Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 9/5/08 04:03 AM, Luxury-Yacht wrote:

At 9/5/08 03:38 AM, Samuel-HALL wrote: We are not at war with white christian fundamentalists, or eco-terrorists, or prank callers. We are at war with Islam.

NO WE ARE NOT.
We are at war with TERRORISTS. If we were at war with ISLAM, we'd be attacking areas other than Iraq, like Indonesia, which has a much larger Islamic population.

Just give us some time.

That is NOT true. How much of the Koran have you read?

Don't have to read their book to know their philosophy.

If you want to actually understand it, then yes, you fucking at least need to attempt to.

That's your opinion. I obviously know far more about traditional Islam than you do, and I'd bet money your little Muslim worshipping ass has read the Koran, haven't you?

Without America, WWII would have been hopeless. Period.

YOU COULD SAY THE SAME THING ABOUT BRITAIN AND RUSSIA.

I don't remember anyone else dropping a nuclear weapon on anyone. Case in point.

Terrorists intentionally target areas and people they know to be unarmed and innocent. We did not target innocent british citizens. Argument done.

First of all, the colonies were being attacked by the British, not the other way around. It's hard to attack British citizens from across an ocean, especially in the late 1700's.

So the fuck what if it 'was hard for us to attack british citizens'? All that matters is that we did not, so we weren't terrorists. You'll never beat me on this point, because I'm using a dictionary definition of a word while you use you're own idiot opinion.

At 9/5/08 10:13 AM, Saruman200 wrote: The US was not the only ally in World War II. The war would have been lost had the US not intervened on the side of the Allies, but if Hitler hadn't made a dumbass desicion to invade the USSR against all logic, the Allies would have lost even if the US joined the fight.

That's all I wanted to man to admit. It took all of the Allies to win, but without America, all would have been lost.

On the other historical subject your discussing, the Revolutionary War, all that sugarcoated crap about the nice little Americans and George Washington chopping down some cherry trees is bull. The colonists were known to tar and feather loyalists, aswell as publically excute them. Technically, weren't the Son of Liberty the terrorists of that age aswell? If you look at it in a different lense, you could come to that conclusion.

No, lowbrain. Terrorists intentionally target known civilian structeres and persons Terrorists intentionally and knowingly attack those who they know to be unarmed and innocent. Anyone that does not intentionally target civilian peoples or structures is not a terrorist. Period.
Read a history book. Or a dictionary, for that matter.

At 9/5/08 02:14 AM, SynicalSatire wrote: But I posted this as a place for those discriminated against to tell there storys and suggest how we could make things better, not for people to insult my personal life, a case YOU have no idea about!

Oh, I know all about you. You, and people like you. Feigning tolerance, pushing acceptance. Accusing someone of not knowing what they speak about everytime someone pulls your little hole card.

Wah. Get over it.

At 9/5/08 02:13 AM, Luxury-Yacht wrote:

At 9/5/08 01:59 AM, Samuel-HALL wrote:

We are not at war with white christian fundamentalists, or eco-terrorists, or prank callers. We are at war with Islam.

That is NOT true. How much of the Koran have you read?

Don't have to read their book to know their philosophy.

We ended the war, and you know it. The war was over from the time America stuck it's nose in, and no one even knew it.

The Americans were pivotal in the victory, yes. But so was EVERY OTHER MAJOR FUCKING COUNTRY.

Without America, WWII would have been hopeless. Period.

and compare radical muslim insurgents who intentionally target civilians to Americans fighting a ranked, uniformed British Military...all to maintain your convoluted, disillusioned view of the world.

Organizationally, they were somewhat similar. Guerrilla warfare seen as barbaric by the enemy? Check. Underground alliances? Check. Subversion via other countries (i.e. France, which sent over forces to help support and train Americans)? Check.

Terrorists intentionally target areas and people they know to be unarmed and innocent. We did not target innocent british citizens. Argument done.

At 9/5/08 01:50 AM, Luxury-Yacht wrote:

At 9/5/08 01:37 AM, Samuel-HALL wrote:

You make it sound like Muslims are the only group to have ever used terrorism. Christian fundamentalists have bombed abortion clinics. Timothy McVeigh bombed a stadium. John Walker Lindh, a white man, joined Al Quaida. Students have called in bomb threats to schools. Terrorism is NOT exclusive to Muslims, you dipshit.

