Damn racists...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tacvR87FzBU

Excellent parody. All indigenous people are anti-white racists.

Google Mississippian culture and Cahokia (avoiding the UFO crap).  The North American natives had cities that rivaled those in  Europe. 

In its time, Cahokia supported a larger population than medieval London and maintained a trade network that extended the full course of the Mississippi River, from the Gulf of Mexico into the Great Lakes territories.   

The most influential factor in the demise of the North American natives was the disease carried by the first European settlers. They dropped like flies from illnesses that were common in Europe with its poor sanitation. 

Smallpox was the most significant disease. Others included measles, scarlet fever, typhoid, typhus, influenza, whooping cough, tuberculosis, cholera, diphtheria, chicken pox, and venereal diseases.

muso wrote on Apr 9^th, 2012 at 9:44am:

Google Mississippian culture and Cahokia (avoiding the UFO crap).  The North American natives had cities that rivaled those in  Europe.  In its time, Cahokia supported a larger population than medieval London and maintained a trade network that extended the full course of the Mississippi River, from the Gulf of Mexico into the Great Lakes territories.    The most influential factor in the demise of the North American natives was the disease carried by the first European settlers. They dropped like flies from illnesses that were common in Europe with its poor sanitation.  Smallpox was the most significant disease. Others included measles, scarlet fever, typhoid, typhus, influenza, whooping cough, tuberculosis, cholera, diphtheria, chicken pox, and venereal diseases.

Cahokia began to decline after 1300 CE. It was abandoned more than a century before Europeans arrived in North America, in the early 16th century.

Soren wrote on Apr 9^th, 2012 at 9:54am:

muso wrote on Apr 9th, 2012 at 9:44am: Google Mississippian culture and Cahokia (avoiding the UFO crap).  The North American natives had cities that rivaled those in  Europe.  In its time, Cahokia supported a larger population than medieval London and maintained a trade network that extended the full course of the Mississippi River, from the Gulf of Mexico into the Great Lakes territories.    The most influential factor in the demise of the North American natives was the disease carried by the first European settlers. They dropped like flies from illnesses that were common in Europe with its poor sanitation.  Smallpox was the most significant disease. Others included measles, scarlet fever, typhoid, typhus, influenza, whooping cough, tuberculosis, cholera, diphtheria, chicken pox, and venereal diseases. Cahokia began to decline after 1300 CE. It was abandoned more than a century before Europeans arrived in North America, in the early 16th century.

Before Hernando De Soto, there were accounts of explorers finding large cities of North American Indians. Most of the population decline took place in the early to mid 16th Century, coincident with the first of the conquistadors.

I'll find some better links,  but I recall discussing the decline of the Amerindians on another forum a few years ago and the narrative of an early explorer  describing the wooden walled cities and Pueblos.

Some historians go so far as to say European diseases reduced the pre-contact population of the New World by 90 percent or more. One says the population of central Mexico was reduced from 25 million in 1519 to 3 million by 1568 and only 750,000 by the early 1600s, 3 percent of the pre-conquest total.

I recall reading that the  total population North of Mexico was of the order of 10 million, which was comparable to that of Europe.

muso wrote on Apr 9^th, 2012 at 11:59am:

Soren wrote on Apr 9th, 2012 at 9:54am: muso wrote on Apr 9th, 2012 at 9:44am: Google Mississippian culture and Cahokia (avoiding the UFO crap).  The North American natives had cities that rivaled those in  Europe.  In its time, Cahokia supported a larger population than medieval London and maintained a trade network that extended the full course of the Mississippi River, from the Gulf of Mexico into the Great Lakes territories.    The most influential factor in the demise of the North American natives was the disease carried by the first European settlers. They dropped like flies from illnesses that were common in Europe with its poor sanitation.  Smallpox was the most significant disease. Others included measles, scarlet fever, typhoid, typhus, influenza, whooping cough, tuberculosis, cholera, diphtheria, chicken pox, and venereal diseases. Cahokia began to decline after 1300 CE. It was abandoned more than a century before Europeans arrived in North America, in the early 16th century. Before Hernando De Soto, there were accounts of explorers finding large cities of North American Indians. Most of the population decline took place in the early to mid 16th Century, coincident with the first of the conquistadors. I'll find some better links,  but I recall discussing the decline of the Amerindians on another forum a few years ago and the narrative of an early explorer  describing the wooden walled cities and Pueblos. Some historians go so far as to say European diseases reduced the pre-contact population of the New World by 90 percent or more. One says the population of central Mexico was reduced from 25 million in 1519 to 3 million by 1568 and only 750,000 by the early 1600s, 3 percent of the pre-conquest total. I recall reading that the  total population North of Mexico was of the order of 10 million, which was comparable to that of Europe.

