Pages: 1 … 6 7 8 9

 

2008-12-18 07:28:44
JahManRed
wank
+646|6902|IRELAND

lowing wrote:

JahManRed wrote:

lowing wrote:

Yet again no one will answer the question at hand.

Can a "WHITE BROWSER" exist?

Can a WHITE COLLEGE FUND exist

CAN A WHITE MISS AMERICA PAGEANT exist

CAN A WHITE ENTERTAINMENT TV CHANNEL exist.

etc........... ALL without being condemned as racist?  Now how about one you politicians stop playing PC and answer the question? Oh and try to be honest about it.
Its not because they are Black. Its because they are a minority. Most things entertainment wise are aimed at the majority audience. Therefore they don't always cater for the minorities needs. Here in Northern Ireland we have Irish language & Ulster Scott's programmes on BBC Radio and TV. My licence fee pays for them and I don't speak either. They cater for the 2% of the population who speak it. Id don't want to watch programmes about the Irish language or about the Ulster Scott's tradition. Same way you don't want to watch "Fela Kuti, the founder of Afro Beat" either. So these minority services keep the minorities happy without encroaching on the majorities time............
Nope, there are no programs targeting whites. ALL programs are interracial, ALL magazines are interracial. All that is, except for the aforementioned "black" examples


How about you, are you gunna answer the question that was posed in the post you quoted or not?
Ok then. Thought I answered the questions. But here you go.
No
No
No
No

Because as I said most shit is targeted at the majority. The majority in the US are white and adverts & programming is aimed at the target. Therefore the minority seek programing thats more aimed at them. In spain for example their is a TV channel for English speaking ex pats, because they are in the minority and cant speak good Spanish. Just like your questions point out, its bad for integration.
I do agree with you.  I am just pointing out how it happens everywhere.
2008-12-18 07:51:09
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6926|USA

JahManRed wrote:

lowing wrote:

JahManRed wrote:


Its not because they are Black. Its because they are a minority. Most things entertainment wise are aimed at the majority audience. Therefore they don't always cater for the minorities needs. Here in Northern Ireland we have Irish language & Ulster Scott's programmes on BBC Radio and TV. My licence fee pays for them and I don't speak either. They cater for the 2% of the population who speak it. Id don't want to watch programmes about the Irish language or about the Ulster Scott's tradition. Same way you don't want to watch "Fela Kuti, the founder of Afro Beat" either. So these minority services keep the minorities happy without encroaching on the majorities time............
Nope, there are no programs targeting whites. ALL programs are interracial, ALL magazines are interracial. All that is, except for the aforementioned "black" examples


How about you, are you gunna answer the question that was posed in the post you quoted or not?
Ok then. Thought I answered the questions. But here you go.
No
No
No
No

Because as I said most shit is targeted at the majority. The majority in the US are white and adverts & programming is aimed at the target. Therefore the minority seek programing thats more aimed at them. In spain for example their is a TV channel for English speaking ex pats, because they are in the minority and cant speak good Spanish. Just like your questions point out, its bad for integration.
I do agree with you.  I am just pointing out how it happens everywhere.
TV channels are not geared toward whites, there are countless examples of programs that portrait black families, black talk show hosts, black news casters etc.......all on these channels that you say cater to white AMerica. In fact these channels cater to America as a whole with something for everyone. There is nothing exclusive about them. Same goes for the magazines, colleges, charities etc..........
2008-12-18 08:55:28
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6803|Global Command
I wonder if Obama uses it.
2008-12-18 09:03:42
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6816|Texas - Bigger than France

ATG wrote:

I wonder if Obama uses it.
only half the time.
2008-12-18 16:13:40
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6427|what

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

Lowing, why didn't you make any noise about this browser, clearly aimed at "morally" wrong people:

http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/07/11/po … n-browser/

Maybe this one:

http://missamericakids.com/

Which promotes a negative self image for young girls.

No?

Just a black web browser.... 'That' we shouldn't have.
Or http://www.mykidsafeinternet.com/

And this: http://browser.flock.com/gloss/ is clearly sexist.
Why don't you answer us this lowing? The double standard is coming from you.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
2008-12-18 16:21:48
.Sup
be nice
+2,646|6728|The Twilight Zone

TheAussieReaper wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

Lowing, why didn't you make any noise about this browser, clearly aimed at "morally" wrong people:

http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/07/11/po … n-browser/

Maybe this one:

http://missamericakids.com/

Which promotes a negative self image for young girls.

