An English man in Skypeland claimed that Americans are arrogant because cocaine makes them arrogant. He said that there are currently kilograms of cocaine in the White House, and anyone who says otherwise is a "fucking idiot". He said that South America is in complete control of North America for this reason....
He blamed all the world's drug problems on the USA as well. Interesting theory, considering who was the main driving force behind the Chinese Opium Wars.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
The important thing is...
One can hear people with strange political agendas in Skypeland sometimes. A Muslim was asking about the UN and the decision by the US to go to Iraq. I started to explain, and the Muslim claimed that the United Nations is not fair since the United States has not thrown Israel off of Palestinian lands (???). He refused to talk about Iraq and wanted to talk about the Palestinians.
The Muslim was then asked why he said that the land of Israel was all stolen Palestinian land. He said he knew it from history. He was asked who was the first King of Jerusalem and other questions. He did not know who Solomon was, or King David, or the Arab historian Josephus who wrote an extensive history of the Jews about 2000 years ago, or who the Babylonians were. He thought the first king of Jerusalem was Suleyman (who ruled from 1520-1566 AD). He did not know UN Resolution 181 and its terms. As we asked him question after question, he revealed that he knew nothing at all. At being confronted with this, he wanted to talk about something else, saying, "Go away from the subject." A bit uncomfortable for him to be shown to be an ignoramus, I guess.
He decided he did not want to talk about the Palestinians and accused us of lying, so he brought up the situation with the American indigenous peoples. I explained the story as I understood it, describing the European exploitation of the natives in the Americas, and the migration of peoples all over the world for millenia. Then the Muslim and some others started to complain about the Palestinians again, stating that "This is a North American problem". Huh?
He then made the claim that Abraham is not the father of the Jews. It even states this in the Koran, so we were astounded...Wow.
The Muslim was then asked why he said that the land of Israel was all stolen Palestinian land. He said he knew it from history. He was asked who was the first King of Jerusalem and other questions. He did not know who Solomon was, or King David, or the Arab historian Josephus who wrote an extensive history of the Jews about 2000 years ago, or who the Babylonians were. He thought the first king of Jerusalem was Suleyman (who ruled from 1520-1566 AD). He did not know UN Resolution 181 and its terms. As we asked him question after question, he revealed that he knew nothing at all. At being confronted with this, he wanted to talk about something else, saying, "Go away from the subject." A bit uncomfortable for him to be shown to be an ignoramus, I guess.
He decided he did not want to talk about the Palestinians and accused us of lying, so he brought up the situation with the American indigenous peoples. I explained the story as I understood it, describing the European exploitation of the natives in the Americas, and the migration of peoples all over the world for millenia. Then the Muslim and some others started to complain about the Palestinians again, stating that "This is a North American problem". Huh?
He then made the claim that Abraham is not the father of the Jews. It even states this in the Koran, so we were astounded...Wow.
Ugly Americans
Sometimes Americans are their own worst enemies in Skypeland. This includes both the left wing Americans, and the far right wing Americans. Both think nothing of misrepresenting the situation and ignoring facts and data. And both of them do harm, in the end.
For example some right wingers rant and rave about how they want nonEuropeans out of the US. Some claim that all Muslims are terrorists. Some state belligerently that the US should take over the Middle East and suck all its oil out with no payment. Some state that Islam is an evil religion. Some say that soccer is a game for pussies. Some state the United States is the best country in all aspects and has no faults. Some state that the US went to Iraq to steal their oil and they don't care and are proud of it. None of these sorts of statements from certain elements on the American right are true, or particularly helpful.
Left wing Americans are not much better, with all their talk of 9/11 conspiracy theories and claims that the US is an evil empire. These sort of crazy opinions are accepted as acknowledged truth by Muslims and Europeans and others who hate the US...
And neither the extreme left or the extreme right are very helpful in presenting a true and fair image of the United States, as far as I am concerned.
For example some right wingers rant and rave about how they want nonEuropeans out of the US. Some claim that all Muslims are terrorists. Some state belligerently that the US should take over the Middle East and suck all its oil out with no payment. Some state that Islam is an evil religion. Some say that soccer is a game for pussies. Some state the United States is the best country in all aspects and has no faults. Some state that the US went to Iraq to steal their oil and they don't care and are proud of it. None of these sorts of statements from certain elements on the American right are true, or particularly helpful.
Left wing Americans are not much better, with all their talk of 9/11 conspiracy theories and claims that the US is an evil empire. These sort of crazy opinions are accepted as acknowledged truth by Muslims and Europeans and others who hate the US...
And neither the extreme left or the extreme right are very helpful in presenting a true and fair image of the United States, as far as I am concerned.
The evil news outlets
One of the more unbalanced individuals who visits Skypeland claimed that the news media are all biased since they give only soundbites, and not the full speeches or complete coverage of certain events. I have pointed out to him repeatedly that commercial news outlets have to do what sells. He has maintained that this is a sign of an evil bias that exists in the media and a conspiracy.
We showed him that he could get the full versions of UN speeches etc by visiting the United Nations or CSPAN or several other outlets, and he complained that this was unfair since there were no links on the commercial news websites to their competitors, or to the full text of speeches, or complete coverage. We pointed out that these commercial entities are under no obligation to provide links to their competitors or to host a huge amount of content for free on their websites. He argued and argued and argued about this like a madman (which might not be too far from the truth...)
Interesting, he does not trust the governments, and in fact hates them, but advocates letting them control all news. Oh brother...
We showed him that he could get the full versions of UN speeches etc by visiting the United Nations or CSPAN or several other outlets, and he complained that this was unfair since there were no links on the commercial news websites to their competitors, or to the full text of speeches, or complete coverage. We pointed out that these commercial entities are under no obligation to provide links to their competitors or to host a huge amount of content for free on their websites. He argued and argued and argued about this like a madman (which might not be too far from the truth...)
Interesting, he does not trust the governments, and in fact hates them, but advocates letting them control all news. Oh brother...
Random calls
Sometimes in Skypeland, one gets random calls. I usually do not answer them, but in this instance I decided to find out what the person wanted.
I was called repeatedly and tried to send him instant messages instead, at the start:
[1:04:21 PM] PP says: hello?
[1:05:07 PM] الشــــــــــاطـر says: I need you plees
[1:05:16 PM] PP says: ?
[1:05:17 PM] الشــــــــــاطـر says: take me plees naw
[1:05:32 PM] PP says: huh?
[1:05:36 PM] PP says: what are you talking about
[1:05:46 PM] الشــــــــــاطـر says: take me plees naw
[1:05:50 PM] الشــــــــــاطـر says: take me plees naw
[1:05:53 PM] الشــــــــــاطـر says: take me plees naw
[1:05:59 PM] PP says: you do not speak english?
[1:06:09 PM] الشــــــــــاطـر says: ;(;(;(
[1:06:14 PM] الشــــــــــاطـر says: no
[1:06:28 PM] PP says: i only speak English
[1:06:30 PM] PP says: I am sorry
[1:06:47 PM] الشــــــــــاطـر says: speak English
Finally, I answered the call. I asked if this person spoke English. He said he did, and was a teacher in Egypt. He asked what my name was. I told him (it was in my profile already). He asked where I was from. As soon as he heard I was in the United States, which was in my profile already, he apologized and hung up. Hmm...
I was called repeatedly and tried to send him instant messages instead, at the start:
[1:04:21 PM] PP says: hello?
[1:05:07 PM] الشــــــــــاطـر says: I need you plees
[1:05:16 PM] PP says: ?
[1:05:17 PM] الشــــــــــاطـر says: take me plees naw
[1:05:32 PM] PP says: huh?
[1:05:36 PM] PP says: what are you talking about
[1:05:46 PM] الشــــــــــاطـر says: take me plees naw
[1:05:50 PM] الشــــــــــاطـر says: take me plees naw
[1:05:53 PM] الشــــــــــاطـر says: take me plees naw
[1:05:59 PM] PP says: you do not speak english?
[1:06:09 PM] الشــــــــــاطـر says: ;(;(;(
[1:06:14 PM] الشــــــــــاطـر says: no
[1:06:28 PM] PP says: i only speak English
[1:06:30 PM] PP says: I am sorry
[1:06:47 PM] الشــــــــــاطـر says: speak English
Finally, I answered the call. I asked if this person spoke English. He said he did, and was a teacher in Egypt. He asked what my name was. I told him (it was in my profile already). He asked where I was from. As soon as he heard I was in the United States, which was in my profile already, he apologized and hung up. Hmm...
Palestine has no television
One Arab visitor to Skypeland claimed to us that there are no Palestinian television stations or programs. Someone from Israel was talking about the children's television shows on the Palestinian television station, and the Arab visitor claimed that this was a lie, since there were no Palestinian television stations.
This amazing claim can easily be refuted, and was. Interested people can visit:
http://www.aish.com/jewishissues/middleeast/Palestinian_TV_Kill_All_The_Jews.asp http://www.pmw.org.il/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhbHVEGnYD8&mode=related&search=#
Of course, when confronted with this, the Arab just threw a tantrum and left in a huff. I have no idea where people get these sorts of ideas. Amazing...
This amazing claim can easily be refuted, and was. Interested people can visit:
http://www.aish.com/jewishissues/middleeast/Palestinian_TV_Kill_All_The_Jews.asp http://www.pmw.org.il/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhbHVEGnYD8&mode=related&search=#
Of course, when confronted with this, the Arab just threw a tantrum and left in a huff. I have no idea where people get these sorts of ideas. Amazing...
Saturday, September 29, 2007
You don't need to know English
A person from India came to a room in Skypeland and talked about how he approved of requiring people to know English to pass the US citizenship test. Immediately someone with an American accent interrupted and said that you did not need to know English to live in the US and that he took offense at this.
The Indian explained over and over and over that all he was saying was that you need to pass an English exam to pass the US citizenship test, over the increasingly heated objections from the person with the American accent. The person with the American accent claimed more and more and more aggressively that a person did not need to know English to live in the USA and no one should be required to know English to live in the US. (Of course, the Indian was talking about citizenship, NOT the right to live in the US, but this abusive and argumentative character refused to acknowledge that or let this minor point go. Amazing what ridiculous things people will fight about).
Finally I pointed out that this was the citizenship law in the US and had been the law for years. I was met with a string of abuse and invective and expletives, and I was told repeatedly how wrong and stupid I was. I said that if he wanted to get the law changed, he was free to do so, but it was the law. I was cursed and heckled. I and the Indian guy said you need to speak English to pass the citizenship test. The American said "No, no, you are wrong you do not need to speak English to live in the USA." We said we are not talking about residency, but citizenship. The American said, "No, no you are wrong you do not need to speak English to live in the USA. This went on over and over and over and over. Eventually, the American was cursing us and telling us we are "fucking stupid and morons".
At this point, I just decided I had had enough from another uneducated fool, so turned off my sound to let him speak to the wall. Who needs to hear more of this kind of nonsense? I should have asked him if he had ever taken the US Citizenship Test himself, but I didn't. Oh well...
I looked at the US Customs and Immigration Service web page where I found that the general requirements for US naturalization include, "an ability to read, write, and speak English":
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=ce2b2cd1f7e9e010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=96719c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD and this requirement has been in place since 1906:
http://www.ilw.com/articles/2007,0829-murray.shtm
However, if people are old or disabled, they might be exempt from this requirement in some cases:
http://usimmigration.visapro.com/Naturalization.asp, thanks to a US law passed in 1990.
Interestingly, the belligerent American ignoramus claimed that his grandmother who died 25 years ago was a naturalized US citizen who never spoke a word of English. Hmmm... there is something wrong with this picture...
When I went back to check on the room later, this same stupid yokel was attacking the immigrant from India, abusing the Indian for being a "curry Indian" instead of a "woo- woo Indian". This dufus accused the Indian in an obnoxious manner of coming to the US to "run a donut shop." I decided I did not need to hear more racist nonsense from this imbecile and I turned off the sound again...wow...
Later a friend from Australia told me he had also been irritated with this same American, particularly when he started saying how much he hated "niggers" and did not want to live next to them. What a nice guy...
The Indian explained over and over and over that all he was saying was that you need to pass an English exam to pass the US citizenship test, over the increasingly heated objections from the person with the American accent. The person with the American accent claimed more and more and more aggressively that a person did not need to know English to live in the USA and no one should be required to know English to live in the US. (Of course, the Indian was talking about citizenship, NOT the right to live in the US, but this abusive and argumentative character refused to acknowledge that or let this minor point go. Amazing what ridiculous things people will fight about).
Finally I pointed out that this was the citizenship law in the US and had been the law for years. I was met with a string of abuse and invective and expletives, and I was told repeatedly how wrong and stupid I was. I said that if he wanted to get the law changed, he was free to do so, but it was the law. I was cursed and heckled. I and the Indian guy said you need to speak English to pass the citizenship test. The American said "No, no, you are wrong you do not need to speak English to live in the USA." We said we are not talking about residency, but citizenship. The American said, "No, no you are wrong you do not need to speak English to live in the USA. This went on over and over and over and over. Eventually, the American was cursing us and telling us we are "fucking stupid and morons".
At this point, I just decided I had had enough from another uneducated fool, so turned off my sound to let him speak to the wall. Who needs to hear more of this kind of nonsense? I should have asked him if he had ever taken the US Citizenship Test himself, but I didn't. Oh well...
I looked at the US Customs and Immigration Service web page where I found that the general requirements for US naturalization include, "an ability to read, write, and speak English":
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=ce2b2cd1f7e9e010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=96719c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD and this requirement has been in place since 1906:
http://www.ilw.com/articles/2007,0829-murray.shtm
However, if people are old or disabled, they might be exempt from this requirement in some cases:
http://usimmigration.visapro.com/Naturalization.asp, thanks to a US law passed in 1990.
Interestingly, the belligerent American ignoramus claimed that his grandmother who died 25 years ago was a naturalized US citizen who never spoke a word of English. Hmmm... there is something wrong with this picture...
When I went back to check on the room later, this same stupid yokel was attacking the immigrant from India, abusing the Indian for being a "curry Indian" instead of a "woo- woo Indian". This dufus accused the Indian in an obnoxious manner of coming to the US to "run a donut shop." I decided I did not need to hear more racist nonsense from this imbecile and I turned off the sound again...wow...
Later a friend from Australia told me he had also been irritated with this same American, particularly when he started saying how much he hated "niggers" and did not want to live next to them. What a nice guy...
Palestinian Canadian living in Spain
A person who claimed to be a Palestinian-Canadian living in Spain entered our room in Skypeland. He said, "I was born in Palestine and was in the first uprising and went to Canada." He said correct me if I am wrong, and immediately he said several things that people disagreed with, and he was stopped. He objected to being stopped. He started talking about how the Americans had helped the Israelis steal the Palestinian land illegally. He was asked if he had read UN resolution 181. He immediately said, "Lets forget history." Ah...facts don't count I guess...
The Palestinian-Canadian told a fable about someone living in his house with his garden. And he answers the door when someone knocks on the door. The person at the door has many stronger people behind him, and so the person had to live his house. The person came back to his house, and knocked and knocked on the door and finally the president answered the door. The president asked the person into the house and told him they would negotiate. The person was told by the president he could live in the kitchen and if he stepped over the threshold outside the kitchen, he would be arrested or killed. He asked if this was fair.
I wanted to tell a story about someone buying a house, and then finding out that the previous owner or people from across the street wanted to eject him from the house he had just bought. However, there was so much discord in the room I could not describe my own fable.
This quickly turned into an Israel vs. Palestine debate. However, many others interrupted with non sequiturs about Tupak Shakur and other off-topic interjections. I tried to keep them quiet so I could hear the Palestinian discuss the issue with the Israeli, but others objected since they just wanted to tell jokes and say nonsense.
One of our more frequent room-disturbers interrupted the two principles discussing Israel and Palestine at least a dozen times to ask the question, "What will the world talk about if we do not have this to worry about ?" I tried to shut him up, since this was a nonsense question, and one without much of an interesting answer, if any answer were even possible. He insisted over and over and over on asking his question. Others joined in and got upset that this person couldn't get his bascially rhetorical question answered. It completely disrupted the conversation, but finally I gave up.
The room just descended further and further into chaos, since the host seemed to be absent or disinterested (or maybe he had a malfunctioning computer...)
The Palestinian-Canadian told a fable about someone living in his house with his garden. And he answers the door when someone knocks on the door. The person at the door has many stronger people behind him, and so the person had to live his house. The person came back to his house, and knocked and knocked on the door and finally the president answered the door. The president asked the person into the house and told him they would negotiate. The person was told by the president he could live in the kitchen and if he stepped over the threshold outside the kitchen, he would be arrested or killed. He asked if this was fair.
