Racism is bad?

Google

Web Adequacy.org

This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.

Poll

Votes: 30

Racism is bad?

Author:

Topic:

Posted:

Apr 06, 2002

Comments:

I was browsing the net and I came across something rather interesting: a computer game called Ethnic Cleansing: The Game. I was surprised, because never before had I encountered a game like this.

I suppose that this is a good thing in a way. At least kids are only going to be virtually killing negroes, mexicans, and dirty jews rather than blowing them away execution style in real life. I mean, it's only a game, right?

Anyhow, check it out y'all. Click!

I think there's going to be a spiffy game based on the Turner Diaries soon, and I'm looking forward to its' arrival very much.

I don't hate non-whites, I just don't consider them my equals...does that make me evil?

	More games (none / 0) (#1)
	by Yoshi on Sat Apr 6th, 2002 at 08:55:18 PM PST

	I've had quite a gleeful time playing a small game called Super KKK Bros. Its origin is unknown, but it's a real good game if you've got the setup to play it right. It's just that the little black guys running around with KFC buckets always kill me. I suppose I'm not cut out for these computer games.

	I prefer... (none / 0) (#3)
	by Aryan King on Sun Apr 7th, 2002 at 01:44:05 PM PST

	Super KKK Bros. 2. I just love that NAACP cannon. My dad always used to tell me that NAACP stood for "Negros Ain't Anything but Cracksmoking Parasites". And I think he was right. We need to spread the word...those Jews can't keep us from informing the world about their wickedness! *We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	I am sure (5.00 / 2) (#4)
	by Anonymous Reader on Sun Apr 7th, 2002 at 04:16:42 PM PST

	I am sure you're able to secure the existence of your people and a future for white children. I doubt you're able to secure the future of the English language. A Cracksmoking Parasite.

	I just love that. (none / 0) (#2)
	by Anonymous Reader on Sun Apr 7th, 2002 at 03:11:03 AM PST

	Our leaders are really stupid. This is the solution for the anti-Americanism in the world: create a game with that only rule, virtually kick the butt of Americans, destroy New York, Chicago, etc ...

	oh just you wait (none / 0) (#11)
	by PotatoError on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 07:20:12 AM PST

	How long until the first RTS game comes out featuring Taliban vs American? I heard that some people were thinking of making a movie out of the WTC - I dont feel it would make a particually interesting movie personally. But still, it just shows that people are ready to cash in on the event. And if I hear one more person tell me that the WTC incident "changed their world" then im going to be sick. <<JUMP! POGO POGO POGO BOUNCE! POGO POGO POGO>>

	making a movie out of the WTC (none / 0) (#12)
	by because it isnt on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 07:28:17 AM PST

	I was thinking of using it to host Junkyard Wars. adequacy.org -- because it isn't

	Nerd. (none / 0) (#20)
	by Anonymous Reader on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 11:36:01 AM PST

	Here you are... (none / 0) (#13)
	by walwyn on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 08:04:36 AM PST

	And if I hear one more person tell me that the WTC incident "changed their world" then im going to be sick. take this.

	Racsm is bad because: (3.00 / 2) (#5)
	by Anonymous Reader on Sun Apr 7th, 2002 at 05:14:08 PM PST

	1. It is destructive 2. One day a person of different race might save you from drowning, etc. 3. Raicism can cause September 11. So, please do not Racism or I will kill you. Thank you.

	"please do not Racism"? (none / 0) (#7)
	by Aryan King on Sun Apr 7th, 2002 at 05:55:42 PM PST

	I'll be sure no Racism happen here. If I see happen it, I'll shoot it on Sight! Racism didn't cause September 11. I don't evar want to hear anybody making that claim again. And, if everybody was blond/redheaded and blue-eyed, I'm sure that someone who looked like that would save me from drowning, smoking crack, eating too much KFC, etc., etc.. *We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	If everybody .... (5.00 / 1) (#9)
	by Anonymous Reader on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 02:58:14 AM PST

	And, if everybody was blond/redheaded and blue-eyed, I'm sure that someone who looked like that would kick your ass severely, just to teach you good english.

	umm.. (none / 0) (#10)
	by PotatoError on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 07:13:28 AM PST

