Re: Kids should work...

[bobb]

"Ignoramus22857" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Doan
wrote:
> > If this is true as you claimed why is the crime rate so in the 50's?
> > Why is it so low in Singapore?
>
> Do not forget people, US crime rate is to a very large extent a "race
> issue". 53% of the offenders were black and only 45% white in 1996,
> according to the FBI statictics. That's even though blacks are a small
> fraction of the population.
>
> In 1950s, blacks were not liberated as much, did not have easy access
> to weapons, etc. Liberation of them, while it had a lot of desirable
> effects, unfortunately had a great effect on black crime rate.
>
> A lot of crimes, such as forcible rape, was not as well reported in
> 1950s, either.
>
> I strongly suspect that if you break crime down well, the difference
> between 1950s and now would not be as huge for, say, white middle
> class people.
>
> I would also be very surprised if trash criminals were grown in
> nonviolent homes. I am too lazy to look for it, but my sense is that
> these criminals grow up amongst drunk, drug abusing, wife beating,
> child beating retards, and not paragons of respectful, attentive
> methods of child rearing.
>
>

You're not being very politically correct. Remove the black statistics for
CPS, crime, public aid, and welfare.
Go a step further... elimiate the cost illegal immigrants our costing this
country.

bobb

[Kane]

"bobb" > wrote in message .net>...
> "Ignoramus22857" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >, Doan
> wrote:
> > > If this is true as you claimed why is the crime rate so in the 50's?
> > > Why is it so low in Singapore?
> >
> > Do not forget people, US crime rate is to a very large extent a "race
> > issue". 53% of the offenders were black and only 45% white in 1996,
> > according to the FBI statictics. That's even though blacks are a small
> > fraction of the population.
> >
> > In 1950s, blacks were not liberated as much, did not have easy access
> > to weapons, etc. Liberation of them, while it had a lot of desirable
> > effects, unfortunately had a great effect on black crime rate.
> >
> > A lot of crimes, such as forcible rape, was not as well reported in
> > 1950s, either.
> >
> > I strongly suspect that if you break crime down well, the difference
> > between 1950s and now would not be as huge for, say, white middle
> > class people.
> >
> > I would also be very surprised if trash criminals were grown in
> > nonviolent homes. I am too lazy to look for it, but my sense is that
> > these criminals grow up amongst drunk, drug abusing, wife beating,
> > child beating retards, and not paragons of respectful, attentive
> > methods of child rearing.
> >
> >
>
> You're not being very politically correct. Remove the black statistics for
> CPS, crime, public aid, and welfare.
> Go a step further... elimiate the cost illegal immigrants our costing this
> country.

So what ARE the costs that illegal immigrants levy on this country?

We get far more them than they take from this country dummy. Or you
can go pick your own tomatos, learn to become a yard man or sew in a
sweatshop for your own clothes.

The only costs going on right now to the american public is that there
is still someone to do all the scut work we white's have forgotten,
and are too soft, to do any more. That and the rapid offshore movement
of our formerly higher paying jobs to lower wage countries. The latter
is the big reason for our economic problems.

And in fact the behavior of the holders of this country's capitol
goods, the wealthy, have always done this. In fact they came from
Europe just to do that in new fertile ground.

You are a victim of greed bobb, and those who empty our pockets have
successfully propagandized YOU, the dummy, using your deepseated
racial bigotry and xenophobia to make you think it's the little
darkskinned folks that are the problem.

You are soooooo dumb.

> bobb

Kane

[Kane]

On 23 Nov 2003 20:02:29 GMT, Ignoramus22857
> wrote:

>In article .net>,
bobb wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Ignoramus22857" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> In article >,
Doan
>> wrote:
>>> > If this is true as you claimed why is the crime rate so in the
50's?
>>> > Why is it so low in Singapore?
>>>
>>> Do not forget people, US crime rate is to a very large extent a
"race
>>> issue". 53% of the offenders were black and only 45% white in
1996,
>>> according to the FBI statictics. That's even though blacks are a
small
>>> fraction of the population.

That's why it's expressed as a percentage.

I think I feel a bigot baggin' comin' on.

Do you know anything at all about the black experience in this country
beyond Rochester, Step and Fetchit'and Shaft movies?

>>>
>>> In 1950s, blacks were not liberated as much, did not have easy
access
>>> to weapons, etc. Liberation of them, while it had a lot of
desirable
>>> effects, unfortunately had a great effect on black crime rate.

Like whites began to notice the prevalent black and black crime that
had always been around. Funny, how when you press people into a Ghetto
with each other the crime rate for ghetto dweller upon ghetto dweller
goes up.

I don't suppose proximity has much to do with it though. "Those folks"
can just mount up and go out to the burbs to do their crime where the
police presence and response is not as high...oh wait...

You apparently haven't known any blacks well enough for them to
familiarize you with DWN or DWB...Driving While ****** or Driving
While Black is the common experience of black people, men especially
(the women are though to be just servants coming and going to work)
have of being rousted when they leave the Ghetto.

>>>
>>> A lot of crimes, such as forcible rape, was not as well reported
in
>>> 1950s, either.
>>>
>>> I strongly suspect that if you break crime down well, the
difference
>>> between 1950s and now would not be as huge for, say, white middle
>>> class people.
>>>
>>> I would also be very surprised if trash criminals were grown in
>>> nonviolent homes.

Now you are on to something.

>>>I am too lazy to look for it, but my sense is that
>>> these criminals grow up amongst drunk, drug abusing, wife beating,
>>> child beating retards, and not paragons of respectful, attentive
>>> methods of child rearing.

More or less. What has the race of someone got to do with it, given
your prior examples?

>>>
>>>
>>
>> You're not being very politically correct. Remove the black
statistics for
>> CPS, crime, public aid, and welfare.
>> Go a step further... elimiate the cost illegal immigrants our
costing this
>> country.
>
>Um, with all due respect, what does the cost of illegal immigration
>have to do with what I was discussing?
>
>Let's say that illegal immigration is very expensive.

When it is slowed or stopped anywhere, you betcha. Those farmers and
clothing sweat shops get real ****ed at the loss in profits their low
low wages to illegals afforded them.

>Does it change
>anything in regards to what I said? Or let's say that it was
>cheap. Would it change anything in regards to what I said?

I think so, if you can get your head around bobb's rabid racism. He
thinks that if the hispanics and blacks would get out there would be a
world of jobs for whites. Yeah, I can see all those white tomato
pickers now, and the landscape yard men, the ditch diggers and
cleaners, the chemical farm spray workers...sure.

All would be white....and all would be pulling down better wages or
we'd see the 30's all over again and the rise of unions big time.

Immigrants and blacks, brought as slaves or snuck in over our boarders
are the foundation of our economy. If you stopped all blacks and other
minorities from working right this instant, this would be a third
world country in a month.

Whites would just sit and whine about the lazy darkies not doin' their
jobs.

Welcome to Usenet Bigot Country...and I used to think these ngs were
about parenting and CPS.

Best.

Kane

[Kane]

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 23:53:57 GMT, occupant
> wrote:

>Stephanie and Tim wrote:
>>
>> "Ignoramus22857" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article >,
Doan
>> wrote:
>> > > If this is true as you claimed why is the crime rate so in the
50's?
>> > > Why is it so low in Singapore?
>> >
>> > Do not forget people, US crime rate is to a very large extent a
"race
>> > issue". 53% of the offenders were black and only 45% white in
1996,
>> > according to the FBI statictics. That's even though blacks are a
small
>> > fraction of the population.
>> >
>> > In 1950s, blacks were not liberated as much, did not have easy
access
>> > to weapons, etc. Liberation of them, while it had a lot of
desirable
>> > effects, unfortunately had a great effect on black crime rate.
>> >
>> > A lot of crimes, such as forcible rape, was not as well reported
in
>> > 1950s, either.
>> >
>>
>> I wonder what percentage of blacks are living at or below the crime
rate
>> compared to whites? I wonder what the conviction rate of blacks is
compared
>> to whites.
>>
>
>This whole topic is so huge, but on the point of "conviction"
>investigating officers
>when they discovery youth or adults committing a crime, they can give
>purputrator a warning
>depending on circumstances.

*DWB trumps.

>The prosecutor may exercise discretion
>whether to proceed to
>prosecute or not, subject to some guidlines.

*WWB trumps.

>The judge may convict or
>find reasonable doubt
>depending on whether or not he believes the credability of the
accused.

*BWB trumps.

>All of the above
>may be related to a lot of factors including race and affect the
>statistics that follow.
>So comparing black and white conviction rates is not an ideal
picture.

You better believe it.

*Driving While Black
Walking While Black
Breathing While Black

and to that we can add such things as, Shopping While Black...that is
YOUR kid gets to try out only one shoe at a time while the clerk holds
the other, and you can count on extremely attentive sales clerks ready
to meet your every need and ask to see seven kinds of identification
and the name of your 1st grade teacher.

Think I'm kidding. Go hang out and watch, if you are white, black
shoppers, black drivers in white neighborhoods, and various and sundry
other things you take for granted everyday turning to **** for black
folks.

Remember, when you check yourself in the mirror before you walk out
the door in the morning, you don't have to ask yourself, "How many
people will treat me like a ****** today because of that face?"

"And how long will it be before I just lose it and punch them in the
face, **** the honkey police?"

Kane

[Kane]

On 24 Nov 2003 00:48:29 GMT, (Super ****ed Dad) wrote:

>
>Funny thing happened to me shopping for a wedding ring 12 years ago.
The
>jeweler wouldn't let me hold the ring~I had to look at it thru the
glass case.

First time?

Oh sure.

R R R R "SWB! Well! Just who do you think you are?" r r r r.

`scuse the prior N referrence. I like to speak so Honky can be sure to
hear over his braying.

> spd

Kane

[Kane]

On 24 Nov 2003 00:56:12 GMT, (Super ****ed Dad) wrote:

> Kane :Whats your view on reparations ? If the Gov't could find a way to invest
>the monies back into society...just maybe...

Now that IS a tough one. Bein'swhite as I am, the first response is to
clench my ass checks together real tight, as in UP. R R R R

When I give it some thought, and I look at the various ideas, from
Sharpton to whoever....it occurs to me, given what I learned in my
Economics 101 class waaaaay back in 1967, that almost anything would
work to enrich us all.

I do believe I caught the Kensian fever in that I believe that
movement of money is the key, not accumulation. We see what
accumulation has done..just spiking the greed instead of the populous.
And the greedy don't spend any more than they have to.

They, the holders of the nation's capitol goods, are entrenching right
now causing the massive slowdown in our economy. Take it away's my
motto, and what better cause than reparations.

Even little ****ants like the bigots here would benefit big time if
the economy was seeded heavily. Doesn't matter who spends first, as
long as the money flows and doesn't slow.

Even interest bearing bank accounts are a form of spending in that the
banks get to spend it out in loans. The fatter their holdings the more
pressure to put more of the money out to work. Banks are the key
really.

So bring it on. Reparations it is.

Now, how to spread it around?

Let me see now....where is that geneology chart I left laying around.

Hmmm....why there's some branches with question marks...(I wonder if
whitey ever wonders why there are those dead ends in their family tree
that the old folks don't and won't talk about...or that declare the
missing ancestor was "Spanish" or "Italian" when they show up on
family photos with all the Blonds around them r r r r?)

Surely, like about 45% of the population of the US, I've got some
black ancestors that would look down on me from above asingin' Swing
Low...etc....R R R R R whilst I collected and spent.

> spd

I think I'll start an Organisation called SBSB...

Sally's Babies Strike Back.

You know it's not going to happen though, right? I mean, come on. The
man isn't going to let go until the bitter end. And on that sad
note......

Best, Kane

[Greg Hanson]

> I do believe I caught the Kensian fever in that I believe that
> movement of money is the key, not accumulation.

I do believe you are referring to Keynesian economic theory,
and that's not it either.

Where'd you take your economics Commander McBrag?

[Greg Hanson]

Kane wrote
> `scuse the prior N referrence. I like to speak
> so Honky can be sure to hear over his braying.

I wonder how SPD will like your tokenization
and patronizing behaviors?

Going for those liberal brownie points again eh?

[bobb]

"Ignoramus22857" > wrote in message
...
> In article .net>, bobb
wrote:
> >
> >
> > "Ignoramus22857" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> In article >,
Doan
> > wrote:
> >> > If this is true as you claimed why is the crime rate so in the 50's?
> >> > Why is it so low in Singapore?
> >>
> >> Do not forget people, US crime rate is to a very large extent a "race
> >> issue". 53% of the offenders were black and only 45% white in 1996,
> >> according to the FBI statictics. That's even though blacks are a small
> >> fraction of the population.
> >>
> >> In 1950s, blacks were not liberated as much, did not have easy access
> >> to weapons, etc. Liberation of them, while it had a lot of desirable
> >> effects, unfortunately had a great effect on black crime rate.
> >>
> >> A lot of crimes, such as forcible rape, was not as well reported in
> >> 1950s, either.
> >>
> >> I strongly suspect that if you break crime down well, the difference
> >> between 1950s and now would not be as huge for, say, white middle
> >> class people.
> >>
> >> I would also be very surprised if trash criminals were grown in
> >> nonviolent homes. I am too lazy to look for it, but my sense is that
> >> these criminals grow up amongst drunk, drug abusing, wife beating,
> >> child beating retards, and not paragons of respectful, attentive
> >> methods of child rearing.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > You're not being very politically correct. Remove the black statistics
for
> > CPS, crime, public aid, and welfare.
> > Go a step further... elimiate the cost illegal immigrants our costing
this
> > country.
>
> Um, with all due respect, what does the cost of illegal immigration
> have to do with what I was discussing?
>
> Let's say that illegal immigration is very expensive. Does it change
> anything in regards to what I said? Or let's say that it was
> cheap. Would it change anything in regards to what I said?
>
> i

You're right.. it doesn't have anything to do with what you were saying. I
was sleepy or something and was just trying to demonstrate the needless
amount of money spent to support the undeserving. My error.


bobb

[bobb]

"Kane" > wrote in message
m...
> "bobb" > wrote in message
.net>...
> > "Ignoramus22857" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > In article >,
Doan
> > wrote:
> > > > If this is true as you claimed why is the crime rate so in the 50's?
> > > > Why is it so low in Singapore?
> > >
> > > Do not forget people, US crime rate is to a very large extent a "race
> > > issue". 53% of the offenders were black and only 45% white in 1996,
> > > according to the FBI statictics. That's even though blacks are a small
> > > fraction of the population.
> > >
> > > In 1950s, blacks were not liberated as much, did not have easy access
> > > to weapons, etc. Liberation of them, while it had a lot of desirable
> > > effects, unfortunately had a great effect on black crime rate.
> > >
> > > A lot of crimes, such as forcible rape, was not as well reported in
> > > 1950s, either.
> > >
> > > I strongly suspect that if you break crime down well, the difference
> > > between 1950s and now would not be as huge for, say, white middle
> > > class people.
> > >
> > > I would also be very surprised if trash criminals were grown in
> > > nonviolent homes. I am too lazy to look for it, but my sense is that
> > > these criminals grow up amongst drunk, drug abusing, wife beating,
> > > child beating retards, and not paragons of respectful, attentive
> > > methods of child rearing.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > You're not being very politically correct. Remove the black statistics
for
> > CPS, crime, public aid, and welfare.
> > Go a step further... elimiate the cost illegal immigrants our costing
this
> > country.
>
> So what ARE the costs that illegal immigrants levy on this country?
>
> We get far more them than they take from this country dummy. Or you
> can go pick your own tomatos, learn to become a yard man or sew in a
> sweatshop for your own clothes.