I wanted to tell a story about someone buying a house, and then finding out that the previous owner or people from across the street wanted to eject him from the house he had just bought. However, there was so much discord in the room I could not describe my own fable.
This quickly turned into an Israel vs. Palestine debate. However, many others interrupted with non sequiturs about Tupak Shakur and other off-topic interjections. I tried to keep them quiet so I could hear the Palestinian discuss the issue with the Israeli, but others objected since they just wanted to tell jokes and say nonsense.
One of our more frequent room-disturbers interrupted the two principles discussing Israel and Palestine at least a dozen times to ask the question, "What will the world talk about if we do not have this to worry about ?" I tried to shut him up, since this was a nonsense question, and one without much of an interesting answer, if any answer were even possible. He insisted over and over and over on asking his question. Others joined in and got upset that this person couldn't get his bascially rhetorical question answered. It completely disrupted the conversation, but finally I gave up.
The room just descended further and further into chaos, since the host seemed to be absent or disinterested (or maybe he had a malfunctioning computer...)
Kuwait was not freed by the US
A Kuwaiti visitor to Skypeland told us that Kuwait does not owe its freedom to the USA and its coalition partners. He later said he was grateful even though he implied that the USA is Kuwait's enemy (??). He said that every single Wahabi is a terrorist.
He said that, "After September a friend of mine went to the United States they searched his backhole. Only Arab. Only Arab". We disagreed and gave him counterexamples. He was asked if he preferred to be searched, or to be blown up. The Kuwaiti ignored the question, and replied, "I never get noisy from searching. I am a very lucky man in searching. Anywhere I go in the world. My family are not welcome to Saudi Arabia."
He asked if Ahmadinejad had "passed" when Ahmadinejad spoke at Columbia. He was told that Ahmadinejad sounded like an idiot when he spoke. Particularly when Ahmadinejad said that there are no gay people in Iran. The Kuwaiti was a bit shocked, and said Ahmadinejad was correct. The Kuwaiti explained, "In all Arabic countries you cannot fuck anyone in the street. If you fuck someone in your house no one can see you fucking..."
The Kuwaiti said, "Please please please one thing one thing. In Islam all Muslims, all Muslims I think they hang they hang the gays." Someone asked about the Sufis. The Kuwaiti replied, "Not sure... not sure." The Kuwaiti then said, "In Islam if a man fuck a lady, if the lady is a girl, they just beat her. If she is married, they kill her with little stones." The Kuwaiti later said that Arafat was a "damned filthy gay Muslim". Ah, I see...
We started to get more and more nonsense from a flood of Arabs in the room. They started to argue more and more religion and proclaim Islam to be the best religion, without knowing much about any other religions. The Kuwaiti said, "What will happen for Jewish, they will have the Armageddon..." At this point, people started to get tired of the descent of the room into religious foolishness.
The Kuwaiti then said he had never met an American man until now. (A bit hard to understand for someone that supposedly really lives in Kuwait).
Someone else said, "Jews abuse Jesus and their damn Talmud and her mother Mary... We Muslim hate Jewish". All this time, there were constantly interjections from "hello people" who were shouting hello randomly in the room. It was clear the room was starting to get out of control...
He said that, "After September a friend of mine went to the United States they searched his backhole. Only Arab. Only Arab". We disagreed and gave him counterexamples. He was asked if he preferred to be searched, or to be blown up. The Kuwaiti ignored the question, and replied, "I never get noisy from searching. I am a very lucky man in searching. Anywhere I go in the world. My family are not welcome to Saudi Arabia."
He asked if Ahmadinejad had "passed" when Ahmadinejad spoke at Columbia. He was told that Ahmadinejad sounded like an idiot when he spoke. Particularly when Ahmadinejad said that there are no gay people in Iran. The Kuwaiti was a bit shocked, and said Ahmadinejad was correct. The Kuwaiti explained, "In all Arabic countries you cannot fuck anyone in the street. If you fuck someone in your house no one can see you fucking..."
The Kuwaiti said, "Please please please one thing one thing. In Islam all Muslims, all Muslims I think they hang they hang the gays." Someone asked about the Sufis. The Kuwaiti replied, "Not sure... not sure." The Kuwaiti then said, "In Islam if a man fuck a lady, if the lady is a girl, they just beat her. If she is married, they kill her with little stones." The Kuwaiti later said that Arafat was a "damned filthy gay Muslim". Ah, I see...
We started to get more and more nonsense from a flood of Arabs in the room. They started to argue more and more religion and proclaim Islam to be the best religion, without knowing much about any other religions. The Kuwaiti said, "What will happen for Jewish, they will have the Armageddon..." At this point, people started to get tired of the descent of the room into religious foolishness.
The Kuwaiti then said he had never met an American man until now. (A bit hard to understand for someone that supposedly really lives in Kuwait).
Someone else said, "Jews abuse Jesus and their damn Talmud and her mother Mary... We Muslim hate Jewish". All this time, there were constantly interjections from "hello people" who were shouting hello randomly in the room. It was clear the room was starting to get out of control...
An Irish retort
After I presented the data I had found about Irish immigration, of course I was the target of a sharp retort or two:
I would firstly like to thank PP who has kindly taken some time to write a blog about me. (It was not a blog, it was an entry in my blog about your ludicrous statements. I actually have several blog entries about your irrational rants, but who is counting?) Unfortunately these are not my opinions. (Oh really? So much so, that you repeated these opinions over and over, in front of many people. I guess this was just imagined or a fantasy on our part. A mass delusion, as it were.) I will not go into detail as I know the Publisher of the blog has serious Psychological Disorders. (Oh really? Well maybe better than being dumb as a rock, right?) I do not feel a need to defend myself as I know that what is said here about me is untrue. (Oh really? Well I wonder why you repeated your incorrect opinions so often). I will finish by using PP as a typical example of somebody with plenty of Intelligence but not an ounce of commmon sense. I notice you are a very credible arbiter of what is intelligence and common sense...
I told several people in Skypeland that I am glad to drop topics when people recognize their mistakes and apologize. This is an instant message exchange on this topic with this Irish woman who claims that the US has a selfish, greedy, unfair immigration policy:
[11:44:29 AM] L says: Excuse me
[11:44:45 AM] PP says: Well I will wait for an apology
[11:44:48 AM] PP says: thanks
[11:45:46 AM] L says: You will be waiting
[11:45:58 AM] PP says: And you will be dealing with the consequences
[11:46:07 AM] PP says: Fair enough
[11:46:09 AM] PP says: Just so we are clear
[11:46:46 AM] PP says: You are free to be a hypocrite
[11:46:55 AM] L says: I never said your statment was not true I just asked for the site that you got the information from
[11:47:11 AM] PP says: Ah.....another nice contradiction. Thanks.
[11:47:46 AM] L says: Dealing with What? Consequences...... That is halarious.
[11:48:02 AM] L says: Even more so coming from you.
[11:48:19 AM] PP says: I am glad to call out your hypocrisy
[11:48:25 AM] PP says: Makes for good blog material
[11:48:33 AM] L says: Well done (clap)
[11:48:35 AM] PP says: and make sure everyone recognizes it
[11:48:53 AM] L says: Who takes your blogs seriously anyway?
[11:48:59 AM] PP says: You are free to be proud of your ignorance.
[11:49:09 AM] L says: Anyone I know that read them thinks they are halarious
(They are supposed to be funny and interesting. Glad they are succeeding, although I am not sure this person is able to understand the sarcasm and the irony...)
[11:49:19 AM] L says: Including myself
[11:49:19 AM] PP says: No one takes them seriously. Why should they? However, you took the blog seriously enough to reply I noticed.
(The reply is posted above, of course)
[11:49:53 AM] L says: Yes I wanted to play along with your Little game i thought it was funny
(Well this is one way to save face, maybe)
[11:50:30 AM] PP says: Well fine. You have no reason to complain then when I point out your hypocrisy and agressive ignorance and denialism.
[11:51:39 AM] L says: yes
[11:51:43 AM] L says: You are right
[11:51:47 AM] L says: Your always right
[11:51:50 AM] L says: Im so sorry
[11:52:02 AM] L says: You are the higest, you are the greatest
[11:52:16 AM] PP says: I am not always right. I have lots of examples of places I have learned things and I have made mistakes and I note them.
(Many examples of this are posted in this blog).
[11:52:32 AM] PP says: You might find it valuable to do the same in your life. However, there is no obligation.
[11:54:48 AM] PP says: Complaining about the US immigration policy when it is far far more generous and unselfish and ungreedy and unracist and more evenhanded than the Irish immigration problem is just a bit over the top.
[11:55:07 AM] PP says: Fix your own country first
[11:55:11 AM] PP says: then we can talk.
[11:55:38 AM] PP says: Like when 50% of Ireland is of African origin, or Indian or Chinese, then we can talk.
[11:55:46 AM] L says: I dont represent my country
(Of course she does not, but she was pretty quick to criticize me as though I was responsible for all opinions of other Americans and all US immigration policies I noticed).
[11:56:47 AM] PP says: So go protest the horrendous conditions in your resettlement facilities with 5 refugee seekers to a room, no money, and less than a 10% chance of success at getting access to Ireland permanent residency.
[11:57:03 AM] PP says: Outrageous. Embarassing. Shocking.
[11:57:20 AM] PP says: And 80% of your population expressing racist views in a referendum.
[11:57:32 AM] PP says: Ireland is not covering itself with glory here.
[11:57:45 AM] L says: I also do not ''COMPLAIN'' about the lack/ influence of Immigramts in my Country unlike you- Now post that on you pathetic blog
(If L can complain about the immigration policy of the US, why can she not complain about the far more unfair and far less progressive immigration policy of Ireland? I do not complain about the US policy, but I have defended it. I do think that it is unfair sometimes to people who are trying to follow the laws, however, and I was attacked for this opinion by L).
[11:57:58 AM] PP says: So go be an activist in Ireland, and keep your mouth shut about the US since you seem to know nothing about the US.
[11:58:23 AM] L says: Now you have something against the Irish.... This is typical of you
(Where on earth did I say I had something against the Irish? They can have whatever immigration policy they like. They are a sovereign country, after all).
[11:58:30 AM] L says: First Mexican
(Mexican? Whatever did I say against the Mexicans?)
[11:58:32 AM] L says: Now Irish
[11:58:45 AM] PP says: That is the entire point. You do not complain about your own country's behavior, which is egregious and does not hold up to scrutiny.
[11:59:01 AM] L says: But my opinions are different than yours
(They are not only different, they are irrational and hypocritical and not based on facts)
[11:59:03 AM] PP says: Me? I have nothing against the Mexicans. Who told you that?
[11:59:09 AM] L says: Why should i feel like you?
(You are free to ignore the facts and the unfair immigration policy in your own country and attack the US immigration policy instead. However, I might point this out from time to time.)
[11:59:25 AM] PP says: And Ireland can have a racist immigration policy if they want, but in that case, do not complain to me about our immigration policy.
[11:59:31 AM] L says: Why should i complain
(Well L did complain several times about the US immigration policy, and never says a word about the far more unfair Irish immigration policy.)
[11:59:38 AM] PP says: Exactly.
[11:59:51 AM] PP says: You proved my point. You attack us, but do not complain about your own faults.
[12:00:00 PM] L says: my own faults?
(I meant faults as in the faults of the Irish immigration policies, of course).
[12:00:04 PM] PP says: Remember the biblical quote about the "mote in the eye" (Mathew 7:3 "Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?")
[12:00:10 PM] L says: oh lord
[12:00:16 PM] L says: the bible
[12:00:19 PM] PP says: People in glass houses should not throw stones.
[12:00:24 PM] L says: dont get me started
[12:00:26 PM] PP says: Ireland is a glass house.
[12:01:02 PM] L says: and your psycho
(Oh really? And you are completely rational and reasonable ? I definitely noticed.)
[12:01:03 PM] PP says: Clean up your own back yard first before you attack the US.
[12:01:13 PM] PP says: Oh yes fine. Believe what you want. I will expose it all.
And then later:
[4:05:45 PM] L says: No-body cares
[4:05:52 PM] L says: Only you.
[4:06:01 PM] L says: In your weird world
[4:07:54 PM] PP says: Ok, thanks.
[4:08:16 PM] L says: And i am also reporting you to Skype
[4:08:49 PM] L says: I have Copies of your blog and what you do is not allowedx
[4:08:52 PM] L says: *allowed
[4:09:21 PM] PP says: Oh really?
[4:09:27 PM] PP says: My blog is not part of Skype.
[4:09:33 PM] L says: yes exactly
[4:09:39 PM] PP says: I do not give people's real names.
[4:09:44 PM] L says: You ''quoting'' people
[4:09:49 PM] PP says: I do not even give their Skype names.
[4:09:54 PM] L says: Its the content
[4:12:07 PM] PP says: Oh ok. Show me the place in the Skype regulations and agreements that I signed or acquiesced to where it states I cannot write a blog. I have found similar blogs by others including employees of Skype itself. So show me the regulation please.
[4:32:24 PM] L says: Oh look i'm not interested anymore im not concerned about your opinions, your blogs, whatever i will now just avoid you like the plague. I disagree with everything you stand for and probably likewise so best just to avoid eachother and keep the peace
[4:38:40 PM] PP says: I stand for evidence, I stand for data, and I stand for numbers and the hard facts. I am a moderate and I condemn extremists wherever they are; in my culture and other cultures. I stand for moderation. I condemn the left wingers and the right wingers. I want everyone in the world to live together in peace. I am not in favor of violence. I am in favor of negotiation and compromise and understanding.
I would firstly like to thank PP who has kindly taken some time to write a blog about me. (It was not a blog, it was an entry in my blog about your ludicrous statements. I actually have several blog entries about your irrational rants, but who is counting?) Unfortunately these are not my opinions. (Oh really? So much so, that you repeated these opinions over and over, in front of many people. I guess this was just imagined or a fantasy on our part. A mass delusion, as it were.) I will not go into detail as I know the Publisher of the blog has serious Psychological Disorders. (Oh really? Well maybe better than being dumb as a rock, right?) I do not feel a need to defend myself as I know that what is said here about me is untrue. (Oh really? Well I wonder why you repeated your incorrect opinions so often). I will finish by using PP as a typical example of somebody with plenty of Intelligence but not an ounce of commmon sense. I notice you are a very credible arbiter of what is intelligence and common sense...
I told several people in Skypeland that I am glad to drop topics when people recognize their mistakes and apologize. This is an instant message exchange on this topic with this Irish woman who claims that the US has a selfish, greedy, unfair immigration policy:
[11:44:29 AM] L says: Excuse me
[11:44:45 AM] PP says: Well I will wait for an apology
[11:44:48 AM] PP says: thanks
[11:45:46 AM] L says: You will be waiting
[11:45:58 AM] PP says: And you will be dealing with the consequences
[11:46:07 AM] PP says: Fair enough
[11:46:09 AM] PP says: Just so we are clear
[11:46:46 AM] PP says: You are free to be a hypocrite
[11:46:55 AM] L says: I never said your statment was not true I just asked for the site that you got the information from
[11:47:11 AM] PP says: Ah.....another nice contradiction. Thanks.
[11:47:46 AM] L says: Dealing with What? Consequences...... That is halarious.
[11:48:02 AM] L says: Even more so coming from you.
[11:48:19 AM] PP says: I am glad to call out your hypocrisy
[11:48:25 AM] PP says: Makes for good blog material
[11:48:33 AM] L says: Well done (clap)
[11:48:35 AM] PP says: and make sure everyone recognizes it
[11:48:53 AM] L says: Who takes your blogs seriously anyway?
[11:48:59 AM] PP says: You are free to be proud of your ignorance.
[11:49:09 AM] L says: Anyone I know that read them thinks they are halarious
(They are supposed to be funny and interesting. Glad they are succeeding, although I am not sure this person is able to understand the sarcasm and the irony...)
[11:49:19 AM] L says: Including myself
[11:49:19 AM] PP says: No one takes them seriously. Why should they? However, you took the blog seriously enough to reply I noticed.
(The reply is posted above, of course)
[11:49:53 AM] L says: Yes I wanted to play along with your Little game i thought it was funny
(Well this is one way to save face, maybe)
[11:50:30 AM] PP says: Well fine. You have no reason to complain then when I point out your hypocrisy and agressive ignorance and denialism.
