Blackman save white women from 10 yea...
Janette

Jamaica, NY

#783 May 15, 2013
Trouble wrote:
<quoted text>LOL..i love this. You don't think i knew a hero entails "bravery" and "courage". You act like you're having some kind of "GOT YA!" in which you made me look stupid. Shorty..as a kid i've watched cartoons like superman, batman, He-man..etc, as well as knowing that "courage" and bravery are attributes which are integral to the definition of hero. Ok i probably shouldn't have insulated "having courage" and "doing something that benefits someone's life",(as saving it..etc). I made that statement not because i didn't that showing courage was an integral part of being a hero, but because i assumed you were smart enough to understand the context of my statement. When we use hero in everyday language it implies not just "showing bravery", but doing something that saves a life or helps another in good. Anyone can "show bravery/courage" shorty..a suicide bomber shows alot of bravery and courage to do that but is he a hero in the term we usually say the word? Or like the example of a bank robber who robs a bank but when cops come he stays to have a shootout with police, is he a hero because he was "brave?"
Look as I said before,don't go acusing people of misusing the proper definition of words,without first checking the dictionary to make certain you've got it right before you go correcting them. You were in error of the definition of hero,and I was correct,plain as that. You can split hairs all you want about how the word hero is use in everyday language,has zero to do with how you wrongly called me ignorant of the term hero,when I was in fact correct. Like I said,check first,make sure that you are correct, then you can go call someone up on some error that you accuse them of making,since that seems to be your pastime. Look I'm done bandying back and forth about this. Use words whichever way you wish,I'm really not all that concerned about it.
Idiots everywhere

Santa Clara, CA

#784 May 15, 2013
mr marvelous wrote:
The craziest thing about Charles Ramsey rescuing those women was when his history with the law was examined as if he didn't just saved lives....or a part of this crime. This will make ppl who may have a prior misdemeanor or whatever more reluctant to get involved next time a similar situation like this occurs. Ppl hate calling that man a hero for some reason. Smh
He's a convicted felon (severely beating women) who happened to do a noble thing. But he'll always be a woman beater/felon just as someone who murders someone else never ceases to be a murderer.

Janette

Jamaica, NY

#785 May 15, 2013
Trouble wrote:
<quoted text>Shawty..this was confirmed by proffessionals, movie stars..its proven that fire that high the towers was not enough to melt the buildings and bring it down..we even had many firefighters on live TV saying they heard explosions before the buildings came down,etc...i can go on and on..i'm just dumbfounded that there's still people in 2013 who still believe the official story..that's crazy for real.
When people get together if it makes them feel better to think so,like for some political or social reason,people are likely to feed each other any false belief.In psychology it is called group behavior,where one person if their personality is strong enough, they start up some such story,that becomes popular to accept as truth.So I guess as a result,there probably are movie stars and some professionals who believe that destruction of the world trade was U.S. gov done.
Firefighters are not the sharpest knives in the drawer,they are physically strong and brave however. So that I personally am not likely to rely on the reports of firemen who naively say that the plane that hit the world trade did not bring it down,but that they heard bombs going off within the building that brought it down. Yes likely they did hear explosions throughout the world trade on that awful day.But those explosions that they heard, was from the explosions from the gasoline of the exploded airplane creating a domino affect downward. causing fires and explosions to all the ignitable fixtures,aircondioners,electri cal wiring and such that was throughout that tall world trade building. Do you realize how much gasoline that passenger plane held,and how on impact and exploding all that gasoline,the fire had nowhere to go,but by gravity downwards.
Mix a large fire and gasoline,and a broken torn building at the top,and it is not that hard to see how the fire,and gasoline can spread and keep exploding lower and lower down and weaken the structure. You viewed firemen on the scene that awful day saying that they heard explosions,so that those explosions that they hear must have been bombs going off,is that what they and you are saying???
You viewed these firemen,who likely don't have a clue. I viewed a building specialist who explained in technical detail, how the structure of the world trade came down after the plane hit.Without going into detail of his explaining it,the building as tall as it was,was not built strong enough to withstand the large explosion of an aircraft hitting it and exploding. Something to do with the inadequate solidness of the metal supports,something to do with compromising superior structure of the world trade building for expediency. But to top it all off that Arab terrorist,forget his name,admitted himself, that he was behind the planning of the planes that rammed into the world trade center.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Level 8

