Nja

[Damien Howard]

JD: What did Martin Luther King say? Something to the effect:
"In the end, it's not the voices of our enemies that we'll remember, it's the silence of our friends..."
Ok then I will respond to Paul's sillyness.
Paul: To begin that web-site did not appear to be very reputable but rather the propoganda of other racists. The web-site was very obviously one-sided in its reports of black on white crime. Many stories did not have both sides represented. In addition I did not see descriptions of white on black crime (perhaps I didn't look hard enough) surely that exists as well.
Secondly even if one were to take the information on that web-site as factual, your interpretation of the results was very narrow minded. it would seem to me based on my life experience (short as it may be) that there are a much higher % of minorities who have minimal opportunites compared to whites. Surely if the situation were reversed it is possible so would the crime statistics, thus perhaps these statisitics should have been looked at from a poverty/wealth point of view rather than putting on the blinders and just examining race.
Lastly your apology appears to be bullsh*t based on your post in this thread google goes goofy
Perhaps I'm miss interpreting your post in that forum, but based on your arguments in other forums I'm pretty sure that there is some predujice in your reasoning for that post.

[John Dunn]

Paul, you weren't serious, were you? How could you use such a biased site to make your point?? This site is devoted to Anti-white crimes - you even book mark to a page on rape. Btw, Timmy Black author of the 'famed' essay you posted from Storm Front also heads or has headed up in the past a crusade against male rape in prison. If you want to make head way on this topic, you should steer clear of the hate-sites. I do believe some respected groups like Amnesty Int., for one, attack this U.S. male prison rape situation.
One area that link failed to address is that the folks who wind up in prison are not a accurate snapshot of society outside of prison. So they compare apples to oranges at some point. They play with numbers and statistics to present their point, not they other way around. Because there may be a higher black on white rape rate in the prison system, does that mean I'm not safe among blacks outside of prison?? NO!!

[Paul McKenna]

OK! OK! Hold it both of you. I am having a hard time catching up since so much has been said in so little time. I will post specific replies but I make my stand very clear.. so much of opposition from the other side can only mean one of two things
1. I am right and the truth hurts.. hurts real bad!
2. I am right and people "Cant handle the truth"

[Paul McKenna]

Originally posted by John Dunn:
I disagree, why can't we put a label of bigot on this? Where there's smoke there's fire. I wasn't using the term lightly...
big�ot
Pronunciation: 'bi-g&t
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French, hypocrite, bigot
Date: 1661
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices
- big�ot�ed /-g&-t&d/ adjective
- big�ot�ed�ly adverb

The term bigot does not apply as per the definition provided. Because I am NOT "obstinately" or "intolerantly" devoted to my own opinions. I am yet to see any evidence to the contrary to be provided by you to substantiate your viewpoint. In your own words.. "if there is smoke there is fire".. so if 68% of rapes in Sweden are being committed by people of a certain ethnic group whats wrong in labelling people of that ethnic group as a high suspect group??? Answer that! You are looking at this from a pessimist perspective.. you think labelling is meant to discriminate. Sure it can be one of the effects but dont you think labelling also helps to identify problems with a particular community and take steps to resolve it???

Recall that essay that Paul posted, on the topic of reverse racism, written by a leader of a white supremist site, and recognized and tracked down by many anti-hatred groups for its content, was debunked by me, over the summer. (The articles have since been deleted by the javaranch sheriffs). Paul's claim was that he wanted to speak of the issues, yet he had no comment regarding many of the counter-arguments I raised. Why not? (and recall that I had found a Supreme Court Justice and a U.S. Federal Judge, both of African American descent, on opposing sides of the argument.) My gut feeling here is that he is acting like a person noted by the above definition for 'bigot'.

I recall that I responded to every single argument you raised. If possible Map, could you please take that article out of the trash can. I am more than willing to take on the argument again if required. John, if I remember right.. your last question was why did I choose the article I chose and not people like Brooker T Washington etc.. to state the same argument. The answer to that is I had no idea who Brooker T Washington was but the article was easily accessible and made a whole lot of sense.
In the following months I notice the other topics Paul defends and I wonder what agenda he is pushing or why he does it?

