sad news, indeed

On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 23:22:42 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
The adjective racist has 2 meanings:

Meaning #1: based on racial intolerance

Meaning #2: discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion
... Interesting...what dictionary contains
this definition?
WordNet. Online dictionary. Look it up.

Such a definition makes no sense, and on a number of levels, including
simply ignoring the etymology of the word. ...

Damn the luck, eh Richard ? **** a bunch of dictionaries
all to hell. Dictionaries ? We don't need no steenking
dictionaries. And on a number of levels.

"A bunch of dictionaries" don't have anything to do with it. I looked
in a couple, and none mention anything other than race with regard to
"racist." And since WordNet doesn't claim to be a "dictionary," not
even _a_ "dictionary" is involved. And you avoided the part where
behind door #1, your WordNet definition making no sense, and behind door
#2, you are a "racist." Send not to know for whom the doorbell chimes,
it chimes for thee....

HTH,
R

wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 23:22:42 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
The adjective racist has 2 meanings:

Meaning #1: based on racial intolerance

Meaning #2: discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion
... Interesting...what dictionary contains
this definition?
WordNet. Online dictionary. Look it up.
Such a definition makes no sense, and on a number of levels, including
simply ignoring the etymology of the word. ...
Damn the luck, eh Richard ? **** a bunch of dictionaries
all to hell. Dictionaries ? We don't need no steenking
dictionaries. And on a number of levels.

"A bunch of dictionaries" don't have anything to do with it.

You're right about that. We were discussing a particular
anti-Islamist website. Is that website racist ? Yeah, I
think that website is a racist website. On a number of
levels. If you have actually read that website and still
need a dictionary to determine whether or not it is racist,
then shame on ya, Richard. Shame on ya.

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 00:10:00 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 23:22:42 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
The adjective racist has 2 meanings:

Meaning #1: based on racial intolerance

Meaning #2: discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion
... Interesting...what dictionary contains
this definition?
WordNet. Online dictionary. Look it up.
Such a definition makes no sense, and on a number of levels, including
simply ignoring the etymology of the word. ...
Damn the luck, eh Richard ? **** a bunch of dictionaries
all to hell. Dictionaries ? We don't need no steenking
dictionaries. And on a number of levels.

"A bunch of dictionaries" don't have anything to do with it.

You're right about that. We were discussing a particular
anti-Islamist website. Is that website racist ? Yeah, I
think that website is a racist website. On a number of
levels. If you have actually read that website and still
need a dictionary to determine whether or not it is racist,
then shame on ya, Richard. Shame on ya.

I clearly said that I didn't examine it in-depth, nor do I intend to.
And given the number of links, etc., I can't imagine you have, either.
And thus far, the only evidence you've provided that it is "racist" is
alleging some tarted-up photo of "Jhimmi Carter," calling him a
"dhimwit" and some half-assed "definition" of racist that allows the
expansion of "racist" to include things like digital scanners and coffee
blenders. And you STILL haven't addressed your own "racism" ala WordNet
- your own "source"...

Ball's in your court, scooter,
R

wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
If you have actually read that website and still
need a dictionary to determine whether or not it is racist,
then shame on ya, Richard. Shame on ya.

I clearly said that I didn't examine it in-depth, nor do I intend to.
...
Ball's in your court, scooter,

If you were to actually read that website and still need a
dictionary to determine whether or not it is racist, then
shame on ya Richard. Shame on ya.

So was that "ping" or "pong", boopsie ? ;-)

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 01:16:28 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
If you have actually read that website and still
need a dictionary to determine whether or not it is racist,
then shame on ya, Richard. Shame on ya.

I clearly said that I didn't examine it in-depth, nor do I intend to.
...
Ball's in your court, scooter,

If you were to actually read that website and still need a
dictionary to determine whether or not it is racist, then
shame on ya Richard. Shame on ya.

Uh-huh, that's what I thought....

...."He rode into amarillo as the sun sank in the west..."....

You can have the ball,
R

wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 01:16:28 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
If you have actually read that website and still
need a dictionary to determine whether or not it is racist,
then shame on ya, Richard. Shame on ya.
I clearly said that I didn't examine it in-depth, nor do I intend to.
...
Ball's in your court, scooter,
If you were to actually read that website and still need a
dictionary to determine whether or not it is racist, then
shame on ya Richard. Shame on ya.

Uh-huh, that's what I thought....

..."He rode into amarillo as the sun sank in the west..."....

You can have the ball,

Well yeah, I mean it's pretty much stupid to say I ain't
gonna read the website but I have to argue about it anyway.

As for that ball, Owwwwwwww, Owwwwwwwww, pain, pain, pain
that nasty man, that horrible nasty man *hurt* me, I swear
ta gawd he *hurt* me, now give the ******* a yellow card.

It's no wonder Americans suck at soccer, Americans won't
stoop so low as to be friggin' drama queens.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Alaskan420 wrote:

Wow! The LA Times? Well, there's an unbiased source for you. Why didn't you
go all out and quote the NY Times or Geraldo?

Yes, Uncle Rush woulda been such a credible source.

The Nazi and Soviet propaganda machines put a lot of effort into
discrediting the independent press in their countries as well.

"Alaskan420" wrote in message
news:8gHng.9164$U%1.5780@trndny07...
And please... Do you truly believe Islamic terrorism exists because of
George Bush?

Just in case anyone was wondering about the sort of non sequiturs that got
us into this mess in the first place....

"Alaskan420" wrote in news:8gHng.9164$U%1.5780
@trndny07:

Do you truly believe Islamic terrorism exists because of
George Bush?


The level of Islamic terrorism that one finds in Iraq today is almost
directly attributable to GW.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

Scott Seidman wrote:
"Alaskan420" wrote in news:8gHng.9164$U%1.5780
@trndny07:


Do you truly believe Islamic terrorism exists because of
George Bush?



The level of Islamic terrorism that one finds in Iraq today is almost
directly attributable to GW.

Almost?

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.