Tomatos. if I were to buy them today, are around $2.50 lb. Not much of a
savings.

Even so, if the wages are so very low as everyone says, they can hardly be
'giving back' much to the society that supports them. Crunch the numbers
and see for yourself.

If you are talking about mexican illegals then you should also be aware that
there is a huge movement to 'legally' take over the U.S. California and
other border states are well aware of what's happening. Legislators have yet
to worry they they are looking for votes.. illegals votes.. to keep
themselves in office.

bobb


>
> The only costs going on right now to the american public is that there
> is still someone to do all the scut work we white's have forgotten,
> and are too soft, to do any more. That and the rapid offshore movement
> of our formerly higher paying jobs to lower wage countries. The latter
> is the big reason for our economic problems.
>
> And in fact the behavior of the holders of this country's capitol
> goods, the wealthy, have always done this. In fact they came from
> Europe just to do that in new fertile ground.
>
> You are a victim of greed bobb, and those who empty our pockets have
> successfully propagandized YOU, the dummy, using your deepseated
> racial bigotry and xenophobia to make you think it's the little
> darkskinned folks that are the problem.
>
> You are soooooo dumb.
>
> > bobb
>
> Kane

[bobb]

"Ignoramus3100" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Kane wrote:
> > On 23 Nov 2003 20:02:29 GMT, Ignoramus22857
> > wrote:
> >
> >>In article .net>,
> > bobb wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "Ignoramus22857" > wrote in
message
> >>> ...
> >>>> In article >,
> > Doan
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> > If this is true as you claimed why is the crime rate so in the
> > 50's?
> >>>> > Why is it so low in Singapore?
> >>>>
> >>>> Do not forget people, US crime rate is to a very large extent a
> > "race
> >>>> issue". 53% of the offenders were black and only 45% white in
> > 1996,
> >>>> according to the FBI statictics. That's even though blacks are a
> > small
> >>>> fraction of the population.
> >
> > That's why it's expressed as a percentage.
> >
> > I think I feel a bigot baggin' comin' on.
> >
> > Do you know anything at all about the black experience in this country
> > beyond Rochester, Step and Fetchit'and Shaft movies?
>
> No I do not.
>
> >>>>
> >>>> In 1950s, blacks were not liberated as much, did not have easy
> > access
> >>>> to weapons, etc. Liberation of them, while it had a lot of
> > desirable
> >>>> effects, unfortunately had a great effect on black crime rate.
> >
> > Like whites began to notice the prevalent black and black crime that
> > had always been around.
>
> An excellent point.
>
> Like I said earlier, if all crime stats were properly broken down and
> analyzed, you would, first, see a much lower increase in actual crime,
> and second, you would not see any causal link that suggests that child
> beating leads to lower crime.
>
> > Funny, how when you press people into a Ghetto
> > with each other the crime rate for ghetto dweller upon ghetto dweller
> > goes up.
>
> Surely, you are quite right.
>
> > I don't suppose proximity has much to do with it though. "Those folks"
> > can just mount up and go out to the burbs to do their crime where the
> > police presence and response is not as high...oh wait...
>
> Think about the LA riots and why the rioters trashed their own
> neighborhoods.
>
> > You apparently haven't known any blacks well enough for them to
> > familiarize you with DWN or DWB...Driving While ****** or Driving
> > While Black is the common experience of black people, men especially
> > (the women are though to be just servants coming and going to work)
> > have of being rousted when they leave the Ghetto.
>
> And surely you are right here, as well.
>
> >>>> A lot of crimes, such as forcible rape, was not as well reported
> > in
> >>>> 1950s, either.
> >>>>
> >>>> I strongly suspect that if you break crime down well, the
> > difference
> >>>> between 1950s and now would not be as huge for, say, white middle
> >>>> class people.
> >>>>
> >>>> I would also be very surprised if trash criminals were grown in
> >>>> nonviolent homes.
> >
> > Now you are on to something.
>
> Thanks.
>
> >>>>I am too lazy to look for it, but my sense is that
> >>>> these criminals grow up amongst drunk, drug abusing, wife beating,
> >>>> child beating retards, and not paragons of respectful, attentive
> >>>> methods of child rearing.
> >
> > More or less. What has the race of someone got to do with it, given
> > your prior examples?
>
> I was pointing out that the OP's statement linking nonviolent methods
> of childrearing to increased crime was absurd, and that other reason
> explain apparent rise in crime rates readily. One of those reasons had
> to have something to do with tha changes in how the black community is
> treated, and another one, as I pointed out, was that crime statistics
> today is done differently.
>
> >>Does it change
> >>anything in regards to what I said? Or let's say that it was
> >>cheap. Would it change anything in regards to what I said?
> >
> > I think so, if you can get your head around bobb's rabid racism. He
> > thinks that if the hispanics and blacks would get out there would be a
> > world of jobs for whites. Yeah, I can see all those white tomato
> > pickers now, and the landscape yard men, the ditch diggers and
> > cleaners, the chemical farm spray workers...sure.
>
> I think that I am being dragged into a debate in which I have little
> interest. I came here when I saw a statement that said that less child
> beating means more crime. And now somehow I am being dragged into a
> discussion as to whether illegal immigration is a good thing.
>
It is a huge social problem. Many of the CPS laws apply to blacks or were
incorporated because of the black population. Absent fathers, etc. The
illegal immigrant population is leading down another path that will be just
as badly mishandled by the government.

But more to your point... there are those who see any kind of spanking or
slap on the butt as a terrible beating, or at least like to protray it as
such and use it to justify bad behaviors in later life. That's like saying
anyone who chewed gum will turn out to be a criminal. Few kids get through
childhood without a slap on the butt.. or chew gum.

bobb

bobb

[Kane]

On 24 Nov 2003 08:55:24 -0800, (Greg Hanson)
wrote:

>Kane wrote
>> `scuse the prior N referrence. I like to speak
>> so Honky can be sure to hear over his braying.
>
>I wonder how SPD will like your tokenization
>and patronizing behaviors?

Explaining my use of the word "******" when both he and I know what
that loaded term means and is used for in different contexts?

I guess we'll have to let him decide for himself.

Kinda get's yah, eh? That's you are so ignorant I mean.

>Going for those liberal brownie points again eh?

Kinda speakin' the truth doesn't get me brownie points.

I leave that kind of sucky behavior up to little ****s that slather
the backsides of the other child abusers hereabouts.

You have little idea of what we were talking about. Which speaks
volumes to your ignorance.

So tell me, suckass. Where do you stand on White Reparations to
Blacks?

I won't be the least surprized if you dodge and weasel, true to form.

And if you think there's some merit in it I'll be sure NOT to label
you as a liberal brownie point suckup.

Kane

[Kane]

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 17:48:17 GMT, "bobb" > wrote:

>
>"Kane" > wrote in message
m...
>> "bobb" > wrote in message
.net>...
>> > "Ignoramus22857" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> > > In article >,
>Doan
>> > wrote:
>> > > > If this is true as you claimed why is the crime rate so in
the 50's?
>> > > > Why is it so low in Singapore?
>> > >
>> > > Do not forget people, US crime rate is to a very large extent a
"race
>> > > issue". 53% of the offenders were black and only 45% white in
1996,
>> > > according to the FBI statictics. That's even though blacks are
a small
>> > > fraction of the population.
>> > >
>> > > In 1950s, blacks were not liberated as much, did not have easy
access
>> > > to weapons, etc. Liberation of them, while it had a lot of
desirable
>> > > effects, unfortunately had a great effect on black crime rate.
>> > >
>> > > A lot of crimes, such as forcible rape, was not as well
reported in
>> > > 1950s, either.
>> > >
>> > > I strongly suspect that if you break crime down well, the
difference
>> > > between 1950s and now would not be as huge for, say, white
middle
>> > > class people.
>> > >
>> > > I would also be very surprised if trash criminals were grown in
>> > > nonviolent homes. I am too lazy to look for it, but my sense is
that
>> > > these criminals grow up amongst drunk, drug abusing, wife
beating,
>> > > child beating retards, and not paragons of respectful,
attentive
>> > > methods of child rearing.
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > You're not being very politically correct. Remove the black
statistics
>for
>> > CPS, crime, public aid, and welfare.
>> > Go a step further... elimiate the cost illegal immigrants our
costing
>this
>> > country.
>>
>> So what ARE the costs that illegal immigrants levy on this country?
>>
>> We get far more them than they take from this country dummy. Or you
>> can go pick your own tomatos, learn to become a yard man or sew in
a
>> sweatshop for your own clothes.
>
> Tomatos. if I were to buy them today, are around $2.50 lb. Not much of a
>savings.

If YOU had to pick them how much would you like to be paid to do so?
And that's NOT what the farmer gets for them.

>Even so, if the wages are so very low as everyone says, they can
hardly be
>'giving back' much to the society that supports them. Crunch the
numbers
>and see for yourself.

It isn't how much one is paid, but how much one spends that determines
that...and stoop labor workers "give back" what YOU do not have to,
pain and hard work, and high health risk, and shorter lives. Grow up.

They have to eat, buy shoes and clothing, feed their children, put gas
in the car they bought here with their friends and relatives, and with
all that try to pay back their relatives and friends that staked them
to come north.

Oh, and least you forget, they are required to pay taxes on their
income just as you are. You should visit a community center that
serves that population. Take an interpreter.

>If you are talking about mexican illegals then you should also be
aware that
>there is a huge movement to 'legally' take over the U.S.

And so tell us, just how would they do that without annexing Mexico to
the US, which it practically is now..(shhh...don't tell any of my
Mexican aquaintances I said that). Mexico is a labor pool for the US.

The pressure isn't Mexican, it's US manufacturers, growers, industry,
that uses that cheap labor pool.

>California and
>other border states are well aware of what's happening.

What they are well aware of is how to keep using Mexico as an economic
resource for US business interests. It's ain't the Mexican's stupid,
it's that fat dude with the imported cigar, brooksbrothers suit, and a
Mercedes limo waiting outside the restaurant you are eating in that is
back staffed by little brown people mopin' and cookin' away.

He owns the restaurant, blocks and blocks of lowcost ****ty assed
housing, partnered in huge businesses, and pickin' your pocket whilst
pointing your nose at the help and tellin' you "It's those dirty
Spicks from south of the border."

You sure are a dumb ass.

If you and other's like you were respectful enough Mexicans wouldn't
be in reaction. They only way left open to minorities is the one you
leave them...fight back. What dumb asses you bigots are.

>Legislators have yet
>to worry they they are looking for votes.. illegals votes.. to keep
>themselves in office.

Do you wish those that work and pay taxes to NOT have the vote? Do you
wish, like the snot assed Loyalists in the colonies, that the
population NOT have the vote and representation?

No, you are in for it, bobb. Unless we get smart quick (and I don't
expect that from you) and disarm the militancy I see in minorities,
but us white folks, growing up and being respectful and end our
bigotry and projection of our OWN failings onto other peoples, we are
in for it..you and I. So I don't like your sorry dumb ass.

Besides, I've found nothing personally, when I've interacted closely
with black people, and brown people, and yellow people, and red
people, except people. Some even as dumb as you.

The only real differences are your bigotries forcing them to behave in
reaction. Then you and yours blaming them for that.

Google on "Blue Eyes Brown Eyes" and learn.

Kane

[Doan]

On 24 Nov 2003, Ignoramus3100 wrote:

> I think that I am being dragged into a debate in which I have little
> interest. I came here when I saw a statement that said that less child
> beating means more crime. And now somehow I am being dragged into a
> discussion as to whether illegal immigration is a good thing.
>
Then you are mistaken! Nowhere did I ever say that less "beating" means
more crime. The issue here is whether spanking (not beating) leads to
crime - as the anti-spankings claimed. All I said is there is no
evidence of it and if you look at the studies they cited, the
'correlations" is even stronger for non-cp alternatives!

Doan

[Kane]

On 24 Nov 2003 14:46:50 GMT, Ignoramus3100
> wrote:

>They say that we owe reparations for black slavery, obviously owed to
>the generation of people who never experienced slavery.

But have suffered the result.

If you had a large valuable inheretance due you earned by the labors
of say your grandfather, and you were diddled out of it because you
had little or no political and economic power..well...you get the
drift here.

>But the alternative to their slavery was to remain in Africa,

That's odd. I distinctly remember not only stories of blacks
immigrating on their own out of Africa, but them being depicted in
European art as landowners, nobles, traders....etc. Even Shakespeare
used an African Black as a character, Othello.

Please. Let not another idiot start mouthing those absurdities.

That was distinctly NOT their alternative. And if it were, what would
have been wrong with that?

>where
>slavery was also rampant,

Driven by Arabs, into a major industry instead of a local issue, who
in turn sold them to Europeans. And we whites had slavery at least as
far back as Africans did.

>and many diseases and civil wars continue to
>this day. Not an enviable existence.

The intervention into the body politic of Africa by Europeans had
something of a disruptive influence on an already advanced medical and
academic based civilization.

While, just as in other parts of the world, there certainly were such
conditions, there were centers of learning and power and commerce that
were once the equal and even surpassing the outside world. Africa
wasn't much different than anywhere else in the world, and in many
ways superior.

>The very generation who wants reparations, would be living in
>appalling conditions, starvation, illiteracy, civil war etc.

From the result of incursions and disruptions by European invaders.

Do you, for instance, understand the history of the Middle East and
why we REALLY are there at war today?

Africa had a stable political climate with set borders based on tribal
allegences and treaties...we Europeans disrupted that according to
economic exploitation we saw fit to do. We used rivalries between
tribes to set one group over another and THAT is the cause of the
current bad conditions.

>Instead
>they have air conditioning, tap water, police protection, relative
>peace, enough food etc, stuff that all of us have in the great USA.

They do? You haven't seen South Sacramento, or parts of Phoenix AZ
have you? Other big cities boast similar centers of urban affluence
and comfort. You need to get out and about.

>So... they are better off due to slavery than they would be without
>slavery and their ancestors being brought here.

Well, if they had stayed in the pit that Europeans created in some
parts of Africa (by the way, not all African nations are as you
describe) yes, you are correct. But had their not been and
international slave trade the incursions probably wouldn't have taken
place either.

>Why do they deserve any form of reparation then?

Because they ancestors labored for free for tens of generations. I'll
give you a hint. Do you know what capitol goods are? Do you know what
fixed resources are?

What do you think the rate of ownership might be between white america
and black america and this true indicators of wealth and power?

>Obviously I think that bringing all those slaves was a very bad
>idea. With bad consequences. A typical story about immoral acts
>exacting revenge in ways completely unforeseen. Civil war, etc etc,
>was a consequence of slavery.

It was more a consequence of economic pressures by the north on the
south. Slavery was, sadly, a side issue. Do some studying.

I am constantly amazed and frequently amused at the ignorance that we
Americans allow those with economic power to foist on us.

This country is still a colony being exploited as surely as King
George did. It's just our own folks doing it too us and the brits
never did really get out.

Remember when we were, about 15 years ago, all atwitter when it was
disclosed in the major media that the Japanese were major investors in
US fixed resources, real estate mostly, but with mineral deposits,
timber, grazing lands, etc.

