Supremecist group to march in Jena, La. - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
User avatar
By Potemkin
#1424231
MLK was far more radical than people give him credit for. I think he would certainly have supported Jesse Jackson, even to this day. If anything, Jackson is less radical in his politics than MLK was.
By Zyx
#1424332
RancidWannaRiot wrote:You're a child.


:lol: on the sarcasm scale.

But seriously, you made a totally O'Reilly comment there.

"as disgusted as i am... they do have the right to "protest""

I would think a better comment to be "I am utterly disgusted and find this an abuse of the intentions of the founding adults."

Instead you were like "I don't like it, but I'll accept it." No reason, no nothing . . .

At least explain your level of disgusts or so . . . rather than conceding defeat . . . it's so . . . weak.
User avatar
By Brutus
#1424347
Quote:
Rancid . . . you are SOOO full of yourself.

The whole of us know that they have a "right."

You adding that just goes to show how much you approve . . . though you will likely say you do not.

Rancid, if I took a snapshot of these people, would I see you in the picture?


wow...you really are a jackass huh? My post shows how much i approve? WTF?

Yes kumatto.. you hit it on the head..

I wholly support a WHITE supremacist group that would love nothing more than to send my Hispanic ass back to the Caribbean.. Roll eyes (I would use the S-word instead of Hispanic, but you get the point)

in fact, they would probably lynch me on sight as they would probably think I'm just another dirty n-word... since you know, we all look the same to them. I completely support that. yes sir!


in fact.. I'm going to join my local KKK chapter! Maybe i can break the color barrier in the KKK... Roll eyes

hell, while I'm at it, I'll give the Aryan brother hood a call and see if they'll induct me, maybe i can become chair of their "keep them blacks, hispanics, and asians out of the USA" committee ... Roll eyes

Bravo Kumatto, Bravo

please do so and continue to make a complete ass out of yourself. It makes for great entertainment. Don't expect me to reply to any more of your asinine comments.

You're a child.



I haven't seen an ownage that hard since Paris 1940.
By Zyx
#1424372
Brutus wrote:I haven't seen an ownage that hard since Paris 1940.


May I remind you that Paris won the war?

And yes, my wit is infinite.
User avatar
By Brutus
#1424376
If by win you mean run away when the Nazi's a-coming, then yes, they fucking rocked at winning.

Your such a party pooper.
By Zyx
#1424386
We are talking about WWII?

And we are talking about a world with France and not Nazi Germany?
User avatar
By Brutus
#1424400
And we are talking about a world with France and not Nazi Germany?


Don't understand, what? But what I do understand is this:

I say: How many Frenchmen does it take to defend Paris?

You say: Uhhh I dunno. I'm an ignorant person in need of enlightening you super cool smart guy.

I say: No one knows, they've never tried!
By Zyx
#1424404
Brutus wrote:Don't understand, what? But what I do understand is this:


The WAR was WWII, and the Victor of WWII was France.

Hence the Security Council in the UN.

That is, the Nazi's won the battle but lost the war. Get it now?
User avatar
By Brutus
#1424406
France won on fleet little legs. When the Americans came (We're so awesome) that's when they won. More like they didn't do so much (not their fault for not being as awesome as us).

On the other hand, Charles DeGaulle is a rudimentary beast.

And you completely ignored my great joke. :*(
User avatar
By Nets
#1424420
France didn't win, The UK, USSR and USA won and threw France a bone and let them sit at the big-boys table as a full-fledged ally at the end of the war. Seriously France held out for about 45 days.....hell the Warsaw Ghetto held out for only 10 days less. Pretty weak.
User avatar
By KurtFF8
#1424459
MLK was far more radical than people give him credit for. I think he would certainly have supported Jesse Jackson, even to this day. If anything, Jackson is less radical in his politics than MLK was.


Absolutely. MLK started to talk about economic inequalities and was going to take that on next, but then was assassinated of course.
User avatar
By Goranhammer
#1424543
Lets have a communist minorities march


You can't. Curfew laws would halt it.

As far as this, I don't think much of it. I see them doing it more now as quid pro quo than anything. Let's face it: the black lobby right now is fucking annoying. Don Imus. The golf skirt. These fucking people can't pick their battles anymore.

So if these douchebags want to fight fire with fire and throw their ignorant march on the mountain of shit involved, I say go ahead. Right now, both race movements are just blowing far too much hot air. They both need to simmer down.

But until that happens, I can enjoy pointing and laughing at them both.
User avatar
By Rancid
#1424813
Absolutely. MLK started to talk about economic inequalities and was going to take that on next, but then was assassinated of course.


I wrote a research paper on MLK and Malcom X, i don't ever recall coming across much info on MLK's thoughts on economic inequality so i can't comment much on that.
User avatar
By Potemkin
#1424894
I wrote a research paper on MLK and Malcom X, i don't ever recall coming across much info on MLK's thoughts on economic inequality so i can't comment much on that.

There's a reason for that. After his assassination, once he was safely dead, MLK was adopted by the establishment as the 'acceptable face' of the Civil Rights movement. This meant reinventing him, erasing his political radicalism from the history books.

Read this.
By Zyx
#1424914
Brutus wrote:More like they didn't do so much (not their fault for not being as awesome as us).


Wrong, I think around 90% of the bullets fired for the allies side were from France . . . if not 90 then at least the majority.

Americans barely fought.

Ibid. wrote:And you completely ignored my great joke.


No, I stressing the battle and war difference, that is someone can win a battle but lose a war . . . like Nazis.

NetsNJFan87 wrote:France didn't win, The UK, USSR and USA won and threw France a bone and let them sit at the big-boys table as a full-fledged ally at the end of the war.


Again, France was the largest force in taking down the Nazis.

Ever look at the data that says that the US had the lowest casualties. It is not because Americans can dodge bullets, though we can, but because we barely fought.

Ibid. wrote:Seriously France held out for about 45 days.


Stupid statement. France could have taken down Hitler from the get go, BUT England's appeasement prevented France from doing so. By the time that Hitler attacked France, Germany was already in France [the Rhineland.]

France did not fight, because England fucked up, not because it was weak.

It'd be like the police allowing a male man slayer to dorm in your adjacent room; when the bloke attacks, are you going to fight him or say "fuck the police" and live with him.

I would fight the bloke if he were outside of my house, but I lost the advantage when he is not.
User avatar
By Oxymoron
#1424930
Again, France was the largest force in taking down the Nazis



:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Thanks I needed that.
User avatar
By Lightman
#1424932
Wrong, I think around 90% of the bullets fired for the allies side were from France . . . if not 90 then at least the majority.

Americans barely fought.
The idiocy of your posts knows no bounds. You may wish to reinvent history, but history does not bend to your will.

According to wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties ) France suffered 212,000 military deaths. The United States suffered 416,800 military casualties, nearly twice that country. Admittedly, that civilian population of France lost more than the United States, but then again, much of WW2 was fought in France.

The UK also lost 382,600 soldiers, China lost a full 3,800,000 (obviously a different front, but still they were allies) and the Soviets "win" with 10,700,000 dead.

The Soviet Union lost over 13% of its population in WW2. In total, 72,289,600 military men and civilians lost their lives in World War 2, with the Soviets accounting for more than 23 million of that.
User avatar
By Rancid
#1424958
Wrong, I think around 90% of the bullets fired for the allies side were from France . . . if not 90 then at least the majority.


the bullets were French.. but who fired the guns?
Last edited by Rancid on 13 Jan 2008 23:59, edited 1 time in total.
Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Friedrich Engels once said, “All that exists dese[…]

This is too verbose to excuse thinking teaching ho[…]

Let me guess, those were Hamas fighters like the o[…]

@FiveofSwords What a professor of biological […]