No?

Just a black web browser.... 'That' we shouldn't have.
Or http://www.mykidsafeinternet.com/

And this: http://browser.flock.com/gloss/ is clearly sexist.
Why don't you answer us this lowing? The double standard is coming from you.
If you wont answer to us lowing you will answer to God!
https://www.shrani.si/f/3H/7h/45GTw71U/untitled-1.png
2008-12-18 19:56:55
LividBovine
The Year of the Cow!
+175|6654|MN

TheAussieReaper wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

Lowing, why didn't you make any noise about this browser, clearly aimed at "morally" wrong people:

http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/07/11/po … n-browser/

Maybe this one:

http://missamericakids.com/

Which promotes a negative self image for young girls.

No?

Just a black web browser.... 'That' we shouldn't have.
Or http://www.mykidsafeinternet.com/

And this: http://browser.flock.com/gloss/ is clearly sexist.
Why don't you answer us this lowing? The double standard is coming from you.
None of these are acceptable.  I don't want any of them around.

I still have a struggle with there being a legitimate Black culture.  I truely feel that the idea of a black culture is based on skin color almost exclusively.
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)
2008-12-18 21:44:39
Catbox
forgiveness
+505|6991
I have read on a lot of sites where black men and women don't even like this... they are asking how does someone know what they want? lol
what a dumb idea this was...  marketing tards with no clue
Love is the answer
2008-12-19 02:01:34
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6926|USA

TheAussieReaper wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

Lowing, why didn't you make any noise about this browser, clearly aimed at "morally" wrong people:

http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/07/11/po … n-browser/

Maybe this one:

http://missamericakids.com/

Which promotes a negative self image for young girls.

No?

Just a black web browser.... 'That' we shouldn't have.
Or http://www.mykidsafeinternet.com/

And this: http://browser.flock.com/gloss/ is clearly sexist.
Why don't you answer us this lowing? The double standard is coming from you.
Pretty simple really, because these sites target ALL Americans regardless of race skin color. They target Americans that share these interests.

A black web browser targets black people, not all Americans. They target and promote a specific race, skin color, culture, and the exclusion of others by design, and I thought we have all learned that in America, that is discrimination and racist. The truth is, it is discrimination and racist, ONLY if white people were to try and do it.
2008-12-19 02:19:00
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6427|what

lowing wrote:

Pretty simple really, because these sites target ALL Americans regardless of race skin color. They target Americans that share these interests.

A black web browser targets black people, not all Americans. They target and promote a specific race, skin color, culture, and the exclusion of others by design, and I thought we have all learned that in America, that is discrimination and racist. The truth is, it is discrimination and racist, ONLY if white people were to try and do it.
Pretty simple really, because those browsers target ONLY Americans based purely interests. BlackBird targets Americans that share African American interests.

The Porn browser targets porn lovers, not all Americans. They target and promote a specific person, fetish, culture, and the exclusion of others by design (children), and I thought you would have learned that in America, that isn't discrimination either. The truth is, your looking at this browser as racist, because you think if white people were to try and do it that would be racist. We've shown other examples that you seem to ignore.

It's already been shown that ANYONE can download it. It doesn't discriminate by skin colour.

Last edited by TheAussieReaper (2008-12-19 02:20:09)

https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
2008-12-19 02:31:24
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6926|USA

TheAussieReaper wrote:

lowing wrote:

Pretty simple really, because these sites target ALL Americans regardless of race skin color. They target Americans that share these interests.

A black web browser targets black people, not all Americans. They target and promote a specific race, skin color, culture, and the exclusion of others by design, and I thought we have all learned that in America, that is discrimination and racist. The truth is, it is discrimination and racist, ONLY if white people were to try and do it.
Pretty simple really, because those browsers target ONLY Americans based purely interests. BlackBird targets Americans that share African American interests.

The Porn browser targets porn lovers, not all Americans. They target and promote a specific person, fetish, culture, and the exclusion of others by design (children), and I thought you would have learned that in America, that isn't discrimination either. The truth is, your looking at this browser as racist, because you think if white people were to try and do it that would be racist. We've shown other examples that you seem to ignore.

It's already been shown that ANYONE can download it. It doesn't discriminate by skin colour.
Based on your logic a KKK website is not racist because ANYONE can log on to it. An American Nazi web browser would not be racist because anyone can download it. Your logic fails.

