From shikaka
Sunday, July 08, 2007, 13:23
(Agree/Disagree?)
The envornmental issue was neither here nor there, I simply cut and pasted his glaringly contradictory statements: One where he states that he doesnt think climate change is a myth, and the other where he refers to it as a myth.
But you dont need me to point out the fact that our fine friend samuel is not the brightest bulb on the tree. Perhaps I'll pick on somebody my own size.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From conan
Sunday, July 08, 2007, 13:50
(Agree/Disagree?)
Yeah, ok. We'll accept coservapidia as a reliable source of information. Dumbass! I know that you are a conservative, Bible thumping dingbat, but let's try and use the 'ol melon on this one. Just for fuck's sake, and to show how erroneous your new favorite source of information on the web is, this is what that preposterous website has to say on homosexuality:
Homosexuality is an immoral sexual lifestyle between members of the same sex. It is more than simply a sexual act, it is going beyond the boundaries that God has setup for marriage; one man and one woman. http://www.conservapedia.com/Gay
Come on, Sammy! For you to even consider anything on that site as factual and to base your arguments and cite it as your source only makes you look worse (hard to do, I know) than your ignorant self manages without. (reply to this comment) |
| | From Samuel
Sunday, July 08, 2007, 14:51
(Agree/Disagree?)
Somehow I knew you were going to play this card, conan. What is there sounds more like a sermon than a real article, which is unfortunate, and I believe it to be wrong. Other than saying that, I am not falling for your trick. If you want to have an honest discussion with me about what the Bible can be proven to say about about homosexuals, then e-mail me. I am not going to do that here.
I am however, going to e-mail Conservapedia and ask them to remove those parts from the article, as it definitely appears to be opinion rather than news. If one wants opinion mixed in with their news, they might as well go to Wikipedia.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Ne Oublie
Sunday, July 08, 2007, 14:16
(Agree/Disagree?)
Conan, find me a single source from which you can accept every piece of information at face value as absolute fact - and I'll show you a sucker! Try using that melon of yours to actually process information for yourself for a change. Conservapedia is as likely to have reliable information as pretty much any site out there it's just a case of deciding what to accept from where.(reply to this comment) |
| | From conan
Sunday, July 08, 2007, 18:23
(Agree/Disagree?)
You totally missed the point, NeO. I think you know that I don't think there is a single source of information currently available, where each and every fact can be considered absolute truth, but the conservapidia website has absolutely nothing on there that I would even consider trusting when seeing that as the source. I know, I know. That's 'close-minded' of me, or whatever. Fuck that! Conservapedia is a retarded website along the same validity to me as myconclusion.com. Both have as much merit and quotability, in my opinion, which is none, zilch, nada, zip, bupkus, and so on and so forth. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | From steam
Monday, July 09, 2007, 06:24
(Agree/Disagree?)
What the link said on glabal warming was so ridiculous it did fall into the vein of "my conclusion" website level of debate. They take some poll from 1992 of some U.S scientists to try to show there is debate on the issue when there have been so many polls in the fifteen years since then that would show a totally different outcome that the consensus of scientist worldwide is firmly rooted in the conclusion that humans play a major roll in the temperature changes. They on the one hand pretend that they are not saying it is not real, only that humans may not be causing it, then they try to imply it is not real because some scientist think a sheet of ice in the himilayas is expanding. They kept saying 1% rise since 1850 trying to draw out the timeline, but in one point (almost accidentaly it seems)admit it is 0.9% rise in fifty years which is a lot more clear indicator. The other number is something of a smokescreen. As far as other planets, we have very little data on that and mountains of data on earth, it seems that is where we should draw our conclusions from. They kept belittling the massive intergovernmental report saying "some scientist dropped out because they felt it was politicized. They never identify these dissenters nor the number of scientist involved in the actual report, but I do know that the majority of scientist involved did say that the report had political interference and they were not completely satisfied. Due to the fact they had to water down the conclusions that that the data led them to. They felt the evidence for human induced global warming is overwhelming. As far as the effects on the planet, it is certainly clear that we are looking at major changes with the arctic ice melts etc. There is certainly debate about how it will all play out with cold water entering the ocean currents and wreaking havoc on that, we could get major cold shifts etc. The correct term really is global climate change.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Samuel
Monday, July 09, 2007, 19:02
(Agree/Disagree?)
Steam,
I respectfully disagree with your opinion. Yes, some of the things contradict each other, but that is what happenes when anyone is allowed to edit an article. Wikipedia has the same problem.