	"We must secure the existance of our people and a future for White children" May I assume that you seek to fulfil this by using methods that current society may frown upon? Have you wondered how much easier it is for all races to live together (within reason) rather than deciding superiority in some kind of worldwide free for all? In such a war no race could definitely say they would come out on top - is it worth the risk? <<JUMP! POGO POGO POGO BOUNCE! POGO POGO POGO>>

	uh...no (none / 0) (#16)
	by Aryan King on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 09:52:34 AM PST

	I'm sure that it is very possible to create a future for White children without resorting to violence; for example, there's no real stigma related to two White people having a White child, right? and suppose that about 500 White people wanted to live in a White only neighborhood? is that illegal? is there anything wrong with that? By not having to coexist with people of other races there would be almost no anxieties or worries, or racially motivated crimes. Sure, it'd be nice if we could all live together in peace, but take a look at Mugabe's Zimbabwe. It's not likely that the negros will ever let us live in peace (they'd rather steal our private property, eat our children, and drink our blood). *We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	Re: uh...no (none / 0) (#22)
	by Uncanny Vortex on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 11:54:28 AM PST

	> suppose that about 500 White people wanted to > live in a White only neighborhood? is that > illegal? Yes, I believe it is illegal, if they used racial discrimination to prevent others from securing loans or housing there. -- Uncanny Vortex

	so... (none / 0) (#25)
	by Aryan King on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 12:03:57 PM PST

	basically, it would be illegal because they are using arbitrary standards to live their lives as they see fit? what race are you, btw? if you're black, do you have black pride? or how about asian pride? or mexican pride? has anyone ever given you a hard time about that in the last 5 years? if a black person says that white people are being "racist" and keeping him down, people will rally behind him, but if a white person accuses a black person of being "racist", he is himself accused of being racist. if 500 mexicans wanted to create a neighborhood all to themselves, nobody would care, but if White people tried to make one, everybody would start screaming and getting all upset. stupid double standards... >:( *We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	...so yeah, it would be illegal. (none / 0) (#26)
	by Uncanny Vortex on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 12:37:34 PM PST

	> it would be illegal because they are using > arbitrary standards to live their lives No, it would be illegal because of federal and state equal housing laws. Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act) prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental and financing of dwellings based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin. (http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/progdesc/title8.cfm) You ask my race. I'm not sure why you ask, but I'm guessing it's because I've been outspoken against your racist viewpoints, so you assume I must be one of them, the ones you oppose. Actually I'm white, mostly Irish, Scottish, French blood. However, if you are seeking a channel for your hate, I'm part Jewish. If a group of Mexicans started a community and denied housing to whites based on their race, the incident would fall under the same legislation mentioned above. -- Uncanny Vortex

	ok... (none / 0) (#27)
	by Aryan King on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 12:43:59 PM PST

	you got me there, but suppose 500 white families decided to build 500 houses in an undeveloped area? would that be legal? *We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	Excuse me (5.00 / 2) (#33)
	by walwyn on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 02:51:08 PM PST

	but isn't this already done.

	No, trailer parks are legal. (none / 0) (#34)
	by Anonymous Reader on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 02:55:53 PM PST

	You dont need a black person's permission to build 500 houses in an undeveloped area. We'll just wait for your fine work to end before moving in. You have a problem with that?

	actually, (none / 0) (#28)
	by Aryan King on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 12:50:18 PM PST

	if "Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act) prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental and financing of dwellings based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin", doesn't that mean that they would be forbidden to discriminate against buyers just because they are White? so I suppose that it would be legal for white people to buy a large number of homes in the same area as long as they aren't doing it to the obvious exclusion of other, you know, non-human creatures. *We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	Listen up, (none / 0) (#15)
	by jvance on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 09:07:18 AM PST

	you illiterate fuckwit. If everyone were blond or red-headed, the blonds and red-heads would be at each others' throats. Now go whack off to your poster of Hitler or something. Which was he, by the way - blond or red-headed? -- Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

	speak to the hand... (1.66 / 3) (#18)
	by Aryan King on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 10:06:51 AM PST

	because you ain't talkin' to my face! *We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	Yes: (5.00 / 1) (#8)
	by tkatchev on Sun Apr 7th, 2002 at 11:46:34 PM PST

	The two things I hate the most: racism and niggers. -- Peace and much love...

	there isn't anything wrong with racism per se (3.33 / 3) (#6)
	by foon on Sun Apr 7th, 2002 at 05:45:48 PM PST

	"Racism" as defined by the socialist, pro-homosexual media, is just the acknowledgment of the natural differences between the races, and the need for each to retain its distinctive identity. There is nothing wrong with this -- we were all made differently by the Lord, after all, and denying that is no different than denying any other aspect of creation. Of course, when racism results in breaking the law or endangering national security, for instance, when negro seperatist hoodlums riot and destroy the property of honest business owners, that is another matter.