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#786 May 15, 2013
Janette wrote:
<quoted text>And what you state here is a reflection of the double standard between how black women and white women are perceived,and treated by society,and by the police,and also the contrast between how white men and black men are perceived. That's what I was mentioning above,about how I was disrespected,and treated shabbily by a white officer,and I had done nothing illegal,in fact I was the one who had summoned the cops. Then someone got on here and responded by telling me that I was imagining things and all.Also I'm fairly certain that blacks are stopped in their cars on the highway,at higher rates than whites are,while doing nothing more to warrant it than white drivers do. In fact,I think most law abiding blacks being aware of this, are probably on their best behavior while on the high ways to minimize this,probably having better driving behavior than a white person,who doesn't have cause to worry about being singled out by the cops.
You see these social reflections from your own experience and from observation of how other blacks are treated,and spoken of,yet people don't want to admit that it is the case.
It's mainly simpleminded whites who insist that the inequities in ther conduct of the police or judicial system (or whatever) is simply a part of our imgaination. Yet, the inequities in the reatment of Black women wh are violated, or black peole who are violated--often by the LAW itself--is well known, well recorded, studied, and simply no longer news. Even Amnesty International has studied and made note of systemic police and judicial abuse in Black and Brown communities. It isn't that we Blacks are delusional, but rather that far too many whites are SELF-DELUSIONAL. They simply believe what they want to believe.

“Yes WE Can! Yes we Will!”

Level 8

Since: Jul 07

Baltimore, Md.

#787 May 15, 2013
Janette wrote:
<quoted text>Well that's you,and how you feel. Perhaps you yourself, don't look for media attention,and reward for performing your job. But in my post that you are responding to here,what I was replying to,-was the posters who stated that professionals like firemen,and cops, don't get media attention when they rescue anyone,so therefore Ramsey does not merit it.
I commend you as a teacher of philosopy.I studied philosophy in school many moons ago. It's very good study to expand one's conceptual thinking.,which certainly can be a quide throughout life.
Whatever wrong paths he took in the past, Ramsey does deserved to be commended for rescuing those women. He did time for spousal abuse, which is appropriate. To be commended for saving three captive women is commendable, and he should be commended for THAT.
Christian commend Paul, not Saul. Many people commend Malcolm X, not Malcolm Little. Why should the bad that men do be eternally remembered while the good is interred with their bones and forgotten?
Trouble

Brooklyn, NY

#788 May 15, 2013
Janette wrote:
<quoted text>When people get together if it makes them feel better to think so,like for some political or social reason,people are likely to feed each other any false belief.In psychology it is called group behavior,where one person if their personality is strong enough, they start up some such story,that becomes popular to accept as truth.So I guess as a result,there probably are movie stars and some professionals who believe that destruction of the world trade was U.S. gov done.
Firefighters are not the sharpest knives in the drawer,they are physically strong and brave however. So that I personally am not likely to rely on the reports of firemen who naively say that the plane that hit the world trade did not bring it down,but that they heard bombs going off within the building that brought it down. Yes likely they did hear explosions throughout the world trade on that awful day.But those explosions that they heard, was from the explosions from the gasoline of the exploded airplane creating a domino affect downward. causing fires and explosions to all the ignitable fixtures,aircondioners,electri cal wiring and such that was throughout that tall world trade building. Do you realize how much gasoline that passenger plane held,and how on impact and exploding all that gasoline,the fire had nowhere to go,but by gravity downwards.
Mix a large fire and gasoline,and a broken torn building at the top,and it is not that hard to see how the fire,and gasoline can spread and keep exploding lower and lower down and weaken the structure. You viewed firemen on the scene that awful day saying that they heard explosions,so that those explosions that they hear must have been bombs going off,is that what they and you are saying???
You viewed these firemen,who likely don't have a clue. I viewed a building specialist who explained in technical detail, how the structure of the world trade came down after the plane hit.Without going into detail of his explaining it,the building as tall as it was,was not built strong enough to withstand the large explosion of an aircraft hitting it and exploding. Something to do with the inadequate solidness of the metal supports,something to do with compromising superior structure of the world trade building for expediency. But to top it all off that Arab terrorist,forget his name,admitted himself, that he was behind the planning of the planes that rammed into the world trade center.
All of that is B.S. Seems you're a liitle too gullible, i won't get into this because you will believe that everything you hear in the news media is the gospel truth, that alone means we'll get nowhere. But i noticed you didn't address building 7, you know, that building right next to the twin towers that was NEVER hit by a plane, and collapsed like the other two..what do you say about that?
Trouble