I realize it is possible that global climate change is being induced by human behavior, but I think it is more probable that it is a natural occurance. It is nice to see someone who has the brains and the guts to actually do their homework, study the subject, read what the link I posted said, and lastly, come back and give their opinion. Too bad the same cannot be said for some of the other commentors on here. For shame.(reply to this comment) |
| | From steam
Tuesday, July 10, 2007, 10:24
(Agree/Disagree?)
I am no scientist, and as far as I know you Samuel are not either. So any debate we have would not rise to the high standards of evidence such a subject should require, however I will only point out that the vast majority of scientists in the fields of meteorology and related disciplines have a very solid consensus that human input is a major factor, and that the consequences of climate change will be disastrous. However based on your (I assume) limited knowledge you have decided that the vast majority of scientist studying this situation are probably wrong. Lets hope you are right.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | From shikaka
Sunday, July 08, 2007, 13:24
(Agree/Disagree?)
The envornmental issue was neither here nor there, I simply cut and pasted his glaringly contradictory statements: One where he states that he doesnt think climate change is a myth, and the other where he refers to it as a myth.
But you dont need me to point out the fact that our fine friend samuel is not the brightest bulb on the tree. Perhaps I'll pick on somebody my own size.((reply to this comment) |
| | From Samuel
Sunday, July 08, 2007, 13:48
(Agree/Disagree?)
Okay, now I see where you got that idea. I do not believe that climate change is a myth. To deny climate change would be to deny the obvious.
But I do not believe that it is dangerous, or that we are going to get huge tidal waves or anything that remotely resembles the movie Al Gore made. The believe that the Earth warming is a natural occurance. I am glad that the United States is not a party to the Kyoto protocol, because I think it would have been bad for America and would not have made any difference on our world.
What John Stossel was saying on the show is that the idea that our behavior is harming the environment and causing global warming is a myth. No, he didn't claim on TV that global warming is a myth, only I would make an error like that :)
See ya.
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From Jules
Saturday, July 07, 2007, 20:32
(Agree/Disagree?)
I am truly sorry that you had a bad day. I really didn't mean to make it worse. Of your many attempted slurs though, the only one that was accurate was "Canadian". Obviously that is is a bit of a compliment to me as I think I have had made my pride in being Canadian clear. Perhaps we should properly debate each other at another time. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From jolifam67
Saturday, July 07, 2007, 19:16
(Agree/Disagree?)
OH. So now you blame fanatics for the misery that abounds in racially diverse impoverished third-world countries. That's a narrow net to cast. I say (what should be obvious) it is not fanatics per se that causes such poverty and misery, but rather the inherent mental capabilities of the populace in aggregate. Read Wealth of the Nations.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Samuel
Sunday, July 08, 2007, 05:13
(Agree/Disagree?)
How do you know that these mental capabilities are inherent? How do you know that, if given the opportunity, more people would not want to be educated, go on to higher learning, and move up in life?
I was wrong only in that fanatics are not the sole cause of misery in racially diverse countries, corruption is another cause for this. I do beleive that if Mexican government was not so corrupt- the people would be much happier, there would be a higher standard of living.
I studied "Wealth of the Nations" in High School, and If I had an "invisible hand" I would use it to smack you upside the head for this idiotic comment.
Now, this is just a thought I'm putting out there. What if one of these poor third world countries (we'll say Malawi) borrowed a lot of money, and started working on building roads, better access to water, health care, and educating their children from Kindergarten to college. This would all be free. They might even find oil, which would help to offset the high costs of this. Once those young people graduated college, the government made it easy for them to work abroad if they wished. South Africa, Europe, the US- places where the standard of living is much higher. They change the tax rates to a system like we have- you have to pay taxes no matter what country you live in. How much progress would they have made in 20 years? How much of that debt would the Malawi government still have? It's just an idea. Does anyone think this would actually work?(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From mb
Sunday, July 08, 2007, 07:35
(Agree/Disagree?)
The IT bussiness is widening th e gap between the haves and the have-nots in India. it is conveinient for those that support free (rather than fair) market economics to point at India's Open Skies policy of attracting international investment as the reason for India's burgeoning commercial succsess and the rise in wealth again of the middle class. However they shy away from citing those whose front door is a sheet of polythene and their back door a billion dollar IT business.
Unlike traditional industry, much of the data based industries don't require much in ancillary work, hence ther e is little likely hood of the trickle down effect in regards to employment.
Chocolate workers children have barely enough to live on and make ten percent while cadburys et el rake in 90 percent. They say they are dealing in market price yet they SET the amrket price. Go fair trade on chocolate and coffee. We as connsumers have sway.
