User talk:Deeceevoice/Archive 6

A Mediterranean Trinity?

Hello there. I have noticed your presence here at the Wikipedia, on and off for awhile. Is it not a sham that racial supremacists deny the value of darker coloured peoples, whilst inventing imperialist relationships between East and West in the Northern Hemisphere? I am a European-North American who probably has some ancient ancestry with the Middle East and African peoples. I do not consider sub-African blood to be unpleasant; I think that's where curly hair in Europeans originally came from. Imagine if our three Western races had a united front across Atlantic shores. I think the Asiaphile Aryanists are dead wrong in their approach to racial relations. I am more than happy in finding beauty in African aesthetics, foods and religion--I am definitely not anti-Islamic. By the way, I am not trying to condescend or partake in a White Mans' Burden. I genuinely feel this way and argue with opponents of Africans on an irregular basis. There is nothing wrong with your race or mine. Lord Loxley 19:38, 8 July 2006 (UTC)\:

I'm not certain what you mean by "our three Western races," and I find your comments rather curiously worded -- but I appreciate the spirit in which they appear to be offered. I also appreciate your willingness to dialogue with other Euro-Americans who are backward in matters of race, because, as you've probably gathered, I don't have much patience for that sort of thing. :p Peace 2 u. :) deeceevoice 16:31, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I was referring to the European sons of Japheth...Arabian sons of Shem...African sons of Ham. Each has their own religion: Christianity, Judaism, Islam. We all acknowledge Noah and the universal ancestor Adam. I think that our Mediterranean races should be the focus of social stratification in the Atlantic Americas. Let the Pacific peoples handle their own thing. I am not impressed by Japanese industry, nor race and intelligence tests. I feel that it is my good responsibility as a White man, to see that my brothers in Abraham are well cared for and not abandoned to foolhardy quests such as "Whitening the Yellow man". I tell you something, there is a great deal wrong with Whites who would rather bang Kate Beckinsale or Kelly Hu than Tyra Banks or Iman. Although I am not interested in fat Black chicks, Queen Latifah is a far cry from ugly. Beyoncé Knowles is definitely more attractive than any Asian I've ever seen. There are too many of these racial supremacists who think only in terms of colour and forget that ancestry varies beyond that. Doesn't Morgan Freeman claim Irish blood? African-Americans have quite a bit of White ancestors, so what's the fucking deal with accepting them (you) as brothers and sisters? I like how Chris Tucker has tried to find his ancestors in Africa; I saw a documentary (African American Lives) on African-Americans submitting genetic samples for testing and they went into the details. I would be honoured to learn of any African ancestor in my own family tree, unless he/she was a criminal or lunatic. Of course, I think I would have to trace back to before Roman times. Lord Loxley 07:50, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