One confused white man joins a terrorist cell, and students calling bomb threats into schools. Mcveigh, I'll give you. White Christian fundamentalists, I'll give you. The difference? White Christian fundamentalists don't explode and/or hijack airplanes. Students fucking around and calling in faux-bomb threats is not the two attacks we suffered at the World Trade Center, nor is it the Cole. Or the embassy. We are not at war with white christian fundamentalists, or eco-terrorists, or prank callers. We are at war with Islam.

world war...In WW2, Germany squandered many of its resources on its fruitless invasion of Russia and its prolonged bombing of London. The U.S. was primarily battling the Japanese in naval and aerial battles at first. Saying that the U.S. was the Hero of the war is insulting. We came in late, sustained relatively few casualties, and mobilized the economy to our advantage.

Who stormed the beaches of Normandy? Who pushed Axis forces out of France? Who dropped the bomb on the Japanese.
We ended the war, and you know it. The war was over from the time America stuck it's nose in, and no one even knew it.

Still, you would stand to tell me that we cannot beat a bunch of insurgents - a bunch of untrained, hastily prepared militia with almost no budget, organization, or rank. Men who's idea of 'military training' is swinging on some ropes, running through some tires, and shooting an ak-47 at a target with an American flag on it. Men so bereft of funds and support that they build crude explosive devices as their main front against our troops.

If that's so true, these guys would have all been eliminated LONG ago.
Remember the American Revolution? A bunch of untrained, ordinary men fighting the most powerful military in earth at the time? Did the Americans not win against all odds?

Time, brother. That which I would allow and you would not. That which is not the easy fucking Americanized answer. That which is not what your philosophy allows. You would discredit the American military in WWII, and compare radical muslim insurgents who intentionally target civilians to Americans fighting a ranked, uniformed British Military...all to maintain your convoluted, disillusioned view of the world.

You, my friend, are part of the fucking infection.

At 9/4/08 09:21 PM, SynicalSatire wrote: How many times have you looked at a foreighner and gone, "OH CRAP TERRORIST!" Just because the dude is whereing a turbin. Have you ever looked at a black person and gone, "Neanderthal." in your mind.

You have never, ever, then? You've never looked at another man's religion, or beliefs, or philosophy, and been disgusted? You've never been scared of shady figures outside a train station, or in a subway? Not once, ever? You've never discriminated any belief, at any time, you fucking saint, you?

Good for you, buddy. It's called psychology, and defense mechanisms. Everyone's got buttons. Everyone. Look at how folks act towards christians, or conservatives, and see the other side. How about intravenous drug addicts? Don't discriminate against them, either? Convicted rapists, no?

Go fuck yourself.

In my opinion discrimination should be a more savere crime then it is.

Ohemgee. A man has a condescending thought about another man. A man chooses to hire whoever he wants for his privately owned business. Let's fucking indict. You're a tool.

At 9/5/08 01:05 AM, Luxury-Yacht wrote:

At 9/5/08 12:04 AM, Samuel-HALL wrote:

At 9/2/08 03:57 PM, Luxury-Yacht wrote: First of all, I hope you're not trying to say that our ancestors should be proud of extinguishing a culture (which they didn't, reservations/etc. still exist, and a few people still celebrate their Native American heritage).

Not proud. Just not ashamed of. We made an enemy, for whatever fucking reason, among Native Americans. And it was either us pack up and leave the colonies, or defeat our enemy. We did what was necessary.

I'm pretty ashamed of it. Shit, I have an ancestor that was on the fucking Mayflower, for Christ's sake. What's not to be ashamed of? Why couldn't we have lived in America using diplomacy? We would have never even established colonies here had the natives not had mercy on us, and still we chose violence and coercion. Not exactly noble.

Diplomacy, as much as I love 'er, isn't always the best tool. You are correct: we would not have established the colonies without the help of the Natives. Yet, also, you must admit that if we had not coherced and pirated the Natives, this country would have never reached the height of it's superpower. And what does being noble have to do with doing what is necessary?

Look, I'm not talking about rounding people up. I'm talking about this nation having enough common sense to not use the same suspicioun on old white folks and black college kids as they do muslims living in this country.

Most muslims living in this country are far more moderate and even liberal in their beliefs than those living abroad. Why would a terrorist fundamentalist choose to live in a country that has been defined as the enemy of his religion?

Couldn't tell ya. Only point I'm making is that it's not middle class white men that commit acts of terrorism is America. I mean, sure, yes, you have your eco-terrorists, and your uni-bombers. We all know, though, that that is a far different breed of criminal than ol' Hadji with the boxcutter. I'm not happy that things have come to this, that we must watch our own fellow Americans. I'm not happy that true patirotism has to be tested, and sometimes roughed around, to be justified. That's the way, though, that the rain falls. I can bitch all day about it, but I still need an umbrella. And that was my only point - that this equalist bullshit of checking everyone at the airport the same is only a symptom of our utter lack of common sense, in dealing with terrorism.

"Look at it this way: say we kill a German soldier fighting for Hitler. His family and friends are angered and saddened at the loss, and may decide to focus their passion on those who killed him: The Allied forces. This anger can be manipulated and used by German recruiters to get others to join the Axis' cause. You can kill a confirmed and loyal German soldier, but there's no telling how many will spring up after him."

First of all, many of the German soldiers were recruited via compulsion; they were forced to fight for Hitler, whether they believed in him or not. Terrorists and insurgents have members spanning from several different countries, while the Germans relied on forces from occupied territories, and were therefore easier to keep track of. The axis was much more organized and predictable in its recruiting, while terrorists can recruit members based not on geographical location, but from global indoctrination, allowing for a much larger pool of recruits.

We, as a nation and a military, single handedly crippled one of the most technologically advanced, well organized, and intelligent armies ever gathered in history. Still, you would stand to tell me that we cannot beat a bunch of insurgents - a bunch of untrained, hastily prepared militia with almost no budget, organization, or rank. Men who's idea of 'military training' is swinging on some ropes, running through some tires, and shooting an ak-47 at a target with an American flag on it. Men so bereft of funds and support that they build crude explosive devices as their main front against our troops.
Fucking please. You're the one with tunnel vision, my friend. You're the one that lacks trust in what has worked so many times before.

At 9/2/08 03:49 PM, Saruman200 wrote: First off, Native American culture still exists.

It exists where we have chosen and allowed it to exist.

Kill everyone who dares to disagree with you, good idea. If we execute all the terrorists, how are we any better than them?

Targeting those that intentionally target civilians and the innocent is not the same as targeting civilians. Genius.

Wow, stereotyping much? Let's go out and kill anyone with brown skin, a plain dress, and a turban.

I don't want to kill them. I just want them searched harder than anyone else at airports, and the such.

At 9/2/08 03:49 PM, Saruman200 wrote: First off, Native American culture still exists.

It exists where we have chosen and allowed it to exist.

Kill everyone who dares to disagree with you, good idea. If we execute all the terrorists, how are we any better than them?

Targeting those that intentionally target civilians and the innocent is not the same as targeting civilians. Genius.

Wow, stereotyping much? Let's go out and kill anyone with brown skin, a plain dress, and a turban.

I don't want to kill them. I just want them searched harder than anyone else at airports, and the such.

At 9/2/08 03:51 PM, Saruman200 wrote: Because killing those innocent Native Americans was a good thing right?

"Innocent'' is subjective. Doesn't matter. Some in history conquer, while others are conquered. So turns the wheel.

Good job using two posts to churn out one half assed naive view on the world, too.

At 9/2/08 03:57 PM, Luxury-Yacht wrote: First of all, I hope you're not trying to say that our ancestors should be proud of extinguishing a culture (which they didn't, reservations/etc. still exist, and a few people still celebrate their Native American heritage).

Not proud. Just not ashamed of. We made an enemy, for whatever fucking reason, among Native Americans. And it was either us pack up and leave the colonies, or defeat our enemy. We did what was necessary.

Second of all, picking out terrorists isn't as easy as picking out someone based on ethnicity. Let's assume that the only terrorists we're worried about are Middle-Eastern. You can't really tell who's a terrorist on the street until they start actually terrorizing. Second, terrorists aren't born that way, they are indoctrinated that way. Maybe their family raised them radically, maybe an event in their lives made them turn to terrorism, etc.

Look, I'm not talking about rounding people up. I'm talking about this nation having enough common sense to not use the same suspicioun on old white folks and black college kids as they do muslims living in this country.

Look at it this way: say we kill a man who is a terrorist. His family and friends are angered and saddened at the loss, and may decide to focus their passion on who killed him: the U.S. this anger can be manipulated and used by terrorist recruiters and cells to get them to join the terrorist cause. You can kill a confirmed terrorist, but there's no telling how many will spring up afterwards.

Pfft. Retard.
"Look at it this way: say we kill a German soldier fighting for Hitler. His family and friends are angered and saddened at the loss, and may decide to focus their passion on those who killed him: The Allied forces. This anger can be manipulated and used by German recruiters to get others to join the Axis' cause. You can kill a confirmed and loyal German soldier, but there's no telling how many will spring up after him."

Retard.

At 9/2/08 03:37 PM, Luxury-Yacht wrote:

At 9/2/08 03:33 PM, Samuel-HALL wrote: Our enemies ride a crusade of hatred, envy, and wrath. Teaching them isn't going to solve the problem: executing them would.

Because killing every single terrorist is SO EASY AND POSSIBLE

We don't have to kill every single terrorist. Just as we did not have to kill every Native American, to get the job done. We only have to kill and imprison enough where it kills their culture and ideals. The rest falls into place.

At 9/1/08 10:58 PM, jonnyrules935 wrote: You cannot win a war against terrorism or radical religious societies.

Sure you can. You forget the fact that cultures are assimiliated and/or destroyed everyday. Just as the good ol' Native American. Or the reformed people's of Germany. Radical islam is just another culture, and it's a fact that culture can be killed of conformed.

So the american people are right, get those soldiers outta there, it doesn't make you people look weak, it makes you look intelligent.

You don't seem very intelligent. Hope we don't have any of you on our side.

Use schools against terror, not bombing civilians against terror.

Our enemies ride a crusade of hatred, envy, and wrath. Teaching them isn't going to solve the problem: executing them would.

'cause, how can you make out the terrorist in the croud ?

Easy. Brown skin. Plain dress. Possible turban. Name is 'Achmed Muhhamed".
Easy.

At 9/2/08 01:07 PM, Jizzlebang wrote: So don't rub them off as all anarchists who should be executed.

So they weren't all anarchists. They're still problem Americans, interrupting while the adults were talking.

At 9/2/08 12:11 PM, Jizzlebang wrote: Since when were they rioting about nothing? I heard they were protesting the war.

No. Their own words explained they were supporters of 'anarchy'.
Which in my book makes them terrorists. Execute them, already. Fuck the tear gas. The cops should have had their pistols drawn.

The real story here is how dissapointed we are all that none of the rioters were killed.

At 8/29/08 11:52 AM, MrHero17 wrote: I think it's a stupid move on Mccains part, her only use as a VP is possibly getting him more votes, nothing wrong with her per say(except that firing someone becuase he wouldn;t fire his brother or w/e scandal) but she's really inexperienced. I mean as an actual VP WTF dose she bring to the table?

Inexperienced? As oppossed to who? Obama?

At 8/29/08 11:54 AM, Joshiwa wrote: Its a horrible choice.
She has been governor for only 2 years

Like Obama?

At 8/29/08 03:14 PM, therealsylvos wrote: What the hell is up with you people?
Bush- Governor
Clinton- Governor
Reagan- Governor
Carter- Governor
Basically after Kennedy anyone who was president and NOT a governor was a vice president first.

I'm so glad you said it, so I didn't have to. Many great presidents have been nothing but governers. One could argue that a governer is more in touch with leading people, than a senator.

At 8/29/08 06:12 PM, Xcyper33 wrote: VigilanteNighthawk wins this topic hands down. If Republicans get back in office i'm packing my bags and moving to Canada.

And we as a nation are glad to see you're pacificism loving, coward coddling, tree humping ass go, too.

At 8/29/08 11:52 AM, MrHero17 wrote: I think it's a stupid move on Mccains part, her only use as a VP is possibly getting him more votes, nothing wrong with her per say(except that firing someone becuase he wouldn;t fire his brother or w/e scandal) but she's really inexperienced. I mean as an actual VP WTF dose she bring to the table?

Inexperienced? As oppossed to who? Obama?

At 8/29/08 11:54 AM, Joshiwa wrote: Its a horrible choice.
She has been governor for only 2 years

Like Obama?

At 8/29/08 03:14 PM, therealsylvos wrote: What the hell is up with you people?
Bush- Governor
Clinton- Governor
Reagan- Governor
Carter- Governor
Basically after Kennedy anyone who was president and NOT a governor was a vice president first.

I'm so glad you said it, so I didn't have to. Many great presidents have been nothing but governers. One could argue that a governer is more in touch with leading people, than a senator.

At 8/29/08 06:12 PM, Xcyper33 wrote: VigilanteNighthawk wins this topic hands down. If Republicans get back in office i'm packing my bags and moving to Canada.

And we as a nation are glad to see you're pacificism loving, coward coddling, tree humping ass go, too.

I think this is a great and crafty move, by the GOP. I really feel like we've snatched the rug out from under Obama and his over the rainbow talk. Now both parties have locked in a major minority in America, almost guaranteeing those votes. This means this election is going to be made by the people who vote in every election. This levels the playing field for Obama being black and muslim and transgendered or anything else he might be.

I can't wait to see the GOP's ground game. Can't wait to see them eat Obama and Biden up. We took a war hero, in 2004, and ate his ass up, too. If we can do it to a decorated verteran like Kerry, little Obama won't be no trouble at all. Especially now.

At 8/28/08 11:47 AM, ThePretenders wrote:

At 8/27/08 09:15 PM, Samuel-HALL wrote: And this shows what kind of person you are. A person who lives for only now, and remembers nothing of the past. A person who cares nothing for pride or heritage is really nothing but a savage. A dog cherishes nothing, as well. A dog lives only for right now, as well. A dog is proud of nothing, save for immediate accomplishments.
More power to you, though, sparky.

Haha, I think the opposite is true. I plan for the future. If you want to look at the past with rose-tinted glasses, be my guest, because in the past, mankind was poorer, mankind was less informed, and now we're in a globalised, interconnected, prosperous world and you're the savage for being proud of backward shit that happened the past.

Backward shit that happened in the past? You mean when America once it's independance for the despots in Brittain? You mean when we etched a constitution out of nothing out all, and guaranteed rights to all Americans? You mean when this country was reunited for permanent good, after The War Between the States? You mean when we gave women and blacks the same rights as rich right land owners? You mean when my anscestors got off the boat, thrilled to be here in America?

Right. Who cares about that, right?

Retard.

At 8/28/08 01:42 AM, fli wrote:

At 8/28/08 01:40 AM, Samuel-HALL wrote:

At 8/28/08 12:30 AM, fli wrote: Samuel-HALL... he's back from the dead.

Hey now. You didn't miss me? C'mon.

welcome back, darling...

i guess...

I'm chugging a beer, as my finger presses enter to send this post.

At 8/28/08 12:30 AM, fli wrote: Samuel-HALL... he's back from the dead.

Hey now. You didn't miss me? C'mon.

At 8/27/08 10:42 PM, LazyDrunk wrote:

At 8/27/08 10:18 PM, Samuel-HALL wrote:

At 8/27/08 10:15 PM, LazyDrunk wrote: Don't mess with Flagg, he'll fuck you up.

I'd been gone so long, I assumed I'd been forgotten.

Can't forget the legends.
Update your website lately? Links? Some of the new Atmosphere I've been listening to reminded me of your poetic writings, and then whammy, you post in a white power thread.
Life's been good.

I have no updated lately, no. I've changed directions. The poetry has not come these past months. Political rants and manifesto-esque expoundations, though?
You betcha.

At 8/27/08 10:15 PM, LazyDrunk wrote: Don't mess with Flagg, he'll fuck you up.

I'd been gone so long, I assumed I'd been forgotten.

At 8/27/08 09:53 PM, Achilles2 wrote:

At 8/27/08 09:44 PM, Samuel-HALL wrote: Yes. Alright. My fault. You're right. Africa is simply teeming with both industry, and natural resources.

The post ended a little early. It would've been better if I said that Africa was screwed over by the empires of the past, such as the French, British, Dutch, etc. On top of that, WWII really messed Africa up. This set them back a couple of decades from the rest of the world.

But African countries still would've easily been able to trade their resources with Western Nations. Africa has a lot of desirable resources, such as diamonds, gold, silver, etc. But due to the chaos that the empires of the past caused after they left the African countries in ruin, factions are fighting against each other for power. The money made from trading gold and diamonds that could be used for strengthening the economy are instead being used by factions to fight each other.

No no no. They do not get to blame their current savagry on colonists that were there hundreds of years ago. We cannot blame our current problems on the british, nor can Mexico blame their current problems on us. Their factionalized brutality is what holds them down, today. That is a conscious choice that they make every day. If they chose to become a civilized country, they could. They've chosen to be savages, instead.

At 8/27/08 09:37 PM, Achilles2 wrote:

At 8/27/08 09:15 PM, Samuel-HALL wrote: They'd probably be in the same exact place they are now, actually.

Clearly, you know nothing about African history.

Yes. Alright. My fault. You're right. Africa is simply teeming with both industry, and natural resources.

give me a break.

At 7/18/08 04:20 PM, FalconPunch wrote: Being proud about something out of your control is stupid and ignorant.

Who the fuck would you be, to tell me or anyone else what we should or should not be proud about? I'm proud of my german-irish heritage. I'm proud of being an American. I'm proud of being a good looking guy. I had no control over any of those things, sure. But what does it matter to you?

At 7/18/08 05:50 PM, aninjaman wrote: Heres the problem with your logic. When Black people say Black pride they are taking pride in their African heritage and being able to come out of centuries of oppression and racism(something white people cant say).

No? Not any white people, at all? How about the Irish, who were brutalized, oppressed, and violated as a people from the very second they stepped off as legal immigrants, into this country?

At 7/18/08 08:55 PM, The-evil-bucket wrote: I think it's silly to be proud of the amount of pigment in ones skin.

People are more proud of far more ignorant things. People are proud of everything from how quickly they can shotgun a beer, to how high they can jump. People are proud of their stamp collections. People are proud of their own pretty hair, or eyes, or the size of their johnson.

At 7/19/08 10:33 AM, BuddhaGeo wrote: You're speaking the truth, but you are liable to note that white people weren't enslaved and there hasn't been a whole century of white people being dragged in chains, whipped, abused, tortured, decapitated, segregated, ignored and killed merely for their different skin color. Not too much has passed since the abolition of racial segregation and the old scars haven't had enough time to heal the wounds.

Wah. They wanted equal treatment, correct? And would not 'equality' be a society where everyone is entitled (barring felonies) to the same potential possibilities? What's good for the goose is good for the gander. I understand where blacks are coming from, taking pride in their transcension from second class citizens. I also understand my own pride, being german irish. The immigrants that came to this country (black, irish, and the rest) were the backbone of the workforce that made this country great. We all learned the language. We assimilated, and became productive citizens. We became no longer Irish-german-african-greek, and instead became American. Having a little bit of myself that held out, that remembers at least in theory (the same way the blacks today 'remember' slavery) my ancestors struggle...well, there's nothing wrong with that.

At 7/19/08 05:31 PM, Creek wrote: Why do black people have parades when white people don't?
They do. I don't know where you have been. But they tend to be racist.

And so are the 'black' parades.

White people are the majority.

For now.

At 7/21/08 08:49 PM, slowerthenb4 wrote: I would rather fly free for an hour knowing the world in its true glory then to be caged for a eternity only to yearn to know what the world was like.

Get in the cage then, fucko.

At 7/23/08 03:02 PM, JackPhantasm wrote: Also, how do you think african culture would have developed had we not interfered.

Are they going to eat the sand? They grow next to nothing, and export next to nothing. They are rife with disease.
They'd probably be in the same exact place they are now, actually.

At 8/26/08 04:55 PM, ThePretenders wrote: No, so move to the future and forget all this crap about heritage and pride. I don't give a fuck about what I did at 9:00, why should I give a fuck about events that happened 50, 100, 200 years ago?

And this shows what kind of person you are. A person who lives for only now, and remembers nothing of the past. A person who cares nothing for pride or heritage is really nothing but a savage. A dog cherishes nothing, as well. A dog lives only for right now, as well. A dog is proud of nothing, save for immediate accomplishments.

More power to you, though, sparky.

Murder can, in the terms of a war, lead to long-term peace.
Not how he's talking about it, though.

I'm not sure why I'm even involved in this.

At 6/11/07 06:56 PM, SouthAsian wrote: Well you should start with Pennsylvania and Pittsburgh(German origins) as well as Philledelphia.Those places are the German capital of America.

And are crime rates higher there? Is the high-school drop out rate astronomical, in those places? Are more hate crimes committed?

The fuck is the 'german subculture', anyway? Are we speaking of skinheads, or racists in general?

At 6/13/07 01:42 AM, Zantief wrote: In my limited experience, (online games...) a lot of Germans are pricks. At least the ones who play online games.

Oh well, Lord. I retract any arguments, retorts, or criticizations you may have incurred as a result of my posts. Allow to apologize for everyone else, too.

Afterall, Germans you've played videogames with are assholes. Say no fucking more. Topic done.

Great. I, personally, have nothing but support for this.
Crazy fucks shouldn't own firearms, and that's about the total jist of it.

Also glad to see the NRA supporting this bill. Anyone standing opposed to this bill should come under close moral (and intellectual) scrutiny.

At 6/12/07 03:42 PM, Abyss wrote: Men have a bigger build than women, and are also therefore, in general, are physically stronger. I don't think conscription will ever be introduced for women in any country. Women are joining the army, but that's because they chose to and not because they were forced, like men, in many countries.

And I fing that reprehensibly sexist, and bigoted. Everything that is mandatory for a male to meet his 'civic duty' should be required for females, as well.
Women asked for equaltiy, right? Women asked to be treated as equals, and yet there are archaic laws on the books barring them from fighting on the frontlines, even if they volunteer for the armed services.

The fact that more females are not complaining about this speaks goddamn volumes about the differences in men and women.

And the feminist request for male/female teams can be forgotten, because of the physical differences again.

Oh, I disagree. Nothing would define 'equality' more perfectly to me, than to see women being crushed out on a hockey rink by a bunch of 'equal' men. Imagine the nfl, har har har, with women as the defensive line, trying to stand up to three hundred pound men.

You want equality, darling? You got it.

Are Women and Men now as equal as they could possibly be? Discuss.

Of course not. Women cannot fight on the front lines, and are not elilgible for conscription. There are still all-women colleges (women colleges who fight very strongly to maintain their bigotry, too), and all-women sports team. Not until total integration of the sexes is reached will we achieve true 'equality'.

At 6/11/07 01:42 PM, Memorize wrote:

At 6/11/07 01:33 PM, TwO-FaCeD-PaRaNoID wrote: Not why I shouldn't be smoking.

It might be because I have the right to breathe clean air every now and then.
Just maybe.
I could care less about you smoking. I just don't want around me where I have to breathe it.

Already, you're free from smelling my smoke on planes, trains, buses, and many restaurants. If there is a restaurant that allows smoking, you possess the right to gracefully choose another place to dine. If you go to someone's house, or party, and the smoke bothers you...leave.

At 6/11/07 03:20 PM, Brick-top wrote: And after you smoke, you stink. Really, I couldn't care about you smoking but smokers fucking smell afterwards. Not just the breath the clothes as well.

And I think AXE smells like asshole. Not just the guys who wear it, but their clothes and cars, too. Fortunately for everyone, AXE and tobacco are both legal products in almost every country in the world.
So we can both grow up, and get over our dissatisfaction with the way other people smell.

And lets not forget smokers blaming everything else in the world other than smoking on the problems you get due to smoking.

That's not a problem with smoking. That's a problem with ignorant folk irresponsibly using a completely legal substance.

At 6/13/07 07:15 PM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote: I just dislike the fact that everywhere I go, I have to breath in their cancerous second-hand smoke. You can do whatever you want in your own home, but when you start taking it to my streets and my buildings, that's where it needs to stop.

Petition your local congressman to promote a bill to ban smoking on all city property. This will force smokers to indulge in their cars, and homes.
Until your congressman does that, however, you can sit back down and deal with it...because that's the only choice you have.

At 6/13/07 08:00 PM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote: People should only be allowed to smoke in thier own homes.

Petition your congressman.

Like every other symbol in existance, the meaning is hinged on intention and perception.

Anything can be made a symbol of hate. Look how the Germans took a symbol of peace and turned it into their hateful little flag of war and intolerance, for example. Look how the Christian's cross once stood for persecution, and tyrrany. Spain and England's flag once stood for imperialism and genocide.

It all depends on who is waving and the flag, and who is watching it wave.

At 10/8/06 09:42 AM, o-r-i-g-i-n-a-l wrote: Hell, I even know some ardent right wingers who smoke it…and it doesn’t stop them from cutting their hair.

I'm an ardent right winger who smokes pot...and I have long hair, too.

At 10/9/06 12:09 AM, jAk88 wrote: Just because you had the luck of being born in this country doesn't mean that people south of us shouldn't get the luxery of living in a place where they can make an honest living off hard work.

Yes, it does.

At 10/6/06 02:20 AM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

At 10/6/06 02:13 AM, Samuel-HALL wrote:

Go ahead and ask me how I know.

Because your Bi my little fudge packer.

Pfft. Shows what you know.

I'm not the one who does the packing, thankyouverymuch.