The thing is Africa has its share of white people as well. but you defend a label that promotes African-Americans could only be black. This is racist and discriminatory.

Now try and defend a web browser, a magazine, a college fund, a TV station, a charity, a black holiday ( Kwanza) etc..........that targets WHITE-American interests. What would the reception be? and you are gunna say that this would not be racist? I doubt you really believe your own bullshit on this topic.
2008-12-19 02:33:34
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6380|eXtreme to the maX

Lowing wrote:

Can a "WHITE BROWSER" exist?

Can a WHITE COLLEGE FUND exist

CAN A WHITE MISS AMERICA PAGEANT exist

CAN A WHITE ENTERTAINMENT TV CHANNEL exist.
Its just the swing of the pendulum, in 50 years time no-one will give a crap.
Fuck Israel
2008-12-19 02:35:34
DonFck
Hibernator
+3,227|6906|Finland

Maybe if us white people hadn't been such cunts toward other ethnic groups in the past, no one would have to resort to the race card?

lowing wrote:

Can a WHITE COLLEGE FUND exist

CAN A WHITE MISS AMERICA PAGEANT exist

CAN A WHITE ENTERTAINMENT TV CHANNEL exist.
They do, don't they?
I need around tree fiddy.
2008-12-19 02:36:53
.Sup
be nice
+2,646|6728|The Twilight Zone

DonFck wrote:

Maybe if us white people hadn't been such cunts toward other ethnic groups in the past, no one would have to resort to the race card?
Its all Finland's fault
https://www.shrani.si/f/3H/7h/45GTw71U/untitled-1.png
2008-12-19 02:46:05
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6926|USA

DonFck wrote:

Maybe if us white people hadn't been such cunts toward other ethnic groups in the past, no one would have to resort to the race card?

lowing wrote:

Can a WHITE COLLEGE FUND exist

CAN A WHITE MISS AMERICA PAGEANT exist

CAN A WHITE ENTERTAINMENT TV CHANNEL exist.
They do, don't they?
The wrongs have been corrected. Hardly anyone alive today even lived through it. It is being kept alive by those communities when everyone else wants to let it die. It is being kept alive so they can have excuses for personal failures. God knows, no one wants to blame themselves for being a fuck up!!
2008-12-19 02:55:54
Little BaBy JESUS
m8
+394|6423|'straya

lowing wrote:

DonFck wrote:

Maybe if us white people hadn't been such cunts toward other ethnic groups in the past, no one would have to resort to the race card?

lowing wrote:

Can a WHITE COLLEGE FUND exist

CAN A WHITE MISS AMERICA PAGEANT exist

CAN A WHITE ENTERTAINMENT TV CHANNEL exist.
They do, don't they?
The wrongs have been corrected. Hardly anyone alive today even lived through it. It is being kept alive by those communities when everyone else wants to let it die. It is being kept alive so they can have excuses for personal failures. God knows, no one wants to blame themselves for being a fuck up!!
Because its someones fault if their born into a poor/homeless/debt stricken family? yep... they must've fucked up pretty major to be born
2008-12-19 02:58:34
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6926|USA

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

lowing wrote:

DonFck wrote:

Maybe if us white people hadn't been such cunts toward other ethnic groups in the past, no one would have to resort to the race card?


They do, don't they?
The wrongs have been corrected. Hardly anyone alive today even lived through it. It is being kept alive by those communities when everyone else wants to let it die. It is being kept alive so they can have excuses for personal failures. God knows, no one wants to blame themselves for being a fuck up!!
Because its someones fault if their born into a poor/homeless/debt stricken family? yep... they must've fucked up pretty major to be born
Yup. If you are poor/homeless/debt stricken, why the fuck are you having kids??? Yes it is their fault.
2008-12-19 03:04:01
DonFck
Hibernator
+3,227|6906|Finland

lowing wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

lowing wrote:

The wrongs have been corrected. Hardly anyone alive today even lived through it. It is being kept alive by those communities when everyone else wants to let it die. It is being kept alive so they can have excuses for personal failures. God knows, no one wants to blame themselves for being a fuck up!!
Because its someones fault if their born into a poor/homeless/debt stricken family? yep... they must've fucked up pretty major to be born
Yup. If you are poor/homeless/debt stricken, why the fuck are you having kids??? Yes it is their fault.
Wow.