[11:51:39 AM] L says: yes
[11:51:43 AM] L says: You are right
[11:51:47 AM] L says: Your always right
[11:51:50 AM] L says: Im so sorry
[11:52:02 AM] L says: You are the higest, you are the greatest
[11:52:16 AM] PP says: I am not always right. I have lots of examples of places I have learned things and I have made mistakes and I note them.
(Many examples of this are posted in this blog).
[11:52:32 AM] PP says: You might find it valuable to do the same in your life. However, there is no obligation.
[11:54:48 AM] PP says: Complaining about the US immigration policy when it is far far more generous and unselfish and ungreedy and unracist and more evenhanded than the Irish immigration problem is just a bit over the top.
[11:55:07 AM] PP says: Fix your own country first
[11:55:11 AM] PP says: then we can talk.
[11:55:38 AM] PP says: Like when 50% of Ireland is of African origin, or Indian or Chinese, then we can talk.
[11:55:46 AM] L says: I dont represent my country
(Of course she does not, but she was pretty quick to criticize me as though I was responsible for all opinions of other Americans and all US immigration policies I noticed).
[11:56:47 AM] PP says: So go protest the horrendous conditions in your resettlement facilities with 5 refugee seekers to a room, no money, and less than a 10% chance of success at getting access to Ireland permanent residency.
[11:57:03 AM] PP says: Outrageous. Embarassing. Shocking.
[11:57:20 AM] PP says: And 80% of your population expressing racist views in a referendum.
[11:57:32 AM] PP says: Ireland is not covering itself with glory here.
[11:57:45 AM] L says: I also do not ''COMPLAIN'' about the lack/ influence of Immigramts in my Country unlike you- Now post that on you pathetic blog
(If L can complain about the immigration policy of the US, why can she not complain about the far more unfair and far less progressive immigration policy of Ireland? I do not complain about the US policy, but I have defended it. I do think that it is unfair sometimes to people who are trying to follow the laws, however, and I was attacked for this opinion by L).
[11:57:58 AM] PP says: So go be an activist in Ireland, and keep your mouth shut about the US since you seem to know nothing about the US.
[11:58:23 AM] L says: Now you have something against the Irish.... This is typical of you
(Where on earth did I say I had something against the Irish? They can have whatever immigration policy they like. They are a sovereign country, after all).
[11:58:30 AM] L says: First Mexican
(Mexican? Whatever did I say against the Mexicans?)
[11:58:32 AM] L says: Now Irish
[11:58:45 AM] PP says: That is the entire point. You do not complain about your own country's behavior, which is egregious and does not hold up to scrutiny.
[11:59:01 AM] L says: But my opinions are different than yours
(They are not only different, they are irrational and hypocritical and not based on facts)
[11:59:03 AM] PP says: Me? I have nothing against the Mexicans. Who told you that?
[11:59:09 AM] L says: Why should i feel like you?
(You are free to ignore the facts and the unfair immigration policy in your own country and attack the US immigration policy instead. However, I might point this out from time to time.)
[11:59:25 AM] PP says: And Ireland can have a racist immigration policy if they want, but in that case, do not complain to me about our immigration policy.
[11:59:31 AM] L says: Why should i complain
(Well L did complain several times about the US immigration policy, and never says a word about the far more unfair Irish immigration policy.)
[11:59:38 AM] PP says: Exactly.
[11:59:51 AM] PP says: You proved my point. You attack us, but do not complain about your own faults.
[12:00:00 PM] L says: my own faults?
(I meant faults as in the faults of the Irish immigration policies, of course).
[12:00:04 PM] PP says: Remember the biblical quote about the "mote in the eye" (Mathew 7:3 "Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?")
[12:00:10 PM] L says: oh lord
[12:00:16 PM] L says: the bible
[12:00:19 PM] PP says: People in glass houses should not throw stones.
[12:00:24 PM] L says: dont get me started
[12:00:26 PM] PP says: Ireland is a glass house.
[12:01:02 PM] L says: and your psycho
(Oh really? And you are completely rational and reasonable ? I definitely noticed.)
[12:01:03 PM] PP says: Clean up your own back yard first before you attack the US.
[12:01:13 PM] PP says: Oh yes fine. Believe what you want. I will expose it all.
And then later:
[4:05:45 PM] L says: No-body cares
[4:05:52 PM] L says: Only you.
[4:06:01 PM] L says: In your weird world
[4:07:54 PM] PP says: Ok, thanks.
[4:08:16 PM] L says: And i am also reporting you to Skype
[4:08:49 PM] L says: I have Copies of your blog and what you do is not allowedx
[4:08:52 PM] L says: *allowed
[4:09:21 PM] PP says: Oh really?
[4:09:27 PM] PP says: My blog is not part of Skype.
[4:09:33 PM] L says: yes exactly
[4:09:39 PM] PP says: I do not give people's real names.
[4:09:44 PM] L says: You ''quoting'' people
[4:09:49 PM] PP says: I do not even give their Skype names.
[4:09:54 PM] L says: Its the content
[4:12:07 PM] PP says: Oh ok. Show me the place in the Skype regulations and agreements that I signed or acquiesced to where it states I cannot write a blog. I have found similar blogs by others including employees of Skype itself. So show me the regulation please.
[4:32:24 PM] L says: Oh look i'm not interested anymore im not concerned about your opinions, your blogs, whatever i will now just avoid you like the plague. I disagree with everything you stand for and probably likewise so best just to avoid eachother and keep the peace
[4:38:40 PM] PP says: I stand for evidence, I stand for data, and I stand for numbers and the hard facts. I am a moderate and I condemn extremists wherever they are; in my culture and other cultures. I stand for moderation. I condemn the left wingers and the right wingers. I want everyone in the world to live together in peace. I am not in favor of violence. I am in favor of negotiation and compromise and understanding.
My English is really bad
We were hit by an onslaught of nonEnglish speakers in Skypeland tonight. It was a string of incomprehensible nonsense. Their microphones were very bad, and there was a lot of static. They entered, interrupting any conversation that was in process to chant "hello, hello, hello..what da subject..what da subject..." One or two entered to chant say in broken English, "My English is really bad". (I think we noticed already.) "Can I changa for da hello? My English is Brazillian English. English is the universal language. I am not native in it." (No kidding...) "Brazil is not Bolivia?" (Ah, I never knew...) "Hey man Hey man Listen. Brazil is not Bolivia, ok? United States is a very good country. Brazil is not Bolivia. A country is a country. I am a native American. And you...you cannot and you do do English ok? Hey man, hey man, wrong idea is that Brazil is only Rio De Jenario? Ok ? Do you accept? Rio is only a city ok? Brazil is a big country? I am gentler man. I no use bullshit and offensive words, ok? Hey man listen. Listen, listen... I know speak the bullshit, understand?" While this was going on, some "mouth breather" was breathing heavily into his or her microphone. Really annoying...
Someone was sufficiently irritated to make a "Hello room":
*the HELLO room
Started 21 minutes ago - 17 participants
YOU ASKED FOR IT - HERE IT FINALLY IS... A PLACE WHERE YOU CAN POINTLESSLY AND REPEATEDLY SAY HELLO WITH WHATEVER ACCENT OR INFLECTION YOU DESIRE, BEING THE ONLY ENGLISH WORD YOU KNOW HOW TO PRONOUNCE. ENJOY... WE WILL ENJOY THE ROAST. hello hello hello hello hello hello hello hello hello hello hello hello hello....
Someone was sufficiently irritated to make a "Hello room":
*the HELLO room
Started 21 minutes ago - 17 participants
YOU ASKED FOR IT - HERE IT FINALLY IS... A PLACE WHERE YOU CAN POINTLESSLY AND REPEATEDLY SAY HELLO WITH WHATEVER ACCENT OR INFLECTION YOU DESIRE, BEING THE ONLY ENGLISH WORD YOU KNOW HOW TO PRONOUNCE. ENJOY... WE WILL ENJOY THE ROAST. hello hello hello hello hello hello hello hello hello hello hello hello hello....
Prove that there are 50,000 Illegal Irish
Some of the pushy Irish in Skypeland claimed that my statistics about Irish immigration were irrelevant since statistics are always lies.
I was asked about the number of illegal Irish immigrants in the US, and I said I had read that it was about 50,000. I was immediately attacked and so I said I would get some links containing this information:
http://cbs5.com/topstories/local_story_076021919.html
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-rodriguez8apr08,0,7661039.column?coll=la-opinion-columnists
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/03/15/IRISH.TMP
http://www.nysun.com/article/28835
http://immigrationforum.org/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=871
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/support-for-50000-irish-illegals-in-us-257364.html
Some people said these were not of any value since they were not government statistics. Others said that government statistics were all lies and were not worth anything. One Irishman claimed that the reason there were 50,000 illegal Irish in the US was that the law was changed to make it unfair to Irish to allow in more people from South America. However, these are the same people who claim that the US is unfair because the US does not let in a greater proportion of people from South America. Can't have it both ways...
I recited the statistics I had found in the article comparing American and Irish immigration statistics. This drove the people in the skypecast crazy and finally the person who had called Americans selfish and greedy and racist threw a tantrum and logged off in a huff. Ah...nice...
People just wanted to fight and fight and fight. Ugh...
Addendum:
[9:50:07 PM] N says: u are right there is 50000 illegal irish i know a few of them they want to get legalised
[10:06:02 PM] PP says: so do the other 20 or 30 million
[10:06:03 PM] PP says: so what
[10:08:10 PM] N says: they were but congress wouldnt pass imegration law that why there a problem
[10:08:29 PM] PP says: well i dont care that they are here
[10:08:42 PM] PP says: but I do NOT like being called a racist and selfish and on and on and on
[10:08:46 PM] PP says: when the data do not support it
[10:08:58 PM] PP says: coming from someone from a country that is 98% europena
[10:09:08 PM] PP says: with your federal judges making racist statements
[10:09:18 PM] PP says: and with your illegal immigrant raids all in the press
[10:09:31 PM] PP says: and you not ever giving refugee status to poor people
[10:09:35 PM] PP says: and putting them 5 to a room
[10:09:59 PM] PP says: and voting at an 80% rate in a referendum to take away the rights of the children born in ireland to foreigners
[10:10:02 PM] PP says: it is a bit much
[10:10:06 PM] PP says: if you want to call us racist
[10:10:10 PM] PP says: look in a mirror first
[10:10:21 PM] PP says: i REALLY am offended by that
[10:10:22 PM] nathy says: yes but they wont do that in the states for the greedy employers wont have cheep labour
[10:10:36 PM] PP says: I live in a neighborhood that is 60% African American
[10:10:38 PM] PP says: so give me a break
[10:10:57 PM] PP says: the USA has plenty of faults
[10:11:05 PM] N says: u have the laws they are not enforced
[10:11:09 PM] PP says: yes we do
[10:11:28 PM] PP says: and if we try to enforce them...people like L scream we are discriminating and are selfish and greedy
[10:11:36 PM] PP says: so....this is what we have
[10:11:46 PM] N says: they are the same as here it beign enforced here
[10:11:47 PM] PP says: you are allowed to enforce your laws and we are not allowed to enforce ours?
[10:11:55 PM] PP says: you are allowed to
[10:11:57 PM] PP says: we are not
[10:11:59 PM] PP says: nice
[10:12:01 PM] PP says: real rational
[10:12:35 PM] N says: now u haved turned something i didnt say read again please
[10:12:56 PM] PP says: I wrote that article with statistics to address what L said
[10:12:58 PM] PP says: not you
[10:13:00 PM] PP says: L
[10:13:07 PM] PP says: and looked them up
[10:13:10 PM] PP says: and researched them
I was asked about the number of illegal Irish immigrants in the US, and I said I had read that it was about 50,000. I was immediately attacked and so I said I would get some links containing this information:
http://cbs5.com/topstories/local_story_076021919.html
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-rodriguez8apr08,0,7661039.column?coll=la-opinion-columnists
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/03/15/IRISH.TMP
http://www.nysun.com/article/28835
http://immigrationforum.org/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=871
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/support-for-50000-irish-illegals-in-us-257364.html
Some people said these were not of any value since they were not government statistics. Others said that government statistics were all lies and were not worth anything. One Irishman claimed that the reason there were 50,000 illegal Irish in the US was that the law was changed to make it unfair to Irish to allow in more people from South America. However, these are the same people who claim that the US is unfair because the US does not let in a greater proportion of people from South America. Can't have it both ways...
I recited the statistics I had found in the article comparing American and Irish immigration statistics. This drove the people in the skypecast crazy and finally the person who had called Americans selfish and greedy and racist threw a tantrum and logged off in a huff. Ah...nice...
People just wanted to fight and fight and fight. Ugh...
Addendum:
[9:50:07 PM] N says: u are right there is 50000 illegal irish i know a few of them they want to get legalised
[10:06:02 PM] PP says: so do the other 20 or 30 million
[10:06:03 PM] PP says: so what
[10:08:10 PM] N says: they were but congress wouldnt pass imegration law that why there a problem
[10:08:29 PM] PP says: well i dont care that they are here
[10:08:42 PM] PP says: but I do NOT like being called a racist and selfish and on and on and on
[10:08:46 PM] PP says: when the data do not support it
[10:08:58 PM] PP says: coming from someone from a country that is 98% europena
[10:09:08 PM] PP says: with your federal judges making racist statements
[10:09:18 PM] PP says: and with your illegal immigrant raids all in the press
[10:09:31 PM] PP says: and you not ever giving refugee status to poor people
[10:09:35 PM] PP says: and putting them 5 to a room
[10:09:59 PM] PP says: and voting at an 80% rate in a referendum to take away the rights of the children born in ireland to foreigners
[10:10:02 PM] PP says: it is a bit much
[10:10:06 PM] PP says: if you want to call us racist
[10:10:10 PM] PP says: look in a mirror first
[10:10:21 PM] PP says: i REALLY am offended by that
[10:10:22 PM] nathy says: yes but they wont do that in the states for the greedy employers wont have cheep labour
[10:10:36 PM] PP says: I live in a neighborhood that is 60% African American
[10:10:38 PM] PP says: so give me a break
[10:10:57 PM] PP says: the USA has plenty of faults
[10:11:05 PM] N says: u have the laws they are not enforced
[10:11:09 PM] PP says: yes we do
[10:11:28 PM] PP says: and if we try to enforce them...people like L scream we are discriminating and are selfish and greedy
[10:11:36 PM] PP says: so....this is what we have
[10:11:46 PM] N says: they are the same as here it beign enforced here
[10:11:47 PM] PP says: you are allowed to enforce your laws and we are not allowed to enforce ours?
[10:11:55 PM] PP says: you are allowed to
[10:11:57 PM] PP says: we are not
[10:11:59 PM] PP says: nice
[10:12:01 PM] PP says: real rational
[10:12:35 PM] N says: now u haved turned something i didnt say read again please
[10:12:56 PM] PP says: I wrote that article with statistics to address what L said
[10:12:58 PM] PP says: not you
[10:13:00 PM] PP says: L
[10:13:07 PM] PP says: and looked them up
[10:13:10 PM] PP says: and researched them
Blacks cannot be racist
Conversations in Skypeland often expose interesting views. One obviously African-American gentleman started ranting about Jews, horrible Whites and Hispanics etc. After he was asked if he was racist, he made the claim that this was impossible, since he was black and "Blacks cannot be racist". Ookay...
Friday, September 28, 2007
New Orleans
Once in a while, you get positive proof that someone you are talking to in Skypeland is either a complete moron, or is just yanking your chain. One "gentleman" that we had been talking to for a long time with minimal results, started on a long sob story about how the US government could have done something for poor people on television with sad faces begging for help, but chose not to. We did not know what he was talking about, so we guessed he was talking about New Orleans. He expressed surprise (possibly mock surprise) and shock at us for suggesting such a thing, and said he had never meant that.
So I asked, okay in that case, what are you talking about? And then he acted huffy and superior and claimed that we had already identified the situation he was talking about correctly, and implied we were stupid for asking what he was talking about. Oh brother....what a load of nonsense...
So I asked, okay in that case, what are you talking about? And then he acted huffy and superior and claimed that we had already identified the situation he was talking about correctly, and implied we were stupid for asking what he was talking about. Oh brother....what a load of nonsense...
The US should and should not
A common question in Skypeland that arises over and over, is "What should the US do in the world?" It is amazing to have people claim on one hand, that the US should never interfere in the rest of the world, and then in the next breath have them blame the US for not interfering with a much heavier hand to force foreign governments to treat their people better. Amazing. I always tell them, it is impossible for the US to both interfere and not interfere at the same time. And somehow, they never seem to sense a contradiction...