That was a caluculated bit of propaganda the GOBs (good ol boys) like
to put out from time to time. The brits own far more of the US than
the Japanese could have ever hoped to.

Do you know who the major holder of gold mining interests is in the
US. Her name starts with an E and you better courtsey.

Bigots, and you ARE one, whether you like to admit it or not, are the
tools of these manipulators.

In fact the natural instinct that underlies bigotry has been a major
tool for elitists to gain and maintain power since the middle ages.

Have a nice day.

Kane

[Kane]

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 16:12:17 -0000, "The Rifleman"
> wrote:

>slavery is still rampant in north africa, as is other such
wondefulcultural
>things like forced female circumcision, endenturement, tribal
massacres, the
>dregrading of women etc.

It isn't "rampant." That's just an emotion based rant word. It is a
problem.

Africa is a continent that exhibits the results of imperialistic
colonization and it's long term results. The Arabs began it and the
Europeans hopped on board with better technology and more avarice.

So, tell us, "gun up the butt," what's your solution?

Kane

[Kane]

On 24 Nov 2003 08:49:34 -0800, (Greg Hanson)
wrote:

>> I do believe I caught the Kensian fever in that I believe that
>> movement of money is the key, not accumulation.
>
>I do believe you are referring to Keynesian economic theory,
>and that's not it either.

Given that I was proposing that money flow was more important to a
healthy economy than money accumulation and Keynsian economics is
based on the concept of pumping money into the economy by whatever
means, but primarily government works and projects as per FDR, then I
have to ask...

>Where'd you take your economics Commander McBrag?

....did you take your economics the same place you took your legal
"motion" writing courses?

Kane

[Kane]

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 17:38:06 GMT, "bobb" > wrote:

>
>"Ignoramus3100" > wrote in message
...
>> They say that we owe reparations for black slavery, obviously owed
to
>> the generation of people who never experienced slavery.
>>
>> But the alternative to their slavery was to remain in Africa, where
>> slavery was also rampant, and many diseases and civil wars continue
to
>> this day. Not an enviable existence.
>>
>> The very generation who wants reparations, would be living in
>> appalling conditions, starvation, illiteracy, civil war etc.
Instead
>> they have air conditioning, tap water, police protection, relative
>> peace, enough food etc, stuff that all of us have in the great USA.
>>
>> So... they are better off due to slavery than they would be without
>> slavery and their ancestors being brought here.
>>
>> Why do they deserve any form of reparation then?
>>
>> Obviously I think that bringing all those slaves was a very bad
>> idea. With bad consequences. A typical story about immoral acts
>> exacting revenge in ways completely unforeseen. Civil war, etc etc,
>> was a consequence of slavery.
>>
>> i
>>
>
>Uh oh, you're gonna get in big trouble talking like that. That's for
too
>intelllectual for most to understand.

You maybe....and it's quasi intellectual given that it is all too
limited in scope, misses the point of European and Arab incursions
onto the African continent, and the repartitioning of african nations
into little tribal feifdoms.

He got nowhere near the subject of exploitation of both natural
resources in Africa....a huge extraction of a continent's wealth..or
should I say a people's wealth, as well as centuries of colonization
that also extracted the production of people who were slaves,
sometimes actually and often economically, in their own lands.

The ONLY reason for the miserable state of some parts of Africa today
is the outcome of European incursions.

>
>bobb
>

But that of course is more than enough excuse for you to get the
shivery chills when you see a black person in "your" country.

And those Mexicans, my oh my, they are surely invaders.

Kane

[Tom Enright]

Kane wrote:

> On 24 Nov 2003 14:46:50 GMT, Ignoramus3100
> > wrote:

> >They say that we owe reparations for black slavery, obviously owed to
> >the generation of people who never experienced slavery.

> But have suffered the result.

Or, may have benefited. There is no way to prove it either way, and I believe
that proof is very important here.

The Irish potato famine was by all measure a "bad thing" and my ancestors
suffered as a result. Certainly the English share some responsibility for
their suffering, but they don't owe me anything.

I am most likely better off that my forbearers suffered, as my life, and as
the lives of every descendant of slave or immigrant, is for the better.

> If you had a large valuable inheretance due you earned by the labors
> of say your grandfather, and you were diddled out of it because you
> had little or no political and economic power..well...you get the
> drift here.

Certainly. Punish the guilty, not the people who happen to remind you
of the guilty.

> >But the alternative to their slavery was to remain in Africa,

<snip>

> >where slavery was also rampant,

> Driven by Arabs, into a major industry instead of a local issue, who
> in turn sold them to Europeans. And we whites had slavery at least as
> far back as Africans did.

Incorrect. Africans bought and sold Africans for centuries prior to any
European setting foot on the continent, just as slavery still exists in
Africa. Blaming it entirely on whites and Arabs is revisionism.

> >and many diseases and civil wars continue to
> >this day. Not an enviable existence.

> The intervention into the body politic of Africa by Europeans had
> something of a disruptive influence on an already advanced medical and
> academic based civilization.

It was not advanced in medicine nor academics. You had people who
built Cathedrals and used calculus meet peoples who have no written
language, have no concept of numbers and have yet developed the wheel

> While, just as in other parts of the world, there certainly were such
> conditions, there were centers of learning and power and commerce that
> were once the equal and even surpassing the outside world. Africa
> wasn't much different than anywhere else in the world, and in many
> ways superior.

In the time frame being discussed, this is totally incorrect.

What was developed when the Europeans landed in West Africa was a
successful slave traded, which the Europeans benefited from. In fact,
when the British began to outlaw slavery not only in Britain but in their
colonies, it was the Africans who protested the strongest as it was bad
for their business.

> >The very generation who wants reparations, would be living in
> >appalling conditions, starvation, illiteracy, civil war etc.

> From the result of incursions and disruptions by European invaders.

Canada, The USA, Australia, Hong Kong etc. all were invaded by
Europeans. How do their economies survive?

> Do you, for instance, understand the history of the Middle East and
> why we REALLY are there at war today?
>
> Africa had a stable political climate with set borders based on tribal
> allegences and treaties...we Europeans disrupted that according to
> economic exploitation we saw fit to do. We used rivalries between
> tribes to set one group over another and THAT is the cause of the
> current bad conditions.

Slave empires in Africa predated major contact with Western Europeans.
It is interesting that you use terms like "invasion" when describing the
actions of the Europeans but use "rivalries" to describe brutal wars
between African tribes.

> >Instead
> >they have air conditioning, tap water, police protection, relative
> >peace, enough food etc, stuff that all of us have in the great USA.
>
> They do? You haven't seen South Sacramento, or parts of Phoenix AZ
> have you? Other big cities boast similar centers of urban affluence
> and comfort. You need to get out and about.
>
> >So... they are better off due to slavery than they would be without
> >slavery and their ancestors being brought here.
>
> Well, if they had stayed in the pit that Europeans created in some
> parts of Africa (by the way, not all African nations are as you
> describe) yes, you are correct. But had their not been and
> international slave trade the incursions probably wouldn't have taken
> place either.

Virginia is a "pit?" Canada? The slave trade was big business before
the Europeans had any part. African leaders were over-joyed to have
a new market for their product.

> >Why do they deserve any form of reparation then?
>
> Because they ancestors labored for free for tens of generations. I'll
> give you a hint. Do you know what capitol goods are? Do you know what
> fixed resources are?

So did mine. I'm not demanding any money from the British.

What about blacks in the US who owned slaves? What about families who
lost sons and fathers in the Civil War? Do they own money as well? What
about people that have came to this country 50 years ago? Two years ago?

> What do you think the rate of ownership might be between white america
> and black america and this true indicators of wealth and power?

I have no idea, and neither do you. To steal money from person A, not because
they are guilty, they most certainly are not, only because they LOOK LIKE
people who did bad things a century ago and give that stolen property to people
who LOOK LIKE people who suffered a century ago is racism pure and simple.

> >Obviously I think that bringing all those slaves was a very bad
> >idea. With bad consequences. A typical story about immoral acts
> >exacting revenge in ways completely unforeseen. Civil war, etc etc,
> >was a consequence of slavery.

> It was more a consequence of economic pressures by the north on the
> south. Slavery was, sadly, a side issue. Do some studying.
>
> I am constantly amazed and frequently amused at the ignorance that we
> Americans allow those with economic power to foist on us.
>
> This country is still a colony being exploited as surely as King
> George did. It's just our own folks doing it too us and the brits
> never did really get out.
>
> Remember when we were, about 15 years ago, all atwitter when it was
> disclosed in the major media that the Japanese were major investors in
> US fixed resources, real estate mostly, but with mineral deposits,
> timber, grazing lands, etc.
>
> That was a caluculated bit of propaganda the GOBs (good ol boys) like
> to put out from time to time. The brits own far more of the US than
> the Japanese could have ever hoped to.

Your sexism is obvious.

> Do you know who the major holder of gold mining interests is in the
> US. Her name starts with an E and you better courtsey.
>
> Bigots, and you ARE one, whether you like to admit it or not, are the
> tools of these manipulators.

You are the bigot. You believe that people can be given the fruits of one's
labor and have it taken away based on their skin color.

> In fact the natural instinct that underlies bigotry has been a major
> tool for elitists to gain and maintain power since the middle ages.

The greatest crime that the Europeans have ever committed, was the
export of Marxist collectivism. This failed orthodoxy has destroyed more
Africans than all the colonizing powers combined. In 1960 Africa was
a net food exporter and had an economy greater than Asia. Once
countries gained their independence they adopted the left socialism
that has ruined dozens of countries and continues to rob the people
of their ability to support themselves.

> Have a nice day.
>
> Kane

[bobb]

"Ignoramus3100" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Doan
wrote:
> >
> > On 24 Nov 2003, Ignoramus3100 wrote:
> >
> >> I think that I am being dragged into a debate in which I have little
> >> interest. I came here when I saw a statement that said that less child
> >> beating means more crime. And now somehow I am being dragged into a
> >> discussion as to whether illegal immigration is a good thing.
> >>
> > Then you are mistaken! Nowhere did I ever say that less "beating" means
> > more crime. The issue here is whether spanking (not beating) leads to
> > crime - as the anti-spankings claimed. All I said is there is no
> > evidence of it and if you look at the studies they cited, the
> > 'correlations" is even stronger for non-cp alternatives!
>
> If you substitute word "beating" to "spanking" in appropriate places
> of my original followup, the meaning of that followup will not change.
>
> i

Well put, and it would be fruitless to try and improve on your response.

bobb

[Kane]

On 24 Nov 2003 12:09:48 -0800, (Tom Enright)
wrote:

>Kane wrote:
>
>> On 24 Nov 2003 14:46:50 GMT, Ignoramus3100
>> > wrote:
>
>> >They say that we owe reparations for black slavery, obviously owed
to
>> >the generation of people who never experienced slavery.
>
>> But have suffered the result.
>
>Or, may have benefited. There is no way to prove it either way, and
I believe
>that proof is very important here.

You haven't visited the worst urban slums then, have you? It's just
like a third world slum experience. No garbage service, phone, water
and electrical service spotty. Poor police protection, and in fact BAD
police protection.

Take a walk there white boy. I have, and I'm as white lookin' as you
I'd bet. It's a thrill a minute.

It becomes all too apparent, if you aren't lost in your bigotry, what
is up and going on there. White trash neighborhoods and black ghettos
have one thing different about them...they are NOTHING alike.

>The Irish potato famine was by all measure a "bad thing" and my
ancestors
>suffered as a result. Certainly the English share some
responsibility for
>their suffering, but they don't owe me anything.

The Irish Potato Famine was a political ploy. There was no "famine"
other than by political manipulation by the British. The loss wasn't
to the potato blight, but to Brit marketing manipulation.

You were conned and you ate it. You need to do more study of the times
and the politics. The Irish were to be driven out of Ireland and
replaced with protestants. Scots mostly. I've ancestors on both sides
so it's of interest to me...enough to study it more deeply.

>I am most likely better off that my forbearers suffered, as my life,
and as
>the lives of every descendant of slave or immigrant, is for the
better.

Well, I guess you managed to get out of the Irish ghettos then. How
are things back in the American Irish ghetto, by the way?

>> If you had a large valuable inheretance due you earned by the
labors
>> of say your grandfather, and you were diddled out of it because you
>> had little or no political and economic power..well...you get the
>> drift here.
>
>Certainly. Punish the guilty, not the people who happen to remind
you
>of the guilty.

The "guilty" took the inheritence of others and gave it to their
children, etc. down over the years. And the capitol goods produced,
while more easily identified is in other names than those of blacks
now...lost long ago.

>> >But the alternative to their slavery was to remain in Africa,
>
><snip>
>
>> >where slavery was also rampant,
>
>> Driven by Arabs, into a major industry instead of a local issue,
who
>> in turn sold them to Europeans. And we whites had slavery at least
as
>> far back as Africans did.
>
>Incorrect. Africans bought and sold Africans for centuries prior to
any
>European setting foot on the continent, just as slavery still exists
in
>Africa. Blaming it entirely on whites and Arabs is revisionism.

On the contrary. YOUR claim is revisionism. No such wholesale buying
and selling took place until international slavery opened the door to
it.

Slavery was local and a minor factor at the SAME TIME INHABITANTS OF
EUROPE were also ingaged in slavery of their own.

Your revisionist claimers of revisionism are just bull**** artists
ignorant of history.

Africans participated in slavery, they didn't originate it.

>> >and many diseases and civil wars continue to
>> >this day. Not an enviable existence.
>
>> The intervention into the body politic of Africa by Europeans had
>> something of a disruptive influence on an already advanced medical
and
>> academic based civilization.
>
>It was not advanced in medicine nor academics. You had people who
>built Cathedrals and used calculus meet peoples who have no written
> language, have no concept of numbers and have yet developed the wheel

That was Turtle Island natives, known now by some as Native Americans,
you have mixed up with the peoples that built the pyramids.

http://24.24.31.212/literature/POL-HS-Origin-Writing.htm

You are amazingly poorly read for someone that leapt into this thread
full of opinions. The ancestors of current Africans seem to have been
the originators of the alphabet.

If you want to claim that they were from somewhere else THEN fine, but
their blood runs in African's veins today.

>> While, just as in other parts of the world, there certainly were
such
>> conditions, there were centers of learning and power and commerce
that
>> were once the equal and even surpassing the outside world. Africa
>> wasn't much different than anywhere else in the world, and in many
>> ways superior.
>
>In the time frame being discussed, this is totally incorrect.

Translation: "in the time frame I am only willing to discuss."

No time frame was set. If you say Africa and Africans you can't very
well limit it to just a sort time frame when discussing it and them
and assigning blame for their plight to them.

If I get sore on my heel from new shoes shall we, when I go back to
the store, leave out the past when I bought the shoes and only discuss
how I walked in them later?

>What was developed when the Europeans landed in West Africa was a
>successful slave traded, which the Europeans benefited from.

It was not a successful African slave trade. It was a successful Arab
slave trade with Africa being the exploited resource.

>In fact,
>when the British began to outlaw slavery not only in Britain but in
their
>colonies, it was the Africans who protested the strongest as it was
bad
>for their business.

Yep. I wouldn't ever attempt to claim that any race or people could
not be subverted. Black Africans are no different than Asians (slavers
for thousands of years) or Europeans (slavers for thousands of years),
the red peoples (asian forebears) of North America (slavers
themselves).