You're creepin' me out, LL. "... the focus of social stratification...." What? Social stratification??!! If I even have to think to address that subject with you, then I'm afraid there's nothing to say at all. And I'm still not certain I understand you, but I don't think your "brothers in Abraham" need to be "well cared for." The very notion smacks of paternalism. And as a woman of color, a feminist and activist, my natural affinities and alliances are with other people of color -- not with whites -- including "the Pacific peoples," many of whom are part of the African diaspora. And I frankly don't care whom white folks would rather "bang," nor do I care one whit that you have a distaste for "fat Black chicks" (cringing at "chicks"). As an African-American woman, I, frankly, am opposed, in principle, (for any number of reasons) to black-white relationships -- none of which I care to go into; they are immaterial in this context. Suffice it to say I believe they are detrimental to the race. Finally, if the fact that many African-Americans have European (and Native American) ancestry makes us less objectionable to whites, then our mongrelization is my deepest regret, our full-blooded African brothers and sisters being no less beautiful or intelligent, no less worthy of full and complete acceptance in the community of humankind. I have nothing more to say. deeceevoice 18:40, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought you was a dude by the way you was talkin'. Marvin Gaye would have a fit at what you're saying. LMAO. I'm not as afraid as you, I guess. Then again, how can you be down on yourself for having multiracial ancestry? It's rather unavoidable. Perhaps my point was that Mediterranean blends are much more beautiful and natural, than Eurasian or Afrostralian hybrids. We at least have a common world history behind us, which binds us together. Despite Africa's tragedies, it is still among the best racial homelands one can have. I'd rather live in the heart of Africa for the rest of my life than be given a free spaceflight. I hope that means something to you. I never intended to offend you in the first place. When you talk about the Caucasian choice for a loving partner, it sounds one-sided. This is a two-way street my dear, with African choice open to pick Whites. I'm not a Negrophobe, but it appears you are a Blancophobe. By the way, I wonder why you would cringe at my Negrophilia. Part of my reason for writing, was because I am alienated by those anime freaks and their fanatic take on Japan. I get along a lot better with Black people than Asians, which I attribute to shared characteristics going back to at least Ancient Egypt. We have a similar Western soul and relating to one another is easier. I can just as easily listen to Mary J. Blige as you could the Beatles. It's in our blood. You say that my proposed aid would be paternalistic, but I envision a future where Whites in the North Atlantic invest all their non-Caucasian business interest in sponsoring African ambitions and universities. I don't believe in affirmative action, but I believe in massive relief, without any specific compensation. The only thing I need is friendship and an alliance as equals. Hope that doesn't sound too scary you know, I could just look down at you on the street and then how would you feel? When somebody extends their hand, the polite thing to do is shake it. I contacted you becauee you seemed hurt or offended, so I obviously meant no harm. Chill. Why are you a colour-bound activist? It doesn't matter if you are Black or White. Remember Martin Luther King's dream. I'm not attracted to Black women merely because of colour, but because of their inner beauty. I can find it in your race just as easy or difficult as in my own. What a big deal it is, huh? I don't have a problem with Mulatto children or a Afropean/Eurafrican culture. Why do you? Lord Loxley 03:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

You misunderstand. Whatever you're referring to has nothing to do with fear. And the Beatles? Well, considering they learned, by their own admission, much of what they know from old R&B masters, they're hardly an example of whatever point you're trying to make. And, no. In a contest, Blige would win every time. And in my blood? Africa. Yes, much of my upbringing is Western and neo-European, but my roots, my ties, my affinities are with Africa and African peoples. The fact is the struggles African people and other people of color face have a lot to do with enduring white supremacy, racism, oppression, usurpation, colonialism and neocolonialism, Western hegemony, etc., etc., etc. To suggest black people have a more natural pairing with European/neo-European peoples and interests instead of with others who face the same or similar challenges to empowerment and advancement is utterly absurd and completely defies logic.

"Relief"? Well, I appreciate your point there, but it's pie-in-the-sky and highly unlikely. Should such a thing come to pass, however, I'd see it more as reparations; there is a heavy debt owed there. But that, I suppose, is neither here nor there. The assistance is much needed (however unlikely it is that such a scenario ever would come to pass).

"Hurt or offended"? I don't know by what or by whom, because I am neither. But, again, thanks. "... the polite thing to do is shake it." Uh, I don't think I need a lesson in etiquette. If someone comes forward to shake my hand, but in doing so utters such apparent nonsense -- well-meaning though it may be -- as you have, I am obliged by my nature to respond, calling you on it.

And, no. I don't have a "problem"; I have a strong preference/preferences -- shaped by my objective experience and that of my people, the circumstances in which we find ourselves; and the far-ranging social, political and cultural implications of race and racism and white supremacy. Again, I view black-white miscegenation as detrimental to the race. And, no. I will not discuss it further. This is not an appropriate venue, and there is nothing to be gained from such an exchange with you.