You know in England we have parties
One hears all kinds of things in Skypeland. A lady from England with a really thick accent who lives in Spain gave us a very confused description, "You know in England we have a different system than you. We have parties you know. You know we have a Queen in England. You don't notice. That is my point. We have a prime minister you know. What do you have ? It has slipped my mind. I don't know what it is called. You have.. a ... a ...you dont have a king. ...what is it called?" Meanwhile people were trying to prompt her over and over and over, saying "president president president" but somehow she didn't get it...
She was completely confused about what a democracy is. She could not understand the difference between a representative democracy and a direct democracy. The more she talked, the more confused she seemed. She was quite upset when people sent her chat messages. And finally we had to move her down to try to answer her questions. And she was probably offended by this, and so she left...
She was completely confused about what a democracy is. She could not understand the difference between a representative democracy and a direct democracy. The more she talked, the more confused she seemed. She was quite upset when people sent her chat messages. And finally we had to move her down to try to answer her questions. And she was probably offended by this, and so she left...
Texas has no bananas
A Texas man entered Skypeland and he seemed to be pretty confused on a lot of issues. He complained that the United States is like a prison and he is not allowed to leave (??). He said that obviously the reason US is in Iraq is not about oil, but to satisfy the Jews. He said that the oil is not benefitting him in Texas since there are no bananas in Texas (???).
He was upset that there are people in jail in Europe for denying the reality of Holocaust. He said that this is one reason he would never go to Europe.
No bananas in Texas huh? Hmm...
He was upset that there are people in jail in Europe for denying the reality of Holocaust. He said that this is one reason he would never go to Europe.
No bananas in Texas huh? Hmm...
Why does the US not help Africa?
A man from South Africa came in to our room in Skypeland to claim that the US does not ever assist Africa; it only promises money but never delivers. He claimed that the US had promised 50 million dollars to Africa but had only given one million dollars. I asked where this was, and he had no information. I looked at the official statistics, and the US government budget for aid for sub-Saharan Africa alone is 5.1 billion dollars:
http://www.usaid.gov/locations/sub-saharan_africa/
There are billions more being poured in there from American foundations such as the Gates Foundation, of course. This also does not include US indirect aid through the UN, the World Bank and the IMF. This does not include American contributions to NGOs like the Red Cross. And it does not include all the other African countries, like the African country of Egypt is the 2nd largest recipient of US aid, getting over 3 billion dollars a year, which is not included in this total.
When I asked him more, he switched to Sudan and wondered why the US was not doing anything in Sudan. When it was pointed out that the US is trying to correct the situation in Sudan (for example, putting pressure on offenders: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4952522.stm), he switched to complaining about New Orleans.
When I pointed out that New Orleans was not part of Africa, he said he could complain about whatever he wanted. When I tried to explain, he cut me off repeatedly. I could not discuss it since the room was repeatedly attacked by a hacker from India who just recited a memorized anti-American patter over and over in a monotone voice without breathing. Every time he came in the room to do this, I just turned off my sound so I would not have to listen. I think this South African was trying to play the "racism" card against the US by bringing up New Orleans. Somehow, someone from South Africa does not have a lot of authority to lecture the US about racism, frankly.
I did manage to ask the man from South Africa why rich South Africa did not help their poor African neighbors. Of course, he had no answer to that.
http://www.usaid.gov/locations/sub-saharan_africa/
There are billions more being poured in there from American foundations such as the Gates Foundation, of course. This also does not include US indirect aid through the UN, the World Bank and the IMF. This does not include American contributions to NGOs like the Red Cross. And it does not include all the other African countries, like the African country of Egypt is the 2nd largest recipient of US aid, getting over 3 billion dollars a year, which is not included in this total.
When I asked him more, he switched to Sudan and wondered why the US was not doing anything in Sudan. When it was pointed out that the US is trying to correct the situation in Sudan (for example, putting pressure on offenders: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4952522.stm), he switched to complaining about New Orleans.
When I pointed out that New Orleans was not part of Africa, he said he could complain about whatever he wanted. When I tried to explain, he cut me off repeatedly. I could not discuss it since the room was repeatedly attacked by a hacker from India who just recited a memorized anti-American patter over and over in a monotone voice without breathing. Every time he came in the room to do this, I just turned off my sound so I would not have to listen. I think this South African was trying to play the "racism" card against the US by bringing up New Orleans. Somehow, someone from South Africa does not have a lot of authority to lecture the US about racism, frankly.
I did manage to ask the man from South Africa why rich South Africa did not help their poor African neighbors. Of course, he had no answer to that.
Sneak
Every so often, a person will change their name and come up into the talking area in Skypeland. Many try to disguise their voices, but this is not so easy to do, and they are often found out.
This was the case with my "friend" who called me a "fucking CIA dog" the other day. What this person expects to gain by hanging around furtively in a room of people he clearly loathes with every fiber of his being, I do not know. Some bit of interesting information, inadvertently mentioned by some room participant? Intel on ideological foes?
Anyway, this UK/Pakistani "gentleman" could not resist and began to mutter insults. I instantly knew who it was and told the entire room his story. Several who had not encountered him before wanted to meet him one on one to tell him off. I said they were welcome to, but I had had enough.
Of course, this coward quickly left the room when he was found out. What depth of character! How impressive....
This was the case with my "friend" who called me a "fucking CIA dog" the other day. What this person expects to gain by hanging around furtively in a room of people he clearly loathes with every fiber of his being, I do not know. Some bit of interesting information, inadvertently mentioned by some room participant? Intel on ideological foes?
Anyway, this UK/Pakistani "gentleman" could not resist and began to mutter insults. I instantly knew who it was and told the entire room his story. Several who had not encountered him before wanted to meet him one on one to tell him off. I said they were welcome to, but I had had enough.
Of course, this coward quickly left the room when he was found out. What depth of character! How impressive....
Melt down
I had the pleasure of witnessing a bit of one of the more spectacular meltdowns in Skypeland the other night. The drunken Irish/English lout and bully came in and began berating and attacking all and sundry. Instead of leaving as I had previously, I just went idle and let him talk to the ether, befouling the room with his insults. Since I was not present, he got into fights with several others instead (He is an equal opportunity bully). He even attacked his supporters, calling them traitors for trying to calm down the situation and call a truce, apparently. He vomited his venomous detritus at everyone and anyone, in a slurred tirade of invective and expletives. This man definitely knows how to make friends and influence people...
I did hear a little bit before I shut off my audio. Again, for about the fourth or fifth time, I heard him go on long rants about pedophiles, calling others pedophiles, etc. I think this might be a clue to some event in his past or his current activities. Who else gets drunk and starts to focus obsessively on pedophilia?
Finally, after the host gave him several chances, the host started to get the message that this person is pure room poison. I only came back when this person had his microphone shut off, or was banished from the room. He managed to attack, insult and hurt the feelings of several of his allies and defenders who have been constantly claiming that he has a good side (which no one else I know has ever seen). I think that people who think it is unfair of us to berate him or try to silence him should experience him a few times for themselves, and decide if they want to engage in his form of "debate" and discussion. I have had my fill already and I plan to decline to engage him further in the future, aside from a furtive attack or two when he is unable to respond (on the theory that if he dishes it out, he sure better be able to take it, and also as a signal to him and others that I find him reprehensible). Others have suggested that as a silent message to any host allowing this person a platform on which to speak, that when this person has his microphone activated, everyone else should turn theirs off and leave the talking area and go to the listening area, so hosts start to understand that others do not want to talk to this degenerate.
My theory is that several people, such as the assorted "room killers" I described in a previous blog entry, are deadly to a conversation. You might be able to use their input to a skypecast in small doses, but you cannot leave their microphones open or they will destroy a room. The host must manage the room with one of these characters in it very carefully, and turn on their microphones for very short periods only; 15 or 30 seconds, perhaps. They can come up, insult everyone, and then have their microphones turned off so others are allowed to respond unimpeded. This can liven up a room, but it keeps the "room killers" from getting the upper hand. No one wants to hear one of these consummate bores take center stage for 1 or 2 hours, as is their wont. Others will leave out of boredom and frustration, or get into huge fights trying to drown out the nonsense and insults, or go idle, drifting away to other rooms ("room-hopping").
In the case of this contantly-inebriated Irish/English imbecile, I am no longer willing to listen to anything he has to say. He has proven himself to be completely unable to contribute in a constructive manner to any conversation on any subject. I see no reason anyone should subject themselves to the drunken blathering of uneducated losers. What is the point? It might have been funny the first 10 times. It is no longer that funny. It is just pitiful. And the sooner everyone realizes it, the better.
I did hear a little bit before I shut off my audio. Again, for about the fourth or fifth time, I heard him go on long rants about pedophiles, calling others pedophiles, etc. I think this might be a clue to some event in his past or his current activities. Who else gets drunk and starts to focus obsessively on pedophilia?
Finally, after the host gave him several chances, the host started to get the message that this person is pure room poison. I only came back when this person had his microphone shut off, or was banished from the room. He managed to attack, insult and hurt the feelings of several of his allies and defenders who have been constantly claiming that he has a good side (which no one else I know has ever seen). I think that people who think it is unfair of us to berate him or try to silence him should experience him a few times for themselves, and decide if they want to engage in his form of "debate" and discussion. I have had my fill already and I plan to decline to engage him further in the future, aside from a furtive attack or two when he is unable to respond (on the theory that if he dishes it out, he sure better be able to take it, and also as a signal to him and others that I find him reprehensible). Others have suggested that as a silent message to any host allowing this person a platform on which to speak, that when this person has his microphone activated, everyone else should turn theirs off and leave the talking area and go to the listening area, so hosts start to understand that others do not want to talk to this degenerate.
My theory is that several people, such as the assorted "room killers" I described in a previous blog entry, are deadly to a conversation. You might be able to use their input to a skypecast in small doses, but you cannot leave their microphones open or they will destroy a room. The host must manage the room with one of these characters in it very carefully, and turn on their microphones for very short periods only; 15 or 30 seconds, perhaps. They can come up, insult everyone, and then have their microphones turned off so others are allowed to respond unimpeded. This can liven up a room, but it keeps the "room killers" from getting the upper hand. No one wants to hear one of these consummate bores take center stage for 1 or 2 hours, as is their wont. Others will leave out of boredom and frustration, or get into huge fights trying to drown out the nonsense and insults, or go idle, drifting away to other rooms ("room-hopping").
In the case of this contantly-inebriated Irish/English imbecile, I am no longer willing to listen to anything he has to say. He has proven himself to be completely unable to contribute in a constructive manner to any conversation on any subject. I see no reason anyone should subject themselves to the drunken blathering of uneducated losers. What is the point? It might have been funny the first 10 times. It is no longer that funny. It is just pitiful. And the sooner everyone realizes it, the better.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Iran is a movie
In Skypeland, a man from Yemen came in to claim that all the drama about the nuclear program in Iran is not reality, but is only part of a movie. He claimed that this was all scripted out and planned by the US ahead of time.
He heard it in the street from a friend and he believes it must be true since it is different from what is in the media. He thought that all the activity in Iran was not reality, but just preparations for a movie. Iran has no real nuclear facilities; they are just movie sets constructed for the purpose of the movie. George Bush is the director of this movie. Someone else suggested that Yemen was hiring Iran to make a nuclear weapon for them. The Yemeni man said that this was also a movie, and they were both correct simultaneously.
The Yemeni person said that the governments do not represent the government of the people generally, but not always. It became fairly clear that this young man was exhibiting evidence of delusions and confusion... Well there have to be nuts everywhere, I guess...
He heard it in the street from a friend and he believes it must be true since it is different from what is in the media. He thought that all the activity in Iran was not reality, but just preparations for a movie. Iran has no real nuclear facilities; they are just movie sets constructed for the purpose of the movie. George Bush is the director of this movie. Someone else suggested that Yemen was hiring Iran to make a nuclear weapon for them. The Yemeni man said that this was also a movie, and they were both correct simultaneously.
The Yemeni person said that the governments do not represent the government of the people generally, but not always. It became fairly clear that this young man was exhibiting evidence of delusions and confusion... Well there have to be nuts everywhere, I guess...
USA vs. Ireland on immigration
An Irish lady who often criticizes the US for its immigration policy came to our cast in Skypeland. She said the US policy should not be skills-based, but should be purely humanitarian. She said that the US should allow in anyone who wanted to come to US. She said that the US should not give preference to anyone with needed or special skills, and should only show favoritism to those who are in the worst economic circumstances.
I said we should compare the Irish immigration policy to the American one to see which was more generous. She flew into a rage, and said she would not "insult" the Irish government by "googling around" to get numbers to compare the two countries. Nevertheless, I figured I would look at some of the data to try to understand the situation:
Foreign born are working in Each Country:
The foreign-born portion of the US workforce is 11.7% from the US Census data:
http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/p20-551.pdf
The foreign-born porition of the Irish workforce is only 8% :
http://www.workpermit.com/news/2006_04_04/uk/immigrants_to_ireland_continue.htm
So the US currently appears to be far more open to foreign-born workers than Ireland.
Skill Requirements for Immigration:
It turns out that Ireland has no humanitarian immigration categories at all, and has a big list of skills that are ineligible to immigrate to Ireland:
http://www.workpermit.com/ireland/ineligible_job_categories.htm
Ireland only allows those with needed skills to immigrate to Ireland, and has a severely restrictive immigration policy:
http://www.workpermit.com/ireland/ireland.htm
Current Yearly Immigration:
The US is currently admitting over 1.2 million immigrants per year:
http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=53
or about 0.4% per year. In addition, the US is the destination of 400,000-700,000 illegal immigrants per year, or about 0.13% -0.23%. This gives the US a total of legal and illegal immigration of 0.53%-0.63% per year.
Ireland is admitting about 40,000 immigrants per year:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/19/world/europe/19ireland.html?_r=1&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Subjects/I/Immigration%20and%20Refugees&oref=slogin
or about 0.95% per year.
Ireland started cracking down on illegal immigrants in 2002:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950CE2DE1239F934A25754C0A9649C8B63
Racial Mix: How many nonEuropeans?
Ireland has currently about 88,500 non-EU-15 residents:
http://migrationinformation.net/Feature/print.cfm?ID=260
constituting about 2% of the population.
The US is far more diverse, with
European American 58.8% (nonHispanic)
Hispanic American 14.5%
Black American 12.1%
Asian American 4.3%
American Indian 0.8%
Hawaiian and Pacific Islander 0.1%
Other Races 6%
Mixed Race 1.9%
Jewish Americans 2.5%
Arab Americans 1.3%
Iranian Americans 0.1-0.2%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States#Racial_groups (and related pages).
It is incredible that someone from a country that is 98% European is criticizing someone from a country that is 59% European of being racist or not admitting enough nonEuropeans as immigrants. I mean really, find something else to complain about...
Refugee Programs:
Between January 1995 and June 2004, Ireland officially recognized 6,304 persons as refugees, correspondinng to about 630 refugees per year. Irish asylum seekers cannot work unless they are officially recognized as refugees, and Ireland only recognizes a tiny fraction of the 5000-10,000 yearly asylum seekers as refugees:
http://migrationinformation.net/Feature/print.cfm?ID=260 This refugee flow, which was the peak of the Irish program, corresponds to about 0.015% of the current population.
However, Ireland abandoned the jus solis principle, which said that children born to immigrants in Ireland were Irish citizens, as holds in most other countries, including the US. Prior to January 2003, about 11,000 children of foreign born people a year applied for Irish residency under jus solis. In January 2003, the Irish Supreme Court ruled that these children did not have an automatic right to residency, and each situation had to be considered individually, taking into account "general requirements of the common good." A June 2004 public referendum confirmed this principle, with 79% of the public agreeing that those children born in Ireland to nonIrish should not be granted citizenship automatically. This caused a large drop-off in the number of people seeking asylum in Ireland.
Throughout the early 1990s, the US admitted 115,000 per year under refugee programs: http://www.migrationinformation.org/USfocus/display.cfm?id=229 In the latter 1990s, the US admitted 76,000 per year seeking asylum under refugee programs. After 9/11 this dropped to 28,000 per year:
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/36495.pdf
In 2003, President Bush announced a commitment to increase this back to at least 70,000 per year:
http://www.lirs.org/News/PresDesk/RD200312.htm and in 2004 the number admitted rebounded to 53,000: http://hias.org/advocacy/Docs/refFY_05_2005.php
and was also 54,000 in 2005:
http://www.state.gov/g/prm/rls/65215.htm and 41,000 in 2006 through September 30, 2006: http://www.state.gov/g/prm/refadm/rls/85970.htm
Over the 30 years ending on September 2006, the US admitted an average of 90,000 refugees per year. For most of this period, the US admitted more refugees than the rest of the world combined, and has always been the largest recipient of refugees. This corresponds to a yearly total of about 0.03% of the present US population.
