Rev. Jeremiah Wright's Bill Moyers interview + NAACP speech

[quote name='mykevermin']What's depressing is to see folks (1) assume that I agree with everything Wright has said thus far, which is untrue and putting words in my mouth, and also (2) that people would write off a person's argument entirely because it was framed poorly or had one or two easily disagreeable statements in it.[/QUOTE]

Are you kidding? You do #s 1 and 2 quite a bit. :roll:
 
This is no time to pat yourself on the back, my friend. The work not only isn't complete, but the foundation's corroding at the bottom already and you don't even see it happening.

Not sure what you mean by that. Are you saying the next generation is going to be racist? I defninitely don't see it happening.

Doesn't shield you from any criticism. Keep in mind that my key point underlying all this is that the practice of racism no longer comes in the form of a group of folks in white hoods - it comes with a smile on its face, and its twice as dangerous as a result. It's taking the place of differential hiring, promoting, pay, lending at banks, provision of mortgages, renting, arresting, incarcerating, and now

So you believe that so many people are closet racists. Whenever differential hiring, promoting, pay, etc. happen, I would like to think that the jilted employee would bring it up. If the hire-ups get away with that kind of stuff, it is wrong, and I don't defend it. However, I don't believe that differences in races are because of skin color and judgments based on that. Obviously, if a black man has less experience or a lesser education than a white man, he will likely (rightfully) receive less pay and be less suitable for the job. Why would an employer hire a lesser-qualified white instead of a more suitable black if the black brings the company more money? I'm familiar with at least one study that shows that even in times of more rampant racism that profit-seeking companies would hire minorities at a more proportional rate than the whistleblowers would have you believe. read Thomas Sowell's Affirmative Action Around The World if you want some insight into how race and laws that govern it have affected the world, including the United States. That execution study you linked is far from black and white (no pun intended), and it is irresponsible for that author to make such allegations without extremely thoroughly examining each case.

Be clear: it will breed hate and contempt among whites - just like affirmative action policies, many non-minority people are just fine with the current policies we have in place. They do not realize, of course, that it's just another form of racial preference for whites.

I agree, preferential treatment policies breed hate and contempt, and rightfully so. Affirmative action policies favoring blacks and just as bad as policies favoring whites. I'm not sure how affirmative action is just another form of racial preference for whites, however. I'm aware that in many instances it is bad for minorities, for instance a minority student getting into a college that is too tough for them that they would have otherwise not been accepted into, but that is bad for society as a whole. Something bad for minorities isn't automatically good for whites.

I would say the same about any church that's actively promoting an anti-abortion agenda. By focusing on the hate and scandalous aspect of it, you've ignored looking at solutions that would work (e.g., reducing unwanted pregnancies).

:cool:I agree.

Oh, look. It's another person who seems to think that all the racially divisive people are black, and that it's whites who are politely waiting for blacks to collectively wake up and start behaving themselves. :roll:

Wow, I'd like to see where I said that. Living in east TN I see plenty of people, white, black, and Hispanic, who are racially divisive or just plain racist in general. I'm waiting for hoodlums and hillbillies alike to start getting some sense, thank you very much. ;)
 
[quote name='Koggit']I really doubt Obama "figured it out" so much as he saw that the American public (read: media) won't focus on America's issues so long as they can make a soap opera out of Wright. Controversial, racially-charged anger gets better ratings (slash readership) than education, energy and the economy.

It's sad that this has gone on for so long, eclipsing all other issues. It's really just depressing.[/quote]

I agree. I had to actually research the stances of the Democrats online, and even then there was little up-to-the-minute information. However, I can see how keeping such an apparently loony, racist person as your close associate and religious mentor is worth discussing. I'm glad he made the latest speech because, to be honest, I wouldn't want him as President, no matter how great his economic plans are.
 
[quote name='camoor']
At least Obama finally figured it out.[/QUOTE]

He used polls to help him figure out what he really thinks about Wright and what he should say, like any modern politician would. I heard his campaign was polling about the issue the day before his speech.

Meanwhile we are all expected to believe that we all got to know Wright better in the last two months than Obama had the last 20 years.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']He used polls to help him figure out what he really thinks about Wright and what he should say, like any modern politician would. I heard his campaign was polling about the issue the day before his speech.