Hypothetical scenario:

Let's say you have 2 kids (which I hope you don't) while your quality of life is decent. You plan ahead and think you have everything covered. Then, you get fired for some odd reason, and your wife can't get a job because she didn't get an education as you were on the fast track. She decided to be a stay at home ex-cheerleader mom instead. So there you are, the bank comes in and takes your house, you move into a condo in the more rough parts of town but you're having difficulties to meet ends as your new job at White Castle pays you enough for bus fares to and from your work.

Would you want your kids to have the chance to achieve awesomeness at that point? I mean, you would be the fuckup you described earlier at this point. With kids. My God, how dare you!

But yeah, I'm off topic.
I need around tree fiddy.
2008-12-19 03:14:47
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6926|USA

DonFck wrote:

lowing wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:


Because its someones fault if their born into a poor/homeless/debt stricken family? yep... they must've fucked up pretty major to be born
Yup. If you are poor/homeless/debt stricken, why the fuck are you having kids??? Yes it is their fault.
Wow.

Hypothetical scenario:

Let's say you have 2 kids (which I hope you don't) while your quality of life is decent. You plan ahead and think you have everything covered. Then, you get fired for some odd reason, and your wife can't get a job because she didn't get an education as you were on the fast track. She decided to be a stay at home ex-cheerleader mom instead. So there you are, the bank comes in and takes your house, you move into a condo in the more rough parts of town but you're having difficulties to meet ends as your new job at White Castle pays you enough for bus fares to and from your work.

Would you want your kids to have the chance to achieve awesomeness at that point? I mean, you would be the fuckup you described earlier at this point. With kids. My God, how dare you!

But yeah, I'm off topic.
Wow another "what if" scenario.

Basically what you are saying is "life happens"? I have made my self marketable where as I do not need toworry about finding work. My wife also DECIDED to go to school and get educated, now she is a teacher. My life was in decent a few years ago. I tried to start a business and my marriage was failing, both of which damn near broke my ass and I also have 2 kids. Guess what happened!! I recovered and so did my marriage, all without having to suck on the taxpayers tit.


YOu forgot to add to your scenario that I was in a tragic car accident that left me paralyzed from the neck down and my wife was stricken with the plague.
2008-12-19 03:32:50
DonFck
Hibernator
+3,227|6906|Finland

lowing wrote:

DonFck wrote:

lowing wrote:


Yup. If you are poor/homeless/debt stricken, why the fuck are you having kids??? Yes it is their fault.
Wow.

Hypothetical scenario:

Let's say you have 2 kids (which I hope you don't) while your quality of life is decent. You plan ahead and think you have everything covered. Then, you get fired for some odd reason, and your wife can't get a job because she didn't get an education as you were on the fast track. She decided to be a stay at home ex-cheerleader mom instead. So there you are, the bank comes in and takes your house, you move into a condo in the more rough parts of town but you're having difficulties to meet ends as your new job at White Castle pays you enough for bus fares to and from your work.

Would you want your kids to have the chance to achieve awesomeness at that point? I mean, you would be the fuckup you described earlier at this point. With kids. My God, how dare you!

But yeah, I'm off topic.
Wow another "what if" scenario.

Basically what you are saying is "life happens"? I have made my self marketable where as I do not need toworry about finding work. My wife also DECIDED to go to school and get educated, now she is a teacher. My life was in decent a few years ago. I tried to start a business and my marriage was failing, both of which damn near broke my ass and I also have 2 kids. Guess what happened!! I recovered and so did my marriage, all without having to suck on the taxpayers tit.


YOu forgot to add to your scenario that I was in a tragic car accident that left me paralyzed from the neck down and my wife was stricken with the plague.
You are quite talented in dodging questions.
I need around tree fiddy.
2008-12-19 03:47:31
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6926|USA

DonFck wrote:

lowing wrote:

DonFck wrote:


Wow.

Hypothetical scenario:

Let's say you have 2 kids (which I hope you don't) while your quality of life is decent. You plan ahead and think you have everything covered. Then, you get fired for some odd reason, and your wife can't get a job because she didn't get an education as you were on the fast track. She decided to be a stay at home ex-cheerleader mom instead. So there you are, the bank comes in and takes your house, you move into a condo in the more rough parts of town but you're having difficulties to meet ends as your new job at White Castle pays you enough for bus fares to and from your work.

