Quote:
Your irrelevant attempted counter-arguments
My irrelevant attempted counter-arguments? Do you even know what's wrong with that statement?
Quote:
lead me to believe you don't know how many facts you're arguing against. Sorry kid, the shoe fits.
What facts? And what shoes fit me? No shoes shall ever touch my feet :)
Quote:
You've yet to prove how the Washinton Times is an unreliable source.
What? I haven't? Well, let's see how reliable the Moonies are. They believe:
That there leader, Sun Myung Moon is basically God incarnate, and that worshiping him is mankinds last chance of salvation. "the Savior, Messiah and King of Kings of all of humanity"
"Jesus never achieved a thousandth of what Father has done. In his two years and eight months of public ministry, [Jesus] didn't even establish the national foundation. Now, Father has established a foundation of worldwide power that is unprecedented in history."
They also feces are "holy"...or something:
"You use the bathroom each morning. When you defecate, do you wear a gas mask? This is not a laughing matter but a serious one. If you are near someone else defecating, you will quickly move a good distance away. But when you smell your own feces, you do not even notice it. This is because that fecal matter is one with your body. Therefore, you do not feel that it is dirty.
"When you were young, did you ever taste the dried mucus from your nose? Does it taste sweet or salty? It's salty, right? Since you can answer, you must have tasted it! Why did you not feel that it was dirty? It is because it was part of your body.
"Reverend Moon has figured out something that no one in the world knew."
Of course, that's just the tip of the iceberg, but the church is well known for illegal activity, fraud and downright lying.
http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/re...un-myung-moon/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unification_theology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_World_Communications
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Was..._controversies
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...966889,00.html
http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mh...shington_times
Quote:
e. Regardless, if you don't like Sailer, don't like him -- I was using his site as a source because of the statistics, not because of his personal opinions.
He didn't show statistics, he threw numbers not supported by facts and then went on about his racial opinions on matters.
Quote:
You go ahead and keep on dismissing the facts because they're presented by people you disagree with.
What facts did he present?
Quote:
I did read it, which is why I know that racial differences exist, with blacks disproportionately represented among homicide victims and offenders. And how do I know that? Because, hey, what do you know, the title of the article is "Racial differences exist, with blacks disproportionately represented among homicide victims and offenders".
Uh...I guess we need another trip to the dictionary:
Pronunciation:
\-sh(ə-)nət\
Function:
adjective
Date:
1555
: being out of proportion <a disproportionate share>
— dis·pro·por·tion·ate·ly adverb
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dicti...roportionately
The title is not suggesting a racial divide exist, it's suggesting that polls inaccurately suggest that. Don't you have reading comprehension?
Quote:
You must have skipped over the first few lines and graphs to get to the statistics on homicide victims, which has nothing to do with the argument that, well, racial differences exist, with blacks disproportionately represented among homicide offenders.
I think you're the one doing the skipping.
The race distribution of homicide victims and offenders differs by type of homicide
For the years 1976-2005 combined -
* Black victims are over represented in homicides involving drugs. Compared with the overall involvement of blacks as victims, blacks are less often the victims of sex-related homicides, workplace killings, and homicide by poison.
* Race patterns among offenders are similar to those among victims.
Homicide Type by Race, 1976-2005
Victims Offenders
White Black Other White Black Other
All homicides 50.9% 46.9% 2.1% 45.8% 52.2% 2.0%
Victim/offender relationship
Intimate 56.6% 41.2% 2.2% 54.4% 43.4% 2.2%
Family 60.7% 36.9% 2.4% 59.2% 38.5% 2.3%
Infanticide 55.9% 41.6% 2.5% 55.4% 42.1% 2.5%
Eldercide 69.2% 29.1% 1.6% 54.5% 43.8% 1.6%
Circumstances
Felony murder 54.7% 42.7% 2.6% 39.1% 59.3% 1.6%
Sex related 66.9% 30.5% 2.5% 54.7% 43.4% 1.9%
Drug related 37.4% 61.6% .9% 33.9% 65.0% 1.1%
Gang related 57.5% 39.0% 3.5% 54.3% 41.2% 4.4%
Argument 48.6% 49.3% 2.1% 46.8% 51.1% 2.2%
Workplace 84.6% 12.2% 3.2% 70.5% 26.7% 2.8%
Weapon
Gun homicide 47.2% 50.9% 1.9% 41.9% 56.4% 1.7%
Arson 58.9% 38.1% 2.9% 55.7% 42.0% 2.3%
Poison 80.6% 16.9% 2.5% 79.8% 18.4% 1.8%
Multiple victims or offenders
Multiple victims 63.4% 33.2% 3.3% 55.7% 40.8% 3.5%
Multiple offenders 54.8% 42.5% 2.7% 44.6% 53.0% 2.4%
Although slightly less true now than before, most murders are intraracial
From 1976 to 2005 --
* 86% of white victims were killed by whites
* 94% of black victims were killed by blacks
To view data, click on the chart.
Race of Offender and Victim[D]
Stranger homicides are more likely to cross racial lines than those that involve friends or acquaintances
For homicides committed by --
* a friend or acquaintance of the victim, less than one-tenth (8%) were interracial
* a stranger to the victim, one-quarter were interracial
To view data, click on the chart.
Race of Offender and Victim by relationship[D]
Source: FBI, Supplementary Homicide Reports, 1976-2005.
See also Additional information about the data.
Note: The victims of the 9/11/01 terrorist attacks are not included in this analysis.
Related charts on this site
* The number of homicides of children under age 5 by race, 1976-2005
* Homicide victimization rates for children under age 5 by race, 1976-2005
* Homicides of intimates by gender and race of victim, 1976-2005
* Intimate homicide rates by race, gender and relationship, 1976-2005
Patterns of victimization and offending vary by age, gender, and racial group
During the late 1990's, homicide victimization rates dropped for all groups. In recent years, rates for most groups stabilized.
In 2005 --
* Black males 18-24 years old had the highest homicide victimization rates. Their rates were more than double the rates for black males age 25 and older and almost 4 times the rates for black males 14-17 years old.
* Although much lower than the rates experienced in the late 1980's and early 1990's, rates for black males ages 18-24 remain higher in 2005 than in earlier periods.
* After increases in the early 1990's, both white and black 14-17 year old males experienced homicide victimization rates in 2005 that were about the same as those of the early 1970's.
* Young adults (18-24 years old) have the highest victimization rates in each racial and gender group.
* For white females of all ages, victimization rates have declined. Since 1993, rates for black females have also declined in all age groups.
To view data, click on the chart.
Homicide trends in the U.S. Victimization by Age, Race, Gender[D]
Homicide offending patterns are similar to victimization patterns
* Black males 18-24 years old have the highest homicide offending rates. Their rates are more than 3 times the rates of black males 14-17 years old and almost 5 times the rates of black males age 25 and older.
* Young adults (18-24 years old) have the highest offending rates in each racial and gender group.
* For black males 18-24 years old, offending rates declined after 1993 reaching a low in 2004. The rate increased in 2005.
* For black male teens (14-17 years old), offending rates have increased since 2002 but remain relatively low compared to earlier periods.
* For white male young adults (18-24 years old), offending rates fell to an alltime low in 2005.
* For black females of all age groups, offending rates declined since the early 1990's.
* White females of all age groups experience the lowest offending rates.
To view data, click on the chart.
Homicide trends in the U.S. Offending by Age, Race,Gender[D]
Young males, particularly young black males, are disproportionately involved in homicide compared to their share of the population
* For young white males, their proportion of the population increased slightly since 2001, while their proportion of homicide victims has been stable and their proporation of offenders has declined.
* For young black males, their proportion of the population has remained at about 1%. After 1993, their proportion of homicide victims declined slightly before stablizing in recent years. Their proportion of homicide offenders increased rapidly from the mid 1980's to the early 1990's and then declined slightly remaining at over one-quarter of all offenders..
To view data, click on the chart.
Trends in proportions of black and white young males[D]
Source: FBI, Supplementary Homicide Reports, 1976-2005.
Geesh.
Quote:
The citations made by others have proved nobody wrong but you
How?
Quote:
namely, that crime and pregnancy rates are higher among blacks than among whites.
Uh, I've never said in certain areas blacks among whites have higher pregnancy rates. I'm arguing their race has nothing to do with it. Haven't you kept up?
Quote:
Yet you still claim to be "winning" ... funny.
I've never claimed that. What, is this a contest to you?
Quote:
You were asked, multiple times, for your views and the circumstances which lead you to hold these views, so that everybody here can better understand why you continue to deny factual information.
Uh, I said it is pretty apparent from the nature of my responses what my views are. If you can't figure it out, that's tough for you.
What factual information am I denying?
Quote:
If this is too much for you, don't worry about it.
It's too much for me. Take this burdon from me, please.
Quote:
ou want me to prove that wikipedia is an unrealiable source? Are you serious, kid?
Yes, prove it. It's the internet, not hard to do.
Quote:
Besides common sense and knowledge of anybody above a middle-school education
Yet every single middle school institution I can think of, along with high schools and colleges encourage wikipedia. Geesh, don't pound me with your "common sense" because it isn't sense at all.
Quote:
Tell you what, I'll offer up as many sources as you want to this, as soon as you discredit the statistics put together by Sailer, or prove that the Washington Times is inaccurate.
Blah, blah blah. If wikipedia is inaccurate, prove it. I've already given my reasons why I think The Washington Times is inaccurate, with factual proof, and why Sailer is obviously not an impartial source on the subject, and is not a qualifited expert in the field, but just a baboons ass, so if you think Wikipedia is inaccurate, show why and prove it. I don't care about your opinion on the site, prove it. I'm going to keep using it until you prove without a doubt every single article on there is not worth citing.
Quote:
Then it should be easy to find them, shouldn't it?
You mean the studies? Sure:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4530930.stm
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061127-8296.html
http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2005/...iew051215.html
Wow, that was easy. We're on the internet, see how easy it is to back up your claims, when the facts back them up that is?
Quote:
You were referring to people that say, "I'm not racist, but..."
I'm still referring to them.
Quote:
Unless you misunderstand your own comments. Unless you've also forgotten, "To those who say "I'm not a racist, but..." I say just embrace your inner klansman, inner nazi, inner black panther, inner whatever racist thinking you subscribe to, and leave me alone."
Most of them are racist, and since they are, they should embrace that.
Quote:
Oh, and unless you want to seem anti-Christian, I'd get away from "CE".
Woops, meant EC. Sorry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESRB#Ratings
Err, how is the wording CE anti-Christian?
Quote:
Well it's such a good thing you don't hold any prejudices and negative generalizations, isn't it?
I guess so...
Quote:
Wrong again. Unless you're vying for direct links to every racist comment they've ever made and every time they've blamed others for the problems of their race, which would be extremely childish, examples have indeed been shown.
No, I'm asking for some sources, some evidence of their apparent racism and why it's so bad that it amounts to powerful groups trying to oppress the white race. We are on the internet, so prove it.
Quote:
Yet you still haven't made any arguments at all against the statistics you've been confronted with.
I'm not arguing against the statistics because they back up what I say.
Quote:
Like I said, dislike him all you want. Wacky or not, he still presents statistics that completely disprove any points you've tried to make (or, rather, prove the points that you've disagreed with), and you haven't presented anything against them.
What statistics does he show? I mean, ones he doesn't put a spin on? What facts are presented in his idiotic articles?
Quote:
The black version of a polite racist? Damn kid, you're really out there, aren't you?
To Saturn and back...or something.
Quote:
When people advocate violence against another race to prove that they're capable,
Who are you talking about that advocates violence and is capable of carrying that violence out? Prove it that the black racist you list do that and have that power? Louis Farrakhan is a joke, and he has no power whatsoever. Him, and the New Black Panthers, and other black racist groups are considered jokes by mainstream socieities, and are not powerful. List me recent intense terrorist attacks conducted by them, list me prominent murders done by them, something that would prove they are carrying out this violence you mention.
Quote:
or support taking money away from hardworking people solely to give it to one specific race for something that nobody for a hundred and fifty years has had anything to do with
Who supports that, and who's doing that?
Quote:
r support programs that are nothing but racist in nature ...
What programs do you rerfer too?
Quote:
hat's nothing like "polite racist"
In actuality, they just are the black versions of David Duke and the such, polite racist. They are not like Kent Hovind, or Ron Paul, or those guys who think it's rational to prepare for an upcoming race war between white americans and non white americans, and that every single piece of government legislature is meant to bring down and destroy the white race.
Quote:
And blacks being racist aren't different from whites being racist in that they're still racist.
I never said it was good or any different.
Quote:
"Reverse racism" is just a PC term for racism.
How?
Quote:
Sharpton = racist. Jackson = Sharpton. This would mean that Jackson = racist. "So" that.
Great logic. I knew Al Sharpton was a shape shifting creature, but can you prove how this shape shifting being is a racist? I actually don't disagree with you, but I want to see you prove it to see you don't just believe every piece of racist crap you are fed.
Quote:
Nobody follows Farrakhan?
Did I say that?
I said:
Yes, but he's considered a whackjob but most everyone in the US, and in the world, and does not have power.
Having followers does not equate to power.
[quote]The Nation of Islam doesn't exist?[/quote}
Did I say that? It simply existing means black racism is prominent and is being made into laws?
Quote:
He doesn't make hundreds of thousands of dollars at speaking venues?
What, white racist don't make millions at speaking venues? That means?
Quote:
He -- along with a few other prominent black leaders -- don't affect voters or political issues?
They affect a fringe minority. Prove to me their "influence" has affected the politics in this country to go into their favior.
Quote:
Yes, he has power. Maybe not direct authority, but not all power is direct.
What power does he have?
Quote:
What threat are illegal immigrants? You serious?
Yep.
Quote:
How about this -- you post some citations that illegal immigrants don't bring with them illegal substances,
What, that's the threat? By the way, you make the claim, you prove it. Prove to me the trafficking in the US is most prominent among new illegal immigrants that have barely anything but their own clothes. Come on, prove it. I'm not here to do your homework.
Quote:
r that areas with higher numbers of illegal immigrants don't have higher poverty and higher crime.
Maybe it's because they are poor, and are only allowed to live in already inpolverished communities, where crime is already rampant? Can you prove that illegal immigrants have moved into any good standing neighborhoods and made them crap?
Quote:
Maybe researching something for yourself -- especially away from wikipedia -- will lead you to learn something, instead of dodging the facts that everybody else presents.
But you haven't presented any facts on that particular subject. Come on, it's the internet...show them.
Quote:
And your anecdotes supposedly concerning some people you know are supposed to represent the whole of America?
I've actually never said I'm talking about people who represent the majority. I've actually said the white racist I talk about are a minority. On this issue however, it's not so much racism, just stupidity. The few racist asses who spread the propaganda about illegal immigrants do control what these dumbasses think, and I hear over and over, "We need to stop welcoming immigration" "Immigration is degenerating our society" "We need a wall across Mexico" Yeah, that will work. Everyone loved the Berin Wall, and everyone loves a police state.
Quote:
When we're not feeding, protecting, and liberating them in their countries,
What countries is the US feeding, protecting and liberating? The US has done quite the opposite in history.
Quote:
we're bringing them into our countries to do the same thing.
Prove it.
Quote:
Drugs, crime, poverty, dependence on taxpayers, poorer education ... need I go on?
Proof...?
Quote:
Where are you getting these ideas?
I think it's called reality.
Quote:
First you think that racist whites blame those of other races for their problems,
Of course they do. All racist blame the other races for their problems.
Quote:
then you think that racist whites don't like individual responsibility because it means they couldn't lump all of a certain race together (like you do with Jews).
They don't, because they are lazy parasites who just want to blame others for their problems.
When have I done that with Jews, and how are they a race, and how do they come into this particular part of this discussion?
Quote:
So do they like individual responsibility or not?
I never said they did. Hence, they don't.
Quote:
I'm going to go past a simple "wrong" and all the way to "you're full of it" on this.
Fine...
Quote:
Not only do you lump in other stereotypes and prejudices ("redneck" and "white trash")
How is redneck and white trash sterotyping and predjuice? What, white trash doesn't exist? Black trash exist, so why can't white trash...?
Quote:
in with the rest of those you hold, but you also -- again -- contradict yourself with another one of your incorrect accusations. accusations. So you're saying that black people are to blame for all their problems, right?
What? The concept of black people does not count as an individual. When an entire community is affected and made poor, those people are not held responsible. White trailer park trash does not fit into that situation. They are always lazy deadbeats, who beat up their spouses, get hard ons from the Confederate flags, blame everyone else for their individual mental and emotional problems, and are generally parasites. Seriously, don't you have reading comprehension?
Quote:
Or are white people to blame for black people's problems?
Did I ever say that white people are to blame for black people's problems?
Quote:
Because according to you, if black people blame white people for their problems, they're racists.
If they blame an entire race for all their problems, they usually are racist.
Quote:
Me specifically, that's rare. My race?
A race of billions of people is specific...?
Quote:
My race? Quite often. Especially if you listen to the likes of the racist black spokespeople like Sharpton, or Jackson, or Farrakhan ... or plenty others.
....
Quote:
Excuse me if I don't keep up with the current racism trends.
You are already conforming to racist trends, aren't you?
Quote:
I've still yet to see many racists that believe half the crap you put on them.
So what do white racist believe in?
Quote:
Do you know what "genocide" is? Nevermind, I'll admit, that's a stupid question -- if you knew, you wouldn't accuse America of ever committing genocide.
What..?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocid...story#Americas
Quote:
But then again, as we've seen before, an issue being completely false doesn't stop you from supporting it.
Or not...
Quote:
Your interpretations of "white racists" have gone from a near-majority of "polite racists"
The majority of America are polite racist..?
Quote:
who hold racist views but don't express them to an extreme, to the extreme few who hold xenophobic views and take action against any and every non-white culture. Tell you what, when you figure out your own definitions, come back and debate.
Yeah..., this is getting too weird. Seriously, do you have reading comprehension?
Quote:
OR, it doesn't at all. Try posting actual evidence and statistics, instead of sarcastic exaggerated internet posts.
But I've posted plently...oh nevermind. Everything I post is wrong. This is a contest, according to you, and you beat me....damn.
Quote:
I've very rarely seen Asians that can't speak English.
They're all over here. But that's okay, with me at least. And with all these racist who just have some bent against mexicans.
Quote:
I have, however, seen plenty of non-"very elderly" Mexicans who can't speak English at all, and plenty more who can barely speak functional, moreless conversational English.
You have...? They are not here. Guess they are all over Wisconsin.
Quote:
More yet, there's not an outcry from the Asian community to annex American land and make it part of Asia
What Mexican outcry is there to annex California or Arizona or such and make it part of Mexico? No one here wants to live in Mexico, why would they want successful US states to be part of a crappy country?
Quote:
or to have American schools teach in Asian languages instead of English so that Asian children don't have to learn English,
Uh...schools here teach in vietnamese. However, they learn English as well, and Spanish too. Prove to me Mexicans are trying to make it so that their children don't speak English. Do they have some bent against English or something?
Quote:
or against the idea of deporting Asians who are in America illegally
What are you talking about? The Korean and Vietnamese communities are against that, and joined with the anti-immigration bill protest this state saw a few years ago. So did European immigrants. Yes, WHITES in those protest. Oh noes...
Quote:
or demanding that local or state governments provide for Asians who can't speak English instead of supporting programs for those Asians to learn English.
Yeah, when is that happening?
Quote:
I have seen Mexicans do all of these things.
Cool, prove it.
Quote:
Referring to opponents pulling their head out of their ass,
That's not an insult, that's just what you need to do.
Quote:
outright insults of "hey moron",
How is that an outright insult?
Quote:
there it is. "... stupid opinions, like yours ..."
It's not an insult when your questions really are stupid.
Quote:
Have you forgotten the other insults you've hurled towards opponents and others who hold opposing views, or do you need to go back and check your own posts again?
Can't you check them for me?
Quote:
How is Affirmative Action racist in nature, or how was it established as counter-racism? Please let me know your level of knowledge and mentality, so I can figure out how long I'm going to have to hold your hand and walk you through the learning process, here.
If it's racist, can't you just prove it's racist, without all the other crap? Come on, it's the internet...show me the proof.
Quote:
Proof that less qualified applicants are accepted because of their skin color? Do you have any clue what Affirmative Action is?
Yes I do, and can you prove to me that happens? Or is it a conspiracy...?
Quote:
It doesn't matter if you think that everybody in America holds that "mindset" or not,
Uh...
Quote:
While not in the mindset of the majority, it's not like it hardly exist.
Quote:
what matters is whether or not anybody acts upon it. And that, in as much as it has been proven, is extremely rare anymore.
How..?
Quote:
There are some jobs, like public office, that depend on votes, not qualifications or skin color.
Yes, but how are they racist?
Quote:
(Usually, unless you're talking about Obama.)
Yeah, because he's a qualified candidate..:)
Quote:
These politicians aren't in danger of losing their jobs if others get special treatment because of their skin color
How so...?
Quote:
they only gain minority votes from promising them special treatment.
When does that happen?
Quote:
Vote-buying tactics are not uncommon. And I find it interesting that you think that "white businessmen" promote Affirmative Action,
I didn't say they did.
Quote:
when you said earlier that businessmen oppose Affirmative Action because "it hurts their part of the private sector". You were somewhat accurate, however, finally, in that the truth that institutionalized racism and forcing employers to hire less-qualified applicants based on race hurts, well, everything.
Where is there institutionalized racism, in the sense that benefits blacks and hurts whites?
Quote:
It's not possible to NOT "inject race" into Affirmative Action,
How? It's a socio-economic issue, not a race issue.
Quote:
considering that the program is based on racism for the purpose of counter-racism.
It's not though:
Affirmative action, sometimes called positive discrimination outside the United States, refers to policies intended to promote access to education or employment aimed at a historically socio-politically non-dominant group (typically, minority men or women of all races). Motivation for affirmative action policies is to redress the effects of past and current wrongful discrimination and to encourage public institutions such as universities, hospitals and police forces to be more representative of the population.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_Action
Quote:
It is neither racist nor stupid to recognize the facts, yet again.
What facts?
But you haven't implied that...
Quote:
The statistics are indeed related, and they've been shown to be related. You've been presented with factual information showing a correlation between race and teen pregnancy rates, which you are completely oblivious to. The two sources of statistics showing a direct correlation between race and crime rates (namely, homicide) that you have been presented with have either been discounted based on your personal disagreement with the presenter's opinions or your ignorance and failure to understand and accept the statistics. It's nobody's fault but yours that you don't know the truth.
You don't have to post it again, you just have to read it once. You've posted it more than once, and I've cut away the fat and posted the substance more than once, and yet you STILL refuse to see it.
Yawn...
Quote:
When the Mayor, who is at large part responsible for the destruction of the city of New Orleans
How is he responsible?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Nagin
I can't find any of that anywhere...
Quote:
even before Katrina and the complete failure after,
Isn't that Bush and FEMAs fault?
Quote:
publicly announces that he wants to keep white people from intervening into his plans for his city ... that's bad.
He did? He just made one dumbass statement. Where did you get that?
Quote:
Except that you have no proof whatsoever that Israel intentionally mistreats Arabs,
But I just gave them.
Quote:
and further, no proof that it would be because of racism, and further, the issue has no relevance to the topic at hand of racism in America.
You brought it up, but since you see it as irrelevant, I won't bring it up anymore. You can just PM me with the rest of your Israel diatribe.
Quote:
Collateral damage and human shields are all you can dig up?
The incident took place amid heavy fighting between the Israeli Defense Forces and Hezbollah during "Operation Grapes of Wrath". Israeli, U.N. and U.S. officials accused Hezbollah of using civilian refugees as human shields by opening fire from positions near the UN compound. A United Nations military investigation later determined it was unlikely that Israeli shelling of the U.N. compound was the result of technical or procedural errors.[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qana_massacre
Quote:
"Alternate history theories"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_revisionism
Quote:
That's a hell of a stretch there, kid. But the point was that your incredibly ignorant opinions of the Washington Times
So criticism of the Washington Times is amount to writing about space aliens living in the core of the Earth?
Quote:
nd complete acceptance and defense of wikipedia
Because Wikipedia has some damning evidence against that? How is that at all like Truthism?
Quote:
lead one to assume your acceptance of sources like truthism or al-jezeera.
How is Al-Jezeera related to Truthism? They are completely different websites.
Quote:
But it is propaganda.
Do you have any arguments other than "it's this way because I say it's this way"? How about some evidence that the Washington Times is inaccurate propaganda?
Quote:
Why doesn't he use the Washington Post?
Because it's a liberal rag, not much better than the New York Times.
Quote:
Wait, you guys used links from the NY times to try to prove your point, now it's extremely biased and unreliable? Come on, make up your mind.
It wouldn't matter what sources were used to disprove your false arguments -- they've come from a wide variety, and you've yet to even acknowledge their statistical truth OR present arguments against it.
Quote:
Uh, yeah it does. Unless homocide is not crime.
Why do you think that statistics on why people kill or who gets killed matter more in an argument about who kills more people than statistics on who kills more people matter?
Quote:
Wait, this entire argument is about the motives of crime itself in relations to race, that there is this supposed correlation between race and crime. Don't you follow?
Unless you're trying to create a new argument or fabricate another one, the argument has nothing to do with the motives of a crime, only the perpetrators. Where did you get that motive had anything to do with the argument at hand?
Quote:
I have?
Yes, you definitely missed the statistics that prove you wrong, or else you wouldn't be still trying to argue. Unless you like arguing after you've been proven wrong.
Alright, this is taking way too damn long, so I'm gonna skip through most of the rest of this and eat and get to bed so I can get some decent sleep before work in the morning. When nothing I say -- and no facts or statistics being presented -- are getting through anyway, there's not much point.
Quote:
Which didn't back up your claims.
The Department of Justice site, which claims that blacks are disproportionally represented by homicide statistics, does indeed back up my claims that blacks are disproportionally represented by homicide statistics.
Quote:
What would be the point? It'd just give more perspective on the point that violence, crime, and other ills are caused by poor socio-economic issues. It'd just shoot yourself in the foot.
If my argument is that blacks, and not poor people, are disproportionally represented, including worldwide statistics would only help my case. Of course, let's not fail to mention the cause of poverty in all of these cases.
Quote:
But there isn't. Just a correlations between socio-economic issues.
If there is only a correlation between "socio-economic issues" and crime, you've completely failed to present the correlation or any evidence to support it.
Quote:
I have. US Department of Justice for one...but sources don't matter to you, you've said many times it's just about the claims and how you talk. So I'll just talk now...if that makes you happy.
The Department of Justice was cited against you, not by you, and you miserably failed in attempting to turn it to your favor by ignoring half of it and quoting sections of it that are irrelevant to the argument. And when, praytell, did I ever say that "it's just about the claims and how you talk"?
Quote:
I'll play along. What should I change my views too?
Something that could be backed up by factual statistics would be ideal. A good change, you know.
Quote:
I didn't prove that though, it says on the article:
"Ethnic Jew" (also known as an "assimilated Jew," see cultural assimilation) is a term generally used to describe a person of Jewish parentage and background who does not actively practice Judaism but still identifies with Judaism and/or other Jews culturally and fraternally. The term "ethnic Jew" does not specifically exclude practicing Jews, but they are usually simply referred to as "Jews" without the qualifying adjective "ethnic". See: Ethnic group.
My point was that "Jewish" is considered an ethnicity instead of just a religion -- mainly because your point was that "Jewish" is a title applied only to members of the religion and not of the ethnicity. Your own cite proved you wrong.
Quote:
Oh you're right, everything I cite backfires on me. Not like you. Oh wait...
I love the irony in this statement, posted immediately after something you cited backfired on yet another one of your bad arguments. In addition to the fact that the only way you can turn around a citation to support you is by omitting all relevant information.
Quote:
But I want to play along, I want you to tell me why you're right about these specific topics, without much argument from me.
Because the statistics and facts back me up -- that's why I'm right about these specific topics.
Quote:
Those people in Palestine are not mostly muslim extremist, and didn't have muslim extremist for decades until constant israeli oppression created an enviroment for them to thrive. Still, many of the Palestinian terrorist groups are not muslim extremist, like Fatah, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, etc, etc.
I didn't say most of the people in "Palestine", I said the ones Israel is fighting against. And the so-called "constant Israeli oppression" is made up of counter-attacks, especially since the first military act of the reestablished Israel was its defense against nearly all of its surrounding nations, who attempted to push Israel into the sea. Those surrounding nations, and especially (but not limited to) specific groups within those nations, have kept that same goal.
Quote:
They are taking action against them because they don't want to give up their piece of land.
Yes -- Israel's piece of land that was captured when it was used as staging areas to invade Israel. Whenever Israel decides to be nice and give some land back, hoping that it will calm the terrorists that hate them, it is again used to launch more attacks against Israeli civilians. There's no reason Israel should give up their land -- they're not expanding, they're only defending their own territory.
Quote:
How am I predjuice against Jews?
If you don't think that "most of them have an oppressive religious attitude" is prejudiced, then nevermind, you're beyond hope.
Quote:
Oh dear...
And if the only argument you have is "oh dear" while still dodging and denying the facts, there's not much of a point to argue against you anyway. You've been presented with factual evidence and statistics for a few days now, and you haven't gotten any smarter.
Snore, snore, snore. The fact that you make a comparison of Al-Jezeera, a news station, to Truthism, a small website dedicated to spamming video sharing sites about reptilian humans and alternate history theories just shows what a moron you are and your lack of understanding of the English language.
Come on, you can do better.
