US Army deserter André Lawrence Shepherd has applied for asylum in Germany, his lawyer told reporters on Thursday. Shepherd said he did not want to participate in a war that violates international law.
He said he had submitted his asylum request on Wednesday, although the Federal Agency for Migration and Refugees told the DPA news agency it did not have a record of such a document.
Shepherd, 31, has previously served in Iraq where he repaired and maintained Apache helicopters. "I believe that the helicopters are responsible for a substantial number of civilian deaths," he told reporters in Frankfurt. "I am ashamed that I was a part of these horrible acts."
Shepherd has appealed to both the Geneva Refugee Convention and EU guidelines that provide protection from persecution for deserters if the military services in question are seen as having violated international law.
Shepherd, who is from Cleveland, Ohio, deserted in April 2007 when he learned he would be sent back to Iraq. He is the second US soldier to have asked for asylum in Germany, although he would be the first to be receive it. According to the government, an application submitted by a US soldier in 2007 was later withdrawn. Shepherd said he thought many other soldiers would follow his example if Germany did approve is asylum request.
According to his lawyer Reinhard Marx, since Shepherd is still a member of the US Army, NATO statute says he could be arrested in Germany and sent before a military court. However, under the Geneva Refugee Convention Germany must provide him protection from seizure until a decision is made on his asylum application. Marx emphasized on Thursday that the Convention takes precedence over the NATO statute.
A US Army Europe spokesperson told The Local that the military would not be involved in the matter. "Matters involving the federal agencies of a sovereign foreign government and the status of U.S. citizens in foreign countries are matters for the State Department," he said.
Based on State Department information that the spokesperson has, less than one percent of soldiers desert, usually for reasons other than conscientious objection, and numbers have reportedly gone down by several hundred soldiers since 9-11.
The US military does not actively look for deserters the spokesman said, but if they are returned to military authorities, they are subject to military law which punishes each case individually.
Politicians on the left side of the political spectrum called for solidarity with Shepherd. Hans-Christian Ströbele of the Green party wrote in a letter to the soldier that the military conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan would only end when more soldiers "said 'no' in a similarly radical way to any participation in war."
Parliamentarians of the Left Party and refugee organizations called on the federal government to support the asylum application. According to the asylum group Pro Asyl, Germany's experience with National Socialism gives it a special duty "to respect the decisions made by conscientious objectors and deserters."
US army deserter requests political asylum in Germany Berlin,[/N] Nov 27, IRNA Germany-US-Military
An American soldier who deserted the US army 18 months ago to prevent a second deployment in Iraq has requested political asylum in Germany, the online site of the US military daily Stars and Stripes reported Thursday.
Handing his asylum petition Wednesday to a German federal office in charge of migration and refugee affairs in the southern city of Giessen, US army specialist Andre L. Shepherd alleged he was forced to fight an illegal war in Iraq.
In the asylum request, the first of its kind since the Vietnam War according to Shepherd's German lawyer Reinhard Marx, the deserter said he did not want to take part in a war that violates international law, citing Article 2.4 of the UN charter.
It also invoked the likelihood of him being accused of "war crimes which he did not want to be a party to." Shepherd who had worked as an Apache helicopter mechanic at a US military base in the south German town of Katterbach has been AWOL from his unit since April 2007.
Germany hosts dozens of US army and air Force installations, from which tens of thousands of troops funnel through on their way to Afghanistan or Iraq every year. ============================================================
[B]Canada Expels an American Deserter From the Iraq War
By IAN AUSTEN Published: July 16, 2008 OTTAWA — An American Army deserter who sought refuge in Canada from the war in Iraq was expelled Tuesday to the United States. The deserter, Robin Long, a native of Boise, Idaho, is believed to be the first from the Iraq war returned by the Canadian government. Mr. Long was expelled a day after the Federal Court of Canada rejected his request to delay his removal order pending further legal appeals. That decision and Mr. Long’s expulsion were somewhat unexpected. Two other American deserters received Federal Court permission this month to stay in Canada to continue their appeals. Since the Iraq war began in 2003, about 200 people have abandoned the United States military and fled to Canada, according to groups that represent their interests and provide them with support, legally and otherwise. “This is just one skirmish,” said Bob Ages, the chairman of the Vancouver War Resisters Support Campaign. “Despite the current government strategy of picking on resisters, the tide has turned in our favor both in the legal and political spheres.” While many Canadians support the deserters’ efforts to remain in Canada, the deserters have not been welcomed as warmly as deserters and draft dodgers were during the war in Vietnam. Canada has not backed the war in Iraq. But its Conservative government has ignored a nonbinding motion demanding asylum for deserters that was approved in June by Parliament, where Conservatives do not control a majority of the votes. Changes in Canadian immigration laws since the Vietnam War leave a refugee claim process as the only legal avenue for deserters to remain in Canada. But that process, intended to screen asylum seekers fleeing violence and repression generally from poor and unstable nations, requires several tests that are difficult for deserters from the United States to pass. The federal Immigration Department has swiftly acted against several deserters who have failed in the initial rounds of making claims, including Mr. Long. Sadia Qureshi, a spokeswoman for Diane Finley, the immigration minister, said agents from the Canada Border Services Agency sent Mr. Long back to the United States from British Columbia, where he had been living, at 9:55 a.m. local time. Representatives of several Canadian government departments said that privacy laws prohibited them from discussing the specifics of Mr. Long’s case. John Brent, a spokesman for Stockwell Day, the public safety minister, said by e-mail, “Our government is committed to enforcing removal orders against those persons who are inadmissible to Canada.” Thomas Schreiber, the chief of United States border protection in Blaine, Wash., said that Mr. Long had been sent to his border crossing rather than the main crossing at the Pacific Highway to avoid a demonstration against the Canadian removal order. Mr. Schreiber said that immediately after Mr. Long had been handed over he was arrested, adding that he would probably be taken to Fort Lewis, Wash., on Tuesday night. Late Tuesday afternoon, Maj. Nathan Banks, a spokesman for the United States Army, said that the military had not been told about Mr. Long’s expulsion. But Major Banks said Mr. Long would eventually be returned to Fort Knox, Ky., his home base, for disciplinary procedures. Major Banks declined to say what punishment Mr. Long faced, but lawyers for deserters in Canada said it could include prison and the equivalent of a felony conviction. Mr. Long, who is 25, joined the Army in 2003 to become a tank commander and fled to Canada with his partner and two children in 2005. He was arrested twice on charges of immigration violations in Canada, including not notifying the government that he had moved from a remote part of Ontario to Nelson, British Columbia. Bill Siksay, a New Democratic member of Parliament from British Columbia who has been involved with deserter issues, dismissed the significance of those charges. “These were small issue compared to the larger issues of the war in Iraq,” he said. “I’m shocked by this.”
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
December 15, 2001, dawned overcast at Pakistan's Chaman crossing point into Afghanistan, and Al-Jazeera reporter Abdelhaq Sadah and cameraman Sami Muhyideen al-Haj were anxious to get moving. Just across the border, the Taliban had fled Kandahar, their rule effectively ended by a fierce U.S. air and Afghan ground assault. The pair's assignment was to cover the aftermath.
They wouldn't get far, as Sadah recalls today. When they presented their passports, a Pakistani border guard grew angry. Sadah could go through, the officer barked, but there was a problem with al-Haj's passport. The officer produced an English-language notice from Pakistani intelligence instructing border guards to apprehend al-Haj for suspected links to al-Qaeda, Sadah recalled.
Both journalists were puzzled. Several times over two months, al-Haj had crossed Chaman with another Al-Jazeera crew without incident. Just a few days earlier, Sadah and al-Haj had traveled across the border to Spinboldak, where they reported on damage to the main Afghan road from Chaman to Kandahar.
Al-Haj thought there was a misunderstanding. The written order that the border guard produced listed the number of his old Sudanese passport, which he had lost two years earlier. A Pakistani intelligence official identifying himself as Major Nadeem arrived at the border later that day and told the two journalists not to worry. The next morning, Sadah said, the major drove off with al-Haj.
Behind Prison Walls
More than 100 journalists are jailed worldwide, CPJ research shows. In this special report, CPJ also examines secret prisons in Eritrea and how the Internet has led to more imprisonments. Slipping from Sight Virtual Reach of Faraway Jails Prison Snapshot: A Statistical Look "Since that time, I have not seen Sami," Sadah told CPJ. Neither have al-Haj's colleagues, family, and friends.
Al-Haj thus began an odyssey that would take him from Pakistan to Afghanistan and then on to an 8-by-7-foot detention cell at the U.S. Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where he remains today with some 450 other detainees the Bush administration has designated "enemy combatants."
Championed as a prisoner of conscience on Al-Jazeera though virtually unknown in U.S. media circles, al-Haj is the only confirmed journalist now imprisoned at Guantanamo. The U.S. military alleges that he worked as a financial courier for Chechen rebels, and that he assisted al-Qaeda and extremist figures. In one taped message, Osama bin Laden purportedly called for his release.
Yet al-Haj has been held for nearly five years on the basis of secret evidence; he has not been convicted or even charged with a crime. Until this year--when an Associated Press lawsuit prompted the Pentagon to identify the detainees--the military would not acknowledge al-Haj was in custody. Al-Haj's lawyer, who has been barred from attending his client's hearings, has called the allegations baseless and the justice system at Guantanamo a sham.
"There is absolutely zero evidence that he has any history in terrorism at all," said Clive Stafford Smith, legal director of Reprieve, a London-based human rights group, who took up al-Haj's case in 2005. Stafford Smith contends that al-Haj's continued detention is political, and the main focus of U.S. interrogators has not been al-Haj's alleged terrorist activities but obtaining intelligence on Al-Jazeera and its staff.
Whatever the truth, al-Haj's detention has raised questions about the U.S. military's treatment of journalists as it pursues a global war on terrorism. In 2005, the U.S. detention of al-Haj and at least four journalists in Iraq placed the United States sixth among countries jailing journalists, just behind Uzbekistan and tied with Burma. In Iraq, each journalist was held for months without charge. Each was eventually freed; no charges were substantiated in any of the cases.
Al-Haj's supporters ask that he be given a fair trial. In June, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that military tribunals established for Guantanamo detainees were unlawful. The court said the Bush administration must ensure minimal due process as outlined in U.S. military and international law, or it must seek congressional approval for detainee tribunals. By September, Congress approved guidelines that allow detainees the right of counsel and the ability to see evidence against them. But the guidelines still permit indefinite detention, and they allow the use of hearsay evidence and evidence obtained through coercion.
Following his detention at Chaman, Sami al-Haj spent the next 23 days in the custody of Pakistani intelligence officials before being taken to the nearby city of Quetta, where he was handed over to U.S. forces, according to Al-Jazeera.
Al-Haj was soon taken to the newly established U.S. air base at Bagram, outside the Afghan capital Kabul, for 16 days which, by his account, were the "longest days of my life." Al-Haj told Stafford Smith that he was severely beaten by U.S. troops, who accused him of recording videos of Osama bin Laden for Al-Jazeera. Al-Haj denied the accusation, and Stafford Smith said he believes the military confused his client with another, similarly named cameraman. The accusation has not resurfaced publicly.
On January 23, 2002, the U.S. military brought al-Haj to Kandahar where he remained until June 13, when he was transported to Guantanamo Bay, bound and gagged, along with dozens of other prisoners. Through his lawyer and in letters he has written from prison, al-Haj has described harsh conditions at Guantanamo and has accused U.S. troops of depriving him of sleep as an interrogation technique. He said he suffers from rheumatism and has been denied medication to prevent a recurrence of throat cancer.
Al-Haj's disappearance wasn't made public until September 18, 2002, when Al-Jazeera announced in a press release that its cameraman was being held at Guantanamo. For months, the station said, it sought to resolve the matter through behind-the-scenes contacts with Pakistani and U.S. officials, fearing that publicity would jeopardize any release. Pakistani intelligence warned one of the station's reporters not to inquire about al-Haj. U.S. officials were silent.
"We have not really received any official detail from the Americans about what exactly the charges are," said Waddah Khanfar, Al-Jazeera's general manager.
To viewers of the Arab world's most watched news channel, al-Haj is a familiar face. Al-Jazeera regularly reports on developments in his case, has devoted a section of its popular Web site to the detained journalist, and, this year, broadcast a 53-minute documentary detailing his story. Yet for all the attention, al-Haj remains an enigma.
Few Al-Jazeera staffers knew him well during his brief stint at the station. By all accounts, he had virtually no experience in journalism before joining one of the world's most influential news organizations.
Born in 1969 and raised in central Sudan, al-Haj showed a keen interest in media, according to his younger brother, Asim, who recalled that he "loved reading and writing, and also photography." Asim and another family member said al-Haj studied English in India.
Discouraged by the lack of journalism opportunities in Sudan, Asim said, he bypassed a career in media and got a job in the United Arab Emirates. In the late 1990s, he worked as an administrative assistant for the Sharjah-based Union Beverages, which makes soft drinks for the Middle East and Asia. His lawyer, Stafford Smith, said al-Haj also worked for an import-export company called Romat International. Public listings show Union Beverages and Romat belong to a group of companies owned by Muhammad Abdullah al-Umran, a UAE national.
At around the same time, al-Haj met his wife, Asma, an Azeri national. They married in 1998, had a son, Muhammad, now 6, and later took up residence in Doha, Qatar.
Asma said her husband started work at Al-Jazeera in April 2000 after responding to an employment ad. He had ambition, knowledge of computers, and a strong command of English, she told CPJ. Al-Haj's lawyer and Al-Jazeera journalists said al-Haj started on a freelance basis as a trainee. Al-Jazeera reported that he was initially assigned to help cover Chechnya but never traveled there.
Fawzi al-Bushra, a long-time Al-Jazeera reporter and fellow Sudanese national, befriended al-Haj and remembers him as quiet and inexperienced but eager to prove himself. "He was a man with no credentials," al-Bushra remembered. Still, al-Bushra and other Al-Jazeera reporters said it wasn't unusual for the station to train novice journalists.
By most accounts, al-Haj's big opportunity came after 9/11 and the subsequent U.S.-led assault to unseat the Taliban in Afghanistan. Al-Jazeera, which prized exclusive images from war zones, signed al-Haj to a contract at a time when it needed cameramen, said former station director Muhammad Jasem Ali. "Sami had some training in camera and we trained him in videophone," Ali said, noting that it was difficult to find anyone willing to go to "hot areas" like Afghanistan.
Al-Haj was eager to demonstrate his worth. Several Al-Jazeera staffers said he volunteered to go to Afghanistan when there were few takers for the assignment. Al-Bushra said he advised his inexperienced colleague against going, but al-Haj insisted. "I remember saying, 'You are going to a war, not a picnic,'" al-Bushra said. "He said, 'OK, but that will give me an opportunity to prove myself.'"
Al-Haj's family was nervous, too. "But after a long discussion Sami said ... he couldn't say no because he was new," said his brother, Asim.
In October 2001, new contract with Al-Jazeera in hand, al-Haj joined a crew headed by reporter Youssef al-Shouly in Taliban-controlled southeastern Afghanistan. The men worked together for nearly two months, often putting in 15-hour days, al-Shouly recalled. Using a handheld camera and videophone, al-Haj documented the civilian fallout from U.S. bombs, a common feature of Al-Jazeera's war reporting, and his shots were some of the only images coming from southeastern Afghanistan at the time. Al-Haj could be moved to tears by the bombing, al-Shouly said.
Al-Shouly and al-Haj were briefly detained by Taliban forces for reporting without authorization, according to Al-Jazeera. It was at Chaman, though, that al-Haj's career was put on indefinite hold.
For much of the last five years, the reasons surrounding al-Haj's detention have been secret. In September 2002, CPJ wrote to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, calling on the Pentagon to detail the basis for the detention. CPJ received no response. Spokesman Bryan Whitman did not respond to requests for comment for this story.
At CPJ's request, the Pentagon did provide declassified transcripts of hearings involving al-Haj. Those documents, along with information provided by al-Haj's attorney, shed some light on the case.
Military officials have made what appear to be several troubling allegations against al-Haj, according to a summary of his 2004 Combatant Status Review Tribunal, a hearing to determine whether detainees were "enemy combatants," and a transcript of his 2005 Administrative Review Board, a parole-type proceeding.
The military labels the allegations as "evidence." But a review of the public documents shows that they are assertions of wrongdoing without the documentation or testimony normally considered by a court to be evidence. Supporting evidence, if any, is part of the U.S. military's classified file--off-limits to the public, al-Haj, and his lawyer.
One prime allegation is that al-Haj served as a financial courier for Chechen rebels and other armed groups in the Caucuses, delivering large sums of cash from the United Arab Emirates to Azerbaijan on several occasions between 1996 and 2000. Azerbaijan was a known transfer point for arms and materiel in support of Chechen armed groups.
U.S. officials allege that al-Haj made cash deliveries on behalf of his boss at Union Beverages, Abdel Latif al-Umran, to the Baku branch of the Islamic charity Al-Haramain. Al-Umran, son of the company's listed owner, did not respond to several requests for comment. The elder al-Umran also did not respond to messages from CPJ. Al-Haramain was not on a U.S. terrorist watch list at the time, although it was placed there after the September 11 attacks.
Al-Haj is also accused of meeting with and helping secure a visa for reputed al-Qaeda founder Mamdouh Mahmoud Salim, who was extradited to the United States on conspiracy charges stemming from the 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa. Salim was convicted in 2004 of maiming a Manhattan corrections officer.
Military officials also say al-Haj falsified Romat International documents as a way to establish a corporation in Azerbaijan. Investigators allege Salim was affiliated with Romat, but provide no details about Salim's role or the intent of the alleged scheme.
On their face, other accusations appear to be an indictment of al-Haj's journalistic work. At his 2005 Administrative Review Board hearing, military officials said al-Haj had "interviewed several Taliban officials" and top al-Qaeda figure Abu Hafs al-Mauritani while in Afghanistan.
The U.S. government's classified file could include other allegations, but such accusations, if any, have not been disclosed to the public, al-Haj, or Stafford Smith.
In a January 2005 report in The Wall Street Journal, U.S. commanders acknowledged that many Guantanamo detainees are not a threat and likely have no valuable intelligence about al-Qaeda or the Taliban.
Stafford Smith said his client did nothing wrong and has no involvement with terror groups. He said al-Haj traveled to Azerbaijan for family and business reasons, delivering money for his boss to Islamic charities on one, or possibly two occasions.
"At the time Sami didn't know what it was for," said Stafford Smith, who said his client acted solely on his boss' instructions. "He thought it was going to charity." On one occasion, when he was carrying US$220,000 to Azerbaijan, al-Haj declared the cash to customs officials, the lawyer said.
The defense lawyer said his client picked up Salim at an airport on one occasion, and drove his family around Dubai another time, both at his boss' direction. Stafford Smith said that al-Haj helped secure a visa to the United Arab Emirates, not for Salim, but for Salim's relatives, again at the behest of his employer.
He said that the military has disclosed so little about the corporate document allegation that he can't respond substantively. "I really don't know what they are saying and neither does Sami," Stafford Smith said. "We haven't seen anything on this. Sami has no idea and can't respond."
In all, he said, the accusations are pernicious because--without evidence, witnesses, or even a statement of what crime was committed--they cannot be rebutted. "It is impossible to defend against 'charges' that are not real," he said. "I could charge you with being unpleasant to your mother, and you would have a hard time disproving it."
Most of Stafford Smith's information has come from his eight interviews with al-Haj at Guantanamo, information and documentation al-Haj has provided, and from recently declassified documents.