So I claim that Paul is doing this:

in�tel�lec�tu�al�i�za�tion
PRONUNCIATION: ntl-kch--l-zshn
NOUN: Psychology 1. The act or process of intellectualizing. 2. An unconscious means of protecting oneself from the emotional stress and anxiety associated with confronting painful personal fears or problems by excessive reasoning.
I WANT TO KNOW WHY HE THINKS THE WAY HE DOES??? So I asked him directly. That is discussion. Let him fend for himself.

Geez! I do not have any painful personal fears or problems that I may have problems confronting. Are you trying to use your "elite" mentality and draw a conclusion of my problems even before you know me?? Kinda sounds like a "bigot" as per your own definition to me...

Who actually deleted the Storm Front article that Paul posted? Why didn't you complain about censorship back then? (Note, I actually thought it was a good idea though, as it would probably make the whole site look stupid if Amnesty International and other respected anti-hate groups were asking javaranch to tone it down Also, how would some of us explain to our bosses, spouses, kids that we get java info from a site tracked down by anti-Hate sites???)

First of all I did not get that article from StormFront.. i got it off newsgroup and you will find that article on several conservative sites because the article made a whole lot of sense without any racist overtones.
John, it seems to me you have some sort of pyschological barrier in looking at the truth. I have given factual evidence about my analysis and yet you persist on harping the same stuff that is taught by liberals. You refuse to look beyond the veil and see what is actually going on. You refuse to see that people who were once oppressed are now the oppressors in certain areas. Note the clause "certain areas".. I know they are still oppressed in other places but if we have a goal of acheiving true equality we shouldnt do so by lifting one over the other .. we should work towards levelling the playing field totally. But for some unknown reason you simply fail to agree over and over again.
Judging by what you said about Amnesty International etc.. seems to be you are definetly one of those la-la liberals who is afraid of what the third person will think if the truth is discussed. See, that is the difference between you and me. I dont care what the third person thinks.. if the truth hurts.. so be it! I will not alter my principles for the sake of appeasing others.. I base my principles on the truth and if the truth is different so shall be my principles. Prove me wrong with facts not just liberal rhetoric or name-calling or labelling.. and I will retract each and everyone of my comments. You can't do that can you?? 'Cos I am right!

Paul's claim is that he is non-white so how can he be racist? Well, my gut feeling is that Paul knows first hand that it is very possible to be dark skinned and still use the N-word with malice (and mean it) towards African Americans. It happens all the time with dark skinned folks from Puerto Rico, Cuba, etc. It happens within the African American community between dark and light skinned blacks. Being dark skinned doesn't exonerate anyone from being hate-filled towards blacks in this country.
On another note, when Mahatma Ghandi was asked if he was going to help the African Americans, after his success in South Africa, he said, 'NO'. It's their fight to fight." Now Paul claims to be one of them (African American) and wants to tell us all how racist 'his people' all are against whites. :roll: Wow man, thanks.

Dude, I am an Indian. Geez! Where did I ever say I was an African-American?? I said I was a non-white. This confirms that you make false assumptions very easily. This is not the first time you have done so either.. you did this before in the gay-marriage post. Just because I was against gay-marriage you assumed I was homophobic. Infact now it is more apparent to me that your style of arguing is labelling. Say something that you disagree with and automatically you jump to label the other person as a hate-filled, race baiting, homophobic villain. Very nice way to debate John!! :roll:

I am discussing it. I want Paul to zero in on his THEMES because I don't think they'll hold any weight. I also want to know what makes him tick? I want to get beyond the superficial level and know why he thinks what he thinks and why he wants us to see things his way. Any problems there?

For every argument I have provided I have given you links and I have made my analysis based on factual evidence.. you on the other hand are yet to make one single argument based on factual evidence. All your arguments have simply been name-calling so far.

Damn man, the pro-war folks had to defend their ideas to a minute detail, so why does Paul get off the hook so easy? I guess what I don't get is why if Joe Pluta says the slightest thing in favor of America, he needs to get a lawyer and so few people throw the same level of defense at some of Paul's ideas? Why is that?

Because most of the people agree! Or if they say something that sounds remotely as though they support me, they are afraid of being called names like "Bigot", "Homophobic", "racist".. thanks to people like yourself. Liberals have a found an excellent way to stifle debate.. but not the most pleasant one. Recall that Herb did actually say something but stopped short because of the fear of being labelled.. thanks again to you!

