HEMI-Powered wrote:
S'mee added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

On Nov 2, 8:46 pm, Outback Jon
wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Outback Jon wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Outback Jon wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
HEMI-Powered wrote:
Here's the part of the Bible I believe it: adultery is
punished by death by stoning and queers are beaten in
the streets. That isn't from the Bible. You're right,
it's the homosexuals who get put to death:

Leviticus 20:13
The entire book of Leviticus applies only to the
Israelites.

However, YOU should be put to death for working on the
Sabbath. As you are the one advocating killing people
for not following Old Testaent rules I expect that you
will agree that you should be put to death, by your own
standards.
I didn't advocate anything. Nor did I in any way imply
that my standards and Biblical standards are one and the
same. I merely poi nted out that the laws put forth in
the Bible stated that homosexuals and adulterers were to
be put to death.

Except that it does NOT say that, and you are either being
willfully ignorant or lying.

Excuse me, but you're the one being willfully ignorant.

Leviticus 20:10 - If a man commits adultery with another
man's wife-wit h the wife of his neighbor-both the adulterer
and the adulteress must be put to death.

Leviticus 20:13 - If a man lies with a man as one lies with a
woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must
be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

Both of those passages seem to be quite clear to me.

Really? Then are you aware it ONLY applies to levites and they
were jewish. One can then argue succesfully that it doesn't
apply to members of the christian cult. Nor the Islamic cult
or any other religious cult. It also doesn't apply to me and I
dare anybody to start thorwing stones while I work whatever
day I wish.

Jews, elephant jockies, camel jockies, whatever. God only refers
to "people" and His Law applies to all no matter how any
religions may have perverted His Law over the millenia. But, all
sinners must face their maker when they die, including the
queers, so justice will eventually prevail

And, the Sabbath is generally considered to be what is
commonly referr ed to as "Saturday".

Wrong again. The Christian sabbath is SUNDAY.

I fail to see where I stated that I was Christian. Or
Jewish. Or an y religion for that matter.

You did imply it. Not intentionally but to some knuckleheads
you did imply your membership in one of those faiths. shrug
Me I make no guesses and I'm not worried either way. Were I
you I'd consider his comment a straw man.

So, you're wrong twice again.

Stupid bigot

I fail to see how I am a "bigot". I'm not advocating the
killing of adulterers or homosexuals. I merely provided a
reference to the Biblical passage that *does* call for their
deaths. I have in no way stated whether I agree or disagree
with that passage. Nor do I intend to make such a statement.

It is safe to say evreybody on the planet is bigoted to one
exstent or another.
--
Keith

Kurt Ullman wrote:

In article ,
Jeff wrote:



On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 20:34:56 -0500, Kurt Ullman
wrote:



In article ,
J?rgen Exner wrote:



Please correct me if I'm wrong, but _I_ learned in school that the only
people inhabiting the American continent were red indians and inuit.
All others are immigrants.


Technically the Indians were immigrants, too. Just a little earlier.
I think Buffalo and a couple kinds of dear may be the only true Native
Americans.


And horses!



I thought the horses were brought over by the Spaniards. At least that
is what the guy next to me at the rail of the local race track told me.
Although come to think of it, there wasn't anything he did during the
day to indicate he was an expert on horses (grin).


"Modern" horses, perhaps. Fossil horses in North America go back
millions of years. But, then,
wasn't North America part of Africa then? It's all so confusing ) If yer
weren't born in Eden, yer an immigrant )

On Nov 3, 11:13�pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
. wrote:
On Nov 2, 10:47 am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
HEMI-Powered wrote:

Here's the part of the Bible I believe it: adultery is punished by
death by stoning and queers are beaten in the streets.

That isn't from the Bible.

Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a
woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely
be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

But that applies only to Israelites and only if you reject the
teaching of Jesus.

Are you dull-witted, or what? You say that public punishment of
adulterers and homosexuals isn't in the Bible, and when somebody shows
you that it *is* in the
Bible, you start saying, "Well, the Law of Moses is only for
Israelites", and act as if somebody who isn't a Christian is somehow
in the wrong.

