Topic: Racist John Derbyshire Writes Most Racist Article Possible, Pegged to Trayvon Martin Case
Falco !PZmcClOUDk started this discussion 14 years ago #18,588
http://gawker.com/5899884/racist-john-derbyshire-writes-most-racist-article-possible-pegged-to-trayvon-martin-case
lulzy, reminds me of Walter pre-2011.
lulzy, reminds me of Walter pre-2011.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later[^] [v] #308,101
the funny part was gawker not refuting anything he said but just irrationally condemning it.
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,136
> (10a) Avoid concentrations of blacks not all known to you personally.
> (10b) Stay out of heavily black neighborhoods.
> (10c) If planning a trip to a beach or amusement park at some date, find out whether it is likely to be swamped with blacks on that date (neglect of that one got me the closest I have ever gotten to death by gunshot).
> (10d) Do not attend events likely to draw a lot of blacks.
> (10e) If you are at some public event at which the number of blacks suddenly swells, leave as quickly as possible.
> (10f) Do not settle in a district or municipality run by black politicians.
> (10g) Before voting for a black politician, scrutinize his/her character much more carefully than you would a white.
> (10h) Do not act the Good Samaritan to blacks in apparent distress, e.g., on the highway.
> (10i) If accosted by a strange black in the street, smile and say something polite but keep moving.
That's just common sense.
> (10b) Stay out of heavily black neighborhoods.
> (10c) If planning a trip to a beach or amusement park at some date, find out whether it is likely to be swamped with blacks on that date (neglect of that one got me the closest I have ever gotten to death by gunshot).
> (10d) Do not attend events likely to draw a lot of blacks.
> (10e) If you are at some public event at which the number of blacks suddenly swells, leave as quickly as possible.
> (10f) Do not settle in a district or municipality run by black politicians.
> (10g) Before voting for a black politician, scrutinize his/her character much more carefully than you would a white.
> (10h) Do not act the Good Samaritan to blacks in apparent distress, e.g., on the highway.
> (10i) If accosted by a strange black in the street, smile and say something polite but keep moving.
That's just common sense.
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q double-posted this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,137
@308,101 (B)
IT'S BAD BECAUSE IT'S RACIST BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD
IT'S BAD BECAUSE IT'S RACIST BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD BECAUSE RACISM IS BAD
(Edited 7 seconds later.)
Falco !PZmcClOUDk (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 56 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,138
well the funniest part is the reactions of the general public, because its going around facebook
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,139
@previous (Falco !PZmcClOUDk)
Racism is still alive in most white people but we hide it as to not risk social ostracization.
Racism is still alive in most white people but we hide it as to not risk social ostracization.
Falco !PZmcClOUDk (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,140
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,142
Falco !PZmcClOUDk (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,144
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,146
Falco !PZmcClOUDk (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 14 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,148
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 2 hours later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,193
> gawker
tl;dr
tl;dr
Falco !PZmcClOUDk (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 11 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,208
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 12 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,217
@previous (Falco !PZmcClOUDk)
I think it's supposed to be satire. The whole article basically takes the speech that some black parents give their children, but replaces the word "white" with "black". It shows how racist those parents are being, but a lot of people believe that blacks can't be racist because they're oppressed. Their is some merit to that, as whites are privileged and do not have to take the same caution as blacks, but the knee-jerk reaction his article got just shows how ridiculous it is. Of course, he's still racist.
I think it's supposed to be satire. The whole article basically takes the speech that some black parents give their children, but replaces the word "white" with "black". It shows how racist those parents are being, but a lot of people believe that blacks can't be racist because they're oppressed. Their is some merit to that, as whites are privileged and do not have to take the same caution as blacks, but the knee-jerk reaction his article got just shows how ridiculous it is. Of course, he's still racist.
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q replied with this 14 years ago, 35 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,229
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
> whites ... do not have to take the same caution as blacks
> whites ... do not have to take the same caution as blacks
BULLSHIT
(Edited 23 seconds later.)
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,233
@previous (HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q)
Calm down, Walter. Even if you pull a bunch of black crime statistics out of your ass, most of that is black on black crime. You live in your basement and have a victim complex.
Calm down, Walter. Even if you pull a bunch of black crime statistics out of your ass, most of that is black on black crime. You live in your basement and have a victim complex.
Falco !PZmcClOUDk (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 44 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,235
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
> Calm down, Walter. Even if you pull a bunch of black crime statistics out of your ass, most of that is black on black crime. You live in your basement and have a victim complex.
> Calm down, Walter. Even if you pull a bunch of black crime statistics out of your ass, most of that is black on black crime. You live in your basement and have a victim complex.
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q replied with this 14 years ago, 10 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,240
@308,233 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
You are an ignorant fool if you think such guidelines do not apply to white people as well.