So what's with this "they are better off now so they don't deserve
anything" bull**** about. No, they AREN'T better off. A few are.

>> >The very generation who wants reparations, would be living in
>> >appalling conditions, starvation, illiteracy, civil war etc.
>
>> From the result of incursions and disruptions by European invaders.
>
>Canada, The USA, Australia, Hong Kong etc. all were invaded by
>Europeans. How do their economies survive?

I wasn't making a claim that all incursions result in bad outcomes
(though I have a hunch some Amerinds, some Australion Abos, a few
ethnic locals in Hong Kong might like to answer your question).

I was only claiming that the African experience came out badly for
Africans.

Now, Shall we chat with the Amerinds and Abos?

>> Do you, for instance, understand the history of the Middle East and
>> why we REALLY are there at war today?
>>
>> Africa had a stable political climate with set borders based on
tribal
>> allegences and treaties...we Europeans disrupted that according to
>> economic exploitation we saw fit to do. We used rivalries between
>> tribes to set one group over another and THAT is the cause of the
>> current bad conditions.
>
>Slave empires in Africa predated major contact with Western
Europeans.

Slave based economies predated European incursion in Africa in many
parts of the world. China, Europe (ask the Russian peasants in the
1800's...they went from nearly nothing to totally nothing under the
Czar), all of the Americans, had slave based economies.

>It is interesting that you use terms like "invasion" when describing
the
>actions of the Europeans but use "rivalries" to describe brutal wars
>between African tribes.

Yep. It is interesting in that it differentiates the intra-continental
and local vs the intercontinental and international. Local wars were
local. A study of say the South African Zulu battles internally and
with other tribes locally shows, against the backdrop of a continent,
how very territorial and small such wars were.

By the all "wars" are "brutal" to the victims. Why the hyperbole?

>> >Instead
>> >they have air conditioning, tap water, police protection, relative
>> >peace, enough food etc, stuff that all of us have in the great
USA.
>>
>> They do? You haven't seen South Sacramento, or parts of Phoenix AZ
>> have you? Other big cities boast similar centers of urban affluence
>> and comfort. You need to get out and about.
>>
>> >So... they are better off due to slavery than they would be
without
>> >slavery and their ancestors being brought here.
>>
>> Well, if they had stayed in the pit that Europeans created in some
>> parts of Africa (by the way, not all African nations are as you
>> describe) yes, you are correct. But had their not been and
>> international slave trade the incursions probably wouldn't have
taken
>> place either.
>
>Virginia is a "pit?" Canada?

I would say so. If you are a slave, yanked out of your familiar home,
made to travel and watch your relatives, brothers and sisters,
children, grandparents, die and be raped and brutilized, then find
yourself living in squalor on half rations and being worked to death
day by day, I think "pit" is kind of a mild term.

You can't accuse me of overstating..not in the least.

And the fact that those places are wonderful today is based as much on
the industry of Africans after freedom as white. Now as to the matter
of the work products of the black african slaves the hundreds of years
before their freedom.............well, we'll go into that later.

>The slave trade was big business before
>the Europeans had any part.

Everywhere in the world.

China is a good example, though often not understood in this sense so
not used often. If you have the power of life and death over a person,
the power to use their body in any way you see fit, and to pay them or
not exactly as you decide, you have that person as your slave.

That was the case for the Emperor and his courtiers and Mandarins
throughout China for thousands of years.

Dig into the Middle Ages in Europe. Serfs were slaves in the sense
that if they didn't give over to the Lord what he said they had to
they could have their lands taken, be left to wander and die.

>African leaders were over-joyed to have
>a new market for their prodct.

Any people can be subverted.

I believe that slavery in Africa would have faded out as surely as
slavery in other parts of the world did around the same time, had
their been no incursion of Europeans THAT HAD JUST LOST THE ADVANTAGES
OF SLAVERY AND NEEDED NEW BODIES.

With out that outside pressure from us slavery would have evolved out.

So you see I agree with you, but not your apparent claim that Africans
were somehow less moral than we.

>> >Why do they deserve any form of reparation then?
>>
>> Because they ancestors labored for free for tens of generations.
I'll
>> give you a hint. Do you know what capitol goods are? Do you know
what
>> fixed resources are?
>
>So did mine. I'm not demanding any money from the British.

Funny, I think there are some Irish (some my own relatives) running
about making them pay to this very day. Not getting a lot but they
take their penny here and their penny there and more than a tiny
portion of the blood of British boys.

>What about blacks in the US who owned slaves?

What about them? How does these moral shortcoming of some blacks
excuse the moral shortcomings of millions of white slaveowners, or
evev ONE?

Lousy argument. See it all the time. Childish school yard whining,
"Well Billy got to play on the big swings."

>What about families who
>lost sons and fathers in the Civil War?

Economic conflict between northern industrialists squeezing the south
for machinery and manufactured goods (the mills where in the north
were the coal was to run them) by banding together and setting the
prices they would pay (today that would be prosecuted under federal
law) for the raw baled cotton is what set things off.

Slavery was a convenient distraction for the populace so it wouldn't
be so obvious their sons were dying for industrialist profits.

It was a good one because abolishionists had been pushing for many
years prior about the slavery issue. And it was a moral sickness, no
question.

I consider the question you ask below more of that moral sickness we
still haven't cleaned up.

> Do they own money as well? What
>about people that have came to this country 50 years ago? Two years
ago?

I am reminded of my question of the non-existent jewish, irish,
polish, welch, german, italian, ghettos of today. Which still stands?

There is only one, and I didn't name it.

Until you have gone into black ghettos...not black "neighborhoods"
which aren't a whole lot different than white neighborhoods...you have
no idea what you are talking about.

Were I the big boss and could have things my way, I'll levy some
reparations, through taxes, on the top 20 percent earners in the US,
all of then, all colors and ethnicities. They all have profited by the
black experience, even the better off blacks.

And I'd put that money into those still existent hell holes.

I wish had been in one...the really bad bad ones like Pheonix and
Sacramento. I mean you can't believe it from what I say here, but the
stench, the babies showing signs of malnutrition, the hopelessness,
would answer you right off.

Every person there needs an education, decent living conditions, and a
heartfelt and genuine invitation and welcome to change it or leave it.

The chance of failure would be very high, but that is a moral question
I don't care about... doing what's right shouldn't be about risk.

The risk would be the failure through the mental condition, the
psychological historically based mental state of the people there.

Ever been a slave? Your ancestors within say four generations?

You have to really roll that term around in your mouth and your head
like black people sometimes do. You have to read about the bodies of
black women found in NY slave cemetaries with their spines driven up
into their skulls from being forced to carry huge loads, the signs on
the bones of the tendons torn from limbs by those same kinds of
labors, the wear on bones that is NOT found on white bones of the
times, even on servants.

They were worked, literally, until it killed them.

And their children were.

They were raped at the pleasure of the owners.

>> What do you think the rate of ownership might be between white
america
>> and black america and this true indicators of wealth and power?
>
>I have no idea, and neither do you.

Yes I do. Very few blacks own capitol goods outright or control them,
but they are learning. The resergence of black banking in the US is an
obvious sign of their awareness of "economics," not that it's a sign
to anyone but whites who don't get it that blacks know what's up and
been up for centuries.

>To steal money from person A,

Labor is money. Yes, black people had their "money" stolen from them.

That's what the "re" in reparations is all about.

>not because
>they are guilty,

It's not a matter of guilt. That's liberal hogwash. I don't feel
guilty about my ancestors. I just know what is right and just.

If I have money in my pocket that came to me through the opporunity I
have to live and work in the conditions I do, then some of that
accrued to me from the work of others that DIDN'T GET PAID AT THE TIME
OF THEIR LABORS.

>they most certainly are not, only because they LOOK LIKE
>people who did bad things a century ago and give that stolen property
to people
>who LOOK LIKE people who suffered a century ago is racism pure and
simple.

Backass as usual. Does whitey take lessons in double talk at a special
school? I guess I missed it when I was young...though I think I recall
hearing a little bit of it around me among my relatives.

The badness that happened can only be addressed in the present by how
any reparations are used. I'm not suggesting flying over black
neighborhoods and kicking bundles of cash out.

The "badness" can never be made up for, only addressed to heal some of
the damages....mostly psychological. The deaths far too young, the
pain and shortness of life, the incessant raping of black women, the
broken families, these aren't going to be "made up for" iun any way.

What can be though, is the looting of the labors, the money, that was
rightfully their's, and converted to its value today.

You can trust me on this: I'm not going to walk up to the first black
person I see and hand him some percentage of my pocket change with an
eye to fixing things between us. Neither he nor I would be so foolish
as to think that means anything substantial.

>> >Obviously I think that bringing all those slaves was a very bad
>> >idea. With bad consequences. A typical story about immoral acts
>> >exacting revenge in ways completely unforeseen. Civil war, etc
etc,
>> >was a consequence of slavery.
>
>> It was more a consequence of economic pressures by the north on the
>> south. Slavery was, sadly, a side issue. Do some studying.
>>
>> I am constantly amazed and frequently amused at the ignorance that
we
>> Americans allow those with economic power to foist on us.
>>
>> This country is still a colony being exploited as surely as King
>> George did. It's just our own folks doing it too us and the brits
>> never did really get out.
>>
>> Remember when we were, about 15 years ago, all atwitter when it was
>> disclosed in the major media that the Japanese were major investors
in
>> US fixed resources, real estate mostly, but with mineral deposits,
>> timber, grazing lands, etc.
>>
>> That was a caluculated bit of propaganda the GOBs (good ol boys)
like
>> to put out from time to time. The brits own far more of the US than
>> the Japanese could have ever hoped to.
>
>Your sexism is obvious.

Sexism?

Did I leave out The GOG's then? Sorry.

>> Do you know who the major holder of gold mining interests is in the
>> US. Her name starts with an E and you better courtsey.
>>
>> Bigots, and you ARE one, whether you like to admit it or not, are
the
>> tools of these manipulators.
>
>You are the bigot. You believe that people can be given the fruits
of one's
>labor and have it taken away based on their skin color.

I believe that the fruits of black people's labor was taken away, and
it's time to give it back to their children.

If someone ripped off your father for wages, and now you found out
that his employer was being class action sued by the children of
other's of his employee's would it be morally improper of you to sign
up?

Particulary if he had ripped your father off for the current day
equivalent of a half to a million dollars or so?

Just think what a single slave produced in his or her lifetime.

Salaries today over a lifetime, even modest incomes, can amount to
close to a million.

>> In fact the natural instinct that underlies bigotry has been a
major
>> tool for elitists to gain and maintain power since the middle ages.
>
>The greatest crime that the Europeans have ever committed, was the
>export of Marxist collectivism.

Oh boy, here we go.

>This failed orthodoxy has destroyed more
>Africans than all the colonizing powers combined.

Over similar timespans and population rates considered, it can't hold
a candle to slavery more misery quotient.

>In 1960 Africa was
>a net food exporter and had an economy greater than Asia. Once
>countries gained their independence they adopted the left socialism
>that has ruined dozens of countries and continues to rob the people
>of their ability to support themselves.

That wasn't a matter of Marxist collectivism except in name. The
brutal african leaders that claimed to be installing such systems were
lying through their teeth...a habit inculcated by a few hundred years
under colonial rule.

I think you are just ****ed about the white farmers, right?

True collectivism, though not my personal favorite, would not have
booted them, but in fact would have included them. That IS what
collectivism is supposed to be about.

No, it was avarice and corruption that was and is causing trouble in
Africa today. The fruits of European Imperialism.

We can never know what the path for Africa could have been (though
your mention of its success in food export suggests they have more
than enough knowledge, skill, and productivity) had they been left
alone.

>
>> Have a nice day.
>>
>> Kane

Gosh, no salutation? Okay, have a nice day anyway.

Kane

[Kane]

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 17:59:34 GMT, "bobb" > wrote:

>
>"Ignoramus3100" > wrote in message
...
>> In article >, Kane
wrote:
>> > On 23 Nov 2003 20:02:29 GMT, Ignoramus22857
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>In article .net>,
>> > bobb wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> "Ignoramus22857" > wrote in
>message
>> >>> ...
>> >>>> In article >,
>> > Doan
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>> > If this is true as you claimed why is the crime rate so in
the
>> > 50's?
>> >>>> > Why is it so low in Singapore?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Do not forget people, US crime rate is to a very large extent
a
>> > "race
>> >>>> issue". 53% of the offenders were black and only 45% white in
>> > 1996,
>> >>>> according to the FBI statictics. That's even though blacks are
a
>> > small
>> >>>> fraction of the population.
>> >
>> > That's why it's expressed as a percentage.
>> >
>> > I think I feel a bigot baggin' comin' on.
>> >
>> > Do you know anything at all about the black experience in this
country
>> > beyond Rochester, Step and Fetchit'and Shaft movies?
>>
>> No I do not.
>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> In 1950s, blacks were not liberated as much, did not have easy
>> > access
>> >>>> to weapons, etc. Liberation of them, while it had a lot of
>> > desirable
>> >>>> effects, unfortunately had a great effect on black crime rate.
>> >
>> > Like whites began to notice the prevalent black and black crime
that
>> > had always been around.
>>
>> An excellent point.
>>
>> Like I said earlier, if all crime stats were properly broken down
and
>> analyzed, you would, first, see a much lower increase in actual
crime,
>> and second, you would not see any causal link that suggests that
child
>> beating leads to lower crime.
>>
>> > Funny, how when you press people into a Ghetto
>> > with each other the crime rate for ghetto dweller upon ghetto
dweller
>> > goes up.
>>
>> Surely, you are quite right.
>>
>> > I don't suppose proximity has much to do with it though. "Those
folks"
>> > can just mount up and go out to the burbs to do their crime where
the
>> > police presence and response is not as high...oh wait...
>>
>> Think about the LA riots and why the rioters trashed their own
>> neighborhoods.
>>
>> > You apparently haven't known any blacks well enough for them to
>> > familiarize you with DWN or DWB...Driving While ****** or Driving
>> > While Black is the common experience of black people, men
especially
>> > (the women are though to be just servants coming and going to
work)
>> > have of being rousted when they leave the Ghetto.
>>
>> And surely you are right here, as well.
>>
>> >>>> A lot of crimes, such as forcible rape, was not as well
reported
>> > in
>> >>>> 1950s, either.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I strongly suspect that if you break crime down well, the
>> > difference
>> >>>> between 1950s and now would not be as huge for, say, white
middle
>> >>>> class people.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I would also be very surprised if trash criminals were grown
in
>> >>>> nonviolent homes.
>> >
>> > Now you are on to something.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> >>>>I am too lazy to look for it, but my sense is that
>> >>>> these criminals grow up amongst drunk, drug abusing, wife
beating,
>> >>>> child beating retards, and not paragons of respectful,
attentive
>> >>>> methods of child rearing.
>> >
>> > More or less. What has the race of someone got to do with it,
given
>> > your prior examples?
>>
>> I was pointing out that the OP's statement linking nonviolent
methods
>> of childrearing to increased crime was absurd, and that other
reason
>> explain apparent rise in crime rates readily. One of those reasons
had
>> to have something to do with tha changes in how the black community
is
>> treated, and another one, as I pointed out, was that crime
statistics
>> today is done differently.
>>
>> >>Does it change
>> >>anything in regards to what I said? Or let's say that it was
>> >>cheap. Would it change anything in regards to what I said?
>> >
>> > I think so, if you can get your head around bobb's rabid racism.
He
>> > thinks that if the hispanics and blacks would get out there would
be a
>> > world of jobs for whites. Yeah, I can see all those white tomato
>> > pickers now, and the landscape yard men, the ditch diggers and
>> > cleaners, the chemical farm spray workers...sure.
>>
>> I think that I am being dragged into a debate in which I have
little
>> interest. I came here when I saw a statement that said that less
child
>> beating means more crime. And now somehow I am being dragged into a
>> discussion as to whether illegal immigration is a good thing.
>>
>It is a huge social problem. Many of the CPS laws apply to blacks or
were
>incorporated because of the black population. Absent fathers, etc.