It should be noted that a separate set of asylum programs allow those already in the US to seek asylum:
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3a82ef4c766fd010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=3a82ef4c766fd010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD
Amnesty programs and other special programs:
The US granted 3 million illegal aliens amnesty in 1986:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1106/p13s01-ussc.html
The US allowed 80,000 Chinese students to stay in the US in 1989:
http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/news/2006,0207-crs.pdf
after the Tiananmen Square massacre.
I said we should compare the Irish immigration policy to the American one to see which was more generous. She flew into a rage, and said she would not "insult" the Irish government by "googling around" to get numbers to compare the two countries. Nevertheless, I figured I would look at some of the data to try to understand the situation:
Foreign born are working in Each Country:
The foreign-born portion of the US workforce is 11.7% from the US Census data:
http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/p20-551.pdf
The foreign-born porition of the Irish workforce is only 8% :
http://www.workpermit.com/news/2006_04_04/uk/immigrants_to_ireland_continue.htm
So the US currently appears to be far more open to foreign-born workers than Ireland.
Skill Requirements for Immigration:
It turns out that Ireland has no humanitarian immigration categories at all, and has a big list of skills that are ineligible to immigrate to Ireland:
http://www.workpermit.com/ireland/ineligible_job_categories.htm
Ireland only allows those with needed skills to immigrate to Ireland, and has a severely restrictive immigration policy:
http://www.workpermit.com/ireland/ireland.htm
Current Yearly Immigration:
The US is currently admitting over 1.2 million immigrants per year:
http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=53
or about 0.4% per year. In addition, the US is the destination of 400,000-700,000 illegal immigrants per year, or about 0.13% -0.23%. This gives the US a total of legal and illegal immigration of 0.53%-0.63% per year.
Ireland is admitting about 40,000 immigrants per year:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/19/world/europe/19ireland.html?_r=1&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Subjects/I/Immigration%20and%20Refugees&oref=slogin
or about 0.95% per year.
Ireland started cracking down on illegal immigrants in 2002:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950CE2DE1239F934A25754C0A9649C8B63
Racial Mix: How many nonEuropeans?
Ireland has currently about 88,500 non-EU-15 residents:
http://migrationinformation.net/Feature/print.cfm?ID=260
constituting about 2% of the population.
The US is far more diverse, with
European American 58.8% (nonHispanic)
Hispanic American 14.5%
Black American 12.1%
Asian American 4.3%
American Indian 0.8%
Hawaiian and Pacific Islander 0.1%
Other Races 6%
Mixed Race 1.9%
Jewish Americans 2.5%
Arab Americans 1.3%
Iranian Americans 0.1-0.2%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States#Racial_groups (and related pages).
It is incredible that someone from a country that is 98% European is criticizing someone from a country that is 59% European of being racist or not admitting enough nonEuropeans as immigrants. I mean really, find something else to complain about...
Refugee Programs:
Between January 1995 and June 2004, Ireland officially recognized 6,304 persons as refugees, correspondinng to about 630 refugees per year. Irish asylum seekers cannot work unless they are officially recognized as refugees, and Ireland only recognizes a tiny fraction of the 5000-10,000 yearly asylum seekers as refugees:
http://migrationinformation.net/Feature/print.cfm?ID=260 This refugee flow, which was the peak of the Irish program, corresponds to about 0.015% of the current population.
However, Ireland abandoned the jus solis principle, which said that children born to immigrants in Ireland were Irish citizens, as holds in most other countries, including the US. Prior to January 2003, about 11,000 children of foreign born people a year applied for Irish residency under jus solis. In January 2003, the Irish Supreme Court ruled that these children did not have an automatic right to residency, and each situation had to be considered individually, taking into account "general requirements of the common good." A June 2004 public referendum confirmed this principle, with 79% of the public agreeing that those children born in Ireland to nonIrish should not be granted citizenship automatically. This caused a large drop-off in the number of people seeking asylum in Ireland.
Throughout the early 1990s, the US admitted 115,000 per year under refugee programs: http://www.migrationinformation.org/USfocus/display.cfm?id=229 In the latter 1990s, the US admitted 76,000 per year seeking asylum under refugee programs. After 9/11 this dropped to 28,000 per year:
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/36495.pdf
In 2003, President Bush announced a commitment to increase this back to at least 70,000 per year:
http://www.lirs.org/News/PresDesk/RD200312.htm and in 2004 the number admitted rebounded to 53,000: http://hias.org/advocacy/Docs/refFY_05_2005.php
and was also 54,000 in 2005:
http://www.state.gov/g/prm/rls/65215.htm and 41,000 in 2006 through September 30, 2006: http://www.state.gov/g/prm/refadm/rls/85970.htm
Over the 30 years ending on September 2006, the US admitted an average of 90,000 refugees per year. For most of this period, the US admitted more refugees than the rest of the world combined, and has always been the largest recipient of refugees. This corresponds to a yearly total of about 0.03% of the present US population.
It should be noted that a separate set of asylum programs allow those already in the US to seek asylum:
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3a82ef4c766fd010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=3a82ef4c766fd010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD
Amnesty programs and other special programs:
The US granted 3 million illegal aliens amnesty in 1986:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1106/p13s01-ussc.html
The US allowed 80,000 Chinese students to stay in the US in 1989:
http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/news/2006,0207-crs.pdf
after the Tiananmen Square massacre.
There have been recent calls to grant amnesty to the 12 million - 20 million illegal aliens in the US.
Blindly religious, easily manipulated
A "European" who joined Skypeland said that he thought the Americans were professional and hard working, but blindly religious and easily manipulated. The "European" said he was proud to be a muslim. He said that the American government was a criminal organization exploiting the Arab countries for their oil. He said this is what the US is doing in Afghanistan. I asked him about Afghani oil production, and he alluded to a planned pipeline across Afghanistan as the motivation of the US and coalition forces invasion of Afghanistan.
I told him that the contracts for the oil pipeline in Afghanistan were signed by the Taliban, which he was somewaht surprised to hear. He shut up on the subject after he heard that.
The "European" claimed that the government in Iraq was a puppet government. An Iraqi came up to ask this person where he was from. The "European" refused to say where he was from. The Iraqi said it was because the "European" was ashamed to say where he was from. The "European" became more and more belligerent. Finally he had so much background noise and so many echoes that the host moved him down. He came back and said he would tell us where he was from. But he never did and just started to insult everyone. Then he finally he said he was in France but refused to give his country of origin. He just insulted and cursed others and called them chickens.
We asked him since he was so proud to be French, what he thought of French President Sarkozy's threat to bomb Iran. He was caught offguard at this, and had no reply. Characteristically, when he had no response, he just cursed others. A sure sign of his close-mindedness, lack of intellectual capability and vacuousness of his arguments.
Addendum: A good friend who is from Morocco tells me it is more than likely that this person is Moroccan, since similar arguments are common in Morocco. Moroccans also pride themselves as being "European" and will often lie and say they are French.
I told him that the contracts for the oil pipeline in Afghanistan were signed by the Taliban, which he was somewaht surprised to hear. He shut up on the subject after he heard that.
The "European" claimed that the government in Iraq was a puppet government. An Iraqi came up to ask this person where he was from. The "European" refused to say where he was from. The Iraqi said it was because the "European" was ashamed to say where he was from. The "European" became more and more belligerent. Finally he had so much background noise and so many echoes that the host moved him down. He came back and said he would tell us where he was from. But he never did and just started to insult everyone. Then he finally he said he was in France but refused to give his country of origin. He just insulted and cursed others and called them chickens.
We asked him since he was so proud to be French, what he thought of French President Sarkozy's threat to bomb Iran. He was caught offguard at this, and had no reply. Characteristically, when he had no response, he just cursed others. A sure sign of his close-mindedness, lack of intellectual capability and vacuousness of his arguments.
Addendum: A good friend who is from Morocco tells me it is more than likely that this person is Moroccan, since similar arguments are common in Morocco. Moroccans also pride themselves as being "European" and will often lie and say they are French.
Lies or bias?
In Skypeland, a cast whose subject was the "Lies on Al Jazeera" attracted a trickle of visitors from the Muslim/Arab world. One young engineer from Canada whose family lives in Baghdad visited to tell us he was positive Al Jazeera was full of lies. I asked how he knew, and he said his family would often witness visit events that were subsequently completely incorrectly reported on Al Jazeera. He has been noticing this for a few years, and now he no longer believes Al Jazeera.
An Iraqi doctor had many examples, including an incorrect report of legislation in the US Congress ordering the split of Iraq into 3 separate countries. An Israeli noted several incorrect reports of rocket firings and terrorist actions. One could even check these reports against youtube videos of the events and see they are wrong.
A man from Egypt came in to state that what he had seen on Al Jazeera about Egypt was wrong and all lies. The Egyptian said that Al Jazeera only shows the negative side of Egypt. The Egyptian said that even though Al Jazeera lied all the time about Egypt, he was positive Al Jazeera did not lie about Israel. Ah, how reasonable... He was directed to a video that showed Al Jazeera was lying in one instance about Israel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uH2VGOo3Nos
He said, "I have seen enough videos". He did not want to see anything that might change his mind I guess. Finally when he saw the video, he claimed it was a fake video.
One person who came into the room thought that since the cast had a Western bent, that surely everyone in the room had to be Israeli, or Jewish. However, there were 2 or 3 Muslims in the room, an Iraqi, a Canadian, two Americans, a German, two Jewish people etc.
An Iraqi doctor had many examples, including an incorrect report of legislation in the US Congress ordering the split of Iraq into 3 separate countries. An Israeli noted several incorrect reports of rocket firings and terrorist actions. One could even check these reports against youtube videos of the events and see they are wrong.
A man from Egypt came in to state that what he had seen on Al Jazeera about Egypt was wrong and all lies. The Egyptian said that Al Jazeera only shows the negative side of Egypt. The Egyptian said that even though Al Jazeera lied all the time about Egypt, he was positive Al Jazeera did not lie about Israel. Ah, how reasonable... He was directed to a video that showed Al Jazeera was lying in one instance about Israel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uH2VGOo3Nos
He said, "I have seen enough videos". He did not want to see anything that might change his mind I guess. Finally when he saw the video, he claimed it was a fake video.
One person who came into the room thought that since the cast had a Western bent, that surely everyone in the room had to be Israeli, or Jewish. However, there were 2 or 3 Muslims in the room, an Iraqi, a Canadian, two Americans, a German, two Jewish people etc.
Thank God I am an atheist!
One hears all kinds of things in Skypeland. A French lady told us today, "Thank God I am an atheist!"
More about conspiracy theories
Amy Zegart, a professor at UCLA, was interviewed about her new book published by Princeton University Press, Spying Blind. She looked at all the material about 9/11 conspiracies she could for over 5 years and interviewed 75 government officials and others involved. She was able to find absolutely NO evidence whatsoever for 9/11 conspiracies. You can hear it by visiting this site:
http://www.wamu.org/audio/dr/07/09/r2070927-13736.asx
http://www.wamu.org/audio/dr/07/09/r2070927-13736.asx
That is not terrorism!
An Algerian came to a room about Al Jazeera in Skypeland and started talking about terrorism. He said that all the turmoil in Iraq was caused by the USA to give it a reason to stay in Iraq. He was asked about the foreigners in Iraq who were engaged in terrorism, and he denied that they existed. He was told that 2500 Saudis and 1500 Iranians had been arrested in Iraq for engaging in terrorism and he did not have much to say. He was asked if people who strap bombs to themselves in Iraq are terrorists and he said they were not. However, he said people who strap bombs to themselves in Algeria are terrorists.
He said he gets all his news from Al Jazeera and he believes they tell nothing but the truth. He was given examples of lies in Al Jazeera, such as misrepresentation of US Congressional actions, with examples and evidence of their lies. He claimed that what Al Jazeera said was true since he heard it on Al Jazeera. He claimed that it did not say it in the evidence he was given. The host disagreed. He wanted to nit-pick. He was given two articles, one from Al Jazeera and one from the US media. It turned out after a lot of arguing, he had not read the US media account. He was asked to read it. He refused to read it. He claimed he had promised to read it, but just wanted to argue instead. Wow, how rational and reasonable...
He said that there were no problems between Shia and Sunni, and never had been. When I talk to Shia, sooner or later many of them will tell me that Sunni are not real Muslims, but are infidels, and deserve to die. Similarly, many Sunni will tell me that Shia are infidels and not real Muslims and deserve to die. According to a friend who is knowledgeable about such things, the Shia and Sunni have different prayers and even use different use different versions of the Koran. There is a long history of conflict between these groups in many places, contrary to his claims:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunni-Shia_relations
He said he gets all his news from Al Jazeera and he believes they tell nothing but the truth. He was given examples of lies in Al Jazeera, such as misrepresentation of US Congressional actions, with examples and evidence of their lies. He claimed that what Al Jazeera said was true since he heard it on Al Jazeera. He claimed that it did not say it in the evidence he was given. The host disagreed. He wanted to nit-pick. He was given two articles, one from Al Jazeera and one from the US media. It turned out after a lot of arguing, he had not read the US media account. He was asked to read it. He refused to read it. He claimed he had promised to read it, but just wanted to argue instead. Wow, how rational and reasonable...
He said that there were no problems between Shia and Sunni, and never had been. When I talk to Shia, sooner or later many of them will tell me that Sunni are not real Muslims, but are infidels, and deserve to die. Similarly, many Sunni will tell me that Shia are infidels and not real Muslims and deserve to die. According to a friend who is knowledgeable about such things, the Shia and Sunni have different prayers and even use different use different versions of the Koran. There is a long history of conflict between these groups in many places, contrary to his claims:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunni-Shia_relations
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Elect Schwarzenegger
A question that arises over and over in Skypeland from foreigners is, "Why can't Arnold Schwarzenegger be president?" No matter how often the constitutional clause discussing the birthplace requirements of American presidential candidates and vice presidential candidates is explained to them, they never seem to get it. For some reason, Europeans and residents of the UK seem to want to argue about this for hours on end. It is incredible. They dispute whatever you tell them, and the more you explain it to them, the angrier and angrier they get about it. It is that hard to understand? Incredible...
You think too much
Someone who sounded like a Rastafarian, but claimed to be from Sri Lanka and one of the areas hit by the Tsunami, came into our room in Skypeland. When someone said that he was cooking spaghetti, the Tsunami survivor said, "That is great. It is so tropical". Then he started ranting and raving about "Don't think too much. You think too much".
Then the host asked, "What is going on in this crazy world?" The Tsunami survivor said, "I don't know I have nothing to say" and so on. And then another person came in, and said, "Can you hear me?" Everyone said yes. The new person said, "Am I coming through?" Everyone said yes. The new person said, " Am I clear?" Everyone again said yes. Then the new person said, " I switched microphones. So this has clear?" Everyone said yes. The new person said, "There is no background noise?" Again, everyone confirmed this. The new person said, "You don't hear no shit?" And this continued, on and on.
The Rastafarian then launched into a random string of nonsense, "You know I dont use the word white to describe the difference between you and me. I use white to describe the difference between you and me, you know? You have to prepare the way...I know understand this. How are you ? I can' call you sister... Sister, lemme tell you somethin... Who is dis? Explain da name an rank. Malgamation. Yeah I know ancestors may like may like you a mistakes must you take the blame for it? Like divide and rule for instance? I think you should. Divide and Rule? I think you should. I think the world is in balance because something is stolen from us. Go to the third world; they all think the same ting. I don't hate like conflict... But we are priveleged. Who you defend the pole or protect yourself? Is a big possible question, I know. But it is a question I have experience, you know. You know. Killing. Ya naw. You have web cam? I wanna talk to you some more. So sister, how is it in your country? Are you afraid to show how you look? Wall else? I am curious because I have my own problems. Soldiers die all the time. I don't need a ring. Your brother died 89. White-black the same, you know. But you divide us, you know. There is no south east west Tsunami mon. You know about the wind? I am froma eye-lan. Just wanna cept me as a brudder man. Why you you tink you know about me. We no have panadol, we have no aspirin, we have ganja. I am naw gunna le go a ma roo, ya know? You still have no idea, you know. I gant even try. I dont even try. I dont wanna try.I want america to understand us. They got the power you know. You got to meet it you know. So please, you know. You are young like me. Black-white. Don't lose your soul. Let's talk about one love. You explain it all to me. Definitely be back. Be cool. I am just a fruit tree. I am just worried about the rest of the world. You are American. You gotta stand up brudder. That is all I am saying you know. My identity is very certain. Who said dat? You know what tropical is? You probably will not. You think I am enemy to you? Ella ella. In Africa we usually say ella when there is a problem. Aye. Whose da ? It is not a good way to talk to a brudder man. What you gunna do? You gunna mix me in tea? I wish. I wish...I like you not to know what lankin Island there is. Because I don't think you will understand that. No I can't bro. Knowledge is one tin, you know, but experience is dis...one ting you know. Definitely one ting. Too many... too many... too close to bah bah. It is de way it is do...I carry on like straight arrow. I carry on like dat. So no problem. Was up doe?"