[Jim Yingst]

[PmK]: so much of opposition from the other side can only mean one of two things
1. I am right and the truth hurts.. hurts real bad!
2. I am right and people "Cant handle the truth"
Those seem to be two ways of saying the same thing. And you seem to be overlooking a fairly obvious alternate explanation for why so many disagree with you. Assuming that people disagree with you because you're right is a nice self-reinforcing conceit for yourself, but surely you don't think this argument will actually convince others, do you?

[Paul McKenna]

Originally posted by Jim Yingst:
Those seem to be two ways of saying the same thing. And you seem to be overlooking a fairly obvious alternate explanation for why so many disagree with you. Assuming that people disagree with you because you're right is a nice self-reinforcing conceit for yourself, but surely you don't think this argument will actually convince others, do you?

Ofcourse Jim, you are right.. I was being smug there for a moment. Neverthless do you disagree with everything I have said Jim? Do you really think I am a racist?? Sure I may be controversial and insensitive to other's feelings but am I a racist???

[Joe Pluta]

I guess what I don't get is why if Joe Pluta says the slightest thing in favor of America, he needs to get a lawyer
Thanks, John, you made my year with this... .
By the way, I think lots of people agree with me, but they don't want to do so publicly because and take the abuse I take. I think there are a lot of people who read the Ranch who quietly cheer me from behind the monitor but at the same time have no desire whatsoever to deal with the anti-Americanism here in MD.
And after six months of it, I can see why. I'm naturally a scrapper - I don't back down to much of anyone or anything. But this might be the last straw. Now that I find myself defending Christmas, it's just too, too much.
Joe

[Paul McKenna]

Originally posted by John Dunn:
Sorry, I missed this apology on my first pass through this thread tonight...
Not sure how to react to this, though. My first reaction is, "how nice", it seems like you are saying you're sorry, BUT you will just promise to be more clever in the future. ???
Kind of like:Sorry ladies, I promise not to be a misogynist, but I will now only hate prostitutes, lesbians, radical feminists and pro-Abortion extremists and drunk bitches in lawdy bars.

Isnt that what you wanted.. you wanted me to zero in on the criminal instead of handing out collective punishment. Well, I am prepared to do that. I agree collective punishment is not good.. so we will isolate criminals and punish only them and not the group as a whole. Gee! I thought atleast this would satisfy you.. but apparently not!

Hmmm... said another way, I believe you lack sincerity. I also don't believe you REALLY believe some of the arguments you've raised in the past.

How nice of you to judge me.. even before you know me. Isnt this what they call prejudice??? John, I dont know how long you've been reading Meaningless Drivel, but if you go back a year or so and read some of my posts you will find that I was a bleeding heart liberal. I used to watch those PBS documentaries about Jim Crow etc. and feel that Affirmative Action is right, Blacks are being discriminated against everyday and everywhere etc. But thats all it was.. a TV world. I got out into the reality and boy!! it was very very different.
Listen John, for the last time.. let me make it clear to you. I am not against blacks, whites, yellows, browns etc.. I am against all forms of racism practised by any person of any skin color. I simply want others to recognize that racism is a two way street these days and thats all. Especially people like yourself.. because you are of the opinion that only whites can be racist and blacks cannot be. If a white person is discriminated then he or she should keep quiet and bear it because of the hundreds of years of discrimination that was done in the past. I'm sorry.. I beg to differ!!
A classic example of the above.. my "white" friend and I were walking through the mall and some black kids were walking in the opposite direction. They hurled abuses at my friend.. but my friend couldnt do a damn thing because to do so would be automatically characterized as racist by people like you.

My gut feeling, (and I'm speculating), is that you want to tangle some of us in our own arguments, or criss-cross our principles for no other reason than to have us be confused. (I can't help but wonder, 'Why'?) It is kind of devious and insidious. Many people here are open to having their arguments poked at, but excuse me for my opinion, but you seem to try to do it in a way that hurts. Do you realize that you may come across like this? Do you even care?

So you want me to say the samethings I am saying but in a manner that does not hurt anyone.... is anyone else here now convinced John is a liberal???
Why John?? Why? The message is the same isnt it.. being frank is a good virtue I thought. Masking the truth with "candy" is something that you didnt like, or so I thought...

Now if I'm wrong, do what you can to convince us otherwise. Your credibility IMHO is seriously deficient.
Paul it's not enough to argue one's point. In the world of public opinion (javaranch, in this case), you also need to package it so it actually get's heard, otherwise it's nothing. One can get away with a lot if one is genuine and honestly inquisitive. You are certainly capable of being more tactful and creative in attempting to say what you want. In fact, your topics might even be discussed. But if you can't, maybe that's a good sign.