Darn, I guess I been taken in. I didn't know whites had no problem
with absent fathers.

>The
>illegal immigrant population is leading down another path that will
be just
>as badly mishandled by the government.

And that would be what path and what handling?

>But more to your point... there are those who see any kind of
spanking or
>slap on the butt as a terrible beating,

Bull****.

>or at least like to protray it as
>such and use it to justify bad behaviors in later life.

Since I can get better responses from children with close to zero
chance of unwanted side effects with non-violent means I find such a
portrayal pointless for my purposes.

Though in looking at the brainscans work on learning issues I'm coming
to the conclusion that any punishment is pointless when we are
teaching. Even we are teaching children about unwanted behavior.

>That's like saying
>anyone who chewed gum will turn out to be a criminal.

No, it's nothing like that at all. Though I wonder if we could work up
some grant money to study learning ability and characteristics while
chewing and not chewing gum.

You see bobb, it isn't about "turning out bad" because of the trauma
of being spanked (though there IS a fair argument for it) but the
turning out bad because of learning issues...inability to learn
without unwanted side effects, and not being able to fully learn what
we intended.

The Embry study is a classic in this mistaken bull**** by you
spankers.

>Few kids get through
>childhood without a slap on the butt.. or chew gum.

Which has no point whatsoever. The ones that do get through childhood
with a slap on the butt turn out exceedingly well, much to your
frustration and screeching refusal to believe.

As for gum, I ask kids that I'm teaching to take gum out for one
simple reason...one doesn't hear as well when chewing.

Simple practical things such as this is why I don't have to worry
about children parented by non-violent means, and I do have to worry
about children who are spanked and punished, when each gets out in the
environment with me.

>
>bobb
>
>bobb
>

Tah, bobb bobb.

Kane

[Doan]

On 24 Nov 2003, Ignoramus3100 wrote:

> In article >, Doan wrote:
> >
> > On 24 Nov 2003, Ignoramus3100 wrote:
> >
> >> I think that I am being dragged into a debate in which I have little
> >> interest. I came here when I saw a statement that said that less child
> >> beating means more crime. And now somehow I am being dragged into a
> >> discussion as to whether illegal immigration is a good thing.
> >>
> > Then you are mistaken! Nowhere did I ever say that less "beating" means
> > more crime. The issue here is whether spanking (not beating) leads to
> > crime - as the anti-spankings claimed. All I said is there is no
> > evidence of it and if you look at the studies they cited, the
> > 'correlations" is even stronger for non-cp alternatives!
>
> If you substitute word "beating" to "spanking" in appropriate places
> of my original followup, the meaning of that followup will not change.
>
So here goes it: "I came here when I saw a statement that said that less
child SPANKING means more crime." CAN YOU SHOw ME WHERE IN THIS THREAD
SOMONE SAID THAT???

Doan

[Kane]

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 22:08:21 GMT, "bobb" > wrote:

>
>"Ignoramus3100" > wrote in message
...
>> In article >,
Doan
>wrote:
>> >
>> > On 24 Nov 2003, Ignoramus3100 wrote:
>> >
>> >> They say that we owe reparations for black slavery, obviously
owed to
>> >> the generation of people who never experienced slavery.
>> >>
>> > Only if you are assuming that blacks don't have a past. What we
owed
>> > their fore-fathers, we owed their offsprings. It's like if I owe
your
>> > father some money and he died, do you think that money should be
yours
>> > as part of your father's estate?
>>
>> Except that there is no genuine debt.
>>
>> The issue that that the present generation is entitled to money
from
>> white people as compensation of some ancient wrong. And I say, the
>> present generation _benefited_ from past wrongs. If those wrongs
were
>> not committed, they would be in Africa living a very destitute
life.
>>
>> >> But the alternative to their slavery was to remain in Africa,
where
>> >> slavery was also rampant, and many diseases and civil wars
continue to
>> >> this day. Not an enviable existence.
>> >>
>> > Oops! Basic logical flaw! We don't know that. Noone can
predict what
>> > would have happenned. It could also be that without losing all
the
>> > men power to whites, the blacks would have the resources to build
their
>> > own society that would rival what we have today.
>
>One need only look as far as africa.

Sure can.

>They have had the resources,

Are you one of those that think the Brits in African spent their time
holding cricket matches and have to tea their neighboring German,
Dutch, Portuguese, French colonials?

How quaint. The resources of Africa were stripped bare. Now the cost
of getting what's left out has escalated hugely. Ask a mining engineer
about it.

Soils have been depleted in many areas by white cattle farmers
overgrazing and nearly depleting traditional herds.

>and in
>fact demanded their own destiny when they threw the British out,

Ah...the British were not the only folks vacationing in African and
talking back little trinkets with them, like Ivory, Gold, Copper,
Diamonds, etc. And the product of millions of black peoples labors.

>and the
>situation is now appalling.

Yes, in some areas the colonials left behind devastated economies and
political systems. On the other hand there are places in Africa that
are still like Eden. Quiet, peaceful, villages of well fed folks
happily playing with fat little babies, milking goats, picking their
crops.

>Without a doubt Kenya can be looked upon as the
>most progressive

One has to define what they mean by "progressive." Some African's
don't define it as you might.

>but unless you've been there don't hark too loud. Crow
>doesn't taste too good I'm told.

Loo! Zii! I don't think you've been there, rafiki.

Rafiki, Kiswahili zungumza kiasi gani?

bobb laghai.

>Given that fact that blacks have had, and remain to have, the
opportunity
>for self determnation and have failed,

Beg pardon?

I notice whites all over the world, and asians, and all races or
ethnicities failing sometimes in some places.

Do you just blindly agree with everything the media feeds you?

They tend to focus rather much on the negative. Rarely on the
positive. Blacks do quite well in many places and times. 1

>is a fairly good indication that
>their present status in the U.S. would not have been acheived except
for
>whites.

R R R R R....you mean without bleeding their ancestors dry, lyching
those that tried to rise above their station, running them out then
keeping them out of white neighborhoods, denying them the vote by
lynching and threats, and them not rising up and cutting the throats
of every white person they could find.

Yeah, they sure wouldn't have achieved. I find them extraordinarily
patient and strong of character...and certainly compared to you.

Seen that list of black inventors yet?

>bobb

bobb, when you put in a salute it appears you have stopped writing.
Just a friendly reminder....read on folks.

busily sitting there judging others he knows little about what his
childhood taught bigotry will allow.

>
>>
>> you are grasping at straws here...
>>
>> >> So... they are better off due to slavery than they would be
without
>> >> slavery and their ancestors being brought here.
>> >>
>> > Then that somehow makes slavery right??? We are doing them a
favor,
>right?
>
>The slavery issue is distorted. The only true difference between
working
>for a low wage, or the basics, is the treatment of those doing the
work. We
>are still 'slaves' to the work force except we are now treated
differently.

Yep, and the man knows how to set us slaves against each other.

>In Japan, workers are still 'owned' by those who do the employing.
>Employers own the workers cars, apartments, and control lives.
Slavery is a
>relative status and even history speaks of the fact that not all
slavery was
>bad nor were all slaves treated bad.

Could you provide us with some references for your claim...just
interested. You could well be right, but having met a number of
Japanese that own their own homes and work for corporations I find it
just a tad hard to believe.

Rather a few own their own cars as well. I've ridden around in a few
and recall the owners telling me the cost of the vehicle. Are my
friends lying, domo arigato. Sayonara, chee si tomadachi.

I once made my living as an importer, and loved staying in countries
long after my formal business was completed. Want to tell us some more
lies about other people and their countries and cultures? Or is it
just plain ignorance?

>
>bobb
>
>>
>> It does not make slavery wrong, but the present generation blacks
in
>> the US benefited from their forefathers being imported. Who
suffered
>> is their forefathers and not the descendants.
>>
>> i
>

I loved that, "not the descendents" not suffering line.

It tends to fly in the face of the logic that tells me that the good
fortunes of certain families did no good for their descendents either.

I know that the fortunes of a black slave couldn't possibly have any
effect on a black descendent of today, just like the current crop of
Kennedies don't profit by their educations, estates, political power
their old poppa and grandpoppa didn't get by way of his rum running
back in prohibition...sure.

And those Rothchilds, well every generation had to start fresh,
don'tchaknow.

The great problem with reparations will be that the potentials of
those who died in slavery can not be known. There will be no parity
because while some were by genetic inheritence just ordinary folks,
some where geniuses who died in poverty without ever being able to
gain from their capacities...locked forever in the ground, lost to
their ancestors.

If you live in America every day of your life you enjoy the
convenience and sometimes your very life to inventions of black
geniuses.

But then, that can be left alone. Hopefully their children profited by
their legacy to them.

Kane

[Kane]

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 22:14:07 GMT, Gunner >
wrote:

>On 24 Nov 2003 19:58:43 GMT, Ignoramus3100
> wrote:
>
>>>>
>>> Then that somehow makes slavery right??? We are doing them a
favor, right?
>>
>>It does not make slavery wrong, but the present generation blacks in
>>the US benefited from their forefathers being imported. Who suffered
>>is their forefathers and not the descendants.
>
>A not particularly politically correct question....

That's okay...we don't stand on ceremony.

>If Whites

Whites don't owe. All those that profit by the labors of millions of
slaves owe.

>owe black descendants of slaves reparations...

Many blacks will not participate in the outpay, but will in the taxes
to make them. Blacks too have profited, some of them, but their own
ancestors contributions to this nation.

>I wonder if we
>can get a refund on all the Welfare and entitlement payments we have
>given them?

Nope. Most that are in that state of poverty wouldn't be there without
the help of the controlling majority.

What society pays for is maintainence of a cheap labor pool. It just
happens that one of the largest at present, and for a considerable
time historically, has been black.

>Or do we credit them the balance? When agreed amount of reparation
>money is set..can we compare it with those monies already paid?

Nope. That was rent payments for the use of their ancestors labors and
production. Or lease, if you like. Or consumption of.
>
> And whom owes whom more?
>
Those with owe those without. Not too difficult a question really.

Been in any REAL ghettos lately?

What is needed goes beyond simply money. It has to be addressed at the
damage done. Many black people came out of the experience of slavery
just fine. Some were more injured and haven't really recoved.

That was explained to me by a young black women...obviously with the
mentallity of a genius if she hadn't discovered it yet. In 1991 she
and I were discussing reparations (yep, been around for quite some
time now) and she wanted a major focus on psychological services for
healing and recovery.

Seems to make sense to me. Many people that are in a shooting war come
out with memories of things that are disabling. And a few hundred
years of it generation after generation would, I think, cause some
disabilities to be planted.

>Gunner

When you go to visit the ghetto, as I suggested, you certainly should
carry. I can't really guess what you might run into. And I'm not going
to rely myself on the extraordinary patience ordinary black people
have shown for so long.

I mean, after all, some of them are actually like you and I...r r r r

I don't think Bakersfield has a respectable sized one. Try Pheonix.
Hey, better and closer, try South Sacramento....it's a pip.

>"The British attitude is to treat society like a game preserve where
a
>certain percentage of the 'antelope' are expected to be eaten by the
>"lions".
>Christopher Morton

Say, did Chris ever out himself one way or another? I always loved how
he drove the anti gun loons out of their tiny little heads about his
race one way or another.

What's your bet? I say he's black. You?

Swing low, sweet chariot.........

Kane

[Kane]

Now here's a pip...

Something of bobb's no doubt.

see my reply intersperced.....
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From:
>To:
>Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 2:05 PM
>Subject: Immigration Alert: Benefits Plan For Illegal Aliens?
>
>
>**************************************************
>*** Please Forward, and sign the petition to
>*** stop immigration now!
>*** http://www.stopimmigrationnow.org
>**************************************************
>
>Benefits Plan For Illegal Aliens?
>
>Hi,
>
>As hard as it is to believe,

Hey, I can believe just about anything. I read email and post to the
Web.

included in the massive prescription drug benefit plan currently being
debated by the Senate is a provision that would provide ONE BILLION
DOLLARS of our federal taxes to pay for the cost of healthcare
provided to illegal aliens in our border states (almost 100% along the
Mexican border).
>

Yah mean if I want to go down to the border I'm going to have to hang
around a bunch of sick Mexicans?

That's going to smart.

>Whatever your opinion about the prescription drug benefit plan in
general, you must call your senators as soon as possible and let them
know what you think about this.
>
>Demand that they remove this funding for illegal aliens!

And allow a disease pool to build up to flow out to the rest of the
nation?

>America should not be paying the healthcare costs of foreign nations.

I don't get how Mexicans living on the US side or working in the US
create a valid cost for a foreign nation..such as Mexico.

Are those Mexicans working in the US? Are they paying taxes in the US?

Then they have a right to the same services that everyone else that
lives and works here get.

>
>I can think of a long list of people who should FIRST get this money
(or keep this money), all of them American citizens.

I only know one. His name is bobb. He should get his first just to pay
him off so he'll have some dinero to go back to school. No tiene
dinaro, loco Si.

>**************************************************
>What you can do
>**************************************************
>
>Call your rep, senators, and president. Let your voice be heard on
immigration!
>
>Gov Contact Info:
>Whitehouse comments: 202-456-1111
>http://www.senate.gov/
>http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html
>
>**************************************************
>Correction
>**************************************************
>
>In the last action alert, we announced that Senator Kyl from Arizona
was in favor of the agricultural guestworker program. Fortunately he
is not.

Oh, these Mexican's aren't just indigent touristas then. They come
here and work, earn their pay too I've heard. I would not work all day
in the hot sun in conditions they do for anything. I'm a lazy ass
white American.

>You can call him and thank him for being opposed to the guestworker
program, which is in fact a blanket amnesty for illegal aliens.
>

If all the illigal aliens being ****ed about quite right now and all
walked, swam, paddled, flew, back home to their contry of origin the
economy of this nation would grind screechingly to a halt.

>Unfortunately, Senator Kyl does support Orrin Hatch's bill to provide
in-state tuition rates for illegal alien college students, which also
includes an amnesty provision. So you can ask him to not support
in-state tuition while you have his assistant on the line.
>

Damn. First thing yah know those furriners will be catchin' on and
gettin' ideas. Spoiling a good thing for lazy ass white americans that
can use them against other white americans to divert those other white
americans from catchin' on to how EVERYONE IS GETTIN' SCREWED, BLACK
WHITE RED YELLOW AND BROWN the "the man" with the money.

>Also be sure to ask him to remove healthcare funding for illegal
aliens in the prescription drug benefit plan!

Watch the drug companies squeal....eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.....


