Mexican Flag flies over US Flag

[Tokenconservative]

Do you even need to guess the response to this?

What the hell, you need to be asked again anyway:

DO YOU HAVE ANY EVIDENCE FOR THIS OUTRAGEOUS, ABSURD CLAIM, OR DID YOU MAKE IT UP, LIKE YOU MAKE UP EVERYTHING ELSE YOU SAY?

Well, Newsweek would never be MY first choice, but lefties like you have been proclaiming their white-as-the-driven snow purity for decades.

For some reason, I note, you neglected to quote the part where I mentioned that august publication....hmmm....curious.

Tokie

 

[JoeEllison]

Do you even need to guess the response to this?

What the hell, you need to be asked again anyway:

DO YOU HAVE ANY EVIDENCE FOR THIS OUTRAGEOUS, ABSURD CLAIM, OR DID YOU MAKE IT UP, LIKE YOU MAKE UP EVERYTHING ELSE YOU SAY?

You have to wonder... when someone posts that "illegals"= Hispanics, maybe they are asking people to call them racist?

 

[Tokenconservative]

So, when Hispanics become the largest group of Americans sometime around 2025, we should make Spanish the official language, right? Yes?

Well, no...we should be teaching kids in the various areas of the country to speak the "native" languages that were here before the Spanish invasion and conquest of this land.

And we should be teaching the kids of the natives still here, how to speak the ur-languages of the people who preceeded them here.

Tokie

 

[Mephisto]

I always love this ridiculous argument...but why stop there? Didn't Spanish replace (conquer) other languages in the New World, or was Spanish the native language of the Maya, Aztec, Dine, etc.? So shouldn't we send the interlopers, the rapers of the land, those who speak the Devil Tongue, Spanish, packing? And once they get back to Spain, what of the native people they displaced there? The people who lived there BEFORE the Spanish, going all the way back to the Neaderthals? Shouldn't the Spanish be forced to give Spain back to its rightful owners?

Tokie

Ha! Speaking of ridiculous arguments, weren't we speaking about the United States, Junior?

 

[bruto]

My understanding is that yes, there are rules against being racist here.

I'm still here.

Now, what the problem generally is with hysterical PCers like you, is that anyone who admits the truth is a RAAAAAACCIIISTTTTTTTTT!!!!

Tokie

You are mistaken. There are no rules here against being racist, or bigoted in other ways. There are rules against certain forms of personal attack, but as this and other threads have recently demonstrated, it is not against the rules to be a bigot, even to the extent of making extremely contumelious statements about a group when you are aware that those you are addressing belong to it, as long as the connection is not explicitly personal.

 

[linusrichard]

"RAAACCIIIISTTTTTT!!!!" and "XENOPHOOOOOBBBEEEEEEE!!!!"

First, stop whining.

Second, how would you even pronounce those words? I get why you put a bunch of As and Is in "racist," but why all the Ts? That's going to sound pretty weird if you try to pronounce it. And all the Es at the end of "xenophobe"? The normal one is silent - are all the others too, or do you say them? So strange.

 

[Mephisto]

So shouldn't we send the interlopers, the rapers of the land, those who speak the Devil Tongue, Spanish, packing?

The Devil tongue, huh? What does that make you, an angel?

If someone can, however falsely, identify their opponent as "racist," "sexist," "xeno- or homo'phobic;" etc., etc., etc., then they are automatically dismissed from any other consideration.

(emphasis mine) Ha! You're really feeble-minded, aren't you? You claim you're being falsely accused of being racist, yet you've done an EXCELLENT job of proving that you are! And yes, racists should be dismissed of any serious consideration much the same way that creationists should be dismissed for asserting that the world is only 6,000 years old and that man walked with the dinosaurs!

And while were at it, shrieking "RAAAAACCIIISTTTTT!!!!" let's forget the fact that in "Hispanic" areas of LA (illegal colonies)

Being feeble-minded you obviously can't see your error here.

For some reason, this does not lead the news; even FOX is ignoring it.

Could it be because even Faux News doesn't subscribe to the world according to Tookie?

We know that Latin culture is inherently racist, sexist and xenophobic, that's a given. What's curious about this, is that while "Hispanics" (illegals) . . .

Could it be that you're D. All of the above?

Now, what the problem generally is with hysterical PCers like you, is that anyone who admits the truth is a RAAAAAACCIIISTTTTTTTTT!!!!

And WHERE do you get your version of "the truth?" Aryan Nations? The Pinhead Skinhead Monthly? The Racists 'R' Us Daily News?