Meanwhile we are all expected to believe that we all got to know Wright better in the last two months than Obama had the last 20 years.[/quote]

Maybe Obama is stupid. That only makes him slightly better than McCain.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']HMeanwhile we are all expected to believe that we all got to know Wright better in the last two months than Obama had the last 20 years.[/quote]

That is a problem.

Choose One:

A) Obama chose to put up with the dude because he was okay except for that racism stuff.
 
I wonder how many of you actually watched the video interview Moyers did? And if you still feel so strongly about Wright's "God damn America" phrase once you realized that it was said in the context of a sermon that discussed people moving their faith from God to government?

My guess is probably not, and probably anyway.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']He used polls to help him figure out what he really thinks about Wright and what he should say, like any modern politician would. I heard his campaign was polling about the issue the day before his speech.

Meanwhile we are all expected to believe that we all got to know Wright better in the last two months than Obama had the last 20 years.[/quote]

True, but after viewing the reaction at least he was able to figure out how divisive the words were to American society at large and act accordingly.

You say "like any modern politician", but Bush is a modern politician and he never talked like a unifier. Bush wasn't out to bring ppl together, he wanted a win for his voting base, period.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Maybe Obama is stupid. That only makes him slightly better than McCain.[/QUOTE]

:D

Touche sir. That will be difficult to argue, so I'll not attempt it.
 
I'll go easy on you for being a first timer here, and only pick on this one point. Besides, I can finally get to play some GTA in a bit.

[quote name='SpiderLocMTGO']I'm not sure how affirmative action is just another form of racial preference for whites, however. I'm aware that in many instances it is bad for minorities, for instance a minority student getting into a college that is too tough for them that they would have otherwise not been accepted into, but that is bad for society as a whole. Something bad for minorities isn't automatically good for whites.[/QUOTE]

In this case, yes. Think of racial minority status as having a "social penalty" that goes along with it. You're more likely to get pulled over, more likely to be followed by loss prevention in stores, less likely to be hired or promoted for jobs, and so on.

The absence of that social penalty is, in fact, a social privilege. The privilege to not be followed or pulled over, the privilege to be hired - not because you *ARE* white, but because you *AREN'T* black.

That's a good thing. The current (again, repeated and predictable) patterns of hiring bias in this country show, time and again, blacks are discriminated against. For every act of discrimination, then, there is someone who gained a job, a raise, a promotion - or an apartment, or a mortgage - precisely because they weren't black. Had they been black, they would have likely been turned down. That's the current way things work: affirmative action that gives whites the advantage.

There are ample and repeated audit studies that demonstrate just how pervasive and deep racism continues to run in this country. I'd like to see the contrary one you mentioned earlier in this post.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I'll go easy on you for being a first timer here, and only pick on this one point. Besides, I can finally get to play some GTA in a bit.



In this case, yes. Think of racial minority status as having a "social penalty" that goes along with it. You're more likely to get pulled over, more likely to be followed by loss prevention in stores, less likely to be hired or promoted for jobs, and so on.

The absence of that social penalty is, in fact, a social privilege. The privilege to not be followed or pulled over, the privilege to be hired - not because you *ARE* white, but because you *AREN'T* black.

That's a good thing. The current (again, repeated and predictable) patterns of hiring bias in this country show, time and again, blacks are discriminated against. For every act of discrimination, then, there is someone who gained a job, a raise, a promotion - or an apartment, or a mortgage - precisely because they weren't black. Had they been black, they would have likely been turned down. That's the current way things work: affirmative action that gives whites the advantage.

There are ample and repeated audit studies that demonstrate just how pervasive and deep racism continues to run in this country. I'd like to see the contrary one you mentioned earlier in this post.[/quote]

I'm sure your local library has a copy. If you have access to online book databases they should have one as well.

Also, saying that one group of people have any real advantage simply because someone else has a disadvantage is inane.

Going back to my affirmative action example: Minorities lose because they are wrongfully accepted into a college that is too advanced for them. Well, whites must make out like bandits, then, right!

Wrong! Some of those minorities took up spots that would've otherwise been for white students (that's the entire point of affirmative action in colleges), and those white students have to go somewhere, so they go off to a college one tier lower than they would've otherwise gone, and acquire less knowledge than they otherwise could have.

Well, since whites just lost, looks like minorities won!