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From roughneck
Sunday, July 08, 2007, 11:16
(Agree/Disagree?)
Should have guessed that would be your answer.
On a related note (somewhat), if anyone else owns the Thomas and Friends wooden railway, there is a recall on several engines due to the (chinese) manufacturer's use of lead-based paint. http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml07/07212.html
What especially ticks me off about this is that these are by no means cheap toys, costing from $16-$26 per (tiny) engine at Toys 'R' Us. Now, I've come to expect such low-down-dirty shenanigans from dollar-store grade items but what's the world coming to when even the big, well known and expensive brands stoop so low as to deliberately poison kids for a couple pennies extra profit? But hey, they're making moolah, so go capitalism, right?
Needless to say, I'm highly displeased at Gullane and their dime-store-grade suppliers right now. I should also mention that our family has had to return at least 4 toys because of this recall, so yeah, personal. Grrr!
(reply to this comment) |
| | From rainy
Monday, July 09, 2007, 04:51
(Agree/Disagree?)
It's bad for the customers and the workers producing the toys.
"Bratz dolls are all the rage, ranking as the most sought-after toy this holiday season, surpassing even Barbie, which has dropped to third place. Bratz dolls now make up 40 percent of the fashion doll market, and will bring in $3 billion in sales this year. Many parents are already concerned about the big doe-eyed, scantily-clad, high-heeled and half-emaciated Bratz dolls, some of which look like little hookers with supersized lips, being marketed to their very young children.
But there is another dirty little secret behind the Bratz dolls. They are made in a sweatshop in China, where women are routinely forced to work seven days and 94 ½ hours a week, for wages of just 51 ½ cents an hour, $4.13 a day.
As bad as conditions are now, they are about to get worse. The factory wants to fire all the workers and then bring them back as temporary workers with contracts of just one to eight months, which would strip them of any legal rights they might have. As it is, the workers are denied sick days as well as work injury and health insurance."
Makes me never want to buy made in China. Maybe that's not logical. Do you buy made in China and the evil continues, or do you not buy it and the would-be workers starve? I don't know.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | From rainy
Wednesday, July 11, 2007, 02:42
(Agree/Disagree?)
I completely agree with what Jolifam said above.
It is painful to me to see Australians exporting our seafood and having to eat Thai seafood. We actually don't NEED to import anything, except technology. We certainly don't need other people's agriculture. But we're forced to export and import, just to play nice. The world is much too globalised, especially when it comes to things like children's toys and clothing. Why do children all over the world need Bratz dolls and Mary-Kate and Ashley clothes? For Heaven's sake. This world is beyond ridiculous.
And Jolifam, as much as a lot of your comments offend me, I do think I understand that you want to preserve American society and you see it under threat.
It is a point we all need to consider and wake up to somewhat, as many Muslims living in Western countries raise their children in total disrespect to the society around them, and are, to some extent, sociopaths. They seem friendly and sociable but amongst private communities, they often see westerners as infidels. Similar to the way we were taught to view systemites.
I realise that many of them have integrated and are not like that, but still, I take your point, and I also want to protect our lifestyle. Here in Australia we have Indonesia just salivating to storm on in from the North, and that's one of the reasons we have to act like your stupid side-kick, hoping to benefit from your big bully status.
(reply to this comment) |
| | From neez
Thursday, July 12, 2007, 03:31
(Agree/Disagree?)
Forget seafood... What about all the untapped oil reserves we have here, and we still pay $1.40 for imported petrol!
As far as Indonesians storming in from the north, it won't happen for a number of reasons. One of them being that they would have to land somewhere in the outback to remain undetected. And between the extreme heat, lack of water, local wildlife, and the slightly deranged Queenslanders carrying guns, that my friend is where the story would end.
The potential terrorists already living here could be a real problem though.
As far as the lebs go, you're absolutely correct. And I'm telling you now it's not over. It will get worse before it gets better. Most likely not with the same amount of publicity Cronulla recieved, but actually the media didn't even report half the shit that was happening.
I swear I'd move to Queensland if it weren't for all the bloody Queenslanders there.(reply to this comment) |
| | From J_P
Wednesday, July 11, 2007, 07:49
(Agree/Disagree?)
I tend to agree, but I classify it as a Cultural issue, not a Race issue. When they all clan together and close themselves off to the rest of Australia and then try to force their culture on the rest of us, thats where its starts getting on my nerve. If I want to experience Chinese culture, I'll go to China. I don't want someone leaving an oppressive middle-eastern country and then come here to Australia, work for cash, get on the dole then try to force their views on me. I've got no beef with a Chinese or middle-eastern person per se.
