On 3/29/24 4:34 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article
> <17c15538b804c570$26844$2601257$cad58068@news.newsdemon.com>,
> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 3/29/2024 2:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> In article <uu6ij9$b577$7@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/28/24 6:06 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/28/2024 4:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mar 28, 2024 at 12:47:48 PM PDT, "moviePig" <never@nothere.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/28/2024 2:05 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 10:26:49 -0400, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Because BLM ain't racist like you.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> BLM isn't racist?
>>>>>>>>> HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Black lives matter" is not an inherently racist sentiment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But the people who run the organization are quite racist indeed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Presumably, you mean that they believe blacks to be a superior race. I
>>>>>> don't think human nature works that way ...nor is that belief necessary
>>>>>> to the organization's stated aim.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, at least we agree that all the claims of "white supremacy" that we
>>>>> constantly hear about from progs are bullshit.
>>>
>>>>> Scott followed up to say that the definition of a white nationalist is
>>>>> someone believing "the white race is superior to all other races"
>>>
>>> (1) Mind your attributions, Shit-Shoes. I didn't say what your quote
>>> levels claim I did.
>>>
>>> (2) That's not the definition of a white nationalist.
>>>
>>> A nationalist is someone who believes in the policy or doctrine of
>>> asserting or giving primacy to the interests of one's own nation viewed
>>> as separate from the interests of other nations or the international
>>> community.
>>>
>>> A white nationalist is someone who believes all that and is white.
>>>
>>>> and asked, "Do you believe that white nationalists are racist?"
>>>
>>> The answer would be-- like most groups of people-- some are and most
>>> aren't.
>>>
>>> Just as black nationalists, taken as a whole, would count a few racists
>>> among their group while most are just people advocating that the
>>> interests of their own country should be the priority.
>>
>> What, then, shall we call someone who advocates for a "white nation"?
>
> Are we expected to answer every question you post in triplicate?
>

What's the matter? Can't you spell "racist"?

--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC
Bible 25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0

Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0

On 3/29/24 2:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <uu6ibp$b577$4@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 3/28/24 2:04 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> In article <uu3un9$3kj1o$2@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/28/24 12:18 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>
>>>>> BLM protesters flooded Western Kentucky University today and surrounded
>>>>> the building where Kyle Rittenhouse was making an appearance.
>>>>>
>>>>> The biggest question I have is: why is BLM mad at Kyle Rittenhouse?
>>>>>
>>>>> The dude shot three white guys and has never said anything that can be
>>>>> construed as racist toward blacks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it because he came to Wisconsin to defend businesses from looters?
>>>>> Is it now racist to stand in the way of a black mob when they want to
>>>>> take shit that doesn't belong to them?
>>>>>
>>>> Because BLM ain't racist.
>>>
>>> Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
>>>
>>> And who says dour leftists have no sense of humor?
>>
>> Usually you. Guess you're wrong again.
>
> Yes, you got me. You told a pretty good joke there. Props where props
> are due.
>

Well, it's only funny when you're too dumb to know you're the butt of it.

--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC
Bible 25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0

Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0

On 3/29/24 8:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article
> <17c15b50736ea91f$14175$2820980$c4d58e68@news.newsdemon.com>,
> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 3/29/2024 4:12 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>>> On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:47:48 -0400, moviePig <never@nothere.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/28/2024 2:05 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 10:26:49 -0400, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Because BLM ain't racist like you.
>>>>>
>>>>> BLM isn't racist?
>>>>> HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa
>>>>
>>>> "Black lives matter" is not an inherently racist sentiment.
>>>>
>>> Never said it was. Nor did I say BLM urged their people to loot and
>>> pillage stores and other buildings - but equally there is no doubt
>>> that many of the "mostly peaceful protesters" did exactly that. And
>>> cited real or imagined grievances as justification for their looting.
>>>
>>> If you look at the speeches of BLM leaders they're fairly hardcore
>>> towards anybody who isn't black - and the claim that ONLY whites can
>>> be racist is pure bollocks - no matter your color, if you're treating
>>> people differently by reason of ethnicity, yeah that's racist. All of
>>> us to one extent or another but 90+% of people keep it well checked
>>> and actually DO try to do better.
>>>
>>> Which is why I have no time for the 'grievance' types who would rename
>>> everything and demolish statues and other meorials. I am particularly
>>> appalled by what's going on in London since October 7th particularly
>>> with war memorials and statues. (Though I personally tend to feel a
>>> lot of the "Confederate herore" memorials should have come down
>>> decades ago) Because the bottom line is having laws is fine but what's
>>> in peoples' hearts is more important and peoples' attitudes do change
>>> over time once they realize the effects of attitudes on actions.
>>
>> Then that'd make, e.g., busing and affirmative action "racist".
>
> Now you're getting it!
>