;)

You can't have a general rule like you are saying when there are solid, concrete examples to the contrary. Just because someone else has a disadvantage doesn't mean I have an advantage. If I was "pulled over while driving black" as the common excuse is, the ticket (or whatever they try to give) can be contested in courts, and most (all?) police cars are equipped with cameras and such nowadays. You could also possibly sue for harrassment if it happened as often as you claim it does, which would turn this into an advantage instead of a detriment.

As for the "blacks get paid less" deal, if a black person knows that the average person makes $X and they are looking for a job, they may be lowballed (more than a white) because they are black. I think this is wrong. However, it is EVERYONE'S job to know how much they are supposed to be making; companies aren't going to pay you what you are worth just because they feel like it. If the company has a good ROI on you, white or black, they are going to hire you. It costs them money to be racist, and companies don't like throwing money, and possibly PR, out the window.

I'm not saying racism doesn't exist, I'm just saying that it isn't as widespread as a lot of people think.
 
Let me try this one last time: I'm NOT, REPEAT NOT talking about the stereotype of the unqualified black student taking the qualified white student spot.

That's the problem with so many criticisms of AA policies; they seem to think that every case of black discrimination is due to some sort of hackneyed "Bakke" decision that put a dumbass black kid in medical school.

So let's go back to square one.

Two people.

EQUALLY QUALIFIED.

Let's stop there for a moment. What do I mean by equally qualified? Well, that would be "equally qualified." That's what I mean.

The strong and repeated patterns of discriminations against blacks in the case of people who are equally qualified is there.

In fact, racial bias against blacks is so strong that Devah Pager found that the hiring bias against *convicted felons* (when compared against equally qualified non-felons) was SMALLER than the bias against blacks!

Please, don't think I'm talking about taking someone "unqualified" for a spot and putting them in a deserving, achieved white kid's spot. That in itself is a rather racist stereotype, don't you think?
 
So affirmative action only kicks in when the students are exactly the same? I didn't know that. I guess taking the minority by default isn't racist or anything in that situation. This also isn't a stereotype, it is a fact. I think you are pulling garbage out of your ass, and I am done with you. You are being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative.
 
[quote name='SpiderLocMTGO']So affirmative action only kicks in when the students are exactly the same? I didn't know that. I guess taking the minority by default isn't racist or anything in that situation. This also isn't a stereotype, it is a fact. I think you are pulling garbage out of your ass, and I am done with you. You are being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative.[/QUOTE]

Myke has a tendency to be a pedantic nonce but he definitely knows his shit.

I have yet to see him flinch when challenged to provide data, you are going to look like (rightfully so BTW) you are running away because you got nothing.
 
At least in the domain of higher education, I really don't see much of a preference for whites as opposed to other races... if anything, it's the opposite.

Admissions comittees are almost invariably run by liberals who are pro-minority. As a boring, private school educated and outspoken conservative white guy whose main qualifications rested on a perfect GPA and >1500 SAT (on the old scale), I was somewhat surprised that some of my latino and black collegues with significantly lower numbers (
 
Well it doesn't help their fucking families always push them into medical shit. I wish more of those families would be open to them doing entertainment. It would be nice to see more Asian chicks and guys acting.
 
[quote name='SpiderLocMTGO']So affirmative action only kicks in when the students are exactly the same? I didn't know that. I guess taking the minority by default isn't racist or anything in that situation. This also isn't a stereotype, it is a fact. I think you are pulling garbage out of your ass, and I
am done with you. You are being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative.[/QUOTE]

I've yet to see you present a fact. That's a fact.

In the meantime:
Use of Black English and Racial Discrimination in Urban Housing Markets: New Methods and Findings

The Mark of a Criminal Record

Those should last you for the next few hours. I'm goin' skating, and then I'm doing some writing.

In the meantime, I took an admittedly brief glimpse through Sowell's book and found not science, not empiricism, but a person who used anecdotes (Bakke blah blah) and other people's work to construct a case for damning affirmative action. You won't find any of that above. You'll find genuine empiricism, honest inquiry, bulletproof research methods, and findings that contradict one book written by someone with an agenda.
 
Well it doesn't help their fucking families always push them into medical shit. I wish more of those families would be open to them doing entertainment. It would be nice to see more Asian chicks and guys acting.
I've got to hand it to the Asian population as a whole. They really seem to thrive under the educational system in America, despite often being 1st or 2nd generation immigrants...
 
