You are too white to be American! Says Latino KKK

reply to post by Asktheanimals


I agree with you except that I see a difference between being a racist and being a bigot. I am a bigot for the reason that you posted and just like alcoholism I have to admit that to myself or I will never change. A racist is a person that thinks their race is superior to another, they believe that their race should provide them with certain rights and benefits that other races do not deserve.

I am in no way a racist but I am a bigot, by admitting that to myself I can work to change it.

I still believe that this is all caused by Coloring Books.
Just remove all People from Coloring Books.
If there were no People in Coloring Books
Then no People would be colored or left plain white!

If don't believe me just Google

Images for Flesh Colored Crayon


[edit on 20-7-2010 by Gmoneycricket]

So has anyone ever been racist and chose
What color the people were going to be in your Coloring Book?

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by ladyinwaiting

 

Diversity is our strong point. Sorry, kids. You'll have to try again.

I used to believe that and was proud of it, now I think it may be our breaking point.

How sadly ironic if the very thing we were once most proud of came to be our final undoing.

I'm not yet convinced that this will be the case, but I will say, the thought has crossed my mind lately.
For now, I will stay optimistic.

Now lets move on

How to be Racist with a Cookie Cutter

Baking 101

What color of Cookie People would Grandma prefer?

reply to post by Mr. Tinkertrain


"The person making the racist comments isn't racist, the person who brings it to the public eye is. "


the person making racist comments isnt racist?

WOW. I want some of what you are smoking.

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket
I still believe that this is all caused by Coloring Books.
Just remove all People from Coloring Books.
If there were no People in Coloring Books
Then no People would be colored or left plain white!

If don't believe me just Google

Images for Flesh Colored Crayon


[edit on 20-7-2010 by Gmoneycricket]

I believe you. Just look at the gaming industry and see the same color in use for skin.

Originally posted by Common Good
reply to post by Mr. Tinkertrain

 

"The person making the racist comments isn't racist, the person who brings it to the public eye is. "


the person making racist comments isnt racist?

WOW. I want some of what you are smoking.

I think you should read my whole post again.

reply to post by Mr. Tinkertrain

Originally posted by Mr. Tinkertrain

Originally posted by Common Good
reply to post by Mr. Tinkertrain

 

"The person making the racist comments isn't racist, the person who brings it to the public eye is. "


the person making racist comments isnt racist?

WOW. I want some of what you are smoking.

I think you should read my whole post again.

ITS IN PLAIN ENGLISH.

Beginning of sentence-"The person making the racist comments isn't racist, the person who brings it to the public eye is. " - End of sentence.

You typed it, not me. I am just calling you on it.

You should have never written it UNLESS you were characterizing or quoting someone else...IN THAT CASE...you should have used the proper quotations. Its kind of hard trying to tell when someone is quoting someone or not if they dont use the proper format.

But I will give you the benefit of the doubt and just say 'ok'.
I will let this rest.

[edit on 20-7-2010 by Common Good]

reply to post by Common Good


I forgot that ATS members are notorious for not having the ability to plainly see sarcasm, they must be told.

Next time I employ sarcasm I will preceed it with "The following is sarcasm, dont get your panties in a wad."

No need to give me the benefit of the doubt. I can care less if you follow the meaning of my post or not.

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by ladyinwaiting

 

Diversity is our strong point. Sorry, kids. You'll have to try again.

I used to believe that and was proud of it, now I think it may be our breaking point.

How sadly ironic if the very thing we were once most proud of came to be our final undoing.

I'm not yet convinced that this will be the case, but I will say, the thought has crossed my mind lately.
For now, I will stay optimistic.

When "diversity" meant multi-ethnicity here to assimilate it was a good thing. Lately it has been twisted to mean multi-culturalism where each group tries to retain their original national identity - which is a bad thing that could result in this country being torn apart.

reply to post by Mr. Tinkertrain


Learn how to use a keyboard properly, and maybe your posts might come out the way you intended.

Like I said, I picked up on it, but wasnt too sure if that was your intention.

And there is no need to cry about it.

you know what bothers me? Until today - i never knew a group like this existed.

In retrospect, it makes perfectly good sense that a latino KKK exists...but to have never heard about it - ONCE - before?

But everywhere we turn we see the real KKK & the Black panthers on TV

hmmmMmmMmmmmm....media bias much?

I apologize to everyone for this terrible video. Latinos every just shed a tear over this woman's moronic attitude.

reply to post by centurion1211


Follow up to my previous post - from a speech by Dick Lamm - former governor of Colorado on how to destroy America.

The audience sat spellbound as he described eight methods for the destruction of the United States. He said, 'If you believe that America is too smug, too self-satisfied, too rich, then let's destroy America. It is not that hard to do. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and fall and that 'An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.''

'Here is how they do it,' Lamm said:

'First, to destroy America, turn America into a bilingual or multi-lingual and bicultural country... History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. The historical scholar, Seymour Lipset, put it this way: 'The histories of bilingual and bicultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy.' Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, and Lebanon all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with Basques, Bretons, Corsicans and Muslims.'

Lamm went on:

'Second, to destroy America, invent 'multiculturalism' and encourage immigrants to maintain their culture. Make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal; that there are no 0cultural differences. Make it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rates are due solely to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out of bounds.

'Third, we could make the United States an 'Hispanic Quebec' without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently: 'The apparent success of our own multi-ethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentricy and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together.' Lamm said, 'I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with the salad bowl metaphor. It is important to ensure that we have various cultural subgroups living in America enforcing their differences rather than as Americans, emphasizing their similarities.'

'Fourth, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated. I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% dropout rate from high school.'

'My fifth point for destroying America would be to get big foundations and business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of 'Victimology...' I would get all minorities to think that their lack of success was the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority plation.'

'My sixth plan for America 's downfall would include dual citizenship, and promote divided loyalties. I would celebrate diversity over unity. I would stress differences rather than similarities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other - that is, when they are not killing each other. A diverse, peaceful, or stable society is against most historical precept. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together. Look at the ancient Greeks. The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshipped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic games.. A common enemy, Persia, threatened their liberty. Yet all these bonds were not strong enough to overcome two factors: local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions. Greece fell. 'E. Pluribus Unum' -- From many, one. In that historical reality, if we put the emphasis on the 'pluribus' instead of the 'Unum,' we will 'Balkanize' America as surely as Kosovo.'

'Next to last, I would place all subjects off limits. Make it taboo to talk about anything against the cult of 'diversity.' I would find a word similar to 'heretic' in the 16th century - that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like 'racist' or 'xenophobe' halt discussion and debate. Having made America a bilingual/bicultural country, having established multi-cultum, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of 'Victimology,' I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra: That because immigration has been good for America , it must always be good. I would make every individual immigrant symmetric and ignore the cumulative impact of millions of them.'

Sound at all familiar?

LOL, they look like a bunch of brokeass refugee boyscouts.
Just who in the Hell is instigating this kind've crap anyways, behind the scenes?

"Diversity" is an interesting issue. I see others mentioning it, Like LadyInWaiting and Centurion1211. Is it good? Bad? Everyone will have their opinions, and some might even invoke some portion of their nation's history to make a point, especially in America or the UK or Canada.

I'm not sure it's one of the things that made the US "proud", but certainly some may feel that the historical US posture of being open to the peoples of the world, has contributed to what strengthened the nation, at least for a time.

Going back a century and more, the US opened it's doors, not to the whole world, but to primarily European peoples. Interestingly, at the time, there was still no "problem" with those south of the border. Mexicans, and Americans, moved rather freely in the Southwest, between the borders. There were "Mexican" towns that ended up on one side of the border, or on the other, and they essentially remained "Mexican" culturally (and still are in many ways). Even Americans went south, especially Southerners after the War Between the States, and some actually took slaves with them (!), and bought plantations and mines, in Mexico. To this day, areas like Puebla in Mexico (a large mining area), has a high percentage of African ancestry, compared to the rest of the population.

So when did the current situation begin, with Mexicans and Americans so at odds with each other? I still haven't seen anyone give their opinion of this, and maybe it will ultimately factor-in, to the issue of whether "diversity" is a good or bad thing.