Finally! You finally ADMIT to being a racist. God, but it took you
long enough!

Baby steps... Now maybe you'll even admit the song "Barack the Magic
Negro" is also racist?

Or are you still defending that one?

--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC
Bible 25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0

Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0

On 3/30/24 10:45 AM, moviePig wrote:
> On 3/30/2024 10:32 AM, NoBody wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 13:33:36 -0700, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In article
>>> <17c1554881e6f860$47316$3081049$52d51861@news.newsdemon.com>,
>>> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/29/2024 2:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> In article <uu6ij9$b577$7@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/28/24 6:06 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 3/28/2024 4:44 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Mar 28, 2024 at 12:47:48 PM PDT, "moviePig" <never@nothere.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/28/2024 2:05 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 10:26:49 -0400, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Because BLM ain't racist like you.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> BLM isn't racist?
>>>>>>>>>>> HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Black lives matter" is not an inherently racist sentiment.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But the people who run the organization are quite racist indeed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Presumably, you mean that they believe blacks to be a superior
>>>>>>>> race. I
>>>>>>>> don't think human nature works that way ...nor is that belief
>>>>>>>> necessary
>>>>>>>> to the organization's stated aim.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well, at least we agree that all the claims of "white supremacy"
>>>>>>> that we
>>>>>>> constantly hear about from progs are bullshit.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Scott followed up to say that the definition of a white
>>>>>>> nationalist is
>>>>>>> someone believing "the white race is superior to all other races"
>>>>>
>>>>> (1) Mind your attributions, Shit-Shoes. I didn't say what your quote
>>>>> levels claim I did.
>>>>>
>>>>> (2) That's not the definition of a white nationalist.
>>>>>
>>>>> A nationalist is someone who believes in the policy or doctrine of
>>>>> asserting or giving primacy to the interests of one's own nation
>>>>> viewed
>>>>> as separate from the interests of other nations or the international
>>>>> community.
>>>>>
>>>>> A white nationalist is someone who believes all that and is white.
>>>>>> and asked, "Do you believe that white nationalists are racist?"
>>>>>
>>>>> The answer would be-- like most groups of people-- some are and most
>>>>> aren't.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just as black nationalists, taken as a whole, would count a few
>>>>> racists
>>>>> among their group while most are just people advocating that the
>>>>> interests of their own country should be the priority.
>>>>
>>>> What, then, shall we call someone who advocates for a "white nation"?
>>>
>>> The same thing we call someone who praises "the browning of America": a
>>> racist.
>>
>> Don't look for any honesty out him.  It would be earth shattering if
>> he were.
>
> Do you (honestly) think BTR answered the question (honestly)?

When Pubie says "out him" is he talking about outing Oath Keeper Twat?
Now things are getting interesting!

In article
<17c195517c0b87ac$48982$3384359$c2d58868@news.newsdemon.com>,
moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:

> On 3/30/2024 10:32 AM, NoBody wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 13:33:36 -0700, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> >> In article
> >> <17c1554881e6f860$47316$3081049$52d51861@news.newsdemon.com>,
> >> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:

> >>> What, then, shall we call someone who advocates for a "white nation"?
> >>
> >> The same thing we call someone who praises "the browning of America": a
> >> racist.
> >
> > Don't look for any honesty out him. It would be earth shattering if
> > he were.
>
> Do you (honestly) think BTR answered the question (honestly)?