Brooklyn, NY

#789 May 15, 2013
Janette wrote:
<quoted text> Look as I said before,don't go acusing people of misusing the proper definition of words,without first checking the dictionary to make certain you've got it right before you go correcting them. You were in error of the definition of hero,and I was correct,plain as that. You can split hairs all you want about how the word hero is use in everyday language,has zero to do with how you wrongly called me ignorant of the term hero,when I was in fact correct. Like I said,check first,make sure that you are correct, then you can go call someone up on some error that you accuse them of making,
I was not in error of the difinition of hero. I just didn't think i needed to be technical about it because i assumed you were smart enought to understand the context i made my statement. When you're having a dialogue it's not about just knowing the definition of words, you have to be able to apprehend the CONTEXT in which someone makes a statement. Let's break it down.

My statement was that a hero is someone that does something to positively benefit someone else, as in saving a life..etc. You then said a hero is someone who shows "courage". I then said "courage just means having heart and does not constitute heroism". When i made that statement it was to challenge your implication that "courage" alone constitute heroism..hence, alluding that U.S soldiers are heroes simply they were "brave" enough to fight soldiers of other countries they were plundering and destroying for imperialistic goals. That does not make American soldiers heroes anymore than a thief who has "courage" to burglarize the white house amid all the security, etc...
Trouble

Brooklyn, NY

#790 May 15, 2013
Janette wrote:
<quoted text>
And no,it is not that important, but you did say that I was ignorant of the definition of the word hero,and so I did not let that go by without retorting,since I know that I used the term adequately. And if you choose to use an English word loosely instead of using the strict dictionary definitions, then that's you,it doesn't mean the rest of us should not if we choos, use some word strictly, but use it loosely just because you choose to do so.
True you should adhere to the correct definition in the dictionary and you were right to do so, but like i said, you have to attentive to the context in which a statement is made. i delineated my statement to a point that any person could understand the context i said bravery by itself don't constitute heroism. Hero has dual definitions, one being "courage" like you said, the other being "a man admired for his achievements and noble qualities", like i said, not exactly in those words but i did say a hero does something that benefits another positively, hence would being admired by the media, etc. Both definitions are integral parts to the word hero, and "courage", even though is "one" of the definitions of hero, does not constitute heroism because even a thief can have courage, like the examples i gave prior, if a man robs a bank and police come and he takes out his gun and shoot at cops, that is "courage", but not "heroism".I said you were "ignorant" because you dubbed American soldiers heros simply for showing "courage" in fighhing foreign soldiers, even though they were fighting to plunder, kill, and expand imperialism.

P.S "ignorant" is not always an insult, it means lacking knowledge about something.
Trouble

Brooklyn, NY

#791 May 15, 2013
Janette wrote:
<quoted text>Nearly everyone who takes a certain stand for or opposed to a war,or on any other issue, believe that their judgement is based upon facts.We do so because to each of us,which ever way we see something is our own reality,and is therefore factual to us. So the facts that you say you base your view of U.S, wars on,are only facts to you,because that is how you and maybe some who hold your same view, evaluate it,which may not be factual,to others who assess it differently.
It's kind of like religion. There are like a thousand different religions out with the same goal, how to get right with God. All of these religions have their own way to in which they think will get them right with God, so how do we know which one is the right one? Everybody can't be right..someone has to be right, someone has to be wrong..only one is right. You want to know one of the main reasons i'm right about my views on the wars, aside from examining history, using my head and not believing everything im told just because they say it on the news, is because of examples like this, here is a U.S soldier from his own mouth that confirm everthing i said so don't just take my word for it
Sadbuttrue

Arlington, VA

#792 May 16, 2013
Mutant Crusher wrote:
http://www.news.com.au/world-n ews/north-america/charles-rams ey-the-neighbour-who-helped-sa ve-three-abducted-women-in-ohi o/story-fnh81jut-1226636696130
Blackmen are heroes by nature.
MACEO
BLACK MEN ARE CRIMINAL BY NATURE! LMAO
Sadbuttrue

Arlington, VA

#793 May 16, 2013
Janette wrote:
<quoted text>When people get together if it makes them feel better to think so,like for some political or social that rammed into the world trade center.
MACEO

YOur 60 years old Grown up! The other profiles you talk to are you own with the exception of Capree, Brownman, KennyfromBaltimore, Lovinglife1974.........