[quote name='BigT']I've got to hand it to the Asian population as a whole. They really seem to thrive under the educational system in America, despite often being 1st or 2nd generation immigrants...[/QUOTE]

Yes but do you know how fucked up their family system is? There was a teen around here, Esmie Tseng, whose family dynamic was even worse then the typical one.
Even mild I remember someone telling me how batshit one person's parents were, the mom punishing the kid for doing a subpar job on a particular instrument, not even realizing it was the first time they played the piece. See how she jumped the gun so badly?
 
[quote name='BigT']At least in the domain of higher education, I really don't see much of a preference for whites as opposed to other races... if anything, it's the opposite.

Admissions comittees are almost invariably run by liberals who are pro-minority. As a boring, private school educated and outspoken conservative white guy whose main qualifications rested on a perfect GPA and >1500 SAT (on the old scale), I was somewhat surprised that some of my latino and black collegues with significantly lower numbers (
 
[quote name='Koggit']Whether you see it or not, most who live without diversity (read: most Americans) are disconnected from the rest of the world.[/QUOTE]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contact_hypothesis

It's a nice point you make about what people see in front of them. Much of the discussion I see here takes place in the form of people denying what they don't see or understand, and conforming situational interpretations to fit the myths they believe.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contact_hypothesis

It's a nice point you make about what people see in front of them. Much of the discussion I see here takes place in the form of people denying what they don't see or understand, and conforming situational interpretations to fit the myths they believe.[/quote]

But everything he said is anecdotal and a matter of interpretation.

Oh that's right - you won't call it, because anecdotal evidence and personal theories on how people view others actually count if you happen to agree with it.
 
Up until today, I have blatantly ignored this entire Rev. Wright scandal and merely brushed it off as another political distraction.

What really perked me up today was this....

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RPAtWF9eo4[/media]


BRAVO!!! Rev. Wright!!!!! :applause::applause::applause::applause:
 
Rev. Wright should know better. It's preposterous to state that AIDS was created to kill black people! Everyone knows that it was created by the government to kill homosexuals... ;)
 
[quote name='BigT']Rev. Wright should know better. It's preposterous to state that AIDS was created to kill black people! Everyone knows that it was created by the government to kill homosexuals... ;)[/quote]

I understand that your being sarcastic or facetious, but seriously, the AIDS virus was designed to reduce the "undesirables" from the population, not just 1 group.

Google: "William Cooper" & "AIDS"

here's a little excerpt of what he wrote.... and btw, he's now dead. murdered shortly after 9/11.

---------
---------

The orders were given to develop the microbe and to also develop a
cure and a prophylactic. The microbe would be used against the general
population and would be introduced by vaccine administered by the
World Health Organization. The prophylactic was to be used by the
ruling elite. The cure will be administered to the survivors when they
decide that enough people have died. It will be announced as newly
developed. This plan was called Global 2000. The cure and the
prophylactic are suppressed. Funding was obtained from the U.S.
Congress under H.B. 15090 where $10 million was given to the Department
of Defense to produce "a synthetic biological agent, an agent that
does not naturally exist and for which no natural immunity could have
been acquired." "Within the next 5 to 10 years it would probably be
possible to make a new infective microorganism which could differ in
certain important aspects from any known disease causing organisms.


Most important of these is that it might be refractory to the
immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to
maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease." The project was
carried out at Fort Detrick Maryland. Since large populations were to
be decimated the ruling elite decided to target the "undesirable
elements of society" for extermination. Specifically targeted were the
black, hispanic, and homosexual populations.
The name of the project
that developed AIDS is MKNAOMI. The African continent was infected via
smallpox vaccine in 1977. The U.S. population was infected in 1978 with
the hepatitis B vaccine through the Centers for Disease Control and the
New York Blood Center. You now have the entire story. The order was
given by the POLICY COMMITTEE of THE BILDERBERG GROUP based in
Switzerland. Other measures were also ordered. The one you will be able
to check the easiest is the Haig - Kissinger Depopulation Policy which
is administered by the State Department.

-------
-------
 
Regardless of what you believe I think there's pretty clear suspicion AIDS was created. Look at how AIDS functions, it's kill rate, how quickly it can be spread as well.
Look at other diseases that kill like AIDS does, how easily they spread and then contain themselves readily. Look at Ebola. One of the ONLY diseases I've heard of that functions like AIDS and will kill you probably long after it's infection compared to AIDS is Symphilis. Give me one other disease besides that because if you find one other it will most likely be that, ONE more.
Oh and when I said that comment about Symphilis I meant AIDS without treatment of course.
 
