"Cary Kittrell" <cary at afone.as.arizona.edu> skrev i melding
news:ah73mn$dr3$1 at oasis.ccit.arizona.edu...
> In article "Thalamus" <zhil at online.no> writes:
> Well, first off, Jet, allow me to apologize for this excresence
> on the fundament of my own race. He's the idiot cousin we keep
> locked in the attic.
I don't know what you have locked in your attic.
And what have your attic anything to do with the crime-stats that I
presented, I don't know.
Besides the factoids thta I presented can't be refuted - I'm using the FBI,
the Justice Department etc. etc. and all you can come up with are Ad Hominem
insults.
Shows us what a weak-minded idiot you are, CK.
If you want to try me, grab some factoids; which can't be refuted; and show
me that I'm wrong, if you can (hypocrite).
> Formalities aside, I have to wonder just exactly what:
>> < Here's the crime-stats and other data about your inferior race.
>> all that has to do with her criticism of John's "findings"
> in regard to the male-female debate that the rest of us
> (pay attention now, eh?) are actually engaged in.
when you cut-and-paste, it can easily be confusing for such a small mind as
yours, CK ?
She said, and I quote (something you should learn):
"Ah, so you are a racist and a woman hater. Must really piss you off that
this BLACK WOMAN can do basic algebra and you can't."
And I threw facts about her race back into her ugly monkey-face.
> I don't suppose it could be that you're ill-equipped to debate
> her face to face, so you resort to screaming magic hate-words
> in the hope that no one will notice you're changing the subject?
Pure B.S, CK, and I think people here will agree, that once you bring up
racism, then you have to expect factoids to be played onto the arena of
debate.
If people are small minded, they might object to my use of real data, as it
would damage their self-esteem.
Keep playing a looser, looser - that way I'll steamroll right over you,
blitzkrieg-style.
> Man, I bet you were the king of badinage on the junior high playground.
'Bandinage' - please excuse my ignorance (I'm Norwegain), could anybody
explain what this has to do with the current debate ?
I can't imagine what anybodies time at school would have to do with this
debate, but I'll give it a try.
"He did it. No, <screaming> she did it !" - this must be the exchange that
CK is most familiar with, and so expect me to play by the same rules.
Sorry CK, I play civilized, unlike the inferior subhumans.
If I played UNcivilized, they wouldn't know what hit them.
Ohhhh, I guess I was a bit uncivil that I expected them to actually
UNDERSTAND what I was refering to........................
> < Maybe John is a misogyn,
>> Maybe Don Corleone was a bit shady,
And he might NOT be a misogyn.
He's stating things from his point of view, but I think it is a stretch to
say that the only thing a woman is good for is in the kitchen and the
bedroom (this example is not my point of view - women should be shovered in
wealth, and I like them very much).
> <but I doubt he's a racist.
>> Well, you're right there. John isn't a "racist", he's a pan-racist.
> The polymath of racists. A universal racist. An equal opportunity
> racist.
And your objection to this is exactly what ?
> <Stupid inferior Nigger, you're the laughing-stock of the world, Mugabe is
> <setting the standard of behavior for your kind.
> <
>> Says a proud member of a (my own) race, who slaughtered a hundred
> million of one another, give or take, in the wars of the last century.
Of western-instigated wars to secure Palestine for the Khazarian
tribe........
You didn't forget how certain people are claiming land "accoreding to their
God" ??
The so-called chosen ones.
> But that's totally different, right Brian?
Well, if a certain tribe could keep their noses out of every conflict on
this planet, then there might be peace.
Europe used to be peaceful, until this thing called 'religion' came into the
picture; with the dead Jew on a stick.
Brian
-Proud and not ashamed.
