What do you consider more important.....

[tunot]

Re: What do you consider more important.....

You can repeat the mantra as many times as you like, and no doubt it will make you believe that which you repeat, but that doesn't make it so. It will make you feel good, but so what? The issue you seem to be misunderstanding is not potential, for everyone obviously has some potential, as warped and mediocre as it may be in some, but it is the degree to which that potential can stretch to. Some minds, characters and capacities are more potent than others and therein lies the distinctions, the differences, the highs and lows, and the successes and failures. That you are able to spot a black PhD candidate is not what is in question. Did I ever deny that there will not be a black PhD doctoral student in physics? The question and the point is about generalities. It is about populations and what we observe in the grand scheme of things, and the rhyme and reason of these vast groups and through time. Exceptions to the rule, while you may not like it, do not disprove the rule. You might think it does, but what you think pales in comparison to what is. If 100 people fart incessantly and have a biological propensity for farts, and 2 people out of that 100 are not so, that does not mean the other 98 people do not have a problem. Differences, as they are, are in degrees, not in kinds.

What I don't get, Mouse, is that while you do not deny that it is possible for blacks to be PhD canditates in an exact science, you try to argue that on a larger scale this would be impossible. My friend, if this black boy that I met had not left Nigeria and had not had the opportunity to get a British education, he would have been a soldier now in Nigeria, and most propably dead.

Again, as long as you do not believe in this potential on a larger scale, you are not intelligent. You know why? Because you will only support the downfall of the world, instead of supporting its continuation. You say that idiots breed more than intelligent people. Now if you would think: "In every race, ethnicity, and class, there are many who could be educated on higher levels," you would reduce the number of idiots drastically, as I have done at least with approximately eighty kids from a lower class background, of which I'm fairly sure at least 50 have gone on to do a higher education, something that NO ONE thought would be possible, except for myself. Why do you keep ignoring this?

No, not even the potential to learn, associate, memorize, analyze or criticize is the same. The fact that we can do all those things, does not mean we are equal in the way we produce. Different individuals, as well as different groups, have different potentials to do all those things. The fact that they may have potential does not mean anything at all. All land animals have a potential to run, does mean anything? No. Your reference to production, to me at least, translates to outcome and results, which is untrue. In conclusion, nothing is equal, not production, not consumption and not presumption.

I meant reproduction. Don't know why I wrote "production." The point was, nature does not make a distinction in giving us the ability to learn how to walk, talk, and have sex.

The fact that you have exceptions to the rule, because of conditioning and socialization are able to speak without any accentual variation, again, does not mean anything. The vast majority of cases that are observed every day, can be seen and heard. There is actually evidence that the perception of pitch, which plays a major role in music and language, is genetically determined in humans. This could, if unearthed further, explain the different races and their relation to pitch and rhythm, both in rhetoric and music. Most blacks speak in what we call "ebonics". Even if they speak perfect English without any accentual variation, that comes as a result of years of conditioning, or adoption, or what have you. When they themselves, without any conditioning or socialization, pick up a language such as English, we can observe the natural differences of their tongue, vocal chords, ululation, accentuation, and inflection.

So what? What you are you saying? That an African American who speaks English with an "accent" does not have the ability to learn how to speak impeccable English? Or for that matter Spanish, Armenian, and Russian?

I forgot to mention that during the Soviet Union, Russia promoted the education of Africans (from Africa, not America) at their technical universities. To this day, there are African students in Russia studying some engineering, physics, or mathematics at university level, in RUSSIAN! So even learning Russian is a piece of cake for them, a language I bet you would have liked to believe is more complex than Swahili or Igbo.

And before a language can be considered complex, there must be a written form of it, somehow.

We have the ability to record languages and transcribe them, even if the people who speak this language do not have a written form of it.

You obviously wouldn't say that a language with 15 cases is the same as one with 7, would you?

You are forgetting that when a language has no case, it has prepositions and postpositions to compensate.

[jgk3]

Re: What do you consider more important.....

Finnish has something like 27 cases in their language, yet has a greater lacking for masculin and feminin distinctions compared to any other language... Complex eh?

Due to this structuring, children learn their gender later than many of those who speak a language that doesn't lack these distinctions, so language clearly has a psychological effect on one's learning.

Complexity does not equal to superiority, it's just another path that has its own benefits and shortcomings.

