BB Racism - Downing Street Quote
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
wear bed sheets on their heads
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
camel jockie
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
camel jockie
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
camel jockie
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
camel jockies beat woman relentlessly...
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
I'm called a racist here almost on a daily basis
Can't say I'm suprised.
-
oilFactotum wrote:
Can't say I'm suprised.
You think that's racism? I'm surprised. What race?
Shog9 wrote:
What race?
They all look the same to him.
-
oilFactotum wrote:
And describing it as such is in no way being tolerant of murder(what a bizarre idea!).
It is when commitment to racism as an original sin that must be stamped out at all costs before we have any sort of moral authority to pass judgement on other cultures. And it is when exageration of every little incedent that can remotely be considered racist is used to denegrate your own society. It is a continuous, on going, leftist jihad against its own civilization. The left invest more effort and concern in protected arab minorities from the mythical spectre of racism from our own citizens than it does in vigorously tracking down terrorists and attempting to interupt their plans. It will not do the latter at all if it in any way conflicts with the former. That is in every possible way being more tolerant of murder than of racism. And whenever anyone trying to point that out is castigated as a deluded fanatic provides only more proof of the grip the left has on the juggular of our civilization.
oilFactotum wrote:
"Camel jockie" adds nothing to the discussion.
Than why even bother responding to it?
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Stan Shannon wrote:
It is a continuous, on going, leftist jihad against its own civilization.
Just in your mind, stan.
Stan Shannon wrote:
The left invest more effort and concern in protected...
Just in your mind, stan.
Stan Shannon wrote:
And whenever anyone trying to point that out
How was that CJ "joke" making any sort of valid criticism?
Stan Shannon wrote:
Than why even bother responding to it?
I didn't. I responded to:
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Yep. I'm called a racist here almost on a daily basis
-
oilFactotum wrote:
Can't say I'm suprised.
You think that's racism? I'm surprised. What race?
Shog9 wrote:
I'm surprised
Really?
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
It is a continuous, on going, leftist jihad against its own civilization.
Just in your mind, stan.
Stan Shannon wrote:
The left invest more effort and concern in protected...
Just in your mind, stan.
Stan Shannon wrote:
And whenever anyone trying to point that out
How was that CJ "joke" making any sort of valid criticism?
Stan Shannon wrote:
Than why even bother responding to it?
I didn't. I responded to:
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Yep. I'm called a racist here almost on a daily basis
-
led mike wrote:
There is no "concept" of equality you freak, other than the racist concept which is basically that you are better than everyone that is not just like you, which of course is NOT EQUALITY. But I understand that your minuscule mental capacity has difficulty with such complex concepts. Maybe this will help (of course it won't).
Ummmmmm....Huh? I don't advocate equality because people aren't equal. Our character (achieved during life) sets us apart from one another. Liberalism asserts that people (who aren't equal) should be forced into equality and that pointing out the glaring inferiorities of certain groups of people (which is contary to that liberal principle of equality) constitutes bigotry*. Sorry, but if you choose to join a group of people which advocates the destruction of western civilization, then you are worthy of any and all ridicule. *Unless a leftist is criticizing conservatives. That fits the definition of bigotry, but sense liberalism was developed in Bizarro world, that kind of bigotry is acceptable.
led mike wrote:
Now by all means reply to this with more fabricated opinionated academically phrased unsupportable nonsense as a means of "proving" you are one of the "right people".
Thank you
Red Stateler wrote:
Liberalism asserts that people (who aren't equal) should be forced into equality
Liberalism asserts that? You have evidence to back that "assertion" up? Of course not... never mind. I on the other hand don't assert anything, I know. I know that the founding fathers guaranteed "everyone's" right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness based on the acknowledgement that all men are "created" equal. Therefore in The United States of America we do not tolerate discriminatory restriction of those rights. That does not mean that we "force anyone into equality". It means everyone is afforded the same rights, period. It does NOT MEAN as you and Stan claim that everyone has the equal right to be heterosexual and should they choose not be heterosexual they forfeit their access to "equal rights". Now I'll sit back and watch how that comes out the other side of the (D)espeir logic prism
led mike
-
led mike wrote:
Now by all means reply to this with more fabricated opinionated academically phrased unsupportable nonsense as a means of "proving" you are one of the "right people".
Thank you
Red Stateler wrote:
Liberalism asserts that people (who aren't equal) should be forced into equality
Liberalism asserts that? You have evidence to back that "assertion" up? Of course not... never mind. I on the other hand don't assert anything, I know. I know that the founding fathers guaranteed "everyone's" right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness based on the acknowledgement that all men are "created" equal. Therefore in The United States of America we do not tolerate discriminatory restriction of those rights. That does not mean that we "force anyone into equality". It means everyone is afforded the same rights, period. It does NOT MEAN as you and Stan claim that everyone has the equal right to be heterosexual and should they choose not be heterosexual they forfeit their access to "equal rights". Now I'll sit back and watch how that comes out the other side of the (D)espeir logic prism
led mike
led mike wrote:
Liberalism asserts that? You have evidence to back that "assertion" up? Of course not... never mind.
Sure I do. That comes right out of the left's mouth.
led mike wrote:
I on the other hand don't assert anything, I know. I know that the founding fathers guaranteed "everyone's" right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness based on the acknowledgement that all men are "created" equal. Therefore in The United States of America we do not tolerate discriminatory restriction of those rights. That does not mean that we "force anyone into equality". It means everyone is afforded the same rights, period. It does NOT MEAN as you and Stan claim that everyone has the equal right to be heterosexual and should they choose not be heterosexual they forfeit their access to "equal rights".