Holy shit. I actually gave you the answer you were looking for and
that's not even good enough.

On 3/30/2024 4:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article
> <17c195517c0b87ac$48982$3384359$c2d58868@news.newsdemon.com>,
> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 3/30/2024 10:32 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 13:33:36 -0700, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article
>>>> <17c1554881e6f860$47316$3081049$52d51861@news.newsdemon.com>,
>>>> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> What, then, shall we call someone who advocates for a "white nation"?
>>>>
>>>> The same thing we call someone who praises "the browning of America": a
>>>> racist.
>>>
>>> Don't look for any honesty out him. It would be earth shattering if
>>> he were.
>>
>> Do you (honestly) think BTR answered the question (honestly)?
>
> Holy shit. I actually gave you the answer you were looking for and
> that's not even good enough.

The answer I was looking for was "white nationalist". Well, 'looking
for', I dunno...

In article <17c1a8d41c86459d$139241$3265$48d50260@news.newsdemon.com>,
moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:

> On 3/30/2024 4:55 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> > In article
> > <17c195517c0b87ac$48982$3384359$c2d58868@news.newsdemon.com>,
> > moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 3/30/2024 10:32 AM, NoBody wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 13:33:36 -0700, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> In article
> >>>> <17c1554881e6f860$47316$3081049$52d51861@news.newsdemon.com>,
> >>>> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>>> What, then, shall we call someone who advocates for a "white nation"?
> >>>>
> >>>> The same thing we call someone who praises "the browning of America": a
> >>>> racist.
> >>>
> >>> Don't look for any honesty out him. It would be earth shattering if
> >>> he were.
> >>
> >> Do you (honestly) think BTR answered the question (honestly)?
> >
> > Holy shit. I actually gave you the answer you were looking for and
> > that's not even good enough.
>
> The answer I was looking for was "white nationalist". Well, 'looking
> for', I dunno...

No, I gave you the definition of nationalist and it's not "someone who
wants their nation to be racially homogenous".

If I answered the way you apparently wanted me to, *that* would have
been dishonesty.

The honest answer to your question is "a racist".

On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 13:33:36 -0700, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

>> What, then, shall we call someone who advocates for a "white nation"?
>
>The same thing we call someone who praises "the browning of America": a
>racist.

Agreed - though MOST BLM supporters would claim that anyone from an
'oppressed group' CAN'T be racist since they don't have the power to
discriminate.

Which is of course a complete crock as most of us know.

ALL of us COULD be racist - most of us try very hard not to be.

Imagine that!

On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 10:31:04 -0400, NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote:

>>Wait, so you're claim is because you're a white supremacist to say
>>"black lives matter" is racist? Do you have ANY IDEA how stupid this
>>makes you look?
>
>"you're claim"? Do you have ANY IDEA how stupid this makes you look?

"Black lives matter" in itself isn't racist - because they're a
portion of humankind of which any member is of equal value. But the
leadership of BLM >DEFINITELY< has numerous black racists and the sort
of rhetoric of those who looted equally definitely was racist.

And Kendi is one of the worst of them all - and yes I've read Kendi.

On 4/2/2024 3:50 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 13:33:36 -0700, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
>>> What, then, shall we call someone who advocates for a "white nation"?
>>
>> The same thing we call someone who praises "the browning of America": a
>> racist.
>
> Agreed - though MOST BLM supporters would claim that anyone from an
> 'oppressed group' CAN'T be racist since they don't have the power to
> discriminate.
>
> Which is of course a complete crock as most of us know.
>
> ALL of us COULD be racist - most of us try very hard not to be.
>
> Imagine that!

If a society inherits a racist component, as ours has, what measures can
address it that can't be (mis)labeled 'racist' by those so inclined?

