Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Posters of USPO: Do you have a problem with this?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Posters of USPO: Do you have a problem with this?

    I'm posting this thread as an inquiry into the current culture of this forum. I found a recent series of posts troubling, but soon became even more troubled by the response (or, rather, lack of response) to them. The following snippets all come the same thread on Ferguson. The thread has a dozen different participants as of this writing, including on moderator, most of whom are well established posters here. I confess I expected this sort of language to provoke a more general response from the community.

    I copy this material here simply to ask, are you comfortable with this sort of language in the forum? And particularly with just leaving it there unchallenged?

    I am NOT asking about anything being banned, or censored, or deleted. There's a big jump between being disturbed by something and wanting it censored. I'm NOT attempting to provoke debate over the merits of anything said below. This is the wrong sub-forum for that, though feel free to pick it up in another thread. And I'm NOT trying to attack a particular poster. I've removed names and my interest is in these particular comments, not the individual who made them and who is, I'm sure, far larger and more nuanced than this tiny subset of expressions. In short: I found the following deeply distressing and I'm simply curious if the forum in general reflects that distress or is essentially in agreement (or just comfortable) with these remarks. I suppose I'm also wondering whether I belong here anymore. Thanks.

    Negroes are funny with regards to how they protest. They'll rip shit up regardless; they just want something they can point to as a reason. But, as long as they keep it in the 'hood, and burn down there own businesses, I don't care. But the National Guard should have shoot-to-kill orders for when those pieces of shit try to expand their circle of unrest...
    … this incident occurred in a black neighborhood, and the rioters are, by and large, black. I see nothing wrong with acting to keep the rioting within that neighborhood. There's zero reason for it to extend beyond that neighborhood so law enforcement, acting in the best interests of the surrounding citizens, should practice containment. If that includes cutting down those who would wish to do others harm, yeah, I'm good with that.
    But, riddle me this: If they decide to tear the shit out of their own community and burn it to the ground, why shouldn't they live there? How is it "racist" to say they should? They will have done it to themselves. That's not "being kept down", that "being held responsible", which is something those animals know nothing about, as the very idea scares the shit out of them.
    <In response to the statement: "We can't just treat all the residents of (or even just all the black residents) as some monolithic bloc.">
    Sure, we can, and we should.
    When was the last time we saw whites rioting and burning down their neighborhoods after a verdict? What about Asians? Anyone recall any Jews flying off the handle after a verdict?

    You won't want to admit it, but the inescapable truth is that blacks are far more prone to this type of primitive, animalistic behavior than any other single group. History bears that out.

    Now, why are they more prone to it? Who the fuck knows why? Maybe it's because, relatively speaking, more blacks are stupid enough to put themselves in positions to be rightly shot and killed than anyone else. I mean, you know, let's face it: I don't think anyone would ever be asking Michael Brown for his Mensa card. But, yeah, who the fuck knows? And, you know what? I don't really care why. They're animals, acting only as animals know how to act, and they should be dealt with as such.
    I didn't do anything; not a fucking thing. I'm in favor of sterilization for women who keep spitting out babies like their vaginas are clown cars. I'm in favor of imprisoning deadbeat fathers.
    What I "hate" is when people like you decide it's better to try to explain away the "why" of when animals lash out as opposed to dealing with them forcefully and decisively.

    You can't reason with them. You can't expect them to stop if you ask them.

    You can expect them to stop when the threat of the reaction to what they're doing is greater than the satisfaction they get by doing it.
    5
    I have no problem with these remarks.
    20.00%
    1
    I find these remarks troubling.
    80.00%
    4

  • #2
    I vote neither. Unfortunate that the race hustlers piled on in and kept throwing gas on the fire, needlessly, without positive contribution, to the eventual and predictable detriment of that community to itself.

    The businesses that were burned out aren't going to rebuild there, but will take their insurance money and build on the other side of town. I suspect that the burned out buildings will not be rebuilt any time soon, and the community itself is at risk of dying out. The lament will be 'dam Whitey' and 'American is racist', and 'White Privilege', so nothing but victim crap. When they did it to themselves.

    Such is the impact and positive contribution of the race hustlers, only their victims haven't noticed it yet. We may turn the corner on this racist crap when they do, if they do.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #3
      I am (along with CYD) the only staff member left here for the most part and even at that my participation is less than frequent, but if i understood you correctly Dilettante are you saying some of those comments above came from a moderator / staff member?