Yes you're right that the United States has managed to reject the tenets of liberalism and consquently equality is not forced on its citizens (like it is in countries where liberalism has thrived). But the fact that the US has rejected liberalism's false premises does not negate the fact that "equality" (which must be compulsory, since it contradicts reality and human nature) is liberalism's core principle. I do have to correct your claim that behavior "choices" cannot lessen someone's position in society. In fact, it defines your position in society. Your assertion that homosexuality is guaranteed (without legislative consideration, mind you, since you arbitrarily believe it to be a "right" that transcends law...naturally resulting in judicial legislation) equal consideration by society is an example of this compulsory equality the left tries to thrust onto Americans (though it's not quite as purist as such leftist policies as the graduated income tax or Social Security). It is true that homosexuals are rightfully guaranteed the same rights as all Americans, but that doesn't mean that homosexuality is a right. The very fact that the only leftist example of equal creation you could give turns out to be, in fact, compulsory equality is illustrative of the all to common misunderstanding of leftist philosophy by the left. I suppose that makes since, if you understood it, you wouldn't believe in it.
-
Shog9 wrote:
I'm surprised
Really?
-
oilFactotum wrote:
How was that CJ "joke" making any sort of valid criticism?
Arabs are worthy of any and all ridicule because theirs is a ridiculous culture. 11?
When can we start talking about Indians? I'm bored with the whole towel-head thing, and it's not that I don't like Indians, but they sure are fun to make fun of. My list of favorite people to make fun of goes something like this (and this is in no particular order): French Corporate America Rednecks Time Warner Cable French Icelandians Pakistanis Indians Iranians Iraquis Muslamics Catholics Baptists Venezuelans French People who don't like Monte Python Visual Basic "Programmers" French English Irish Germans (I do this with a French accent hoping to stir up trouble between the two countries again) French Transsexuals People who live in Idaho People who live in Florida French Police Sports figures Co-workers Family members French People that play WoW People hat spent sooooo much money on a fucking game console... Pretty much everybody I haven't already mentioned French In my book, everybody, every animal, every thing is a target. IMHO, I'm not a racist.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
That suprises me.
-
That suprises me.
-
Yup
-
Yup
Re-he-he-he-he-heaaaaaaaaaaallly?
-
led mike wrote:
Liberalism asserts that? You have evidence to back that "assertion" up? Of course not... never mind.
Sure I do. That comes right out of the left's mouth.
led mike wrote:
I on the other hand don't assert anything, I know. I know that the founding fathers guaranteed "everyone's" right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness based on the acknowledgement that all men are "created" equal. Therefore in The United States of America we do not tolerate discriminatory restriction of those rights. That does not mean that we "force anyone into equality". It means everyone is afforded the same rights, period. It does NOT MEAN as you and Stan claim that everyone has the equal right to be heterosexual and should they choose not be heterosexual they forfeit their access to "equal rights".
Yes you're right that the United States has managed to reject the tenets of liberalism and consquently equality is not forced on its citizens (like it is in countries where liberalism has thrived). But the fact that the US has rejected liberalism's false premises does not negate the fact that "equality" (which must be compulsory, since it contradicts reality and human nature) is liberalism's core principle. I do have to correct your claim that behavior "choices" cannot lessen someone's position in society. In fact, it defines your position in society. Your assertion that homosexuality is guaranteed (without legislative consideration, mind you, since you arbitrarily believe it to be a "right" that transcends law...naturally resulting in judicial legislation) equal consideration by society is an example of this compulsory equality the left tries to thrust onto Americans (though it's not quite as purist as such leftist policies as the graduated income tax or Social Security). It is true that homosexuals are rightfully guaranteed the same rights as all Americans, but that doesn't mean that homosexuality is a right. The very fact that the only leftist example of equal creation you could give turns out to be, in fact, compulsory equality is illustrative of the all to common misunderstanding of leftist philosophy by the left. I suppose that makes since, if you understood it, you wouldn't believe in it.
Red Stateler wrote:
Sure I do. That comes right out of the left's mouth.
That's odd. I thought everything you write here comes straight out of your ass. :confused:
-
When can we start talking about Indians? I'm bored with the whole towel-head thing, and it's not that I don't like Indians, but they sure are fun to make fun of. My list of favorite people to make fun of goes something like this (and this is in no particular order): French Corporate America Rednecks Time Warner Cable French Icelandians Pakistanis Indians Iranians Iraquis Muslamics Catholics Baptists Venezuelans French People who don't like Monte Python Visual Basic "Programmers" French English Irish Germans (I do this with a French accent hoping to stir up trouble between the two countries again) French Transsexuals People who live in Idaho People who live in Florida French Police Sports figures Co-workers Family members French People that play WoW People hat spent sooooo much money on a fucking game console... Pretty much everybody I haven't already mentioned French In my book, everybody, every animal, every thing is a target. IMHO, I'm not a racist.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
People that play WoW
I think one section of the WoW EULA goes something like "Expect to be harassed, so suck it up you dork!".
-- Verletzen zerfetzen zersetzen zerstören Doch es darf nicht mir gehören Ich muss zerstören