Stafford Smith cites shifting allegations against his client as evidence of the flawed justice system at Guantanamo. U.S. authorities have dropped at least three original accusations against al-Haj--that he had disseminated terrorist propaganda on the Internet; that he traveled extensively throughout the Middle East and Eastern Europe; and that he had arranged to transport shoulder-fired Stinger missiles from Afghanistan to Chechnya. The missile charge, the lawyer said, appeared to be based on a badly garbled conversation in which another detainee talked about an attempt to sell the weapons.
But for Stafford Smith, the most persuasive evidence that the case is a sham is that al-Haj's interrogators hardly seem interested in the allegations themselves. Virtually all of the roughly 130 interrogations al-Haj has been subjected to have focused on Al-Jazeera, Stafford Smith said. He said military officials have appeared intent on establishing a relationship between Al-Jazeera and al-Qaeda, questioning al-Haj about prominent network journalists, the station's finances, and how it pays for airline tickets.
At one point, U.S. military interrogators allegedly told al-Haj that he would be released if he agreed to inform U.S. intelligence authorities about the satellite news network's activities. Al-Haj refused. Bush administration officials have made no secret of their distaste for Al-Jazeera, repeatedly labeling its programming inflammatory and accusing the station of working with terrorists.
Al-Haj professed his innocence during a 40-minute hearing before the Administrative Review Board on August 12, 2005. Although he refused to answer questions about the accusations on the advice of his lawyer, a transcript of the hearing includes an impassioned plea to the review board. The transcript quotes al-Haj as saying that he misses his family deeply and that he does not understand how he could be considered an enemy combatant.
"With all due respect, a mistake has been made because I have never been a member of any terrorist group and I never took part in any terrorist or violent act," he told the board. "I can say without hesitation that I am not a threat to the United States or to anyone else. I strongly condemn any act that is taken against innocent people, and I strongly condemn the tragic attack on the World Trade Center in New York. Islam properly understood would never allow the killing of innocent people in this way."
U.S. officials have described the detainees at Guantanamo Bay as "the worst of worst," but colleagues and relatives find it difficult to reconcile that description with the shy, unassuming man they knew. Stafford Smith calls him "one of the most cheerful and upbeat people--always smiling--that I have ever met."
"He loved his wife and son--he always spoke about them," said Al-Jazeera's Youssef al-Shouly, who remembers al-Haj as a practicing Muslim not given to extremist statements. "He is a gentle person," said al-Haj's wife, Asma. "He never did anything and the Americans realize that, but the Americans put themselves in a bind and they cannot get out of it."
The review board has singled out al-Haj for very good behavior, and, according to hearing transcripts, he frequently leads prayers in cellblocks and teaches inmates English and the Quran.
Al-Haj's supporters maintain that his case has been hampered by bad publicity--or no publicity at all. Falling squarely in the first category is a purported audiotape from Osama bin Laden in which he called for the release of al-Haj and others by name. Although the authenticity of the May 23, 2006, message has been questioned by some experts, it said Guantanamo detainees "have no connection whatsoever to the events of September 11 and even stranger is that many of them have no connection with al-Qaeda in the first place."
Al-Jazeera staffers also criticize the station's initially meek show of public support for al-Haj, which contrasted with the outpouring for its star reporter, Taysir Allouni, who was jailed in Spain in 2003 on terrorism charges. "The fact it took them so long to intervene harmed him immensely," said Stafford Smith, who added that he didn't want to be "too critical of Al-Jazeera because it is in a difficult position."
Was al-Haj a knowing or unwitting conspirator with terrorist groups? Or is he entirely innocent--a journalist plucked from the field while covering the world's biggest story? What crime has he committed? What is the evidence against him? Only a fair and transparent legal process can provide those answers.
"The rule of law should prevail," said colleague al-Bushra. "He's spent five years now without a trial."
Joel Campagna is senior program coordinator responsible for the Middle East and North Africa at the Committee to Protect Journalists. CPJ Research Associate Ivan Karakashian contributed to this report.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
Black Americans polled prior to the Iraq war voted overwhelmingly at 90% aversion to entering a war with Iraq.
Whites voted 90% in favor of war.
After the war began, black enlistment to all US military branches fell 40-50%. Even today, it's down 35% from 10 years ago.
US military recruiters are running all kinds of TV and Radio Ads attempting to reverse this, but so far, have failed.
I would not allow my sons to serve during the Bush admin, and I will strongly advise them against serving under Obama.
A black man has no place in the white man's military.
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
Still I see too many Blacks participating in this genocide against Muslims. This is very important as the US is planning new invasions in Iran and Africa as well.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
Blacks are diverse. Too diverse for their own good. ~8% of black American vote Republican. These are the 10% of blacks who went against the 90% majority who opposed the war, or had no opinion.
Today, we see which group was right and which were dead wrong.
Whites get inheritance money or their parents steal enough to pay college tuition.
Blacks are enticed into military service with the hopes of earning tuition.
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
A new approach perhaps? Change yourself and so change your situation. Blacks should be worthy for freedom too, and stop oppressing and exploiting each other. They should make coalitions because the White's are not a monolith. Black on black crime should stop. Beginning on this very forum with this con-artist using over thirthy nicks by now.
Meninarmer, Sorry to say this but I feel disappointed in your racist post.
First: It is not "the white mans military". This kind of talk is divisive. It is America's military.
Now I am a pacifist and oppose to war but I don't think it is a bad thing to have a military. I am not opposed to defending our country or our allies. For instance I would not be opposed for our military going into Dafur and rescuing the helpless people there.
Second: "Whites get inheritance money or their parents steal enough to pay college tuition." What kind of BS statement is this?
I have not gotten an inheritance nor have my parents stole anything. My parents worked for everything they have and I have worked my butt off for everything I have. I put myself though school. My sister put herself through school while raising four kids. She worked as a waitress while doing it. When I started school, I was divorced and worked three jobs, eventually dropping down to one.
I find your generalizations offensive. Would you like me to generalize about all blacks from the bad experiences I have had from some? I certainly could.
For instance the black council member who I did work for who never paid me. Him knowing that I was struggling financially and a single mother while he had a good paying job.
Or the black couple that I did work for at his office. The man constantly hitting on me while his wife sat in the next room. He owned his own business, the property too and a nice home. Yet I saw him cheat his "brothers" who were customers, while treating them badly to the point where I felt embarrassed, and I saw him using food stamps to buy food. Do you think he was a cheat because he was black?
Or the black owned upholstery business that I took a small job to who took forever to finish it and when I would drop by the store they would be sleeping in the back. When I finally got my little chair back they had done an awful job. They had lost the pillow and the tacks were not even put in the same distance apart. I could of done better myself.
The reason I can't generalize is because of the black school board member and his wife who I did a lot of work for. They paid me well and we worked well together. I respect them and they respect me. They even tried to get my money from the council member telling me "we know how he is".
Or my dear friend who is as good a person as you would want to meet.
Sorry to go off on a rant but I never expected this kind of talk from you. Posted by Bonzo (Member # 12594) on :
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer: Whites get inheritance money or their parents steal enough to pay college tuition.
Blacks are enticed into military service with the hopes of earning tuition.
That is TOO funny!!!! hahahahahaha I guess I must be black then because according to your statement I surely can't be white. You just continue to show your ignorance meninarmer.
As far as deserters go, no one twisted their arm to join up. It's an "all volunteer" military in the US and the last time I checked there wasn't a draft. What did these guys think they were signing up for? A trip to Disneyland? Most likely a Democrat who realized you actually have to give something back after receiving the military benefits/pay. Wow, what a concept.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: Meninarmer, Sorry to say this but I feel disappointed in your racist post.
First: It is not "the white mans military". This kind of talk is divisive. It is America's military.
Now I am a pacifist and oppose to war but I don't think it is a bad thing to have a military. I am not opposed to defending our country or our allies. For instance I would not be opposed for our military going into Dafur and rescuing the helpless people there.
Second: "Whites get inheritance money or their parents steal enough to pay college tuition." What kind of BS statement is this?
I have not gotten an inheritance nor have my parents stole anything. My parents worked for everything they have and I have worked my butt off for everything I have. I put myself though school. My sister put herself through school while raising four kids. She worked as a waitress while doing it. When I started school, I was divorced and worked three jobs, eventually dropping down to one.
I find your generalizations offensive. Would you like me to generalize about all blacks from the bad experiences I have had from some? I certainly could.
For instance the black council member who I did work for who never paid me. Him knowing that I was struggling financially and a single mother while he had a good paying job.
Or the black couple that I did work for at his office. The man constantly hitting on me while his wife sat in the next room. He owned his own business, the property too and a nice home. Yet I saw him cheat his "brothers" who were customers, while treating them badly to the point where I felt embarrassed, and I saw him using food stamps to buy food. Do you think he was a cheat because he was black?
Or the black owned upholstery business that I took a small job to who took forever to finish it and when I would drop by the store they would be sleeping in the back. When I finally got my little chair back they had done an awful job. They had lost the pillow and the tacks were not even put in the same distance apart. I could of done better myself.
The reason I can't generalize is because of the black school board member and his wife who I did a lot of work for. They paid me well and we worked well together. I respect them and they respect me. They even tried to get my money from the council member telling me "we know how he is".
Or my dear friend who is as good a person as you would want to meet.
Sorry to go off on a rant but I never expected this kind of talk from you.
I'm sorry you feel this way Of_Gold, but I have served in the military, and I don't believe you have. If the US military goes into Dafur, it won't be to "rescue" anybody, but to place Africa under US military control. Or, do you believe the US/Israel doesn't have a hand in what has happened in Dafur?
I could share far too many examples of black men I've met who came back from combat and were completely forgotten by the military they fought and gave their lives, limbs, and sometimes, minds for. The US presently has over 300,000 homeless veterans living on it's streets. It that an example of a country worthy of giving your life for? My nephew joined in 2001 to earn college money. He returned last year after doing 3 tours. He was blown up twice, once on his first tour and once on his third. He has completely lost his hearing, one eye, and can hardly walk. The military repaid him by not giving him his due disability and so he had to move in with his mother. When they finally did give him his disability, they would not give him the 100% he deserved, by haggled and gave him 60% disability. Hardly enough to pay his bills, so now he is working as a janitor.
Now with no hearing and limited sight, he has given up on the idea of college.
This all doesn't address black Americans going over to Africa to kill Africans when the military calls on them to do so. As the Vietcong said to black soldiers in Vietnam, "Go home Soul brothers. We have no fight with you." I agree. Blacks don't start these wars. Whites do even before they try some foreign thing called, diplomacy. I say, if whites wish to fight these wars, then blacks should let them. On their own.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bonzo:
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer: Whites get inheritance money or their parents steal enough to pay college tuition.
Blacks are enticed into military service with the hopes of earning tuition.
That is TOO funny!!!! hahahahahaha I guess I must be black then because according to your statement I surely can't be white. You just continue to show your ignorance meninarmer.
As far as deserters go, no one twisted their arm to join up. It's an "all volunteer" military in the US and the last time I checked there wasn't a draft. What did these guys think they were signing up for? A trip to Disneyland? Most likely a Democrat who realized you actually have to give something back after receiving the military benefits/pay. Wow, what a concept.
History and fact are on my side. I won't bother to go into details with a white boy. You've been hearing it for decades and still promote racism. What I say will make absolutely no difference.
Guess how many of the US's 300,000 homeless war veterans are black?
Following WWII returning veterans were given low interest VA home loans. They were denied to blacks but freely given to whites. That's right. Something was GIVEN to them, and they in turn, handed it down to you. Therefore, You've received handouts too. If not in that way, in many other ways whites receive handouts in America, which is exactly why America is broke right now, Whites, democrat of Republican (with more Republican) receiving too many free handouts.
Look at Detroit. They lose billions of dollars. Receive a free bail-out, and the incompetent whites running those businesses aren't even penalized, but continue to receive a free HAND-OUT, first by the shareholders, and now by the government. They are about to receive big fat government welfare checks. Sure, you whites call it, hard work. I call it what it really is. A big fat handout that makes social welfare look like pocket change.
Had Obama been a cocaine using AWOL national guardsmen, do you believe he would be President-Elect today? Of course not. Only whites receive this kind of HAND-OUT in America.
A black man fighting white man's war is a sucker.
Posted by Bonzo (Member # 12594) on :
First, let's get the gender correct. . .I'm a female.
Second, we can talk all day long about what's happened in the past. Plenty of our white soldiers were spat upon after returning from Viet Nam. Go to any VA hospital and see how many different races are being seen for their service-connected injuries. I should know, I used to work in one.
I'll repeat again that NO black man in the military today was drafted or forced to join up. It's on their own free will so any whining and complaining is no longer justified about fighting some "white man's war".
Succeeding despite whatever tragic circumstances have been handed to you in life is called "determination". How many black men have succumbed to gangs, killing each other on the streets, drugs, and end up in jail. Guess you want to blame that on the "white man", too.
These are just excuses on your part. I could also share plenty of stories of people who have made it despite negative events happening in their life. I made it, too, and I wasn't given a "free pass" because of my color. In fact, I was discriminated against because of my color. Even today I see civil service jobs advertised where those who graduated from "historically black colleges/universities" are given first priority in hiring. It's all about having the desire to get out of the situation you are in and making it better. Yes, you have to make some sacrifices to do it but it can be done.
Posted by Tigerlily (Member # 3567) on :
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer: A black man has no place in the white man's military.
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer: I'm sorry you feel this way Of_Gold, but I have served in the military, and I don't believe you have.
Wow, you are an embarrassing example for the US military and your own country. You truly had no place in serving your nation.
Racism is one of the major things which won't be tolerated at all in the US military.
So WHY did you sign up then??
~ TL
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bonzo: [QB]
Second, we can talk all day long about what's happened in the past.
Very easy to say when you are the beneficiary of the past. Let's not talk about the tens of millions paid to these majority white corporate CEOs who've run the nation into the ground yet still get a free handout million dollar bonus for being idiots. To fire the fools you have to pay them a golden parachute handout of $20M. Why is this true? Because of the past, and will still be so in the future. Get with it babe. Free handouts to whites have ruined the country.
The chief white in the country, President Bush, is the main symbol of white privilege. Here is a man who has NEVER worked a hard day in his life, was given free handouts all of his life. Attended the best college in the land, yet is one of the biggest losers in history. Other Republicans are mirror images of Mr. Bush. Free loading welfare recipients, except their welfare free handouts are millions and billions of taxpayer dollars. Republicans stand for free handouts and corporate welfare.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tigerlily: You truly had no place in serving your nation.
I've served my nation in many ways. However, I don't serve whites seeking oil. I'd prefer to expose you racists. I am not alone. Black military enrollment is still down 44%. Ask yourself, why. Let YOUR sons fight for Oil and territorial control. My sons have better things to do.
Posted by Bonzo (Member # 12594) on :
Not only are you racist, meninarmer, but you are a very bitter man. I feel sorry for you to have that much hatred built up inside of you. Just think what you could do with all that negative energy and bitterness if you wanted to do something positive with it. What's even more sad is that you've passed it on to the next generation with your sons. The cycle will never be broken. . .what a shame.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer:
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: Meninarmer, Sorry to say this but I feel disappointed in your racist post.
First: It is not "the white mans military". This kind of talk is divisive. It is America's military.
Now I am a pacifist and oppose to war but I don't think it is a bad thing to have a military. I am not opposed to defending our country or our allies. For instance I would not be opposed for our military going into Dafur and rescuing the helpless people there.
Second: "Whites get inheritance money or their parents steal enough to pay college tuition." What kind of BS statement is this?
I have not gotten an inheritance nor have my parents stole anything. My parents worked for everything they have and I have worked my butt off for everything I have. I put myself though school. My sister put herself through school while raising four kids. She worked as a waitress while doing it. When I started school, I was divorced and worked three jobs, eventually dropping down to one.
I find your generalizations offensive. Would you like me to generalize about all blacks from the bad experiences I have had from some? I certainly could.
For instance the black council member who I did work for who never paid me. Him knowing that I was struggling financially and a single mother while he had a good paying job.
Or the black couple that I did work for at his office. The man constantly hitting on me while his wife sat in the next room. He owned his own business, the property too and a nice home. Yet I saw him cheat his "brothers" who were customers, while treating them badly to the point where I felt embarrassed, and I saw him using food stamps to buy food. Do you think he was a cheat because he was black?
Or the black owned upholstery business that I took a small job to who took forever to finish it and when I would drop by the store they would be sleeping in the back. When I finally got my little chair back they had done an awful job. They had lost the pillow and the tacks were not even put in the same distance apart. I could of done better myself.
The reason I can't generalize is because of the black school board member and his wife who I did a lot of work for. They paid me well and we worked well together. I respect them and they respect me. They even tried to get my money from the council member telling me "we know how he is".
Or my dear friend who is as good a person as you would want to meet.
Sorry to go off on a rant but I never expected this kind of talk from you.
I'm sorry you feel this way Of_Gold, but I have served in the military, and I don't believe you have. If the US military goes into Dafur, it won't be to "rescue" anybody, but to place Africa under US military control. Or, do you believe the US/Israel doesn't have a hand in what has happened in Dafur?
I could share far too many examples of black men I've met who came back from combat and were completely forgotten by the military they fought and gave their lives, limbs, and sometimes, minds for. The US presently has over 300,000 homeless veterans living on it's streets. It that an example of a country worthy of giving your life for? My nephew joined in 2001 to earn college money. He returned last year after doing 3 tours. He was blown up twice, once on his first tour and once on his third. He has completely lost his hearing, one eye, and can hardly walk. The military repaid him by not giving him his due disability and so he had to move in with his mother. When they finally did give him his disability, they would not give him the 100% he deserved, by haggled and gave him 60% disability. Hardly enough to pay his bills, so now he is working as a janitor.
Now with no hearing and limited sight, he has given up on the idea of college.
This all doesn't address black Americans going over to Africa to kill Africans when the military calls on them to do so. As the Vietcong said to black soldiers in Vietnam, "Go home Soul brothers. We have no fight with you." I agree. Blacks don't start these wars. Whites do even before they try some foreign thing called, diplomacy. I say, if whites wish to fight these wars, then blacks should let them. On their own.
No, I haven't and have no desire to but my cousin has, my dad and uncle did and my nephew does... all of them are white.
My gosh, listen to yourself, you sound like a black Hammer. I agree that the military men are forgotten but I know for certain that they are not all black. If you were in an all black army then it was not the American army. You are being very raciest meninarmer. How can you talk like this and condemn Hammer for being raciest?
As far as it being a white mans war, tell me the the color of Collin Powel and Condelisa Rice. I am white, this is not my war. I believe that you are confusing "white man" with "oil man" or "rich man".
This kind of talk is exactly why some whites would not vote for Obama. He would never talk like this.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bonzo: Not only are you racist, meninarmer, but you are a very bitter man. I feel sorry for you to have that much hatred built up inside of you. Just think what you could do with all that negative energy and bitterness if you wanted to do something positive with it. What's even more sad is that you've passed it on to the next generation with your sons. The cycle will never be broken. . .what a shame.
LOL, a white person calling a black man a racist, as if it has a drop of credibility.
Some blacks use their frustrations to kill each other. That's OK with you. Some others like Rev. Wright channel their frustrations outwards to the source, whites. That frightens you. Stop hiding and take responsibility for who and what you are. You'll feel better about yourself and than perhaps you can make some not just feel good change, but REAL change.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by of_gold:
My gosh, listen to yourself, you sound like a black Hammer.
Whites tolerate people like Hammer. You sit across from them as they say racist things and simply tolerate it.
I am not a turn the other cheek kind of guy. It's not what people like Hammer say, but what they do when in a position of authority.