You are an ignorant fool if you think such guidelines do not apply to white people as well.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,245
@308,136 (HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q)
It's shocking that I've managed to live in Florida so long without being murdered. I encounter these situations weekly!! I'm doomed!
It's shocking that I've managed to live in Florida so long without being murdered. I encounter these situations weekly!! I'm doomed!
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q replied with this 14 years ago, 8 hours later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,357
@previous (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
Florida is different. Even I kind of fear the poorer "white" people there.
Florida is different. Even I kind of fear the poorer "white" people there.
(Edited 6 minutes later.)
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 7 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,364
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,367
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Step 1: be of 100% Northern, Western or Eastern European descent
Step 1: be of 100% Northern, Western or Eastern European descent
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 14 years ago, 49 seconds later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,368
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,369
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 14 years ago, 3 hours later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #308,406
@308,364 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
he actually has no idea. that requires uncomfortable thought into his deeply held beliefs.
he actually has no idea. that requires uncomfortable thought into his deeply held beliefs.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 8 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,569
i still don't know who trayvon martin is
meticulousMisnomer !M9.6XYhKxM joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,570
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,572
I cracked up at the "most racist article possible" part. So, Gawker is saying that there's a "limit" on racism?
Anonymous C replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,612
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 14 years ago, 45 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,643
meticulousMisnomer !M9.6XYhKxM replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,647
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 14 years ago, 42 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,648
@previous (meticulousMisnomer !M9.6XYhKxM)
when you say someone got himself killed, you are implying fault.
when you say someone got himself killed, you are implying fault.
meticulousMisnomer !M9.6XYhKxM replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,650
@previous (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
when you argue over ho I orded something on a forum, you are implying mad.
when you argue over ho I orded something on a forum, you are implying mad.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 14 years ago, 53 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,652
@308,648 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
So you don't believe there was any self-defense involved and this was just cold-blooded murder?
So you don't believe there was any self-defense involved and this was just cold-blooded murder?
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,660
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
Drive-by self-defense against a 130lb teenager eating skittles, sure.
Drive-by self-defense against a 130lb teenager eating skittles, sure.
kook !nH6RAuX8mo replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,662
kook !nH6RAuX8mo double-posted this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,664
@308,652 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
I believe that he was an asshole on a power trip who wanted to use his gun.
I believe that he was an asshole on a power trip who wanted to use his gun.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,667
@308,660 (J)
There was an eye-witness who said he was down on the ground with a bloody nose and that back of his head bashed up when he pulled his gun. He could have avoided the confrontation by not following him and not getting out of his truck, but laws in Florida say he was in the right.
There was an eye-witness who said he was down on the ground with a bloody nose and that back of his head bashed up when he pulled his gun. He could have avoided the confrontation by not following him and not getting out of his truck, but laws in Florida say he was in the right.
Anonymous J replied with this 14 years ago, 4 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,716
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
You're mixing up your witnesses. That was two people. The first eye-witness, who calls himself 'John', said, more specifically, that he saw Martin sat on top of Zimmerman, and Zimmerman was screaming for help. But his mother says that she recognised the voice of the person screaming for help (heard over 911 calls from neighbors) to be her son, not Zimmerman. The second, Officer Smith, arrived after the fact and noted that Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and had a bloody back head. But another eye-witness says that he clearly saw Zimmerman get up after the shot and walk away with no blood on him.
> "I saw two men on the ground, one on top of the other. I felt they were scuffling and I heard gunshots which to me were more like pops," he said. "I don't know if was an echo but it definitely made more than one pop.
> "After the larger man got off there was a boy, obviously now dead, on the ground facing down*. It was dark. I can't say I watched him get up, but in a couple of seconds or so he was walking towards where I was watching and I could see him a little bit clearer. It was a Hispanic man. He didn't appear hurt or anything else. He just kind of seemed very worried with his hand up to his forehead. I saw no blood."
I highlighted that part myself. He was facing down. Zimmerman was sat on Martin's back, and then pulled a gun and shot him. Is "pinned face-down by a man twice your weight" a threatening position in Florida?
As well as this, leaked CCTV footage of the fight doesn't show any indication that Zimmerman was battered about the head and face.
According to ABC News, Martin was on the phone from when he left the store right up until the fight happened:
> "He said this man was watching him, so he put his hoodie on. He said he lost the man," Martin's friend said. "I asked Trayvon to run, and he said he was going to walk fast. I told him to run, but he said he was not going to run."
> Eventually, he would run, said the girl, thinking that he'd managed to escape. But suddenly the strange man was back, cornering Martin.
> "Trayvon said, 'What are you following me for,' and the man said, 'What are you doing here.' Next thing I hear is somebody pushing, and somebody pushed Trayvon because the head set just fell. I called him again, and he didn't answer the phone."