Here's what I recall. Early in the last century, revolution swept Mexico. Pancho Villa was the big revolutionary leader of that period, and Mexico essentially became a war-zone. This spilled over the borders, not in terms of battles so much, but mainly because Mexicans were simply trying to get away from the chaos. They were "lucky" the borders really had no enforcement at the time, this is a more recent phenomenon. I think I've read somewhere that the US still considers Mexico a nation in "revolution" by the way (and this is actually true, if you have ever travelled in the South of Mexico especially).

Beyond the political situation, the economic one became primary after a time. Mexico was not always a basket case of course. The peso was actually worth more than the US Dollar at one time. But because of the revolution, many Mexicans had already found a home in the US, years before. Communities in Texas, and Arizona, and California, many already had significant hispanic populations long before the large influx that was to hit when the worldwide Depression got bad.

And then, the US pulled out of the Depression, and prosperity seemed to sweep over the country after WW2. This didn't quite happened in Mexico. After all, they did not have the "benefit" of having their peso universally accepted, as the US dollar was, post Bretton Woods (which is where the world decided to accept US dollars). So, the inevitable occurred. Mexicans went North, often encouraged by relatives already living in the US for decades.

To pause for a moment, what would have been the status of hispanic "diversity" during the decade of the 1950's? If we recall, relations were mostly still "good". Mexicans hadn't yet developed the desire to demand better jobs, and were satisfied with taking the menial labor. They did not yet feel they could "demand" political recognition, etc. On TV, Americans were feeling good about the I Love Lucy show, that featured a Spanish-speaking Cuban married to Lucy. Things were perhaps still "acceptable".

And then, the 1960's. Race rioting, primarily black, took center-stage across the nation. Meanwhile, the old immigration policies were replaced by more "progressive" ones. No longer would there be a goal of "maintaining" the existing nation's population profile. Rather, "diversity" was "pushed" officially, manifesting itself as quotas, etc. No longer would the nation be trying to "improve" itself in the traditional sense, such as taking in those who were educated, or who had a skill to offer, etc. But rather, the immigrant's "race" became all important.

Adding to this were other global population disruptions, such as the immigrations that were due to Asian turmoil, largely caused by US military and geopolitical policies, that resulted in millions of Southeast Asian (primarily Cambodian and Vietnamese) peoples arriving in the US, permanently.

Today the nation is nothing like it was in 1960. It is a completely different nation, for better, or for worse, than it was only a short 50 years ago. Yes, whites will become the "minority" in most parts, very soon, and interestingly, it appears to be, by design. Hmmm.

Regardless of a person's "race", or how they feel about the current situation, some attention should be given to this very recent history. This happened very fast, relatively speaking. Additionally, it was not the result of mere "natural" chance. The US (as well as the UK and Canada) embarked on a deliberate course that got us to where we are now.

Again, I ask, in the context of the above small "history lesson", was this good, or bad?

I think the short answer, with no "racial" prejudice intended, is that it is largely "bad", and yet that would obviously be from the point of view of what used to be (was what "used to be" so bad after all?). And we might come to this conclusion if we knew nothing more than the fact that this "agenda" was pushed by TPTB. We are "here", precisely because they wanted it that way.

And now, I should ask, "Why?" Why did our masters want what we have today, in the USA? Perhaps if our masters were benign, we might entertain the possibility that we are simply headed for a "Star Trek" future. But they have proved, over and over again, that they are far from benign. It's possible that this was never intended to end well for some of us.

JR

I don't mind what she's saying but it really is laughable, and that some people were upset with her is also pretty laughable. But older adults love to get involved with such stupidity when most young people would just laugh and move on....wonder why that is.

In US different type of lived in it like white , Black and British , African, European etc.

reply to post by Hudson


They are just a bunch of ignorant racist idiots just like J.T Ready and his band of skinheads going down to the Arizona border to shoot themselves some brown people. What needs to happen is they should all be thrown into a battle arena armed to the teeth and let them just kill each other off. The victor should then be gased to allow the rest of us people to live the way life should be for an American.

[edit on 23-7-2010 by Procession101]