If you really want answers, you need to study your own Bible
carefully, and you'll find that there were debates 2000 years ago
about whether The Law applied to
gentiles who were uncircumcized.

And it was concluded that uncircumcized gentile *christians* all
qualified as Jews.
�

On Nov 4, 4:02�am, Kurt Ullman wrote:

� I thought the horses were brought over by the Spaniards.

What, you never heard of Eohippus, American ancestor of all horses?

On Nov 3, 9:24*pm, "." wrote:
On Nov 3, 8:07 pm, J rgen Exner wrote:

"." wrote:
The European settlers had followed game animals on the ice shelf
extending westward from Europe and had been in North America for about
2,000 years when they encountered the "Indians" moving eastward.
Interesting story, actually I have not heard about it before but would
be very interested in reading up on details. Do you have a reference?

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



Anyway, I suppose you are tracing your lineage back to those European
settlers from 15000 years ago, right?

My lineage has only been traced back 2000 years, through Robert Brus
(father of Robert the Bruce, king of Scotland) to the ancient kings of
Sweden.

When I say that I am a Real American, I refer to my descent from
Master Richard Warren, Mayflower passenger and signatory to the
Mayflower Compact.

The Plymouth colony was the first successful colony in New England,
and the fifty or so survivors of that first bitter winter in
Massachusetts are the ancestors of the White Anglo Saxon ruling class
of America.

RPOTFLMAO!!! Such a short ingnomious linage...not a single REAL
conqourer in the lot. MY clan was so feared others wrote songs about
us to teach their children to respect and FEAR us... Such a petty
lineage you come from. Cowards, wastrials and worse. Mine stood up and
so often to their political leaders they were kicked out! You either
claim to have a pair or you have a pair and those that wont risk them
are naught but slackards, cowards and LIARS. Oh wait that would be
YOUR family.

--
Keith

Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:
HEMI-Powered wrote:

Outback Jon added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

Ray Fischer wrote:
Then you hardly have any justification for citing the Bible
as a source for any law.

Do you work at being this dense? Or are you just delusional?

You stated that being put to death for adultery wasn't in the
Bible. I merely provided a cite of the facts that it *is* in
the Bible. I made no attempt to apply it to *anyone*. Or to
cite it as *law*.

My cite shows that being put to death for
adultery/homosexuality is in fact in the Bible. Nothing more,
nothing less. Every version of the Bible I've seen has the
book of Leviticus. Whether it applies to anyone specific, or
not, it's in there.

too bad that Biblical law isn't real law or we'd have less
adulterers and far less queers to **** up our country

Why are you so afraid of people replying to you? Can't take the heat,
eh? Pretty sad :-D I refer of course to you setting followups to email
only so people mistakenly email your fake address rather than respond on
Usenet.

Quiet!

"Bob Myers" wrote
And exactly what evidence can you present to support the
notion of racial differences in planning ability or the ability to
"work harder," (whatever that might mean)?

First, change "racial" to "evolutionary" then note the domesticated horses
and elephants outside (but not in) sub-Saharan Africa. Ditto complex
civilizations with roads, water supplies, et al, which require planning and
work beyond women planting and reaping.. Find a Stone Henge. I know of
nothing in Sub-Saharan Africa that equates to Greece, Rome, Egypt (Greek),
India or to modern developed countries. In fact, Euro controlled Rhodesia
exported food but now Zimbabwe cannot feed itself. Then ask why.

"Twibil" wrote:
Oh dear. A racist ...

I cannot be a racist. I'm not black and didn't vote for Obama.

(Clue: Nobody of any race has ever successfully domesticated either
zebras *or* African elephants in any great numbers. This is because
both species tend to kill the people who try.)

Duh -oh! Never broke any really wild horses have you. Modern horses, and
people like you, are the product of millennia of weeding out any "wild"
tendencies. All horses and elephants were originally just as dangerous as
their African cousins.