The problem with skeptics (to a feeble-minded person like yourself) is that they require proof of "the truth." Care to provide a link or to cite your source? I'm sure we'll all have a good laugh.

For some reason, I note, you neglected to quote the part where I mentioned that august publication....hmmm....curious.

Tokie

For some reason you failed to provide a link to the article supporting your assertion . . . hmmm, curious.

I think you're clearly outgunned here, Token - maybe you'd be better off posting at the White Brotherhood website where all the other feeble-minded racists readily agree with you. I've carefully read all your statements and assertions here and all I hear is, BWAAAHAAAHAAA! Mommy dey cawed me a widdo wacist and buwewsed my widdo ego. Dey don't beweaved me and I'm vewy upset!"

 

[linusrichard]

Yet ANOTHER preposterous assertion! I'm not advocating the fracturing of anything! I'm saying that people's culture, heritage and language should be RESPECTED and left alone by those who insist on their assimilation, as long as it's not in their neighborhood (which is the original reason that Chinatown, Little Italy, Indian Reservations and various Latino barrios came about in the first place)!

Indian reservations came about because they were the sections of land retained (or reserved, hence the name) by the Indians when they gave or sold most of their land to the United States. Your point may be fine, but I had to nitpick one of your examples.

 

[Mephisto]

Indian reservations came about because they were the sections of land retained (or reserved, hence the name) by the Indians when they gave or sold most of their land to the United States. Your point may be fine, but I had to nitpick one of your examples.

Heheh, no problem, but since we're nitpicking.

when they gave or sold most of their land to the United States.

 

[linusrichard]

Heheh, no problem, but since we're nitpicking.

I see what you're saying, but actually the tribes did give or sell most of their land to the United States. This is not to imply for a moment that the process was fair, just, moral, or anything short of brutal and dishonorable on the part of the United States. It was unqualified evil - no arguments from me there. But yes, even if it was coerced, the land was given and sold away by the tribes.

I think it's an important distinction, because if the land had just been conquered and stolen, there would be no legal basis for reservations, no legal basis for tribal sovereignty and self-government. Because there are treaties, and because the US has gotten to the point where it's actually seeming to honor treaties more than breaking them (although Congress does have the power to abrogate treaties...), we can point to a legal source for these powers that are so vital to tribes today.

 

[Mephisto]

I see what you're saying, but actually the tribes did give or sell most of their land to the United States. This is not to imply for a moment that the process was fair, just, moral, or anything short of brutal and dishonorable on the part of the United States. It was unqualified evil - no arguments from me there. But yes, even if it was coerced, the land was given and sold away by the tribes.

I think it's an important distinction, because if the land had just been conquered and stolen, there would be no legal basis for reservations, no legal basis for tribal sovereignty and self-government. Because there are treaties, and because the US has gotten to the point where it's actually seeming to honor treaties more than breaking them (although Congress does have the power to abrogate treaties...), we can point to a legal source for these powers that are so vital to tribes today.

I was just being facetious - you're absolutely right of course (and definitely NOT a racist).

 

[linusrichard]

I was just being facetious - you're absolutely right of course (and definitely NOT a racist).

Not even a RRRRAAACCCIISSSTTTTT??

 

[Mephisto]

Not even a RRRRAAACCCIISSSTTTTT??

Nope! Not even a BBBBIGGGGOOOOOTTTTT!

Where is our token bigot anyway? Do you think he went to stock up on some more "facts" from the brownshirt websites?

 

[volatile]

Well, Newsweek would never be MY first choice, but lefties like you have been proclaiming their white-as-the-driven snow purity for decades.

For some reason, I note, you neglected to quote the part where I mentioned that august publication....hmmm....curious.

Tokie

Sorry - Newsweek said ""Hispanics" (illegals) are routinely murdering African AMERICANs simply because they are of African heritage", did they?

Did they really?

Let's look the article in question, shall we? Did you not notice the part that said:

The targeting of blacks by the Latino F13 appears to be an anomaly

, or this bit:

"On average, the violence just isn't race-based," says UC Irvine criminologist George Tita. "Our studies show there's no pattern of black-brown crime."

This story is about one particular inter-gang feud (about drug turf) that got out of hand, and some civilians got caught in the cross fire. It certainly wasn't "routine", as you claimed, and the article said as much.

That, my dear friend, is why we ask for supporting evidence around these parts...

 

[JEROME DA GNOME]

This story is about one particular inter-gang feud (about drug turf) that got out of hand, and some civilians got caught in the cross fire. It certainly wasn't "routine", as you claimed, and the article said as much.

That, my dear friend, is why we ask for supporting evidence around these parts...

Nice.