Syphilis is a disease the Indians gave the Europeans.

The creation and spread of disease is an unavoidable by-product of close living, as in cities. If there really were great cities in the new world, they would have given rise to diseases that Europeans settlers would have had no immunity to.  It would have been very hard for them to have got established if they had a mortality rate of even half the 90% claimed for the natives. 


Quote:

There are at least three sets of reasons to explain the findings that agriculture was bad for health. First, hunter-gatherers enjoyed a varied diet, while early fanners obtained most of their food from one or a few starchy crops. The farmers gained cheap calories at the cost of poor nutrition, (today just three high-carbohydrate plants -- wheat, rice, and corn -- provide the bulk of the calories consumed by the human species, yet each one is deficient in certain vitamins or amino acids essential to life.) Second, because of dependence on a limited number of crops, farmers ran the risk of starvation if one crop failed. Finally, the mere fact that agriculture encouraged people to clump together in crowded societies, many of which then carried on trade with other crowded societies, led to the spread of parasites and infectious disease. (Some archaeologists think it was the crowding, rather than agriculture, that promoted disease, but this is a chicken-and-egg argument, because crowding encourages agriculture and vice versa.) Epidemics couldn't take hold when populations were scattered in small bands that constantly shifted camp. Tuberculosis and diarrheal disease had to await the rise of farming, measles and bubonic plague the appearnce of large cities.

http://www.ditext.com/diamond/mistake.html

Soren wrote on Apr 9^th, 2012 at 4:27pm:

Syphilis is a disease the Indians gave the Europeans.

http://hnn.us/articles/7302.html

Quote:

The most lethal of the pathogens introduced by the Europeans was smallpox, which sometimes incapacitated so many adults at once that deaths from hunger and starvation ran as high as deaths from disease; in several cases, entire tribes were rendered extinct. Other killers included measles, influenza, whooping cough, diphtheria, typhus, bubonic plague, cholera, and scarlet fever. Although syphilis was apparently native to parts of the Western hemisphere, it, too, was probably introduced into North America by Europeans.

Quote:

A second, even less substantiated instance of alleged biological warfare concerns an incident that occurred on June 20, 1837. On that day, Churchill writes, the U.S. Army began to dispense"'trade blankets' to Mandans and other Indians gathered at Fort Clark on the Missouri River in present-day North Dakota." He continues: Far from being trade goods, the blankets had been taken from a military infirmary in St. Louis quarantined for smallpox, and brought upriver aboard the steamboat St. Peter’s. When the first Indians showed symptoms of the disease on July 14, the post surgeon advised those camped near the post to scatter and seek"sanctuary" in the villages of healthy relatives.

... wrote on Apr 9^th, 2012 at 6:13pm:

The creation and spread of disease is an unavoidable by-product of close living, as in cities. If there really were great cities in the new world, they would have given rise to diseases that Europeans settlers would have had no immunity to.  It would have been very hard for them to have got established if they had a mortality rate of even half the 90% claimed for the natives.

You don't think the Aztecs lived in cities?

http://abrahimappel.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/tenochtitlc3a1n-diego-rivera.jpg

Tenochtitlan, the capital city was enormous, probably the biggest city in the World at the time, with a population of around 200,000. It's sister city of Tlatelolco had a population of 60,000.

It was probably their high standards of sanitation that prevented disease.


Quote:

Two double aqueducts, each more than 4 km (2.5 mi) long and made of terracotta, provided the city with fresh water from the springs at Chapultepec. This was intended mainly for cleaning and washing. For drinking, water from mountain springs was preferred. Most of the population liked to bathe twice a day; Moctezuma was said to take four baths a day. As soap they used the root of a plant called copalxocotl.

Quote:

When we saw so many cities and villages built in the water and other great towns on dry land we were amazed and said that it was like the enchantments  on account of the great towers and cues and buildings rising from the water, and all built of masonry. And some of our soldiers even asked whether the things that we saw were not a dream?  I do not know how to describe it, seeing things as we did that had never been heard of or seen before, not even dreamed about.

from Bernal Díaz del Castillo, The Conquest of New Spain

muso wrote on Apr 10^th, 2012 at 11:39am:

... wrote on Apr 9th, 2012 at 6:13pm: The creation and spread of disease is an unavoidable by-product of close living, as in cities. If there really were great cities in the new world, they would have given rise to diseases that Europeans settlers would have had no immunity to.  It would have been very hard for them to have got established if they had a mortality rate of even half the 90% claimed for the natives.  Quote: There are at least three sets of reasons to explain the findings that agriculture was bad for health. First, hunter-gatherers enjoyed a varied diet, while early fanners obtained most of their food from one or a few starchy crops. The farmers gained cheap calories at the cost of poor nutrition, (today just three high-carbohydrate plants -- wheat, rice, and corn -- provide the bulk of the calories consumed by the human species, yet each one is deficient in certain vitamins or amino acids essential to life.) Second, because of dependence on a limited number of crops, farmers ran the risk of starvation if one crop failed. Finally, the mere fact that agriculture encouraged people to clump together in crowded societies, many of which then carried on trade with other crowded societies, led to the spread of parasites and infectious disease. (Some archaeologists think it was the crowding, rather than agriculture, that promoted disease, but this is a chicken-and-egg argument, because crowding encourages agriculture and vice versa.) Epidemics couldn't take hold when populations were scattered in small bands that constantly shifted camp. Tuberculosis and diarrheal disease had to await the rise of farming, measles and bubonic plague the appearnce of large cities. http://www.ditext.com/diamond/mistake.html You don't think the Aztecs lived in cities? http://abrahimappel.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/tenochtitlc3a1n-diego-rivera.jpg

Cities that rivalled those of Europe?  No I don't.  The lack of inter-population trade and large domesticable animals are pretty big barriers.


Quote:

The one-sided exchange of lethal germs between the Old and New worlds is among the most striking and consequence-laden facts of recent history. Whereas over a dozen major infectious diseases of Old World origins became established in the New World, not a single major killer reached Europe from the Americas. The sole possible exception is syphilis, whose area of origin still remains controversial. That one-sidedness is more striking with the knowledge that large, dense human populations are a prerequisite for the evolution of crowd diseases. If recent reappraisals of the pre-Columbian New World population are correct, that population was not far below the contemporaneous population of Eurasia. Some New World cities, like Tenochtitlán, were among the world’s most populous cities at the time. Yet Tenochtitlán didn’t have awful germs waiting in store for the Spaniards. Why not? One possible factor is that the rise of dense human populations began somewhat later in the New World than in the Old. Another is that the three most populous American centers--the Andes, Mexico, and the Mississippi Valley--were never connected by regular fast trade into one gigantic breeding ground for microbes, in the way that Europe, North Africa, India, and China became connected in late Roman times. The main reason becomes clear, however, if we ask a simple question: From what microbes could any crowd diseases of the Americas have evolved? We’ve seen that Eurasian crowd diseases evolved from diseases of domesticated herd animals. Significantly, there were many such animals in Eurasia. But there were only five animals that became domesticated in the Americas: the turkey in Mexico and parts of North America, the guinea pig and llama/alpaca (probably derived from the same original wild species) in the Andes, the Muscovy duck in tropical South America, and the dog throughout the Americas.

http://discovermagazine.com/1992/oct/thearrowofdiseas137

... wrote on Apr 10^th, 2012 at 11:53am:

Cities that rivalled those of Europe?  No I don't. Quote: The one-sided exchange of lethal germs between the Old and New worlds is among the most striking and consequence-laden facts of recent history. Whereas over a dozen major infectious diseases of Old World origins became established in the New World, not a single major killer reached Europe from the Americas. The sole possible exception is syphilis, whose area of origin still remains controversial. That one-sidedness is more striking with the knowledge that large, dense human populations are a prerequisite for the evolution of crowd diseases. If recent reappraisals of the pre-Columbian New World population are correct, that population was not far below the contemporaneous population of Eurasia. Some New World cities, like Tenochtitlán, were among the world’s most populous cities at the time. Yet Tenochtitlán didn’t have awful germs waiting in store for the Spaniards. Why not? One possible factor is that the rise of dense human populations began somewhat later in the New World than in the Old. Another is that the three most populous American centers--the Andes, Mexico, and the Mississippi Valley--were never connected by regular fast trade into one gigantic breeding ground for microbes, in the way that Europe, North Africa, India, and China became connected in late Roman times. The main reason becomes clear, however, if we ask a simple question: From what microbes could any crowd diseases of the Americas have evolved? We’ve seen that Eurasian crowd diseases evolved from diseases of domesticated herd animals. Significantly, there were many such animals in Eurasia. But there were only five animals that became domesticated in the Americas: the turkey in Mexico and parts of North America, the guinea pig and llama/alpaca (probably derived from the same original wild species) in the Andes, the Muscovy duck in tropical South America, and the dog throughout the Americas. http://discovermagazine.com/1992/oct/thearrowofdiseas137

I edited Reply 8 and added some comments on sanitation. Washing twice a day is an improvement on the contemporary European habit of washing twice a year. Maybe that had something to do with their lack of disease.

muso wrote on Apr 10^th, 2012 at 12:02pm:

... wrote on Apr 10th, 2012 at 11:53am: Cities that rivalled those of Europe?  No I don't. Quote: The one-sided exchange of lethal germs between the Old and New worlds is among the most striking and consequence-laden facts of recent history. Whereas over a dozen major infectious diseases of Old World origins became established in the New World, not a single major killer reached Europe from the Americas. The sole possible exception is syphilis, whose area of origin still remains controversial. That one-sidedness is more striking with the knowledge that large, dense human populations are a prerequisite for the evolution of crowd diseases. If recent reappraisals of the pre-Columbian New World population are correct, that population was not far below the contemporaneous population of Eurasia. Some New World cities, like Tenochtitlán, were among the world’s most populous cities at the time. Yet Tenochtitlán didn’t have awful germs waiting in store for the Spaniards. Why not? One possible factor is that the rise of dense human populations began somewhat later in the New World than in the Old. Another is that the three most populous American centers--the Andes, Mexico, and the Mississippi Valley--were never connected by regular fast trade into one gigantic breeding ground for microbes, in the way that Europe, North Africa, India, and China became connected in late Roman times. The main reason becomes clear, however, if we ask a simple question: From what microbes could any crowd diseases of the Americas have evolved? We’ve seen that Eurasian crowd diseases evolved from diseases of domesticated herd animals. Significantly, there were many such animals in Eurasia. But there were only five animals that became domesticated in the Americas: the turkey in Mexico and parts of North America, the guinea pig and llama/alpaca (probably derived from the same original wild species) in the Andes, the Muscovy duck in tropical South America, and the dog throughout the Americas. http://discovermagazine.com/1992/oct/thearrowofdiseas137

Yep, thanks for repeating what I posted.
Is there more to a cities "greatness' than number of inhabitants?  I don't see Mumbai or Karachi topping the worlds best cities lists...

Once again:

(I have a bad habit of editing my post over a period of 30 minutes while doing other things)


Quote:

When we saw so many cities and villages built in the water and other great towns on dry land we were amazed and said that it was like the enchantments  on account of the great towers and cues and buildings rising from the water, and all built of masonry. And some of our soldiers even asked whether the things that we saw were not a dream?  I do not know how to describe it, seeing things as we did that had never been heard of or seen before, not even dreamed about.

Quote:

Two double aqueducts, each more than 4 km (2.5 mi) long and made of terracotta, provided the city with fresh water from the springs at Chapultepec. This was intended mainly for cleaning and washing. For drinking, water from mountain springs was preferred. Most of the population liked to bathe twice a day; Moctezuma was said to take four baths a day. As soap they used the root of a plant called copalxocotl.

I also tend to edit several times, I'm really just thinking out loud on this one.
I was thinking about aqueducts and making sure you don't poo where you eat/drink, but I guess personal bathing could be a factor, but not that large a one. It's also incorrect to claim commonality between Indian populations - the lack of tarde between them suggests they had little contact. When you consider that abos were also decimated by disease and bathing isn't something you could attribute to them, it does seem more likely that a common theme - the lack of domesticable animals for human diseases to evolve from is probably the best reason why disease didn't push back against europeans.  Whitey wins because our animals are awesome. 

... wrote on Apr 10^th, 2012 at 12:21pm:

I was thinking about aqueducts and making sure you don't poo where you eat/drink, but I guess personal bathing could be a factor, but not that large a one. When you consider that abos were also decimated by disease and bathing isn't something you could attribute to them, it does seem more likely that a common theme - the lack of domesticable animals for human diseases to evolve from is probably the best reason why disease didn't push back against europeans.  Whitey wins because our animals are awesome.

I guess you don’t know much about the recent history of England, specifically London.

Abos were decimated by disease because whites brought new disease that their immune system was not adapted too.

bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 10^th, 2012 at 12:23pm:

... wrote on Apr 10th, 2012 at 12:21pm: I was thinking about aqueducts and making sure you don't poo where you eat/drink, but I guess personal bathing could be a factor, but not that large a one. When you consider that abos were also decimated by disease and bathing isn't something you could attribute to them, it does seem more likely that a common theme - the lack of domesticable animals for human diseases to evolve from is probably the best reason why disease didn't push back against europeans.  Whitey wins because our animals are awesome.  I guess you don’t know much about the recent history of England, specifically London. Abos were decimated by disease because whites brought new disease that their immune system was not adapted too.

Thanks for the recap, but I've got it.  ;)

... wrote on Apr 10^th, 2012 at 12:21pm:

I also tend to edit several times, I'm really just thinking out loud on this one. I was thinking about aqueducts and making sure you don't poo where you eat/drink

Of course. Now we must colonise the world with our toilets. Have you seen what we're doing in places like India and Pakistan?

These people have been dining out on stools for generations, and we have to come in and show them how to do things, it's ridiculous.

Mind you, it does provide jobs for the caring professions and create much concern in our own society, so this can only be a good thing.

Did you watch the video karnal?  You'll probably recognise some of the cliches and hackneyed phrases contained within.

It's interesting that in any studies of ancient civilisations, wherever you find wealth, you find dramatic population increases, and probably the root causal factor is a written language. 

You just can't get too far without record keeping, and without a written language and a system, which depends on literacy and numeracy, the scale of trading is held back. Without a written language, it becomes almost impossible to be able to track what goes where, and to detect if something has been stolen.

It's hardly surprising that the ancient Germanic people attached magical properties to the runes.

... wrote on Apr 6^th, 2012 at 11:15am:

Damn racists... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tacvR87FzBU

Good find.
I'll add that to favourites for future encounters with the humanitarian brigade.

muso wrote on Apr 10^th, 2012 at 3:38pm:

You just can't get too far without record keeping, and without a written language and a system

hey! that sounds like disrespectin' the traditional owners and paying bugger-all respect to their elders, past and present.


You've been reading Andrew Bolt's columns, reactionary white supremacist that you are Yes??? Don't deny it. It just makes it worse.

You've never heard of the written Aztec language, I take it?

muso wrote on Apr 15^th, 2012 at 2:05pm:

You've never heard of the written Aztec language, I take it?

Well, it's pretty limited and primitive. You'd really struggle to transcribe a Shakespeare sonnet into Aztec.
But it would b a breeze to transcribe any Aztec script into 16th century English.

Hey, don't call me 'blonde' WHITE.
I'm brunette Blue and light.
Not to similiar to Raven Grey and pale.
Or Ranga Red and fair.
;D :P

Soren wrote on Apr 15^th, 2012 at 9:49pm:

muso wrote on Apr 15th, 2012 at 2:05pm: You've never heard of the written Aztec language, I take it? Well, it's pretty limited and primitive. You'd really struggle to transcribe a Shakespeare sonnet into Aztec. But it would b a breeze to transcribe any Aztec script into 16th century English.

I didn't realise that you were such an expert in Aztec culture, Soren. So that statement is based on your evaluation of the corpus of Nahuatl literature I take it?

Here was I thinking that the conquistadors destroyed all Aztec literature, but then, you never cease to amaze. 

The diseased white people found that their diseases were useful for killing off the clean native Americans.

The diseased white people introduced many diseases to America such as small pox:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/66/Child_with_Smallpox_Bangladesh.jpg/393px-Child_with_Smallpox_Bangladesh.jpg


In 1507 smallpox was introduced into the Caribbean island of Hispaniola and to the mainland in 1520, when Spanish settlers from Hispaniola arriving in Mexico brought smallpox with them. Smallpox devastated the native Amerindian population and was an important factor in the conquest of the Aztecs and the Incas by the Spaniards. Settlement of the east coast of North America in 1633 in Plymouth, Massachusetts was also accompanied by devastating outbreaks of smallpox among Native American populations, and subsequently among the native-born colonists. Some estimates indicate case fatality rates of 80–90% in Native American populations during smallpox epidemics


The British army at least once attempted to use smallpox as a weapon, when they gave contaminated blankets to the Lenape during Pontiac's War (1763–66). It is suspected, but not confirmed, that biological warfare was used against the Indians at other times as well.


Some historians have speculated the British deliberatlry introduced smallpox to the Aboriginal population of Australia. Some of the of the British soldiers sent with the First Fleet had served in Pontiac's War, in which smallpox was used as a weapon by British against native Americans.

SO?

they lost, we won.

Falah thinks sentimental reinterpretations of history make him a "good" person.

muso wrote on Apr 18^th, 2012 at 11:24am:

Soren wrote on Apr 15th, 2012 at 9:49pm: muso wrote on Apr 15th, 2012 at 2:05pm: You've never heard of the written Aztec language, I take it? Well, it's pretty limited and primitive. You'd really struggle to transcribe a Shakespeare sonnet into Aztec. But it would b a breeze to transcribe any Aztec script into 16th century English. I didn't realise that you were such an expert in Aztec culture, Soren. So that statement is based on your evaluation of the corpus of Nahuatl literature I take it? Here was I thinking that the conquistadors destroyed all Aztec literature, but then, you never cease to amaze.

The Aztecs had no alphabet. They used pictograms. You couldn't render Shakespeare's sonnets in pictograms.
But you could easily render any pictogram in written and spoken Elizabethan English.


What part of any of this poses a difficulty to the scientistic mind?

http://baike.baidu.com/view/514.htm

The Mandarin language is generally not written using an alphabet  either. When it is, it can no longer be understood by people speaking other Chinese languages such as Cantonese or Hunanese. The link is for Shakespeare's Sonnets in Chinese. Chinese characters are largely founded on pictograms.

Did you know that the Aztecs had two (or possibly 3) forms of script?

Here's another reference for the Poetry of Li Bai. (701 – 762AD)

The translation to English loses a lot of its original subtlety.  The original ancient Chinese script was written using a writing system comparable to those of Mesoamerica.

http://www.chinese-poems.com/lb16.html

Your comments are similar to some of the ancient ex-pats I met once in Kenya. Nothing would convince them that Kiswahili was a grammatically complex language (except for the way they spoke it to issue orders, which was incredibly simplistic)

Boy - choo chafu!