"The Older Gentleman" wrote
AFAIK, nobody's managed to domesticate either species. Some people have
tamed elephats, and probably zebras, but *domesticated* them? Wake up.

Ahh ... Does nobody ride to the hounds over there any more? Surely even you
have seen movies of horses and elephants working for people.

"." wrote:
When I say that I am a Real American, I refer to my descent from
Master Richard Warren, Mayflower passenger and signatory to the
Mayflower Compact.

Thank you for confirming that you do descent from immigrants to America.

jue

.. ) wrote:

: If you really want answers, you need to study your own Bible
: carefully, and you'll find that there were debates 2000 years ago
: about whether The Law applied to
: gentiles who were uncircumcized.

: And it was concluded that uncircumcized gentile *christians* all
: qualified as Jews.

Are these the same debates that concluded all Jewish practices were to be
deemed heresies?
--
Non Illegitimi Carborundum

"Michelle Steiner" wrote in message
...
In article
,
"." wrote:

The Hebrews were a band of pariahs. As outcasts, they lived on the
outside of the villages and made their living by selling charms and
telling stories and swindling the villagers out of their valuables,
and perhaps taking some livestock with them when they moved on.

They were basically a sinful bunch of thieves and con artists, but
they stuck together for thousands of years. They kept their tribe
together by bad-mouthing the Gentile tribes they moved amongst.

What fairly tale did you get that from?

Might I suggest a very popular one - the Bible or Penetauch. Abraham, the
patriarch of Judism, was exactly like the folks "." describes. He got
kicked out of Ur then got rich by pimping his sister/wife then blackmailing
their marks..

Vito ) wrote:
: "Bob Myers" wrote
: And exactly what evidence can you present to support the
: notion of racial differences in planning ability or the ability to
: "work harder," (whatever that might mean)?
:
: First, change "racial" to "evolutionary" then note the domesticated horses
: and elephants outside (but not in) sub-Saharan Africa. Ditto complex
: civilizations with roads, water supplies, et al, which require planning and
: work beyond women planting and reaping.. Find a Stone Henge. I know of
: nothing in Sub-Saharan Africa that equates to Greece, Rome, Egypt (Greek),
: India or to modern developed countries. In fact, Euro controlled Rhodesia
: exported food but now Zimbabwe cannot feed itself. Then ask why.

Perhaps it has more to do with the difference between those who believe(d)
in living *with* nature vs dominating nature then any innate 'ability'.

--
Non Illegitimi Carborundum

Jürgen Exner added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

When I say that I am a Real American, I refer to my descent
from Master Richard Warren, Mayflower passenger and signatory
to the Mayflower Compact.

Thank you for confirming that you do descent from immigrants
to America.

Everybody except American Indians are descendents of immigrants,
which is our great strenght. Seem to me that your countrymen are
amongst the biggest minorities from Europe. It is also interesting
that for all the hatred bred by envy of anything American, there is
never a shortage of people trying to get in here either legally or
illegally yet a curious lack of people trying to leave for one of
those Socialist bastions of the EU.

BTW and FWIW, I think that people who are eligible for membership
in the DAR are snobs, but who's counting?

--
HP, aka Jerry

"Laid off yet? Keep buying foreign, and you soon will be!" -
increasingly seen on bumper sticker

"Jeff" wrote .

Try to domesticate a Zebra.
You will get injured, or possibly die.
Zebras are not horses with different coat coloring,
they have a different mind, NOT conducive to training.
Even half horse/ zebra crosses are quite dangerous.

You are thinking like an African.

If I took the same approach as I have with dozens of stable bred horses
you're right. I'd have to begin with some newborns and get them used to
people, weeding out (eating) the wilder ones and breeding the tamer (which
takes planning). After many generations I'd have some that could be used to
pull a cart or plow but would still be dangerous and unpredictable. But if
my sons and grandsons continued breeding for docility we would eventually
arrive where we are now with horses.

