Louis
Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006
|
To anyone even remotely interested.
1) The Dictionaries:
rac•ism - Show Spelled Pronunciation[rey-siz-uh m] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.
[Origin: 1865–70; < F racisme. See RACE2, -ISM ]
—Related forms
racist, noun, adjective
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.
American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source
rac•ism (rā'sĭz'əm) Pronunciation Key
n.
1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.
From the OED:
“The theory that distinctive human characteristics and abilities are determined by race”
2) A Rapid Selection from The Troll:
| Quote | “I claim that Muslims, as a group, do not assimilate as well as other groups, and in fact their culture often damages civil liberties.”
“My hypothesis, however, is that all Sunni and Shiite Muslims, as a group, are incompatible with Western societies regardless of nationality. In order to become compatible, they must discard their religion, and nothing less will do. I don't care about fashion and culinary preferences so long as they are not motivated by religious belief.”
“But whatever the reason, it's a very real problem and no one has a clue on how to detect Western-friendly Muslims ahead of time.”
“Sorry for the bolding and all-caps, but do see why Americans and Europeans might consider this a little problematic? He's got his own Muslim countries to live in, but no, he wants to come to traditionally Christian countries and force us to "respect" his religion (on his terms, of course), even if that means a loss of liberty for us. Well, I've got some advice for this imam: if you don't like what you see in the newspapers or on the telly, then don't read or watch the offending material (or organise a boycott, or protest peacefully)! If that's too much, then sorry, but it's time to go back to your homeland, and don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya!”
“For whatever reason, they don't fit in, and that's what matters in immigration policy”
“First of all, I don't hate Muslims; if it were up to me I'd leave Muslims alone to practice their religion to their heart's content. Problem is, they won't leave us alone.”
“Yes. The muslim agena is to rule the world, it is plain in the Qu'ran. This is not just fundie belief, is the living doctine of every muslim.”
“Nevertheless, it all boils down to, "Does the Greek/Swede/American have the right to his own culture? And if not, why not? Why can't the Christian or non-communist atheist enjoy what the Muslim, Hindu, and Buddhist takes for granted?"”
“I think many immigrants want the best of both worlds: they wish to take advantage of the new country's benefits while holding on to their old culture. This isn't so bad if their original culture is compatible with their new society, but if it isn't, trouble ensues. I also have the sneaking suspicion that many Muslims consider themselves colonists rather than immigrants. If you can't beat 'em from the outside, weaken them from the inside. Remember what the Koran teaches.”
"“Let me guess: you're disappointed with Europe for rejecting Creationism and Fundamentalism."
Not as disappointed as they will be. France and Germany are already hurtin' economically, British youths are turning into thugs, crime rates are rising across Europe.......how long until a crisis erupts, I wonder? Clichy-sous-Bois just dropped off its perch.”
“See, this is why liberals have to censor their opponents: they can't handle the evidence and therefore must resort to tu quoque and ad hominem arguments. America's situation -- which is better than Europe's, incidentally-- has little to do with Europe's problems. And yes, I blame much of this decline on replacing Jesus with multiculturalism and Big Brother.”
“Since when does criticising inherent mental differences = racism? You liberals don't make a lick of sense.”
“I just get depressed when people in formerly quiet, crime free countries import gang-rape and thuggery into their beautiful societies.”
“We're the "niggers" now. We're the ones who face legal discrimination, we're the ones who are targeted for robbery, assault, and murder; we're the ones who are constantly stereotyped and ridiculed. The fact that we can compete anyway doesn't change that reality. After all, Jews and Asians had to overcome discrimination too.”
“Since I've never claimed that Muslims are the only group that doesn't assimilate (quite the contrary)….”
“HAAAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!! Sell it to Erin and the other liberals - oh wait, you don't have to - they'll just cover the story, hide the races of the perps, and frame Whitey with sly innuendos....^&%# Marxists. And Russell will claim that the Black students must have been flown in by helicopter.”
“Look, can we agree that massive immigration serves the interests of both liberals (gotta overturn the Evil West) and big bidness ("Those furriners sure work cheap, don't they?")? If you grant that, then it becomes clear that the media can't let Joe Sixpack get restless about the potential consequences of massive, uncontrolled immigration, which may include massive, uncontrolled violence against the native population. And since whites are responsible for the sorry state of___(fill in the blank), they make a better target for violence than anyone else. Given enough stories of minority-on-majority violence, even the dullest citizen may begin connecting the dots. And our plutocracy just can't abide that.”
“This question actually touches upon my basic ambivalence towards our massive Hispanic immigration. On the one hand, Hispanic people(s) do seem to value hard work, faith, and family. On the other hand, their culture(s) also seems to suffer from high levels of crime, a pervasive anti-intellectualism, and a sense of entitlement that seems inseparable from their ethnic identity. They apparently view values such as sexual modesty and respectful attitudes toward women as "anglo", and have little incentive in preserving them. It could be worse - we could be invaded by Muslims like France, Denmark or The Netherlands.”