In article
<17c2979931d751bb$80145$2218499$46d50c60@news.newsdemon.com>,
moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:

> On 4/2/2024 3:50 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 13:33:36 -0700, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> >>> What, then, shall we call someone who advocates for a "white nation"?
> >>
> >> The same thing we call someone who praises "the browning of America": a
> >> racist.
> >
> > Agreed - though MOST BLM supporters would claim that anyone from an
> > 'oppressed group' CAN'T be racist since they don't have the power to
> > discriminate.
> >
> > Which is of course a complete crock as most of us know.
> >
> > ALL of us COULD be racist - most of us try very hard not to be.
> >
> > Imagine that!
>
> If a society inherits a racist component, as ours has, what measures can
> address it that can't be (mis)labeled 'racist' by those so inclined?

Your question rests on a false premise with your use of the word
'mislabeled'.

On 4/2/2024 7:15 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article
> <17c2979931d751bb$80145$2218499$46d50c60@news.newsdemon.com>,
> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/2/2024 3:50 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 13:33:36 -0700, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> What, then, shall we call someone who advocates for a "white nation"?
>>>>
>>>> The same thing we call someone who praises "the browning of America": a
>>>> racist.
>>>
>>> Agreed - though MOST BLM supporters would claim that anyone from an
>>> 'oppressed group' CAN'T be racist since they don't have the power to
>>> discriminate.
>>>
>>> Which is of course a complete crock as most of us know.
>>>
>>> ALL of us COULD be racist - most of us try very hard not to be.
>>>
>>> Imagine that!
>>
>> If a society inherits a racist component, as ours has, what measures can
>> address it that can't be (mis)labeled 'racist' by those so inclined?
>
> Your question rests on a false premise with your use of the word
> 'mislabeled'.

Your best response is to cavil at my parenthetical editorializing?

On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 22:17:03 -0400, moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:

>>> If a society inherits a racist component, as ours has, what measures can
>>> address it that can't be (mis)labeled 'racist' by those so inclined?
>>
>> Your question rests on a false premise with your use of the word
>> 'mislabeled'.
>
>Your best response is to cavil at my parenthetical editorializing?
>
If despite the racial progress made both legally and in every other
way is STILL considered racist (and the BLM people DO demonize MLK for
advocating equality of opportunity rather than equality of results)
then why persist with legal equality?

Obviously that's a rhetorical question but my point is that the BLM +
company definition of "justice" and "equality" (which is the same as
the DEI definition which is 'equality of results" not opportunity) is
positively obscene.

Go back and re-read the ENTIRE "I have a dream" speech and don't just
pay attention to the last minute of it (which is all most of us
remember). If you pay attention to the first half of the speech you'll
see King rips several states quite hard for racism before he gets to
the part about his children that we all remember.

https://www.npr.org/2010/01/18/122701268/i-have-a-dream-speech-in-its-entirety

For my money the first half is at least as important as his inspiring
finale.

On 4/3/2024 5:36 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 22:17:03 -0400, moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>
>>>> If a society inherits a racist component, as ours has, what measures can
>>>> address it that can't be (mis)labeled 'racist' by those so inclined?
>>>
>>> Your question rests on a false premise with your use of the word
>>> 'mislabeled'.
>>
>> Your best response is to cavil at my parenthetical editorializing?
>>
> If despite the racial progress made both legally and in every other
> way is STILL considered racist (and the BLM people DO demonize MLK for
> advocating equality of opportunity rather than equality of results)
> then why persist with legal equality?
>
> Obviously that's a rhetorical question but my point is that the BLM +
> company definition of "justice" and "equality" (which is the same as
> the DEI definition which is 'equality of results" not opportunity) is
> positively obscene.
>
> Go back and re-read the ENTIRE "I have a dream" speech and don't just
> pay attention to the last minute of it (which is all most of us
> remember). If you pay attention to the first half of the speech you'll
> see King rips several states quite hard for racism before he gets to
> the part about his children that we all remember.
>
> https://www.npr.org/2010/01/18/122701268/i-have-a-dream-speech-in-its-entirety
>
> For my money the first half is at least as important as his inspiring
> finale.