I really don't expect you to understand. As I said earlier, when the prospect of the Iraqi war broke out, 90% of White Americans polled voted, YES. While 90% of blacks polled voted, NO. Who was right and who was wrong. The nation is broke due to 100s of thousands, if not millions of rich white men giving themselves billion dollar welfare checks. Who benefits today from these free handouts to whites, their tens of millions of friends and families. When they die, who stands to inherit this loot. Yet, whites insist, they are not responsible. LOL Yes, I'm damn mad, because it's my and millions of other blacks money they're stealing and using exclusively as White welfare. Any black who isn't mad about giving their money to whites for free handouts is a damn fool.
Whites whine about $200 welfare checks to the poor, all the while paying themselves million dollar welfare check. When questioned, they use weak reverse psychology tricks calling reverse racism, or accusing others of getting the free-handouts they give themselves. Look at Bozo and TL nurture these racist like Hammer, and attempt to use the same weak strategy.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
When we tolerate people like Hammer and people like you it is to keep the peace. When appropriate I will and do speak my mind.
You are showing a good example of the pot calling the kettle black or white in this case. You are both part of the problem and you are both racist because you judge people by the color of their skin.
Shame on you.
Damn, I wish my million dollar welfare check would get here... Posted by Bonzo (Member # 12594) on :
Don't fool yourself, meninarmer. . .blacks can be MORE racist than a white person. I grew up in a very diverse culture, worked in places in all black neighborhoods, and (gasp) even dated black men. I've been around long enough to know that blacks can harbour more hatred towards anyone outside their race than anyone else.
Just tune into one of those talk shows. There can be a show with a white family saying they don't want their daughter/sister dating a black man or having babies with black men. The audience boos them & calls them racist and prejudiced. They get called all sorts of names and insulted because they feel the way they do.
A black family will come on the next show and express their dismay that their brother/son is dating a white woman & the audience claps when the black women lay into the "brother" saying they should have "black pride" and how a "sister" is much more than a white woman. . .how they need to keep the bloodline "pure" and not "mixed". Give me a break. Double standards if you ask me but then I don't expect you to ever admit there is.
Posted by Bonzo (Member # 12594) on :
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: When we tolerate people like Hammer and people like you it is to keep the peace. When appropriate I will and do speak my mind.
You are showing a good example of the pot calling the kettle black or white in this case. You are both part of the problem and you are both racist because you judge people by the color of their skin.
Shame on you.
Damn, I wish my million dollar welfare check would get here...
Good post, of_gold.
LOL Let me know when you get your welfare check so I can start looking for mine! hahahaha Since I should have been getting one every month for the last 32 years, hmmmm. . .might add up to a million dollars by the time they add the interest. Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: When we tolerate people like Hammer and people like you it is to keep the peace. When appropriate I will and do speak my mind.
You are showing a good example of the pot calling the kettle black or white in this case. You are both part of the problem and you are both racist because you judge people by the color of their skin.
Shame on you.
Damn, I wish my million dollar welfare check would get here...
LOL, You don't know me, or anyone like me. You do know plenty of Hammer's though, and I know them. If you are not getting you welfare checks, it's because you haven't asked the right person. Move to Palin Country and you'll be sure to receiving one. In Texas, just join your local klan (easy to find, they are everywhere there) and you'll get many, as Hammer does.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bonzo:
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: When we tolerate people like Hammer and people like you it is to keep the peace. When appropriate I will and do speak my mind.
You are showing a good example of the pot calling the kettle black or white in this case. You are both part of the problem and you are both racist because you judge people by the color of their skin.
Shame on you.
Damn, I wish my million dollar welfare check would get here...
Good post, of_gold.
LOL Let me know when you get your welfare check so I can start looking for mine! hahahaha Since I should have been getting one every month for the last 32 years, hmmmm. . .might add up to a million dollars by the time they add the interest.
You can't refute the reality of anything I've said. All you can do is offer the same lame excuses as Hammer and TL do. When America is conflicted, it's a fact that white democrats align with white Republicans in the interest of white America. 90% of whites voted FOR the war, democrat and Republican. Statistically, both you and other whites here were in agreement. If not, you were in the small minority. You need to understand this behavior before you can make any REAL change.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
Nope, I was never for the war, so you are wrong.
I know plenty like you. And most of the year I have aligned myself with you, what color are you again? Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bonzo:
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: When we tolerate people like Hammer and people like you it is to keep the peace. When appropriate I will and do speak my mind.
You are showing a good example of the pot calling the kettle black or white in this case. You are both part of the problem and you are both racist because you judge people by the color of their skin.
Shame on you.
Damn, I wish my million dollar welfare check would get here...
Good post, of_gold.
LOL Let me know when you get your welfare check so I can start looking for mine! hahahaha Since I should have been getting one every month for the last 32 years, hmmmm. . .might add up to a million dollars by the time they add the interest.
No one ever told me that I could get money because I was white. I always thought that having a penis is what got you the big bucks. Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: Nope, I was never for the war, so you are wrong.
I know plenty like you. And most of the year I have aligned myself with you, what color are you again?
Than you are in the 10% minority who opposed the war. Congratulations!!!
I don't believe it was so much that you aligned with ME, but you made the wise decision to Align with TRUTH, as long as it wasn't too painful.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: No one ever told me that I could get money because I was white. I always thought that having a penis is what got you the big bucks.
If that were truth, I wouldn't be so feared and have a quazillion bucks in the bank, and Hammer's account would be overdrawn. Ahh, but alas, it is not so. Posted by Herukhuti (Member # 11484) on :
Meninarmer goes around claiming he's for Justice (RWSWJ?? remember?? ).
But then he goes and attacks the very same people who appear to be for Justice.
Wierdo.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
^ Damn Hammer. yet another niche. Real men need only 1 niche.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer:
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: Nope, I was never for the war, so you are wrong.
I know plenty like you. And most of the year I have aligned myself with you, what color are you again?
Than you are in the 10% minority who opposed the war. Congratulations!!!
I don't believe it was so much that you aligned with ME, but you made the wise decision to Align with TRUTH, as long as it wasn't too painful.
Yes, I align with the truth and I still align with the truth. Too painful? I live in Texas, wtf are you talking about?
I and millions of other white people voted for Obama because we believe him to be the best man for the job. You on the other hand voted for him because he has black skin. Who is aligned with the truth?
You apparently are so blinded by hate that you can't see straight. Let me share a little secrete with you. "You reap what you sow". This explains why you have experienced so much racism. You are a raciest. Yes you are. Overwhelmingly so. You view the world as black and white.
Answer this. What was the skin color of those in Africa who sold your ancestors into slavery? What was the color of the man's skin who fought to free your ancestors from slavery? ANSWER: Black men sold your people into slavery and white men fought for their freedom. Yet, YOU choose to focus on the slave owners.
And you who have never been a slave, tell me who is better off, you or your brothers in Africa who sold your ancestor into slavery?
Martin Luther King had a dream. He put the wheels of that dream into motion. He focused on hope. Now years later, because millions or white men choose to judge a man, not by the color of his skin but by the content of his character, on January 20, 2009 the first black man will be sworn into the office of the highest position in America. Barack Obama the president of the United States of America.
"Little black boys and black girls have joined hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers", Yet YOU want to segregate them, and YOU want to divide them by skin color. You shame what King and Obama have achieved.
"When you change the way you look at things, the things that you look at change." ~ Dr. Wayne Dyer
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by of_gold:
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer:
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: Nope, I was never for the war, so you are wrong.
I know plenty like you. And most of the year I have aligned myself with you, what color are you again?
Than you are in the 10% minority who opposed the war. Congratulations!!!
I don't believe it was so much that you aligned with ME, but you made the wise decision to Align with TRUTH, as long as it wasn't too painful.
Yes, I align with the truth and I still align with the truth. Too painful? I live in Texas, wtf are you talking about?
I and millions of other white people voted for Obama because we believe him to be the best man for the job. You on the other hand voted for him because he has black skin. Who is aligned with the truth?
You apparently are so blinded by hate that you can't see straight. Let me share a little secrete with you. "You reap what you sow". This explains why you have experienced so much racism. You are a raciest. Yes you are. Overwhelmingly so. You view the world as black and white.
Answer this. What was the skin color of those in Africa who sold your ancestors into slavery? What was the color of the man's skin who fought to free your ancestors from slavery? ANSWER: Black men sold your people into slavery and white men fought for their freedom. Yet, YOU choose to focus on the slave owners.
And you who have never been a slave, tell me who is better off, you or your brothers in Africa who sold your ancestor into slavery?
Martin Luther King had a dream. He put the wheels of that dream into motion. He focused on hope. Now years later, because millions or white men choose to judge a man, not by the color of his skin but by the content of his character, on January 20, 2009 the first black man will be sworn into the office of the highest position in America. Barack Obama the president of the United States of America.
"Little black boys and black girls have joined hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers", Yet YOU want to segregate them, and YOU want to divide them by skin color. You shame what King and Obama have achieved.
"When you change the way you look at things, the things that you look at change." ~ Dr. Wayne Dyer
I'm a romantic, yet still a realist.
I did not vote for Obama. My vote went to the Green party. Obama easily won my state and did not need my vote. The Green party did and stand more for what I believe in. So, I didn't vote for Obama because he is black. I did not vote Green because the candidates were black and Hispanic women either. I vote for issues, and Green clearly paralleled issues of interest to me.
Obama is very lucky the economy is in the toilet. Had Bush left office with a Clinton style surplus, McCain would be President today and Obama would not have received those white votes.
Obama owes his election to the seer incompetence of Bush, and the stupidity of the GOP who choose to run a lame like McCain instead of a sure winner like Collin Powell.
In fact, Obama owes his win to having a White mother more then anything. Had his father and mother both been black, white would not feel so comfortable with him and he would have lost to Hillary.
If you think for a second that Obama doesn't agree with his 20 year Pastor's POV, than you are deluded. Wright had Obama under his wing for many years. Obama had heard all those speeches face to face many times, and MORE. Being a great politician, perhaps the greatest America has ever known, he knows exactly what to say to put whites at ease which I'm sure he learned putting his white mother and Grandparents at ease with many of his early black associations.
Get real. Whites wish to "feel good" about their vote for Obama, but in reality, there are many selfish and racial motives behind Obama's historic win. The end of white racism is not one of them.
The only true way to solve a problem is to first, recognize it.
Hey, whites finally got OJ!! His sentencing is today. Where's the party?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Judging from his/her post, it looks likely that of_gold is also convinced that "black men" were the ones who brutally whipped slaves on American plantations and property, that these "black men" were the ones who linched their fellow "black men" because of their skin color, that these "black men" burnt churches where "blacks" were assembled, that these "black men" enacted Jim Crow, hosed their fellow "black men" and unleashed attack dogs on them et al. Yes, it's true that African war captives were traded by other Africans, but guess with whom? In "trade", it takes two to tango; anyone who thinks that only the party who trades/sells another person is morally-destitute, but not the other party who is buying, is severely intellectually-impaired. Guess who were the latter, even if one were to go by of_gold's mentality? In his/her neat little historical trivia, of_gold was incapacitated to mention that other slaves were actually kidnapped; guess who was party to that?
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
If black men killed and brutalized each other for centuries in Africa, sold each other to European slave holders etc why do you not think they would do the same things in America? they are doing the same things to each other today within black communities.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
I'll be glad to examine your sources that state Africans were responsible for those things done to "blacks" in America that I laid out earlier.
Meanwhile, I can put your line of questioning back to you: if white people killed and brutalized not only each other for centuries in Europe, but peoples globally, sold each other to slave owners [matter of fact, slave comes from 'slav' - look it up, boy], etc, why would you not think they are more than capable of the above mentioned acts of savagery, and far worse? They are doing these same things today *globally*.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
^ You want to talk about people brutalizing each other, you should look no further than 1400s England, or Vlad (Dracula) the Impaler.
NEVER HOLD YOUR NOSE IN FRONT OF VLAD In 1459 on St. Bartholomew's Day, Vlad had 30,000 of the merchants and nobles of the Transylvanian city of Brasov to be impaled. In order to enjoy the entire experience (as we know that it's a full day's entertainment for him!) he commanded that his table be set up and that his boyars join him for a feast amongst the forest of impaled corpses. Whilst dining, Vlad noticed that one of his boyars was holding his nose in an effort to try and avoid some of the smell of blood and emptied bowels of the surrounding bodies. Vlad took it upon himself to impale the man higher than all the rest so that he might be above the stench.
BURNING OF UNFORTUNATE ONES Vlad got upset at the increase of cripples, beggars, poor and vagrants upon his land. He was very obsessive regarding that all worked and contributed equally. So he offered up a great feast in a great hall in Tirgoviste, saying that no one should go hungry in his land. The people who were made up of those unfortunate souls that were poor and crippled ate and drank late into the night when suddenly Vlad made an appearance. He asked them "What else do you desire? Do you want to be without cares and lacking nothing in this world?". The crowd were fooled by his question and rose up and answered that they did indeed. Vlad then ordered the hall boarded up and set on fire. No one escaped. Vlad explained his actions saying he did it "in order that they represent no further burden to other men so that no one will be poor in my realm".
Africans have never displayed any level of sadism as Europeans who made executions into town wide social events and went to great pains to keep the victim alive as long as possible, sometimes for days, while subjecting them to everything from disembowelment, to roasting them slowly over slow burning coal while the crowd cheered and got drunk from Ale purchased from the various event vendors.
The whole town generally pulled up their chairs in the town square to entertain themselves at these gruesome events. Africa has no parallel in it's entire history of this form of sick sadism.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Here's another trivia: It has been noted that before widespread use of African captives as slaves in the American colonies, white slaves branded as "indentured servants" were used. Imagine if African captives were not available, what would have happened to this apparatus? Yeap, you guessed it; whites slavery would have continued and become more widespread than it was then. So I guess in a way, those African captives actually saved the would-be white slaves. Now of course, as is the case with the blacks, white slaves would have eventually rose up to fight against the slave apparatus.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
^ The white servants proved to be too weak and unskilled to build the nation. So, they first attempted to enslave the Native Americans, but the Natives began to commit suicide rather than be enslaved, fell ill to the many nasty germs and diseases Europeans carried, or knowing the land better than the invaders, were able to escape and remain undetected. So, they tried Africa. By bringing the Africans far away from their Native Land, stripping them of their identities and constant torture and maiming, the Africans were made to use their strength, skills, and knowledge which the Europeans lacked, to build America.
For two centuries Indians and Africans remained enslaved together, and Native Americans were not exempted from the system until after the Revolution. Scholar C. Vann Woodward has concluded "If the black-red inter-breeding was anywhere as extensive as suggested by the testimony of ex-slaves, then the monoracial concept of slavery in America requires revision.
Though often unmentioned except in family circles, this biological legacy has been shared by such figures as Frederick Douglass, Martin Luther King Jr., Langston Hughes, Lena Horne, Alice Walker, Jesse Jackson, Michael Jackson and L.L. Cool J. Today virtually every African American family tree boasts an Indian branch."
Even still, the Africans escaped and teamed up with Native Americans and nearly defeated the invading whites in military battles that lasted for decades.
The greatest flowering and most militant expression of the Black-Indian alliance took place in Florida. Enslaved Africans fled bondage in Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama and the Carolinas to make a new life on the penninsula claimed by Spain.
Around the time of the American Revolution, Africans welcomed the Seminoles, a breakaway segment of the Creek nation, to the penninsula and taught them rice cultivation methods they had learned in Sierra Leone and Senegambia. On this basis the two peoples formed an agricultural and military alliance that defeated repeated invasions by U.S. slaveholding posses.
Finally, in 1819, to end a perceived threat by U.S. slaveholders, the United States purchased Florida. By this time African-run plantations stretched for fifty miles along Florida's fertile Appalachicola river valley, and included herds of cattle and horses. In Florida the Red and Black Seminoles fought the United States Army, Navy and Marines to a standstill for four decades, and some Seminoles never surrendered. In three Seminole Wars the United States armed forces lost more than 1500 U.S. soldiers, spent more than $40,000,000 and at times Seminole armed forces tied up half of the U.S. Army on the peninsula. "This, you may be assured," said U.S. General Thomas Jesup in l837, "is a Negro, not an Indian war." It was both. Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
One thing that made the prospect of 'Native American' or African slavery appealing, is its ability to leave the class nature of both the slave-driven economic apparatus and the economic motives of the slave owners obscure; for instance, the continuation of slavery could be prolonged and justified along socio-ethnic lines, and why it is supposed to be natural [usually with the assistance of appealing to reactionary theological thinking] in doing so.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
Look The Explorer, I have never said anything to justify slavery. Meninarmer is the one who has divided everything into white and black. I am merely pointing out that good and bad cannot be distinguished by the color of a mans skin. Unfortunately Meninarmer has defined black as good and white as bad.
Meninarmer, I take it that you are proud of OJ because he slaughtered two white people and ashamed of Christopher Allen Darden because he is an accomplished attorney who succeeded on his own like most of us have to do.
I remember Darden saying in an interview after the trial that the black community turned against him because he got an education. Then he commented "what did OJ ever do for the black community?"
I would like to hear from you guys who hate white people so much just what the black leaders in Africa are doing for their own people? Jimmy Carter alone does more for those people.
quote: Here's another trivia: It has been noted that before widespread use of African captives as slaves in the American colonies, white slaves branded as "indentured servants" were used.
You mean there were white slaves? Kinda blows a hole in your "all white men are bad, stealing, and getting million dollar welfare checks platform" now doesn't it.
Grow up!
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
of_gold it is not a matter of justifying slavery or otherwise. Your post was filled with questionable, if not confused, ranting with little basis on fact; just too many holes in it, for any body with a level head not to take notice.
As for the history of white slaves, I've never made the case that there never was any. You've got me confused with somebody else.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: of_gold it is not a matter of justifying slavery or otherwise. Your post was filled with questionable, if not confused, ranting with little basis on fact; just too many holes in it, for any body with a level head not to take notice.
What part of my post was not factual?
quote:
As for the history of white slaves, I've never made the case that there never was any. You've got me confused with somebody else.
Your right about this. I didn't mean to say that you said there were not any white slaves. What I was meant to do was to show how meninarmer is wrong in making everything into a black and white issue. Its simply not.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
^^BTW, who are the "you guys who hate white people so much"?
And Jimmy Carter is just another member of the US ruling layer, who like others before and after him, decided to take on window-dressing "charity" causes after leaving office as a means to obscure what his administration became synonymous with. Is it possible that you have any idea what the Carter administration did to the working class in his own country, before casting him as some sort of a champion for ordinary folks overseas? How do you think he had no prayer for a second term?
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
^ Of_Gold If you are laying in the grass having a picnic and a 3 foot long snake slides in your direction, what is your reaction? Do you stay there and pick it up? Have you ever played with snakes?
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by of_gold:
What part of my post was not factual?
This:
Originally posted by of_gold: Answer this. What was the skin color of those in Africa who sold your ancestors into slavery? What was the color of the man's skin who fought to free your ancestors from slavery? ANSWER: Black men sold your people into slavery and white men fought for their freedom. Yet, YOU choose to focus on the slave owners.
And you who have never been a slave, tell me who is better off, you or your brothers in Africa who sold your ancestor into slavery? Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
You and Meninarmer. I feel really disappointed in him especially. He is more raciest than Hammer.
Tell me what you believe Jimmy Carter did to the middle class. I see him as a good man.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer: ^ Of_Gold If you are laying in the grass having a picnic and a 3 foot long snake slides in your direction, what is your reaction? Do you stay there and pick it up? Have you ever played with snakes?
You are a snake. Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
of_gold, point out what in my post states that I "hate white people so much".
