I'm sure the black city councilman in those video links prefers being an elected official sitting in on a governmental meeting complaining about "black holes" to working the fields as a slave or being lynched for looking the wrong way at a white woman. But maybe people are different wherever it is you are from.

Kor Tort....I am not aware of the video links with black council members your describing...

But are you trying to describe the end of racism due to democracy?

Finally I believe I am from the same place as you originated from ..ie:USA....possibly the only exception being I am still here & dealing with the unravelling possible collapse of it.

As for black holes the only one I see here is the one all the sheeple seem eager to jump into.....

I'm sure the black city councilman in those video links prefers being an elected official sitting in on a governmental meeting complaining about "black holes" to working the fields as a slave or being lynched for looking the wrong way at a white woman. But maybe people are different wherever it is you are from.

Kor Tort....I am not aware of the video links with black council members your describing...

But are you trying to describe the end of racism due to democracy?

Finally I believe I am from the same place as you originated from ..ie:USA....possibly the only exception being I am still here & dealing with the unravelling possible collapse of it.

As for black holes the only one I see here is the one all the sheeple seem eager to jump into.....

For a good laugh you should check out those links. At the meeting one white council member says something about money disappearing into a black hole. A black council member - obviously unaware of what a black hole is - takes offense at calling it black.

And NO, I am not describing an end to racism due to democracy. I am aware that much is lost in communicating via an Internet forum such as tone, etc and that's why they invented smileys. But I didn't think smileys of any kind would be necessary by the way my post was written. I'm not going to have one of these 20-post back-and-forths over use of language that has been so common around here. So I'll just leave it at, if you get it, you get it. If you don't, you don't. But it isn't important enough to bother explaining.

I'm sure the black city councilman in those video links prefers being an elected official sitting in on a governmental meeting complaining about "black holes" to working the fields as a slave or being lynched for looking the wrong way at a white woman. But maybe people are different wherever it is you are from.

For a good laugh you should check out those links. At the meeting one white council member says something about money disappearing into a black hole. A black council member - obviously unaware of what a black hole is - takes offense at calling it black.

And NO, I am not describing an end to racism due to democracy. I am aware that much is lost in communicating via an Internet forum such as tone, etc and that's why they invented smileys. But I didn't think smileys of any kind would be necessary by the way my post was written. I'm not going to have one of these 20-post back-and-forths over use of language that has been so common around here. So I'll just leave it at, if you get it, you get it. If you don't, you don't. But it isn't important enough to bother explaining.

I am still not sure what links you mean?

I think I understand your inference about the black councilman being more comfy in a suit than a pair of farm overalls working as a slave.....But I believe people do in fact evolve & have evolved well beyond the pre civil war era thinking that humans could be considered property Although there still is & probably always will be racism. He!! you can still see such behaviour in how some men treat their wives & vice versa

I would say people from where I am from are quite tolerant of all races. Of course we do see many bad examples of each but we tend to realize it is a bad example of a human more than a bad example of a race.

Sure, I know what the word means. I'm talking about modern, accepted use - and that obviously varies country-to-country. But you've got to be pretty thick to not notice what it sounds like. Not long ago some politician got in trouble for using it. Funny, but not as funny as the African-Amercian city council member from Dallas who during a meeting protested the use of the word "blackhole" in reference to wasting funds. "Why not a WHITE hole?!"

funny stuff...

To tie this in to the topic, if we succeed in making Afghanistan a full-fledged, freedom-loving, flag-waving democracy, this is the stupid shit they have to look forward to. Of course, it's better than what they have now.

I know what it sounds like. That is irrelevant. Semantics used as an argument is a very different subject to phonetics used as an argument by ignorant people......(and I say that it IS ignorant to oppose the word for the fact that it has a phonetic simmilarity to an unPC word).

Harcourt - Irrelevant? Not in the USA it isn't when you are surrounded by blacks - and don't look like one of them.

flying- above are the links in question.

If he uses the word in East Dallas, he's liable to get cut-up as well.

Edit in:

I knew what the word meant. I also know what ludicrous means.

Good for you! I realise that you know "niggardly" now.

Do I recall correctly that you asked in a post whether your interpretation was correct, implying that you were not sure of the meaning then?