The rub occurs when "racist" measures are needed to hasten the advent of
equal opportunity. E.g., for blacks to be accepted as doctors, a few
have to be coerced into (also coerced) medical schools.

moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
> On 4/3/2024 5:36 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 22:17:03 -0400, moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> If a society inherits a racist component, as ours has, what measures can
>>>>> address it that can't be (mis)labeled 'racist' by those so inclined?
>>>>
>>>> Your question rests on a false premise with your use of the word
>>>> 'mislabeled'.
>>>
>>> Your best response is to cavil at my parenthetical editorializing?
>>>
>> If despite the racial progress made both legally and in every other
>> way is STILL considered racist (and the BLM people DO demonize MLK for
>> advocating equality of opportunity rather than equality of results)
>> then why persist with legal equality?
>>
>> Obviously that's a rhetorical question but my point is that the BLM +
>> company definition of "justice" and "equality" (which is the same as
>> the DEI definition which is 'equality of results" not opportunity) is
>> positively obscene.
>>
>> Go back and re-read the ENTIRE "I have a dream" speech and don't just
>> pay attention to the last minute of it (which is all most of us
>> remember). If you pay attention to the first half of the speech you'll
>> see King rips several states quite hard for racism before he gets to
>> the part about his children that we all remember.
>>
>> https://www.npr.org/2010/01/18/122701268/i-have-a-dream-speech-in-its-entirety
>>
>> For my money the first half is at least as important as his inspiring
>> finale.
>
> The rub occurs when "racist" measures are needed to hasten the advent of
> equal opportunity. E.g., for blacks to be accepted as doctors, a few
> have to be coerced into (also coerced) medical schools.

"It's okay when we're racist because our hearts are with the angels!"

On 4/3/2024 5:25 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>> On 4/3/2024 5:36 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 22:17:03 -0400, moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> If a society inherits a racist component, as ours has, what measures can
>>>>>> address it that can't be (mis)labeled 'racist' by those so inclined?
>>>>>
>>>>> Your question rests on a false premise with your use of the word
>>>>> 'mislabeled'.
>>>>
>>>> Your best response is to cavil at my parenthetical editorializing?
>>>>
>>> If despite the racial progress made both legally and in every other
>>> way is STILL considered racist (and the BLM people DO demonize MLK for
>>> advocating equality of opportunity rather than equality of results)
>>> then why persist with legal equality?
>>>
>>> Obviously that's a rhetorical question but my point is that the BLM +
>>> company definition of "justice" and "equality" (which is the same as
>>> the DEI definition which is 'equality of results" not opportunity) is
>>> positively obscene.
>>>
>>> Go back and re-read the ENTIRE "I have a dream" speech and don't just
>>> pay attention to the last minute of it (which is all most of us
>>> remember). If you pay attention to the first half of the speech you'll
>>> see King rips several states quite hard for racism before he gets to
>>> the part about his children that we all remember.
>>>
>>> https://www.npr.org/2010/01/18/122701268/i-have-a-dream-speech-in-its-entirety
>>>
>>> For my money the first half is at least as important as his inspiring
>>> finale.
>>
>> The rub occurs when "racist" measures are needed to hasten the advent of
>> equal opportunity. E.g., for blacks to be accepted as doctors, a few
>> have to be coerced into (also coerced) medical schools.
>
> "It's okay when we're racist because our hearts are with the angels!"