>Kyl:
>(202) 224-4521 | (602) 840-1891 | (520) 575-8633
>
>**************************************************
>Some Free Market Hope
>**************************************************
>
>We don't just have power as free citizens or as voters. We also have
power as consumers.
>
>Now that Dell has changed it's offshoring policy, I suggest we call
other companies that have been famous for offshoring jobs to India.
Off the top of my head American Express comes to mind. Remember,
whenever you are called you can ask what country they are calling
from. They have to tell you!
>
>http://www.stopimmigrationnow.org/news.html

Now there IS a good idea. And while you are at it ask to have the
trade sanctions lifted on all those foreign nations. That diplomacy by
economic threat thing is getting a bit out of hand.

>**************************************************
>Other Good News
>**************************************************
>
>After a tremendous amount of work from activists all over the
country, congress UNANIMOUSLY passed the workplace verification
program - and expanded it to all 50 states. President Bush is expected
to sign the bill. You can of course encourage/thank him: (202)
456-1111 or 456-1414
>

I'm for it. And a living wage too. Now watch white america catch on to
the truth. Someone still has to dip sewers, crop the tomatos, sweep,
mop, etc...and for a decent wage. And who knows how and is willing?

R R R R R

>The tide is turning. Let's make it a tidal wave!

You betcha. Let's hear it for WHITE POWER!!!....OPPS! 'Scuse please,
wrong group. Can someone show me to the talk.nazis.are.us newsgroup?
>
>Greg
>
>
>**************************************************
>What Tom Tancredo has to say about this
>**************************************************
>
>Tancredo Balks At Billion Dollar Boon For Illegal Aliens
>
>"If you build an illegal alien entitlement program, they will come"
>
>WASHINGTON, D.C. - Congressman Tom Tancredo (CO-06) was shocked at
the conference report to H.R. 1, or what he calls the Patients Bill of
Rights for Illegal Immigrants, an expanded version of an ill-advised,
little noticed provision included in the Senate passed version of the
bill.
>
>"Congress has been scraping to find an additional $1 billion for
veterans health care, but doesn't blink when it comes to providing $1
billion in entitlements to illegal immigrants," said Tancredo,
chairman of the Immigration Reform Caucus. "Writers of this Medicare
bill have apparently never seen the movie Field of Dreams - if you
build an illegal alien entitlement program, they will come."
>
>The provision - which now encompasses six pages in the conference
report - provides $1 billion to reimburse hospitals for health care
costs associated with treating illegal aliens. The provision has also
been expanded to include the health care costs of aliens who have been
temporarily paroled into the U.S., and even Mexican citizens who enter
the country for 72 hours using a border crossing card.
>
>The three-term representative from Littleton, Colorado continued
with, "While I do not dispute assertions about the financial hardships
that mandatory care presents for hospitals and health care providers,
I remain concerned that these funds will be flowing to providers in
states that actively aid and abet illegal immigration."
>
>"Many of the states that will benefit from this provision have made
themselves magnets for illegal immigration by enacting ill-advised
policies that permit illegal aliens to obtain driver's licenses,
attend higher education for in-state rates, and obtain public services
through the use of consular ID cards. These policies create
incentives for illegal immigration and drive the need for these
emergency health care reimbursements - reimbursements that would be
underwritten by the American taxpayer if this bill becomes law. This
provision makes a bad bill even worse."
>
>**************************************************
>
>Be glad we have Tom Tancredo working for us in congress.
>
>
>
>**************************************************
>*** Please Forward, and sign the petition to
>*** stop immigration now!
>*** http://www.stopimmigrationnow.org
>**************************************************
>

Hell, if I was a working illegal alien I'd stop paying taxes and dump
a little tea in the harbor.

The big problem with illegal aliens is that they want to become legals
and wouldn't you know it, they want education, an increase in pay, and
not having to work in conditions that would kill a boar hog.

Who the hell do they think they are undermining the highly lucrative
sweatshop economy? Well, I never....hmpphhh.

Kane

[Greg Hanson]

Greg wrote
> >Where'd you take your economics Commander McBrag?

Kane wrote
> ...did you take your economics the same place
> you took your legal "motion" writing courses?

Firstly it was a cooperative effort, I just helped.

I never BRAGGED of any superior ability to write motions.
I do believe that you obtained your economics in the
same place, which makes you just the puffed up weasel
one would expect for Commander McBrag. Quite.

I see that you have started your own little race war
in completely the WRONG place. It suits you, Commander.
Every Commander McBrag needs their Boer War.

Tally Ho.

[Dan Sullivan]

"Greg Hanson" > wrote in message
om...
> Greg wrote
> > >Where'd you take your economics Commander McBrag?
>
> Kane wrote
> > ...did you take your economics the same place
> > you took your legal "motion" writing courses?
>
> Firstly it was a cooperative effort, I just helped.

Yeah, you helped destroy any chance of reunification.

The mother's as freakin dumb as you.

And the little girl is in the best place she could be.

> I never BRAGGED of any superior ability to write motions.

Yes, that would be wrong.

And after being on this NG for over a year you failed to ask for any advice
on the Motion until AFTER you filed it in Court.

There were lawyers here, CPS workers, people who'd beat CPS numerous
times...

You're the guy who stays up all night studying for a urine test.

[Greg Hanson]

Tom Enright wrote
> >Certainly the English share some responsibility for
> >their suffering, but they don't owe me anything.

It seems like the biggest wish was that the Brits
would just plain LEAVE, but they also made that
problematic because of loyalists and cronies.
The corrupt ""legal"" system is a study in terror.

> The Irish Potato Famine was a political ploy.
> There was no "famine" other than by political
> manipulation by the British.

Political ploy?
More like a grand FRAUD, seeking helpful donations
for the ""famine"" from around the world, and
directing them all to England.

Political Manipulation?
MORE like genocidal WARFARE.
The Brits took every foodstuff and product
they could, AT GUNPOINT, throughout the country.
They located ships at ports all around the country
and did the complete vampire thing to feed England.
British goals of starving massive numbers
of Irish was written down in documents.
"Holocaust" is not an exaggeration.

> You were conned and you ate it.

I'm not sure. He looked like he did blame the Brits
but just didn't want to go into this kind of depth
in a thread about a different subject, Kane.

Clearly, Tom's made the point well that he does not
feel owed reparations for wrongs to his ancestors.

What if he was half Brit and Half Eire?
Should his Brit half pay his Eire half? :)

WHY is all of this reparations stuff in
alt.support.child.protective.services anyway?

Kane, Since you are big on reparations are you
now declaring your left wing political stripe?

Are are you still maintaining the BLUFF that
you are politically conservative?

Your raging for reparations is a dead giveaway
that you are a liberal, even further left than
the Dems.

But could you take this raging to a place where
it belongs?

[bobb]

"Kane" > wrote in message
om...
> On 24 Nov 2003 08:55:24 -0800, (Greg Hanson)
> wrote:
>
> >Kane wrote
> >> `scuse the prior N referrence. I like to speak
> >> so Honky can be sure to hear over his braying.
> >
> >I wonder how SPD will like your tokenization
> >and patronizing behaviors?
>
> Explaining my use of the word "******" when both he and I know what
> that loaded term means and is used for in different contexts?
>
> I guess we'll have to let him decide for himself.
>
> Kinda get's yah, eh? That's you are so ignorant I mean.
>
> >Going for those liberal brownie points again eh?
>
> Kinda speakin' the truth doesn't get me brownie points.
>
> I leave that kind of sucky behavior up to little ****s that slather
> the backsides of the other child abusers hereabouts.
>
> You have little idea of what we were talking about. Which speaks
> volumes to your ignorance.
>
> So tell me, suckass. Where do you stand on White Reparations to
> Blacks?
>

Awww... you didn't ask me where I stand on white reparations to blacks,
Kane.

bobb

> I won't be the least surprized if you dodge and weasel, true to form.
>
> And if you think there's some merit in it I'll be sure NOT to label
> you as a liberal brownie point suckup.
>
> Kane

[Kane]

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:21:48 GMT, Gunner >
wrote:

>On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 07:08:52 GMT, "Chia Pet" <Chia
>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>"Gunner" > wrote in message
...
>>> On 24 Nov 2003 19:58:43 GMT, Ignoramus3100
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>> >>>
>>> >> Then that somehow makes slavery right??? We are doing them a
favor,
>>right?
>>> >
>>> >It does not make slavery wrong, but the present generation blacks
in
>>> >the US benefited from their forefathers being imported. Who
suffered
>>> >is their forefathers and not the descendants.
>>>
>>> A not particularly politically correct question....
>>>
>>> If Whites owe black descendants of slaves reparations...I wonder
if we
>>> can get a refund on all the Welfare and entitlement payments we
have
>>> given them?
>>>
>>> Or do we credit them the balance? When agreed amount of reparation
>>> money is set..can we compare it with those monies already paid?
>>>
>>> And whom owes whom more?
>>>
>>> Gunner
>>
>>Dumb question on both sides because there's no way in hell either
will ever
>>happen. Just idiots at the fringe spewing hot air.
>
>
>Not a dumb question at all. If one makes the assumption that the
>descendants of long ago slaves deserve some sort of monetary
>compensation..then the train of logic plays out.

No, it's not "some sort of monetary compensation." I don't doubt but
what it could be, now that we have the capacity of our modern day
supercomputers, work out a just compensation family by family.

Not what I'm suggesting at all. Reparations would be used, targetted,
to the poorest and most disavantaged blacks. In fact I'd be taxing all
people in the upper 20% predecution income range, that would be only
folks well above the 38% bracket...I don't think you qualify.

However, that's not what I'm interested in. I'm interested in a social
program to help the last of the left behind have a shot at what I, as
a white man can have as a matter of course. A chance to better myself.

>Reparations, are no more, nor no less than playing the race card,

And if both groups were white? It isn't a matter of race, but simple
of one identified group taking the lives and labors of another
identified group without compensation or penalty.

>to
>line their own pockets,

Though I kid about it I don't really intend to line my pockets with
what I think is just compensation for blacks.

>by appealing to some White Guilt trip

I think a bit of guilt wouldn't be all that bad a response. I don't
feel guilty for what was done to blacks though, as I didn't do it. I
do feel guilty that I profit by it to this day and blacks are still
help back from access to the opportunities I took for granted, and
squandered or developed on my own merits.

>that
>only Liberals and retards would fall for.

Gosh, would you be calling me a liberal or a retard? Tsk.

>"Whitey he be owning me Cable TV and Nikes cousin what he did some
>dead black people a zillion years ago. Yuins can simply add it to ma
>welfare check"

I guess that kind of sums up your argument.

You do realize that the children of whites can pretty much take for
granted their clothes and cable TV, right. Have you tried a walk
through the real black ghettos, not the neighborhoods, but where the
most poverty ridden of blacks live, barely?

>Which brings up another point..if the Left thinks what Old Dead White
>Guys (like the Founders) did years ago, dont mean **** today......how
>come....

It appears you are going just a tad astray.

>Hummm.....
>.oh..ya..thats right. Left-Libs are hypocrits. I keep forgetting
that.

Not being a left lib I'm at an impasse has to whether or not they are.
I can't read their minds. On the other hand, as a conservation with
the intellect to study this problem I know fair when I see it and a
gip also.

The blacks of this country got gipped and they have overcome
anyway....except for a few left behind that were too damaged by
slavery to recover, and were held down by racism.

Top 20% income earners only, whole income, not "taxable" income.
That's because of them controlling the capitol goods in this country.
I'm not even asking for that, though that is the rightful legacy of
the people who died to create it.

>Sorry

I can see that.

>Gunner

Kane

[Offbreed]

(Kane) wrote in message >...

> You haven't visited the worst urban slums then, have you? It's just
> like a third world slum experience. No garbage service, phone, water
> and electrical service spotty. Poor police protection, and in fact BAD
> police protection.
>
> Take a walk there white boy. I have, and I'm as white lookin' as you
> I'd bet. It's a thrill a minute.

Why is it that the Koreans and other immigrants, even starting with
worse handicaps, are still able to accrue greater wealth than American
negroes?

"Reading be fo' whitey" and doing homework or getting a 9-5 job is
"selling out to whitey".

My grandparents started out as poor as any American negroes today, and
raised my parents in spite of their abject poverty. I have dropped
down into abject poverty, and climbed back out several times. The
American negroes that that were right there with me and working
alongside me that gave up "black culture" made it. Some started to
make it, then decided that the price of giving up the way they were
raised was too steep a price, and went back to the loser culture of
the US Black Slum. Some were too bigoted to accept membership in a
subculture that was mostly not US Black. This is what I have SEEN, not
what was written in some text book or claimed on talk radio, or PBS.

As for Africa? The whole place is crammed with ancient cultures,
seeped with very conservative practices aimed at perserving the powers
of the local bosses and witch doctors (by whatever name you wish to
call them). Yeah, they get a "new shirt" and the tribal chieftan is
now called "President" or some such, but what has changed?

How often do such ancient cultures suddenly blossem into something
more advanced without a revolutionary change in enviornment that
forces a big change in the culture or without an influx of some
immigrant group to change the culture?

[Kane]

"bobb" > wrote in message et>...

snip...................

> > So tell me, suckass. Where do you stand on White Reparations to
> > Blacks?
> >
>
> Awww... you didn't ask me where I stand on white reparations to blacks,
> Kane.

So sorry. Go ahead. (Be sure and read all my posts on the subject
first, if you'll be so kind).

> bobb

Kane

snip......................

[Kane]

On 25 Nov 2003 19:55:51 -0800, (Offbreed)
wrote:

(Kane) wrote in message >...
>
>> You haven't visited the worst urban slums then, have you? It's just
>> like a third world slum experience. No garbage service, phone,
water
>> and electrical service spotty. Poor police protection, and in fact
BAD
>> police protection.
>>
>> Take a walk there white boy. I have, and I'm as white lookin' as
you
>> I'd bet. It's a thrill a minute.
>
>Why is it that the Koreans and other immigrants, even starting with
>worse handicaps, are still able to accrue greater wealth than
American
>negroes?

Because the only oppression and suppression of Koreans, traditionally,
came from the Emperor's of China and by the Japanese occupiers prior
to WWII. Whites have different perceptions of asians vs blacks. A
Korean can walk into a bank with a business plan and get a sizable
business loan. A black has trouble walking into even a black owned
band and doing the same.

The effects of racism is NOT limited to white perceptions...All races,
including their own look down on blacks in certain ways. It's one of
insidious results of our particular brand of racisim.

>"Reading be fo' whitey" and doing homework or getting a 9-5 job is
>"selling out to whitey".

That is reaction to the 300-400 years of racisim and slaver and their
not ending after emancipation. In the vidoe "Blue Eyes Brown Eyes,"
the subjects, all white, that were cast without their being aware of
the exercise into the underdog role reverted in MINUTES to behavior
that is used to call blacks "******s."

In MINUTES mind you. Rowdy, confrontive, name calling, unresponsive to
commands...and those whites were being treated far LESS offensively
that blacks are in real life.

>My grandparents started out as poor as any American negroes today,
and
>raised my parents in spite of their abject poverty.

They were not lynched when they tried.

>I have dropped
>down into abject poverty, and climbed back out several times.

Been there done that. And everytime I came out it would have been far
harder for a black to do the same. I can get money, jobs, even loans
from friends than most poor blacks cannot...hell their friends don't
have any more than they do.

>The
>American negroes that that were right there with me and working
>alongside me that gave up "black culture" made it.

They got over on you, honkey. They didn't give up black culture at
home. What you are saying proves my point. If they behavior black they
will be descriminated against. I see it constantly. Hell, I even have
a negative reaction that I have to get under control when they act
black. It's in your face for a reason. And you think it's about being
difficult.