Would you want your kids to have the chance to achieve awesomeness at that point? I mean, you would be the fuckup you described earlier at this point. With kids. My God, how dare you!

But yeah, I'm off topic.
Wow another "what if" scenario.

Basically what you are saying is "life happens"? I have made my self marketable where as I do not need toworry about finding work. My wife also DECIDED to go to school and get educated, now she is a teacher. My life was in decent a few years ago. I tried to start a business and my marriage was failing, both of which damn near broke my ass and I also have 2 kids. Guess what happened!! I recovered and so did my marriage, all without having to suck on the taxpayers tit.


YOu forgot to add to your scenario that I was in a tragic car accident that left me paralyzed from the neck down and my wife was stricken with the plague.
You are quite talented in dodging questions.
What are you asking me? If I would give my kids an excuse to fail because I failed? Nope. I have raised my kids to be respectful and above all responsible for their actions.
2008-12-19 03:52:59
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7084|Nårvei

He is asking you if your kids would achieve awesomeness regardless of your failure or success, if you cant help them because of some misfortune you cant control will they still prevail and be successful?
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
2008-12-19 03:57:05
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6926|USA

Varegg wrote:

He is asking you if your kids would achieve awesomeness regardless of your failure or success, if you cant help them because of some misfortune you cant control will they still prevail and be successful?
Yes, they should, if I have raised them to be responsible for their actions, they have no excuses outside their own decisions to fail
2008-12-19 05:05:55
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6427|what

lowing wrote:

Based on your logic a KKK website is not racist because ANYONE can log on to it. An American Nazi web browser would not be racist because anyone can download it. Your logic fails.

The thing is Africa has its share of white people as well. but you defend a label that promotes African-Americans could only be black. This is racist and discriminatory.

Now try and defend a web browser, a magazine, a college fund, a TV station, a charity, a black holiday ( Kwanza) etc..........that targets WHITE-American interests. What would the reception be? and you are gunna say that this would not be racist? I doubt you really believe your own bullshit on this topic.
A KKK website is filled with hate and is highly discriminatory. A Nazi web browser would be the same. My logic fails because this black web browser is racist? lol No it isn't. So how can you compare the two? Your logic fails because you refuse to see this browser as non-racist. That is the issue.

African-Americans do have a share of white people. And with inter-racial couples you also see mixed race generations. So a browser that integrates African-American interests can't be racist, if it's catering to both black and whites. So then where is your problem, if even you admit this browser is for both black, white and in between?

The reason that a white ONLY web browser and I say ONLY because that's what your referring to here is racist and discriminatory is because it is beating down on a minority.

That's why you see black college funds and black colleges. Because without them it is difficult to make it into a mainstream college with a large number of your own peers because they have limited numbers available in university. Your going to see far fewer places available down to simple population ratios.

And black Americans come from a lower socio-economic background, you'd admit that and have said so yourself in the past. A black college is designed to balance the education standards of black and non-blacks within America.

A white only college would have to reverse effect.

That is why a white only college is racist and a black only college is not. One is perpetuating the inequality, the other tries to further the equality.

And that is why you have a so called double standard. If you can't work that out for yourself and have to question why there is such a thing as a black only college and no white only equivalent you truly are lost in your own hysteria.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
2008-12-19 05:18:33
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7084|Nårvei

lowing wrote:

Based on your logic a KKK website is not racist because ANYONE can log on to it. An American Nazi web browser would not be racist because anyone can download it. Your logic fails.

The thing is Africa has its share of white people as well. but you defend a label that promotes African-Americans could only be black. This is racist and discriminatory.

Now try and defend a web browser, a magazine, a college fund, a TV station, a charity, a black holiday ( Kwanza) etc..........that targets WHITE-American interests. What would the reception be? and you are gunna say that this would not be racist? I doubt you really believe your own bullshit on this topic.
KKK and Nazis are specifically racists lowing and you know it so that is taken completely out of context ... a browser targeting white interests is not the same as KKK and nazis ...

We know (atleast i do) that not all Africans are blacks and i haven't stated otherwise hence why i stated it was targeted towards African American heritage ...

So as long as the content is not based on racism a white browser or a black one (read African American) is okay by me ... i would not object to either ...

But the majority is seldom in need of specifying special interests seeing as they are the majority and most products and services consider the majority the most but can have certain minorities in mind ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................

 

Pages: 1 … 6 7 8 9

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard