Today Im ashamed of being white in America Cultures and Education Forward to friends

  • View author's info Posted on Mar 18, 2006 at 02:40 PM


    I, however, claim only those that think like me. They are of various races and colors.

    You should be ashamed of the traits of your kind, namely racial discrimination. Racists have a tendency to look over the faults of their people, but see the faults of others. If you do the same thing that another does to you, you don't have a complaint. So, roll in it and learn to live with it.

    You do unto others what others have done unto you. Before doing so, you should ask yourself, "Is this the way of peace?"

    Or, maybe peace is not your objective. If so, is that the way of Allah? Does Allah say, "Practice revenge".

    There is a difference in righting a wrong and revenge. Revenge increases a negative effect versus solving and preventing a problem.
  • View author's info Posted on Mar 17, 2006 at 04:20 PM


    Beanpie, I am so glad that you agree that Shameless1 should be ashamed of her race. You see, utilizing your own wisdom, it shows that you should be ashamed of your race for the things that they do and have done. You go, Beanpie!

    It sounds like you may have stuck your foot in your own mouth.
  • View author's info Posted on Feb 21, 2006 at 02:17 PM


    My only point is:

    "You are classified by how those of influence see you and your ability to negotiate the difference. "


    Could one join your denomination as an atheist and remain an atheist, if they acted pleasantly towards you?
  • View author's info Posted on Feb 20, 2006 at 09:13 AM


    You are pointless beanpie, you just showed that the power of judgment resides in how the most influential sees you. Remember, you said, "They returned only to be treated worse than a stepchild". They could not change how others perceived them. They were forced to accept their unwanted position in life, which was one of a lower class. They desired, not to be white or any other race, but to be respected as an individual.

    If we choose those, who will accept us; then, the power still rests amongst the most influential of that group. If one day that group decides to reject us and we cannot change their minds, we will have the same situation: rejection.
  • View author's info Posted on Jan 16, 2006 at 02:04 PM


    beanpie write:
    "Midlove you're missing his point that he's part white and refuses to acknowledge it. He spews his anti-white semitism in order to appear wholly black in his mind. Self hate is such a sad state of mind. "

    Almost all people of African descent, in America, have "white" ancestors. Instead of being termed "Black", should they be called "partially Black"? LOL!

    The point is, it's not what you and I "think" but, what/who a person "chooses" to identify with.

    FYI "semitism" refers to language NOT race. LOL!...



    The American Heritage? Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.

    Semite

    SYLLABICATION: Sem?ite
    PRONUNCIATION: smt
    NOUN: 1. A member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews, and Phoenicians.


    .


    1 entry found for anti-Semitism.
    Main Entry: racial discrimination
    Part of Speech: noun
    Definition: prejudice based on race
    Synonyms: Anti-Semitism, race discrimination, race prejudice, race snobbery, racialism, racism
    Source: Roget's New Millennium? Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.1.1)
    Copyright ? 2006 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved.

    Apparently your "version" is not the only version, as usual.
  • View author's info Posted on Jan 15, 2006 at 10:28 AM


    MIDLOVE write:

    Can you show us that this is reality?



    Beanpie write:

    That what is?



    Beanpie write:

    I believe it is a CHOICE as to which you identify with or, you may CHOOSE to identify w/both or, neither.

    The CHOICE is yours.





    I don't know how you missed all this, but look below and explain your answer for us; so, we can see that you gave us a logical answer. Show me how I could have come across as white.




    Midlove wrote:

    There must be something to learn from you; Therefore, I've got some questions.

    Can you show us that this is reality?

    There are many families that will not accept a mixed child into their family; because, it is classified as black.

    My grandfather is white, but I cannot state that I am white on my driver's license, as black as I am.

    A long time ago, I walked in a bar and no one knew me. Everybody stopped and looked at me. I mean, the servers quit serving. Everybody froze and I was with a white guy. Beanpie, why was I classified as black and unclean without saying a word? Do you think they would have accepted me, if I said, "I am white"?

    I can't believe that you made such an unintelligent statement. But, I hope that you prove me wrong, for my sake and everybody else's.

    Maybe all the black prisoners can claim to be white; so that, they might have a better chance of getting a job and staying out of trouble.

    Please help us, beanpie.
  • View author's info Posted on Jan 11, 2006 at 01:59 PM


    MIDLOVE write:


    There must be something to learn from you; Therefore, I've got some questions.

    Can you show us that this is reality?

    There are many families that will not accept a mixed child into their family; because, it is classified as black.

    My grandfather is white, but I cannot state that I am white on my driver's license, as black as I am.

    A long time ago, I walked in a bar and no one knew me. Everybody stopped and looked at me. I mean, the servers quit serving. Everybody froze and I was with a white guy. Beanpie, why was I classified as black and unclean without saying a word? Do you think they would have accepted me, if I said, "I am white"?

    I can't believe that you made such an unintelligent statement. But, I hope that you prove me wrong, for my sake and everybody else's.

    Maybe all the black prisoners can claim to be white; so that, they might have a better chance of getting a job and staying out of trouble.

    Please help us, beanpie.


    Midlove you're missing his point that he's part white and refuses to acknowledge it. He spews his anti-white semitism in order to appear wholly black in his mind. Self hate is such a sad state of mind.
  • View author's info Posted on Jan 09, 2006 at 04:36 PM


    beanpie write:

    I believe it is a CHOICE as to which you identify with or, you may CHOOSE to identify w/both or, neither.

    The CHOICE is yours.

    .



    There must be something to learn from you; Therefore, I've got some questions.

    Can you show us that this is reality?

    There are many families that will not accept a mixed child into their family; because, it is classified as black.

    My grandfather is white, but I cannot state that I am white on my driver's license, as black as I am.

    A long time ago, I walked in a bar and no one knew me. Everybody stopped and looked at me. I mean, the servers quit serving. Everybody froze and I was with a white guy. Beanpie, why was I classified as black and unclean without saying a word? Do you think they would have accepted me, if I said, "I am white"?

    I can't believe that you made such an unintelligent statement. But, I hope that you prove me wrong, for my sake and everybody else's.

    Maybe all the black prisoners can claim to be white; so that, they might have a better chance of getting a job and staying out of trouble.

    Please help us, beanpie.
  • View author's info Posted on Jan 08, 2006 at 08:35 AM


    MIDLOVE write:
    Salsassin write:

    "LOL my race? I am mixed. I am of the human race."


    You are classified by how those of influence see you and your ability to negotiate the difference.

    So true...It would be nice if All people respected our "self- classifications", but that is rarely the case.
  • View author's info Posted on Jan 07, 2006 at 01:35 PM


    Salsassin write:

    "LOL my race? I am mixed. I am of the human race."


    You are classified by how those of influence see you and your ability to negotiate the difference.
  • View author's info Posted on Jan 04, 2006 at 03:26 AM


    Salsassin write:

    LOL my race? I am mixed. I am of the human race.
  • View author's info Posted on Jan 03, 2006 at 02:29 PM


    MIDLOVE write:


    I can't recall the name of the book; but, I read a portion of a book on business management and it talked about races becoming equally represented in the future. To many, that sounds like good news; but, it isn't. It means that the same mentality is going to be carried out; except, your own race will be more involved. In such a case, you won't have the fortune of claiming racism, which is becoming increasingly difficult to prove.


    LOL my race? I am mixed. I am of the human race.
  • View author's info Posted on Jan 03, 2006 at 02:28 PM


    beanpie write:
    The Willie lynch letter is a urban legend as well.



    Sir, you are free to, believe as you will or, may.

    .

    don't have to believe. the facts speak for themselves.

    The writer of this speech has made hardly any attempt to use the writing/speech style of the early 18th century.

    The author was not at all successful at steering clear of very specific anachronisms. We'll name only the most glaring word-choice errors: fool-proof, used in the speech, actually dates from only 1902. The noun program is not used in the sense found in this speech until the 1830s. Self-refueling is an utter anachronism, as the term refueling did not arise until the early 20th century. Use of installed when referring to something other than a person did not first occur until the mid-19th century. Moreover, attitude did not refer to anything other than a physical position until the mid-19th century.

    A speaker would hardly need to so carefully identify the date and place of his speech, nor would he be likely to refer to King James as "our illustrious King, whose version of the Bible we cherish", unless he were a person of the 1990s making a clumsy attempt at writing a fake speech from the early 18th century. We cannot imagine why the writer introduces the theme of "James... our illustrious king" unless it is merely to emphasize that this took place in colonial times. Only someone creating a fake would need to try to establish a date for the speech within the fake itself. And, by the way, James was long-dead by 1712, the monarch of that era being Queen Anne.

    There is no evidence that a William Lynch from a "modest plantation" in the West Indies ever existed. There is, however, plenty of evidence for the existence of Captain William Lynch of Pittsylvania, Virginia, whom we have identified as the probable source of the verb lynch, and who was born fifty years after the date given in the speech above.

    I think it is rather odd for a speaker, even in 1712, to go to such lengths to locate the speech in time and space. The hearers of a speech would have no need for such a preamble: they are there and then, and it is not so clear that this was being spoken for a later printing. It is, however, useful to encourage a later reader to place the speech in a time and place, and the florid style fits a contemporary, though usually false, expectation for florid speech by speakers of the time.

    "The bank of the James River," is too generic. If the speaker was making the reference as a matter of courtesy, it is unusual -- indeed it would have been rude -- not to thank the specific hosts: why on the banks of the River, and no reference to a planter at whose landing or house such a speech must have been given? This omission gives rise to another problem: why a speech on such a topic, and given by someone ostensibly imported by ship for the purpose of giving it, would be given to an open riverside assembly, and not in a house or meeting room. It is unlikely that a planter or planters would underwrite the passage of a speaker from the Indies and not have arranged a suitable place for invitees to hear such a speech without fear of being overheard by the lower classes.

    There is utterly no reason for anyone arriving in Virginia to have thought of a single thing, "As our boat sailed south on the James River". The James River flows north, not south, from Hampton Roads. The only way he would travel south on it is after having given the speech and not before. While such a reference would have been impossible for someone on the banks of the river, it does reinforce, to the modern reader challenged by geography that the speaker is in the South.

    In paragraph 6, the author writes that "distrust is stronger than trust," yet only 5 sentences later, contradicts himself, saying, "it is necessary that your slaves trust and depend on us." Such a big contradiction would be expected from someone whose audience is listening intently for detailed information about specific steps in maintaining its livelihood through better control of his property. Why the switch in subjects from 3rd to 2nd person? Why not mention at least 2 or 3 methods of using dark-skinned slaves against light-skinned ones, and vice versa? Contradiction and lack of detail make me leery of any claims that this "speech" is not a hoax.

    Considering the limited number of extant sources from 18th century, if this speech had been ?discovered? it would?ve been the subject of incessant historical panels, scholarly articles and debates. It would literally be a career-making find. But the letter was never ?discovered,? but rather it ?appeared? ? bypassing the official historical circuits and making its way via internet directly into the canon of American racial conspiratoria.

    In the first paragraph, he promises that ?Ancient Rome would envy us if my program is implemented,? but the word ?program? did not enter the English language with this connotation until 1837 ? at the time of this speech it was used to reference a written notice for theater events.

    Two paragraphs later he says that he will ?give an outline of action,? for slave-holders; the word ?out-line? had appeared only 50 years earlier and was an artistic term meaning a sketch ? it didn?t convey it?s present meaning until 1759.

    Even more damning is his use of the terms ?indoctrination? and ?self-refueling? in the next sentence. The first word didn?t carry it current connotation until 1832; the second didn?t even enter the language until 1811 -- a century after the purported date of Lynch?s speech. More obviously, Lynch uses the word ?Black,? with an upper-case ?B? to describe African Americans more than two centuries before the word came to be applied as a common ethnic identifier.

    It was actually created in 1993 as a chain letter which spread like a bad disease throughout Black America. Research indicates that it was "loosely adapted" (to put it nicely) from a section of Anatoli Vinogradov's fictional 1935 novel "The Black Consul" that dealt with Napoleon's supposed plans to divide and conquer the Haitians during the Haitian revolution.
  • View author's info Posted on Jan 03, 2006 at 02:11 PM


    beanpie write:
    Sir, is the followiing a "myth" as well?...

    This is where individuals would "pic" a Black person to lynch and make this into a family gathering. There would be music and a "picnic."

    yes that is a myth as well.


    lynchings did occur and at such occasion they would act stupid an festive, but they did not lynch people just to be festive.
  • View author's info Posted on Jan 03, 2006 at 02:09 PM


    beanpie write:
    Are not the "imperialists" Caucasian?
    Were they born in the Caucasus mountains?
  • View author's info Posted on Dec 30, 2005 at 12:24 PM


    MIDLOVE write:

    Are you saying digging up someone's past and throwing it at them to put them down is moral versus solving the problem?
  • View author's info Posted on Dec 29, 2005 at 03:04 PM


    MIDLOVE write:



    Are you saying digging up someone's past and throwing it at them to put them down is moral versus solving the problem?


    don't forget half truths are not THE WHOLE TRUTH. Beanpie is the biggest part of his own problem. You're still partially white Beanpie through and through. YOUR PEOPLE HAD SLAVES.
  • View author's info Posted on Dec 29, 2005 at 02:54 PM


    beanpie write:
    If so, how?

    by stating that which is truthful.



    Are you saying digging up someone's past and throwing it at them to put them down is moral versus solving the problem?
  • View author's info Posted on Dec 29, 2005 at 01:32 PM


    beanpie write:
    If so, how?
    by stating that which is truthful.
    >>>>mr BEANPIE sir the GREATEST LIE is the teaching that JESUS is NOT the SON OF GOD that is THE GREAT LIE sir,and you sir are GUILTY of that LIE..BRIAN
  • View author's info Posted on Dec 27, 2005 at 04:13 PM


    Since you say that the Ausarian religion taught the same principles presented by Jesus, which taught how to live peacefully, would you say that you practice these principles in these forums and throughout your life?

    If not, why?

    If so, how?
Follow - email me when people comment