Do you have to give up being white to get a job? Hell, you don't even
know that you act "white," with a "white" accent, with "white" dress,
mannerism, colloquiellisms, ... hell you even wear "white" shoes.

>Some started to
>make it, then decided that the price of giving up the way they were
>raised was too steep a price,

I guess.

How would you like to have to act "black" to get a job? We are forcing
them to act "white" to.

>and went back to the loser culture of
>the US Black Slum.

I retreated to my "rich white ghetto" long ago. I can afford to. I
don't have to put up with having to act black to get by in society.

>Some were too bigoted to accept membership in a
>subculture that was mostly not US Black.

What subculture? Irish? German? Italian? British? etc.? Why should
they? I laugh out loud as I see whites adopting dress talk and
mannerism of the urban nee rural black culture. It's a gas.

> This is what I have SEEN, not
>what was written in some text book or claimed on talk radio, or PBS.

What makes you think the text books don't say the same thing. I have
seen it. The difference is I know what's up. You don't.

You think it's bein' a "******." Well, don't be surprized if you
aren't portrayed as you bray your bigotry of being considered a
"Honkey."

>As for Africa? The whole place is crammed with ancient cultures,
>seeped with very conservative practices aimed at perserving the
powers
>of the local bosses and witch doctors (by whatever name you wish to
>call them). Yeah, they get a "new shirt" and the tribal chieftan is
>now called "President" or some such, but what has changed?

And certain, mostly non white "ancient cultures" have been
systematically exploited, and then left out of payoff for their work.

>How often do such ancient cultures suddenly blossem into something
>more advanced without a revolutionary change in enviornment that
>forces a big change in the culture or without an influx of some
>immigrant group to change the culture?

You'll have to explain that for me.

If it's what I think you mean...these cultures did just that when they
came to this country, in no more than three, and usually only two
generations: Chinese, Irish, Italian, Polish, British, Welch,
Japanese, French, Portuguese, Armenian, Dutch, German. The more white
it was the quicker, but it still didn't take many generations to
morph.

And there was no revolutionary change that took place, just whitey NOT
getting in their way as blacks have experienced.

I grew up with blacks that fully bought into walking and talking white
when they needed to to make a living. I watch two generations (three
really when I think of the elders) go through it to little avial. A
few made it out, movin' on up, but not many. Not like my mostly
working class forebears did. I was the only person in my maternal
lineage to graduate college, and one of one two that did so in my
paternal lineage.

Yet I have never lived, and I don't think you really have, in the kind
of third world poverty that the bottom levels of poor blacks do. We
think we know white poverty is the same as black, but that's untrue.
You have to go there. Suck up your butt tight and walk on through. Try
the ghetto's of Phoenix and Sacramento. I'm sure there are others, but
those are the two I've been in.

You can't believe it until you see it.

Nice chatting with you.

Kane

[bobb]

"Offbreed" > wrote in message
om...
> (Kane) wrote in message
>...
>
> > You haven't visited the worst urban slums then, have you? It's just
> > like a third world slum experience. No garbage service, phone, water
> > and electrical service spotty. Poor police protection, and in fact BAD
> > police protection.
> >
> > Take a walk there white boy. I have, and I'm as white lookin' as you
> > I'd bet. It's a thrill a minute.
>
> Why is it that the Koreans and other immigrants, even starting with
> worse handicaps, are still able to accrue greater wealth than American
> negroes?
>
> "Reading be fo' whitey" and doing homework or getting a 9-5 job is
> "selling out to whitey".
>
> My grandparents started out as poor as any American negroes today, and
> raised my parents in spite of their abject poverty. I have dropped
> down into abject poverty, and climbed back out several times. The
> American negroes that that were right there with me and working
> alongside me that gave up "black culture" made it. Some started to
> make it, then decided that the price of giving up the way they were
> raised was too steep a price, and went back to the loser culture of
> the US Black Slum. Some were too bigoted to accept membership in a
> subculture that was mostly not US Black. This is what I have SEEN, not
> what was written in some text book or claimed on talk radio, or PBS.

Interesting observation. I'd kinda like to know more. White folks have done
the same. Not everyone aspires to the same level of sucess yet we beleive
everyone wants to be the CEO of a company or something. Our comfort level
varies and for the majority .. 9 to 5 is ideal.

>
> As for Africa? The whole place is crammed with ancient cultures,
> seeped with very conservative practices aimed at perserving the powers
> of the local bosses and witch doctors (by whatever name you wish to
> call them). Yeah, they get a "new shirt" and the tribal chieftan is
> now called "President" or some such, but what has changed?
>
> How often do such ancient cultures suddenly blossem into something
> more advanced without a revolutionary change in enviornment that
> forces a big change in the culture or without an influx of some
> immigrant group to change the culture?

Africa is a continent with distinct cultures. I'm a bit familiar with the
Maasai and Kikuyu tribe in Kenya. The Maasai are more well known for the
warring factions. They still live in huts made with cow dung, leave their
dead for roaming animals, and cook on open pit fires. The 'wealthy' will
have corragated iron sheeting for the roofs of their huts. The women take
of the children, milk cattle, repair the huts, cook and carry water on their
heads. I haven't figured out what the men do but they can have many wives
and may have sex with anyone considered adult. It seems they are still
warriors in the strictist sense of the word and protect their and cattle
from raiding tribes. Boy of age 10 still practice the passage of adulthood
by being circumcised and are expected to be sexually active. Prior to age
ten they engage in same sex activites with other boys and men. An uncle is
usually a mentor who prepares the boy for his first hetrosexual experience.
I don't know how exactly.. but I could guess.

You are right... enviorment changes have an impact on current cultures but
that has mostly to do with economics, new laws, diminishing lands. All of
this has reduced the need for men being warrior's and they have taken to
selling beads and craft stuff to tourists. It seems the men (remember at age
ten) have little responsibility except for arranging parades and dances.
(The women and younger chidlren do most of the work) There is no need to
search out new lands or grazing areas but in their image of being tribal
warriors they enforce cultual laws.

My driver was a former Maasai warrior and I['d love to relate stories he
told of the old and new cultural changes... and how he was affected. It
really fasinating. Blacks tend to hold on to what they beleive are cultrual
roots but many have no idea except those related to festivities, dress and
appearance. Not unlike a lot of American's who think Chicago is a state...
I watch Jay Leno... and love ignorance.

bobb

[bobb]

"Kane" > wrote in message
om...
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 22:14:07 GMT, Gunner >
> wrote:
>
> >On 24 Nov 2003 19:58:43 GMT, Ignoramus3100
> > wrote:
> >
> >>>>
> >>> Then that somehow makes slavery right??? We are doing them a
> favor, right?
> >>
> >>It does not make slavery wrong, but the present generation blacks in
> >>the US benefited from their forefathers being imported. Who suffered
> >>is their forefathers and not the descendants.
> >
> >A not particularly politically correct question....
>
> That's okay...we don't stand on ceremony.
>
> >If Whites
>
> Whites don't owe. All those that profit by the labors of millions of
> slaves owe.
>
> >owe black descendants of slaves reparations...
>
> Many blacks will not participate in the outpay, but will in the taxes
> to make them. Blacks too have profited, some of them, but their own
> ancestors contributions to this nation.
>
> >I wonder if we
> >can get a refund on all the Welfare and entitlement payments we have
> >given them?
>
> Nope. Most that are in that state of poverty wouldn't be there without
> the help of the controlling majority.

Seems to me the Asians and other who have landed here most recently seem to
do quite well... in spite of the controlling majority. I made a comment
earlier about Jay Leno's 'street walking' and I laugh at the ignoance of
those he interviews. Could it be blacks are 1) ignorant (not much of an
excuse these days when white folk pay for the school) 2) unable or not
willing to learn (possible because of the propagana they are exposed to)
3) or as a product of their culture and expectations they live up to
sterotypical behaviors which have been in-bred since their african days.
Black women in today's africa (Kenya) and the U.S.. are the care-takers, at
least to the extent of their abilities. In both countries the men do as
little as possible except father children. Those who have crossed the
cultural borders do quite well... those who refuse, fail.

Black society doesn't dwell on black sucess stories for they still hue and
cry about how badly they are being treated.

I can relate many stories about how white men have been treated unfairly by
white men... but that's life. Fact is, a lot of blacks are far more
sucessful than some whites. Slavery is over.. get over it.. move on and
get a life.

bobb

>
> What society pays for is maintainence of a cheap labor pool. It just
> happens that one of the largest at present, and for a considerable
> time historically, has been black.
>
> >Or do we credit them the balance? When agreed amount of reparation
> >money is set..can we compare it with those monies already paid?
>
> Nope. That was rent payments for the use of their ancestors labors and
> production. Or lease, if you like. Or consumption of.
> >
> > And whom owes whom more?
> >
> Those with owe those without. Not too difficult a question really.
>
> Been in any REAL ghettos lately?
>
> What is needed goes beyond simply money. It has to be addressed at the
> damage done. Many black people came out of the experience of slavery
> just fine. Some were more injured and haven't really recoved.
>
> That was explained to me by a young black women...obviously with the
> mentallity of a genius if she hadn't discovered it yet. In 1991 she
> and I were discussing reparations (yep, been around for quite some
> time now) and she wanted a major focus on psychological services for
> healing and recovery.
>
> Seems to make sense to me. Many people that are in a shooting war come
> out with memories of things that are disabling. And a few hundred
> years of it generation after generation would, I think, cause some
> disabilities to be planted.
>
> >Gunner
>
> When you go to visit the ghetto, as I suggested, you certainly should
> carry. I can't really guess what you might run into. And I'm not going
> to rely myself on the extraordinary patience ordinary black people
> have shown for so long.
>
> I mean, after all, some of them are actually like you and I...r r r r
>
> I don't think Bakersfield has a respectable sized one. Try Pheonix.
> Hey, better and closer, try South Sacramento....it's a pip.
>
> >"The British attitude is to treat society like a game preserve where
> a
> >certain percentage of the 'antelope' are expected to be eaten by the
> >"lions".
> >Christopher Morton
>
> Say, did Chris ever out himself one way or another? I always loved how
> he drove the anti gun loons out of their tiny little heads about his
> race one way or another.
>
> What's your bet? I say he's black. You?
>
> Swing low, sweet chariot.........
>
> Kane

[Kane]

On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 10:12:02 GMT, strabo > wrote:

>On 28 Nov 2003 12:28:14 -0800,
>(Kane) wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 08:14:02 -0800, Robert Sturgeon
> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 11:33:58 GMT, "Rosemarie Ventura"
> wrote:
>>>
>>>(snips)
>>>
>>>>Second we subtract out the wealth created by the transcontinental
>>>>railroad. It's the Chinese (working from the west) and the Irish
>>>>(working from the east) that got the shaft on that one. We
certainly
>>>>can't give African American's reparations from wealth built by
>>>>Chinese slave labor!
>>>
>>>The Chinese railroad builders were not slaves. They came to the
U.S.
>>>voluntarily. They worked on the railroad for agreed upon wages.
>>They
>>>were not even the employers' first choice of a work force, but
their
>>>superior skills and habits won them the job.
>>>
>>>(rest snipped)
>>
>>
>>In response to all the wonderful logic, and adroit misplacement and
>>artful reframing of what I've actually said, let me point out the
>>following:
>>
>>Nothing in my proposal suggests levying against "whites."
>>
>>No money would come out of the pocket of those of us taxpayers,
>>(outside the extremely wealthy...all of them) who are NOW PAYING FOR
>>VARIOUS PROGRAMS FOR REHABILITIATION, but would instead shift away
>>from us to the beneficiaries of our economy based on it history
>>foundation of slave labor for 300 years, give or take.
>>
>>I do appreciate that I've inspired such vigorous exercise, no matter
>>how willfully resistant to the facts I've given, and such wonderous
>>avoidance of said facts.
>>
>>Now, what do you say to the proposal as I've once again posted it
>>above?
>>
>>Do something useful. Scratching your asses and opinin' that you
think
>>it's all a plot to give the blacks your pocket change is starting to
>>look a little supid, don'tchathink?
>
>Any transfer of wealth within a given economic system effects
>all components of the system. However, given your proclivity
>toward fairness, I suggest that you should devote your life to
>making things right for the downtrodden by giving a portion
>percentage of your goods and labor to the effort.
>
>God will like it and so will I.

I am pleased to know that I find favor with you and "God."

I routinely pay taxes and have for many decades. And I not only know
that some of my taxes go to social programs (you didn't know that?)
and I very much approve.

However, in keeping with the great American tradition of being a pain
in the ass about how my taxes are used I come with these notions I
sometimes foolishly post to Usenet (Pearls before Swine?) to see how
they fly before sending yet another of my vicious letters to my
legislators insisting they consider MY proposals for funding.

Isn't that just ducky?

Kane

[Kane]

"bobb" > wrote in message . net>...
> "Kane" > wrote in message
> om...
> > On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 22:14:07 GMT, Gunner >
> > wrote:
> >
> > >On 24 Nov 2003 19:58:43 GMT, Ignoramus3100
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >>>>
> > >>> Then that somehow makes slavery right??? We are doing them a
> favor, right?
> > >>
> > >>It does not make slavery wrong, but the present generation blacks in
> > >>the US benefited from their forefathers being imported. Who suffered
> > >>is their forefathers and not the descendants.
> > >
> > >A not particularly politically correct question....
> >
> > That's okay...we don't stand on ceremony.
> >
> > >If Whites
> >
> > Whites don't owe. All those that profit by the labors of millions of
> > slaves owe.
> >
> > >owe black descendants of slaves reparations...
> >
> > Many blacks will not participate in the outpay, but will in the taxes
> > to make them. Blacks too have profited, some of them, but their own
> > ancestors contributions to this nation.
> >
> > >I wonder if we
> > >can get a refund on all the Welfare and entitlement payments we have
> > >given them?
> >
> > Nope. Most that are in that state of poverty wouldn't be there without
> > the help of the controlling majority.
>
> Seems to me the Asians and other who have landed here most recently seem to
> do quite well... in spite of the controlling majority.

I'm not sure what you mean by "landed here most recently." I know the
Chinese community on the west coast very well. I know their history.
You might look it up. Look for ["chinese" massacred]. That should
offer you a bit of history.

You'll also note that though there are certainly a great many chinese
who have integrated the Chinese ghetto still exists. They do put a
face on for tourists though. There is a great deal of hidden poverty.

And mainstream America, just as you, has a reverse bigotry that modern
chinese americans find enrages them...the expectation is that they
will do more work for less money better than any other race of
employee. Some Chinese Americans have written freely about it in
recent years. Same is true for other Asian Americans.

Finally...if you think recent Asian immigrants are doing so great you
haven't really followed their progress. Ever hear of Asian Gangs? So
much for on more bigots ranting.

> I made a comment
> earlier about Jay Leno's 'street walking' and I laugh at the ignoance of
> those he interviews.

Of course they kept all the interviews in where the subject was bright
and knowledgable even if it would have sacrified the point of the
'street walking' bit. He is not a comedian, he's a social
reseacher....right?

> Could it be blacks are 1) ignorant (not much of an
> excuse these days when white folk pay for the school) 2) unable or not
> willing to learn (possible because of the propagana they are exposed to)
> 3) or as a product of their culture and expectations they live up to
> sterotypical behaviors which have been in-bred since their african days.