Your the only "Childish Man" that has 500 profiles and talks to them! No other posters create multiple profiles only YOU and your 60 years old!

It simply goes to show that your a loser!
Janette

Jamaica, NY

#794 May 16, 2013
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
Whatever wrong paths he took in the past, Ramsey does deserved to be commended for rescuing those women. He did time for spousal abuse, which is appropriate. To be commended for saving three captive women is commendable, and he should be commended for THAT.
Christian commend Paul, not Saul. Many people commend Malcolm X, not Malcolm Little. Why should the bad that men do be eternally remembered while the good is interred with their bones and forgotten?
I agree.And that which you stated in your last sentence is a Shakespearian quote,"the bad that men do,lives on forever,but the good that they do,lay buried with their bones".
Janette

Jamaica, NY

#795 May 16, 2013
Sadbuttrue wrote:
<quoted text>MACEO
YOur 60 years old Grown up! The other profiles you talk to are you own with the exception of Capree, Brownman, KennyfromBaltimore, Lovinglife1974.........
Your the only "Childish Man" that has 500 profiles and talks to them! No other posters create multiple profiles only YOU and your 60 years old!
It simply goes to show that your a loser!
I kind of figured some fool would get on here and deduce from my post above,where I said that my brother ducked the Vietnam war,and figure that I must be over 60. Well you should have expanded your pea brain a bit, cause my brother was at the time, many years older than me,fool.
Also I notice that all of your statements on here consist of nothing more than going over the posts,and finding who you can post the best insults at,and you then post an insult at that person,you are pathetic. You're not alone though,there are one or two other frequent AAF posters, who do the same.
I have never read any post that you have posted that contain any intelligent opinions or where you have written any thought out views or opinion about the topic that the particular thread is about,and I don't mean a post that I agree with, but your posts don't contain your opinion about the topic but only personal insults. I'm pretty certain that is because your brain is too warped to have any thought out opinion about the topics,being as how you would need the gift of reason to do so.
And though I am not over 60 LOL, you shouldn't feel so smug that a person over 60 is an easy target for one to call names,you jackass. EVeryone is in the same boat pertaining to age,which is to say,that you'll either eventually live past 60 or die before you do.
Janette

Jamaica, NY

#796 May 16, 2013
Trouble wrote:
<quoted text>I was not in error of the difinition of hero. I just didn't think i needed to be technical about it because i assumed you were smart enought to understand the context i made my statement. When you're having a dialogue it's not about just knowing the definition of words, you have to be able to apprehend the CONTEXT in which someone makes a statement. Let's break it down.
My statement was that a hero is someone that does something to positively benefit someone else, as in saving a life..etc. You then said a hero is someone who shows "courage". I then said "courage just means having heart and does not constitute heroism". When i made that statement it was to challenge your implication that "courage" alone constitute heroism..hence, alluding that U.S soldiers are heroes simply they were "brave" enough to fight soldiers of other countries they were plundering and destroying for imperialistic goals. That does not make American soldiers heroes anymore than a thief who has "courage" to burglarize the white house amid all the security, etc...
But you were in error of the definition of the word hero.I used the word correctly ,and you said that I used the definition of the word hero wrongly. I then posted the dictionary definition of the correct meaning,which was the same as what you called me wrong and ignorant for using.
Now here you are going through extensive dialogue to make yourself sound like you were correct when you were in fact wrong. Oh please. Take your correction and move on. We all make mistakes, just be glad that you now have learned a new word.

Level 8

Since: May 08

Pacific Northwest

#797 May 16, 2013
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not quite so simple, however. For it's a matter of CLASS as well as race. In UNDERCLASS white neighborhoods, criminals are also very likely to be "street dengerous" as in the Black ghettoes. But--and this is one of the historic advantages of white privilege and racism--far FEWER whites proportionately are likely to find themselves in such debilitating destitution. But among those who do there is an element which does tend to go street crazy.

And Loulou would be much safer in my middle class (but predominantly Black) neighborhood than in certain destitute white areas in Baltimore. Yet MOST people in destitute areas (white, Black, Latin or other) are NOT criminals.