[quote name='level1online']I understand that your being sarcastic or facetious, but seriously, the AIDS virus was designed to reduce the "undesirables" from the population, not just 1 group.

Google: "William Cooper" & "AIDS"

here's a little excerpt of what he wrote.... and btw, he's now dead. murdered shortly after 9/11.

(...)[/quote]

OMG, as a matter of personal curiosity, I opened up a reference text on Medical Microbiology to look up some AIDS statistics... and guess on what page they were located: 666 :hot:, I shit you not (if you don't believe me, go to your local university book store and look up Medical Microbiology 5th Ed. by Murray, Rosenthal, and Pfaller; turn to chapter 65 on retroviruses and then look at page 666.

Are the authors trying to tell us something? I think even Myke would agree that this constitutes quality scientific evidence that something nefarious is going on. Hmmm.... better break out the tin foil condoms ;).

Oh yeah, back to the stats; as of 2003 ~80% of AIDS cases were in homosexuals (55%) or IV drug users (25%)... they didn't break it down by race, but I'm sure a simple Pubmed or CDC search could turn that up.
 
[quote name='Sarang01']Regardless of what you believe I think there's pretty clear suspicion AIDS was created. Look at how AIDS functions, it's kill rate, how quickly it can be spread as well.
Look at other diseases that kill like AIDS does, how easily they spread and then contain themselves readily. Look at Ebola. One of the ONLY diseases I've heard of that functions like AIDS and will kill you probably long after it's infection compared to AIDS is Symphilis. Give me one other disease besides that because if you find one other it will most likely be that, ONE more.
Oh and when I said that comment about Symphilis I meant AIDS without treatment of course.[/quote]

If I were to create a virus to KILL people, I would generate one that can be transmitted through casual contact and KILL somebody within a matter of months if not weeks.

A condom all but renders transmission of the virus impossible.

The HIV virus is excruciatingly slow and successful transmission requires repeated exposure even under the most optimal situations.

Even after infection, medications can render the infection manageable for decades.

Also, there is no guarantee that an infected female will infect offspring in utero.

IF you want to rid the world of undesirables, get a virus that can spread and kill quickly such as Soviet modified smallpox or hoard the resources necessary to survive (food and water).
 
[quote name='BigT']OMG, as a matter of personal curiosity, I opened up a reference text on Medical Microbiology to look up some AIDS statistics... and guess on what page they were located: 666 :hot:, I shit you not (if you don't believe me, go to your local university book store and look up Medical Microbiology 5th Ed. by Murray, Rosenthal, and Pfaller; turn to chapter 65 on retroviruses and then look at page 666.

Are the authors trying to tell us something? I think even Myke would agree that this constitutes quality scientific evidence that something nefarious is going on. Hmmm.... better break out the tin foil condoms ;).

Oh yeah, back to the stats; as of 2003 ~80% of AIDS cases were in homosexuals (55%) or IV drug users (25%)... they didn't break it down by race, but I'm sure a simple Pubmed or CDC search could turn that up.[/quote]

Y'know.... sometimes a cigar... is just a cigar.
 
The same people that believe Aids was created to get rid of blacks also more recently believe that SARS was created to get rid of Asians.

Not saying they are wrong, but this is a different league of fringe thought that most people aren't willing to tread.
 
[quote name='level1online']Y'know.... sometimes a cigar... is just a cigar.[/quote]

And then there are other times, when it is a blunt!
 
LOL, Looks like 2 of my recent posts have been reported to the mods...

the PM said: Reason: Facilitating Game Piracy

The first "infraction" was for linking to an Educational Documentary on Black Voter Disenfranchisement: American Blackout

The second was for linking to an Educational E-Book (pdf file) by a man who was MURDERED by our federal gov't: Behold a Pale Horse.

BUT.... all this time, in my sig, I've had a link to an actual non-educational PIRATED VIDEO GAME!!!!! HAHAHAHA!!!!!!
 
I thought about reporting you for the DC torrent link.

But even the others, if it's copyrighted material, shouldn't be linked. I don't know if it is, and will say I didn't report you for it.

But, knowing how your mind operates, my denial of reporting you becomes an explicit admission that, in fact, I really did.

;)
 
What the heck, what is wrong with those links? I don't understand.