Thanks!! Next time I'll wait for the John Dunn seal of approval on each of my posts and also hope to gain respect from John Dunn in the future..
:roll:
You would like no one to talk about issues of race, discrimination etc right?? Or is it that if they are discussed they should all be lopsided towards the viewpoint that you hold?? I never stated in any of my posts that I will not listen to another person's viewpoint. But so far the other viewpoint has simply been name calling and labelling instead of getting down to the facts.. in that case how do you expect me to change my stance?? If I may humbly make a suggestion to you.. quit the name calling and work on showing me where I am wrong. I will gleefully be your student!

[Mapraputa Is]

PmK: is anyone else here now convinced John is a liberal???
I do not think so... But I am starting to think that it indeed takes some sort of mental deficiency for a person to become a conservative.
Paul, how difficult is it to throw insults? Let's not do it here! Too much of Rush Limbaugh, I guess. :roll:

[Mapraputa Is]

PmK: If possible Map, could you please take that article out of the trash can.
I cannot find it. When it was posted? If it was so enthusiastically published on conservative sites (brrrr.. Ok) then perhaps a link wouldn't hurt.
--------------------
"A hug is all the home I have but you are welcome to it." --Michael Ernest
[ December 26, 2003: Message edited by: Mapraputa Is ]

[HS Thomas]

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
But I am starting to think that it indeed takes some sort of mental deficiency for a person to become a conservative.

Conservatism is a pschological disorder and it's not a political creed ,according to ...well, psychologists.
A study concluded that conservatism is 'a set of neuroses rooted in fear and aggression, dogmatism and the intolerance of ambiguity'.
The study credited conservatists with certain qualities.
'Liberals may be less intolerant of ambiguity, but they may be less decisive, less commited , less loyal'. But no conclusion that liberals were afflicted by a disorder was reached in the study.

[Mapraputa Is]

HT: 'Liberals may be less intolerant of ambiguity, but they may be less decisive, less commited, less loyal'.
Sure thing... I mean I can sign this.
--------------------
"A hug is all the home I have but you are welcome to it." --Michael Ernest

[Paul McKenna]

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
I do not think so... But I am starting to think that it indeed takes some sort of mental deficiency for a person to become a conservative.
Paul, how difficult is it to throw insults? Let's not do it here! Too much of Rush Limbaugh, I guess. :roll: [/QB]

ha! So Map you admit now that being a liberal is an insult???
C'mon Map.. you've been around longer. You've read my posts for a much longer period to know that I rarely if at all throw insults at others. I didnt mean to insult John or anyone else when I called him a liberal. Its a label.. like the ones he assigns to me viz. "Racist", "Homophobic" etc. And those are definetly insulting. If Liberal has also joined that list (I dont know, I thought liberal was still a good word) then I will edit that post and remove it.
I am the son Rush Limbaugh never had

[HS Thomas]

Originally posted by Paul McKenna:

ha! So Map you admit now that being a liberal is an insult???

Couldn't figure out where Map admitted to any such thing.
Unless Rush Limbaugh is a liberal ?

[Paul McKenna]

Originally posted by HS Thomas:

Couldn't figure out where Map admitted to any such thing.
Unless Rush Limbaugh is a liberal ?

Well she requested me not to hurl insults at John.. and apparently the insult I hurled in her opinion was to call him a liberal

[John Dunn]

P.McK: Its a label.. like the ones he assigns to me viz. "Racist", "Homophobic" etc. And those are definetly insulting. If the shoe fits man, wear it.
Where is your integrity? I questioning your character and your spirit without beating around the bush. Why can't you stand tall and defend yourself in an intelligent and meaningful way?

[John Dunn]

P. McK: Isnt that what you wanted.. you wanted me to zero in on the criminal instead of handing out collective punishment. Well, I am prepared to do that. I agree collective punishment is not good.. so we will isolate criminals and punish only them and not the group as a whole. Gee! I thought atleast this would satisfy you.. but apparently not! Paul I said the THEMES, man. Paul why do you go after Gays, Muslims, Blacks, & Jews??? The KKK, White Supremist groups, the Nazis, etc, etc have also manipulated facts to persecute these groups and push their own agendas. Why do you expect to follow in their footsteps and not be grilled?
Paul keep in mind that you were originally trying to sell us on the idea that Muslim men are sexually frustrated, b/c Muslim women are kept 'locked up' and therefore Muslim men are more likely to be rapists.
So you're saying their culture breeds rapists??? Or in other words, their culture breeds violent attacks against women...