But even if we accept Loulou's claim unqualifiedly, I can still rightly designate as paranoid any white person who is more fearly of Black crime than of white crime (unless he or she happens to be stranded on the corner of North Ave & Pennm or Flag house projects, et). Why? Because whites are MOST likely to be violated by OTHER WHITE than by Blacks or other non-whites....
Excellent points, Brother! I'm glad you raised these issues to help encourage more thoughtful reflection about the racial dynamics of crime.

My interest in, and approval of, Loulou's comments were due to her apparent grasp of the "Phillip Garrido syndrome" - a slow-moving, horror-show, style of crime that some extremely cruel and sexually deviant and/or misogynist white males seem to gravitate towards - at least here in the USA:

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/criminal_m...

Garrido's horrific 18-year-long abuse of Ms. Dugard shocks the moral conscience. Very similar to what Ariel Castro perpetrated in Cleveland. With these demented, sadistic gentlemen, we see the modern incarnation of the 1820s slavemaster from Alabama or Georgia - except that contemporary victims now include white and Latina women.

When I look at the mug shot of Mr. Garrido and look at those soulless eyes...
http://www.examiner.com/images/blog/wysiwyg/i...
I can't help but think of Malcolm X's famous incendiary accusations leveled at the "Blue-eyed Devils" who had tormented Black folks for so long. The image shown above is surely what far too many of our great-great-grandmothers had to put up with as a cruel, manipulative and unwanted sex partner.
Trouble

Brooklyn, NY

#798 May 16, 2013
Janette wrote:
<quoted text>But you were in error of the definition of the word hero.I used the word correctly ,and you said that I used the definition of the word hero wrongly. I then posted the dictionary definition of the correct meaning,which was the same as what you called me wrong and ignorant for using.
Now here you are going through extensive dialogue to make yourself sound like you were correct when you were in fact wrong. Oh please. Take your correction and move on. We all make mistakes, just be glad that you now have learned a new word.
Nope, always knew the definition. If it makes you feel better thinking i didn't know that a hero entails "courage" even though i noted firefighters deserved the title since they "literally risk their lives", everyday, go right ahead. Dictionary definition of hero is just as i described, someone deserving honor for doing something great "a man admired for his achievements and noble qualities" the implication of my statement, which even a child could understand was simply that "courage" alone does not constitute heroism since anybody including a thief, robber..etc can have courage, hence, American soldiers are not heroes because they are brave enough to fight foreign soldiers for imperialism. That argument stands and is very much correct and you did not challenge it once i explained it, but rather tried to hold on to your false idea that i didn't know that one of the attributes of a hero is courage. You were using one attribute of a hero "courage" and implying that that alone constitute heroism, which is not true, as i've proven..either way you want to look at it, i'm still right, you're still wrong.

Level 8

Since: May 08

Pacific Northwest

#799 May 16, 2013
Savant wrote:
<quoted text>
Whatever wrong paths he took in the past, Ramsey does deserved to be commended for rescuing those women. He did time for spousal abuse, which is appropriate. To be commended for saving three captive women is commendable, and he should be commended for THAT.

Christian commend Paul, not Saul. Many people commend Malcolm X, not Malcolm Little. Why should the bad that men do be eternally remembered while the good is interred with their bones and forgotten?
Outstanding post, Brother.

It's amazing - and somewhat disheartening - how we see a concerted effort on Topix-AA to diminish this civic-minded brother who stepped up to the plate when so many others would've just "kept it moving."

I think Ramsey secretly shames many better-educated and higher-income (but *fearful*) people who know in their heart of hearts that they wouldn't have reacted in the same way.
Trouble

Brooklyn, NY

#800 May 16, 2013
Janette wrote:
<quoted text>
Now here you are going through extensive dialogue to make yourself sound like you were correct when you were in fact wrong. Oh please.
I was right from day one, nothing changed. I'm not going through extensive dialogue to "make myself sound like i'm right", i am right. I'm only going through "extensive dialogue" to simplify a concept that you are having problem understanding. Courage alone don't constitute heroism, hence, american soldiers are not heroes because they were "brave" enough to take on the military of foreign nations for imperialistic goals. If a thief is "brave" enough to burglarize the white house, does that make him a hero, yes or no?
Janette