As for you knowing "ludicrous".... I may deign to argue that in the other thread.

Who cares????

Semantics.... disingenuous argument.

Vocabulary.....irrelevant argument.

Spelling.....pointless argument.

Nope, it wasn't me that asked what the word meant. Your memory has failed you once again.

While we are on the subject, how is this for a little lesson in semantics?

"In an aside to this reply....

My handicapped dead children statement was faulty recollection, which I admitted, and so should not be classed as deliberate exageration."

Should we now address your exagerations (sic) as simply "faulty recollection"?

Yes, faulty recollection again...it wasn't you it was maccaroni.

Otherwise, the rest of your post is a disappointment. There had been a glimmer of hope yesterday or the day before (there's that vague memory again) with one of your posts, but you have regressed again with poor logic and probably incorrect word usage.

I thought I was making progress with you.

just a small correction, i did not ask what the word meant. i asked if you were using it correctly i.e. to mean cheap or if you were making some sort of play on word. As you later posted nigardly will get a reaction from the avg black american which does say a lot about certain americans.

I belong to another expat forum which has an African American member who posts regularly. It may be the natural trend to conceal one's real self on forums but he comes across as a pretty normal sort of a guy.

I belong to another expat forum which has an African American member who posts regularly. It may be the natural trend to conceal one's real self on forums but he comes across as a pretty normal sort of a guy.

why not ask him what he thinks of the word nigarrdly? i hope that you did not take what i posted as in any way saying that blacks americans are not normal americans with the same wants, dreams and desires as all other americans. i am simply say that the word niggarly has the potential to hit a nerve with a pc crowd.

flying- above are the links in question.

Thanks that was worth the watch...

There is no explaining ignorance.

On the first clip I thought maybe it was a Ebonics thing where the black man thought he said Black Ho.

On the second longer clip that guy was just off..... but funny none the less.

When he said Jew you down....hahahah reminded me of that Jerry Seinfield episode with the Indian girl he liked.

He made the mistake of saying Indian giver

You know folks many times just need something to align themselves with. Then at times like this it goes extreme.

I belong to another expat forum which has an African American member who posts regularly. It may be the natural trend to conceal one's real self on forums but he comes across as a pretty normal sort of a guy.

why not ask him what he thinks of the word nigarrdly? i hope that you did not take what i posted as in any way saying that blacks americans are not normal americans with the same wants, dreams and desires as all other americans. i am simply say that the word niggarly has the potential to hit a nerve with a pc crowd.

I belong to another expat forum which has an African American member who posts regularly. It may be the natural trend to conceal one's real self on forums but he comes across as a pretty normal sort of a guy.

why not ask him what he thinks of the word nigarrdly? i hope that you did not take what i posted as in any way saying that blacks americans are not normal americans with the same wants, dreams and desires as all other americans. i am simply say that the word niggarly has the potential to hit a nerve with a pc crowd.

That's hard to believe. Maybe it would hit a nerve in a non literate crowd.

Just noticed your spelling of niggardly". Was that intentional and were you saying that if spelt that way it would offend?

I belong to another expat forum which has an African American member who posts regularly. It may be the natural trend to conceal one's real self on forums but he comes across as a pretty normal sort of a guy.

why not ask him what he thinks of the word nigarrdly? i hope that you did not take what i posted as in any way saying that blacks americans are not normal americans with the same wants, dreams and desires as all other americans. i am simply say that the word niggarly has the potential to hit a nerve with a pc crowd.

That's hard to believe. Maybe it would hit a nerve in a non literate crowd.

Just noticed your spelling of niggardly". Was that intentional and were you saying that if spelt that way it would offend?

I think it was a Freudian-type slip, actual ignorance, or a typo.....not purposeful.

fyi i spelt it the way that it would be heard in e. oakland

I belong to another expat forum which has an African American member who posts regularly. It may be the natural trend to conceal one's real self on forums but he comes across as a pretty normal sort of a guy.

why not ask him what he thinks of the word nigarrdly? i hope that you did not take what i posted as in any way saying that blacks americans are not normal americans with the same wants, dreams and desires as all other americans. i am simply say that the word niggarly has the potential to hit a nerve with a pc crowd.