Again, written language was not necessary for Africans UNTIL intervention from Eurasian peoples. Why condemn them to inferiority for not coming up with the idea to invent writing if they did fine without it? Why ignore their extensive oral tradition and say, "thanks to us, they have writing"?

Writing is just another path, a stimulant for a form of learning that is universally accessible among humans. It doesn't matter who invented it and who did not, especially when you refuse to take environmental causes for its invention into consideration.

[Anonymouse]

Re: What do you consider more important.....

What I don't get, Mouse, is that while you do not deny that it is possible for blacks to be PhD canditates in an exact science, you try to argue that on a larger scale this would be impossible. My friend, if this black boy that I met had not left Nigeria and had not had the opportunity to get a British education, he would have been a soldier now in Nigeria, and most propably dead.

Again, as long as you do not believe in this potential on a larger scale, you are not intelligent. You know why? Because you will only support the downfall of the world, instead of supporting its continuation. You say that idiots breed more than intelligent people. Now if you would think: "In every race, ethnicity, and class, there are many who could be educated on higher levels," you would reduce the number of idiots drastically, as I have done at least with approximately eighty kids from a lower class background, of which I'm fairly sure at least 50 have gone on to do a higher education, something that NO ONE thought would be possible, except for myself. Why do you keep ignoring this?

Education does not guarantee that people will rise above their mere animality and mediocrity. The millions that have been flaunted and thrown into 'public education' has only proven this mythology. You can think whatever you want to make yourself feel comfortable. By not believing in the potential on a larger scale, I am unintelligent according to you, yet spending millions of dollars on people who are already idiots is very intelligent! My guess is you have not walked in to a public school and observed the blacks and Mexicans here in L.A. Moreover, before learning can take place, there must first be a propensity to learn, to acquire new knowledge. That propensity is what we call intelligence. Different people have different degrees of intelligence and IQ, and it would be foolish to assume that this does not apply to the human population groups. At the very highest, genius level IQ scores, blacks are hardly to be found at all. At this point, the egalitarian defense claims that IQ tests are somehow biased against blacks. All things considered, this is nothing more than an ex post facto explanation for results that displease the egalitarians, for no one can look through a well designed intelligence test and explain what the bias is and where it is found.

What I don't get, Mouse, is that while you do not deny that it is possible for blacks to be PhD canditates in an exact science, you try to argue that on a larger scale this would be impossible."

I have not tried to argue that on a larger scale blacks will not be scientists, I have only stated what the case is. And what the case is, blacks have always scored 15 points lower on IQ tests than whites on average. Even in studies of adoption where black kids were raised in rich white households, they have still scored 15 points lower (Scarr and Weinberg 1976). This is all documented, but of course, the racial egalitarians have always found excuses for this gap. No matter what, there is always horrible racism lurking that stunts Negro growth. They argue that societal prejudices outside of their adopted home hinder black IQ even more than anyone expected!

I meant reproduction. Don't know why I wrote "production." The point was, nature does not make a distinction in giving us the ability to learn how to walk, talk, and have sex.

Actually nature does make a distinction in giving us the ability to learn how to walk, talk, and have sex. As you will note, some people are born retarded and with mental handicaps, some are born with debilitating diseases, some cannot walk, some are born as conjoined twins, and some are blind, deaf or what have you. What is your point?

So what? What you are you saying? That an African American who speaks English with an "accent" does not have the ability to learn how to speak impeccable English? Or for that matter Spanish, Armenian, and Russian?

I forgot to mention that during the Soviet Union, Russia promoted the education of Africans (from Africa, not America) at their technical universities. To this day, there are African students in Russia studying some engineering, physics, or mathematics at university level, in RUSSIAN! So even learning Russian is a piece of cake for them, a language I bet you would have liked to believe is more complex than Swahili or Igbo.

You are forgetting that when a language has no case, it has prepositions and postpositions to compensate.

And here nairi has at last found her evidence that we are all equal! Now you can sleep well at night, nairi. The Soviet experiment, with its roots in Marxism, was entirely dependent on your cherished notion of egalitarianism and environmental factors of everything. Where is it now you ask? Biology always trumps ideology.

As far as this whole this whole off tangent about language is concerned, it is pointless as I already indicated. These languages have already been developed by the peoples who have made them in their image and in their likeness. They reflect nothing more than the people who created and developed them. Moreover, no one ever denied that people cannot learn a language, but the learning is not uniform and will always depend on both the intelligences and capabilities of different peoples and races. What has been stated is that there are differing complexities to languages. In addition, there are differences in how the general races speak and sound. How many black students do you see who speak a foreign language compared to non-black? And of those that do, how many actually study Chinese or Japanese versus whites who study Chinese or Japanese?