Nothing like a long stream of non sequiturs and nonsense...It would be funnier if it was not so sad.
Then the host asked, "What is going on in this crazy world?" The Tsunami survivor said, "I don't know I have nothing to say" and so on. And then another person came in, and said, "Can you hear me?" Everyone said yes. The new person said, "Am I coming through?" Everyone said yes. The new person said, " Am I clear?" Everyone again said yes. Then the new person said, " I switched microphones. So this has clear?" Everyone said yes. The new person said, "There is no background noise?" Again, everyone confirmed this. The new person said, "You don't hear no shit?" And this continued, on and on.
The Rastafarian then launched into a random string of nonsense, "You know I dont use the word white to describe the difference between you and me. I use white to describe the difference between you and me, you know? You have to prepare the way...I know understand this. How are you ? I can' call you sister... Sister, lemme tell you somethin... Who is dis? Explain da name an rank. Malgamation. Yeah I know ancestors may like may like you a mistakes must you take the blame for it? Like divide and rule for instance? I think you should. Divide and Rule? I think you should. I think the world is in balance because something is stolen from us. Go to the third world; they all think the same ting. I don't hate like conflict... But we are priveleged. Who you defend the pole or protect yourself? Is a big possible question, I know. But it is a question I have experience, you know. You know. Killing. Ya naw. You have web cam? I wanna talk to you some more. So sister, how is it in your country? Are you afraid to show how you look? Wall else? I am curious because I have my own problems. Soldiers die all the time. I don't need a ring. Your brother died 89. White-black the same, you know. But you divide us, you know. There is no south east west Tsunami mon. You know about the wind? I am froma eye-lan. Just wanna cept me as a brudder man. Why you you tink you know about me. We no have panadol, we have no aspirin, we have ganja. I am naw gunna le go a ma roo, ya know? You still have no idea, you know. I gant even try. I dont even try. I dont wanna try.I want america to understand us. They got the power you know. You got to meet it you know. So please, you know. You are young like me. Black-white. Don't lose your soul. Let's talk about one love. You explain it all to me. Definitely be back. Be cool. I am just a fruit tree. I am just worried about the rest of the world. You are American. You gotta stand up brudder. That is all I am saying you know. My identity is very certain. Who said dat? You know what tropical is? You probably will not. You think I am enemy to you? Ella ella. In Africa we usually say ella when there is a problem. Aye. Whose da ? It is not a good way to talk to a brudder man. What you gunna do? You gunna mix me in tea? I wish. I wish...I like you not to know what lankin Island there is. Because I don't think you will understand that. No I can't bro. Knowledge is one tin, you know, but experience is dis...one ting you know. Definitely one ting. Too many... too many... too close to bah bah. It is de way it is do...I carry on like straight arrow. I carry on like dat. So no problem. Was up doe?"
Nothing like a long stream of non sequiturs and nonsense...It would be funnier if it was not so sad.
I am beefy
One young man in Skypeland wanted to prove to me how educated he was and how smart he was and what a deep critical thinker he was. His proof? He told me "I am beefy". Wow...impressive...
Don't use your "meat mind"
We talked to a Turk who had a bit of a fundamentalist bent in Skypeland. We asked him about Charles Darwin and evolution, and he condemned evolution as stupid and claimed that Darwin was mentally ill. He said he knew better than Darwin since he knew how to "think". I asked about all the professors at the Turkish universities and the Turkish Academy of Sciences who subscribed to evolution? Are they not thinking? He said they were only thinking with their "meat minds" and not doing real thinking like he was. Ah...
At first I thought he might be a liberal Muslim because of some of his statements, but as he spoke more and more I realized he was just a different flavor of fundamentalist. The worst feature of his beliefs became revealed when he said he did not need to know about other religions since Islam told him that Islam was the true religion. We tried to get him to learn more about other religions. However, he became combative at this point and claimed he is smarter than all of us since he "reads". Ah, maybe he reads, but it doesn't show very much....
He told me that the prophet Mohammed had meditated and decided that there was no time, which is what he claimed science says currently (??). He said that the Sun is a big ball of Helium that is being consumed to make Hydrogen (backwards, of course) and that it will in 400 years grow to be a huge star extended out as far as Uranus (not true) and that it will turn into a black hole (not true) and will eat the earth, as Mohammed predicted (did Mohammed predict this? I doubt it...).
I could not take being lectured to by someone who knows nothing...so I left...
At first I thought he might be a liberal Muslim because of some of his statements, but as he spoke more and more I realized he was just a different flavor of fundamentalist. The worst feature of his beliefs became revealed when he said he did not need to know about other religions since Islam told him that Islam was the true religion. We tried to get him to learn more about other religions. However, he became combative at this point and claimed he is smarter than all of us since he "reads". Ah, maybe he reads, but it doesn't show very much....
He told me that the prophet Mohammed had meditated and decided that there was no time, which is what he claimed science says currently (??). He said that the Sun is a big ball of Helium that is being consumed to make Hydrogen (backwards, of course) and that it will in 400 years grow to be a huge star extended out as far as Uranus (not true) and that it will turn into a black hole (not true) and will eat the earth, as Mohammed predicted (did Mohammed predict this? I doubt it...).
I could not take being lectured to by someone who knows nothing...so I left...
You have a parasite on your voice
A Turkish man who was first visiting us in Skypeland and he claimed that science and the Koran are meeting at the same place. A friend with a strong American accent joined, and he was confused. He complained bitterly that the American had a "parasite" on his voice and asked the American to adjust his microphone to get rid of this "parasite". A German lady in the cast quickly understood what the problem was; the Turk had never heard someone with an American accent before (amazingly) and thought that this accent corresponded to a "parasite".
More about respect
As I further consider the claims on Skypeland that Columbia University and/or the United States was not behaving properly when it brought up points of contention with Ahmadinejad during his visit, I believe there might have been other benefits to this. Aside from educating Iranians and others around the Middle East about American comportment and mores, and not giving him a free high-visibility platform to engage in hate speech and disingenous misrepresentations, there might be other advantages.
Apparently, according to some at least, Ahmadinejad is cushioned inside some sort of bubble or cocoon and does not realize the reaction of the world to his position. He believes that it is all American propaganda and that he is secretly loved and respected and that most of the world is swallowing his lies. However, seeing an academic institution, and especially a left-wing institution, rejecting him might be valuable. At Columbia, he had strong evidence that he is held in contempt and viewed widely as deceitful in a segment of the world, no matter what his own personal handlers and yess-men say.
I might also note that it was not super disrespectful at Columbia either. People were courteous, however they brought up uncomfortable subjects. He was not booed. He had a nice round of applause at several points while he talked. If people complain about this reception, they are living in a fantasy world...
Here is a radio broadcast discussing it on my favorite radio show, the Diane Rehm Show on NPR:
http://wamu.org/audio/dr/07/09/r1070925-13732.asx
Apparently, according to some at least, Ahmadinejad is cushioned inside some sort of bubble or cocoon and does not realize the reaction of the world to his position. He believes that it is all American propaganda and that he is secretly loved and respected and that most of the world is swallowing his lies. However, seeing an academic institution, and especially a left-wing institution, rejecting him might be valuable. At Columbia, he had strong evidence that he is held in contempt and viewed widely as deceitful in a segment of the world, no matter what his own personal handlers and yess-men say.
I might also note that it was not super disrespectful at Columbia either. People were courteous, however they brought up uncomfortable subjects. He was not booed. He had a nice round of applause at several points while he talked. If people complain about this reception, they are living in a fantasy world...
Here is a radio broadcast discussing it on my favorite radio show, the Diane Rehm Show on NPR:
http://wamu.org/audio/dr/07/09/r1070925-13732.asx
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Being polite to a guest
After President Ahmadinejad came to the USA, many people in Skypeland wanted to voice various opinions about it. One young Iranian/American man came in and claimed that it was rude of the president of Columbia University to give a short critical speech before Ahmadinejad's speech, since they would never do this in the Middle East. I pointed out that he is in the USA, not the Middle East, and when in Rome, you do as the Romans do. And in the USA, people behave like they do in the USA. Someone was expecting people in the USA not to behave like they are in the USA? And if they do not like it, too bad.
Why do people from the West visiting the Middle East conform to Middle Eastern standards for dress codes? They are following this very principle. Why do I use the local currency when I visit a foreign country? I am following this very principle. Why do I expect to hear the local language, eat the local food, and follow the local customs, when I am in another land? I am following this very same principle.
So given all that, why are people even whining about how the US is acting in this instance? Believe me, if sharp questions had not been raised about this man's views and behavior, it would have looked very bad for Columbia and free speech.
People seem to think that democracy and free speech means freedom from offense. It does not; just remember the publication of the Mohammad Cartoons in the West. If the Middle East is offended by this, so much the better, because their lack of knowledge of the outside world is part of what is preventing them from understanding the West and current events and history. As Wafa Sultan says, they need to be insulted more frequently and more vigorously.
People also think Ahmadinejad should have been accorded some measure of respect to spread his hate-filled agenda without opposition at Columbia as a head of state.
*First, we all know he is not a head of state (except in name).
*Second, someone like that deserves minimal respect.
*Third, in a nation with free speech, he and everyone else should have expected he would be challenged. If someone did not expect this, they do not know the US very well and better learn quickly.
*Fourth, Ahmadinejad certainly offends other leaders and nations on a daily basis with his rhetoric; where is his respect? Respect is a two-way street.
*Fifth, Ahmadinejad wants a "debate" with Bush in front of the UN, so he is not showing much knowledge of the formalities and procedures of the UN, so he himself wants to engage in the very criticism of another leader that he has expressed so much outrage over.
*Sixth, in Western culture, a guest who repeatedly insults his hosts who are extending him hospitality as Ahmadeinajad did is not going to be treated with much respect. Ahmadinejad accused the US of terrorism, greed, selfishness, war crimes, and a lot of other misdeeds, all while smiling. His accusations were far worse than those made by the president of Columbia. After all, the president of Columbia did not accuse Iran of engaging in terrorism itself, or advocate the elimination of the state of Iran, which is what Ahmadinejad did to another sovereign state.
So, I get tired of the whining... If you go to a Chinese restaurant, you should not complain that they do not have Mexican food there.
Why do people from the West visiting the Middle East conform to Middle Eastern standards for dress codes? They are following this very principle. Why do I use the local currency when I visit a foreign country? I am following this very principle. Why do I expect to hear the local language, eat the local food, and follow the local customs, when I am in another land? I am following this very same principle.
So given all that, why are people even whining about how the US is acting in this instance? Believe me, if sharp questions had not been raised about this man's views and behavior, it would have looked very bad for Columbia and free speech.
People seem to think that democracy and free speech means freedom from offense. It does not; just remember the publication of the Mohammad Cartoons in the West. If the Middle East is offended by this, so much the better, because their lack of knowledge of the outside world is part of what is preventing them from understanding the West and current events and history. As Wafa Sultan says, they need to be insulted more frequently and more vigorously.
People also think Ahmadinejad should have been accorded some measure of respect to spread his hate-filled agenda without opposition at Columbia as a head of state.
*First, we all know he is not a head of state (except in name).
*Second, someone like that deserves minimal respect.
*Third, in a nation with free speech, he and everyone else should have expected he would be challenged. If someone did not expect this, they do not know the US very well and better learn quickly.
*Fourth, Ahmadinejad certainly offends other leaders and nations on a daily basis with his rhetoric; where is his respect? Respect is a two-way street.
*Fifth, Ahmadinejad wants a "debate" with Bush in front of the UN, so he is not showing much knowledge of the formalities and procedures of the UN, so he himself wants to engage in the very criticism of another leader that he has expressed so much outrage over.
*Sixth, in Western culture, a guest who repeatedly insults his hosts who are extending him hospitality as Ahmadeinajad did is not going to be treated with much respect. Ahmadinejad accused the US of terrorism, greed, selfishness, war crimes, and a lot of other misdeeds, all while smiling. His accusations were far worse than those made by the president of Columbia. After all, the president of Columbia did not accuse Iran of engaging in terrorism itself, or advocate the elimination of the state of Iran, which is what Ahmadinejad did to another sovereign state.
So, I get tired of the whining... If you go to a Chinese restaurant, you should not complain that they do not have Mexican food there.
Nothing like a good lie
Someone who delights in yanking our chain in Skypeland for fun demonstrated one of the more common phenomena in Skypeland. He claimed originally that a "Zionist" was a Jew who was trying to get control of the entire world. Later he denied this and said it was only about Jewish control of the world's money, and later he denied that and said it was only about the protection of Israel. And whenever you asked him any question, he would deny anything he had said previously, and make another statement, which he would later deny. He delights in playing dumb to try to inject chaos into any cast, but it gets old...
I want to lecture
Some people just love to hear themselves speak. One character who identified himself as a Turk living in Australia came to visit our room in Skypeland and proceeded to lecture on and on about how to run a cast, and how it was against Skype policy to not let someone talk and it was undemocratic. He said he had been waiting to talk for 2 hours. The host pointed out to him that there was no such policy and she could do whatever she wanted. He put in his profile the message, "HOST, PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC".
He bored us for about 5 minutes saying he wanted to only talk for 2 minutes, but said nothing at all for 5 minutes except that he wanted to talk for 2 minutes. Then he was asked to not waste time and to say something. He said he did not have a question and just had a statement. Then he decided he had a question. He did not ask a question however. Then he was asked a question, "What would he say if someone threatened to wipe Australia off the map? Would he acquiesce and leave Australia or would he not like it?"
The Turkish Australian refused to answer and just asked another question in return, talking about energy and power and other nonsense but never coming to a point. And then he was asked to be quiet several times, and then started to talk immediately after agreeing to be quiet and listen. And this happened 4 or 5 times in a row. So after waiting for over 2 hours to talk, he had his microphone shut off and lost his turn. Oh well...
I sent him some text messages:
[9:51:58 PM] Stinky says: You want to know what sort of impression you make? read
http://skypelandadventures.blogspot.com/2007/09/i-want-to-lecture.html
[9:59:08 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: HEY MATE , I HAVE BEEN HERE OVER 2 HRS. YOHAVENT GIVE ME 2 MINUTES
[9:59:37 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: YOU COME TO MY CAST I LL SHOW YOU WHAT IS DEMOCRACY
[9:59:52 PM] Stinky says: haha
[9:59:59 PM] Stinky says: you read what I wrote about you?
[10:00:04 PM] Stinky says: that is my impression
[10:00:08 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: AND I DONT NEED A LINK IF YOU DONT HAVE TIME TO LISTEN
[10:00:29 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: NO I DIDNT CLICK ON IT
[10:00:45 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THATS HOW MUCH U DONT KNOW SKYPE
[10:01:01 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THAT SHOW YOUR EDUCATION LEVEL
[10:01:16 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: NEVER CLICK A LINK
[10:01:27 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: WHEN YOU DONT KNOW
[10:01:33 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: :)
[10:01:45 PM] Stinky says: haha
[10:01:46 PM] Stinky says: oh ok
[10:01:54 PM] Stinky says: i will cut and paste it to you
[10:02:36 PM] At this point, I sent him the material above...
He then left the room after I sent that.
[10:06:19 PM] Stinky says: truth hurts huh?