As a matter of fact, I find it exceedingly perverse that a commentary on the upliftment of black peoples should degenerate into a discussion of black-white miscegenation. To my way of thinking, the two have absolutely nothing to do with one another -- except in an inverse way, and to call to the mind of a blackwoman brutalities, depredations and outrages that it would serve no positive purpose to recount here. On a final, strictly personal and far less important note with regard to black-white miscegenation, there is the fundamental matter of aesthetics. Without meaning to offend, and though there are a few exceptions, I have a fairly succinct response possibly akin to your reaction to "fat Black chicks": Ee-uuuw. deeceevoice 03:49, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

If not fear, then possibly anger? I wonder why you think one has to be Afrocentric or Eurocentric, rather than merely coexistent and naturally draw upon one another without this idea of credit or taint. Regardless of the unhapy nature of previous affairs between our races, it was not like this the entire time we've lived together. This thing came about after the countries Spain and Portugal learnt that the Ottoman Empire was trafficking Africans for slavery, while these slaves were known to have the abilities to work in similar environments in the Americas, where it was very difficult for Europeans to do it. I don't think Blacks get enough credit for the work they've done. The Ottomans were not friendly to Whites either, but the African slave trade was conducted by Middle Easterners for a long time anyways. What of Africans enslaving eachother? Whites abolished slavery in their own race, for the most part with the help of the Catholic Church. The more Whites stopped being religious, they pretended to be and used the Bible to enslave Blacks. But those Whites were heretics and you must know, that not all Whites supported slavery. Why do you think otherwise? Whites were the only race to stop slavery, even by killing their own people to stop it. You would only associate with those races which continue to enslave their peoples, rather than those who liberated you.

The point I am trying to make, is that Europe and America should stop giving aid to people who don't need it, or investing in countries just for economic reasons. Whites should only set about helping your race, but also Jews too for other reasons. Whites have a lot to gain by some form of redemption, which they cannot have by wasting efforts on enlarging Asian economies which compete with ours. I think it is only natural that we American Whites make Liberia our chief centre of foreign aid, whilst paying attention to your needs here. Call it pie-in-the-sky, but that's because people are selfish. We continually recieve unwanted immigrants who are only in it for themselves. If not for this Mexican problem, we would have an easier time. They claim for themselves the 1960s equal rights movement, when it had nothing to do with them. I'm really upset about that; they insult both you and me. My Black friend Mario is upset with the Mexicans too, but when we've talked about helping Africa, he thinks it is impossible. That thought of helping Africa being impossible is offensive to me as well.

I have the feeling that you are looking at me through the eyes of Spike Lee or the Wayans Brothers. Please, I do not objectify Blacks in similar ways. I look at you as if you were me, me as if I were you. I've only got open arms, but my off-beat attitude must endure some ridicule. I do not believe this would have come from a Black guy who didn't hold skin colour up on some pedestal. Perhaps I myself am embarrassed because I thought I was writing to a guy.

"Miscegenation"? Are you a member of the Aryan Nations pretending to be an angry, Black woman? Are you a Black Panther or Farrakhan follower?

Who said my statements were originally just about conventional racial activism? I have my own ideas about interracial marriage. My cousin has about five kids from a few different Black guys, who have all left her alone to take care of the children. Even though this is a stereotype that happens to be real, I do not hate Black guys. I don't know how I would feel if a Black guy was with my sister, but it's also not really my decision and she is happy with a boyfriend anyways. It was about aesthetics in the first place; I find Blacks much more appealing than the Nazi barbarian choice of Asians. It is true, these so-called Aryans are infatuated by Asians. I'm turned off by it and know their supremacism is a sham. They only hate Jews and Blacks but no other race, for some reason I do not understand. I am contrary to them; I much believe in the worth of Blacks and Jews, even as ideal partners in comparison. I think that the White-Black-Jew relationship is the right one and it is even in the Bible; it is the natural one of the Mediterranean. Does not the Mediterranean world represent much of Western culture and history by default? We have Memphis, Rome, Athens, Alexandria, Philadelphia, Syracuse, Messina, Toledo and other Mediterranean placenames in the USA. We as Americans have never chosen Asian or Aboriginal names purposefully for towns. Whites have good reason to choose Memphis and Alexandria, as African names. While most Whites are proud of the Egyptian and Nubian heritages we hold, I wonder why you would be concerned with whatever White heritage Black Americans possess. If you don't like White Supremacists, there is no point being a Black version of them.