Still waiting for something besides your dodge of the question up top...

moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
> On 4/3/2024 5:25 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>>> On 4/3/2024 5:36 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 22:17:03 -0400, moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> If a society inherits a racist component, as ours has, what measures can
>>>>>>> address it that can't be (mis)labeled 'racist' by those so inclined?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your question rests on a false premise with your use of the word
>>>>>> 'mislabeled'.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your best response is to cavil at my parenthetical editorializing?
>>>>>
>>>> If despite the racial progress made both legally and in every other
>>>> way is STILL considered racist (and the BLM people DO demonize MLK for
>>>> advocating equality of opportunity rather than equality of results)
>>>> then why persist with legal equality?
>>>>
>>>> Obviously that's a rhetorical question but my point is that the BLM +
>>>> company definition of "justice" and "equality" (which is the same as
>>>> the DEI definition which is 'equality of results" not opportunity) is
>>>> positively obscene.
>>>>
>>>> Go back and re-read the ENTIRE "I have a dream" speech and don't just
>>>> pay attention to the last minute of it (which is all most of us
>>>> remember). If you pay attention to the first half of the speech you'll
>>>> see King rips several states quite hard for racism before he gets to
>>>> the part about his children that we all remember.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.npr.org/2010/01/18/122701268/i-have-a-dream-speech-in-its-entirety
>>>>
>>>> For my money the first half is at least as important as his inspiring
>>>> finale.
>>>
>>> The rub occurs when "racist" measures are needed to hasten the advent of
>>> equal opportunity. E.g., for blacks to be accepted as doctors, a few
>>> have to be coerced into (also coerced) medical schools.
>>
>> "It's okay when we're racist because our hearts are with the angels!"
>
> Still waiting for something besides your dodge of the question up top...

I don't see a question mark anywhere in your previous post.

On 4/3/24 6:30 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>> On 4/3/2024 5:25 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>> On 4/3/2024 5:36 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 22:17:03 -0400, moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If a society inherits a racist component, as ours has, what measures can
>>>>>>>> address it that can't be (mis)labeled 'racist' by those so inclined?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your question rests on a false premise with your use of the word
>>>>>>> 'mislabeled'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your best response is to cavil at my parenthetical editorializing?
>>>>>>
>>>>> If despite the racial progress made both legally and in every other
>>>>> way is STILL considered racist (and the BLM people DO demonize MLK for
>>>>> advocating equality of opportunity rather than equality of results)
>>>>> then why persist with legal equality?
>>>>>
>>>>> Obviously that's a rhetorical question but my point is that the BLM +
>>>>> company definition of "justice" and "equality" (which is the same as
>>>>> the DEI definition which is 'equality of results" not opportunity) is
>>>>> positively obscene.
>>>>>
>>>>> Go back and re-read the ENTIRE "I have a dream" speech and don't just
>>>>> pay attention to the last minute of it (which is all most of us
>>>>> remember). If you pay attention to the first half of the speech you'll
>>>>> see King rips several states quite hard for racism before he gets to
>>>>> the part about his children that we all remember.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.npr.org/2010/01/18/122701268/i-have-a-dream-speech-in-its-entirety
>>>>>
>>>>> For my money the first half is at least as important as his inspiring
>>>>> finale.
>>>>
>>>> The rub occurs when "racist" measures are needed to hasten the advent of
>>>> equal opportunity. E.g., for blacks to be accepted as doctors, a few
>>>> have to be coerced into (also coerced) medical schools.
>>>
>>> "It's okay when we're racist because our hearts are with the angels!"
>>
>> Still waiting for something besides your dodge of the question up top...
>
> I don't see a question mark anywhere in your previous post.

Holy balls are you fucking stupid.

If you're asking directly, end your sentence with a question mark
symbol. If you're asking indirectly, use a period.