We have the ability to record languages and transcribe them, even if the people who speak this language do not have a written form of it.

Then why, pray tell, did the primitive Africans not tap in to their supposed ability to transcribe languages?

To retouch on a previous point that I mentioned about what is truth, currently truth is that there are no such thing as races or racial differences, multiculturalism is the greatest thing alive, that there are racial differences in results and performance is due to societal and environmental factors such as racism, social programs or welfare help people and the poor, intervention into the marketplace is good and capitalism is evil and we should regulate and nationalize everything, and democracy and voting is the best thing ever. Notice how many of the things above you believe, nairi? You really are a product of the age!

[tunot]

Re: What do you consider more important.....

Education does not guarantee that people will rise above their mere animality and mediocrity. The millions that have been flaunted and thrown into 'public education' has only proven this mythology. You can think whatever you want to make yourself feel comfortable. By not believing in the potential on a larger scale, I am unintelligent according to you, yet spending millions of dollars on people who are already idiots is very intelligent! My guess is you have not walked in to a public school and observed the blacks and Mexicans here in L.A. Moreover, before learning can take place, there must first be a propensity to learn, to acquire new knowledge. That propensity is what we call intelligence. Different people have different degrees of intelligence and IQ, and it would be foolish to assume that this does not apply to the human population groups. At the very highest, genius level IQ scores, blacks are hardly to be found at all. At this point, the egalitarian defense claims that IQ tests are somehow biased against blacks. All things considered, this is nothing more than an ex post facto explanation for results that displease the egalitarians, for no one can look through a well designed intelligence test and explain what the bias is and where it is found.

You should look at the public schools and their teachers, before you make a judgment on potential.

I can't take anything you write seriously. You fail to look outside of a few books and tests that you worship like a muslim fundamentalist who believes the Quran is the word of god and therefore truth. How reliable does that make you? I speak of experience and you bring in biased tests and ungrounded books as the word of truth? And you actually expect anyone to take you seriously? Who's going to hire you as an objective lawyer if you already have your preconceived ideas of your clients before even making the smallest attempt to investigate?

I have not tried to argue that on a larger scale blacks will not be scientists,

Yes, you have, and you continue to do so. Don't bring in IQ-tests, please, before explaining exactly who designed them, what was being tested, and why the results should be so goddamn reliable that we should all bow down and believe them as god-sent truth.

Actually nature does make a distinction in giving us the ability to learn how to walk, talk, and have sex. As you will note, some people are born retarded and with mental handicaps, some are born with debilitating diseases, some cannot walk, some are born as conjoined twins, and some are blind, deaf or what have you. What is your point?

Now you're talking exceptions! I was talking about healthy people, the largest majority of us. Are you telling me you sh!t from your mouth instead of your anus? Or that you walk on your arms instead of your legs?

Tell me how many African tribes do not walk on their two feet, have no language, do not eat or drink and then sh!t and p!ss it out from the same holes as the most "civilized" nations in the world, and do not reproduce with a penis, a vagina, and ejaculation.

And here nairi has at last found her evidence that we are all equal! Now you can sleep well at night, nairi. The Soviet experiment, with its roots in Marxism, was entirely dependent on your cherished notion of egalitarianism and environmental factors of everything. Where is it now you ask? Biology always trumps ideology.

The Soviet application of Marxism failed. Yes. But what did NOT fail was in its educating of Africans at very high university levels, in a large variety of engineering and science fields. Bite that!

And of those that do, how many actually study Chinese or Japanese versus whites who study Chinese or Japanese?

Why do you think these languages are more difficult than Swahili and Zulu? The only thing so-called difficult about them is their written forms. Japanese phonology (sound patterns) is actually quite simple. Chinese has no verbal tenses (i.e. past, present, future, past perfect, etc.). Chinese also has no compound words, being made up of solely monosyllabic words, with only very few exceptions. Like Chinese, many African languages are "tonal languages," as in one identical set of sounds can be pronounced in a number of ways depending what tone you apply, in order to give them completely different meanings. Korean, for your information, changed its alphabet in order to make it phonetic, like the Latin and Armenian alphabet, instead of symbolic like the Egyptians. From this perspective, the Chinese and the Japanese have among the most primitive writing in the world.

Then why, pray tell, did the primitive Africans not tap in to their supposed ability to transcribe languages?

THEY DIDN'T NEED TO! How often does this need to be repeated?

To retouch on a previous point that I mentioned about what is truth, currently truth is that there are no such thing as races or racial differences

That is NOT true! We all recognize these differences. All we are saying is that race is NOT a determining factor, therefore a guarantee, for anything. That's all. Please don't make me repeat this again.

[Anonymouse]

Re: What do you consider more important.....

You should look at the public schools and their teachers, before you make a judgment on potential.

I can't take anything you write seriously. You fail to look outside of a few books and tests that you worship like a muslim fundamentalist who believes the Quran is the word of god and therefore truth. How reliable does that make you? I speak of experience and you bring in biased tests and ungrounded books as the word of truth? And you actually expect anyone to take you seriously? Who's going to hire you as an objective lawyer if you already have your preconceived ideas of your clients before even making the smallest attempt to investigate?

Racism? What is racism but the opinions of those who differ from the mainstream of what is truth? It must be a uniquely 20th and now, 21st century experience for large numbers of people to be accused of words, for which the very words to describe them have only just been invented. We are to believe that no race is superior or inferior to any other given race, and if we take this thinking further, individuals are not superior or inferior either. To suggest so means you are a "racist", a smear label concocted by those who don't want to admit to the reality of differences. When this sort of inanity is pointed out racial egalitarians may admit that no individuals are alike and there are inequalities; but while thy may admit this, they will not want to attribute the same to race, that even though individuals may be different, races are not different. No one here made apoligies for hate and violence and crime. No one here said because someone is different we have to kill them or oppress them. Obviously Einstein is a superior mind to me, just like I am a superior creature over an ant. Superior and inferior are part of nature. You cannot absolve it by simply pretending it doesn't exist. The only thing that is highlighted is that in nature is one of inequalities, and therefore superior and inferior elements, and when it comes to race, about civilization and our lives within it because of the importance of those who make a civilization, and who comprimises that civilization.

Yes, you have, and you continue to do so. Don't bring in IQ-tests, please, before explaining exactly who designed them, what was being tested, and why the results should be so goddamn reliable that we should all bow down and believe them as god-sent truth.

No I have not. This is where you, in your desperation to pin arguments on people that did not make such arguments, have assigned what you believe to be my argument, not what is actually my argument. It's a wasted and childish tactic and it doesn't amount to anything and I noticed you have done the same with Siggue. That some blacks can be doctoral students in physics does not mean anything. When we talk about generalities and proportions in general, on average, blacks are less capable of such feats.

And as far as your supposed test bias, I already explained that it is ex post facto displeasure with results that do not conform to your ideological persuasion. You cannot explain what exactly is wrong or flawed with the test, except the tired old rant that since it was designed by whites it must be racist and biased. In fact, many modern IQ tests, such as Raven's Progressive Matrices, have no verbal or cultural content at all. They test a person's understanding of shapes and patterns, and are given to people who do not even speak English on a regular basis. Other varieties of IQ test do involve language and inevitably have some cultural content, ironically, these are the very tests on which the black/white gap in scores is narrowest. And as I stated before, the "cultural bias" argument is disproven by the fact that Asian immigrants, outperform both blacks and whites on IQ tests. The assertion that the same tests that are culturally biased against blacks somehow favor Asians strains credibility.

Now you're talking exceptions! I was talking about healthy people, the largest majority of us. Are you telling me you sh!t from your mouth instead of your anus? Or that you walk on your arms instead of your legs?

No I am not arguing exceptions. You do not even remember what it is you are defending, do you? You made an absolute statement about equality, specifically, potential to. I merely showed that it is not absolute. These are indeed exceptions, but they only stand in your obvious absolute assertion regarding potential to. I have not argued absolutes and have always maintained that differences are in degrees, not in kinds.

Tell me how many African tribes do not walk on their two feet, have no language, do not eat or drink and then sh!t and p!ss it out from the same holes as the most "civilized" nations in the world, and do not reproduce with a penis, a vagina, and ejaculation.

If it makes you feel any better, no one was actually talking about mans animality and those processes of daily life. You seem very angry and perturbed. I know you do not like to hear opposing views, especially ones that go against the mainstream of what is truth, and what you have been taught since birth from every orifice of communication. I also know you are intolerant of those views, or those who propound those views, all the while you proclaim tolerance. But tolerance, as is often the case by its promoters, is a one-way street in which only those whom we agree with, are we to tolerate.

The Soviet application of Marxism failed. Yes. But what did NOT fail was in its educating of Africans at very high university levels, in a large variety of engineering and science fields. Bite that!

What is your point? Who said Africans cannot be educated? And obviously they were educated by Europeans, which I am sure is a bad thing because if IQ made by Europeans is bad, it must certainly be also a bad thing for those same Africans to study in European schools and cirriculum. The whole realm of science and physics has been a thoroughly European pastime, and in fact, the whole field of flight, and aviation has been a uniquely European achievement. So what is your point? Even an Armenian, from such a little population, as Migoyan who designed the Mig, faired better, than all those Africans studying there. The contributions of Europeans and Asians and the lack of African contributions in history is telling and speaks volumes.

Why do you think these languages are more difficult than Swahili and Zulu? The only thing so-called difficult about them is their written forms. Japanese phonology (sound patterns) is actually quite simple. Chinese has no verbal tenses (i.e. past, present, future, past perfect, etc.). Chinese also has no compound words, being made up of solely monosyllabic words, with only very few exceptions. Like Chinese, many African languages are "tonal languages," as in one identical set of sounds can be pronounced in a number of ways depending what tone you apply, in order to give them completely different meanings. Korean, for your information, changed its alphabet in order to make it phonetic, like the Latin and Armenian alphabet, instead of symbolic like the Egyptians. From this perspective, the Chinese and the Japanese have among the most primitive writing in the world.

Thank you for the lesson in linguistics, but as I already indicated, it means nothing. It only means we can learn languages, but that does not, in any way, mean that the propensity to learn is uniform and nor does it have anything to do with the racial differences in intelligence, capabilities, achievements and civilizations in history. My guess is, since you were so desperate to have something to argue and use as a projectile to forward your argument that we are all the same when it comes to potential, you had to bring in the discussion of linguistics, something that are you well versed in. In the process, you have tried to argue, albeit in a different manner, that we are all the same when it comes to potential, which is obviously untrue. What else could explain the primitive backwardness of Africans before colonization?

THEY DIDN'T NEED TO! How often does this need to be
repeated?

In other words, this translates to they couldn't because they were primitive. Otherwise they would have. That they were merely content with simplicity only means they did not think about the supposed potential which is supposedly equal in everyone, as you like to claim.

That is NOT true! We all recognize these differences. All we are saying is that race is NOT a determining factor, therefore a guarantee, for anything. That's all. Please don't make me repeat this again.

Other notable differences which result from the lack of intelligence means blacks are more prone to crime. Race and crime are directly linked and a look into both England and America will offer some insight. Here in America, blacks are disproportionately involved in crime, even though the Latino population here outnumbers them. Despite your appeal to ignorance, race is a determining factor, and all one has to do - even if they do not want to look at IQ tests, or a physics class - is observe not only our present society, but also history.

[tunot]

Re: What do you consider more important.....

Racism? What is racism but the opinions of those who differ from the mainstream of what is truth?

Racism is claiming that we are not all homo-sapiens. What you are saying is that a dining table and a kitchen table cannot both serve as tables. That's racism.

We are to believe that no race is superior or inferior to any other given race,

There is no evidence to the contrary yet, therefore we like to take a shot in the dark and try to allow equal opportunities, which have proven extremely successful so far. The number of minority members in America who are now graduating from universities would never have been made possible without the help of equal opportunities. And the African Americans fought for that. Very hard, influencing among others the Catholic Irish in Northern Ireland to also fight for their rights. I will not stand back and let all of that achievement be destroyed by likes of you, foreign Armenians who know nothing about their host-country, are not even grateful that if it was not for equal opportunities they would have no right to even live in that country, let alone open their filthy mouths against everything that allowed them a better life to begin with.

PS: I'm not pro-affirmative action, before you accuse me of that. We don't have it in Europe because we don't need it. Equal opportunity on its own has proven successful enough.

Obviously Einstein is a superior mind to me,

Only because he was not a racist and did not believe he was a genius to then claim that he knew the truth about mankind.

No I have not. This is where you, in your desperation to pin arguments on people that did not make such arguments, have assigned what you believe to be my argument, not what is actually my argument. It's a wasted and childish tactic and it doesn't amount to anything and I noticed you have done the same with Siggue. That some blacks can be doctoral students in physics does not mean anything. When we talk about generalities and proportions in general, on average, blacks are less capable of such feats.