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #4
        Originally posted by Chloe View Post
        I am (along with CYD) the only staff member left here for the most part and even at that my participation is less than frequent, but if i understood you correctly Dilettante are you saying some of those comments above came from a moderator / staff member?
        No, I'm sorry if I was unclear. All these comments came from the same poster who is not a mod or staff member. I mention the number of thread participants only as part of being surprised at the lack of response. My knowledge of who is and isn't a mod may also be out of date.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #5
          Ah, okay and yes i think El Diablo was given the boot by me previously but returned due it being a temporary suspension, you can put the 2 and 2 together and figure what i think of him given i booted him.

          Keep the discussion going, i am happy to act after pending on whatever comes down on judgement from posters.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #6
            I've been a member since back when we had self-admitted neo-Nazi's here. I didn't respond to them either. Posters are free to say what they want within the bounds of the terms of service. We are free to come to our own conclusions about posters based on their posts.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #7
              I do not have a problem with all of the reprinted posts above, but I do have a problem with the general tone of them. To me, the tone (moreso than the actual words ... although there are definitely SOME words in there...) conveys a general distaste for Blacks and seems to me to represent that entire population as characterized by those members of that population who make it into the news outlets.

              I don't like Obama or Al Sharpton, I do like Ben Carson and Allen West. I do not like or dislike any of them because of their racial background, but because of their ideologies and values. The one post Dilletante noted, above, that gave me a kink in my colon when I read it yesterday is the one that starts off with "...Negroes are funny about how they protest..." In a word, that is assuredly racism in that it castigates all members of a race under one characteristic.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #8
                Originally posted by Good1 View Post
                I do not have a problem with all of the reprinted posts above, but I do have a problem with the general tone of them. To me, the tone (moreso than the actual words ... although there are definitely SOME words in there...) conveys a general distaste for Blacks and seems to me to represent that entire population as characterized by those members of that population who make it into the news outlets.

                I don't like Obama or Al Sharpton, I do like Ben Carson and Allen West. I do not like or dislike any of them because of their racial background, but because of their ideologies and values. The one post Dilletante noted, above, that gave me a kink in my colon when I read it yesterday is the one that starts off with "...Negroes are funny about how they protest..." In a word, that is assuredly racism in that it castigates all members of a race under one characteristic.
                I'd have to agree. That particular choice of words did make the hair on my neck stand up.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #9
                  Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post

                  I'd have to agree. That particular choice of words did make the hair on my neck stand up.
                  Now that I have read Dilletante's post raising concern, I regret I did not say something to Diablo yesterday.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #10
                    What Diablo said was not politically correct. However, if people do not say what they actually believe and dance around a subject just to be accepted, no problem will ever be solved. This is obviously the way he sees things today and he was honest about how he feels. What should be discussed is what is needed to change the way he sees the situation? Is he maybe correct in what he says? If so, what needs to happen in society to change behaviors and attitudes? I get tired of someone being shut down because what he says disturbs someone else.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
                      What Diablo said was not politically correct. However, if people do not say what they actually believe and dance around a subject just to be accepted, no problem will ever be solved. This is obviously the way he sees things today and he was honest about how he feels. What should be discussed is what is needed to change the way he sees the situation? Is he maybe correct in what he says? If so, what needs to happen in society to change behaviors and attitudes? I get tired of someone being shut down because what he says disturbs someone else.
                      I disagree, Dan, and, yes, much of what he said is inaccurate inasmuch as he applies single characteristics to entire (in this case, racial) populations.

                      In society, we do still have some reasonable constraints on what should be said. Not to the extent the PC Police would dictate, of course, but just some minimal standards of behavior, which includes speech. As long as he is not infringing on someone else's rights (and his comments in a community like this do not), his right to make those statements is protected, but we're not talking about the constitutionality of them: We're talking about the propriety of those statements.

                      The lad already knows how his comments will be perceived by rational people and he is not going to change those perceptions simply because someone in here disagrees with him. In my opinion, this community has every right to set those minimal standards of interaction on THIS side of that kind of racism... and, frankly, I am not interested in trying to change his perception. It will take a bigger event than my arguments to do that.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by CYDdharta View Post
                        I've been a member since back when we had self-admitted neo-Nazi's here. I didn't respond to them either. Posters are free to say what they want within the bounds of the terms of service. We are free to come to our own conclusions about posters based on their posts.
                        Originally posted by OldmanDan
                        What Diablo said was not politically correct. However, if people do not say what they actually believe and dance around a subject just to be accepted, no problem will ever be solved. This is obviously the way he sees things today and he was honest about how he feels. What should be discussed is what is needed to change the way he sees the situation? Is he maybe correct in what he says? If so, what needs to happen in society to change behaviors and attitudes? I get tired of someone being shut down because what he says disturbs someone else.
                        As I said in the OP, it isn't a question of shutting anyone down or demanding that some things not be said. It's a question of response and reaction.