[10:06:42 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: SORY MATE I DONT HAVE TIME TO READ
[10:07:00 PM] Stinky says: or think either
[10:07:01 PM] Stinky says: clearly
[10:08:08 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says:
IF YOU DONT HAVE TIME TO LISTEN IS LIKE READING THE COVER OF BOOK AND THROW IT AWAY
[10:08:21 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THATS WHAT YOU GUYS DID
[10:09:14 PM] Stinky says: yeah haha....we are stupid...clearly
[10:10:08 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: IF YOU REALY WANNA KNOW SOME ONE VIEWS YOU LET THEM FINISH, FOR THE SAKE OF THAT HE S BEEN LISTENING YOU GUYS OVER 2 2222222222222222222 HOURS
[10:10:31 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: NOW YOU THINK
[10:10:38 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: YOU HAD AN OPPT.
[10:10:42 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: TO LEARN
[10:10:51 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: BUT YOU TOOK IT AWAY
[10:11:02 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THATS PITTY
[10:13:17 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: MAYBE YOU HAD
[10:16:04 PM] Stinky says: we dont mind contrary views...but we dont like to hear just nonsense...and you are unwilling or unable to read why you created a very very bad impression
[10:16:45 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: IF U LOOK BEUTY YOU SEE BEAUTY
[10:17:02 PM] Stinky says: I have had other friends who said you did the same thing in other rooms with the same result
[10:17:11 PM] Stinky says: so you are good at making friends and making a good impression
[10:17:53 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: 2 MIN . WITH OUT INTREPT.
[10:21:03 PM] Stinky says: ok i got you a chance
[10:21:05 PM] Stinky says: 2 minutes
[10:38:32 PM] Stinky says: dont want your 2 minutes?
[10:49:20 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: PLEASE TELL THAT HOST, SHE IS NICE , COOL, BUT VERY DANGER, IF U ASK ME WHY IGNORANCE IS BIGGEST DANGER WE HAVE IN OUR SOCIETY. IF A PERSON DONT KNOW IS FINE , IF THEY STUBORN TO NOT WANT TO KNOW AND NOT ALLOWING TO SOME ONE TELL THEIR OPPINION IN 2 MIN. MAX.
[10:49:27 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THATS SAD
[10:49:59 PM] Stinky says: haha
[10:50:02 PM] Stinky says: you have a chance
[10:50:06 PM] Stinky says: but you probably wont take it
[10:50:33 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: SO WHEN A OPPORTUNITY COMES TO YOU GRAB IT IF NOT IT LL BE BIGGES CHANCE WE EVER KNOW
[10:59:37 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: REMEMBER THIS IF YOU HAVE WRONG INFO ABUT ANYTHING NO MATTER THAT I COULD HAVE LISTEN TO YOU 3 HRS BUT WHEN SOME ONE GIVE VIRUS TYPE OF INFO. THEN YOUR HIRDDRIVE NEED A VIRUS PROGRAM OR FORMAT OR ECT. ECT. - LIKE U DID. I DIDN'T EVEN TALK AND YOU SEND ME A LINK TO CLICK, DID YOU KNOW PEOPLE SEND LINK TO CLICK JUST TO HAVE FUN OR SEND A VIRUS OR SEND STUPID ARTICLE OR SEND RIGHT INFO. BUT TO GET RIGHT INFO FROM SOME ONE FIR ST THEY HAVE TO KNOW WHAT YOU TALKING ABOUT , OTHER WISE LEWIS (LEVIS (chuckle)) OR LEE COOPER OR DIESEL OR BLUE JEANS , SO IF YOU LOOK AT EVERYTHING WHITE THEN YOU'LL BELIEVE COW DRINKS MILK (blush);(
(I thought calves drank milk; silly me. But what does this have to do with anything?)
[10:59:53 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: AND REMEMBER 1960 S
[11:00:12 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THEN 1980 S
[11:00:20 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THEN WALL
[11:00:25 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: WHAT WALL
[11:00:32 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: WHAT WALL
[11:00:36 PM] Stinky says: huh??
[11:00:40 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: ISTHAT BERLIN WALL
[11:00:43 PM] Stinky says: I cut and pasted it for you
[11:00:49 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: NO FUNNY WALL
[11:00:53 PM] Stinky says: so you didnt have to click
[11:00:57 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: IS THAT PEACE
[11:01:00 PM] Stinky says: Try to be rational
[11:01:52 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: 1980'S WHEN THE WALL IS DOW IN GERMANY
I WAS VERY HAPPY SO PEOPLE BE COME TO KNOW EACH OTHER
THEN YOU MAKE ANOTHER ONE
[11:02:08 PM] Stinky says: and?
[11:02:17 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: YOU BETTER ASK WHAT IS GOOD
[11:02:23 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: FOR PEOPLE
[11:02:40 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: FOR SOCIETY
[11:02:59 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: LIVE WITH EACH OTHER
[11:03:07 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: LIKE IN AUSTRALIA
[11:03:11 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: LIKE IN USA
[11:03:18 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: LIKE IN UK
[11:03:45 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: SO HOW WE ARE GOING TO DO THAT FIRST LEARN FROM EACH OTHER
[11:03:52 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THEN WE TALK
[11:04:19 PM] Stinky says: It is too bad you are not very rational, otherwise you might be able to convince people of your points
[11:04:20 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: SO BELIVE IT OR NOT I VE LISTEN YOU GUYS OVER 2 HRS.
[11:04:37 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: ALL I WANTED TO SAY 2 MIN.
[11:04:59 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: U KNOW WAT AND I WON'T WRITE IT HER
[11:05:13 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: BECAUSE IT DOESN'T WORTH IT
[11:05:34 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: ANY WAY OUR LIFE ISTO SHORT
[11:06:02 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: WE ARE LIVING IN PHISICALY 60 80 MAYBE 95
[11:06:11 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: ALLA THAT YEARS ,
[11:06:20 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: WHAT IS GOOD FOR US
[11:06:30 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: FOR MY NEIGHBOUR
[11:06:35 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: S
[11:06:42 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: RELATIVES
[11:06:47 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: FRIENDS
[11:07:05 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: AND OTHER PEOPLE IN THE WORLD
[11:07:08 PM] Stinky says: Well peace is good...but you dont deliver that message
[11:07:17 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: WHETHER
[11:07:18 PM] Stinky says: you deliver a confused message of nonsense
[11:07:18 PM] Stinky says: sorry
[11:07:26 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THEY LIVE IN NEPAL
[11:07:34 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: OR VENEZULLA
[11:08:07 PM] Stinky says: I am sorry I dont have time for more of this nonsense
[11:08:11 PM] Stinky says: You had your 2 minute chance
[11:08:13 PM] Stinky says: more than once
[11:08:17 PM] Stinky says: and you did not take it
[11:08:30 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: ...............,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,/////////////???????''''''''''''';;;;;;;;;;
[11:08:52 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: MAYBE THAT LL MAKE SENS
[11:08:58 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: U SEE
[11:09:33 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: YOU THINK I CAN WRITE IN 2 MIN . WHAT I WANTED TO SAY ,
[11:09:39 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: SO THERE YOU GO
[11:09:47 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: YOUR OTHER OPPT.
[11:09:51 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: IS GONE
[11:09:53 PM] Stinky says: Oh thanks...well fine...
[11:09:59 PM] Stinky says: Yes peace is good
[11:10:02 PM] Stinky says: So what?
[11:10:52 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: YOU HAVE 3 OPPT . BUT I M SORRY IF I DISTURB U WITH MY NONE SENS SENTENCE
[11:10:56 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: S
[11:12:03 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: SO HOPE YOU FIND THE REASON TO COME WHY OUR PHSICIAL BEEING COME THIS EARTH,
[11:12:11 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: GOOD LUCK MATE
[11:12:42 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: REMEMBER THERE IS NOT TO MANY GOOD FISH IN THE SEE
[11:12:48 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: OR THREASURE
[11:13:41 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: IF YOU WANNA FIND THE TREASURE OF SEA , LOOK AT THE SHORE, WHERE U FIND PEARLS
[11:15:24 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THANKS FOR YOUR TIME AGAIN, MAYBE WE LL HEAR EACH OTHER ON SKYPE AGAIN, THEN WE CAN DEBATE
Hmm...This was a debate? Well, not to me...
He bored us for about 5 minutes saying he wanted to only talk for 2 minutes, but said nothing at all for 5 minutes except that he wanted to talk for 2 minutes. Then he was asked to not waste time and to say something. He said he did not have a question and just had a statement. Then he decided he had a question. He did not ask a question however. Then he was asked a question, "What would he say if someone threatened to wipe Australia off the map? Would he acquiesce and leave Australia or would he not like it?"
The Turkish Australian refused to answer and just asked another question in return, talking about energy and power and other nonsense but never coming to a point. And then he was asked to be quiet several times, and then started to talk immediately after agreeing to be quiet and listen. And this happened 4 or 5 times in a row. So after waiting for over 2 hours to talk, he had his microphone shut off and lost his turn. Oh well...
I sent him some text messages:
[9:51:58 PM] Stinky says: You want to know what sort of impression you make? read
http://skypelandadventures.blogspot.com/2007/09/i-want-to-lecture.html
[9:59:08 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: HEY MATE , I HAVE BEEN HERE OVER 2 HRS. YOHAVENT GIVE ME 2 MINUTES
[9:59:37 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: YOU COME TO MY CAST I LL SHOW YOU WHAT IS DEMOCRACY
[9:59:52 PM] Stinky says: haha
[9:59:59 PM] Stinky says: you read what I wrote about you?
[10:00:04 PM] Stinky says: that is my impression
[10:00:08 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: AND I DONT NEED A LINK IF YOU DONT HAVE TIME TO LISTEN
[10:00:29 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: NO I DIDNT CLICK ON IT
[10:00:45 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THATS HOW MUCH U DONT KNOW SKYPE
[10:01:01 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THAT SHOW YOUR EDUCATION LEVEL
[10:01:16 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: NEVER CLICK A LINK
[10:01:27 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: WHEN YOU DONT KNOW
[10:01:33 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: :)
[10:01:45 PM] Stinky says: haha
[10:01:46 PM] Stinky says: oh ok
[10:01:54 PM] Stinky says: i will cut and paste it to you
[10:02:36 PM] At this point, I sent him the material above...
He then left the room after I sent that.
[10:06:19 PM] Stinky says: truth hurts huh?
[10:06:42 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: SORY MATE I DONT HAVE TIME TO READ
[10:07:00 PM] Stinky says: or think either
[10:07:01 PM] Stinky says: clearly
[10:08:08 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says:
IF YOU DONT HAVE TIME TO LISTEN IS LIKE READING THE COVER OF BOOK AND THROW IT AWAY
[10:08:21 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THATS WHAT YOU GUYS DID
[10:09:14 PM] Stinky says: yeah haha....we are stupid...clearly
[10:10:08 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: IF YOU REALY WANNA KNOW SOME ONE VIEWS YOU LET THEM FINISH, FOR THE SAKE OF THAT HE S BEEN LISTENING YOU GUYS OVER 2 2222222222222222222 HOURS
[10:10:31 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: NOW YOU THINK
[10:10:38 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: YOU HAD AN OPPT.
[10:10:42 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: TO LEARN
[10:10:51 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: BUT YOU TOOK IT AWAY
[10:11:02 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THATS PITTY
[10:13:17 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: MAYBE YOU HAD
[10:16:04 PM] Stinky says: we dont mind contrary views...but we dont like to hear just nonsense...and you are unwilling or unable to read why you created a very very bad impression
[10:16:45 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: IF U LOOK BEUTY YOU SEE BEAUTY
[10:17:02 PM] Stinky says: I have had other friends who said you did the same thing in other rooms with the same result
[10:17:11 PM] Stinky says: so you are good at making friends and making a good impression
[10:17:53 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: 2 MIN . WITH OUT INTREPT.
[10:21:03 PM] Stinky says: ok i got you a chance
[10:21:05 PM] Stinky says: 2 minutes
[10:38:32 PM] Stinky says: dont want your 2 minutes?
[10:49:20 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: PLEASE TELL THAT HOST, SHE IS NICE , COOL, BUT VERY DANGER, IF U ASK ME WHY IGNORANCE IS BIGGEST DANGER WE HAVE IN OUR SOCIETY. IF A PERSON DONT KNOW IS FINE , IF THEY STUBORN TO NOT WANT TO KNOW AND NOT ALLOWING TO SOME ONE TELL THEIR OPPINION IN 2 MIN. MAX.
[10:49:27 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THATS SAD
[10:49:59 PM] Stinky says: haha
[10:50:02 PM] Stinky says: you have a chance
[10:50:06 PM] Stinky says: but you probably wont take it
[10:50:33 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: SO WHEN A OPPORTUNITY COMES TO YOU GRAB IT IF NOT IT LL BE BIGGES CHANCE WE EVER KNOW
[10:59:37 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: REMEMBER THIS IF YOU HAVE WRONG INFO ABUT ANYTHING NO MATTER THAT I COULD HAVE LISTEN TO YOU 3 HRS BUT WHEN SOME ONE GIVE VIRUS TYPE OF INFO. THEN YOUR HIRDDRIVE NEED A VIRUS PROGRAM OR FORMAT OR ECT. ECT. - LIKE U DID. I DIDN'T EVEN TALK AND YOU SEND ME A LINK TO CLICK, DID YOU KNOW PEOPLE SEND LINK TO CLICK JUST TO HAVE FUN OR SEND A VIRUS OR SEND STUPID ARTICLE OR SEND RIGHT INFO. BUT TO GET RIGHT INFO FROM SOME ONE FIR ST THEY HAVE TO KNOW WHAT YOU TALKING ABOUT , OTHER WISE LEWIS (LEVIS (chuckle)) OR LEE COOPER OR DIESEL OR BLUE JEANS , SO IF YOU LOOK AT EVERYTHING WHITE THEN YOU'LL BELIEVE COW DRINKS MILK (blush);(
(I thought calves drank milk; silly me. But what does this have to do with anything?)
[10:59:53 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: AND REMEMBER 1960 S
[11:00:12 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THEN 1980 S
[11:00:20 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THEN WALL
[11:00:25 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: WHAT WALL
[11:00:32 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: WHAT WALL
[11:00:36 PM] Stinky says: huh??
[11:00:40 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: ISTHAT BERLIN WALL
[11:00:43 PM] Stinky says: I cut and pasted it for you
[11:00:49 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: NO FUNNY WALL
[11:00:53 PM] Stinky says: so you didnt have to click
[11:00:57 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: IS THAT PEACE
[11:01:00 PM] Stinky says: Try to be rational
[11:01:52 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: 1980'S WHEN THE WALL IS DOW IN GERMANY
I WAS VERY HAPPY SO PEOPLE BE COME TO KNOW EACH OTHER
THEN YOU MAKE ANOTHER ONE
[11:02:08 PM] Stinky says: and?
[11:02:17 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: YOU BETTER ASK WHAT IS GOOD
[11:02:23 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: FOR PEOPLE
[11:02:40 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: FOR SOCIETY
[11:02:59 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: LIVE WITH EACH OTHER
[11:03:07 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: LIKE IN AUSTRALIA
[11:03:11 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: LIKE IN USA
[11:03:18 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: LIKE IN UK
[11:03:45 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: SO HOW WE ARE GOING TO DO THAT FIRST LEARN FROM EACH OTHER
[11:03:52 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THEN WE TALK
[11:04:19 PM] Stinky says: It is too bad you are not very rational, otherwise you might be able to convince people of your points
[11:04:20 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: SO BELIVE IT OR NOT I VE LISTEN YOU GUYS OVER 2 HRS.
[11:04:37 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: ALL I WANTED TO SAY 2 MIN.
[11:04:59 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: U KNOW WAT AND I WON'T WRITE IT HER
[11:05:13 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: BECAUSE IT DOESN'T WORTH IT
[11:05:34 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: ANY WAY OUR LIFE ISTO SHORT
[11:06:02 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: WE ARE LIVING IN PHISICALY 60 80 MAYBE 95
[11:06:11 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: ALLA THAT YEARS ,
[11:06:20 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: WHAT IS GOOD FOR US
[11:06:30 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: FOR MY NEIGHBOUR
[11:06:35 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: S
[11:06:42 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: RELATIVES
[11:06:47 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: FRIENDS
[11:07:05 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: AND OTHER PEOPLE IN THE WORLD
[11:07:08 PM] Stinky says: Well peace is good...but you dont deliver that message
[11:07:17 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: WHETHER
[11:07:18 PM] Stinky says: you deliver a confused message of nonsense
[11:07:18 PM] Stinky says: sorry
[11:07:26 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THEY LIVE IN NEPAL
[11:07:34 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: OR VENEZULLA
[11:08:07 PM] Stinky says: I am sorry I dont have time for more of this nonsense
[11:08:11 PM] Stinky says: You had your 2 minute chance
[11:08:13 PM] Stinky says: more than once
[11:08:17 PM] Stinky says: and you did not take it
[11:08:30 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: ...............,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,/////////////???????''''''''''''';;;;;;;;;;
[11:08:52 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: MAYBE THAT LL MAKE SENS
[11:08:58 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: U SEE
[11:09:33 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: YOU THINK I CAN WRITE IN 2 MIN . WHAT I WANTED TO SAY ,
[11:09:39 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: SO THERE YOU GO
[11:09:47 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: YOUR OTHER OPPT.