So Zimmerman chased him down, backtracked to find him again after Martin escaped from him, accosted him, intimidated him, and then engaged him in a fight, during which Martin fell on the ground, and then pulled a gun and killed him. Who pushed first is irrelevant, by the way, since I think you will mention that. If Martin pushed first, then Zimmerman was close enough for Martin to feel the need to do it for... self-defense!, and if Zimmerman pushed first, then that means he opened hostilities. You can't claim self-defense if you're the aggressor, and in both cases Zimmerman is the aggressor.
The law you're talking about is the Stand-Your-Ground law, which says that a killing is justified if the killer fears for his own life or safety. Now, I suppose that at some point after chasing down the kid, knocking him over and fighting him and then pinning him face down on the ground, Zimmerman may well have suddenly considered his safety to be in jeopardy, even though he had called Emergency Services a fair while ago and they were minutes away. So the question is which is stronger? Martin's self-defense attempt or Zimmerman's stand-my-ground killing?
You're mixing up your witnesses. That was two people. The first eye-witness, who calls himself 'John', said, more specifically, that he saw Martin sat on top of Zimmerman, and Zimmerman was screaming for help. But his mother says that she recognised the voice of the person screaming for help (heard over 911 calls from neighbors) to be her son, not Zimmerman. The second, Officer Smith, arrived after the fact and noted that Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and had a bloody back head. But another eye-witness says that he clearly saw Zimmerman get up after the shot and walk away with no blood on him.
> "I saw two men on the ground, one on top of the other. I felt they were scuffling and I heard gunshots which to me were more like pops," he said. "I don't know if was an echo but it definitely made more than one pop.
> "After the larger man got off there was a boy, obviously now dead, on the ground facing down*. It was dark. I can't say I watched him get up, but in a couple of seconds or so he was walking towards where I was watching and I could see him a little bit clearer. It was a Hispanic man. He didn't appear hurt or anything else. He just kind of seemed very worried with his hand up to his forehead. I saw no blood."
I highlighted that part myself. He was facing down. Zimmerman was sat on Martin's back, and then pulled a gun and shot him. Is "pinned face-down by a man twice your weight" a threatening position in Florida?
As well as this, leaked CCTV footage of the fight doesn't show any indication that Zimmerman was battered about the head and face.
According to ABC News, Martin was on the phone from when he left the store right up until the fight happened:
> "He said this man was watching him, so he put his hoodie on. He said he lost the man," Martin's friend said. "I asked Trayvon to run, and he said he was going to walk fast. I told him to run, but he said he was not going to run."
> Eventually, he would run, said the girl, thinking that he'd managed to escape. But suddenly the strange man was back, cornering Martin.
> "Trayvon said, 'What are you following me for,' and the man said, 'What are you doing here.' Next thing I hear is somebody pushing, and somebody pushed Trayvon because the head set just fell. I called him again, and he didn't answer the phone."
So Zimmerman chased him down, backtracked to find him again after Martin escaped from him, accosted him, intimidated him, and then engaged him in a fight, during which Martin fell on the ground, and then pulled a gun and killed him. Who pushed first is irrelevant, by the way, since I think you will mention that. If Martin pushed first, then Zimmerman was close enough for Martin to feel the need to do it for... self-defense!, and if Zimmerman pushed first, then that means he opened hostilities. You can't claim self-defense if you're the aggressor, and in both cases Zimmerman is the aggressor.
The law you're talking about is the Stand-Your-Ground law, which says that a killing is justified if the killer fears for his own life or safety. Now, I suppose that at some point after chasing down the kid, knocking him over and fighting him and then pinning him face down on the ground, Zimmerman may well have suddenly considered his safety to be in jeopardy, even though he had called Emergency Services a fair while ago and they were minutes away. So the question is which is stronger? Martin's self-defense attempt or Zimmerman's stand-my-ground killing?
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 14 years ago, 8 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,718
@previous (J)
Sounds to me that there are conflicting eye-witness accounts. I never read anything about Zimmerman sitting on Trayvon while Trayvon screamed for help and was shot in the back. Is there any proof of that? I heard the bullets went through his chest. That's not consistent with anything I've read on this case. Can you provide some links?
Sounds to me that there are conflicting eye-witness accounts. I never read anything about Zimmerman sitting on Trayvon while Trayvon screamed for help and was shot in the back. Is there any proof of that? I heard the bullets went through his chest. That's not consistent with anything I've read on this case. Can you provide some links?
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 double-posted this 14 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,720
@308,716 (J)
Reading up on it more, the mother claiming that it was her son calling for help is inconsistent with what eye-witnesses saw. The witness claimed he saw Zimmerman on his back on the ground, crying, with a bloody nose, calling for help. The story that you could hear Zimmerman fire a warning shot before the cries for help is also inconsistent with the fact the forensics show that his gun was fired only once. Only one shell was found at the scene and his magazine was full. Only the bullet in the chamber was fired.