As for the Jimmy Carter question, does your lack of answer suggest that you don't know the answer?
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by of_gold:
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer: ^ Of_Gold If you are laying in the grass having a picnic and a 3 foot long snake slides in your direction, what is your reaction? Do you stay there and pick it up? Have you ever played with snakes?
You are a snake.
So, you are afraid of snakes. Sharks too? How about, hungry Lions, Tigers, and Panthers?
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: of_gold, point out what in my post states that I "hate white people so much".
As for the Jimmy Carter question, does your lack of answer suggest that you don't know the answer?
It wasn't your post, it was meninarmer.
I was not giving you an answer about Jimmy Carter. I was asking you a question. I just failed to use a question mark.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
I imagine that if you feel the Carter administration did good by the American working class folks and was seen as such, then I believe you can explain why he wasn't able to win a second term, no?
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
Carter was a failed President. During his administration everything that would go wrong went wrong. Not all of it was his fault but his leadership skills were not up to the challenge. During that time we had double digit unemployment, inflation and interest rates all at the same time. In addition the humilation of the Iranian hostage crisis crippled the Carter administration. In addition Carter was up against Ronald Reagan, a giant in American history.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
I said that Carter is a good man. I did not say that he had a good presidency. You implied that he purposely went out to hurt the middle class. I am asking you what he did to the middle class?
I would like to hear your opinion of this article. Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
I do not think the economic problems were Carter's fault but he got blamed for them. He did not institute a policy that hurt the middle class.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Carter was a failed President. During his administration everything that would go wrong went wrong. Not all of it was his fault but his leadership skills were not up to the challenge. During that time we had double digit unemployment, inflation and interest rates all at the same time. In addition the humilation of the Iranian hostage crisis crippled the Carter administration. In addition Carter was up against Ronald Reagan, a giant in American history.
Carter is both a better man and better past President relative to George Bush's legacy.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
First off, let's be clear: the mention of "middle class" came from you, not I.
You spoke of Carter in the same breath as African leaders, comparing what he supposedly did for ordinary Africans than what they did, which would be an appeal to his political influence. To that end, I asked you what you knew of Carter's record with the working class at home, before presenting him as a champion for working class folks overseas. Now, if you say his administration did good by workers at home, then it only makes sense, that you have a perfectly good explanation for coming to that conclusion, no?
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: ^^BTW, who are the "you guys who hate white people so much"?
And Jimmy Carter is just another member of the US ruling layer, who like others before and after him, decided to take on window-dressing "charity" causes after leaving office as a means to obscure what his administration became synonymous with. Is it possible that you have any idea what the Carter administration did to the working class in his own country, before casting him as some sort of a champion for ordinary folks overseas? How do you think he had no prayer for a second term?
working class = middle class.... Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
So there are no workers below the "middle class"; why then do you call it the "middle class", of_gold?
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
Nice way to avoid the questions Explorer. Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Isn't that ironic of you to say of_gold, even as you repetitively quote me without providing answers, and even admitting not doing so?!
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
I have answered every question that you have asked. You on the other hand have not. Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Well, where is the answer to that question you cited me on above, regarding 1) Jimmy Carter and 2) why you bother using the term "middle class" when there is no layer of workers below it? I recall you saying you had no answer in the last page; that aside, nada!
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
Explorer, There are three sections of the middle class, upper, middle and lower. It is not based only on income but other factors as well.
2. Middle middle class- small me chants, small businessmen
3. Lower middle class- teachers, policemen, firemen etc.
Most modern factory workers would be considered lower middle or upper lower class.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
TheAmericanPatriot, you need to expend your energy explaining what the "middle" class means to of_gold, as she is the one having trouble answering my question pertaining to that term, and I suspect you will too.
In the meantime, are you suggesting that there is no such thing as the modern "working class", as of_gold is apparently implying?
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
I think the topic was getting a bit too uncomfortable for The Explorer.
He diverts the focus to something so insignificant "aka: is the term working class equivalent to the term middle class" to causes us to chase our tails so he can avoid the real topic at hand.
Bravo Explorer! Are you a salesman or a politician?
Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
quote:In addition Carter was up against Ronald Reagan, a giant in American history.
According to those who knew him firsthand as President, RR was prone to snoozes, naps and watching kiddy cartoons. For those who studied him in a public dimension RR came accross as relatively dimmwitted man with that old style brylcreamed hair. The story is that the WH was on autopilot most of the time.
But in the grand tradition of American presidents he earned his racio-fascist spurs by slaughtering a bunch of innocent people on a tiny island[Grenada] in the Eastern Caribbean.
He killed many more people than Manson yet he got his big state funeral while the former is a druggie in jail for life.
OK, OK, he was a giant--like Polyphemus without a brain.
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
You are an uneducated nut lamin. Historians of all stripes rate reagan as a major american president. To compare Ronald reagan with Charles manson are the words of a fool.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
of_gold, what's holding you up? Are there no layer of workers below the "Middle" class? This simple question, along with the one on Jimmy Carter, turned out to be quite a tough nut to crack, hasn't it?!
I mean, I could entertain your childishness, but frankly, short of getting the requested answers, I don't have too much time to waste.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
Back to the thread's topic, Blacks should avoid US military service.
If blacks are 90% AGAINST an armed conflict (as they were with Iraq), than YES, they should avoid enlisting and fighting in a conflict which they clearly do not support. That black military enlistment is down ~40% is testament that blacks agree with the above.
If whites are 90% FOR the conflict (as they were), than there should be no reason for the need of blacks. There should be an overwhelming number of white enlistments to fulfill military requirements. However, these 90% of whites often are FOR a conflict but no willing to actually enlist and fight the conflict.
Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
TAP,
Thanks! Proves though that I do have a sense of humour! Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
Black Enlistment Down 58 Percent
The Bryant Park Project, October 9, 2007 ·
Since fiscal year 2000, the decline in signing up for military service is steeper among African-Americans than any other group. Lt. Col. Irving Smith, a sociologist at West Point who served in the Gulf War and Afghanistan talks about what's causing the trend, what can be done to reverse it, and whether he'd encourage his own kids to enlist. http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=15111061&m=15111044 Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: of_gold, what's holding you up? Are there no layer of workers below the "Middle" class? This simple question, along with the one on Jimmy Carter, turned out to be quite a tough nut to crack, hasn't it?!
I mean, I could entertain your childishness, but frankly, short of getting the requested answers, I don't have too much time to waste.
Sorry for not answering as quickly as you would like. I have had computer problems all week which has made it difficult for me to get my work done much less entertain your childishness.
I had always considered working class and middle class to be equivalent terms. I do realize that there are people who work who are not middle class. So I guess the terms are not interchangable after all. I never thought about it this way.
I did answer the question about Jimmy Carter. I will repeat what I said because you seem to have missed it. The following is the post where I answered you about Jimmy Carter.
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: I said that Carter is a good man. I did not say that he had a good presidency. You implied that he purposely went out to hurt the middle class. I am asking you what he did to the middle class?
I would like to hear your opinion of this article.
Now tell me how does answering these questions relate to whites being the bad guy and black being the good guy?
Let me let you in on a little secrete. Most white people do not think this way. Most of us feel that slavery is unexcusable, that people should be judge by their ablities and charecter not by the color of their skin. Most of our families never owned slaves or condoned it. The only time it becomes an issue with us is when black people keep throwing in our face that it is black against white. Then we can't help but think that these people hate us. It was even implied on this thread that Obama hates his white side of the family. As long as a person speaks against what King preached he will never experience King's dream, which is being relized even though some choose not to see it.
I am still waiting to hear how Carter hurt the middle class?
Why black people love OJ and hate Christopher Allen Darden?
And who sold the Africans into slavery?
Also, how you feel about the article I posted?
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
WASHINGTON - In the face of a huge drop in Black recruitment, the U.S. military is waging a losing battle on the home front—for new enlistees to don the uniform. Since fiscal year 2000, Defense Department statistics show that the number of young Black enlistees has fallen by more than 58 percent.
The Army may have been hardest hit. In 2000, Pentagon statistics reveal that 42,000 Black men and women applied to join. Just five years later, that number was down to just above 17,000.
The immoral and unpopular war and occupation of Iraq is the biggest single factor depressing Black enlistment, along with distrust of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney—neither of whom served in combat themselves—and the persistent complaint since the Vietnam War that Black soldiers are the Army’s “cannon fodder,” disproportionately assigned to combat jobs.
Since December 2001, the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan has been a leading voice in the principled opposition to the Iraq war, warning Pres. Bush directly, as well as young Blacks, Latinos and others, in two open letters of the consequences now unfolding in this country.
“There is a rising chorus of anti-war demonstrations in the nation and throughout the world and it will intensify as you move toward war with the thought of occupying Iraq,” Lpuis Farrakhan said in a letter to Pres. Bush dated October 30, 2002. “The anti-war demonstrators will blame every death of an American service person and every death of an Iraqi citizen on you, and this will produce a crisis for your administration within the United States, as well as in countries throughout the world.”
The Army Recruiting Command acknowledged that the war in Iraq has depressed respect for the military in the Black community where the war is very unpopular. A recent CBS News poll showed 83 percent of Blacks said the Iraq invasion was a mistake. In addition, Pres. Bush’s approval rating is at an all-time low with Black voters at about 9 percent, according to a 2006 Pew Research Center poll.
U.S. Marine Major Kevin Norton (L) stops for gas along the Garden State Parkway November 21, 2006 near Cape May, New Jersey. Major Norton is in charge of overall Marine Corps recruitment for New Jersey and faces the challenge of meeting his monthly goals with wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. While the U.S. Marines have met their state quota for the past four months, the U.S. Army has fallen short with their 2006 fiscal year recruitment goals.
The Black decline is by far the largest of any demographic group. By contrast, from 2000 to 2005, White applicants declined by about 10 percent, while Hispanic applications dropped by only 7 percent.
“African-Americans have been such a key part of the modern military,” said Michael O’Hanlon, military analyst for the Brookings Institution, according to a published report. “There’s obviously been a degree where the Black community in the United States has seen [military service] as culturally valuable and promoted it. That whole culture and value system is at risk in the Black community. That is a big, big change. To me, it portends the possibility of a longer-term loss of interest. It can be tough to get it back.”
Just as frustration over the pace of the Civil Rights movement began to cool Black enthusiasm for the military during the Vietnam War era, the Bush administration’s non-response to the suffering of victims during Hurricane Katrina has also increased the notion that the government itself “does not care about Black people.”
“The VietCong never called me a n----r,” was the refrain made popular in 1967 by Heavyweight Boxing Champion Muhammad Ali, whose celebrated claim to be a conscientious objector because of his status as a minister in the Nation of Islam was eventually decided in his favor by the U.S. Supreme Court.
According to an October 2007 Boston Globe article, young Blacks today confirmed their disillusionment with the war.
“Why would we go over there and help them [Iraqis], when [the U.S. government] can’t help us over here?” Nathaniel Daley, a young Black man from Atlantic City, N.J. told Boston.com recently, noting the government’s failure in 2005 at providing Hurricane Katrina relief.
The war “is unnecessary,” said his friend Brian Jackson. “It’s not our war. We got our own war here, just staying alive,” Mr. Jackson continued, pointing to the fact that his hometown of Philadelphia has seen more than 200 homicides, mostly Black men killing other Black men, so far this year.
CS1 Eric Bass (R) of Prentiss, Mississippi gives instructions to United States Navy recruits shortly after they arrived at Great Lakes Recruit Training Command September 18, 2007 in North Chicago, Illinois. The Navy graduates over 40,000 recruits who complete the eight weeks of training at the facility each year. The base, which opened in 1911, was the first U.S. Navy boot camp and is the only one remaining.
In response, the military has lowered its standards on age, education, physical fitness, and acceptable past criminal record. The Army has also raised its enlistment bonuses, highlighted its offer to provide college tuition money, and has gone on a recruitment and advertising offensive in high schools. One advertisement features a young Black man convincing his parents that enlistment is a good choice.
The Pentagon has increased its waivers to new recruits with criminal backgrounds by 65 percent in the last three years. More than 8,000 wavers were issued in 2006, up from fewer than 5,000 in 2003. “The data is crystal clear,” said Rep. Martin Meehan, Chair of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight earlier this year, “our armed forces are under incredible strain and the only way they can fill their recruiting quotas is by lowering their standards.”
Among high school youth, the influence of some adult role models such as parents, coaches, or other mentors, makes them less likely to choose military service, according to Pentagon surveys. Of all groups, Black adults are the least likely to suggest military enlistment, according to the surveys.
At Oxon Hill High School however, located in Washington’s wealthy, predominantly Black suburban neighbor, Prince George’s County, guidance counselor Kabir Tompkins is also an Army National Guard sergeant who was wounded in Iraq. He tells interested students the Army can lead to better life: a good salary, health benefits, and tens of thousands of dollars for college. But their parents, he said, are harder to convince.
“They see it from the aspect of ‘I don’t care about the benefits, I don’t care about the money, I don’t care about nothing. I don’t want my child going to Iraq,’” Mr. Tompkins told Boston.com.
Other Iraq war veterans have staged protest demonstrations to discourage enlistment. In March, a platoon of 13 Iraq War Veterans Against the War took to the streets of downtown Washington in full desert camouflage, reenacting their experiences in Iraq. A dozen others participated as civilians under foreign occupation. The soldiers reenacted mass roundups and detentions, prisoner searches and interrogations, and patrol operations on the lawn of the U.S. Capitol, at the gates of the White House, the Washington Monument, the Treasury Building, and at a recruiting station. “This is what is happening every day in Iraq,” read the leaflets they distributed.
In neighboring Montgomery County, where Blacks are the minority population, parents and civic groups have organized to aggressively oppose military recruitment in their schools. A coalition of 180 parents called the Montgomery Coalition on Recruitment Issues joined members of Peace Action Montgomery and took their concerns to a Montgomery County Board of Education meeting in March, complaining that school policies give preferential treatment to military recruiters over college and corporate recruiters.
“The school board took pretty strong stance, claiming that they give equal access to military recruiters and college recruiters,” coalition member Pat Elder said in a broadcast interview. “Yet, several people with our groups testified that their children are routinely approached by military recruiters as they enter the cafeteria at lunch time. But college recruiters have to set up camp in the guidance office and students are required to make appointments to see college recruiters. We certainly don’t think that’s equal access.”
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
of_gold, you are the one who has resorted to toddler name-calling antics in the course of our exchanges, from your fraudulent immaterial charge of my being a racist to your amateurist red herring about my avoiding your distractive/off-tangent questions, meant to help you stall and avoid answering the questions you proclaim to have answered; mind you, you say that you've anwered one of my questions, but is "I don't know" really an answer? To this extent, I'd like you to lay out *specifically*, what about my posts here, you find "childish"; I can readily pinpoint more examples of your's.
Now, you recite a post of your's presumably answering a question on Jimmy Carter, with a one-liner that merely says "Jimmy Carter is a good man"; of_gold, you cannot possibly be that mentally slow to suggest that this actually answers the question you were citing, or are you?
As to your distractive non-sequiturs that you call "questions", I'm waiting on you to demonstrate from my posts, why I need to entertain them. Get busy!
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
And oh, of_gold,
Now that you've *finally* conceded that "working class" [which comprises of "hired" laborers/workers of varying economic status] cannot be used interchangeably with the "Middle" class, have you not only actually learnt something new today thanks to me, but also markedly misinterpreted the context my questioning on Jimmy Carter?
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
Excuse me? I don't have to demonstrate anything to you. My original post was directed to meninarmer and you butted in like I needed to chase you around the block. I have yet to see anything relevant from your post.
You are the one who accused Carter of doing something to the "middle class". You still refuse to answer what he did to the middle class. Maybe "I don't know" is the answer you have as well. I at least am willing to acknowledge when I don't know something. You obviously have no intention of answering anything.
I am reminded of a proverb: "Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him."
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
of_gold, you are not excused; you made some pretty wild claims about Africans, whom mind you, had nothing to do with your mutual racist filled exchanges with meninarmer, around the issue of *American* [not African] blacks enlisting in the army, with questionable basis where facts are concerned. This is what prompted me to jump in, and help straighten out facts where possible.
You've admitted just now, that until our exchange, you were essentially unaware that "working class" cannot be used interchangeably with the "Middle" class, and yet you charge that you've yet to see anything relevant from me, and continue to say that you've answered the question on Carter, when it is clear that you've misinterpreted it for starters? Why haven't you answered my last question on this issue, and on others in the one prior to it?
Please present what about my posts that are *specifically* irrelevant, and why.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
Who are you...a?
Look, your definition of "working class" would included all socioeconomic groups between the ages of 18 - 65. So what is the great relevance you see in this enlightenment? I must say that it is nice to see you so impressed by someone who is able and willing to learn and accept new ideas? Thanks. Being able to learn is quite pleasant, you should try it sometimes.
My post was in response to this:
quote: Whites get inheritance money or their parents steal enough to pay college tuition.
A black man has no place in the white man's military. Blacks are enticed into military service with the hopes of earning tuition.
Yes, I'm damn mad, because it's my and millions of other blacks money they're stealing and using exclusively as White welfare.
Whites whine about $200 welfare checks to the poor, all the while paying themselves million dollar welfare check.
What I posted in response that seems to of offended you is this:
quote: Answer this. What was the skin color of those in Africa who sold your ancestors into slavery? What was the color of the man's skin who fought to free your ancestors from slavery? ANSWER: Black men sold your people into slavery and white men fought for their freedom. Yet, YOU choose to focus on the slave owners.
Now tell me which are the raciest post the former or the later? (which judging by your history on this thread you will not)
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
of_gold, you must be reading-challenged:
You charged me with being racist; that turned out to be just hot air.
You accused me of avoiding your red herring questions, when in fact, it is *your* claims that are being scrutinized. The Carter post of mine, was a followup *question* to your claim, and yet, it remains unanswered. So yes, your charge here too is just bunk.
Re: working class - You were not a willing learner; you were *forced* to learn in the face of your trolling around, upon being pressed to elaborate and clarify your claim. You may feel free to delude yourself of this being a sign of my being impressed with you, rather than what I've accomplished *despite* your stubborness against being educated and exposed to facts.
[As to my definition of the "working class", it is in reference to the layers of the society which does not own the means of production, but are paid for their labor either on a salaried or waged basis. If this includes people from 18 to 65 years, or even beyond, then so be it.]
You charge that I'm offended by posts which lack factual foundation, but you are merely confusing desire for facts and the busting of myths and lies with being offended. To this end, perhaps it's safe to say that it is you who is offended by truth-telling.
You charge that my posts are irrelevant, yet when pressed to specify which aspects, you fall gravely silent. So again, it looks like we're dealing with your hot air.
Your above post is racist because it not only seeks to make a dichotomy on the basis of skin color, but is rooted on false premise.
Deal with these facts!
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
Man, you are slow.
Here is your exact post. This will be the last time I answer your question. I will try to spell it out for you. If you can't get it this time you should just go have drink and chill. My, my, you do tend to over react don't you.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: ^^BTW, who are the "you guys who hate white people so much"?
And Jimmy Carter is just another member of the US ruling layer, who like others before and after him, decided to take on window-dressing "charity" causes after leaving office as a means to obscure what his administration became synonymous with. Is it possible that you have any idea what the Carter administration did to the working class in his own country, before casting him as some sort of a champion for ordinary folks overseas?
ANSWER: No, I do not have any idea what you are talking about that Jimmy Carter did to the working class.
quote:How do you think he had no prayer for a second term?
ANSWER: Because Jimmy Carter did not have a successful first term.