[Mapraputa Is]

PmK: ha! So Map you admit now that being a liberal is an insult???
Nothing even close, 'Paul'.
Actually, it depends on who is saying. In *your* mouth this is an insult, sure thing. But let's read...
John, it seems to me you have some sort of pyschological barrier in looking at the truth. I have given factual evidence about my analysis and yet you persist on harping the same stuff that is taught by conservatives .
John, it seems to me you have some sort of pyschological barrier in looking at the truth. I have given factual evidence about my analysis and yet you persist on harping the same stuff that is taught by conservatives. You refuse to look beyond the veil and see what is actually going on. You refuse to see that people who were once oppressed are now the oppressors in certain areas
Juging by what you said about Amnesty International etc.. seems to be you are definetly one of those la-la conservatives who is afraid of what the third person will think if the truth is discussed.
Prove me wrong with facts not just conservatives rhetoric or name-calling or labelling..
Conservatives have a found an excellent way to stifle debate..,
John, I dont know how long you've been reading Meaningless Drivel, but if you go back a year or so and read some of my posts you will find that I was a bleeding heart conservative.
So you want me to say the samethings I am saying but in a manner that does not hurt anyone.... is anyone else here now convinced John is a conservativeS???.
I didnt mean to insult John or anyone else when I called him a conservative. Its a label..
And those are definetly insulting. If conservatives has also joined that list (I dont know, I thought liberal was still a good word) then I will edit that post and remove it.
[ December 26, 2003: Message edited by: Mapraputa Is ]

[Paul McKenna]

Originally posted by John Dunn:
Paul I said the THEMES, man. Paul why do you go after Gays, Muslims, Blacks, & Jews??? The KKK, White Supremist groups, the Nazis, etc, etc have also manipulated facts to persecute these groups and push their own agendas. Why do you expect to follow in their footsteps and not be grilled?

Lets make one thing clear John, if you are going to persist in attributing things to me which I do not do then I will ignore every remark of yours in the future. I am trying my best to behave decently while still engaging in a debate with you however heated it may be. If you persist in calling me insulting and sometimes very offensive labels I WILL definetly ignore you. Whether that is exactly what you want me to do is something else I am not going to bother with.
I do not hate gays.. go back few threads earlier and check for yourself. I posted a lot in opposition to Rick Santorum and his anti-gay "acts" stance. So stop feeding your propoganda into my mouth. I am only objecting to gay-marriage..
I do not hate jews. This is a pure lie from you to support your own argument. I never said one word against jews in any of my posts. I linked an article that was nowhere remotely anti-semitic or offensive to jews. You are the only one complaining. It seems to me that you have an agenda to stifle me everytime I post something?? Any particular reason?
I do not hate blacks. I posted an article questioning affirmative-action, reverse-racism etc. Things which do exist. But you choose to look at me in a racist light without providing even one line of factual evidence. Infact it makes me think why I am not ignoring you already.
Secondly, I have no idea if what I post sometimes is also found on KKK, Stormfront etc. that tells me you monitor those sites more closely than I do. Why? You have some interest there??? I often get my news from newgroups, website which are quite legit, e.g. NewsMax, Townhall, CNN, FOX etc. John I am not dumb.. if something is obviously racist then I will definetly ignore it. You can look at these debates from two perspectives.. one the way you are looking at it presently, with the sole intention of stifling the other side or two, you could educate me on where I am wrong or where I am right. I would prefer the latter.. which Jim often does.

Paul keep in mind that you were originally trying to sell us on the idea that Muslim men are sexually frustrated, b/c Muslim women are kept 'locked up' and therefore Muslim men are more likely to be rapists.
So you're saying their culture breeds rapists??? Or in other words, their culture breeds violent attacks against women...[/QB]

Far from it. I said that one must bear in mind that most of the rapists accused in the mentioned article were muslim immigrants to sweden. Where was this outburst from you to Frank's "swarthy immigrants" comment?? You overlooked that obviously didnt ya?? I infact did a better job and removed the blame from the immigrant community to the ones actually responsible.
There is another article linked in there which gives an analysis of why 68% of rapes are committed by foreigners. Take a look at it.. you might be shocked at how similar the analysis is to mine.