That's hard to believe. Maybe it would hit a nerve in a non literate crowd.

Just noticed your spelling of niggardly". Was that intentional and were you saying that if spelt that way it would offend?

Are you trying to be offensive on purpose? It sounds like you are calling blacks (African-Americans) ignorant. Because they are the ones who find it offensive.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/longterm/williams/williams020499.htm

D.C. Mayor Acted 'Hastily,' Will Rehire Aide

D.C. Mayor Anthony A. Williams said yesterday that he will rehire a former top aide who resigned last month because some city employees were offended that the aide used the word "niggardly" in describing how he would have to manage a fund's tight budget.

Williams, whose quick acceptance of David Howard's resignation last month led to a national debate over racial sensitivity and political correctness, indicated in a statement yesterday that he had made a mistake and "acted too hastily" in allowing Howard to resign as head of the city's constituent services office.

The mayor said that an internal review had "confirmed for me that Mr. Howard did use the word 'niggardly,' but did not use a racial epithet" during a Jan. 15 discussion with two employees of the Office of the Public Advocate. "Niggardly" means miserly and has no racial connotation.

For a long list of controversies over niggardly, check out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niggardly

That's hard to believe. Maybe it would hit a nerve in a non literate crowd.

Just noticed your spelling of niggardly". Was that intentional and were you saying that if spelt that way it would offend?

Are you trying to be offensive on purpose? It sounds like you are calling blacks (African-Americans) ignorant. Because they are the ones who find it offensive.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/longterm/williams/williams020499.htm

D.C. Mayor Acted 'Hastily,' Will Rehire Aide

D.C. Mayor Anthony A. Williams said yesterday that he will rehire a former top aide who resigned last month because some city employees were offended that the aide used the word "niggardly" in describing how he would have to manage a fund's tight budget.

Williams, whose quick acceptance of David Howard's resignation last month led to a national debate over racial sensitivity and political correctness, indicated in a statement yesterday that he had made a mistake and "acted too hastily" in allowing Howard to resign as head of the city's constituent services office.

The mayor said that an internal review had "confirmed for me that Mr. Howard did use the word 'niggardly,' but did not use a racial epithet" during a Jan. 15 discussion with two employees of the Office of the Public Advocate. "Niggardly" means miserly and has no racial connotation.

For a long list of controversies over niggardly, check out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niggardly

I hardly ever try to be offensive on purpose and when I do, no one needs to ask if I was. Anyhow, that's a shame, reading your links. People wasting time, energy, goodwill, over nothing. Worse than that, pandering to the lowest common denominator, rather than uplifting the ignorant. Personally, if that's the word I'm looking for, that's the word I'll use.

edit: as an aside, this Thai Visa software that limits quotes is a real pain in the ass.

I knew you weren't, I was just pulling your chain.

Hey, lannarebirth, this is just the same as I was going to reply to you about the "trying to be offensive" bit.

I knew you weren't, I was just pulling your chain.

And all that pandering is sad, I agree.

I have been away for a while and just checked this Fred. Are we now in the stage of checking words, punctuation and stuff?

So silly.

Run out of arguments to defend your position?

The proponents of these war's will most likely never admit that these wars were the wrong thing to do.

Even when using International law, where these occupations were judged illegal, our war mongers still believe they were right.

Good luck, we will never come to a conclusion that fit's both sides.

Alex

Run out of arguments to defend your position?

The proponents of these war's will most likely never admit that these wars were the wrong thing to do.

Satisfactory arguments have already been given. You choose to ignore them.

I think the Afghanistan debate came to a halt after you posted the link to a story about veterans protesting along with a photo of riot police that turned out to be unrelated. You did say later it was unintentional but by then I think the damage had already been done.

Agreed!

And there it is.

The "Damage" already been done after I explained they were two different issues which I was looking into.

The question remains, why do ex soldiers protest against these (illegal) invasions, and do you pro people think they got it wrong??

Were there anti riot police during some of these protest?

You claim to have given satisfactory arguments but those have been from your point of view. The fact that for example the invasion of Iraq under international law had no standing and is therefore illegal according to the davids commission is undeniable.