Don't bother to answer any questions, I already understand that you have no answers. Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Then of_gold, you should shoot yourself in the head for demonstrating that you are much slower than a slow person, whose kindergarten level questions turn out to be too hard for you to comprehend, much less answer.
Your latest attempt of an answer to that Jimmy Carter question is case in point.
*If you don't have a clue about Carter's track record with the working class right at home, how are you supposed to have sufficient judgement to conclude that he's a champion of working class folks overseas?
*Why did Jimmy Carter not have a successful first term *and* lose the run for a second term, without supposedly having anything to do with how he handled the working class at home?
You're right about not bothering to answer any questions, unless I'm provided a perfectly good reason as to why I should in the first place...and you have so far given me no reason to.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
Exiled, I answered these insignificant questions many post ago. You were too busy with your ego or perhaps low self esteem to notice. I'm sure you feel powerful now, being so skillful with your use of a key board to force people to obey your every command. So glad that by humoring you I was able to stroke your ego and help give you some purpose in life.
Cheers! Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
^Wrong, I was busy over-estimating your intellectual capacity to answer simple questions and behave like a *civilized* human being when I formulated those simple questions that drove you to troll, that I lost sight that you actually had none...*until* your trolling kicked in.
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
Never knew my thread sparked this fierce debate. I do not believe in racism and counter racism. Racist views, behaviour is the mark of true ignorance. It’s bad for interracial love and it clouds the mind. How can you research history if you are already biased against a group, a race, a religion? Research is as good as the integrity of the researcher. Good people cannot see how racism is used by the status quo to keep groups separate. To frighten them from trusting and listening to each other, finding out they have the same problems. Here in Holland its Christian Blacks played out against Muslim Turks and Moroccans, while they all get equally discriminated and tortured by the police, who remains lily-white. Not all White’s benefit from white supremacy, nor are all Blacks poor, living in slums. Amazing how people who live in the same country, hear the same news, come up with a totally different analysis. I always try to explain racism to non-Blacks: it’s just like how men keep women down. If you have figured that out, how men are pitted against women, sometimes by their own mother; you understand racism against Blacks. The very few people who have read my threads can understand that Blacks should be viewed as real people, not victims. Colour does not speak of merit. Blacks are capable of despotism, just like White’s today do. Today the Black is the underdog. By keeping blacks in a second-class position, by hiding Black history, they can be manipulated into signing up. I saw some images of Obama talking with Black troops. This is what it’s all about, deceiving Blacks (and Whites!) that the American Dream is also their dream. That they should happily sign up for genocide duty else where, just because ONE Black man has entered the White House. Perhaps the establishment is really gearing up to conquer Africa and they can’t have Blacks protesting back home when they watch the massacre of Africans. Hell no, it might remind them of US lynching time.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
Nice post Egmond.
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: Nice post Egmond.
BLESS YOU HONEY! NOT MANY WOMEN WHO TACKLE THE BIG ISSUES ON E.S.
MISSISSIPPI BURNING
FOR GOOD MEASURE I SAW THIS MOVIE AGAIN. IT EXPLAINS SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED IN THE US IN 1964. IT’S HURTFUL IF PEOPLE FEIGN IGNORANCE ABOUT THESE MATTERS.
Calling the Iraq war genocide against Muslims shows a level of dementia seldom seen, even on this board. It seems that we have people here who pride themselves on their ignorance. Who simply go as far out of their way as possible to show that they know nothing about geopolitics and the global economy. If we wanted to kill all of the muslims they would all already be dead.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Calling the Iraq war genocide against Muslims shows a level of dementia seldom seen, even on this board. It seems that we have people here who pride themselves on their ignorance. Who simply go as far out of their way as possible to show that they know nothing about geopolitics and the global economy. If we wanted to kill all of the muslims they would all already be dead.
Finally some sense around here. Good response.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
mmmmmm Our Prez Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
Hey Egmond You start a thread entitled, Why Black People Shouldn't enlist in the military, and get a bunch of soft white women filling the thread as if their opinions of this topic matter.
Why should blacks fight for white, come home, none of the whites will hire them so they out of work while watching whites give themselves a $700B welfare check they neither need or account for. Essentially getting a free handout for being incompetent and messing everything up. Ain't that a blip! Than when these black veterans try to make some money on the side in the streets, whites throw them into their Wall Street Prisons so whites & Jews can make a quick buck on the stock market.
Naw, I say, let whites send their own daughters and sons to other countries, to fight other people of color they are setting up to exploit. I predict the number of black military recruits will continue to decline, even under Obama, because their are many black fathers and mothers in America who agree with me.
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
Obama's election wipes out your argument. A black man is President of the united states. get off your ass and go to work.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
Well I didn't realize that this was the black man's thread.
Its saddening to see a prejudice black man yearning for segregation.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Obama's election wipes out your argument. A black man is President of the united states. get off your ass and go to work.
LOL, I work harder than you, you daddy, and bothers all put together. That's because unlike ya'll, I can't get a government welfare handout. You get free handouts all the time which is why you are so rosy and pleased. Take those handouts away and you'll be crying and trying to start another Civil war.
The only reason Obama is president and whites voted for him is, White people cannot trust their own who just fukked up the nation and economy due to their own greed and incompetence. To truly believe anyone but whites ignore this fact, and that the election of Obama signals the end of institutionalized racism by whites is no more than a sad joke on yourselves.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: Well I didn't realize that this was the black man's thread.
Its saddening to see a prejudice black man yearning for segregation.
What do little white womens have to do with Black people's decision to join the military? Exactly what can you contribute to this?
Be real with yourself, than you can be real with others.
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
Gold, They get on here and whine, snibble and cry and think this is 1948 in Alabama. Most of them are just looking for a hand out of one kind or another. Obama destroys their argument and they are too silly to see it.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
^ Yes, whine and cry to your kind when you are unable to present fact. You are so spoiled from centuries of free handouts and welfare you cannot competently think, or the larger task of fairly and honestly, running a nation. When asked to do so, you stick your hands out for yet more free handouts, as we are seeing in Washington. Slavery began because you were too dumb and unskilled to build a nation yourselves. It is still true today. This is why Barack Obama was elected, because as is usual when comparing black to white, Obama is 10 times more capable and intelligent then his white counterparts.
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
No we get up every day and try to educate your dumb, low IQ kids, thats just a fact.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
^ You get up every morning and think about how to receive or steal another free handout. Another welfare check. US whites and Israelis are so tight because they both have something in common. They both receive welfare handouts from what is pretending to be a Capitalistic society. Yet, for whites & Jews, it's pure free handout socialism. Blacks ain't fighting for that, and I notice you have not bothered to serve.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer:
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: Well I didn't realize that this was the black man's thread.
Its saddening to see a prejudice black man yearning for segregation.
What do little white womens have to do with Black people's decision to join the military? Exactly what can you contribute to this?
Be real with yourself, than you can be real with others.
I have not made one comment on black people's decision to join the military. My comments have been about your bigotry.
You need to be real with yourself.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
^ Your liberal usage of words is indicative of your group's 90% opposition to black thought. ________________________________________________ Bigotry Bigotry Big"ot*ry, n. [Cf. F. bigoterie.] 1. The state of mind of a bigot; obstinate and unreasoning attachment of one's own belief and opinions, with narrow-minded intolerance of beliefs opposed to them. [1913 Webster] _________________________________________________
As you can see, my reasons for opposing my children or other children of black origin from fighting WHITE wars is not based on any, narrow-minded intolerance of beliefs opposed to them , but rather due to 90% of blacks polled pre-Iraqi war, being opposed to same, while 90% of WHITES polled were PRO war, and could not wait to go and kill, "sand niggers" (White term). To state I am bigoted because of this decision is to say the other 90% blacks polled are likely bigoted, or being narrow-minded and intolerance of the beliefs opposed to them by the 90% of whites who wished to go to war.
Rather than attempting to dismiss the PRO-war stance of 90% of US PRO-WAR whites, you should instead be asking yourself why Post-war, that white PRO-WAR 90% has FINALLY caught up and begun to reverse their opinions to reflect the MORAL opinions of the 90% of pre-war blacks. It seems to me, that 90% of whites polled are the REAL bigots, but as usual, have tremendous difficulty reconciling their nature.
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
meninarmer is so demented he cannot distinguish between bigtry and geopolitics. this guy simply hates being black from the time he wakes in the morning until he falls asleep at night.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
^ Rather, what you attribute to politics is no more than outright Racism. A political body sitting on a foundation of Racism.. That, PRE war, 90% of white Americans voted, FOR, and today, that same group has changed to 22% FOR, with 78% moving towards the black 90% against, makes my case. You and the other PRO-McCain/Palin bigots are the most racist foundation members of YOUR RACIST geopolitical position. I.E., You build a house on a foundation of sh.it, expect and don't be surprised to smell like a toilet. OR, when your home is infested with deadly BLACK MOLD, all one can do is tear it down, and build anew.
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
You have no case. We'll be in Iraq for decades. Our new Secretary of State and President are building a right of center foreign policy, they only realistic policy avilable. How things change when the campaigns all end.
Posted by finished (Member # 16076) on :
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer: ^ Rather, what you attribute to politics is no more than outright Racism.
Lol..look who's talking
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
I know, this guy is nothing but racist. He thinks we owe him something because one of his ancestors was a slave two centuries ago. Even the goofey afrocentrics on the other board think he is wierd. People like meninarmer go through life obsessed with white people. It is all he ever talks about.
Posted by finished (Member # 16076) on :
To live anywhere in the world today and be racist is like living in Alaska and being against snow.
-William Faulkner
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
People like meninarmer go through life obsessed with white people. It is all he ever talks about. [/QB]
There is no such thing as a "white" person. Just a false nomenclature you've assigned to yourself for identification that remains in effect today due to your racist system. In actuality, "whites" are simply descendants of Africans suffering from de-pigmentation via, Albinism.
Somewhere, far back in history in Africa, your ancestors were badly mistreated and in your insanity in response to this ill treatment, you became this;
These barbarians have a grim look, untidy hair, and an unpleasant smell. They have no rituals worthy of the name. They are liars and arrogant. They conquer countries by fraud and force, ingratiating themselves before they oppress the natives. At the heart of their conduct, is violence.
Taken from, State Of Maryland Public Media; Legacy Series, Origins Of Civilization, China" The Mandate Of God.
Isn't it time for you to reconcile your insanity and allow yourselves to heal mentally, and grow? Haven't you grown tired of killing everything in sight?
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
No such thing as white people? This guy is a bigger nut than we thought. He talks about nothing but white people and now tells us there is no such thing. Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
^ I am speaking YOUR language, I.E. White, black, Caucasian, Negro, etc. These are not African constructs. Plus, the above quote comes from the Chinese, who must also be "racists" to have that opinion of you. LOL, let's not even speak about the Native American description which follows the name they used to describe members in their tribes with Albinism. Palefaces.
Isn't it time for you to reconcile your insanity and allow yourselves to heal mentally, and grow? Haven't you grown tired of killing everything in sight?
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
When we turn on the six o'clock news every night it is not white people we see killing everything in sight.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
^ Perhaps you should change the channel from FOX News. Hammer, your problem is, you've never really LIVED. I'll bet you've never even dared venture out of racist Texas. LOL, Instead of just sitting in your garage feeding your auto-loaders and playing with them phony militias, you should have been man enough to join the real military.
Isn't it time for you to reconcile your insanity and allow yourselves to heal mentally, and grow? Haven't you grown tired of killing everything in sight?
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
It's childish to argue if Whites are more cruel, evil then Blacks or vice versa. Either they are equal or not equal and we accept white superiority. Then whites are superior in evil too. Nonsense.
By the way, my blue blood is black blood theory says that these cruelties were perpetrated by a Black and coloured European elite (1500-1789) against whites and non-noble blacks, who did not belong to the elite, and opposed this despotic elite. This also gave rise to the Enlightenment and French Revolution. Some 'enlightened despots' ended these practices way into the eighteen century.
I have been trying to get people to look for causes of hatred against blacks which are more recent and not mythical in tone, but rational and can be reproduced. The nobility identified itself with the image of the Moor and were described as black, the black boy, black tom, swarthy, very dark, brown black, chimney sweep etc. yet their museums show us white royal portraits. If blacks want to study history and expose revisionism which cuts out blacks from history, no part of history should escape their attention. Especially the areas which are deemed 'white.' These black nobles might be survivors of the original black europeans, who were called blue men in medieval times, while their descendents called themselves blue blood and ruled as nobles and kings in Europe (1500-1789)
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: Well I didn't realize that this was the black man's thread.
Its saddening to see a prejudice black man yearning for segregation.
Never you mind! Just give us your views. If you understand how females are and were discriminated against, you can figure out racism against Blacks. Some people claim that there is no discrimination of women. These people are sometimes women too, like Margareth Thatcher. It's like not giving a permit to illegals, even after a decade living in a rich county, but not really deporting them. Because they remain exploited, without civil rights. You can get them to do almost anything. Poor whites get as worse a deal as blacks, but somehow they are convinced that the government is looking after their whites interest. This new crisis might shake things up and open peoples eyes to the truth.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
^ So what does all that soft & queer talk have to do with black enlistment in the racist US army?
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
I just wonder, do we feel better after trading all these insults? Did we accomplish anything. Are we satisfied?
As you can see i'm from Holland,where things are not the same as the US, so I approach things differently. But still I think we should use this opportunity well.
For Holland i Hate to see descendents of Dutch slaves and 19th century immigrant workers, who were treadted as slaves, helping their former masters to kill and enslave others who want to be free. It is just not right.
I guess that if you tried one method of changing things which did not work, you try something else. research things which massa told you not to meddle in, perhaps?
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
Well, I guess the question also applies to blacks residing in Holland, and their willingness to serve in the Dutch military. Holland is an US ally and does support Anti-terrorism and the Iraq campaign.
Also, many of the Jews who purchase black US interests such as, Motown, B.E.T., and other enterprises are located in Belgium. So, they definitely are interested in being protected.
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer: Well, I guess the question also applies to blacks residing in Holland, and their willingness to serve in the Dutch military. Holland is an US ally and does support Anti-terrorism and the Iraq campaign.
Also, many of the Jews who purchase black US interests such as, Motown, B.E.T., and other enterprises are located in Belgium. So, they definitely are interested in being protected.
WOULD BE VERY REFRESHING IF YOU STOPPED THE JEW/WHITES BASHING. I'm totally puzzled, some times you sound like somebody with brains who has actually read Toni Morrisson, other times you come off as a wilful Nazi. Morrison has a poor white girl, an indentured labourer, help Sethè to deliver that baby. Many whites have voted Obama while only a few decades ago they would be throwing stones at black students who entered lily-white schools. Now be a dear and give me your sources on how many blacks were against the Iraq war and how many have enlisted. That is something to work with, not the goddam shouting contest you have made of my thread.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
No I haven't read Toni Morrison, nor Alice Walker. Those are like subscribing to and reading Oprah's "O" magazine. Not exactly a manly pursuit.
Many whites have voted Obama simply because they are AFRAID, and Obama presented a soft enough image to not frighten them more. The stars were aligned just right for Obama. It probably also helps that the US political machine has greased the wheels with 8 years of Bush, Wall Street, the Mortgage meltdown, etc., to make the conditions to make his election possible. Until I observe otherwise, I look at Obama's election as a preplanned "buffer" period to calm the storm following Bush so as not to agitate citizens into extreme frustration & revolt. Following the 4-8 year buffer, the nation will return to business as usual. Still, more whites did not vote for him that did. Yes, I am a cynic, but so are many blacks in the US.
A case in point, is the ~55% in black military enlistment. Where blacks in the past have comprised up to 30% of the combined US military forces. Understand that? Blacks comprise 10% of the population, but 30% of the military. Why? Many blacks have become cynical of the US's international policies, as well as their domestic policies, and refuse to be a part of it. Hence, the drastic reduction in military enrollment.
Life would be simply grand, if it allowed blacks to pretend they were white, living their lives in gay fashion as whites do. However, the realistic picture is, black world wide are under extreme assault, and losing much more ground then they are making. There is no time for childish games and pursuit of fanciful wishful thinking. That you are in love with your oppressors is no cause for me to follow the blind.
Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
M, Why minimize your numbers? You say "blacks" which would include "Hispanic" blacks, Haitians, blacks from Africa, etc. That should get you a number of some 15-16%.
But your general point is understood.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
^ I haven't taken time to review the general breakdown by ethnicity, however I imagine some of the reduction in Black enlistment is being slowly offset by Hispanics as well as newly migrating Russians and other Europeans.
Oh, I see what you are saying. Percentage of US population. Yes, I did go on the low side.
Recently, the military has lowered the acceptance again by accepting those with felony convictions. Since the courts are finally adjusting drug conviction disparity laws, many of the 100s of thousands of blacks presently incarcerated will be hitting the streets into the weak economy, unable to find employment with their records. They will be shunted over into military service as an alternative way to allow them to make a living. Obama did say he plans on making government service a high priority.
Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
You might note that at the heights of the Iraq war "blacks" who were not U.S. born were offered a "fast track to citizenship" if they signed up. Some did not make it past that: they died in combat.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried:
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer: Well, I guess the question also applies to blacks residing in Holland, and their willingness to serve in the Dutch military. Holland is an US ally and does support Anti-terrorism and the Iraq campaign.
Also, many of the Jews who purchase black US interests such as, Motown, B.E.T., and other enterprises are located in Belgium. So, they definitely are interested in being protected.
WOULD BE VERY REFRESHING IF YOU STOPPED THE JEW/WHITES BASHING. I'm totally puzzled, some times you sound like somebody with brains who has actually read Toni Morrisson, other times you come off as a wilful Nazi. Morrison has a poor white girl, an indentured labourer, help Sethè to deliver that baby. Many whites have voted Obama while only a few decades ago they would be throwing stones at black students who entered lily-white schools. Now be a dear and give me your sources on how many blacks were against the Iraq war and how many have enlisted. That is something to work with, not the goddam shouting contest you have made of my thread.
Good post Egmond.
meninarmer, you are really in a sad situation there on your island alone. Truth be told, you have no idea how anyone besides yourself thinks. You post these black/white statics without anything to back them up.
You remind me of a black man in our community who was constantly stirring up trouble saying everything was a race issue. He complained that there were no blacks on the city council when the truth of the matter was that no black man had every run for city council.
He created a tension in the whole community even in the school district where the black children basically did not have to follow the same rules the white children did because they would shout racism anytime they were expected to comply.
Now that the city council and school board are racially diverse. I did work for one African American school board member who would complain to me about the school district not being tough enough on the black children. He said he wants his children to follow the rules and get a good education, that is why he moved here.
Obama's victory has nothing to do with his skin color. What it does have to do with is that here is a man who is articulate, intelligent, and wants to take the country in a new direction. You really insult him with your remarks. You should be ashamed, really.
Posted by Arwa (Member # 11172) on :
No one should read Toni Morrisson or Alice Walker. They are the reason we have the condescending picture of Black man, and gave us 50 cent et al http://tinyurl.com/a23ltf Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by lamin: You might note that at the heights of the Iraq war "blacks" who were not U.S. born were offered a "fast track to citizenship" if they signed up. Some did not make it past that: they died in combat.
I didn't know this. Now, I'm curious on how many they siked into joining and dying for them and their pursuit of Oil?
I have no doubt the same tactic will be used in AFRICOM, and if so, based on Africa's past level of cooperation, it will be very successful.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by of_gold:
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried:
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer: Well, I guess the question also applies to blacks residing in Holland, and their willingness to serve in the Dutch military. Holland is an US ally and does support Anti-terrorism and the Iraq campaign.