I consider Nubians to be my cousins, if not brothers. The darkness of their skin means less than their cultural worth to me and my ancestors, some of whom probably were Nubians.

Lord Loxley 20:12, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

You still don't get it, do you? I don't care whom you -- or any other white person, for that matter -- find more appealing (or objectionable). Besides, it's hardly news. White men have always had jungle fever. It is, in fact, how many of us got the color we are. It is only now that many are admitting it publicly.

Spike Lee? The Wayans brothers? If by that comment you mean that I have a perspective colored by my experience as an African-American, then you are absolutely correct.

Whites had little to nothing to do with dynastic Egypt -- at least not until Roman rule. That's just another ridiculous Eurocentric fantasy. Dynastic Egypt was an African (read "black") civilization.

I make no common cause with Arabs, who are, by and large, a despicable, hypocritical, racist lot; nor with brainwashed blacks who call themselves "Arabs" and prey on their own black cousins in the name of jihad. The same goes for those who deal death/dope in black communities and engage in gang violence. White supremacy is an ideology that must be opposed whether it is held by whites who victimize people of color, or whether it is internalized as self-loathing by people of color who victimize others like them. And religious zealotry is simply stupid. As an activist, I make common cause with whomever it is appropriate around issues; they are working relationships.

And it's got nothing to do with fear or anger. When it comes to natural affinities, again, I am a pan Africanist. My experience is that most white people are racist, consciously or unconsciously, and are so ignorant/obtuse/perverse, they try my patience. Generally, I choose other company. That's my preference, my prerogative, and I need not defend it to anyone -- and certainly not to you.

"Black supremacy"? You've jumped to another false conclusion.

With regard to Mexicans (and other Latinos), it is not your place to tell me who offends me; I am more than capable of determining that for myself. And I disagree. The Civil Rights Movement had everything to do with everyone seeking equal protection under the law and a life of safety, dignity and opportunity. It's easier to post here a few comments I made elsewhere regarding the immigration issue:

I view the current immigration debate here in the U.S. with great interest and some amusement. The real Moctezuma's revenge isn't the intestinal discomfort some gringos endure as a result of some unwise dietary decisions during a vacation jaunt south of the border. It's the fairly twitchy, almost apoplectic, frothing-at-the-mouth hissyfits of some über conservative members of Congress and people like the mayor of Hazelton, Pennsylvania [1] at the flood of undocumented workers entering the country.

New York mayor Michael Bloomberg knows the truth.[2] Latinos are critical to this nation's economy, holding a significant percentage of the jobs in the hospitality, agriculture, construction, meat processing and packing industries/sectors, among others, and the birth rate among Latinos is on the rise.

As a gross understatement, yes, Native Americans have been given a sucky deal, and they have a right to be pissed. But no doubt Chief Phil [Fontaine, National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations] derives some of the same perverse glee I do from the current state of affairs in the nation. The unvarnished truth is the U.S. can't live without illegal immigrants. And the real Moctezuma's revenge is the fact that they may speak Spanish instead of Zuni, or Siksika, or Choctaw, but Native Americans are takin' this muthafucka back.