“For the liberal, only the underdog motif counts. The liberal doesn't care about the social group as a cohesive unit - he merely wishes to consume the technological and moral fruits of his society. The individual is all. Any talk about tradition, and how past visions are necessary for a healthy future, is dismissed as reactionary griping. Being the eternal teenager, he doesn't recognise the moral, intellectual, and physical effort that went into creating the West - he merely skims the cream, and complains that there isn't enough to go around. He doesn't care about how his policies damage society - after all, the future is now, and future generations can go rot. And why not? The liberal has no children to care for, no religion to uphold, no rituals to follow - past, present, and future intertwine into a perpetual present, stripped of any context that endows life with meaning. If it feels good, do it, man! But such nihilism can never be content to be, and must itself mirror the drives of the healthy society that surrounds it. So the liberal sets himself in opposition, so that he may create through destroying, give life through abortion, innovate by quashing.”
“Contrary to Flint's opinion, there's some evidence that most black criminals [edit: actually, a plurality] target whites. See here, and here. Yes, be skeptical of the source - this is Jared Taylor, after all. But do check his figures - they come from the government's data base.”
|
3) The Links to some threads:
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin....16;st=0
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin....;st=210
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin....69;st=0
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin....ey;st=0
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin....ey;st=0
4) Impressions:
I was struck by three things as I read back over the threads:
a) The Troll is not merely similar to his claimed "TrollPersona" he is IDENTICAL. I refuse to buy the claims of his "TrollPersona" as being separate from his own.
b) The Troll twists and lies his way through every conversation he has had here and demonstrates his own biases very obviously. I am not the only one to note this.
c) The utter pointlessness of the Troll's presence is demonstrated. He manifestly cannot read anything for comprehension, and will and has lied to back out of every corner he has placed himself in.
5) I don't buy the recent bunk about him tolerating other groups. Why believe a proven liar when he changes his story to avoid the consequences of his lies? Perhaps what the Troll doesn't realise is that I know all about these "clarifications" he has made of his politics, I agree he made those self same statements, and that yes those self same statements would appear to be at odds with his previous claims. So what? I doubt he holds these positions at all. He's a proven liar, weaselling away from previous claims he knows he cannot support. Since I can't be bothered to put time checks on all those quotes (a thing I'll get to in a minute) I'll leave it to the HONEST reader to check that some were made before the Troll's fake (IMO) "revelation" of deliberate trolling and some were made after (Which they were).
It is not possible to emphasise this enough: ANY other poster could tell me they've changed their mind or that they were joking about some argument and I would believe them. The Troll has provided NO evidence whatsoever that he has changed one jot from his "Troll Persona". He claims to hold different views but then all recent conversations since such claims bear the ideological and behavioural hallmarks of the "Troll Persona". I am stating flat out I do not believe that Ghost of Paley WAS trolling this board, I fully believe he IS trolling this board.
6) I really cannot be bothered to waste more time on justifying my opinion that the Troll is a racist. There's actually too much evidence as opposed to too little. Which is weird I know. Reading back through the threads the Troll's desire to insist on cultural fixedness in his own nation and to frequently treat others of different cultures or races or religions as a homogenous and opposed force to his own percieved cultural block stands out. This is an inherently racist desire.
No doubt the troll will whine about my lack of formatting and linking. I couldn't care less, my impression of him comes from reading every damned word, not selectively quoting, which I've done above to provide a vague (and I would say only partially accurate) entree into the world of the Troll. I invite the interested parties to re-read those threads in their entirety. The Troll's attempt at selective revisionist history will be utterly foiled by that at least.
7) It's late, I'm tired, and so the possibility exists that I have erred. I stand by what I said though: in my opinion the Troll is a proven liar, a racist and a deliberately dishonest distraction to any form of rational conversation on this board. I yet again ask the question "why has he been tolerated over all other trolls?" and yet again state that in my opinion he should have been removed from this forum a long time ago. Not because he represents any form of threat but because of his demonstrable dishonesty.
8) In light of all of this I am monumentally fed up. So it's vote time.
I ask the members and management of this board to vote on the following questions:
a) Have I in anyway dishonestly misrepresented the public views of the poster known as Ghost of Paley? (I absolutely concede that I have been in no way charitable or granted him the benefit of the doubt. I explicitly am not charitable nor do I grant him the benefit of the doubt regarding any of his claims)
b) The current situation cannot continue, I request that either Ghost of Paley or myself or both be banned from comment at this forum.
I have no great desire either way. I cannot and will not tolerate dishonesty, even if it is my own (obviously I don't think I have been dishonest). If the members and management of this forum consider my conduct to have been dishonest, then I will happily so concede cease to post here forthwith. Should the members and management decide against me, I will of course apologise unreservedly to all concerned. Needless to say I expect the self same courtesy.
c) With recent removals/restrictions of AFDave, Thordaddy and members of this forum who have demonstrated conclusively that they cannot and will not debate or discuss any issue with any degree of intellectual rigour or honesty I suggest that the poster Ghost of Paley to have more than earned his placed amongst them. Regardless of the result of the vote on b) I would like the members and management to vote on whether or not Ghost of Paley's conduct has been materially different to that of AFDave or Thordaddy, and as such, on whether it has made him deserving of being banned.
I shall set up a seperate thread with these votes in for the sake of clarity.
Louis
--------------
Bye.
|