Same with people.

"Bob Myers" wrote
Let's be accurate - most people, at least most of those who
managed to get beyond an 8th-grade education, don't believe
in the whole Genesis creation myth as literal truth in the first
place.

People "know" things in different ways. On the one hand they know the
scientific theories; on the other the Biblical story. Somehow they believe
both. I was discussing this with a student of ancient Greek. He said that
language even had seperate words for the two kinds of knowledge. Most
people here in Florida have at least high school educations but there is an
ongoing debate about teaching Biblical vs scientific creation theories.
Wierd.

On 4 Nov, 16:21, "Vito" wrote:
"The Older Gentleman" wrote

AFAIK, nobody's managed to domesticate either species. Some people have
tamed elephats, and probably zebras, but *domesticated* them? Wake up.

Ahh ... Does nobody ride to the hounds over there any more? *Surely even you
have seen movies of horses and elephants working for people.

Yes, I've agreed elephants can be tamed. 'Domesticated' I'm not sure
about. But zebras? Nope, no how, no way. And they ain't horses.

On 4 Nov, 17:03, "Vito" wrote:
"Jeff" wrote .

Try to domesticate a Zebra.
You will get injured, or possibly die.
Zebras are not horses with different coat coloring,
they have a different mind, NOT conducive to training.
Even half horse/ zebra crosses are quite dangerous.

You are thinking like an African.

If I took the same approach as I have with dozens of stable bred horses
you're right. *I'd have to begin with some newborns and get them used to
people, weeding out (eating) the wilder ones and breeding the tamer (which
takes planning). *After many generations I'd have some that could be used to
pull a cart or plow but would still be dangerous and unpredictable. But if
my sons and grandsons continued breeding for docility we would eventually
arrive where we are now with horses.

You might. It has been tried with zebras, and it didn't work, although
I agree that it would be interesting to try a breeding programme over
a great many generations.

On 4 Nov, 17:20, "Vito" wrote:

*He said that
language even had seperate words for the two kinds of knowledge. *

So does French.

On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 10:56:02 -0600, in rec.photo.digital you wrote:

Jürgen Exner added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

When I say that I am a Real American, I refer to my descent
from Master Richard Warren, Mayflower passenger and signatory
to the Mayflower Compact.

Thank you for confirming that you do descent from immigrants
to America.

Everybody except American Indians are descendents of immigrants,

Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!! That's exactly what and all of what
I was trying to explain for the last 2 gazillion postings.

Mr. "I'm a True American and immigrants can never be Americans"
contradicted himself as he himself is not an American Indian.

Thank you again for confirming my point.

yet a curious lack of people trying to leave for one of

Application is pending....

jue

-----Original Message-----
From: . ]
Posted At: Monday, November 03, 2008 10:24 PM
Posted To: alt.home.repair
Conversation: America 2042: WHITE MINORITY, the country you have left
for your kids
Subject: America 2042: WHITE MINORITY, the country you have left for
your kids

On Nov 3, 8:07 pm, J?rgen Exner wrote:
"." wrote:
The European settlers had followed game animals on the ice shelf
extending westward from Europe and had been in North America for
about
2,000 years when they encountered the "Indians" moving eastward.

Interesting story, actually I have not heard about it before but would
be very interested in reading up on details. Do you have a reference?

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

Anyway, I suppose you are tracing your lineage back to those European
settlers from 15000 years ago, right?

My lineage has only been traced back 2000 years, through Robert Brus
(father of Robert the Bruce, king of Scotland) to the ancient kings of
Sweden.

When I say that I am a Real American, I refer to my descent from
Master Richard Warren, Mayflower passenger and signatory to the
Mayflower Compact.
=====================================

Looks like we're cousins.
Are you a member of the Mayflower Society too?

I guess I've never thought of myself as more of a 'real' American
because of that lineage, rather a closer connection to our country's
founders. I've recognized in myself some of the characteristics and
strengths they had for survival. Of particular note was Richard's wife
(Elizabeth) who carried on after his death (8 years after he arrived on
the Mayflower).

She never remarried, lived to be about 90 yrs old, raised her children
and managed at a functional level usually allotted only to men. She was
allowed to succeed to her husband's rights as "Purchaser" and acquired
much property which she transferred to her sons-in-law before her death.
She was honored with the title "Mrs.", as most women were called
"Goodwife".

From the union of Richard and Elizabeth came many tenacious, creative,
brave, responsible and enduring spirited people: [Ulysses S. Grant
(President), FDR (President), Allen B. Shepard, Jr (Astronaut, first man
into space, 5th to walk on the moon), Laura Ingalls Wilder (author of
Little House on the Prairie books), Grandma Moses (artist), Richard Gere
(actor).

On Nov 4, 8:40�am, J�rgen Exner wrote:

Thank you for confirming that you do descent from immigrants to America.

Wrong. My ancestors were *colonists*, not immigrants. They never left
the
jurisdiction of England when they arrived in New England, which was a
territory of the British empire.

There was no established country there, just a wilderness where a
bunch of recently-arrived savages lived in a hunter-gatherer mode.

They had no government, they lived by savage custom.

My ancestor could and did sail back and forth between New England and
England, in the conduct of their commerce.

When they tired of British restrictions on said commerce, they
rebelled and declared their independence and started a new country.

People who arrived in *our* country after 1789, with the intent to
remain permanently were immigrants.

country Date: 13th century
:the land of a person's birth, residence, or citizenship b: a
political state or nation or its territory

territory Date: 14th century
a: a geographic area belonging to or under the jurisdiction of a
governmental authority b: an administrative subdivision of a country

colony Date: 14th century
a: a body of people living in a new territory but retaining ties with
the parent state b: the territory inhabited by such a body

colonize Date: 1622
a: to establish a colony in or on or of colonize an island b: to
establish in a colony the rights of colonized people

immigrant Date: 1789
ne that immigrates: as a: a person who comes to a country to take up
permanent residence

immigrate Date: circa 1623
:to enter and usually become established ; especially : to come into a
country of which one is not a native for permanent residence

On Nov 4, 10:50 am, "." wrote:

Wrong. My ancestors were ........

Your ancestors should fry in hell for producing you
and your incredibly tiresome blather about them.

Not the least bit frikkin impressive or extraordinary,
or especially better or worse or different than
anybody else's.

Take it somewhere where somebody cares,
if you can ever find such a place.

On Nov 4, 8:56 am, "HEMI-Powered" wrote:

Everybody except American Indians are descendents of immigrants,
which is our great strenght. Seem to me that your countrymen are
amongst the biggest minorities from Europe.

What, are you about thirty years old now? You're just a kid.

Fifty years ago, long before you were ever born, if you asked a Real
American to describe what an American was, he would have told you that
an American was a White person, whose ancestors came here from the
British isles and northern Europe, perhaps Germany, or Scandinavia.

If you asked the same Real American what an immigrant was, he would
have
spoken of Kikes and Wops and Dagos and Spics, the unwanted refugees
from
southern and eastern Europe.

Ask your Dad, if you don't believe that.

It is also interesting
that for all the hatred bred by envy of anything American, there is
never a shortage of people trying to get in here either legally or
illegally yet a curious lack of people trying to leave for one of
those Socialist bastions of the EU.

You're not old enough to have a background of knowledge about *who*
invented socialism and *why* White Anglo Saxon Protestants are so
hated by the Jewsmedia.

The Jews were always a problem in Europe. They just didn't fit in with
the existing system of government where the rich and powerful kings
and their appointed nobles worked with the Roman Catholic and eastern
Orthodox churches to keep
the common people in servitude.

Unfortunately for this system, many Jews were highly educated and they
became the tax collectors for the king of Poland and tithe collectors
for the Roman Catholic
church.

Imagine the resentment that the serfs felt, as they handed their
meager tithe to a Jew standing by the church door! The serfs rose up
and massacred the Jews in the 15th or 16th centuries.

Poland was once a powerful empire that oppressed Russia, but, in the
18th century, the tables turned, and much of the Polish empire became
part of the Russian empire.

Problem was, the acquisition also included millions of Jews, who were
better educated and smarter than the typical Russian or Polish serf.

The problem facing the tsar was, "What to do with this strange foreign
group of independant, argumentative Jews to make them into loyal
productive citizens?"

This problem became known as "The Jewish Question" throughout Europe.

This stiff-necked, argumentative people could not be allowed to live
amongst the serfs, who were virtual slaves in Russia.

The Jews were free, educated and dangerous to the Russian social
order. They could not be allowed to move into the cities, because the
Russians knew what Jews did in cities: they took over, and set up
their money changing/lending benches and they invaded academia and the
arts and enveigled their way into
government, becoming factors (money lenders) to the nobility.

So Jews were restricted in The Pale of Settlement, between Poland and
Moscow.

The Jews were not allowed to travel freely, and the tsar tried
unsucessfully to enforce his laws amongst the Jews. Jews were not
allowed to convert to Christianity, nor were they allowed to change
their Jewish names to Russian
names.

The Russians did NOT want the Jews to take over Russia.

The socialist revolution that swept Europe in the early 19th century
spread into Russia, and an anarchist Jew assasinated the tsar with a
bomb.

As a result of the anarchy, about half of all the Jews left Russia,
and many of them immigrated to the United States, where they tried to
live just like they had
lived in Russia.

The Jews didn't believe in obeying the secular laws of the state of
New York, they wanted to resolve their disputes by going to a rabbi.

Within a few decades, there were so many Jews in New York, they were
taking over the newpapers and printing their own Jewish viewpoint
about American politics.

Arguing points of Jewish theology was a sort of hobby for the Jews,
they learned debate in yeshiva school. So it was natural that Jews
would become lawyers in New York.

By 1916, there was even a Jewish judge in the US supreme court,
reinterpreting
American ideals according to the Jewish world view.

Joseph Pulitzer was the Jewish owner of a NY newspaper that was in
competition with the Hearst newspaper. Pulitzer took up a collection
that raised $100,000 for the base of the statue of Liberty on the
Barricades, a symbol of the *French* revolution which stands in New
York harbor.

The words at the base of the statue, imploring the world to dump all
refugees on American shores was written by a young Jewish girl, Emma
Lazarus.

The poem is called "The New Colossus" and it compares the statue of
the bloody
French liberty to the Colossus of Rhodes, which was once one of the
seven wonders of the ancient world.

In her poem, Lazarus invites all the Jewish exiles to come to
America...

Meanwhile, back in Russia, the half of the Jews that stayed there
figured prominently in the Russian revolution, and about 20 to 25% of
all the high offices in the politburo were occupied by Jews.

Leon Trotski was a Jew who had changed his name to a more Russian
sounding name, and, while he could have risen further up in the
politburo, he decided not to, because the politburo was already
topheavy with Jews.

Jews had succeeded in gaining control of Moscow, and nobody was
allowed to
make any anti-semitic remark or even identify party members as Jews.
Stalin enacted a law that prescribed the death penalty for anti-
semitism.

After Stalin died in 1953, the Russian people were gradually able to
extricate
their universities and arts and politics from the despised Jews. By
the mid-1970's, most Jews were emigrating to any country that would
take them.

Today, there are only about 250,000 Jews left in Russia, and they have
little power.

BTW and FWIW, I think that people who are eligible for membership
in the DAR are snobs, but who's counting?

Besides DAR, I'm eligible for membership in any Mayflower society and
the Ancient and Honorable Artillery of Boston. But, why spend the
annual dues on comparing who was who in the colonies? It's all free on
the www...

And, my reason for mentioning my colonial ancestors to to set a stage
for explaining US history, and how the Real Americans have been
forgotten as
recent refugees have taken over NY and New England.

On Nov 4, 8:18*am, "Vito" wrote:

I cannot be a racist. *I'm not black and didn't vote for Obama.

Thank you. Tells us all we need to now about you.

(Clue: Nobody of any race has ever successfully domesticated either
zebras *or* African elephants in any great numbers. This is because
both species tend to kill the people who try.)

Duh -oh! *Never broke any really wild horses have you. *Modern horses, and
people like you, are the product of millennia of weeding out any "wild"
tendencies. All horses and elephants were originally just as dangerous as
their African cousins.

Gawd, you are *SUCH* an idiot.

On Nov 4, 11:14�am, Rob Kleinschmidt wrote:

Take it somewhere where somebody cares,
if you can ever find such a place.

Looks like you're stuck with me, unless you want to stop reading my
pearls of wisdom.

On Nov 4, 12:51*pm, "." wrote:
On Nov 4, 11:14 am, Rob Kleinschmidt wrote:

Take it somewhere where somebody cares,
if you can ever find such a place.

Looks like you're stuck with me, unless you want to stop reading my
pearls of wisdom.

You mean steaming piles of **** wisdom...

--
Keith

"." wrote in message
...

People who arrived in *our* country after 1789, with the intent to
remain permanently were immigrants.

Well, *THEIR* country, perhaps. As you continue to
demonstrate, there's absolutely no reason to think that
a set of national ideals, values, and morality can be
conveyed by something as irrelevant as an accident of
birth and bloodline.

What is it that YOU have done to be worthy of
consideration as a "real American," outside of the
*claimed* conditions of your birth - which, of course,
you had no responsibility for in the first place.

Bob M.

"." wrote in message
...

Fifty years ago, long before you were ever born, if you asked a Real
American to describe what an American was, he would have told you that
an American was a White person, whose ancestors came here from the
British isles and northern Europe, perhaps Germany, or Scandinavia.

And fifty years ago, if you'd asked that same "real American"
whether it was possible to fly to the moon, if cigarettes were
bad for your health, or if gas would ever be more than $0.30 a
gallon, they'd most likely have given you answers that were
equally ignorant and incorrect.

The truth is not determined by popular opinion.

Bob M.

"." wrote in message
...
Joseph Pulitzer was the Jewish owner of a NY newspaper that was in
competition with the Hearst newspaper.

Except, of course, that Pulitzer wasn't Jewish. His father was
of Hungarian Jewish descent, but his mother was a devout
Roman Catholic and Pulitzer was raised as such. (No need
to remind you, I assume, that in Judaic tradition the
"Jewishness" follows the *matriarchal* line, right?) After
coming to America, Pulitzer married an Episcopalian and
joined that church, and his children were all baptized
as Episcopalians.


Pulitzer took up a collection
that raised $100,000 for the base of the statue of Liberty on the
Barricades, a symbol of the *French* revolution which stands in New
York harbor.

Wrong yet again:

http://www.ohranger.com/statue-liber...statue-liberty


Bob M.

"." wrote in message
...
Imagine the resentment that the serfs felt, as they handed their
meager tithe to a Jew standing by the church door! The serfs rose up
and massacred the Jews in the 15th or 16th centuries.

And wrongly so, by your own admission in the above; in other
words, they went after the people who had been forced by
those in power to become the "obvious target," rather than
going after those who were actually oppressing them.


The problem facing the tsar was, "What to do with this strange foreign
group of independant, argumentative Jews to make them into loyal
productive citizens?"

This problem became known as "The Jewish Question" throughout Europe.

This stiff-necked, argumentative people could not be allowed to live
amongst the serfs, who were virtual slaves in Russia.

The Jews were free, educated and dangerous to the Russian social
order.

In short, they exhibited precisely those characteristics that you
would now claim as American ideals. The irony here is
incredible.

Bob M.

BrianNZ wrote:

Michelle Steiner wrote:
In article ,
Michelle Steiner wrote:

In article , BrianNZ
wrote:

To your question, what queers and adulters do isn't in their
private lives, it is in their PUBLIC lives because they have the
unmitigated gall to demand rights and tax advantages equal to those
of the Bible's definition of marriage - that of a union of one man
and one woman.
We queers have the unmitigated gall to demand the rights and tax
advantages that everyone else has under the constitution and laws of
our country. I expect that the same goes for the queers in your
country.

Brian, please learn how to quote properly; it wasn't until I read other
messages in the thread that I realized you were quoting someone else.



My apologies...whenever I hit 'reply to newsgroup', when it comes to
HEMI-powered there is a pop up that requests I send my reply to the
sender, so I just copied/pasted his post to reply to the newsgroup.

Sorry for the confusion but your reply was spot-on for
HEMI-powered.....well said.

I'll pick my act up.

It's part of his childish little games to try to get people to
accidentally email a fake address instead of post to Usenet (because
people will rarely go back and correct this - it's often too difficult
in a large thread finding the right post again to reply to). He's
afraid of people replying which just goes to show exactly what kind of a
person he is.
--
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

On Nov 4, 1:34*pm, "Bob Myers" wrote:
SNIP
The truth is not determined by popular opinion.


There you go again! Bringing reality and FACTS into one of krusties
arguments about why he's discriminated against because of his
ancestry.
--
Keith

"S'mee" wrote in message
...

There you go again! Bringing reality and FACTS into one of krusties
arguments about why he's discriminated against because of his
ancestry.

To quote one of my favorite modern philosophers: "Lord, I
'pologize fer that, an' be with the starvin' pygmies in New
Guinea..."

;-)

On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 12:20:19 -0500, "Vito"
wrote:

"Bob Myers" wrote
Let's be accurate - most people, at least most of those who
managed to get beyond an 8th-grade education, don't believe
in the whole Genesis creation myth as literal truth in the first
place.

People "know" things in different ways. On the one hand they know the
scientific theories; on the other the Biblical story. Somehow they believe
both. I was discussing this with a student of ancient Greek. He said that
language even had seperate words for the two kinds of knowledge. Most
people here in Florida have at least high school educations but there is an
ongoing debate about teaching Biblical vs scientific creation theories.
Wierd.


Well, there is, and there isn't, an ongoing debate here in Florida
over teaching creationism in public schools. There's debate in some
counties where there's a strong base of religious adherents and some
support on the elected school board, but that's not true in all
counties. There may be debate in, say, Polk County, but it's a
non-issue in Seminole or Orange County or Dade County. There's no
serious debate on this issue in Tallahassee (our capitol). Some
legislator may bring it up to look good in his/her county, but that's
just lip service.



--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 11:34:07 -0800 (PST), "."
wrote:

On Nov 4, 8:56 am, "HEMI-Powered" wrote:

Everybody except American Indians are descendents of immigrants,
which is our great strenght. Seem to me that your countrymen are
amongst the biggest minorities from Europe.

What, are you about thirty years old now? You're just a kid.

Fifty years ago, long before you were ever born, if you asked a Real
American to describe what an American was, he would have told you that
an American was a White person, whose ancestors came here from the
British isles and northern Europe, perhaps Germany, or Scandinavia.

If you asked the same Real American what an immigrant was, he would
have
spoken of Kikes and Wops and Dagos and Spics, the unwanted refugees
from
southern and eastern Europe.

Really? Fifty years ago I was in college, and I don't think I ever
referred to Kikes, Wops, Dagos, or Spics. If asked what an immigrant
was, I would have said "Someone not born in the United States who now
lives in the United States". And, fifty years ago I would have
included all races in any description of an American. I don't think I
was particularly progressive in this.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

How about putting a STOP to the spamming of 5 unrelated Newsgroups with this
TRASH.

"tony cooper" wrote in message
...

Really? Fifty years ago I was in college

Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Rudy wrote:
How about putting a STOP to the spamming of 5 unrelated Newsgroups with this
TRASH.


Learn to set followups, at the very least.