deeceevoice 21:00, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't choose to be bitter and look for fights like this. I wonder how you would do around Quakers, which I am not but share some views with. You are defensive where I am ecumenical. So what is wrong with the truth being stated? Who is a hypocrite by doing so? What in the end, do you really seek from all this strife and racial posturing? You know, I do in fact think that Spike Lee is right on many things and the Wayanses are funny, but I do not enjoy the racial conflict that you are apparently looking for. Just so you know, I do in fact like "gangsta rap", but only in the "G Funk" style. I abhor the idea of a race war. So now, you don't want to see Egypt as having given a legacy to Europeans? I am supposed to disown certain ancestors of mine from the Sahara and Nile, as if they weren't there? I don't care if they were Black or White ancestors, slaves or masters. I'm just happy that Egypt existed and to have inherited their culture through whichever means. I think you should be just as proud of Roman ancestors in your own blood. What's the big deal? On the matter of Arabs and Jews, I wish for them to get along and for all of us Atlantic peoples to remember our positive connections instead of go down in history for separatist anarchy. I agree with you, that intraracial relationships are more important than interracial ones. My point was, that I prefer to spend my free time with Blacks at jazz concerts or rapping and Jews than Japanese video game freaks. I think you are rather a Black separatist, using supemacist rhetoric. With regards to the Indians, I think you are taking the stance that "my enemy's enemy is my friend". This is like a soap opera, with race and power mixed into it. I'm sorry, but all this drama is too much for me. I'm not looking for hate and spitefulness. But on the matter of the Indians, I think they deserve the entire West coast from Tierra del Fuego to the Bering Strait, while I believe it is within the White man's own best interest to promote Jewish and Black colonies on the Atlantic coast. I prefer your own happy company, than anything those other people have to offer. I'm just being honest and not relying on IQ tests that are biased to "East Asians". Why would you want a race war? All I'm talking about is advancing you to the level of success my own race has had. What's wrong with that? Would you rather kill me than take my freely offered friendship? You apparently aren't happy with diplomacy. I recognise your anger, but I do not want to be a victim any more than want to make you a victim. Peace. Lord Loxley 21:32, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

You've repreatedly tried to make this simple disagreement into something it's not with your over-the-top language, jumping to ridiculous conclusions and setting up strawmen: "strife and racial posturing," "kill[ing]," "black supremacy," "drama," "race war," "fear," "anger," "victim[ization]," "hate," "spitefulness," etc. Yeah, it's brought me a few chuckles, but it's grown tiresome/boring.

The fact is you wrote: "I think that our Mediterranean races should be the focus of social stratification in the Atlantic Americas," and, "Let the Pacific peoples handle their own thing." I very simply, very fundamentally disagree with the assumptions underpinning those two sentences. And I want nothing to do with a discussion about whom white people want to "bang," or whom you find physically attractive, or whose company you prefer. Again, what do I care?

And your "freely offered friendship"? I'm not certain I want anything to do with some white guy who steps to me seemingly pushing miscegenation (like it means a damned thing) and with crap like "Queen Latifah is far from ugly" and such thoroughly disrespectful language like "fat Black chicks." What? And I'm supposed to embrace you because you wouldn't mind "banging" Beyonce?

This is a joke -- right? Take a number and get in line.