	Is there anything right with racism per se? (5.00 / 1) (#14)
	by Anonymous Reader on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 09:06:36 AM PST

	"Racism" (or sexism, btw) as defined by myself, is just the behavior of a group of assholes who, because of some physical differences, pretend to know better than others what is good for them, where and how they should live, how and what they should think, what should be their limits, whom they should hang on with, where they should hang, where they should be hanged.

	well... (1.00 / 1) (#17)
	by Aryan King on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 10:02:56 AM PST

	aren't YOU saying that you know what's better for me, how and where I shouldn't think, what my limits should be, who I shouldn't hang with, where I shouldn't hang, and who I shouldn't hang? by criticizing my actions and thoughts, you have just brought yourself down to my supposedly 'bad' level. shame on you! *We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	No he hasn't (none / 0) (#19)
	by budlite on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 10:08:46 AM PST

	He's not actually made any references to your race in writing that comment. Therefore his judgment on you is not race-biased.

	Against Stupidity, the Gods themselves fight ... (none / 0) (#30)
	by Anonymous Reader on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 01:15:04 PM PST

	... in vain. Are you afraid of using your brains sometimes? Have you seen all the implications of your last paragraph? If you don't see where it can lead you, it will be my pleasure to be your guide PS: correct your damn signature. It is a double offense.

	au contraire (none / 0) (#37)
	by foon on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 10:24:14 PM PST

	<blockquote>"Racism" (or sexism, btw) as defined by myself, is just the behavior of a group of assholes who, because of some physical differences, pretend to know better than others what is good for them</blockquote> This is exactly the liberalist mythology I was referring to. The truth is that those who support racial distinction are all for choice. We're for the choice to hire the sort of people we want to be around in our business. We want our children to have the choice to attend schools with people who are like them. We want the choice to protect our vibrant culture and spirituality from being destroyed by others. And we think the same choice should be offered to all people, of all groups. You will probably mention slavery as an exception to this, after all slaves had no choice in the circumstances of their lives, you will say, and that was all about race. This is a logical fallacity. Slavery does not have anything to do with race, and slavery has particular economic benefits in an expanding country with a scarce labor force. It becomes naturally outmoded in a true capitalist economy, as paying free workers the wage dictated by supply and demand for the term of service that is convenient to the employer is more cost effective than buying their service and paying to support them for life. The fact that, in the united states, and the carribbean, mainly Negro slaves were used, was mainly a historical accident, as it was a convenient trading route, most of the successful African kingdoms already practiced slavery (and also desired access to European commodities), and the skills of many of the available Negro slaves matched well the needs of American plantations.

	Incredibly backward to keep this story on the site (none / 0) (#21)
	by Uncanny Vortex on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 11:51:09 AM PST

	I am somewhat new to this site, thus I was shocked to see this white supremacist trash being posted so prominently here. It seemed like a great site for quite a while; I like a lot of the articles, but this disgusting tripe shouldn't be given such visiblity here. Unless, of course, most of the readers here are of a similar viewpoint... which I sincerely hope is not the case. I am incredulous that hardly anyone really spoke out against Aryan King's posting(s). Perhaps it's just the idea that "we mustn't criticize or supress his free speech." However, when such disgusting, offensive and ignorant viewpoints are put forth, and people fail to speak up -- or remove them from prominence on the website -- they are in effect condoning what was said. The administrator(s) here might feel that to remove it would constitute censorship. I posit that to leave it here is extremely unkind and insensitive, and constitutes abetting his hate speech. Not legally wrong, surely, but I'm quite disappointed in the people who run this site. Backward, narrow-minded racism. Ugh, how disgusting. Who allowed this guy to post his crap here? It smells. -- Uncanny Vortex

	well, (none / 0) (#23)
	by Aryan King on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 11:58:03 AM PST

	if you want to censor my submissions, why don't we censor everybody else's for things that could potentially offend someone? there is a comment thingie that allows you to express your disgust, don't forget...feel free to use it whenever you feel like slamming someone who don't think the same way as you. most people, if they read something they don't like, can understand that the writer probably doesn't have the same views as them, and will leave the article alone. you, however, seem incapable of doing that. you have to complain and whine about something that offends your sensibilities. if you don't like what I write, whine loudly or just don't read what I write! *We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	Sorry Vortex.. (none / 0) (#24)
	by elby on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 12:02:53 PM PST

	Adequacy is the Internet's best source of controversy. This means that sometimes, people you or I don't like are going to post here and not be censored. Adequacy does not censor people. It is the readers responsibility to the community to provide the conflicting viewpoint when something they disagree with is posted. This includes you. Unfortunately, one thing we don't accept here is simply attacking someone for their beliefs. Your post is not constructive to the conversation here. You call his views disgusting and his post crap, but you don't really provide anything else to discuss or an alternative point of view, do you? -lb

	An alternative viewpoint. (5.00 / 1) (#31)
	by Uncanny Vortex on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 01:29:45 PM PST

	> Unfortunately, one thing we don't accept here > is simply attacking someone for their beliefs. > Your post is not constructive to the > conversation here. Oh, I see. So let me get this straight: I'm the one whose posting was unacceptable, because I expressed outrage at the white supremacist's post. > you don't really provide [...] an alternative > point of view If anyone reading this truly needs to hear an alternative point of view, in order to see why such bias is wrong, that is actually sad. It seems easy enough to understand that racism is inhuman, unjust and cruel. After the struggles our country -- indeed, the world -- has gone through on this issue, a lot more people finally see the light. To hate, mock or mistreat someone based on their race is hurtful, serves no useful purpose, and is morally wrong. Can I prove this, back it up with facts? No. Racial hate is simply wrong. Those who have a conscience and a caring heart will be outraged by it; while cold-hearted people, without a love for their fellow-man, will argue the point endlessly. Elby, I can understand why you are choosing not to censor. Attacking someone for their "beliefs" can be a bad thing, however racism is not a religious or political belief. It is an expression of hate for a part of mankind, and thus it affects us all. It seems obvious why I would react to it with denunciation. Racism has hurt many people, and so many vast injustices and atrocities have happened because of it. So it's not simply a political preference -- it's actually an expression of intent to exclude, of intent to injure, to defame or to otherwise harm those of the affected race(s). Especially when the poster is promoting a video game which glorifies race-based murder. In my opinion, a measure of outrage is in order. As far as having "anything else to discuss", how about this: Let's discuss just how far (any of) you who hold racist viewpoints would like to go with your beliefs. Would you segregate neighborhoods, as Aryan King has suggested? Would you execute your targetted race(s), as A.K. has also hinted? Would you like to make slaves of them, sell them, gas them? Let's hear about where you draw the line. Is it enough to just call them "dirty jews", or other such racial epithets? Or would you go beyond that and back up your words with injurious actions? Elby, I hope this post is more in line with your requirements for stating my viewpoint clearly, and promoting ideas for further conversation. -- Uncanny Vortex

	Re: An Alternate Viewpoint (none / 0) (#32)
	by Aryan King on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 02:19:22 PM PST

	"As far as having "anything else to discuss", how about this: Let's discuss just how far (any of) you who hold racist viewpoints would like to go with your beliefs. Would you segregate neighborhoods, as Aryan King has suggested? Would you execute your targetted race(s), as A.K. has also hinted? Would you like to make slaves of them, sell them, gas them?" Why shouldn't we segregate neighborhoods? Many cities, like Chicago, were quite famous for having segregated neighborhoods (with Polish areas, Italian areas, Mexican areas, Canadian areas, etc., etc.), and look how things are now (ok, so maybe putting all the blacks and mexicans in their own areas did allow gang-related activities to proliferate, but that's not the point). In White neighborhoods, crime is nearly nonexistant; my own neighborhood, which is 96% White, has little visible criminal activity, no gangs, and I feel perfectly comfortable leaving my house doors unlocked when I leave for the day because I know that nobody will steal my things. I would never kill someone who was not like me...segregate and expell, yes, but not kill. If a black person raped and/or killed one of my daughters, I might consider physically harming them, but under most circumstances, I would not seriously consider attacking or hurting a non-White. The game that I 'promoted' was presumably meant to be a way for angst ridden young people to relieve themselves of the frustrations that they may have with the world without actually going out and doing something that would ruin their lives. "Let's hear about where you draw the line. Is it enough to just call them "dirty jews", or other such racial epithets? Or would you go beyond that and back up your words with injurious actions?" I'll call people whatever I want to call them. If I want to call Bill Gates a "goddamned dirty capitalist", that's my right as well. :) *We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	Relax (none / 0) (#38)
	by Peter Johnson on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 12:41:58 AM PST

	It won't be long before I terminate the "Aryan King" account. Not long at all. Sometime Weds. I think. --PJ --Peter Are you adequate?

	hrm... (none / 0) (#42)
	by Aryan King on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 08:55:27 AM PST

	I guess the servers couldn't handle all the controversy, huh? (or perhaps the readers couldn't handle it; I'll bet good money that 70% of the folk reading my posts were frothing at the mouth and wanted to DoS adequacy for their policy of not censoring things) oh well...delete this account if you want; I won't be registering a new one to post similar stuff, but just so you know, I'm not really all that upset over your decision. it was fun while it lasted... ;) *We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	At least ... (none / 0) (#43)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 09:08:34 AM PST

	... you've learned how to write existence.

	'fun while it lasted ;)' (none / 0) (#44)
	by because it isnt on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 09:10:36 AM PST

	bet good money that 70% of the folk reading my posts were frothing at the mouth I'll bet they were frothing at the mouth that some pisspoor imitation of a white supremacist was pretending to say "let's hate black people!" for shits 'n' giggles. You couldn't get your tongue any further into your cheek if you tried. adequacy.org -- because it isn't

	Well... (none / 0) (#51)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 11:05:10 AM PST

	It could be said that Aryan King was only a bit more piss-poor than certain other tongue-in-cheek right-winged fanatics around here, like a certain Mr. Gibbons. Have you read that little hacker piece he posted up a few months ago? Absolutely hilarious, but about as intelligently put together as most of Aryan King's other posts. I'd rather that Shoeboy didn't delete King's account, but his game's up and he's admitted it anyhow, so there really is no reason for him to stick around any longer. Really, though: doesn't anybody else think that we need an ignorant white-supremacist around here, just to even and balance out the mix? My apologies. Too lazy to search and post links to said contributor or story. But rest assured, they should be somewhere on the site.

	three salient points (none / 0) (#52)
	by nathan on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 11:15:20 AM PST

	You are a liberalist. You eat mud. You are an ass-clown. Nathan -- Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

	Hey! (none / 0) (#60)
	by because it isnt on Wed Apr 10th, 2002 at 03:17:01 AM PST

	There's nothing wrong with eating mud. adequacy.org -- because it isn't

	Incorrect (none / 0) (#45)
	by jvance on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 10:02:05 AM PST

	If Shoeboy is deleting your account, then I would guess it has less to do with your "controversial" views and more to do with your Inadequacy. See, there's a strict no trolling policy here. You've failed to comply. Furthermore, your trolls are artless and unentertaining. Go back to Slashdot, little boy. -- Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

	hrm... (none / 0) (#49)
	by Aryan King on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 10:52:32 AM PST

	Furthermore, your trolls are artless and unentertaining. of course. that's why nobody has read my postings and commented on them, right? a truly artless and unentertaining post wouldn't elicit a response of any sort. *We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	Again incorrect (none / 0) (#50)
	by jvance on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 11:02:40 AM PST

	It can be entertaining to reply to worthless posts, but ultimately it gets old. Rather like you. -- Adequacy has turned into a cesspool consisting of ... blubbering, superstitious fools arguing with smug, pseudointellectual assholes. -AR

	well... (none / 0) (#53)
	by Aryan King on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 11:29:57 AM PST

	it probably wouldn't have gotten old so fast if other people were contributing diary entries as well. is it normal for items like mine to sit here for days on end? *We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	Nope! (5.00 / 2) (#54)
	by walwyn on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 11:53:56 AM PST

	We are just letting it fester to see what crawls out.

	ah... (none / 0) (#55)
	by Aryan King on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 12:17:52 PM PST

	*We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	Timing (5.00 / 1) (#61)
	by because it isnt on Wed Apr 10th, 2002 at 04:41:35 AM PST

	is it normal for items like mine to sit here for days on end? Yep. All the new diaries come out on Troll Tuesday. adequacy.org -- because it isn't

	Re: Relax (none / 0) (#46)
	by Uncanny Vortex on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 10:16:04 AM PST

	Dude, sometimes I fall hard for trolls. It's a fault of mine. Sorry. I've been called gullible a few times in my life, as you can imagine. I just felt convinced of the need to speak up. In other words, the need to make an ass of U and ME. Actually just me. :) BTW Peter, not to post off-topic, but... I like your articles, especially the one about virginity. It was funny. I lost my virginity at age 22, to a chunky 33-year-old woman to whom I wasn't at all attracted. But due to the fact that friends weren't watching while eating popcorn, I went through with it. And became a real man. It didn't last long, but it was fine for a first encounter. So by the way, again not to post off-topic, but did you ever lose that damn virginity? -- Uncanny Vortex

	well... (none / 0) (#47)
	by Aryan King on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 10:43:32 AM PST

	Dude, sometimes I fall hard for trolls. It's a fault of mine. Sorry. don't feel bad. you were just adding to the overall controversy of the website. contributions like mine are what make Adequacy worthwile. :) *We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	Apparently you're new to scoop? (none / 0) (#35)
	by nx01 on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 06:54:15 PM PST

	Who allowed this guy to post his crap here? It smells. I agree that it's an incredibly lame entry, but as to who allowed him to post? Seems you're new at this scoop thingy. Here's a little primer. See the "My Adequacy" box? Yes? Good. Go down to the link that says My New Diary Entry. Click it. This is your diary. Not anyone elses, yours. Now you too can post your own crap! Have fun. Oh yes, and the Adequacy does not censor. It has been known to edit a bit, but the Adequacy does not censor. Unless the powers that be are in a bad mood. "Every time I look at the X window system, it's so fucking stupid; and part of me feels responsible for the worst parts of it." -- James Gosling

	Re: Apparently you're new to scoop? (none / 0) (#36)
	by Aryan King on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 07:22:03 PM PST

	I agree that it's an incredibly lame entry, but as to who allowed him to post? well, think of it as a test entry. whenever some other people start putting their diaries entries up here again and this one scrolls off, I'll put up something a little more interesting: dating tips from yours truly. :) I've got a bunch and I know that you all will relly benefit from them. :D *We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	I'm not surprised... (none / 0) (#29)
	by Aryan King on Mon Apr 8th, 2002 at 01:13:58 PM PST

	to hear that the Catholic Church is considering making a negro the next pope. I guess it's not enough that 47,000 of their priests worldwide are suspected of hanky panky with prepubescent boys and girls, now they've got to flush the entire religion down the toilet. <:( Way to go guys... *We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	God is loving, just and colorblind (5.00 / 1) (#39)
	by Adam Rightmann on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 07:38:55 AM PST

	For as long as you are willing to submit to the True Church, you can be green for all God cares. I do think you are grossly exagerrating the number of priests who've succumbed to a minor pleasure of the flesh. My last article goes into a little more depth about what may have happened in many of those situations. A. Rightmann

	Hey Aryan King (none / 0) (#40)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 08:36:04 AM PST

	Give us your opinion on the Muslims in Iran.

	Equals ? (5.00 / 2) (#41)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 08:49:41 AM PST

	I don't hate non-whites, I just don't consider them my equals...does that make me evil? Certainly not! I'm Black, and God I don't want to be considered your equal, ever.

	Not equal at all... (none / 0) (#48)
	by Aryan King on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 10:47:17 AM PST

	Good. *We must secure the existence of our people and a future fer White children.*

	Don't worry then, (1.25 / 4) (#59)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Apr 9th, 2002 at 09:15:44 PM PST

	For you are a dirty nigger, and Mr. King is a member of the human race. Cheers,

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org. The Adequacy.org name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of Adequacy.org. No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to legal@adequacy.org.