I really appreciated and say thank you for Keep up the great work online

http://krtar.info/porn-001.html

G’night

Looks good! Very useful, good stuff. Good resources here. Thanks much!

Bye

You keep saying that, but you never even attempt to explain yourself.

I think if you actually had an explanation, you would have given it by now.

——————————-

“You have incorrectly assumed that I am a racist, and you have put me in the uncomfortable position of proving I am not.” Posted by: Frank | Jun 27, 2007 2:59:44 PM

Sombody doth protest a wee bit too much.

Take a chill pill Frankie…do something constructive—go make a new friend or something.

Really? It was about black people attacking other black people for acting white. That’s a lot of race in a post not about race. Since your very first premise is a lie, I see little reason to trust the rest of the crap you spew.

However…

“My comment referred to the fact that the increasing number of homeless families was going to lead to a generation of “near feral” children (or so I predicted) [which has the same meaning as "the inverted-pyramid hierarchy of values stemming from the glorification of lower-class reality in the hip-hop era"] which we see today.”

1.) You predicted that there would be a lot of near-feral kids.

2.) In a discussion on black youths, you said it came true, that we have a lot of near-feral kids.

3.) If you weren’t referring to the black youths, then who the fuck were you referring to?

4.) In addition, near-feral has nothing to do with inverted value systems. To think so is retarded.

5.) In order to full appreciated that last sentence you must to say it with a Boston accent.

Can’t you ever surprise me by being reasonable?

Oliver’s post was not about “race”, per se, any more than my comment was about homelessness.

(You do realize that I am explaining this to you for two reasons:
1) You have incorrectly assumed that I am a racist, and you have put me in the uncomfortable position of proving I am not.
2) Because you totally misunderstood the meaning and significance of my post, and lack either the grace or the courage to simply state, “I don’t know what you mean. Could you explain it, please”.

I know, in your view, I am not entitled to that courtesy. Of course, in my view, I am.)

I will not withhold the answer because you are not entitled to it. I will answer it, to prove that you are both incorrect and immature.

The post was about “acting white”, referring to the peer pressure on blacks by blacks to not succeed, i.e, not do well in school, do drugs, etc., because that’s “acting white.”

I quote from the link:

the inverted-pyramid hierarchy of values stemming from the glorification of lower-class reality in the hip-hop era — has quietly taken the place of white racism as the most formidable obstacle to success and equality in the black middle classes.

My comment referred to the fact that the increasing number of homeless families was going to lead to a generation of “near feral” children (or so I predicted) [which has the same meaning as "the inverted-pyramid hierarchy of values stemming from the glorification of lower-class reality in the hip-hop era"] which we see today.

So, the comment was completely relevant, and in no way indicates any racism on my part. How could it? I’m not the racist. You are.

Apology accepted. Even for being so politically incorrect as to call anyone retarded.

So you refuse to answer because you don’t want to be accused of breaking your vow to ignore us, then you reply two more times. Mental retardation does seem to be a likely reason for your behavior.

By the way, he wasn’t changing the subject; the discussion was evolving.

If person A says, “Blah, Blah, Blah.”

And person B says, “Yadda, Yadda, Yadda.”

Person A will obviously say something different than, “Blah, Blah, Blah.”

Sorry.

Sorry, no can do.

Translation: “I’m too stupid to keep track of two arguements at once.”

I’m talking about a related point, let’s follow the steps:

1. I pointed out that you called black people “feral”.

2. You claim that you were only calling homeless people “feral”.

3. I point out that homelessness was never part of that previous discussion, and I theorized reasons why you would make that claim.

Apparantly, in Frankie-World, making new arguements is “changing the subject”. *Pats Frankie on the head* you go on believing that.

I do believe you are correct.

Reading the whole thread. it is impossible to conclude race was not an issue when he used the term feral. The discussion was about blacks and he did say, “predicted that we were about to have a generation of near feral children, and now we do.”

If the subject had been homelessness, or homelessness among black families, then you would have a case.

If even said, “And I used the term “near feral”, didn’t I?” That would further indicate he was talking about blacks when he used the term.

You brought up the idea that I had said “Black people were feral.”

I did not.

Now you want to argue another point.

Sorry, no can do.

Game over.

You lose.

Here you go

It was the prejudice of the readers which led them to believe that I was talking about black families, as if only black mothers are single and homeless.

No, it was the fact that Oliver’s post was about race that would lead one to assume that you too were talking about race. But Frank either brought up the homeless angle for one of two reasons:

1. As a cover of plausable deniability.
2. Because he doesn’t give a shit of what the topic at hand is and thinks he owns the discussion.

But,perhaps you have never found it. I will sum it up. I wrote a paper on homeless families in the early 90’s, where I predicted that if the situation continued, we woyld soon have a generation of feral children.

It was the prejudice of the readers which led them to believe that I was talking about black families, as if only black mothers are single and homeless.

What we see is that most of the people here are racists, who believe that black people need special consideration just to get along normally in life.

That didn’t happen.