The idea of advocating multiculturalism is wrong, in my view, if it comes at the expense of security and morals. I would say that race is strongly correlated with culture, but not the real core driver here of the tension.(reply to this comment) |
| | From rainy
Friday, July 13, 2007, 02:33
(Agree/Disagree?)
I agree that it's culture, not race. In particular it's extreme Islam. There are plenty of Christian Lebanese who cause no problems in Australia. I'm strongly for multiculturalism and acceptance of diversity. I love all the colour and tolerance in Australia. But a lot of the Muslim population don't get that. It's their intolerance I'm against. I certainly don't extend my feelings toward Islam in this country to encompass jolifam's prejudiced attitude towards blacks. They were born in that country and are consistently treated as second class citizens, often on an instinctive level by those around them. The issues surrounding that are enormous. That's more comparable to Australia's Aborigines if anything, people who were born into an unfair world. My only problem is with people who come here for the better life but teach their children to disrespect it, and think of themselves as God's chosen ones. They want this country but spit on it. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From jolifam67
Tuesday, July 10, 2007, 16:32
(Agree/Disagree?)
Yes. They buy them, like the super computers, high-end stuff, until they can figure out how to clone them. To pay for it meanwhile they must force their pop to work in sweatshops, making poor bleeding heart liberals have a hard time sleeping at night. This all seems like a vicious cycle. We've been exploiting the Chinese for centuries, and it hasn't benefitted either of us, really.
What bothers me more though is that the yellow race also has a tendency to spread like bacteria. Hence they poured over the Behring strait at the end of the last ice age and infiltrated and/or wiped out the early whites settled on this continent. The amerind stock is the remnant of that invasion. Something tells me they're at it again--and it makes me sick inside.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | From madly
Sunday, July 08, 2007, 08:06
(Agree/Disagree?)
Consumers do have sway. If you don’t buy it, they can’t sell it. My company only purchases and serves organic shade grown Starbucks coffee. The coffee is excellent, but we buy it and serve it because it is harvested and made under the fair labor law. The laborers in Mexico who grow this coffee are treated fairly and given proper wages and health care. The El Triunfo Biosphere Reserve located in Chiapas, Mexico is constantly being inspected to make sure that they live up to these standards and take care of their associates. The coffee is pricey, but I like the idea behind it. I know that coffee doesn’t seem like much, but just think how many people drink coffee everyday and what a huge market coffee is. We do have pull and if we only bought things from countries that insured proper care of their workers, it would inevitably make the companies who did not care for their workers change if they wanted to remain in business. This will never happen, because people are selfish and would tell you to your face that they care, but when it comes down to paying for it, forget it. We do have a huge part and if we cared we could change a few things, but we don’t and we won’t. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From ....
Thursday, July 05, 2007, 08:03
(Agree/Disagree?)
OMG you sound just like my hippie freak dad extolling the virtues of the thrid world.
Fact is, if they were "as good as" they wouldnt still be third world, there is a reason why superpowers are superpowers. And dont go telling me its the fault of the western imperialists raping their countries over the last century. If it weren't for those imperialists colonising thier countries and setting up the infrastructure they would still be canabalistic savages. What have they done since they got independance but tear apart what they were given and let it go to rot.
You see this especially in places like scandinavia where just about all of the crime is the result of asylum seekers they naively took into their country and who are a huge drain on national resourses cuz they refuse to work, stay on benefits and just cause trouble.
I dont get this culture of apologising for being white where ppl feel that they have to constantly prove how "liberal" they are by crawling and excusing themselves for being "OMG white".
Its got to where the minorities have a bigger voice than anyone and dont you dare disagree with them or you are labeled racist. I dont consider myself racist incidentally, but i dont appreciate seeing my hard earned money go to support these losers.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | from Nick
Friday, June 22, 2007 - 13:25
(Agree/Disagree?)
Very typical of what is going on a lot here in Houston at least. Its called reverse discrimination.
If a white man beats a black man its a hate crime. If a black dude beats a white dude, they never prosecute it as a hate crime.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | from XIN
Friday, June 22, 2007 - 11:32
(Agree/Disagree?)
Say what you will about zombies, but don't you drag SQL into this!
"if (self['plpm'] && plpm['Mid-Story Ad']) document.write('');if (self['plpm'] && plpm['Mid-Story Ad']){ document.write(plpm['Mid-Story Ad']);} else { if(self['plurp'] && plurp['97']){} else {document.write(''); } }if (self['plpm'] && plpm['Mid-Story Ad']) document.write('');"
Shameless!
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
]
[About the Trailer Park] [Who Links Here]