Oleg Bach Posted August 8, 2009 Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 You can not put a larger brain in a black person of a white person who is a light weight..who is barbaric - who is boardering on a mad animal - all the social programs will not evolve stupid people into civilized and cultured people who do not commit rape - or stab or shoot....may as well face the fact that - we have pee heads running about that are dangerous - containing them is the best we can do...I see it all the time - violent blacks - and violent whites..they have one thing in common - an under developed spirt and a low level of real intelligence - you can not create a program that establishes intelligence - at one time old Bapitist grandmothers and fathers - Christians keep the black population in check - because they taught the kids one thing "this is right and that is wrong" - now everything goes - thanks a lot you fools who thought your were brighter that Jesus...lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted August 8, 2009 Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 You can not put a larger brain in a black person of a white person who is a light weight..who is barbaric - who is boardering on a mad animal - all the social programs will not evolve stupid people into civilized and cultured people who do not commit rape - or stab or shoot....may as well face the fact that - we have pee heads running about that are dangerous - containing them is the best we can do...I see it all the time - violent blacks - and violent whites..they have one thing in common - an under developed spirt and a low level of real intelligence - you can not create a program that establishes intelligence - at one time old Bapitist grandmothers and fathers - Christians keep the black population in check - because they taught the kids one thing "this is right and that is wrong" - now everything goes - thanks a lot you fools who thought your were brighter that Jesus...lol. No one needs to be very intelligent to feel that Jesus has opened humanity as a whole, irrespective of its numerous differences, to the most violent, apocalyptic path imaginable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strangles Posted August 8, 2009 Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 (edited) Its obvious that Argus and Lictor are arguing for the same ends. Like all WNs, they believe in the complete separation of whites and blacks in all areas across the world. The tiny problem is, it is impossible. Edited August 8, 2009 by Strangles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted August 8, 2009 Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 Its obvious that Argus and Lictor are arguing for the same ends. Like all WNs, they want believe in the complete separation of whites and blacks in all areas across the world. The tiny problem is, it is impossible. Not being motivated only by what is merely possible is exhilarating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted August 8, 2009 Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 Its obvious that Argus and Lictor are arguing for the same ends. Like all WNs, they believe in the complete separation of whites and blacks in all areas across the world. The tiny problem is, it is impossible. Lictor does not quite understand what race is..he assumes that it is strickly a cold cut and dry issue - black-white..little does he realize there are a thousand variations of "whites" and "blacks" - and a thousand variations of mixes of these two. There is not such thing as a pure white person...start the DNA testing now on those nations just north of the middle east stretching to the south of Spain...it is an insult to a Scillian to say he has some black blood..but they do..even some of the fairest people in the world have some black genes..so how is Lictor going to bring about this great dividing of the murky human waters? Will he set up stations for blood testing and bury the ones that are not quite white? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted August 8, 2009 Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 To reiterate something I mentioned earlier, my real interest in this thread has been not in the question itself, but in the reaction the question generates. Whatever his motivations, Argus has created sort of a "Borat" type experiment. Overwhelmingly, the reaction has been: * "we can't discuss this because these statistics don't seem believable." * "we can't discuss this because the motives behind the question seem dubious." * "we can't discuss this because it is racist." * numerous attempts to deflect the topic to some other area of discussion * numerous attempts to deflect the topic with various types of flamebait. as well, * Lictor says "rock on, here's more examples of why the blacks are horrid people." * Oleg chips in with his surreal musings about the baseness of human nature. * and benny invents a new flavor of fortune cookie. Just two people, Tawasakm and Michael Hardner, have made an effort to approach question with an open mind rather than an effort to protect their preconceptions. I think that is a far more interesting statement about our notions about race than anything that can be drawn from these statistics. -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted August 8, 2009 Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 You should see that there is value to addressing the types of arguments Listor makes head-on, rather than banning those types of discussion. Small point of order: his name is not Listor. He should be addressed either as Lictor (pictured, vertical) or as Liston (pictured, horizontal.) -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strangles Posted August 8, 2009 Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 To reiterate something I mentioned earlier, my real interest in this thread has been not in the question itself, but in the reaction the question generates. Whatever his motivations, Argus has created sort of a "Borat" type experiment.Overwhelmingly, the reaction has been: * "we can't discuss this because these statistics don't seem believable." * "we can't discuss this because the motives behind the question seem dubious." * "we can't discuss this because it is racist." * numerous attempts to deflect the topic to some other area of discussion * numerous attempts to deflect the topic with various types of flamebait. as well, * Lictor says "rock on, here's more examples of why the blacks are horrid people." * Oleg chips in with his surreal musings about the baseness of human nature. * and benny invents a new flavor of fortune cookie. Just two people, Tawasakm and Michael Hardner, have made an effort to approach question with an open mind rather than an effort to protect their preconceptions. I think that is a far more interesting statement about our notions about race than anything that can be drawn from these statistics. -k Just like the Hate Crime in Courtenay and Racism in Calgary posts. The players change roles, their ideologies stay the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted August 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 No slavery in Canada? Guess again...... 98% of Blacks in Canada arrived - or their parents did - after immigration was liberalized in the early seventies. In fact, I never saw a non-white until junior high, when there was a Lebanese guy in my Class. So homogeneous was this part of the country (Ottawa) that I had no clue what he was. I never saw a black person until some time around the tail end of when I was going to college. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted August 8, 2009 Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 kimmy * "we can't discuss this because these statistics don't seem believable." That is true. The statistics seem to be quite unbelievable to me, if only because the response rates by black women are so low. * "we can't discuss this because the motives behind the question seem dubious." I would say we need to be cautious about discussing it because the motives in some cases are simple race baiting. * "we can't discuss this because it is racist." Discussing facts can't be racist in itself, it's the interpretation - I would say false interpretation of them - that is. * numerous attempts to deflect the topic to some other area of discussion* numerous attempts to deflect the topic with various types of flamebait. as well, * Lictor says "rock on, here's more examples of why the blacks are horrid people." * Oleg chips in with his surreal musings about the baseness of human nature. * and benny invents a new flavor of fortune cookie. Just two people, Tawasakm and Michael Hardner, have made an effort to approach question with an open mind rather than an effort to protect their preconceptions. I think that is a far more interesting statement about our notions about race than anything that can be drawn from these statistics. And, really, that's why people don't like discussing race - we don't do a good job of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strangles Posted August 8, 2009 Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 kimmyThat is true. The statistics seem to be quite unbelievable to me, if only because the response rates by black women are so low. I would say we need to be cautious about discussing it because the motives in some cases are simple race baiting. Discussing facts can't be racist in itself, it's the interpretation - I would say false interpretation of them - that is. And, really, that's why people don't like discussing race - we don't do a good job of it. To what end is the point of arguing with WNs. You will not change their view no matter what fact is presented to the the arguemtn, hence it is not a discussion. This is a personal reinforcement of ideas. They don't want a discussion. They want to make assertions. Arguing with one is akin to arguing with a brick wall. There's no point, you move on and life continues. That's how we do it in the real world, and that is usually the smartest thing to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted August 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 And, really, that's why people don't like discussing race - we don't do a good job of it. Who says people don't like discussing race? People don't have a problem discussing race as long as the discussion is from the proper perspective. The same people who are filled with vituperation and anger over this thread were all over rushing to the internet to decry the "racist hate attack" in BC. What they can't stand is the suggestion that there could be more black on white hate attacks than the reverse, that, in fact, racism could be more common among the non-white population in Canada than among the White population. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 8, 2009 Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 98% of Blacks in Canada arrived - or their parents did - after immigration was liberalized in the early seventies. In other words, you were wrong. In fact, I never saw a non-white until junior high, when there was a Lebanese guy in my Class. So homogeneous was this part of the country (Ottawa) that I had no clue what he was. I never saw a black person until some time around the tail end of when I was going to college. Oh, I am quite sure of that. You are a throwback to living in a "whites only" society, and it shows. You are not coping well, and in your mind it is only "getting worse". I wanted to asked you how Asians tolerate such high crime rates from whites or blacks, since you are an expert on such things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 8, 2009 Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 (edited) I wanted to asked you how Asians tolerate such high crime rates from whites or blacks, since you are an expert on such things. I was wondering what the nuance would be....you don't seem to throw away words the way yanks throw away beer tins and I was afraid i was going to miss the unvieling. ...to think that many might be under the illusion you are a ____________* * insert incorrect assumption here Edited August 8, 2009 by M.Dancer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted August 8, 2009 Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 To what end is the point of arguing with WNs. You will not change their view no matter what fact is presented to the the arguemtn, hence it is not a discussion. This is a personal reinforcement of ideas.They don't want a discussion. They want to make assertions. Arguing with one is akin to arguing with a brick wall. There's no point, you move on and life continues. That's how we do it in the real world, and that is usually the smartest thing to do. Stangles, I don't think I argued with anybody like that here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 8, 2009 Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 I was wondering what the nuance would be....you don't seem to throw away words the way yanks throw away beer tins and I was afraid i was going to miss the unvieling....to think that many might be under the illusion you are a ____________* * insert incorrect assumption here an American, making certain that race baiting stats are available for projection to Canadian populations, as Canada has not progressed past the silly notion of "visible minorities" (as defined by "whites only", of course). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 8, 2009 Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 an American, making certain that race baiting stats are available for projection to Canadian populations, as Canada has not progressed past the silly notion of "visible minorities" (as defined by "whites only", of course). An "american" is too vague a description. I'm sure you have heard it before.... You can tell an american at 500 feet... ...after that you can't tell them anything, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 8, 2009 Report Share Posted August 8, 2009 An "american" is too vague a description. Americans come from all around the world and walks of life.....so vague is good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 Contrary to our sexual desires which are fixated on one fantasy partnership; our death drive creates the diversity it needs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strangles Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 Stangles,I don't think I argued with anybody like that here. Argus and Lictor are WNs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 Just two people, Tawasakm and Michael Hardner, have made an effort to approach question with an open mind rather than an effort to protect their preconceptions. How would you know what anyone's "preconceptions" are? I would say that it's more accurate to say that you approve of just two people's approach to the question and you've decided that anyone who has a different take on the topic than you do doesn't have an open mind. I had no preconceptions regarding the topic, so I'll thank you not to speak for me. You, on the other hand, have made false statements in your approach to the question. Seems to me that leaves you in no position to judge where anyone else is coming from. To reiterate. The numbers are from a survey only, for one year only, and are not for "rape." As I stated earlier, there are no numbers regarding rape and race. This whole topic is therefore based on nothing but accusations based on certain people's judgments and preconceptions. It's quite obvious who has the preconceptions and agenda, who is trying to make something out of nothing concrete, and who is throwing false accusations around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 Argus and Lictor are WNs. Lictor is not serious: no post since August 3rd! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 Lictor is not serious: no post since August 3rd! Maybe he was raped by a "Black Man"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 b_c, That's neither funny nor does it help the discussion... if it were a little funny I wouldn't make a comment... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 9, 2009 Report Share Posted August 9, 2009 b_c,That's neither funny nor does it help the discussion... if it were a little funny I wouldn't make a comment... It's very very funny. . Even funnier is I suspect he paid for the abuse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.