So, in your world the Federal prosecutors (with their jobs in jeopardy) are making it up and the college professor (with little to lose) is correct?

 

[Mephisto]

Sorry - Newsweek said ""Hispanics" (illegals) are routinely murdering African AMERICANs simply because they are of African heritage", did they?

Did they really?

Let's look the article in question, shall we? Did you not notice the part that said:

, or this bit:

This story is about one particular inter-gang feud (about drug turf) that got out of hand, and some civilians got caught in the cross fire. It certainly wasn't "routine", as you claimed, and the article said as much.

That, my dear friend, is why we ask for supporting evidence around these parts...

And also why he hopes someone doesn't have the inclination to actually research the evidence he misrepresents! Thanks for doing the footwork - you deserve a JREF "attaboy!"

Somehow I suspected the article was going to be about gang violence, and somehow I knew Tokenbigot was going equate the actions of violent individuals with no respect for life OR the law as representative of an entire ethnic group.

I've often expressed how shameless conservatives in these times are, but I suppose new ones come along who can still surprise me!

 

[Mephisto]

Nice.

So, in your world the Federal prosecutors (with their jobs in jeopardy) are making it up and the college professor (with little to lose) is correct?

HUH?

So, in your world of delusional thought and skewed logic it's okay to make claims that can't be backed by substantial evidence? Who needs facts, right? As long as you believe something with enough conviction you can scoff incredulously when someone like volatile comes along, gives your compatriot the benefit of a doubt and researches his claims only to have YOU exercise your flawed thought in an attempt to discredit him - nice!

 

[JEROME DA GNOME]

HUH?

So, in your world of delusional thought and skewed logic it's okay to make claims that can't be backed by substantial evidence? Who needs facts, right? As long as you believe something with enough conviction you can scoff incredulously when someone like volatile comes along, gives your compatriot the benefit of a doubt and researches his claims only to have YOU exercise your flawed thought in an attempt to discredit him - nice!

Did you read the article or were you just so pleased by the cherry-picked quotes that you did not feel the need?

If you read the article you will understand what I wrote. Have some respect for yourself and stop the name-calling and cherry-picking to support your views.

 

[bruto]

First, stop whining.

Second, how would you even pronounce those words? I get why you put a bunch of As and Is in "racist," but why all the Ts? That's going to sound pretty weird if you try to pronounce it. And all the Es at the end of "xenophobe"? The normal one is silent - are all the others too, or do you say them? So strange.

Whining is Tokie's stock in trade. He has that passive-aggressive streak, offending people and then feigning surprise when they respond in kind. He claims not to be a bigot, but speaks the language of bigotry, the vocabulary of bigotry, with the tone of bigotry. If he is unaware of this, he's a bigger fool than even I would have taken him for, and that's a stretch.

Whether or not he actually harbors racist notions or just is guilty of swallowing the sloppy thought and loaded language of other bigots, Tokie is a bigot in the more basic sense of the word. He judges people and their opinions preemptively, according to the assumed characteristics of perceived membership in groups or classes. His posts are larded with snidely phrased innuendoes, in which he makes clear his prejudicial disrespect for any idea that he feels is characteristic of a group he opposes, and his basic notion that that releases him from any need to engage in rational discourse in a respectful way.

Yes, Tokie, I'm talking about you, who lard your posts with gratuitous sniping at groups and ideologies whether they're applicable or not, who think it's clever to misspell "Mexico" purposely, to show your arrogant disdain (or are you really suggesting that the nasty little beaners don't know how properly to pronounce the "x?"), and who meet opposition with the characteristic "RAAAAAACIIIIIISTTTT!" whether the word has been used or not, thinking that criticism will be disarmed by your insinuation that any disagreement with your ideas is extravagant, and implicitly characterized by a strident scream.

Yes, Tokie, your posts give every appearance of being made by a bigot. If you are truly unaware of this, then you should really stop and consider the way that your extremely bad choice of language and style has led you to be misunderstood and misconstrued.

 

[Mephisto]

Did you read the article or were you just so pleased by the cherry-picked quotes that you did not feel the need?

If you read the article you will understand what I wrote. Have some respect for yourself and stop the name-calling and cherry-picking to support your views.

I read the article in it's entirety and I STILL can't see how or why you're defending someone who equates gang warfare (over turf and drugs, no less) with an entire ethnic group. The fact that innocent people of ANY ethnic group get caught up in gang violence isn't indicative of any ethnicity's penchant for violence, AND there ARE crooked cops and crooked Federal Prosecutors who have a stake in the doings of drug gangs. Tell me what a befuddle college professor hopes to gain for his opinion?