When you make such generalities, you are saying exactly what I am interpreting. That some races, on average, cannot excell other races, when the exceptions are exactly what you should be looking at. How many of the Africans that graduated from Russian polytechnic universities were tested on their IQs? What were the results? Not only that, Mouse, you're not giving it TIME. It takes TIME to adapt to a new situation. We all learn and we have all adapted to our own situations. When our environment is completely stripped from us and we are forced to adapt to a completely different one, it will take TIME before we can finally come to the same level and maybe even higher. So far the little time that has been given has proven enough to show that a little more time will only raise the average. Even Siggie pinpointed that the average had risen, and was only different by 15 points. Given them two more generations, and then we can talk again whether this really very slight difference has remained static or not.

No I am not arguing exceptions. You do not even remember what it is you are defending, do you? You made an absolute statement about equality, specifically, potential to. I merely showed that it is not absolute. These are indeed exceptions, but they only stand in your obvious absolute assertion regarding potential to. I have not argued absolutes and have always maintained that differences are in degrees, not in kinds.

I've been saying the same thing since the beginning about natural equality. I will not repeat it. Except that handicaps are not determined racially either. Which brings us back to our homo-sapienism.

If it makes you feel any better, no one was actually talking about mans animality and those processes of daily life.

You make such generalities about inferiority and how we are in no way all homo-sapiens, that you gave me no other choice but to believe that you could not even understand the simple fact that I was trying to convey, namely that we are all HOMO-SAPIENS, and therefore more alike than different, despite the fact that we are not carbon-copies of each other, not even "identical" twins.

[Otto3]

Re: What do you consider more important.....

it is so obvius that races are different so one can assume that their barin capacities may differ too... all you have to do is take 100 kids with different races and raise them in the same enivroment... that too will not be able to prove anything alone but i think if balcks have more muscles and bones than whites (you will not disagreewith that) ,why cant whites have more brains? and why are you furious about that tunot... even i get what mouse is saying...and you behave like a xxx blaming everybody by saying they are racist... just because hitler adopted the idea of natural selection can you disagree with that... easy on yourself... natural selection shows us everything that we need to see... go make an hunting dog out of a sen bernard and come back i say.... i understand what you say too... we must give equal oppurtunitie to all and should not make a discrimination.. thats good..i think you guys are onto two different subjects

[tunot]

Re: What do you consider more important.....

and why are you furious about that tunot...

I'm furious because you are insulting entire generations of hard, hard work. By making such claims, that have no ground whatsoever, you are saying that we should maintan the status quo because there is nothing we can do about it, when after all these years everything that was struggled for is in the process of achievement. And before even given a chance, you already want to tear it all down and bring us all back to the way we were 500 years ago. Have we not progressed, us civilized nations, us most intelligent, us most superior, us most what-ever? Who are you, foreigner, to come and say that there is no point in trying?

Not to mention that you are insulting Armenians for struggling to get to freedom and adapt to their new countries. But also all the Armenians who are now struggling in the homeland to get their acts and country together. If Armenians cannot self-govern, as many Europeans have claimed in their own time, then why even bother trying? We might as well give up our country right now. You may want to, and Mouse may want. I'm not willing to give up until I fall. And even then I will get up again and try one more time. Time and time again. The only advice that I can give to a teacher is: "If the students aren't getting it, it's because you're not." Another motto is: "It's easier for one person to adapt to a group than a group to adapt to one person. (i.e. find the way your students are capable of learning and work on teaching them with that.)"

[Otto3]

Re: What do you consider more important.....

i wasnt aware that i said that much... thanks for thinking instead of me.... i guess you have some connection with anahita here... how can you come up with the all those things including genocide... i didnt do it and i never insulted anybody here about genocide either... you have some loose screws amigo

[tunot]

Re: What do you consider more important.....

i wasnt aware that i said that much...thanks for thinking instead of me.... i guess you have some connection with anahita here... how can you come up with the all those things including genocide... i didnt do it and i never insulted anybody here about genocide either... you have some loose screws amigo

If you're one of those typically ignorant negationist Turcomen, then perhaps you should use the race-card against yourself and you may understand why you're so ignorant not only of everything around you, but worse, of yourself.

Btw, I'd be careful coming to Holland if I were you. A law will be passed soon that will prosecute genocide negationists. Not deniers, mind you, but negationists. There is nothing to deny, you see.