Also, many of the Jews who purchase black US interests such as, Motown, B.E.T., and other enterprises are located in Belgium. So, they definitely are interested in being protected.
WOULD BE VERY REFRESHING IF YOU STOPPED THE JEW/WHITES BASHING. I'm totally puzzled, some times you sound like somebody with brains who has actually read Toni Morrisson, other times you come off as a wilful Nazi. Morrison has a poor white girl, an indentured labourer, help Sethè to deliver that baby. Many whites have voted Obama while only a few decades ago they would be throwing stones at black students who entered lily-white schools. Now be a dear and give me your sources on how many blacks were against the Iraq war and how many have enlisted. That is something to work with, not the goddam shouting contest you have made of my thread.
Good post Egmond.
meninarmer, you are really in a sad situation there on your island alone. Truth be told, you have no idea how anyone besides yourself thinks. You post these black/white statics without anything to back them up.
You remind me of a black man in our community who was constantly stirring up trouble saying everything was a race issue. He complained that there were no blacks on the city council when the truth of the matter was that no black man had every run for city council.
He created a tension in the whole community even in the school district where the black children basically did not have to follow the same rules the white children did because they would shout racism anytime they were expected to comply.
Now that the city council and school board are racially diverse. I did work for one African American school board member who would complain to me about the school district not being tough enough on the black children. He said he wants his children to follow the rules and get a good education, that is why he moved here.
Obama's victory has nothing to do with his skin color. What it does have to do with is that here is a man who is articulate, intelligent, and wants to take the country in a new direction. You really insult him with your remarks. You should be ashamed, really.
Yes, the BAD black man wanted an education system to reflect truth. What a bad person wanting to elevate the US education system from it's present 18Th and declining world position. Shame on him.
Posted by Heru-Tunde (Member # 16164) on :
of gold wrote:
Good post Egmond.
meninarmer, you are really in a sad situation there on your island alone. Truth be told, you have no idea how anyone besides yourself thinks. You post these black/white statics without anything to back them up.
You remind me of a black man in our community who was constantly stirring up trouble saying everything was a race issue. He complained that there were no blacks on the city council when the truth of the matter was that no black man had every run for city council.
He created a tension in the whole community even in the school district where the black children basically did not have to follow the same rules the white children did because they would shout racism anytime they were expected to comply.
Now that the city council and school board are racially diverse. I did work for one African American school board member who would complain to me about the school district not being tough enough on the black children. He said he wants his children to follow the rules and get a good education, that is why he moved here.
Obama's victory has nothing to do with his skin color. What it does have to do with is that here is a man who is articulate, intelligent, and wants to take the country in a new direction. You really insult him with your remarks. You should be ashamed, really.
Obamas victory was a pre-planned action needed in order to keep black peoples minds doctile and furthermore stop the risk of a revolt or a malcolm x/marcus garvey persona emerging. if yu think that obama, could come from nothing, be funded billions of pounds, and then go on to be a president of one of the most racist countries is a coincidence, then theres serious mental problems that need adressing. You need to know how the master works, he would con and decieve people in order to achieve his goal, obama is nothing but a controlled puppet, used to appease to a people(blacks) who are always looking for a saviour, what they don't know is that really there not any closer to racial equality and justice than theyve ever been, the master still controls the country, obama is a black face, controlled by white power.(and on a side note how do you make someones post bold?)
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
quote:Obamas victory was a pre-planned action needed in order to keep black peoples minds doctile and furthermore stop the risk of a revolt or a malcolm x/marcus garvey persona emerging. if yu think that obama, could come from nothing, be funded billions of pounds, and then go on to be a president of one of the most racist countries is a coincidence, then theres serious mental problems that need adressing. You need to know how the master works, he would con and decieve people in order to achieve his goal, obama is nothing but a controlled puppet, used to appease to a people(blacks) who are always looking for a saviour, what they don't know is that really there not any closer to racial equality and justice than theyve ever been, the master still controls the country, obama is a black face, controlled by white power.(and on a side note how do you make someones post bold?)
Oh, I get it now. The white master put a black man in power of the most powerful country in the world to apease the black man. This was done to insure that the black man would not revolt and would continue to remain a slave. Did you think this up on your own or is there some underground organization giving you this brilliant information? Now please tell us, is the Obama presidency to keep all black men docile world wide, or just here in the states?
Hey Mr. 3 post genius, Who are you and what was your previous id? Maybe you don't want people to discover you while you enlighten everyone about Obama being a puppet. Good idea.
Don't you think the white man blew it this time? Shouldn't he of put a stupid black man into office instead of an intelligent one? Usually puppets are dummies.
(and on a side note how do you make someones post bold?) Figure it out on your own Einstein.
Posted by Heru-Tunde (Member # 16164) on :
^ if your not intellectual enough to understand what i'm talking about i think its best i do not reply after this, there are many people, like you(the majority) of blacks in america and abroad who beleive everything they hear, especially from the media, first of all as i said in previous post obama is nothing but a puppet,and the elections were planned,for people like you who believe in "democratic america" i really can't be bothered to argue with you if you don't undestand where im coming from, obama is just another black man, with white bosses, he is not the most powerful man in america, and is not the wholesome character he is portayed to be. and to answer your questions, if you've actually been to a african country, you would see that american culture plays an influential role, in theirs, blacks over in africa, follow trends of those in the diaspora, its also fair to say that the revolutionary blacks of the 20th century have mostly come from the diaspora (bar a few), dr josef jochannan and kwame nkrumah) i.e marcus garvey, malcolm x, farrakhan, khalid muhammed, dr john henrik clarke. Blacks in africa are less of a threat as a vast majority of them are even more doctile than the blacks in America. And im actually new to this forum i was only introduced to the forum a few days ago.(of_load, ive figured it out thanks for the help Tom.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Heru-Tunde: Blacks in africa are less of a threat as a vast majority of them are even more doctile than the blacks in America.
Perhaps where you come from, if you are even African for that matter. If you knew any ounce of African history, you'd know that they are anything but docile. Africans pretty much have clear heritages intact and their own cultures; they don't, nor need to or try to emulate others just to have a culture. Again, if that's the case with *your* own fellow citizens/nationality, then that is an entirely different matter.
Posted by Heru-Tunde (Member # 16164) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by Heru-Tunde: Blacks in africa are less of a threat as a vast majority of them are even more doctile than the blacks in America.
Perhaps where you come from, if you are even African for that matter. If you knew any ounce of African history, you'd know that they are anything but docile. Africans pretty much have clear heritages intact and their own cultures; they don't, nor need to or try to emulate others just to have a culture. Again, if that's the case with *your* own fellow citizens/nationality, then that is an entirely different matter.
Beleive me i know a vast amount about african history, but i'm not talking about africa was then before the arab/european invaders im talking about how africa is now, me myself im a black man with proud african heritage, and have been to a number of african countries, i.e ghana, nigeria, liberia, egypt, as a person with nigerian heritage, i see that many of my people and particularly other west africans, are suffering from the effects of colonisation and you cannot disagree with that, when i say that alot of africans are doctile, im not lying, alot are still effected by the imperialism of the white man and look to him for how to live thier lives whether it be, music, religion, fashion, and movies, for example the nigerian entertainment industry is named nollywood after hollywood. if you look at the history of pan-africanism you would see that a large proportion of those proposing the idea came from the diaspora bar a few, i.e dr josef jochannan, by saying this im not saying africans do not have heritage as i am a african myself, im just commenting on what i see everyday.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by Heru-Tunde:
Beleive me i know a vast amount about african history, but i'm not talking about africa was then before the arab/european invaders im talking about how africa is now, me myself im a black man with proud african heritage, and have been to a number of african countries, i.e ghana, nigeria, liberia, egypt, as a person with nigerian heritage, i see that many of my people and particularly other west africans, are suffering from the effects of colonisation and you cannot disagree with that, when i say that alot of africans are doctile, im not lying, alot are still effected by the imperialism of the white man and look to him for how to live thier lives whether it be, music, religion, fashion, and movies, for example the nigerian entertainment industry is named nollywood after hollywood. if you look at the history of pan-africanism you would see that a large proportion of those proposing the idea came from the diaspora bar a few, i.e dr josef jochannan, by saying this im not saying africans do not have heritage as i am a african myself, im just commenting on what i see everyday.
Heru-Tunde, I don't doubt that history of colonialism has had a lasting impact on Africans socially and economically, but rather, I'm disturbed by your seeming generalization with the 'docile' descriptive. The reason for this "lasting impact", is largely due to what I call neo-colonialism. Years after many of the African anti-colonial mass movements spurred local colonial regimes to come to terms with "token" independence, by appealing to bourgeois "activist" figures who decided to align themselves with the movement of the masses yearning for social democracy, African states are by and large still loyal to their former colonial regimes; the only difference now, is that the regimes are usually overseas and don't generally have local governing satellites made up of the colonialist nations themselves. But you need to be able to delineate between the interests of a thin layer of African ruling elites and those of the masses. Many of the aforementioned African bourgeois "activists" who previously aligned themselves with the mass movement had not lived up to the promises of their rhetoric, and by continuing to align themselves with former colonialists after independence, they betrayed the masses. This in no way makes the masses of African any more docile than the masses of other peoples under smaller layers of elites, whose interests are usually antagonistic to those of the masses.
When African masses were transformed to the modern working class of the industrial age, the contradictions of the framework within which this transformation took place, urged African masses to reject the brutal conditions in which their labor was being super-exploited; this found expression in mass movements against the brutally inhumane colonialism. This doesn't suggest a docile peoples; quite to the contrary, and it post-dates pre-Arab and European contacts or invasions eras.
In an age of globalization, and of course as a result of colonial history, it is not surprising to see pop culture influences spread across the borders of nations. After all, Africans see movies made in the so-called West and from the East, like those from China and India. These are bound to leave some impression and admiration for things "exotic" amongst audiences of these products, especially amongst the youth. I don't exactly consider this an expression of being docile. Seeing that you are African, I would think you'd also realize how relatively conservative Africans are, when it comes to culture; sure change is occurring, but that is not something limited to Africans. It is happening any and everywhere that is not isolated from globalization within the existing geopolitical and economic framework.
For the record, African mass movements were not ignited by "Pan-African" bourgeois figures of the diaspora and Africa; those personalities saw mass discontent, and thereof, the already bourgeoning mass movement [that developed within the masses themselves, not introduced by bourgeois "Pan Africanist" figures] against the capilatist colonial framework within which they were being super-exploited and stripped off their sovereignty. These Pan-Africanist figures and other bourgeois African figures sought to align themselves with a movement that was already underway with or without them. It is the betrayal by these same figures which to this day continues to spur mass social unrest; in most cases, these social unrests are met with brutal suppression with the aid of "colonial turned neo-colonial" allies. This doesn't mean though, that they [mass social unrest] don't erupt. So, I beg to differ with the generalized descriptive of the African as "docile". But perhaps you have your own idea of what "docile" entails, in which case, it is apparently different from mine.
Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
^ could you be more specific? Who were these "Pan-African bourgeois figures of the Diaspora and Africa" that saw this already bourgeoning mass "movement"? And could you identify this "movement" that was already underway? Was it an organisation, an institution or are you just referring to mass feelings of discontent in general? And if it is the latter don't you think calling this a "movement" is misleading? You leftys are so good at theoretical abstractions as opposed to reality.
Posted by Heru-Tunde (Member # 16164) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:Originally posted by Heru-Tunde:
Beleive me i know a vast amount about african history, but i'm not talking about africa was then before the arab/european invaders im talking about how africa is now, me myself im a black man with proud african heritage, and have been to a number of african countries, i.e ghana, nigeria, liberia, egypt, as a person with nigerian heritage, i see that many of my people and particularly other west africans, are suffering from the effects of colonisation and you cannot disagree with that, when i say that alot of africans are doctile, im not lying, alot are still effected by the imperialism of the white man and look to him for how to live thier lives whether it be, music, religion, fashion, and movies, for example the nigerian entertainment industry is named nollywood after hollywood. if you look at the history of pan-africanism you would see that a large proportion of those proposing the idea came from the diaspora bar a few, i.e dr josef jochannan, by saying this im not saying africans do not have heritage as i am a african myself, im just commenting on what i see everyday.
Heru-Tunde, I don't doubt that history of colonialism has had a lasting impact on Africans socially and economically, but rather, I'm disturbed by your seeming generalization with the 'docile' descriptive. The reason for this "lasting impact", is largely due to what I call neo-colonialism. Years after many of the African anti-colonial mass movements spurred local colonial regimes to come to terms with "token" independence, by appealing to bourgeois "activist" figures who decided to align themselves with the movement of the masses yearning for social democracy, African states are by and large still loyal to their former colonial regimes; the only difference now, is that the regimes are usually overseas and don't generally have local governing satellites made up of the colonialist nations themselves. But you need to be able to delineate between the interests of a thin layer of African ruling elites and those of the masses. Many of the aforementioned African bourgeois "activists" who previously aligned themselves with the mass movement had not lived up to the promises of their rhetoric, and by continuing to align themselves with former colonialists after independence, they betrayed the masses. This in no way makes the masses of African any more docile than the masses of other peoples under smaller layers of elites, whose interests are usually antagonistic to those of the masses.
When African masses were transformed to the modern working class of the industrial age, the contradictions of the framework within which this transformation took place, urged African masses to reject the brutal conditions in which their labor was being super-exploited; this found expression in mass movements against the brutally inhumane colonialism. This doesn't suggest a docile peoples; quite to the contrary, and it post-dates pre-Arab and European contacts or invasions eras.
In an age of globalization, and of course as a result of colonial history, it is not surprising to see pop culture influences spread across the borders of nations. After all, Africans see movies made in the so-called West and from the East, like those from China and India. These are bound to leave some impression and admiration for things "exotic" amongst audiences of these products, especially amongst the youth. I don't exactly consider this an expression of being docile. Seeing that you are African, I would think you'd also realize how relatively conservative Africans are, when it comes to culture; sure change is occurring, but that is not something limited to Africans. It is happening any and everywhere that is not isolated from globalization within the existing geopolitical and economic framework.
For the record, African mass movements were not ignited by "Pan-African" bourgeois figures of the diaspora and Africa; those personalities saw mass discontent, and thereof, the already bourgeoning mass movement [that developed within the masses themselves, not introduced by bourgeois "Pan Africanist" figures] against the capilatist colonial framework within which they were being super-exploited and stripped off their sovereignty. These Pan-Africanist figures and other bourgeois African figures sought to align themselves with a movement that was already underway with or without them. It is the betrayal by these same figures which to this day continues to spur mass social unrest; in most cases, these social unrests are met with brutal suppression with the aid of "colonial turned neo-colonial" allies. This doesn't mean though, that they [mass social unrest] don't erupt. So, I beg to differ with the generalized descriptive of the African as "docile". But perhaps you have your own idea of what "docile" entails, in which case, it is apparently different from mine.
i guess in some ways your right, maybe i should of said a large proportion of africans and blacks are mislead, and to a certain degree brainwashed, when i said docile i meant that a large proportion of blacks in general are not continuing in the legacies of marcus garvey, malcolm x, and so on, the only thing i seem to hear nowadyas is that things are better for blacks and that revolutionary icons like garvey and co are not needed? while people in thier mother continent are suffering, and a majority of blacks in the diaspora are unwilling to help classing themselves as "americans" well so be it, maybe is a case of feeling unattached with thier people, what i meant to say in the earlier posts are that the majority of blacks are in a false consciousness.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben: ^ could you be more specific? Who were these "Pan-African bourgeois figures of the Diaspora and Africa" that saw this already bourgeoning mass "movement"? And could you identify this "movement" that was already underway? Was it an organisation, an institution or are you just referring to mass feelings of discontent in general? And if it is the latter don't you think calling this a "movement" is misleading? You leftys are so good at theoretical abstractions as opposed to reality.
It will lead directly to mass recruitment and cooperation with AFRICOM once they get rolling. Millions of Africans will stampede to get in line to wear an AFRICOM uniform in even greater numbers then when they joined the ranks of the British Army.
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
quote:You remind me of a black man in our community who was constantly stirring up trouble saying everything was a race issue. He complained that there were no blacks on the city council when the truth of the matter was that no black man had every run for city council.
Perhaps a lil’ bit off topic. But I wanted to make a clean break a few years ago and joined my neighbourhood ‘council.’ Boy did I ever! I joined the newspaper board, introduced some changes and started some participation drives. Election time came; I put myself up as a candidate. What happened? According to the rules they need 25 persons present on voting day. Lo and behold, twenty vive family members of the sitting board showed up and voted their wives, brothers and uncles again into office. On the candidate list were people who never showed up. I contacted them and they told me they had never entered their names. So was kept out, in spite of my 12 votes for which I campaigned as fiercely like Obama. The board has ghost members. Non-whites are just scared away from these places with the blessing of the city council.
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
quote:Originally posted by lamin: You might note that at the heights of the Iraq war "blacks" who were not U.S. born were offered a "fast track to citizenship" if they signed up. Some did not make it past that: they died in combat.
This is the thing. The military machine is hungry for flesh. Here they do not give blacks and muslims proper jobs so they will have to go and enlist. It's perceived as integration, showing loyalty: blacks being happy to go and kill other blacks.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
Here a black man can become president. Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: Here a black man can become president.
Good for you, Honey! I wouldn’t trust Obama as far as I can kick him. Over here in Horror Land we had our first Moroccan Mayor, of Rotterdam: it was called the ‘Obama Effect’ and he has to rid Holland from its ‘Moroccan problem.’ Just like Hitler helped Europe with its ‘Jewish Problem.’
But granted, I do generalise a bit for effect when I say that the 'white's' over here seem like people from which the spirit of defiance has been completely beaten out. People are murdered in their name and they don’t seem to give a damn, gorge themselves on beer, weed and chicken legs. They belief and accept any ****, any lie, that their government seems to lay on them. Look at Ol'Grand Dragon here soiling my thread with his hatred. He never sounded more hatefull then on christmas!
White's are kept in check by a ruthless elite which considers them nothing more then ‘tax paying cows,’ cannon fodder, expandable; you name it. However, they tell them every day how 'the other' is after them, coming to get them, while every thinking person understands that it was Bush himself who bombed the US on 9/11, claiming 'vaporised planes.' He did not flinch from killing white folks, did he?
Powell, housenigger extraordinaire, gave an expose of lies in the UN about weapons in Iraq. Iraq was supposed to be able to strike ‘the Fucking Free West’ in 45 minutes with deadly force. So if whites were not so much in fear of Blacks and 'the other,' things might improve overnight, in the whole world. Let Bush and his wife together with this nice black couple Obama and daughters go and invade Iran by themselves. That will be the shortest war ever!
My fight is rather with ideologies them skin colour. I hate the fact that they daily massacre poor folks in Afghanistan, using my tax money to buy cluster bombs, mines etc. Why? So they can smuggle dope to the west? I hate the sight of young men drowning in the Mediterranean because they do not get a faire price for their cacao which goes into making chocolate, a luxury product.
Posted by Herukhuti (Member # 11484) on :
You're certainly a more sensible person than meninarmer. This is becoming clear as I actually bother to read your posts these days.
Meninarmer, bruv, happy new year. I haven't had words from you in a while, wassup? You know, I was re-reading 1984 just the other day and whenever I was reading something about O'Brien you came to my mind. I wonder why?
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
Yes, I am "unreasonable" because I am not a weak and shallow man. That you bother to read O'Brien has nothing to do with me, but rather serves as yet another indication of your feeble and weak mental state. Man up, little blood! A boy cannot emulate his mother forever.
Also note, the topic of the thread is, Black Americans should not enlist..... Your weak ass comes in here and as usual with you and Hammer, being shallow and weak, offer no opinion on the topic, and no real or significant contribution. Perhaps, you fail to find the appropriate Youtube rap vid to speak for you.
Egmond's confused ass created the thread and is not a Black American. So, his opinions only apply to being black and serving in EUROPE, which is clear he has NOT, and failed to mention why he hasn't. But, don't ask, don't tell.
Your weak ass should prepare to be fitted for an AFRICOM uniform, or at least begin to comprehend how Obama's AFRICOM will effect you versus taking the usual path of choice of the weak, denial.
Posted by -Your-All-Sick- (Member # 14754) on :
AFRICOM IS SOME WEAK ASS BITCHES AND SNITCHES.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
Posted by meninarmer:
quote: Yes, I am "unreasonable" because I am not a weak and shallow man. That you bother to read O'Brien has nothing to do with me, but rather serves as yet another indication of your feeble and weak mental state. Man up, little blood! A boy cannot emulate his mother forever.
This is a variable depending on if you are a person who for instance sees Hitler as strong or Gandhi as strong. I personally see Gandhi as strong, and I view Egmond as being the stronger man in comparison to you being weak.
Posted by Egmond:
quote: My fight is rather with ideologies them skin colour. I hate the fact that they daily massacre poor folks in Afghanistan, using my tax money to buy cluster bombs, mines etc. Why? So they can smuggle dope to the west? I hate the sight of young men drowning in the Mediterranean because they do not get a faire price for their cacao which goes into making chocolate, a luxury product.
Bravo, I agree.
I met a wonderful "African American" last night. We were both in Radio Shack and he struck up a conversation with me as we walked out. While standing in the cold we touched on politics and religion. We were of like minded, he said that he does not see color, that it is just skin pigment and what is important is the inside of the person. I mentioned this thread and how meninarmer has the whites pitted against the blacks. His response "He is like Rush Limbaugh". I use this example to show an "African American" who sides with Egmond.
It is my opinion that people who pit one race or religion against the other are the problem. It is them who divided us by skin color or belief. It is them who are out to destroy everyone who does not look or act as they do.
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
Rush pits whites against blacks? Gold, Hitler was stronger than Ghandi, he would have had him shot. That may not be the ethical hing to do in terms of some 2009 western value system but it is reality. Power is power and power is strong in every case. Power is the ability to get things done. Sometimes they are bad and sometimes good but if not for power we would still live in caves.
Posted by Herukhuti (Member # 11484) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Gold, Hitler was stronger than Ghandi, he would have had him shot.
Hmmm... is that why Hitler is still here and thriving?
TAP, you're not too wise for an old man. Ghandi's legacy is today stronger than that of Hitler's.
Sun Tzu said:
"In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to capture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy them."
Meditate on the above passage, as we see Obama in office, who revered MLK who in turn revered Ghandi. All that is left is to get the timing right.
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Gold, Hitler was stronger than Ghandi, he would have had him shot.
Hmmm... is that why Hitler is still here and thriving?
TAP, you're not too wise for an old man. Ghandi's legacy is today stronger than that of Hitler's.
Sun Tzu said:
"In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to capture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy them."
Meditate on the above passage, as we see Obama in office, who revered MLK who in turn revered Ghandi. All that is left is to get the timing right.
If he really "revered" non violence why is he calling for more troops in Afghanistan? To turn the other cheek? If he really "revered" non violence why did he not speak out against violence in Gaza as he did Darfur? And what are American troops doing in Afghanistan if not to "shatter and destroy" the damn place? J-Horus you make no damn sense as usual.
The moment Barack Obama took the oath of office, he became commander in chief of America's far-flung global empire, more than 800 military bases strung across the planet, and at least a million and a half uniformed personnel, secret prisons, torturers, and looters of whole economies. The US spends more on arms than all the rest of the planet combined, and in spite of our economic woes, Obama is not committed to reducing this. He may ask us to cut "entitlements" and tighten our belts, but reducing the military budget, the production of arms and the training of bloodthirsty proxy armies in poor countries all around the world is not to be questioned under an Obama administration. Link. Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
Gaza, I thought you were pro Palestinian? Odd that you should be such a strong Obama supporter.
Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
^ I'm not an Obama supporter much less a "strong" one you stupid red neck. lol
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
You also cannot read, the post a response to Gaza. I know better than to ask you even a simple question.
Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
Oh my god. And now I will demonstrate your illiteracy yet again. Yes, I mentioned the violence in Gaza. So what?
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
Hammer, Not surprisingly, ALL of your questions & comments are SIMPLE. LMAO!
Posted by Herukhuti (Member # 11484) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben:
quote:Originally posted by Herukhuti:
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Gold, Hitler was stronger than Ghandi, he would have had him shot.
Hmmm... is that why Hitler is still here and thriving?
TAP, you're not too wise for an old man. Ghandi's legacy is today stronger than that of Hitler's.
Sun Tzu said:
"In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to capture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy them."
Meditate on the above passage, as we see Obama in office, who revered MLK who in turn revered Ghandi. All that is left is to get the timing right.
If he really "revered" non violence why is he calling for more troops in Afghanistan? To turn the other cheek? If he really "revered" non violence why did he not speak out against violence in Gaza as he did Darfur? And what are American troops doing in Afghanistan if not to "shatter and destroy" the damn place? J-Horus you make no damn sense as usual.
I never said he "revered" non violence, I said he revered MLK who in turn reveres Ghandi. You don't have to revere non violence to revere Ghandi, the man and his ideas. "Non violence" is only a tactic, not the end goal.
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
the Ghandi approach works fine unless you are opposing a government who will simply shoot you. if he used non violence against Putin he would end up dead.
Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Originally posted by Herukhuti:
quote:Originally posted by akoben:
quote:Originally posted by Herukhuti:
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Gold, Hitler was stronger than Ghandi, he would have had him shot.
Hmmm... is that why Hitler is still here and thriving?
TAP, you're not too wise for an old man. Ghandi's legacy is today stronger than that of Hitler's.
Sun Tzu said:
"In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to capture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy them."
Meditate on the above passage, as we see Obama in office, who revered MLK who in turn revered Ghandi. All that is left is to get the timing right.
If he really "revered" non violence why is he calling for more troops in Afghanistan? To turn the other cheek? If he really "revered" non violence why did he not speak out against violence in Gaza as he did Darfur? And what are American troops doing in Afghanistan if not to "shatter and destroy" the damn place? J-Horus you make no damn sense as usual.
I never said he "revered" non violence, I said he revered MLK who in turn reveres Ghandi. You don't have to revere non violence to revere Ghandi, the man and his ideas. "Non violence" is only a tactic, not the end goal.
Ok what other context would he "revere" him then? What other aspect or his "ideas" did he "revere"? What about foreign policy, specifically American imperial adventures? Would King support that? King said America is the greatest purveyor of violence, Obama thinks it was chosen by god to spread "freedom". Did he revere King there?
On Iraq and Afghanistan war and the Military Industrial Complex. Would King support them today as Obama does? Please point out exactly what aspect of King's philosophy does Obama really "revere"?
J-Horus you sound just as stupid as the other Obama-maniacs who think he is some sort of continuation of King.
Posted by Herukhuti (Member # 11484) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: the Ghandi approach works fine unless you are opposing a government who will simply shoot you. if he used non violence against Putin he would end up dead.
Then Ghandi would not have used non violence. That's what you're failing to comprehend.
Posted by Herukhuti (Member # 11484) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben:
quote:Originally posted by Herukhuti:
quote:Originally posted by akoben:
quote:Originally posted by Herukhuti:
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Gold, Hitler was stronger than Ghandi, he would have had him shot.
Hmmm... is that why Hitler is still here and thriving?
TAP, you're not too wise for an old man. Ghandi's legacy is today stronger than that of Hitler's.
Sun Tzu said:
"In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to capture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy them."
Meditate on the above passage, as we see Obama in office, who revered MLK who in turn revered Ghandi. All that is left is to get the timing right.
If he really "revered" non violence why is he calling for more troops in Afghanistan? To turn the other cheek? If he really "revered" non violence why did he not speak out against violence in Gaza as he did Darfur? And what are American troops doing in Afghanistan if not to "shatter and destroy" the damn place? J-Horus you make no damn sense as usual.
I never said he "revered" non violence, I said he revered MLK who in turn reveres Ghandi. You don't have to revere non violence to revere Ghandi, the man and his ideas. "Non violence" is only a tactic, not the end goal.
Ok what other context would he "revere" him then? What other aspect or his "ideas" did he "revere"? What about foreign policy, specifically American imperial adventures? Would King support that? King said America is the greatest purveyor of violence, Obama thinks it was chosen by god to spread "freedom". Did he revere King there?
On Iraq and Afghanistan war and the Military Industrial Complex. Would King support them today as Obama does? Please point out exactly what aspect of King's philosophy does Obama really "revere"?
J-Horus you sound just as stupid as the other Obama-maniacs who think he is some sort of continuation of King.
Neither Gandhi nor King were Commander-In-Chief of any free nation. There is a completely different set of moral code for a Commander-In-Chief of a free nation to that of Political Activists.
A "yellowish" dude from Bahamas I worked with once advised me, when he noticed my antagonistic ways towards ungodly authority, "when taking your hands out of a sleeping Lion's mouth, do it slowly". He really had a point. Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
^ Please point out exactly what aspect of King's philosophy does Obama really "revere"?
Posted by Herukhuti (Member # 11484) on :
^ I'll leave that for you to ponder.
Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
^ thought so. Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot:
if not for power we would still live in caves.
Elaborate; for it seems that humanity, and even our forebearers [below], had outgrown cave-dwelling long before any "power structure to control many" was apparent as a social phenomenon...
Now, from the remote shores of Budrinna on Lake Fezzan in Libya, and Melka Konture on the banks of the River Awash in Ethiopia, a series of stunning discoveries are set to challenge the originality of the Neolithic Revolution. After 39 years of surveys and excavations, Professor Helmut Ziegert of Hamburg University presents his results as a world exclusive in Minerva (pp. 8-9). In both African locations he has discovered huts and sedentary village life dating between an astonishing 400,000 and 200,000 Before Present - if correct, literally a quantum leap in our understanding of man's evolution. - Jerome M. Eisenberg, Ph.D. and Dr Sean Kingsley
And this is in reference to the Homo Erectus. Could this mean that the Homo Erectus discovered the value of the "power to control many" before modern human did?
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Rush pits whites against blacks? Gold, Hitler was stronger than Ghandi, he would have had him shot. That may not be the ethical hing to do in terms of some 2009 western value system but it is reality. Power is power and power is strong in every case. Power is the ability to get things done. Sometimes they are bad and sometimes good but if not for power we would still live in caves.
This shows that Hitler had a gun not that he was a stronger man. I hold firmly to the idea that Gandhi was the stronger man.
There are few men in history that have achieved what Gandhi did when he took on one of history's most powerful empires.
Gandhi was a small Indian man that took on the British Empire's policies of injustice, discrimination, and colonial domination without throwing a single punch, firing a single bullet, or in any way using violence as a weapon. He defeated the British Empire by winning Indian Independence. Gandhi has the status of being remembered as a 'great man in history'.
Posted by Herukhuti (Member # 11484) on :
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: Gandhi was a small Indian man that took on the British Empire's policies of injustice, discrimination, and colonial domination without throwing a single punch, firing a single bullet, or in any way using violence as a weapon. He defeated the British Empire by winning Indian Independence. Gandhi has the status of being remembered as a 'great man in history'.
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
Gold, Gandhi was also dealing with a modern western nation in colonial retreat. Henry VIII whoud have chopped his head off. Caesar would have hung him on a cross. I think you have picked the exception and tried to make it the rule. Power is not an ethic, it simply is what it is. I know that does not fit your utopian left wing world view but it is true just the same. 'The Prince' should be a required course for all college students.
Posted by Herukhuti (Member # 11484) on :
^ I'll prescribe Sun Tzu's 'Art of War' over Machiavelli's 'The Prince' anyday. I've read both and Machiavelli's work just seems like Sun Tzu's work rehashed with the beauty taken out of it.
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
Hammer, Power and strength are contrastive in that ANY weak man with a gun can have power and that power can be taken away. Strength on the other hand is a quality of ones character. Posted by Herukhuti (Member # 11484) on :
quote: THE "HOLY EDICT" OF K'ANG-HI.
A CHINESE ANTI-MACHIAVELLI.
SHORTLY before Frederick the Great ascended the throne, he wrote a criticism of Machiavelli's doctrines of statecraft, which in those times were considered the sum-total of political wisdom, in a treatise entitled Anti-Machiavelli. Machiavelli, an Italian statesman, educated in the school of Italian politics with its intrigues and coups d'état, advised princes to maintain their sovereignty by crooked means, by treachery, and violence, but the young Crown Prince of Prussia condemned the book not only as immoral but also as very unwise,—in a word, as absolutely wrong; and he stated his own views that a prince could maintain himself best by serving the people with ability and honesty. "Government is needed," the young Frederick argued, "and so long as a prince will do his duty, his people will need him and will be grateful for the service he gives." In contrast to the notion of Louis XIV. of France, who said; "L'état c'est moi," Frederick's maxim was that a king is, and should consider himself, "the first servant of his people." The statesmen of Europe smiled at the ingenuity of the fantastic idealist, as which they regarded him, but Frederick proved to them by deeds that his maxims were superior to the intricate wiles of the old diplomacy.
^^This explains why folks like TAP are fast losing grip on REALITY. They won't even know what hit them when it hits them.
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
Machiavelli is universal and will always apply. the principles put forth in 'The Prince' applied 10,000 years in the past and will apply 10,000 years in the future. They operate the same in all societies in all times. Frederick was writing during the Enlightenment when silly utopian thinking was almost as popular as it is today. Frederick was simply wrong.
Posted by Rumicrazieluv (Member # 12053) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Gold, Gandhi was also dealing with a modern western nation in colonial retreat. Henry VIII whoud have chopped his head off. Caesar would have hung him on a cross. I think you have picked the exception and tried to make it the rule. Power is not an ethic, it simply is what it is. I know that does not fit your utopian left wing world view but it is true just the same. 'The Prince' should be a required course for all college students.
Obviously the greater minds in our country disagree with you-watch CNN. Our President just ordered the closing of Gitmo bay within the year and banned torture.
Once again, I was right and you were wrong. Looks like you might have to come to terms with advancement towards a civilized society.
You need to start to come to terms with the fact that Bush was a lame duck, and brainwashed many into believing his crap. He is the greatest embarrassment our country has ever seen and 82% of our country agrees with me.
Nows the time to eat crow, and support your new president as you told us time and again that the US president needs to be respected and supported by the People....
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
LOL, I have no doubt Hammer is the site's number One candidate for the, Most-Often-Wrong award winner. Looks like everyone of the site has mentally beat him up at least once. Poor dude.. A prime target for the ACME Rent-A-Brain sales people.
Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
Rummy, You are maki ng the same mistake you always make. You listen to what politicans say instead of watching what they do. gitmo will remain open and the Obama foreign policy will be exactly the same as that of president Bush. When Harry truman left office his approval numbers were lower than those you see for the president. Now he is considered a top 10 President. The same will happen in this case. Obama does not agree with you on anything, most especially your view of President Bush.
Posted by Herukhuti (Member # 11484) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rumicrazieluv: Obviously the greater minds in our country disagree with you-watch CNN. Our President just ordered the closing of Gitmo bay within the year and banned torture.
And this is like on day #1 of his Presidency.
=> Just saw it on the BBC. Posted by TheAmericanPatriot (Member # 15824) on :
He ordered Gitmo closed in a year. In a few months they'll extend it further if it suits their purpose. You have no clue Rummy. In 2006 the Dems in Congress said they would end the war if elected. They then turned around and voted FOR every war bill that came up. Obama has now put qualifiers on everyone of his campaign promises. The foreign policy team he has assembled is right of center. If you will listen Rummy I will educate you and you will not even have to pay.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
LMAO, no one but an insane person would give you a dime for the time of day, loser.
All your opinions are meaningless. All you have to go on are the political records of the past, compromising to incompetent leaders of the past.
There's a new sheriff in town BOY. A new sheriff with an elevated set of skills relative to the incompetence of the past. Try to catch up to modern times old Dixiecrat dude, it's 2009, not 1950. American politics are about to be transformed to the next level, the same as baseball did when blacks entered the league. Quite different then that 1950s basketball game you knew with 100% uncoordinated white/jewish players. In 20 years time, a white man may very well be locked out of politics as they are in today's NBA. What did that take, 30 years?
Posted by Tigerlily (Member # 3567) on :
Hammer is right, there is no doubt about it. I don't understand how people can celebrate Obama for not having accomplished anything yet. Time will tell if his promises really hold value but for the timebeing there are only promises, words only. Again don't have to high expectations because the disappointments could be overwhelming.
I do applaud that Hillary Clinton became Secretary of State - I have fully trust in her. She is extremely qualified and will rock in her job!!
Posted by Tigerlily (Member # 3567) on :
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer: LMAO, no one but an insane person would give you a dime for the time of day, loser.
All your opinions are meaningless.
Hahaaaaaa.... I am bursting into a laugh!! For declaring Hammer's opinions as 'meaningless' you sure of a hell get irritated and respond heavily to them.
And how many times do I have to tell you you don't have to become rude to make your point, old angry black man?? It's not that you have to stand anymore in the cottonfields and do your daily duty, do you?? It's 2009, not 1950, and it's time to bring people together rather than let them drift further apart.
Lastly who gives a fart what you are on?? I KNOW I DON'T.
Posted by binhaden (Member # 9900) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tigerlily: I do applaud that Hillary Clinton became Secretary of State - I have fully trust in her. She is extremely qualified and will rock in her job!!
Posted by Tigerlily (Member # 3567) on :
quote:Originally posted by binhaden:
quote:Originally posted by Tigerlily: I do applaud that Hillary Clinton became Secretary of State - I have fully trust in her. She is extremely qualified and will rock in her job!!
Yes, binladen, your days are counted. Hillary will personally come to get you!! Huhhhh say your last prayers!! Posted by binhaden (Member # 9900) on :
The name is binhaden.
As for Hillary, I'm shocked you'd say she is "extremely qualified." Based on what?
Neither Obama nor Hillary is qualified for the position they hold. Extremely qualified is beyond stretching it.
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: In 2006 the Dems in Congress said they would end the war if elected. They then turned around and voted FOR every war bill that came up. Obama has now put qualifiers on everyone of his campaign promises. The foreign policy team he has assembled is right of center.
Obama is here to lull people to sleep. I'm surprised you'd give him so much credit to think he could "assemble" anything.
Posted by Rumicrazieluv (Member # 12053) on :
quote:Originally posted by binhaden: The name is binhaden.
As for Hillary, I'm shocked you'd say she is "extremely qualified." Based on what?
Neither Obama nor Hillary is qualified for the position they hold. Extremely qualified is beyond stretching it.
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: In 2006 the Dems in Congress said they would end the war if elected. They then turned around and voted FOR every war bill that came up. Obama has now put qualifiers on everyone of his campaign promises. The foreign policy team he has assembled is right of center.
Obama is here to lull people to sleep. I'm surprised you'd give him so much credit to think he could "assemble" anything.
You base your opinions on what ??? State your arguments based on information and factual points of reference then backround info-are you republican or democrat??? What area of the US do you reside in???
Posted by Rumicrazieluv (Member # 12053) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: He ordered Gitmo closed in a year. In a few months they'll extend it further if it suits their purpose. You have no clue Rummy. In 2006 the Dems in Congress said they would end the war if elected. They then turned around and voted FOR every war bill that came up. Obama has now put qualifiers on everyone of his campaign promises. The foreign policy team he has assembled is right of center. If you will listen Rummy I will educate you and you will not even have to pay.
If your offering me lessons on Politics then I'll pass however if you want me to give you a lesson on what a true American Patriot is then I will definitley dialogue with you
You have told me time and again and I have proved you wrong on almost everything. I do have to concede that congress has not done what it had portrayed itself to do because of republican involvment on the part of George bush. They all learned this time around after all the losses they suffered and the power is now in the hand of the Democrats. Didnt you learn anything with this election??? The scales have tipped because the majority of Sane Americans are sick of the way this country is going and we all made our voices Known . Really hammer you always make the same mistake- you think with the neanderthal part of your brain. Think outside the box my friend Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
Hammer is 150% wrong, as usual. His mind works in a similar way of whites who opposed blacks the right to compete with whites in sports. Then came the GREAT 1st US Heavyweight Champion, Jack Johnson, who knocked out all the bums they put before him.
When Muhammad Ali came on the scene, whites reacted the same as Hammer and his ignorant friends are reacting to Barack Obama. They could not see that Ali's arrival was a tremendously good thing for the sport, elevating it to unbelievable heights, and Obama will do the same for American politics. They became even more upset when Ali single-handedly completely changed the rules of the game, becoming the greatest boxer who ever lived and a living legend in the most literal sense. I forecast this reaction towards Obama's salient accomplishments also. May as well get used to it. Obama''s arrival marks the beginning of black elite dominated American politics. Obama, the Jack Johnson of US politics, opening the door to the future Muhammad Ali of politics. Who knows, he may be America's first Muslim President.
Posted by binhaden (Member # 9900) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rumicrazieluv: You base your opinions on what ???
Conjecture.
quote:State your arguments based on information and factual points of reference
See response above.
quote:then backround info-are you republican or democrat??? What area of the US do you reside in???
I have no political affiliation. I live next door to TheAmericanPatriot. Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
meninarmer, Its ashame that all you can see when you look at Obama is skin color.
Probably because it is the only thing that you have in common with him.
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: No one should read Toni Morrisson or Alice Walker. They are the reason we have the condescending picture of Black man, and gave us 50 cent et al http://tinyurl.com/a23ltf
IGNORANT, IGNORANT, IGNORANT! Posted by Arwa (Member # 11172) on :
Egmond Codfried,
Have you tried at least to read the link?
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried:
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: No one should read Toni Morrisson or Alice Walker. They are the reason we have the condescending picture of Black man, and gave us 50 cent et al http://tinyurl.com/a23ltf
IGNORANT, IGNORANT, IGNORANT!
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
EVEN WITH A BLACK MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE; BLACKS SHOULD NOT ENLIST!
Very nice that the discussion has a more civil tone and is more international in outlook.
I’m reading Shelby Steele’s book about Obama. The book is quite entertaining as he is rather colourful and humorous in his examples when explaining his opinions.
A bit puzzling and highly contradictory, though, because Steele himself is bi-racial like Obama, and credits both their white side of the family for their mainstream successes. But he suddenly slips into ‘we’ when he discusses blacks! Next he accuses blacks of being racialist, by talking constantly about their black identity.
It seems overall like he mostly wants to please white readers who do not want to be accused of being racist, because he presents whites and white institution as the underdog. As the victims of angry black activist who unjustly accuse them of being racist.
So now the society or the status quo has turned the tables and are the blacks the ones who discriminate. First this society lays this horrible racist discrimination practices like: the one drop rule, Jim Crow, lynching horror; on blacks, and as black fight these horrors and formulate a group identity and different strategies to different era’s and locations and are successful doing so; they suddenly become the racist e.g. the Racialist. This is like threatening a country but criticising then for arming themselves against the threat of an invasion. Do they expect peoples, countries etc to just sit and take the abuse?
Living inside the belly of this colonial monster I see the other side of colonialism and how they are always right, about anything. They talk endlessly of how the Germans occupied them for (only) five years, but when the Surinamese talk about 350 years of colonisation we are told to hush up. Or when they want to register blacks by ethnicity, we cannot protest by comparing it with what the Nazi’s did with the Jews, forcing them to wear yellow stars and putting a big J in their passports.
By somehow forcing a Black Obama on us, they want to invalidate the ‘racialist’ thinking, and proof that America is racist no more. This I do not buy, especially when I look at the statistics about Blacks in prison. How come there are so many blacks in the US prison system if there is no racism anymore? Does it mean that blacks are more criminal and dangerous then whites?
News & Notes , December 4, 2007 • Writer Shelby Steele has spent a lifetime thinking and writing about race and racial politics in America.
His latest book, A Bound Man, looks at racial identity and the populous politics which have made up much of Sen. Barack Obama's political career.
Though Obama is now the front-runner in Iowa's Democratic presidential caucuses, Steele — a research fellow at the Hoover Institution — says he can't win.
THE WORST US STATES FOR A BLACK MAN FOR ARREST AND INCARCERATION
http://files.blog-city.com/files/A05/141484/p/f/prison_drug_race_state.jpg quote: ________________________________________ Tabacco Speaks: I see the trend here. States with very low Black populations look for Blacks to incarcerate. 6 of the Worst 10 have less than 1% Black population. None of the Worst 10 has 5% Black population, let alone the 12.3% national average. Only 1 State, Rhode Island (4.5%) has as much as 4% Black population.
Note that none of the Worst 10 are in the Deep South. Florida (14.6%) and Arkansas (15.7%) have the lowest % of Black residents in the Deep South. Mississippi (36.3%) has more than 1 in 3 Black residents. I guess that’s why the Deep South is solidly Republican – rednecks don’t like living among a large Black population. The Worst 10 all have miniscule Black populations, and they still jail every Black they can. And they don’t need Rockefeller Drug Laws to do it. Who would have thought it could be that dangerous for a Black man to drive through South Dakota? ________________________________________
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: Egmond Codfried,
Have you tried at least to read the link?
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried:
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: No one should read Toni Morrisson or Alice Walker. They are the reason we have the condescending picture of Black man, and gave us 50 cent et al http://tinyurl.com/a23ltf
IGNORANT, IGNORANT, IGNORANT!
Dear, you strike me as a book burner (which are the worst kind of people) and someone who does not have a mind of his own. Then you seem to have a hatred against women which comes across as barbarous. Most people in the world are horrified at the idea of cutting up and sowing womens vagina's. You seem to come from this culture. Please use the internet and read other ideas and world views and educate yourself.
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
quote: No I haven't read Toni Morrison, nor Alice Walker. Those are like subscribing to and reading Oprah's "O" magazine. Not exactly a manly pursuit.
Many whites have voted Obama simply because they are AFRAID, and Obama presented a soft enough image to not frighten them more. The stars were aligned just right for Obama. It probably also helps that the US political machine has greased the wheels with 8 years of Bush, Wall Street, the Mortgage meltdown, etc., to make the conditions to make his election possible. Until I observe otherwise, I look at Obama's election as a preplanned "buffer" period to calm the storm following Bush so as not to agitate citizens into extreme frustration & revolt. Following the 4-8 year buffer, the nation will return to business as usual. Still, more whites did not vote for him that did. Yes, I am a cynic, but so are many blacks in the US.
quote: Obamas victory was a pre-planned action needed in order to keep black peoples minds doctile and furthermore stop the risk of a revolt or a malcolm x/marcus garvey persona emerging. if yu think that obama, could come from nothing, be funded billions of pounds, and then go on to be a president of one of the most racist countries is a coincidence, then theres serious mental problems that need adressing. You need to know how the master works, he would con and decieve people in order to achieve his goal, obama is nothing but a controlled puppet, used to appease to a people(blacks) who are always looking for a saviour, what they don't know is that really there not any closer to racial equality and justice than theyve ever been, the master still controls the country, obama is a black face, controlled by white power.(and on a side note how do you make someones post bold?)
Sad to hear that you do not read Morisson, for this reason, but it enlightens me on what I’m working with, here. You understand, hopefully, that I have to move your name now to another list. The list with ARWA’s name.
Obama is too good to be true, so he is not true. The CIA grew him in a petri dish. Because it was and is smooth sailing all the way for him, while he is supposed to be a reformer, somebody to turn away America from its highly destructive course.
I saw this thing being done in Star Trek, so they might be using Roswell technology too.
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
quote: I met a wonderful "African American" last night. We were both in Radio Shack and he struck up a conversation with me as we walked out. While standing in the cold we touched on politics and religion. We were of like minded, he said that he does not see color, that it is just skin pigment and what is important is the inside of the person. I mentioned this thread and how meninarmer has the whites pitted against the blacks. His response "He is like Rush Limbaugh". I use this example to show an "African American" who sides with Egmond.
It is my opinion that people who pit one race or religion against the other are the problem. It is them who divided us by skin color or belief. It is them who are out to destroy everyone who does not look or act as they do.
Dear Sister Goldilocks,
There is off course always the possibility that the Brother wants to get into you jeans!
But true, I’m no racist, I understand the attraction, but if I would hate whites I will have to hate blacks too because they did the same things and are doing the same things. Whites are really black people with white skin. I have confronted racist people, tried to reason with them and the idea to descend to their level is just no option for me. They are just fucked up.
People like to turn the page, which is fine, but that does not mean that the hurt and the shutting out and its effects have gone. Then by now accusing blacks of being ‘racialist’ they are just changing the rules of the game, in the middle of the game. Like when you are in power you can decide that black is white and white is black. So the person, who was on the receiving end of centuries of abuse, suddenly turns out to be the heavy. It’s like telling victims of incest that they should shut up because they are causing a rift in the family, spoiling Christmas dinner!
Another thing is that people who seem to or are lead to think they benefit from a situation rarely try to change this situation. Its only when their son is killed or kills himself in an unjust war or their government fails them personally, they start to take a closer look at this thing they held so sacred.
But talking with each other is a first step and made so easy by internet. That's why I hate it if people become abusive and spoil the moment. I'm all the time suspended from odr.org, so I will never begrudge anyone a chance to speak.
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer: Black Americans polled prior to the Iraq war voted overwhelmingly at 90% aversion to entering a war with Iraq.
Whites voted 90% in favor of war.
After the war began, black enlistment to all US military branches fell 40-50%. Even today, it's down 35% from 10 years ago.
US military recruiters are running all kinds of TV and Radio Ads attempting to reverse this, but so far, have failed.
I would not allow my sons to serve during the Bush admin, and I will strongly advise them against serving under Obama.
A black man has no place in the white man's military.
But what about your daughters?
If these figures are right it shows that blacks are mostly doing the right thing already. Who can quibble with facts like these? This is the kind of hard information I would like to put forward instead of insults. Off course, the believe is that blacks cannot think. But isn't that a racist thought, no?
Posted by Arwa (Member # 11172) on :
You have the guts to criticise my culture and my people when you are the one who sucks another man's cock
What kind of culture is that?
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried:
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: Egmond Codfried,
Have you tried at least to read the link?
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried:
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: No one should read Toni Morrisson or Alice Walker. They are the reason we have the condescending picture of Black man, and gave us 50 cent et al http://tinyurl.com/a23ltf
IGNORANT, IGNORANT, IGNORANT!
Dear, you strike me as a book burner (which are the worst kind of people) and someone who does not have a mind of his own. Then you seem to have a hatred against women which comes across as barbarous. Most people in the world are horrified at the idea of cutting up and sowing womens vagina's. You seem to come from this culture. Please use the internet and read other ideas and world views and educate yourself.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: meninarmer, Its ashame that all you can see when you look at Obama is skin color.
Probably because it is the only thing that you have in common with him.
Of_Gold, be real. The fact that Obama is the nation's 1st black President has more to do with Whites and their phobia then I. There have been many blacks in the past as articulate and intelligent as Obama who had no chance of getting past America's racism.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried:
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer: Black Americans polled prior to the Iraq war voted overwhelmingly at 90% aversion to entering a war with Iraq.
Whites voted 90% in favor of war.
After the war began, black enlistment to all US military branches fell 40-50%. Even today, it's down 35% from 10 years ago.
US military recruiters are running all kinds of TV and Radio Ads attempting to reverse this, but so far, have failed.
I would not allow my sons to serve during the Bush admin, and I will strongly advise them against serving under Obama.
A black man has no place in the white man's military.
But what about your daughters?
If these figures are right it shows that blacks are mostly doing the right thing already. Who can quibble with facts like these? This is the kind of hard information I would like to put forward instead of insults. Off course, the believe is that blacks cannot think. But isn't that a racist thought, no?
I have no daughters. If I had, the same would apply. They would not enlist to fight the white man's wars.
Egmong, I ALWAYS put my FACTS forward. There is no shame in my game.
You must believe you are white, believing a black man in America can be a racist. LOL, in spite of what you hear from Whites about Rev. Wright, or even Louis Farrankhan, neither of these great men are racist. Rather, it's just that you are confused and susceptible to white/jew fact bending, and reality shifting propaganda.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: Egmond Codfried,
Have you tried at least to read the link?
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried:
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: No one should read Toni Morrisson or Alice Walker. They are the reason we have the condescending picture of Black man, and gave us 50 cent et al http://tinyurl.com/a23ltf
IGNORANT, IGNORANT, IGNORANT!
You are right Arwa. Morrisson and Walker are just superficial writers, and offer nothing significant. They are definitely no James Baldwins, but more like Zane.
YOU are much stronger then many of the black males on this site. Stand your ground, and Do your thing chicken wing!
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
Nobody knows everything. Any reasonable person will understand that by personal attacks you show that even you do not believe your own arguments. If they are true and forceful enough, why the need to belittle or ridicule another person? Your attacks speak more of yourself then anybody else. I understand that you feel low and want everybody to feel bad, because perhaps the people you (helped) killed are haunting you. There are obvious unresolved sexual identity issues at play. Then some of us over here sound like they never stepped out of their hometown, let alone country, and do not realise there is a whole big world out there. There are many peoples in Africa and they do not always get along, although equally black. They consider the other blacks as an inferior race. Some Somalis regard and address other blacks as natural slaves. In Suriname today the Marron or Bushnegro finds himself to be genetically superior to city blacks because they believe they are of a ‘pure’ race. There is stupidity everywhere. US blacks were also slave masters. Blacks are capable of racism.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: Nobody knows everything. Any reasonable person will understand that by personal attacks you show that even you do not believe your own arguments. If they are true and forceful enough, why the need to belittle or ridicule another person? Your attacks speak more of yourself then anybody else. I understand that you feel low and want everybody to feel bad, because perhaps the people you (helped) killed are haunting you. There are obvious unresolved sexual identity issues at play. Then some of us over here sound like they never stepped out of their hometown, let alone country, and do not realise there is a whole big world out there. There are many peoples in Africa and they do not always get along, although equally black. They consider the other blacks as an inferior race. Some Somalis regard and address other blacks as natural slaves. In Suriname today the Marron or Bushnegro finds himself to be genetically superior to city blacks because they believe they are of a ‘pure’ race. There is stupidity everywhere. US blacks were also slave masters. Blacks are capable of racism.
Name one black person or organization that refused to sell a home to a white person due to their race? Name one black person or organization who refused to hire a white person because of their race? Name one US law suit (out of the billions) brought on by a white person against a black or black organization for racial discrimination? What is the black equivalent organization to the white KKK? If you say the Nation Of Islam then show where they burned down white churches and lynched whites.
As I said, you are confused and weak minded. You fall for the white man's weak reverse discrimination BS because you have no real Worldview or experience with such matters.
Posted by Arwa (Member # 11172) on :
OMG, a black man who tries to use a Freudian home spun sexual philosophy
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
Come to think of it, in the Dutch gay scene the effeminate Somalis are the most conspicuous of all blacks. You proof my point with having this big computer in front of you and still remaining ignorant. Is it the Quat, this horrible drug you are chewing the whole day, which makes you sound so utterly stupid? Or are you born this way?
They are not Somlis, but cockroaches. Go to Somalia and ask anyone what it means to be gays.
BTW, I am out of this topic. Disgusting.
Posted by Arwa (Member # 11172) on :
Edit:
In fact cockroaches have more self-esteem than so called "gays". They are the lowest of the low of all the things from the whole universal.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
^ Everybody's got a problem. We are all susceptible to one or another of the corrupt Anglo influences. A willingness to acknowledge and resolve our flaws is the most important thing.
As the thread's topic initiates, resisting cooperation is one of the first steps to standing up. The problem with Egmond is, he cooperates eagerly and willfully in corruption.
Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: Edit:
In fact cockroaches have more self-esteem than so called "gays". They are the lowest of the low of all the things from the whole universal.
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: Tell me who is homophobic!
quote:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Arwa: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: Well, to say the least I'm puzzled by Arwa's stand. One day he posts in this thread, without objecting to the many gay images, the next day he hates them. So he is one of these rare persons who does not watch any porn! Yeah, right!
Where did I gave my blessing to post gay porns?????
And btw, some people object homosexuality and consider it as a grave sin, but it does not mean they should burn alive and be exterminated.
PS, yes, I DO NOT WATCH porn!!!!!!!!!!
PPS, You are right with one thing, I should not post this thread.
Such a silly, wishy washy, ignorant piece of ****, no? Posted by Arwa (Member # 11172) on :
Egmond Codfried is a Zionist Hollywood Paid Troll.
Who else is so eager to discuss Gays?
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
Give me a break.
Egmond you hit the nail on the head with this statement:
"Any reasonable person will understand that by personal attacks you show that even you do not believe your own arguments."
*key word "reasonable" Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
I’M FROM SURINAME
If I sound different it might have to do with coming from Surinam and living for 28 years in Holland. We have about 12 different cultures from S. America, Africa, India, Indonesia, Lebanon, European Jews, Chinese and new groups like Brazilians, Guyanese, Haitians, Koreans, Puerto Ricans, Dutch etc. There are about 500.000 people living in Surinam, mostly along the coast with a huge, quite empty tropical jungle. We have all religions and we usually live in mixed neighbourhoods. Our country is hot, wet and green. We eat only fresh foods, things we usually make ourselves. We are a rice eating nation. Privacy is sacred; we are egalitarian, old fashioned and mild in our manners. We really try to accommodate anyone as people are not taught to label anything and anybody. Our women are free to have whatever relations they want to have, marriage is not so important. We mix freely socially, at university, at work, in restaurants, in sports and many Surinamese are of many continents. Sometimes the names do not match the face anymore and a black African type might have an Indian name and visa versa. As if the girls defied their meddling mothers and went to fall in love with just the type their mother warned them about. Soon all families will have members of a different race sitting at the dinner table, so who will they discriminate against? You guessed it, as I grow older I’m more appreciative of where I come from. These horrible things which went on and on in the US are not really part of our history. When I grew up the teachers were black, Indian or something, as were the president, judges, police men, scientist etc. Then I was fortunate to be born in a free type of family, with lots of reading and discussing things. My youth was filled with laughter and playing in the sun. People who are today falling over themselves to label me and suspect all kind of evil agenda’s might just consider the simple fact that I ‘m just being my Surinamese self, no?
Posted by of_gold (Member # 13418) on :
It sounds wonderful Egmond. Posted by Egmond Codfried (Member # 15683) on :
quote:Originally posted by of_gold: It sounds wonderful Egmond.
Dear, I was thinking; you selectively answer arguments as if you feel restricted or frightened to speak your mind. Perhaps you also know that we are living under an unjust government which tyrannises us, and that enlisting only helps this unjust government to go and enslave or rob other peoples from their natural riches. So neither whites nor blacks should enlist.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
I guess I must be black then because according to your statement I surely can't be white. You just continue to show your ignorance meninarmer. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)