[Paul McKenna]

John, I didnt want to hijack the other thread so I bought our debate over here if you dont mind.

I really don't buy what 'Paul McKenna' is preaching as searching for the truth. Controversial, yes, but something just doesn't add up here for me. "Searching for the truth" or benign ignorance doesn't exonerate anyone from hatred. (i.e. are misogynists or anti-gays searching for the truth? or promoting their own opinions and beliefs because it keeps them safe and secure? Recall that I've asked Paul on many occasions to come out and explain his psyche.)

Acutally, Map nailed it pretty well. I am seeking for something. Some sort of an explanation. It maybe called the truth but I am basically seeking some sort of explanation. John, since you are asking me explain my psyche.. I will do so now.
I come from a country that was under British rule for 300 years. A lot of people turned anti-white during that period in history and all through our education years we were educated about one side of the white race.. racism. They could be nothing but that. I remember my history textbooks carrying photos of white German soliders having the heads of African tribesmen on stick ends and posing for a photo with a smile. I saw this in the eigth grade or ninth grade.. I dont remember. Anyway, the end result was I grew up all along thinking whites could be nothing but racist.. infact I dont think I was unique in that all. Everyone who grew up with me thought likewise.
Then I travel abroad and I find out that whole damn thing was a lie. People are far from it. Sure I had my share of racism etc. but I chose to overlook it. Sure there was a person who followed me throughout his store thinking I was an Arab ready to blow up his shop but it didnt shock me much.. cos I was prepared for that kind of behaviour. But when a bunch of black kids pelted me with stones thinking I was an Arab and was responsible for 9/11 it confused me. I was told that couldnt happen. Blacks are not prejudiced.. they do not judge anyone by their skin color/appearance/ethnicity etc. But it did. And it happened again when I was with my friend at the mall. A bunch of black kids who hurled racial slurs at my white friend. It definetly confused me for a while, but it taught me that racism is also not color blind. It can afflict any race, any ethnic group etc.

IMHO, if Paul was legit, he would have been ashamed to be associated with anything on that site. Yet, he defended his speech. WHY!!!??? It is not strange for him to tell whites when they should feel offended?
Sonny Gill, you bring up some understanding and compassionite points. I'd like to be so understanding, but Paul only changed his name this past year. So I think that perhaps he needs to be the one that steps up and comes clean.

John, I really dont understand your mindset. You think any kind of debate that is remotely controversial should involve the "perhaps wrong" party being ashamed?? I dont see any reason to be ashamed.. perhaps if at all I see an oppurtunity to be educated. But you are not interested in doing that are you??

Paul keep this in mind to in regards to Joe and I: If a strange doggie craps on my front lawn, I just watch it leave and then go pick up the dog doo-doo. If a person craps on my front lawn, I'll ran down the block and catch him and demand he tell me why he just did that. So, you could be rather grateful that we even question you.

I find this pretty insulting to say the least. I am grateful not that you question me, but that I have better standards of decency in talking to my opponents. You should be ashamed of yourself for the above remarks..
Also going forward, you can engage me in this debate through PMs, atleast I will be spared such offensive remarks. Yuck! I am still disgusted that you could stoop to such a low level.

[Joe Pluta]

Paul said:
John, I didnt want to hijack the other thread so I bought our debate over here if you dont mind.
I am grateful not that you question me, but that I have better standards of decency in talking to my opponents.
Paul also said:
Forgive me for interrupting this thread a bit but I am of the disposition that people who celebrate Kwanza will not get any respect from me or from anyone who holds similar beliefs as me.

I find these statements inconsistent.

Joe

[Paul McKenna]

Originally posted by Joe Pluta:
I find these statements inconsistent.

I would conceed you are right but the reason I bought my debate with John over here is because I wanted our bickering with each other to continue isolated from your meaningful conversation.
I apologize for interrupting your debate earlier and will refrain from doing so in the future as I have already shown intent.

[Paul McKenna]

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
Nothing even close, 'Paul'.
Actually, it depends on who is saying. In *your* mouth this is an insult, sure thing. But let's read...