However they were conquered, it serves them right for invading the americas and killing off all the peace-loving solutreans.  And to think they try to pass themselves off as "native americans".  Tch-oh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solutrean_hypothesis

They were conquered primarily by Don Epidemia de Viruela  ;)

If that makes you feel better.

"What enterprise that an enlightened community may attempt is more noble and more profitable than the reclamation from barbarism of fertile regions and large populations? To give peace to warring tribes, to administer justice where all was violence, to strike the chains off the slave, to draw the richness from the soil, to plant the earliest seeds of commerce and learning, to increase in whole peoples their capacities for pleasure and diminish their chances of pain - what more beautiful ideal or more valuable reward can inspire human effort?"

Joseph Conrad, Heart of darkness

I can provide quotes from previous times too:


Quote:

I've wanted to meet you for some time," said Holmes. "I won't ask you to sit down, for I don't like the smell of you, but aren't you Steve Dixie, the bruiser?" "That's my name, Masser Holmes, and you'll get put through it for sure if you give me any lip." "It is certainly the last thing you need," said Holmes, staring at our visitor's hideous mouth.

  Arthur Conan Doyle

.

muso wrote on Apr 26^th, 2012 at 1:02pm:

I can provide quotes from previous times too: Quote: I've wanted to meet you for some time," said Holmes. "I won't ask you to sit down, for I don't like the smell of you, but aren't you Steve Dixie, the bruiser?" "That's my name, Masser Holmes, and you'll get put through it for sure if you give me any lip." "It is certainly the last thing you need," said Holmes, staring at our visitor's hideous mouth.   Arthur Conan Doyle

Any relevant quotes, though?
Or are you playing the gauche and ill-fitting analogy game again?

"denying that video games are art is the moral equivalent of denying the existence of the armenian genocide" ~ me

Armenians are Jews, aren't they?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9Pv89pykC0

Soren wrote on Apr 26^th, 2012 at 10:31pm:

Armenians are Jews, aren't they?

- but Jews are descended from Sumerians  ;) Personally I blame the Romans for this entire mess.

Oh you want a relevant quotation? OK. Who said this?


Quote:

Faith is a myth and beliefs shift like mists on the shore; thoughts vanish; words, once pronounced, die; and the memory of yesterday is as shadowy as the hope of to-morrow....

It's probably an apt answer to your quote. Who said that again? You must know.

Actually your quote is very apt. It captures the zeitgeist that haunts your attitudes.

Soren wrote on Apr 26^th, 2012 at 10:31pm:

Armenians are Jews, aren't they? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9Pv89pykC0

i had some idea they were related when i was there given how similiar they look to each other

but idk i would have looked this up but given how lazy i am now it is not likely to happen for a while

... wrote on Apr 6^th, 2012 at 11:15am:

Damn racists... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tacvR87FzBU

The clip has been removed for 'hate speech.'
If it was 'hate speech,' then multiculturalism is hate speech, as it was parodying multiculturalism but on non-white people.

When you can't win through reasoned argument, censor!

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Sep 13^th, 2012 at 10:42am:

... wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 11:15am: Damn racists... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tacvR87FzBU The clip has been removed for 'hate speech.' If it was 'hate speech,' then multiculturalism is hate speech, as it was parodying multiculturalism but on non-white people. When you can't win through reasoned argument, censor!

Far out.  They're getting more brazen and loose with their definitions of "hate" with each passing day.

yet it's those on the right who are said to be the 'fascists'  Go figure.

The rebellion against egalitotalitarianism cannot be crushed so easily. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyQYZ6TUs4c

Haha. Excellent. I need the clip because I am arguing against some trendoid in another forum.

Cheers.

... wrote on Sep 13^th, 2012 at 10:56am:

The rebellion against egalitotalitarianism cannot be crushed so easily.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyQYZ6TUs4c

Hmmm ... "unavailable".

Maybe the thought police have struck again.

Not so.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faNge-o0V-k