                        This is a discussion forum. The entire point is to discuss and debate differences of opinion, and a general scan of the threads (including that one on Furgeson) shows that as a group we aren't generally hesitant to speak up when someone makes claims we think are wrong or foolish. I would expect us to be no less willing about responding to content like this. Not that we should engage in prolonged and pointless debate with every racist or neo-Nazi who makes crazy remarks, but it seems odd that there wouldn't be at least a brief chorus of negative responses, if only to make it clear that such remarks don't represent the silent consensus of the community.

                        As they say, "silence is acquiescence."

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #13
                          Oh, for the love of God.

                          At no time did I ever assign any characterization to an entire portion of society.

                          N-E-V-E-R.

                          Saying I did is bullshit.

                          Don't like that I use the word "negro" from time to time? I would be hard-pressed to give less of a fuck than I do now. Blacks use that word. Hell, they even refer to themselves as "colored" when it suits their means. Instead of whining about me doing it, perhaps you could be so kind as to explain why my doing it is so fucking offensive?

                          If you don't believe you belong here, well, "Don't let the door hit ya' where the good Lord split ya".

                          I'm not interested in agreeing with anyone, and I couldn't give a shit about being politically correct. I have my opinions and, like everyone else here, I'll express those opinions. Maybe you should pull up your big boy pants and toughen up.

                          I do not; let me say that again: I do NOT have a "distaste" for blacks. I have a distaste for blacks who believe they're justified in rioting the way we're seeing in Ferguson. I have a distaste for blacks who will look at an angry mob and say "Burn this bitch down". Surely my words cannot be more inflammatory than such a statement coming from Brown's step father. You seem to have no problem with that, though.

                          Good1, you should clear your conscience. What did you want to say to me? Get it off your chest.

                          And, Chloe, this is interesting: "Keep the discussion going, i am happy to act after pending on whatever comes down on judgement from posters."

                          Is this to mean that you're now going to allow popular opinion to dictate what happens when someone says something deemed offensive? While it doesn't apply here, I would remind you that the 1st Amendment is in place not to protect the speech you agree with, but to protect the speech you don't agree with. It's also mildly distressing to see you suggest that your booting me the first time was based on your personal feelings towards me as opposed to my actions.

                          Dilettante, here's a question for you: Had I used the word "blacks" instead of "negroes", would you still be whining? Why not go ahead and do that, and then try to refute the points I was making? If you can do that, we can have a discussion. If you can't, then I'll simply dismiss you. Hell, even when I did use the word "blacks" you failed to address the very valid points I was making. I can only conclude that you just prefer to whine.

                          I support peaceful demonstrations, and I could care less what the color make-up of the protestors are. But when the rioting and the looting starts, I'll bet you my last nickel that 99% of those rioting and looting are negr... um, "black".

                          This is funny, though. Thanks for all the attention and the good chuckle.

                          And have a wonderful Thanksgiving.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
                            What Diablo said was not politically correct. However, if people do not say what they actually believe and dance around a subject just to be accepted, no problem will ever be solved. This is obviously the way he sees things today and he was honest about how he feels. What should be discussed is what is needed to change the way he sees the situation? Is he maybe correct in what he says? If so, what needs to happen in society to change behaviors and attitudes? I get tired of someone being shut down because what he says disturbs someone else.
                            Your brand of common sense and intelligence is most unwelcome here.

                            LOL!!

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by El Diablo View Post
                              Oh, for the love of God.

                              At no time did I ever assign any characterization to an entire portion of society.

                              N-E-V-E-R.

                              Saying I did is bullshit.
                              Not bullshit. Actually observable (or "readable" as the case may be):

                              Originally posted by El Diablo View Post
                              Of course there's going to be rioting.

                              If the cop is indicted, they'll riot in celebration. If he's not, they'll riot in protest.

                              Negroes are funny with regards to how they protest. They'll rip shit up regardless; they just want something they can point to as a reason. But, as long as they keep it in the 'hood, and burn down there own businesses, I don't care. But the National Guard should have shoot-to-kill orders for when those pieces of shit try to expand their circle of unrest...
                              The bolded assigns the characterization of "funny with regards ... to protest" and "just want[ing] something ... as a reason" to the entire Black portion of society.

                              you have a right to your own opinion, but once you've state it, and it has been quoted, you have no right to your own history of it.
                              Last edited by DavidSF; 11-26-2014, 11:23 AM.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?

                              Working...
                              X