Question Mark: Rules, Usage, and Examples - ProWritingAid
ProWritingAid
https://prowritingaid.com › Question-Mark

On 4/3/2024 7:30 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>> On 4/3/2024 5:25 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>> On 4/3/2024 5:36 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 22:17:03 -0400, moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If a society inherits a racist component, as ours has, what measures can
>>>>>>>> address it that can't be (mis)labeled 'racist' by those so inclined?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your question rests on a false premise with your use of the word
>>>>>>> 'mislabeled'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your best response is to cavil at my parenthetical editorializing?
>>>>>>
>>>>> If despite the racial progress made both legally and in every other
>>>>> way is STILL considered racist (and the BLM people DO demonize MLK for
>>>>> advocating equality of opportunity rather than equality of results)
>>>>> then why persist with legal equality?
>>>>>
>>>>> Obviously that's a rhetorical question but my point is that the BLM +
>>>>> company definition of "justice" and "equality" (which is the same as
>>>>> the DEI definition which is 'equality of results" not opportunity) is
>>>>> positively obscene.
>>>>>
>>>>> Go back and re-read the ENTIRE "I have a dream" speech and don't just
>>>>> pay attention to the last minute of it (which is all most of us
>>>>> remember). If you pay attention to the first half of the speech you'll
>>>>> see King rips several states quite hard for racism before he gets to
>>>>> the part about his children that we all remember.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.npr.org/2010/01/18/122701268/i-have-a-dream-speech-in-its-entirety
>>>>>
>>>>> For my money the first half is at least as important as his inspiring
>>>>> finale.
>>>>
>>>> The rub occurs when "racist" measures are needed to hasten the advent of
>>>> equal opportunity. E.g., for blacks to be accepted as doctors, a few
>>>> have to be coerced into (also coerced) medical schools.
>>>
>>> "It's okay when we're racist because our hearts are with the angels!"
>>
>> Still waiting for something besides your dodge of the question up top...
>
> I don't see a question mark anywhere in your previous post.

The question atop *this* post...

In article <17c31d1f5509348f$33221$111488$4ed50460@news.newsdemon.com>,
moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:

> On 4/3/2024 7:30 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> > moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
> >> On 4/3/2024 5:25 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >>> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
> >>>> On 4/3/2024 5:36 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 22:17:03 -0400, moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>> If a society inherits a racist component, as ours has, what measures
> >>>>>>>> can
> >>>>>>>> address it that can't be (mis)labeled 'racist' by those so inclined?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Your question rests on a false premise with your use of the word
> >>>>>>> 'mislabeled'.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Your best response is to cavil at my parenthetical editorializing?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> If despite the racial progress made both legally and in every other
> >>>>> way is STILL considered racist (and the BLM people DO demonize MLK for
> >>>>> advocating equality of opportunity rather than equality of results)
> >>>>> then why persist with legal equality?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Obviously that's a rhetorical question but my point is that the BLM +
> >>>>> company definition of "justice" and "equality" (which is the same as
> >>>>> the DEI definition which is 'equality of results" not opportunity) is
> >>>>> positively obscene.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Go back and re-read the ENTIRE "I have a dream" speech and don't just
> >>>>> pay attention to the last minute of it (which is all most of us
> >>>>> remember). If you pay attention to the first half of the speech you'll
> >>>>> see King rips several states quite hard for racism before he gets to
> >>>>> the part about his children that we all remember.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://www.npr.org/2010/01/18/122701268/i-have-a-dream-speech-in-its-en
> >>>>> tirety
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For my money the first half is at least as important as his inspiring
> >>>>> finale.
> >>>>
> >>>> The rub occurs when "racist" measures are needed to hasten the advent of
> >>>> equal opportunity. E.g., for blacks to be accepted as doctors, a few
> >>>> have to be coerced into (also coerced) medical schools.
> >>>
> >>> "It's okay when we're racist because our hearts are with the angels!"
> >>
> >> Still waiting for something besides your dodge of the question up top...
> >
> > I don't see a question mark anywhere in your previous post.
>
> The question atop *this* post...

Why would I be answering a question five levels up? I respond to the
immediate post before mine.