[11:09:51 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: IS GONE
[11:09:53 PM] Stinky says: Oh thanks...well fine...
[11:09:59 PM] Stinky says: Yes peace is good
[11:10:02 PM] Stinky says: So what?
[11:10:52 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: YOU HAVE 3 OPPT . BUT I M SORRY IF I DISTURB U WITH MY NONE SENS SENTENCE
[11:10:56 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: S
[11:12:03 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: SO HOPE YOU FIND THE REASON TO COME WHY OUR PHSICIAL BEEING COME THIS EARTH,
[11:12:11 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: GOOD LUCK MATE
[11:12:42 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: REMEMBER THERE IS NOT TO MANY GOOD FISH IN THE SEE
[11:12:48 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: OR THREASURE
[11:13:41 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: IF YOU WANNA FIND THE TREASURE OF SEA , LOOK AT THE SHORE, WHERE U FIND PEARLS
[11:15:24 PM] HOST,PLEASE READ SKYPE POLICIES TO BE DEMOCRATIC says: THANKS FOR YOUR TIME AGAIN, MAYBE WE LL HEAR EACH OTHER ON SKYPE AGAIN, THEN WE CAN DEBATE
Hmm...This was a debate? Well, not to me...
Monday, September 24, 2007
Natives are white people
A man showed up in Skypeland, but refused to tell us where he was from (he definitely sounded like he was from the Punjab, however; it is very hard for them to disguise their voices). This reluctance to reveal one's origin always has been a bad sign in the past.
He had some very vague complaints about the US government, and the US people, and their immigration policies for nonwhites and hispanic people. I tried to describe the change of the US immigration policies, and pointed out that within 10 or 15 years "Hispanics" (usually defined as nonwhites in the US) will be the largest ethnic group in the US. Hispanics might very well be the 2nd largest ethnic group at the moment. I tried to understand his complaints. He was vague. I tried to ask what he meant. He was not specific. I could not understand him at all. He was not able to articulate a complaint. I tried to guess if he was having trouble immigrating to the US, but it might not have been the problem. He could never get to the point, and just spewed a long stream of verbiage.
As I was explaining, I used the word "native". In Canada, the word "native" is used to refer to indigenous peoples (i.e., autochthonous or aboriginal peoples), and therefore I used the word "native" to distinguish between the immigrants to the US (including those whose ancestors immigrated to the US) and the indigenous peoples (such as the Blackfoot and the Sioux and the Inuit, etc). However, this putative Punjabi repeatedly used the word "native" to refer to "white people", as opposed to black people, Hispanic people, Asian people etc. I finally could not take it any longer and I had to set him straight. I thought, this is just a bit of confusion and misunderstanding of English and I should correct it.
An hour or so later, one of the famous malcontents in Skypeland attacked me for using an "incorrect" definition of the word "native". I tried to explain, but he would not listen and just spoke over me (Really shows he wants to learn, doesn't it? Actually, he wanted to crow about how "fucking stupid" I am.). I think he might have meant that anyone born in the US is a Native American, but he was not able to make it clear since he was being so combative. He claimed that he had the correct "legal definition". Finally he was thrown into the listening area and I was able to explain. I must admit, I was not particularly diplomatic in my explanation, given this person's ridiculous and contentious argument. Amazing...
Sure enough, I looked up the use of the word "native" in the American Heritage Dictionary, and it includes my definition:
http://www.answers.com/native&r=67
This was also confirmed by looking at documents from the US Census Bureau and Wikipedia:
http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/censr-28.pdf
http://factfinder.census.gov/home/aian/index.html
http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/race/racefactcb.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_name_controversy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_Americans_in_the_United_States
It does not appear that this character's aggressively screamed definitions of the term "Native American" have had much influence on the dictionaries, US Census definitions or Wikipedia yet, at any rate... I guess he should keep his tirade up longer if he wants to change all of standard English language usage of this term.
It is amazing what sort of nonsense people want to start a fight about. However, I have seen this sort of thing before...
Addendum:
In US Federal Law 25 USC 3001 we find the definition:
"(9) "Native American" means of, or relating to, a tribe, people, or culture that is indigenous to the United States."
This should pretty much end the whining from certain quarters, but I have investigated a bit further and found even more evidence. According to the Cambridge Dictionary of American English:
A Native American (also American Indian) is someone who has a member of their family who belonged to one of the groups of people that originally lived in North America before the Europeans arrived.
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/results.asp?dict=A&searchword=native
I checked a total of 23 general purpose dictionaries, and all had a similar definition. Of course, the word "native" is a polyseme, and has multiple meanings, as most words in English do, so this should be no surprise. I asked a few linguistic experts, they said the reason for this person's outburst was his proscriptivist leanings; he wants to dictate his own semantics to the rest of the world and even impose his own hermeneutical musings by force on others. Sounds a bit like a fascist, to me...
I found something interesting, however. A couple of dictionaries noted that this usage might be viewed as offensive by some. For example, Microsoft's Encarta dictionary gives, among its definitions of the word "native",
4. indigenous: originating, produced, growing, or living naturally in a place
5. characteristic of local inhabitants: characteristic of, belonging to, or relating to the indigenous inhabitants of a particular place, particularly those with a traditional culture ( dated ) ( often considered offensive )
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861632486
Also, the Compact Oxford English Dictionary also includes among its definitions a similar statement:
4 dated, offensive a non-white original inhabitant of a country as regarded by European colonists or travellers.
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/native?view=uk
This is clearly an example of the linguistic process known as pejoration, and the word "native", at least in some parts of the English-speaking world, is on a "dysphemism treadmill". I guess "native" will go the way of "colored" or "Oriental", if this continues and becomes more widespread (although clearly colored is not universally accepted as a deprecatory term).
Interestingly, the law.com legal dictionary at
http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?typed=native&type=1&submit1.x=40&submit1.y=15
does not give a definition of the word "native" or the term "Native American". Neither do the legal dictionaries at
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/
or http://www.nolo.com/glossary.cfm or http://www.wwlia.org/diction.htm or http://www.legal-dictionary.org/.
However, one legal dictionary at http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/n035.htm gives a different definition:
NATIVES - All persons born within the jurisdiction of the United States, are considered as natives.Natives will be classed into those born before the declaration of our independence, and those born since.All persons, without regard to the place of their birth, who were born before the Declaration of Independence, who were in the country at the time it was made, and who yielded a deliberate assent to it, either express or implied, as by remaining in the country, are considered as natives. Those persons who were born within the colonies, and before the declaration of independence, removed into another part of the British dominions, and did not return prior to the peace, would not probably be considered natives, but aliens.Persons born within the United States, since the Revolution, may be classed into those who are citizens, and those who are not.Natives who are citizens are the children of citizens, and of aliens who at the time of their birth were residing within the United States.Natives who are not citizens are, first, the children of ambassadors, or other foreign ministers, who, although born here, are subjects or citizens of the government of their respective fathers. Secondly, Indians, in general, are not citizens. Thirdly, negroes, or descendants of the African race, in general, have no power to vote, and are not eligible to office.Native male citizens, who have not lost their political rights, after attaining the age required by law, may vote for all kinds of officers, and be elected to any office for which they are legally qualified.The Constitution of the United States declares that no person, except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of president or vice-president of the United States. --b--
This is clearly a definition that is specific to the United States, and is obviously obsolete by a couple of centuries, having been in place around the time of the founding of the USA, from context. It states that indigenous peoples of the US and negroes are not citizens. It states that a person can be born elsewhere, but as long as they are inside the US in 1776, they are a native of the US. Some born in the US who left and did not return to the US until after the end of the Revolutionary War are not US citizens. Hmm...
Addendum:
The "room tyrant" returned to throw another tantrum like this and incorrectly try to characterize this episode. He would not let me answer and describe what I had found because he ranted and raved and talked over me. He claimed that the foreigner who was confused about the meaning of the word "native" was totally correct, and not using the definition that "native"="white person". He said that the foreigner was claiming that "native"="person born in the USA", which he claimed agreed with the Black's Law Dictionary definition he had found.
I guess he did had misheard this foreigner's claim. The "room tyrant" also claimed that the last definition above is identical to his Black's Law Dictionary definition (which it is not, since by the archaic definition given above, people born outside the US can still be natives of the US).
Finally, I read the material above, after we went through a huge fight with him throwing tantrums and trying to keep anyone else from talking. He claimed everything I said was incorrect, and only common usage, and not legal usage (including the US federal law above and the Census bureau usage !! ??? !!). The room Tyrant then read the definition of "Native American" from Black's Law Dictionary, which had a preamble, saying this definition only applied to the alien and sedition act. One person piped in to tell him that this definition was only specific to the alien and sedition act, but by then he was too angry and upset and did not want to learn anything and he left in a huff. Ah..so reasonable.
He had some very vague complaints about the US government, and the US people, and their immigration policies for nonwhites and hispanic people. I tried to describe the change of the US immigration policies, and pointed out that within 10 or 15 years "Hispanics" (usually defined as nonwhites in the US) will be the largest ethnic group in the US. Hispanics might very well be the 2nd largest ethnic group at the moment. I tried to understand his complaints. He was vague. I tried to ask what he meant. He was not specific. I could not understand him at all. He was not able to articulate a complaint. I tried to guess if he was having trouble immigrating to the US, but it might not have been the problem. He could never get to the point, and just spewed a long stream of verbiage.
As I was explaining, I used the word "native". In Canada, the word "native" is used to refer to indigenous peoples (i.e., autochthonous or aboriginal peoples), and therefore I used the word "native" to distinguish between the immigrants to the US (including those whose ancestors immigrated to the US) and the indigenous peoples (such as the Blackfoot and the Sioux and the Inuit, etc). However, this putative Punjabi repeatedly used the word "native" to refer to "white people", as opposed to black people, Hispanic people, Asian people etc. I finally could not take it any longer and I had to set him straight. I thought, this is just a bit of confusion and misunderstanding of English and I should correct it.
An hour or so later, one of the famous malcontents in Skypeland attacked me for using an "incorrect" definition of the word "native". I tried to explain, but he would not listen and just spoke over me (Really shows he wants to learn, doesn't it? Actually, he wanted to crow about how "fucking stupid" I am.). I think he might have meant that anyone born in the US is a Native American, but he was not able to make it clear since he was being so combative. He claimed that he had the correct "legal definition". Finally he was thrown into the listening area and I was able to explain. I must admit, I was not particularly diplomatic in my explanation, given this person's ridiculous and contentious argument. Amazing...
Sure enough, I looked up the use of the word "native" in the American Heritage Dictionary, and it includes my definition:
http://www.answers.com/native&r=67
This was also confirmed by looking at documents from the US Census Bureau and Wikipedia:
http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/censr-28.pdf
http://factfinder.census.gov/home/aian/index.html
http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/race/racefactcb.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_name_controversy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_Americans_in_the_United_States
It does not appear that this character's aggressively screamed definitions of the term "Native American" have had much influence on the dictionaries, US Census definitions or Wikipedia yet, at any rate... I guess he should keep his tirade up longer if he wants to change all of standard English language usage of this term.
It is amazing what sort of nonsense people want to start a fight about. However, I have seen this sort of thing before...
Addendum:
In US Federal Law 25 USC 3001 we find the definition:
"(9) "Native American" means of, or relating to, a tribe, people, or culture that is indigenous to the United States."
This should pretty much end the whining from certain quarters, but I have investigated a bit further and found even more evidence. According to the Cambridge Dictionary of American English:
A Native American (also American Indian) is someone who has a member of their family who belonged to one of the groups of people that originally lived in North America before the Europeans arrived.
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/results.asp?dict=A&searchword=native
I checked a total of 23 general purpose dictionaries, and all had a similar definition. Of course, the word "native" is a polyseme, and has multiple meanings, as most words in English do, so this should be no surprise. I asked a few linguistic experts, they said the reason for this person's outburst was his proscriptivist leanings; he wants to dictate his own semantics to the rest of the world and even impose his own hermeneutical musings by force on others. Sounds a bit like a fascist, to me...
I found something interesting, however. A couple of dictionaries noted that this usage might be viewed as offensive by some. For example, Microsoft's Encarta dictionary gives, among its definitions of the word "native",
4. indigenous: originating, produced, growing, or living naturally in a place
5. characteristic of local inhabitants: characteristic of, belonging to, or relating to the indigenous inhabitants of a particular place, particularly those with a traditional culture ( dated ) ( often considered offensive )
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861632486
Also, the Compact Oxford English Dictionary also includes among its definitions a similar statement:
4 dated, offensive a non-white original inhabitant of a country as regarded by European colonists or travellers.
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/native?view=uk
This is clearly an example of the linguistic process known as pejoration, and the word "native", at least in some parts of the English-speaking world, is on a "dysphemism treadmill". I guess "native" will go the way of "colored" or "Oriental", if this continues and becomes more widespread (although clearly colored is not universally accepted as a deprecatory term).
Interestingly, the law.com legal dictionary at
http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?typed=native&type=1&submit1.x=40&submit1.y=15
does not give a definition of the word "native" or the term "Native American". Neither do the legal dictionaries at
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/
or http://www.nolo.com/glossary.cfm or http://www.wwlia.org/diction.htm or http://www.legal-dictionary.org/.
However, one legal dictionary at http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/n035.htm gives a different definition:
NATIVES - All persons born within the jurisdiction of the United States, are considered as natives.Natives will be classed into those born before the declaration of our independence, and those born since.All persons, without regard to the place of their birth, who were born before the Declaration of Independence, who were in the country at the time it was made, and who yielded a deliberate assent to it, either express or implied, as by remaining in the country, are considered as natives. Those persons who were born within the colonies, and before the declaration of independence, removed into another part of the British dominions, and did not return prior to the peace, would not probably be considered natives, but aliens.Persons born within the United States, since the Revolution, may be classed into those who are citizens, and those who are not.Natives who are citizens are the children of citizens, and of aliens who at the time of their birth were residing within the United States.Natives who are not citizens are, first, the children of ambassadors, or other foreign ministers, who, although born here, are subjects or citizens of the government of their respective fathers. Secondly, Indians, in general, are not citizens. Thirdly, negroes, or descendants of the African race, in general, have no power to vote, and are not eligible to office.Native male citizens, who have not lost their political rights, after attaining the age required by law, may vote for all kinds of officers, and be elected to any office for which they are legally qualified.The Constitution of the United States declares that no person, except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of president or vice-president of the United States. --b--
This is clearly a definition that is specific to the United States, and is obviously obsolete by a couple of centuries, having been in place around the time of the founding of the USA, from context. It states that indigenous peoples of the US and negroes are not citizens. It states that a person can be born elsewhere, but as long as they are inside the US in 1776, they are a native of the US. Some born in the US who left and did not return to the US until after the end of the Revolutionary War are not US citizens. Hmm...
Addendum:
The "room tyrant" returned to throw another tantrum like this and incorrectly try to characterize this episode. He would not let me answer and describe what I had found because he ranted and raved and talked over me. He claimed that the foreigner who was confused about the meaning of the word "native" was totally correct, and not using the definition that "native"="white person". He said that the foreigner was claiming that "native"="person born in the USA", which he claimed agreed with the Black's Law Dictionary definition he had found.
I guess he did had misheard this foreigner's claim. The "room tyrant" also claimed that the last definition above is identical to his Black's Law Dictionary definition (which it is not, since by the archaic definition given above, people born outside the US can still be natives of the US).
Finally, I read the material above, after we went through a huge fight with him throwing tantrums and trying to keep anyone else from talking. He claimed everything I said was incorrect, and only common usage, and not legal usage (including the US federal law above and the Census bureau usage !! ??? !!). The room Tyrant then read the definition of "Native American" from Black's Law Dictionary, which had a preamble, saying this definition only applied to the alien and sedition act. One person piped in to tell him that this definition was only specific to the alien and sedition act, but by then he was too angry and upset and did not want to learn anything and he left in a huff. Ah..so reasonable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