I believe the same will happen when the investigation of the Afghanistan invasion will be finished. And do not forget the fact that Tony (B)liar himself said that he would come up with some other excuse for invading (Iraq that is). There is a similar investigation being done in the UK.

The CIA themselves and therefore the US have trained and (indirectly)supplied weapons to extremist Muslim's in the past and created a Frankenstein that turned against them.

Our governments don't give a sh1t how many people will die on either side, it is all worth it as they say.

(Please keep in mind that this is the outside of the box forum but our postings could be misunderstood as we do not sit together and can see and hear each other).

I am just trying to figure out what it is that is worth it.

What argument would convince me to grab a gun and kill people?

What argument would convince me to grab a gun and kill people?

Would you protect you family and loved ones with deadly force if required?

What argument would convince me to grab a gun and kill people?

Would you protect you family and loved ones with deadly force if required?

Yes I would in a direct confrontation.

What argument would convince me to grab a gun and kill people?

Would you protect you family and loved ones with deadly force if required?

I would....but I would not travel half way around the world to hunt down a group of peasants, killing 100 times more civilians than the actual peasants I'm hunting.

Not to mention that those actual individual peasants have not attacked me, nor are they likely to.

 

The question remains, why do ex soldiers protest against these (illegal) invasions, and do you pro people think they got it wrong??

Who wrote that they are wrong?  In fact, the only post I have seen about their opinions is that they earned the right to their opinions.  Frankly, more returning military express an opinion that the fight, particularly in Afghanistan, is justitified, but certainly returning military are welcome to their opinion.  

Were there anti riot police during some of these protest?

There may have been police at some rallies just as there are police at football games, parades, Christmas season at the shopping mall, etc.  So waht?  And why try to infer something greater by claling them "riot" police.  A much better indication on the reception of these protesters would be the observe their reception.  And unless you can show me that there ever were riots (Als when the KKK does a rally), then this is a non-issue.

You claim to have given satisfactory arguments but those have been from your point of view. The fact that for example the invasion of Iraq under international law had no standing and is therefore illegal according to the davids commission is undeniable.

Opinion, not fact.  The fact that the Dutch government declared it so does not make this a fait acompli.

The CIA themselves and therefore the US have trained and (indirectly)supplied weapons to extremist Muslim's in the past and created a Frankenstein that turned against them.

True, but what relevance does that have to do with the coalition invasion?  Are you inferring that just because we supplied arms at one time that that gives the mujahideen a free pass forever?  That makes no sense.

....but I would not travel half way around the world to hunt down a group of peasants, killing 100 times more civilians than the actual peasants I'm hunting.

Not to mention that those actual individual peasants have not attacked me, nor are they likely to.

Thank God no one else has either.

The CIA themselves and therefore the US have trained and (indirectly)supplied weapons to extremist Muslim's in the past and created a Frankenstein that turned against them.

True, but what relevance does that have to do with the coalition invasion? Are you inferring that just because we supplied arms at one time that that gives the mujahideen a free pass forever? That makes no sense.

And FDR armed Stalin to the teeth as well. Alex, do you feel that was wrong as well?

I don't usually post links like this where emotion trumps all else, and especially as this is about WWII, not Afghanistan.  The this link shows an emotional and evocative performance on the effects of war on people.  The young lady was the winner of Ukraine's Got Talent.

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=vOhf3OvRXKg

What argument would convince me to grab a gun and kill people?

Would you protect you family and loved ones with deadly force if required?

Yes I would in a direct confrontation.

Carrying this a little further...Would you protect your Nation and way of life with deadly force if required?

No I would not.

Required by what and who?

Kohee, why did the US or the world did not do anything to stop the killing in Russia prior to WW2.

Another inquiry and conformation into why the Iraq invasion is illegal.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jan/24/i...ry-michael-wood

Kohee, why did the US or the world did not do anything to stop the killing in Russia prior to WW2.

Is that a serious question? It was a different world back then. America wasn't a real power at that time and unable to do much of anything in the 1930's. Not to mention that in the 1930's news was a little more difficult to come by and what was really going on in the USSR wasn't common knowledge.

What do you think they should have done?