I noted recently with another ignorant racist bigot that the answer
then would equate with blacks being bad. In fact, as a shorthand and
in the spirit of economy I coined a term to describe how you ignorant
racist bigots (IRBs) define such blacks that haven't been able to make
it yet as "BADBLACKS!"

Work for you, asshole?

> Black women in today's africa (Kenya) and the U.S.. are the care-takers, at
> least to the extent of their abilities. In both countries the men do as
> little as possible except father children.

You are an expert of Kenya and africa then? An anthropoligist and
sociologist?

> Those who have crossed the
> cultural borders do quite well... those who refuse, fail.

You have an acute inability to see anything you don't wish to,
interpreting in little self comforting isolated bundles of bull****
what you think you are seeing.

In both Kenya and the US (I've been to both) there is also a long
tradition among various black communities of male present families.

But then, oddly enough I've seen reports that white families in the US
have rather a large number with single female heads of household. Are
we then to call them "BADWHITES!" ?

> Black society doesn't dwell on black sucess stories for they still hue and
> cry about how badly they are being treated.

Your extremely clumsy and incorrect use of a trite phrase shows
something of the level of knowledge you bring to the issues of race
and social problems.

"Black society," something you know little of beyond the lifetime of
conditioning you have absorbed and cling to so desperately to preserve
your white privelege without having to admit to it communicates little
to the larger world.....because of poor access to and control of the
media.

What they learned long ago though was how to get heard by reactive
behaviors.

YOU don't know what goes on in black society, asshole. And no matter
my interest or intense examination of such issues, neither do I. So
instead of running my mouth off every time I have a negative feeling
experience related to black people I find it useful to listen or even
better, ask and listen.

You'd be amazed what you could find out starting sans stereotype and
asking instead of declaring the nonsense you do.

> I can relate many stories about how white men have been treated unfairly by
> white men... but that's life.

This has to be going somewhere, or it's a typo.

> Fact is, a lot of blacks are far more
> sucessful than some whites.

Yah noticed, didjah?

From the end of the civil war, when a small nation of freed black
slaves, unlettered, illiterate (it was illegal to learn as a black or
teach a black to read), unskilled in commerce, finance, were suddenly
on their own the first thing they did...even when they still had
nowhere to live, was gather together and learn to read and write.

By 1900 less than fifty years after the end of the war and their
freedom began, they had college professors (DuBois) schools of higher
learning (GW Carver), and as many as 40 black members of congress,
doctors, lawyers, bankers, and successful black townships built from
scratch.

The southern response was Jim Crow...the systematic legal (well, there
were laws passed) stripping of the vote from them, 4500 lynchings of
blacks, about a 100 a year average, no longer allowed to sit in the
same public buildings as whites, drink from the same fountains,
excluded from business establishments.

By way of loss of the vote, by 1900, only one black congressman was
left, who, when announcing to his collegues his decision not to run
again pointed out that it was impossible for him to be elected in his
state due to Jim Crow.

He did give an impassioned presentation though, promising that though
the "American Negro" was down he would rise up again. His name was
White, and I've a hunch MLK Jr. was more than a little inspired by
him.

It would be 28 years before another black served in the US congress.
What does THAT tell you about what you say below.

> Slavery is over..

No, the formal institute is over. The informal institutionalized
suppression of a race is NOT. And that IS a form of slavery. Your
blatherings are testament to the continuing nature of "slavery."

> get over it..

When YOU get over it and recognize you have priveleges as a white the
problem will move further toward resolving itself.

During most of your working life you were employeed where black men
and women with your skills or more were not. You could freely go
places without even the thought of being hassled or arrested for your
race.

You rarely had to look in the mirror and wonder if, when you left to
enter the work world that morning, what you looked liked might get you
anything from insulted, cheated, to injured or killed that day.

> move on and
> get a life.

> bobb

....the IRB has spoken.

Kane

[bobb]

I'm not an advocate of spanking.. and never have.. but I fail to see how a
slap on the butt harms any child. I do take exception to those who
repeatedly slap a child which I view as a way for a mother to vent her
frustration and anger. There is a context problem when it comes to
spanking.

I find it unreal that anyone can associate spanking with later adult
behaviors. The 'experts' take a common behavior and twist it into something
that fits their mindset.

That being said, I did a little search on spanking and found that many
parents resort to bare-ass spanking and schools have ordered kids to drop
their pants while being spanked with paddles.. both of which I suppose
found it's roots in the old woodshed.

It might sound terrible but I've told a few kids if they did something
really out-rageous, and using one of their friends as behavior an example,
it would be just cause for a bare-assed spanking. It was just my way of
showing distain for certain certain behaviors I wouldn't approve or
tolerate. Of all the posts I've seen here none have alluded to bare-ass
spanking so in that context I see nothing wrong.

I also found there is a sexual content to spanking. Dumb me... I never
gave a thought about S & M associations. There are adults who get off on
spanking their kids.

Parents also use bare-ass spanking as a way of imposing further humilation
on a child by forcing him/her to undress and not alway in private but
rather an example to others.

What I also didn't give a thought to is there an age appropriate time not
to spank. My sense of spanking was usually that of a child younger than say
6 as an attention getter.. not a punishment. You don't touch the hot stove
or run out into the street.

I now understand there there are many contexts of spanking I was not aware
of.

bobb

[ChrisScaife]

"bobb" > wrote in message
k.net...
>
> I also found there is a sexual content to spanking. Dumb me... I never
> gave a thought about S & M associations. There are adults who get off on
> spanking their kids.

Hum...

I once saw a picture by a famous artist... of mother Mary spanking baby
Jezus.

I wish I could remember whom it was by!
The expression Mary's face really said it all!

Anyone else seen it ?

[ChrisScaife]

Oh wow!
Another one!

The one I saw Mary was scowling and looking vindictive.
Jezus was howling and looking desperate.

Thanks for finding this one though!


"toto" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 7 Dec 2003 10:41:11 +1300, "ChrisScaife"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"bobb" > wrote in message
> k.net...
> >>
> >> I also found there is a sexual content to spanking. Dumb me... I
never
> >> gave a thought about S & M associations. There are adults who get off
on
> >> spanking their kids.
> >
> >Hum...
> >
> >I once saw a picture by a famous artist... of mother Mary spanking baby
> >Jezus.
> >
> >I wish I could remember whom it was by!
> >The expression Mary's face really said it all!
> >
> >Anyone else seen it ?
> >
> I had not seen it, but found the reference. It's by Max Ernst.
>
> An image of the painting is online at:
>
> http://www.duke.edu/web/lit132/spanking.html
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Dorothy
>
> There is no sound, no cry in all the world
> that can be heard unless someone listens ..
>
> The Outer Limits

[bobb]

"Kane" > wrote in message
om...
> Now here's a pip...
>
> Something of bobb's no doubt.
>
> see my reply intersperced.....
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From:
> >To:
> >Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 2:05 PM
> >Subject: Immigration Alert: Benefits Plan For Illegal Aliens?
> >
> >
> >**************************************************
> >*** Please Forward, and sign the petition to
> >*** stop immigration now!
> >*** http://www.stopimmigrationnow.org
> >**************************************************
> >
> >Benefits Plan For Illegal Aliens?
> >
> >Hi,
> >
> >As hard as it is to believe,
>
> Hey, I can believe just about anything. I read email and post to the
> Web.
>
> included in the massive prescription drug benefit plan currently being
> debated by the Senate is a provision that would provide ONE BILLION
> DOLLARS of our federal taxes to pay for the cost of healthcare
> provided to illegal aliens in our border states (almost 100% along the
> Mexican border).
> >
>
> Yah mean if I want to go down to the border I'm going to have to hang
> around a bunch of sick Mexicans?
>
> That's going to smart.
>
> >Whatever your opinion about the prescription drug benefit plan in
> general, you must call your senators as soon as possible and let them
> know what you think about this.
> >
> >Demand that they remove this funding for illegal aliens!
>
> And allow a disease pool to build up to flow out to the rest of the
> nation?
>
> >America should not be paying the healthcare costs of foreign nations.
>
> I don't get how Mexicans living on the US side or working in the US
> create a valid cost for a foreign nation..such as Mexico.
>
> Are those Mexicans working in the US? Are they paying taxes in the US?
>
> Then they have a right to the same services that everyone else that
> lives and works here get.

Then it would seem Mexico should grant the same benefits but they don't.
It's illegal for an American citizen to own property in Mexico and are not
eligible for any Mexican 'benefits'.

>
> >
> >I can think of a long list of people who should FIRST get this money
> (or keep this money), all of them American citizens.
>
> I only know one. His name is bobb. He should get his first just to pay
> him off so he'll have some dinero to go back to school. No tiene
> dinaro, loco Si.
>
> >**************************************************
> >What you can do
> >**************************************************
> >
> >Call your rep, senators, and president. Let your voice be heard on
> immigration!
> >
> >Gov Contact Info:
> >Whitehouse comments: 202-456-1111
> >http://www.senate.gov/
> >http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html
> >
> >**************************************************
> >Correction
> >**************************************************
> >
> >In the last action alert, we announced that Senator Kyl from Arizona
> was in favor of the agricultural guestworker program. Fortunately he
> is not.
>
> Oh, these Mexican's aren't just indigent touristas then. They come
> here and work, earn their pay too I've heard. I would not work all day
> in the hot sun in conditions they do for anything. I'm a lazy ass
> white American.
>
> >You can call him and thank him for being opposed to the guestworker
> program, which is in fact a blanket amnesty for illegal aliens.
> >
>
> If all the illigal aliens being ****ed about quite right now and all
> walked, swam, paddled, flew, back home to their contry of origin the
> economy of this nation would grind screechingly to a halt.

Not so. That is merely an excuse for stupid ass politicians to pander for
mexican votes. Illegal votes. Any politican who gained office by verture
of mexican votes should be tossed out. We need a posting of all politicans
pandering to the mexicans and vote them out of offices as well. That
includes those who support driver licenses, social security benefits,
hospitalization, and blanket citizenship. Start with Senators Kyl and
Hatch and the rest will fall.

The problem is they have already done to much damage to our society and laws
they have managed to pass will be around for along time. Those who pushed
anti-smoking laws are out of office.. but we still see the effects of their
wrong-doing.

bobb

>
> >Unfortunately, Senator Kyl does support Orrin Hatch's bill to provide
> in-state tuition rates for illegal alien college students, which also
> includes an amnesty provision. So you can ask him to not support
> in-state tuition while you have his assistant on the line.
> >
>
> Damn. First thing yah know those furriners will be catchin' on and
> gettin' ideas. Spoiling a good thing for lazy ass white americans that
> can use them against other white americans to divert those other white
> americans from catchin' on to how EVERYONE IS GETTIN' SCREWED, BLACK
> WHITE RED YELLOW AND BROWN the "the man" with the money.
>
> >Also be sure to ask him to remove healthcare funding for illegal
> aliens in the prescription drug benefit plan!
>
> Watch the drug companies squeal....eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.....
>
>
> >Kyl:
> >(202) 224-4521 | (602) 840-1891 | (520) 575-8633
> >
> >**************************************************
> >Some Free Market Hope
> >**************************************************
> >
> >We don't just have power as free citizens or as voters. We also have
> power as consumers.
> >
> >Now that Dell has changed it's offshoring policy, I suggest we call
> other companies that have been famous for offshoring jobs to India.
> Off the top of my head American Express comes to mind. Remember,
> whenever you are called you can ask what country they are calling
> from. They have to tell you!
> >
> >http://www.stopimmigrationnow.org/news.html
>
> Now there IS a good idea. And while you are at it ask to have the
> trade sanctions lifted on all those foreign nations. That diplomacy by
> economic threat thing is getting a bit out of hand.
>
>

There seems to be a revolt taking place. C-Span, CNN, Fox and the like are
exposing stuff the public never really knew about. I suspect a lot grey
haired old men will lose their cushy legislative jobs in the near future and
not a vote too soon.

bobb

>**************************************************
> >Other Good News
> >**************************************************
> >
> >After a tremendous amount of work from activists all over the
> country, congress UNANIMOUSLY passed the workplace verification
> program - and expanded it to all 50 states. President Bush is expected
> to sign the bill. You can of course encourage/thank him: (202)
> 456-1111 or 456-1414
> >
>
> I'm for it. And a living wage too. Now watch white america catch on to
> the truth. Someone still has to dip sewers, crop the tomatos, sweep,
> mop, etc...and for a decent wage. And who knows how and is willing?
>
> R R R R R
>
> >The tide is turning. Let's make it a tidal wave!
>
> You betcha. Let's hear it for WHITE POWER!!!....OPPS! 'Scuse please,
> wrong group. Can someone show me to the talk.nazis.are.us newsgroup?
> >
> >Greg
> >
> >
> >**************************************************
> >What Tom Tancredo has to say about this
> >**************************************************
> >
> >Tancredo Balks At Billion Dollar Boon For Illegal Aliens
> >
> >"If you build an illegal alien entitlement program, they will come"
> >
> >WASHINGTON, D.C. - Congressman Tom Tancredo (CO-06) was shocked at
> the conference report to H.R. 1, or what he calls the Patients Bill of
> Rights for Illegal Immigrants, an expanded version of an ill-advised,
> little noticed provision included in the Senate passed version of the
> bill.
> >
> >"Congress has been scraping to find an additional $1 billion for
> veterans health care, but doesn't blink when it comes to providing $1
> billion in entitlements to illegal immigrants," said Tancredo,
> chairman of the Immigration Reform Caucus. "Writers of this Medicare
> bill have apparently never seen the movie Field of Dreams - if you
> build an illegal alien entitlement program, they will come."
> >
> >The provision - which now encompasses six pages in the conference
> report - provides $1 billion to reimburse hospitals for health care
> costs associated with treating illegal aliens. The provision has also
> been expanded to include the health care costs of aliens who have been
> temporarily paroled into the U.S., and even Mexican citizens who enter
> the country for 72 hours using a border crossing card.
> >
> >The three-term representative from Littleton, Colorado continued
> with, "While I do not dispute assertions about the financial hardships
> that mandatory care presents for hospitals and health care providers,
> I remain concerned that these funds will be flowing to providers in
> states that actively aid and abet illegal immigration."
> >
> >"Many of the states that will benefit from this provision have made
> themselves magnets for illegal immigration by enacting ill-advised
> policies that permit illegal aliens to obtain driver's licenses,
> attend higher education for in-state rates, and obtain public services
> through the use of consular ID cards. These policies create
> incentives for illegal immigration and drive the need for these
> emergency health care reimbursements - reimbursements that would be
> underwritten by the American taxpayer if this bill becomes law. This
> provision makes a bad bill even worse."
> >
> >**************************************************
> >
> >Be glad we have Tom Tancredo working for us in congress.
> >
> >
> >
> >**************************************************
> >*** Please Forward, and sign the petition to
> >*** stop immigration now!
> >*** http://www.stopimmigrationnow.org
> >**************************************************
> >
>
> Hell, if I was a working illegal alien I'd stop paying taxes and dump
> a little tea in the harbor.
>
> The big problem with illegal aliens is that they want to become legals
> and wouldn't you know it, they want education, an increase in pay, and
> not having to work in conditions that would kill a boar hog.
>
> Who the hell do they think they are undermining the highly lucrative
> sweatshop economy? Well, I never....hmpphhh.
>
> Kane