Send a Message
to Keisha-J

Comments

103

Joined

Nov 19, 2012

Keisha-J Profile

Forums Owned

Recent Posts

Top Stories

Wake up, Black America!!

I feel the pain you are experiencing. PM me. I know I can bring you around.  (Apr 1, 2014 | post #235)

Top Stories

Wake up, Black America!!

I made a point of going to the link that you supplied. I'm sorry for your experience and for the pain you suffered. You must understand that blacks in America have suffered too, down throught the decades. That suffering has caused many blacks to strike out at any white man, without rational thought, a sort of knee-jerk reaction. 300 years of subjugation to white rule has got to have its consequences, I'm sure you'll agree. Not all black people are like that though. The ones I know in America are kind, generous, and not in the least of the nature which you have described. Please try to find something about black people that you like. It would be a way out of your hatred. You will only harm yourself in the long run with such feelings. I hope you can one day find it in your heart to forgive those who have hurt you.  (Mar 15, 2014 | post #169)

Top Stories

Wake up, Black America!!

I guess I must be the black girl in this thread that you are asking "somfin" . No, I do not wear blond wigs or weaves. And I don't talk in the manner of the examples you have used. "Wut up wit yu?" Must be a distinctly American way of speaking because I haven't heard it where I live. From what I know of blacks in America, there are long-rooted historic reasons for their state of being today, and those reasons are largely societal. Their black-speak manner of speaking is a relatively new occurence, adopted as a way of pushing back against what they perceive as a still-existing white prejudice inspite of all the rhetoric about civil rights. Even though I do not live in America, I have relatives living there and I can tell you that they do not speak in the manner you characterize all blacks as speaking - and, no, my female relatives do no wear blond wigs.  (Mar 15, 2014 | post #168)

Top Stories

Wake up, Black America!!

It was Spain which invited colonization of Mexican Texas, the invitation extended to not only Americans but Mexicans. There were provisions specified which the American colonials largely ignored. These provisions were primarily that all colonists learn to speak Spanish, that they convert to the Catholic religion, and that they do not practice slavery. Washington had tried to purchase Mexico, having offered initially $1 million and later $5 million, but Mexico declined to sell. This is important because it points out that America recognized legally that Texas belonged to Mexico. When purchasing did not work, Washington then stirred the flames of nationalistic interests in Texas. After Mexico's battle for independence from Spain, Mexico was left exhausted and its military resources largely depleted. This is when Washington, through its Texas settler-politician s, decided to make the big move, calling for Texas to become a republic. Both Andrew Jackson and James Polk were unashamed in their intentions to annex not only Texas from Mexico, but also the territories that now comprise California, Arizona and New Mexico. A young congressman, Abraham Lincoln, condemed the American action in Texas, calling it provocative and unconstitional. He saw it for what it was - a "land grab." I brought up the Texas example as part of my argument supporting President Putin's incursion in Crimea. By the standards of American behaviour, and certainly by the standards of the Monroe Doctrice, President Putin is more than justified in his action, given the regions's historic ties with Russia and the large Russian population involved. There are a myriad of examples in European history that can be a justifiable basis for Putin's actions in Crimea, but it would take a very long book to cite them all. Tiny Alsace-Lorraine is good example though. The people here were of necessity bilingual because from one group of decades to another they never knew if there country would fall within the borders of France or Germany. There are plenty of examples down through history to support Russia's action in Crimea. For Angela Merkel to assert that Russia is reverting to its imperial past and employing 19th century thinking is the height of hypocrisy. Get real. What was true for the 19th or 18th or 12th centuries is true today. In historic terms, 1938 is not that long ago.  (Mar 15, 2014 | post #167)

Top Stories

Wake up, Black America!!

Thanks once again for the information.  (Mar 13, 2014 | post #164)

Top Stories

Wake up, Black America!!

All true, but I was commenting on the lack of political will to stop a blood-bath, regardless of nationalistic interests. I was pointing out that when an incursion was absolutely necessary, nobody stepped up to the plate, not even the UN. Sure, the UN sent peacekeepers but their mandate was not to stop the genocide. In fact, their mandate was so murky that they were told by their commanders not to use their weapons unless for self-defense. General Dallaire, the head of the UN force, was so frustrated by this lack of leadership from the UN that he set about to roundup informants that he could take back to New York in person to try to convince the Security Counsel to act more decisively. Nothing worked. Yes, the political reality was, and still is, "what's in it for me?"  (Mar 13, 2014 | post #163)

Top Stories

Wake up, Black America!!

I don't agree. Winnie was a stubborn old guy and I believe, given the nature of the man, would have gone on rallying the people. The loss of their army at Dunkirk would have been a terrible body blow to the British people and there is a definite possibility that they would have seriously considered negotiation, but I think Commonwealth countries would have ponied up the manpower to make up for the losses at Dunkirk. Such an event at Dunkirk might even have brought America into the war faster. Roosevelt, at this stage, was willing to go to war but held back because of popular opinion against it, but a catastrophe at Dunkirk might have changed popular opinion enough for him to commit. Your comments about the Zero are interesting. I had not known that Japan had given Germany and Italy blueprints to build the Zero. I shall add this to my store of knowledge and make a point to read up on it. Thanks for enlightening me.  (Mar 13, 2014 | post #162)

Top Stories

Wake up, Black America!!

Because there are blood and cultural ties does mean the wars are any the less ruthless. European ruling familes have had a long tradition of marriages of convenience that are meant to cement alliances and territories, but there has been no reluctance to slaughter one another if opportunity for expansion presents itself. I think it was one the early English kings (Henry I possibly) who said with all sincerity that the whole point of having children was solely to expand his empire. Meaning, of course, so that he could marry them off to whatever ruling family he sought opportunity, with the possibility of later having to savage the whole lot of them if they opposed him. So family ties have little to do with blood-letting, at least not in the European tradition. Even the British royal family itself has a Germanic background, coming from the Saxe-Coburg and Gotha line of the House of Wettin. Because of the strong anti-German feelings during World War 1, they changed their name to Windsor. The blood line nevertheless exists. I still maintain that Hitler viewed Britain, in those early days of the war, with a historical perspective which today would probably not be adopted, and that's why he held up his panzers. It's a viewpoint that old Europeans would at least consider. This of course did not prevent all-out battle in later days. I'm sure Hitler came to regret his earlier decision. Why do you think Hitler stopped his panzers?  (Mar 13, 2014 | post #161)

Top Stories

Wake up, Black America!!

All things considered, I think my favourite is Trial by Jury, but when it comes to Gilbert and Sullivan it's difficult to choose because they are all brilliant and silly and satirical and very funny. Trial by Jury has a story line revolving around a man being sued for withdrawing a propsal of marriage (could actually happen in the 19th century). It involves a playboy and a flirtatious jilted woman and a judge who resolves the case by marrying the woman himself. Of course the music carries the audience through fits of laughter.  (Mar 13, 2014 | post #160)

Top Stories

Wake up, Black America!!

The Riviera continues to be what it has always been - a resort for the very wealthy. It is extremely beautiful and rich in history, but out of the reach of most people except perhaps to sightsee through. Provence has retained a more down-to-earth flavour, having had a long tradition of country folk (small towns and country markets). It still has its historic attractions but not as well publicised as those of the Riviera. Marseille sort of typifies the region, being traditionally a working-man's city with plenty of history as a major sea port. It is fast becoming a multi-cultural centre with the immigration of peoples from North Africa and the Middle East. Marseille has in recent years attempted to change its image into a cultural city of museums and galleries, trying to get away from its burly past and appeal to tourism.  (Mar 13, 2014 | post #159)