Jamaica, NY

#801 May 16, 2013
Harrisson wrote:
<quoted text>
Excellent points, Brother! I'm glad you raised these issues to help encourage more thoughtful reflection about the racial dynamics of crime.
My interest in, and approval of, Loulou's comments were due to her apparent grasp of the "Phillip Garrido syndrome" - a slow-moving, horror-show, style of crime that some extremely cruel and sexually deviant and/or misogynist white males seem to gravitate towards - at least here in the USA:
http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/criminal_m...
Garrido's horrific 18-year-long abuse of Ms. Dugard shocks the moral conscience. Very similar to what Ariel Castro perpetrated in Cleveland. With these demented, sadistic gentlemen, we see the modern incarnation of the 1820s slavemaster from Alabama or Georgia - except that contemporary victims now include white and Latina women.
When I look at the mug shot of Mr. Garrido and look at those soulless eyes...
http://www.examiner.com/images/blog/wysiwyg/i...
I can't help but think of Malcolm X's famous incendiary accusations leveled at the "Blue-eyed Devils" who had tormented Black folks for so long. The image shown above is surely what far too many of our great-great-grandmothers had to put up with as a cruel, manipulative and unwanted sex partner.
You're correct,and you explained it well. Whites have a history in this country of being vile,as during the slavery period,even the U.S government had no morals,and condoned white brutality against other human beings(slaves,indians).And not to say that I see whites in general a being immoral or violent,as I instead,judge by individual,not by groups. But whites have already long proven that they can compete with the best of them in violating other people with brutality. Yet in light of all of this, people for some reason choose to stereotype blacks,both black men and black women as the violent,law breaking ones.And that most whites are goody two shoes. Another words, as I said above,you're black it's thought,maybe you've got a record,maybe your violent. Only when they come to know you,do they let up on these stereotypes. While with whites,it goes the other way around, they are assumed to be upstanding citizens,until they prove to being otherwise. This kind of double standard is reflected in the double standard of treatment of blacks and whites. As I stated above,the police are one example.No need for me to go on about the manhandling treatment that cops are overzealous to let out on black males,since it is all too well known.. But as a woman,I can see that a white woman is far more likely to be spoken to with respect,and thought of as a responsible person,than is a black woman.It is assumed of us,that we will at any minute, go out of control,and so instead of speaking to us respectfully,the police will approach us threateningly.
Like my friend the other day,stopped by the police in her car, she was calmly explaining to the white cop what had occurred,and he outright told her to not argue with him. SHe then said to him
"I'm not arguing with you,but just talking,and explaining to you". Had she been a white woman,I think he would have had more patience to listen to her,of that I am certain.
The "stop and frisk" routine is another example here in NYC and other. 90 percent targeted against young blacks,or dark skinned latinos. Being aware of this,arrogance that white police,and other authorities are ready to impose upon you as a black,blacks need to be prepared on how to interpersonal relate to them when confronted,even if they are rude, and arrogant,so that you maybe the most you will suffer is a disrespectful manner towards you,without you falling into their trap,where you become another black police victim.
Trouble

Brooklyn, NY

#802 May 16, 2013
Janette wrote:
<quoted text> Take your correction and move on. We all make mistakes, just be glad that you now have learned a new word.
This is funny. Shorty i always knew hero also mean't bravery/courage, you cant be serious. Check back on page 31 dated last monday. This is what i said. "i think firefighters are ten times the hero as Charles Ramsey, they put their lives in danger everyday yet they don't get the spotlight". From that comment, obviously i already know that courage/bravery is a part of the definition of a hero. Difference between us is you think courage/bravery alone constitute a hero. If guy rob a bank and get in a shootout with police, is he a hero simply because he had the courage to do so, yes or no?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

African-American Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min Realtime 1,536,031
Black women want kids with that GOOD HAIR 18 min Paul 27
Black men are weak and cowardly! lmao 58 min T-BOS 8
I need proof that the Ancient Egyptians Were No... (Oct '07) 1 hr dreamhunk 34,579
Does Washington State Have A Lot Of Racism? (Oct '11) 1 hr StayAwayFromEastWA 63
BM will never RISE 1 hr Virginia Sue Jenk... 13
New Serena Williams Pregnancy pics 1 hr Keyanna 34
HA HA HA! Trump cuts $1.7 TRILLION in welfare! 1 hr Paul 222
Why are black men so thirsty for white women? 2 hr KC The Troll Hunter 77
White women are extremely jealous of bw! 3 hr WHITE MASTER 42
More from around the web