LL, you may be a perfectly decent guy extending your hand in friendship. And that's great. I certainly bear you no ill will. But I think you need to take a step back and stop reading your own sturm und drang into this exchange and simply recognize a disagreement when you see one. Attempting to demonize me for my fundamental, general objection to black-white relationships and my pan-Africanism does nothing to strengthen your somewhat oddball, offbase and decidedly inappropriate comments, and I'm not fazed in the least. Peace back. deeceevoice 05:36, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know about my own strawmen, but it seems as if you misunderstand my points. I understand that I have come off the wrong way, because it was originally geared for a male response. I'm upset that there are Neonazi Aryanists who attack Africans, but want to drain their balls into Japanese women. The Axis Powers strike again. I am furthermore upset that White-owned and operated multinationals are relocating to Pacific countries and Mexico, while still draining the life out of Africa and ranking on African Americans here at home. This expansionist Eurasianism is not what my great-grandfather fought for in WWII when he fought the Japanese, or what my second cousin died for in Vietnam. I don't want my country turned into the Soviet Union; the Cold War was fought for a reason! The thing about the sexual and genetic relationships is this: Neonazis think that Greeks, Italians and Spaniards or other Mediterranean Europeans are inferior because of greater admixture with Semitic and African blood. I am totally opposed to this, especially because the Neonazis have adopted anti-European and anti-Christian rhetoric and symbolisms. They pride on some mythical Eurasian supremacy and glorify Attila the Hun and the Mongolian Genghis Khan, or Hindus, Buddhists and Shintos instead of Hannibal of Carthage, Ramesses the Great, Moses or Muhammad. I prefer to look to the wisdom of desert monks in Africa, than barbarian hordes trying to enslave Europeans. It is a fact that Asiatics introduced slavery (Greeks learned it from the Persians--Iranians) to Europe and it is a fact that the Catholic Church abolished slavery. It is truly insulting that Neonazis attack my heritage as a European who has no problem with darker complexion than they idolize, or my curly hair that I attribute to sub-Saharan African influences. I pride on civilisation and they pride on barbarism. I'm telling you that there are those Whites who would rather have you as a friend or even spouse, than associate themselves with others in their own race who willfully deface and defame the worth of being White. Remember, my language was originally steered for a male and not a female. Look, I never expected to get a feminist response, but I'm not looking to sexually harrass you either.

I'm not trying to demonize you, just be understood and understand you. I am a Euramericanist and think there is potential for Aframericanism too. Imagine South America being the colonial dominion of Africans, where it is a home away from home. Imagine all the Whites driven out to North America, or all the Whites in Africa driven back to Europe. Imagine Jews having security in the Middle East and colonies of their own in Central America, instead of having these be controlled by other peoples. I think it is our time to prove that the Atlantic races can take a stand for the Americas, because at least the Pacific peoples work together like the Poles did in standing against Communism. Why should you or I be opposed to one another, when we both want to enjoy our living out here away from the Old World? Why give it up and surrender to those other races, who can take care of themselves regardless? They might have been here first, but I am unwilling to give it all back. I'm only willing to return the Pacfic watershed up to the Rocky Mountain-Andes chain. Would you be equally upset with Japanese or Chinese companies extracting what they want from Africa and not giving anything in return? They do and have done it, but I see no complaints out of you. There are those Europeans who hate the thought of Jews or Arabs and Africans being accommodated in Europe, but I support your heritage as good and beneficial. I see Pakistanis and Indians, or Chinese to be out of place in Europe (especially a place like Britain). No amount of Naziism will force me to give up my belief that the African contribution to White heritage is well worth reciting to our children, of "pure or mixed" descent. I don't owe anything to Pacific peoples, nor do any of my ancestors. I do however, believe Africa and Africans are worth our friendship, love, time, energy and money. I am not intrigued by the exotic, but I am intrigued about African history as a common parallel to European history. Without your race, a lot of my culture would be lost or distorted and hollow. I'm telling you that you, or at least the symbolism of your heritage means quite a bit to me and my conception of my own future. I am just proposing the idea of alliances, at least geopolitically. Lord Loxley 06:35, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Now it's official. Honestly, I think you're thoroughly misguided. As one whose peoples have suffered occupation and colonization, I am opposed to such practices. I do not support Israel's occupation of Palestine; I am not a Zionist. I frankly do not think a Jewish state can have security in the Middle East, and whatever security it has comes at too great an expense. The establishment of Israel was just another huge, honking f*uck up on the part of the superpowers in the wake of WWII. Further, I would no more support colonies of Jews in South America than I support their settler colony in the Middle East, or than I support/ed white settler colonies in Zimbabwe or South Africa. What you propose is a shell game of oppression, simply shifting the injustices from one continent to another to suit your view of who is and who is not entitled to a life of sovereignty and self-determination in the land of their ancestors. I don't have an axe to grind against Japanese and Chinese -- except that their cultures are abysmally xenophobic and racist. And I do not accept that neither peoples have contributed anything to Western civilization. Hell, the contribution of both groups to this country alone have been important.

You have no business commenting at all on my posture (or involvement) regarding the past and ongoing rape of Africa -- by Europeans, Americans and Asians. You know nothing of me in that regard. (More off-target assumptions, presumptions.)

Nor is it your place to tell Pakistanis, or Indians, or Chinese, or Algerians [that's, of course, France] where they may or may not appropriately live. To my way of thinking, England pretty much invited all those black, brown and yellow folks in when it decided to stick its long, narrow, supercilious/white supremacist, white-man's-burden nose into these people's homelands to try to subjugate and exploit them and extend the reach of the British Crown. Payback's a bitch -- ain't it? And now that the chickens have come home to roost, Anglophiles are uncomfortable. Well, tough titties. They ain't goin' nowhere. I hope they take over the damned place. At least now it's possible to get a decent meal over there. :p

Your view of the world is fundamentally different from mine, your aims different from mine. Colonization will continue to go the way of the dinosaur as peoples become empowered and lift the foot of their oppressors from their backs and reclaim their birthrights as human beings, regardless of their race or ethnicity. Injustice is injustice -- whether it inures to the benefit of people you've decided to favor, for whatever reason, or not.

Colonization and repatriation? And you expect blacks drop our drawz and make "mulatto" babies and common cause with whites with such a twisted worldview as yours? To become what you are? ("If you lie down with dogs, you get fleas" -- indeed.) To betray the heritage of struggle and overcoming and values of tolerance and fundamental humanity and compassion bequeathed to us by our ancestors? Not on your life. And certainly not on the lives of our children. I wanna barf. Frankly, you -- and your worldview -- disgust me.

I'm done with this exchange. deeceevoice 07:36, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I think you are a totally one-sided communicator. You allege that I distort your vision, or that I tell you how to live. You are itching for somebody to attack or oppress you, so that you may complain. Nobody is looking to hold you down; I think you hold yourself down. This struggle is in your head and making you depressed. I should have smelled it a mile away, but who would have thought that your extremist emotions would be softened through a moderate contact by somebody not diametrically opposed to your background? You have asked for a new enemy, by declaring war against me and those considered socially to be collectively part of my heritage. I told you, I wasn't interested in making war, but making love. Now, who's panties are all twisted? You fizzled out from frustration in my appeals to diplomacy; you think revolution is fun and that it is always necessary. When will your thirst for violent revenge be sated? Why not dig up Karl Marx's bones and do some voodoo? You are the consumate angry Black woman stereotype. There, I thoroughly described your attitudes, IMHO. Aww, shit...hah! Lord Loxley 09:26, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

(sigh) Should have read some of the comments on your user and talk page before even bothering to respond the first time -- because I wouldn't have.

"This strugle is in your head and making you depressed." ""...you hold yourself down." "When will your thirst for violent revenge be sated?" "Why not ... do some voodoo?" "You are the consumate [sic] angry black woman." More silly assumptions, hasty conclusions, more strawmen. And then, unable to deal with disgreement, you fall back on racist stereotypes. How (stereo?)typical! Then, "You have asked for a new enemy, by declaring war against me...." "Now, who's [sic] panties are all twisted?" Uh, gee, LL. From where I sit, it looks like yours! :p deeceevoice 10:15, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

AOL auotblocks damnit. you should know better

List of Current Autoblocks

--152.163.100.74 22:08, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

C. Parkhurst

Not that I am aware of. --Sparkhurst 16:16, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Thomas Jefferson

For the "Criticisms of Thomas Jefferson" section, do you have another set of external links to the two sources? Neither of them seem to be wroking and I'd like to read them. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 20:41, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Never mind, I just found the problem, there was a period between the http// and the www. So it read http//.www Fixed now. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 15:21, 19 July 2006 (UTC)