Reading up on it more, the mother claiming that it was her son calling for help is inconsistent with what eye-witnesses saw. The witness claimed he saw Zimmerman on his back on the ground, crying, with a bloody nose, calling for help. The story that you could hear Zimmerman fire a warning shot before the cries for help is also inconsistent with the fact the forensics show that his gun was fired only once. Only one shell was found at the scene and his magazine was full. Only the bullet in the chamber was fired.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 14 years ago, 14 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,729
@308,718 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
It's not uncommon for eyewitness testimony to be unreliable. Loftus and Palmer (1974) and many subsequent studies showed that eyewitnesses can very easily have their memories of the crime influenced, and a lot of the time can't remember it accurately anyway.
Not sure if this applies to this case, but it could help explain the conflicting accounts.
It's not uncommon for eyewitness testimony to be unreliable. Loftus and Palmer (1974) and many subsequent studies showed that eyewitnesses can very easily have their memories of the crime influenced, and a lot of the time can't remember it accurately anyway.
Not sure if this applies to this case, but it could help explain the conflicting accounts.
(Edited 44 seconds later.)
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #308,731
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I agree, you have to be very careful about eyewitness testimony. I'm not saying who I believe, I'm just saying that there are clearly conflicting accounts.
I will say this: the media has been extremely biased in their reporting of this incident. They use words like "murder" and "slaughter" when so far the evidence does show that he acted in self-defense until they can prove otherwise. A lot of people are pissed off that he hasn't been arrested yet, but cases like this make me glad I live in a country where my government will protect me based on the facts and not give in to the emotions of an angry mob.
I agree, you have to be very careful about eyewitness testimony. I'm not saying who I believe, I'm just saying that there are clearly conflicting accounts.
I will say this: the media has been extremely biased in their reporting of this incident. They use words like "murder" and "slaughter" when so far the evidence does show that he acted in self-defense until they can prove otherwise. A lot of people are pissed off that he hasn't been arrested yet, but cases like this make me glad I live in a country where my government will protect me based on the facts and not give in to the emotions of an angry mob.
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 17 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #308,994
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 14 years ago, 6 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #309,001
Anonymous K replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #309,006
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
No -- all. In the US, pedophiles are kidnapped and held against their will by the state. We allow it because human beings are disgusting bigots.
No -- all. In the US, pedophiles are kidnapped and held against their will by the state. We allow it because human beings are disgusting bigots.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #309,009
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 14 years ago, 5 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #309,142
@309,006 (K)
That's very fitting, actually, considering that a lot of them do the same thing to children.
That's very fitting, actually, considering that a lot of them do the same thing to children.
Anonymous K replied with this 14 years ago, 9 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #309,146
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Some do, and they can't be allowed back in society (almost certainly true). Kidnap + rape shows a complete disregard for the natural rights we all cherish and hold dear. However, if someone serves their debt to society, they are free. We have laws in this country. We don't get to decide when to apply them.
I think that the penalty for aggravated child rape should be life. That solves the problem.
What we are doing is so terribly wrong. We are already a disgusting country because of what we do to other countries, but now we are turning on our citizens for profit. It's diagusting. It isn't to keep children safe, it's to keep people in prison indefinitely to ring up $$$.
Some do, and they can't be allowed back in society (almost certainly true). Kidnap + rape shows a complete disregard for the natural rights we all cherish and hold dear. However, if someone serves their debt to society, they are free. We have laws in this country. We don't get to decide when to apply them.
I think that the penalty for aggravated child rape should be life. That solves the problem.
What we are doing is so terribly wrong. We are already a disgusting country because of what we do to other countries, but now we are turning on our citizens for profit. It's diagusting. It isn't to keep children safe, it's to keep people in prison indefinitely to ring up $$$.
brainwurms !!gbU9At49F joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 44 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #309,159
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 7 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #309,220
@308,664 (kook !nH6RAuX8mo)
How do you know the kid wasn't an asshole? You know noting about these people.
How do you know the kid wasn't an asshole? You know noting about these people.
Lee O'Nidas !nBpim1wazU joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 2 days later, 5 days after the original post[^] [v] #309,796
dw joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 5 days after the original post[^] [v] #309,799
great thread faggots
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q replied with this 14 years ago, 13 minutes later, 5 days after the original post[^] [v] #309,805
@309,796 (Lee O'Nidas !nBpim1wazU)
> implying Mexican kids beat up whites for being blonde
The Chicanos are more likely to beat up the blacks than the whites.
> implying Mexican kids beat up whites for being blonde
The Chicanos are more likely to beat up the blacks than the whites.