Once I got banned. I have no idea what for. All I did was go into the wrestling thread and start throwing ridiculous flames and insults around and just generally acted like a complete asshole. I have no idea why I was banned.
 
[quote name='pittpizza']What the heck, what is wrong with those links? I don't understand.

Once I got banned. I have no idea what for. All I did was go into the wrestling thread and start throwing ridiculous flames and insults around and just generally acted like a complete asshole. I have no idea why I was banned.[/quote]

maybe it's because you linked to one of those copywrite-free educational documentaries????

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5965670944815984616&hl=en

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8510748876310097541&hl=en

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1070329053600562261&hl=en
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Based on what do you level all these platitudes on the nation? That the black preacher is an overwhelming source of media scrutiny, when it's NEVER ONCE happened with a divisive, hateful, and vitriolic? When racism happen in durable, predictable, and widespread patterns all across the nation, 40 years after the passage of the civil rights act?

This is no time to pat yourself on the back, my friend. The work not only isn't complete, but the foundation's corroding at the bottom already and you don't even see it happening.[/QUOTE]

I think I have a much different opinion and experience than you do in terms of where we are right now in terms of progress in this area and where we are headed. I think Americans in general are on the way to discounting race as being a defining personal characteristic within the next few generations if only the government and other well-intentioned folks will let it happen.

And you have a good point when we compare the treatment of Wright to people like Pat Robertson.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']I think I have a much different opinion and experience than you do in terms of where we are right now in terms of progress in this area and where we are headed. I think Americans in general are on the way to discounting race as being a defining personal characteristic within the next few generations if only the government and other well-intentioned folks will let it happen.
[/QUOTE]

Someone said something this morning at work that made a good point.

We have pretty much eliminated the HATRED based on race in this nation. That's what you are talking about. That is what most people notice. Reverend Wrong is still living 40 years ago where the country was full of HATE and all white people are evil.

Mykevermin, in a round-about way, acknowledges the hatred is mostly gone. But his big mission in life is to end racism, which is different than hate. Racism is discrimination. Racism is one of a myriad of discriminatory practices practiced multiple times a day by everyone. Discrimination comes in countless flavors, and is never right or fair. But myke's favorite flavor just happens to be racism, for only reasons he can try to explain.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']We have pretty much eliminated the HATRED based on race in this nation.[/QUOTE]

Thrust is full of shit.

Since we are playing thrustball here does that match anyones personal experience?

It certainly does not match mine.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']If I were to create a virus to KILL people, I would generate one that can be transmitted through casual contact and KILL somebody within a matter of months if not weeks.

A condom all but renders transmission of the virus impossible.

The HIV virus is excruciatingly slow and successful transmission requires repeated exposure even under the most optimal situations.

Even after infection, medications can render the infection manageable for decades.

Also, there is no guarantee that an infected female will infect offspring in utero.

IF you want to rid the world of undesirables, get a virus that can spread and kill quickly such as Soviet modified smallpox or hoard the resources necessary to survive (food and water).[/QUOTE]

I know you're a smart guy but what you say would be one of the worst uses of a biological weapon. I'm sorry but given how easily it spreads and semi-quickly it kills we're looking at a worst case scenario. Too easy the chance for it to get out of control.
AIDS is close to the ideal because of how easily it can be reigned in should it get out of control. Even then though I feel they bit off more then they can chew should a catastrophic event happen where they created it and house the cure or in a few major supply lines, I mean really cripple them. Creating a biological disease like this is even putting humanity very much at risk I'd argue. It truly is opening Pandora's Box.
 
[quote name='Msut77']Thrust is full of shit.

Since we are playing thrustball here does that match anyones personal experience?

It certainly does not match mine.[/quote]

Nope, mine either.
 
[quote name='pittpizza']Nope, mine either.[/QUOTE]

So what are you girls saying? You see racial hatred on a regular basis?

Do tell....

How many people do each of you know, that you know for a fact consciously HATE people because of their race. How many verbalize that hate? How many hate a race so much they will avoid them and screw them over any chance they get? How many people do you know that would lynch blacks if they could get away with it?

I know your views and agendas heavily depend on believing that racial hatred is squirting out of the seams of society, but be honest with yourselves.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']And you have a good point when we compare the treatment of Wright to people like Pat Robertson.[/quote]

It's well established that you run in different circles

Most of us treat Pat Robertson as the lunatic he is.
 
bread's done
Back
Top