Map.. point well made. You are right.. John, sorry for calling you a liberal and saying that you espouse liberalism.
There Map, I kept my word

[John Dunn]

P. McK: Secondly, I have no idea if what I post sometimes is also found on KKK, Stormfront etc. that tells me you monitor those sites more closely than I do. That's actually not accurate. When you originally posted the 'now-deleted' essay, I went and searched for info on the writer and I was getting a bunch of info on the StormFront.org. I made that extemely clear over the summer. In fact, my question was to the sheriffs: Are you going to wait for some anti-Hate site to ask you to remove that?? Does that really tell you that I monitor them more than anyone?
Why? You have some interest there???Btw, it happens to be on every anti-hate website I could find. They are watched by many people. Note that the StormFront.org claims to only be spreading the truth.
[ December 27, 2003: Message edited by: John Dunn ]

[John Dunn]

Paul, I did come down pretty hard on you. No harder than anyone else that said the same thing. My only regret here is the nature of forums that lack the other communication cues be it, voice tone, hand movements, & general vibes, etc. etc. Often times they allow for a great deal of passion without any hints of anomosity.
---------------------
I meant what I said about losing my friends, and getting beat on by strangers, if I was to preach some of your comments. NYC may have more of a need than other places to live in harmony with other people. Keep in mind, that I think 9-11 also broke down a lot of barriers.
So should I wear kids gloves when I visit this forum? No one else seems to have that restriction.
I'm not sure if you realize how scrutinized I would be if I was to start defending anti-white racism thing. It doesn't exist here on a big enough scale to be to be taken seriously, hence my passion against that topic.
--------------------------
P.McK: I do not hate gays.. I am only objecting to gay-marriage..
Okay, I'll leave it at that.
P.McK: I do not hate jews. This is a pure lie from you to support your own argument. I never said one word against jews in any of my posts. I linked an article that was nowhere remotely anti-semitic or offensive to jews. No you did not come out and say you hate Jews. But, to be honest the article is something I'd expect to find on an anti-Jewish site. (i.e. look at what trouble makers the jews are... NYC Jews are causing trouble in Europe, etc.) You do see the ADL come out pretty hard on stuff like that in the NYC papers. No I don't know enough if YOU hate Jews. I did want to know why it was important to you.

P.McK: I do not hate blacks. I posted an article questioning affirmative-action, reverse-racism etc. Things which do exist. But you choose to look at me in a racist light without providing even one line of factual evidence. That's not a fair representation of the facts. I gave you plenty of opportunity to continue to discuss the issue, the first time around. Your recent Kwanzaa remark was not in line with the above statement.
P. McK: Infact it makes me think why I am not ignoring you already. It seems to me that you have an agenda to stifle me everytime I post something?? Any particular reason? You can look at these debates from two perspectives.. one the way you are looking at it presently, with the sole intention of stifling the other side or two, you could educate me on where I am wrong or where I am right. I would prefer the latter.. which Jim often does.
Paul, nah, definitely don't ignore the scrutiny. I would not have been pleased if you simply disappeared, in fact I appreciate that you stuck it out, so far. There is no hidden agenda, and let's face it I've been pretty open with you, but I did set out to really challenge you comments. As you said earlier this forum is for debating. This is exactly the scrunity I would get from my peers, I don't think I'm being unfair or abusive at all.
I do believe you could learn from this. It is up to you. I'm questioning you alot and my hunch is that if you honestly answer some of these questions for yourself, I think you will need to revamp some of your arguments. (And granted I don't need an answer to everything - b/c some portions of soul-searching are personal and off limits to me.)
Everyone has their own types of prejudices and irrationalities. We maybe become aware of them, we soul-search, maybe change - maybe not & growth forward.
After 20 years of epilepsy, (oh damn, not this story again!! ) I decided on my own, to finally break my silence and discuss epilepsy. I HATED epilepsy so much I didn't want the least bit of stench of it to still be on my psyche. Long story short, I ended up with a very kind and knowledgeable psychiatrist. In the years that I went she forced me to confront my own fears, ideas, thought processes, prejudices, etc, etc. To the point where when I stumbled across something conflict in my daily life I purposely exposed myself to her intensity to see what would happen. I was sort of like this: expose myself to the elements and let the dirt be washed away and see what I wind up with.
IMHO opinion, and I certainly maybe wrong, but I bet you could not take a serious objective grilling, and come out still wanting to say what you say.