On 4/4/2024 3:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <17c31d1f5509348f$33221$111488$4ed50460@news.newsdemon.com>,
> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/3/2024 7:30 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>> On 4/3/2024 5:25 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/3/2024 5:36 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 22:17:03 -0400, moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If a society inherits a racist component, as ours has, what measures
>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>> address it that can't be (mis)labeled 'racist' by those so inclined?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Your question rests on a false premise with your use of the word
>>>>>>>>> 'mislabeled'.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Your best response is to cavil at my parenthetical editorializing?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If despite the racial progress made both legally and in every other
>>>>>>> way is STILL considered racist (and the BLM people DO demonize MLK for
>>>>>>> advocating equality of opportunity rather than equality of results)
>>>>>>> then why persist with legal equality?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Obviously that's a rhetorical question but my point is that the BLM +
>>>>>>> company definition of "justice" and "equality" (which is the same as
>>>>>>> the DEI definition which is 'equality of results" not opportunity) is
>>>>>>> positively obscene.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Go back and re-read the ENTIRE "I have a dream" speech and don't just
>>>>>>> pay attention to the last minute of it (which is all most of us
>>>>>>> remember). If you pay attention to the first half of the speech you'll
>>>>>>> see King rips several states quite hard for racism before he gets to
>>>>>>> the part about his children that we all remember.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.npr.org/2010/01/18/122701268/i-have-a-dream-speech-in-its-en
>>>>>>> tirety
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For my money the first half is at least as important as his inspiring
>>>>>>> finale.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The rub occurs when "racist" measures are needed to hasten the advent of
>>>>>> equal opportunity. E.g., for blacks to be accepted as doctors, a few
>>>>>> have to be coerced into (also coerced) medical schools.
>>>>>
>>>>> "It's okay when we're racist because our hearts are with the angels!"
>>>>
>>>> Still waiting for something besides your dodge of the question up top...
>>>
>>> I don't see a question mark anywhere in your previous post.
>>
>> The question atop *this* post...
>
> Why would I be answering a question five levels up? I respond to the
> immediate post before mine.

I dunno... because it's the one "up top", being posed again?

On 4/4/24 3:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <17c31d1f5509348f$33221$111488$4ed50460@news.newsdemon.com>,
> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/3/2024 7:30 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>> On 4/3/2024 5:25 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/3/2024 5:36 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 22:17:03 -0400, moviePig <never@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If a society inherits a racist component, as ours has, what measures
>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>> address it that can't be (mis)labeled 'racist' by those so inclined?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Your question rests on a false premise with your use of the word
>>>>>>>>> 'mislabeled'.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Your best response is to cavil at my parenthetical editorializing?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If despite the racial progress made both legally and in every other
>>>>>>> way is STILL considered racist (and the BLM people DO demonize MLK for
>>>>>>> advocating equality of opportunity rather than equality of results)
>>>>>>> then why persist with legal equality?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Obviously that's a rhetorical question but my point is that the BLM +
>>>>>>> company definition of "justice" and "equality" (which is the same as
>>>>>>> the DEI definition which is 'equality of results" not opportunity) is
>>>>>>> positively obscene.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Go back and re-read the ENTIRE "I have a dream" speech and don't just
>>>>>>> pay attention to the last minute of it (which is all most of us
>>>>>>> remember). If you pay attention to the first half of the speech you'll
>>>>>>> see King rips several states quite hard for racism before he gets to
>>>>>>> the part about his children that we all remember.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.npr.org/2010/01/18/122701268/i-have-a-dream-speech-in-its-en
>>>>>>> tirety
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For my money the first half is at least as important as his inspiring
>>>>>>> finale.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The rub occurs when "racist" measures are needed to hasten the advent of
>>>>>> equal opportunity. E.g., for blacks to be accepted as doctors, a few
>>>>>> have to be coerced into (also coerced) medical schools.
>>>>>
>>>>> "It's okay when we're racist because our hearts are with the angels!"
>>>>
>>>> Still waiting for something besides your dodge of the question up top...
>>>
>>> I don't see a question mark anywhere in your previous post.
>>
>> The question atop *this* post...
>
> Why would I be answering a question five levels up? I respond to the
> immediate post before mine.
>

Now he's playing stupid again.

--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC
Bible 25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0

Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0