Do you feel threatened by negroes? Would you look one in the eye if you passed one in the street? Why do you feel the need to make generalisations about them? There are negroes who are undoubtubly more intelligent, more succesfull and contribute more to society in a more postive way than you. Do you dispute this? On what basis do you judge the worth of a person? Cranium thickness? Intelligence quota? Skin coulour? There are black doctors that devote themselves to saving white people's lives. One of the most remarkable things about humans is their capacity to give without expectation of a reward. You could say it is what makes people human. As far as I can tell,you have given nothing. I could say,therefore,according to my own argument that you are not human. You are a member of another species. An inferior offshoot of homo sapiens known as "racists" charicterised by their narrow mindedness and unwillingness to except points of view that are not based around selfishness and and an unreasoning sense of self-superiority. You are an evolutionary throwback,fit for nothing more than a place in the anthropological museum,in a small glass box labelled "EXTINCT." And unless you re-evaluate your whole outlook and challenge your pre-conceptions about race {As you are constantly urging others to do),then that is what you will be.

-- my name is of no importance (anarchicpolo@hotmail.com), August 17, 2004

Answers

To my name is of no importance: Greetings from the Oracle. You ask questions and then presume My answers to them and armed with your preconceived ideas, proceed to comment with an interpretation of what the Oracle you presume might say. After all of My writings you still do not understand the Oracle. You do not even come close. The Oracle shall entertain your questions at this time.

Do you feel threatened by negroes? Of course not! We only fear that which we do not understand. The Oracle understands Negroes, so He is not threatened by them.

Would you look one in the eye if you passed one in the street? Of course! The Oracle would keep His ever-watchful eye on him until he passes. What better way to discern the intentions of an individual than to look into their windows to their soul? Here you assume this Negro has the right to look Me in the eye.

Why do you feel the need to make generalisations about them? What you term as generalizations are in fact characteristics of the Negro race. It is these characteristics we are discussing in our conversations.

There are negroes who are undoubtubly more intelligent, more succesfull and contribute more to society in a more postive way than you. Do you dispute this? Of course not! The Oracle is incapable of lying. Allow the Oracle to clear this misconception once and for all. The Oracle realizes and acknowledges there are undoubtedly more intelligent, more successful Negroes who have contributed to society in a more positive way than the Oracle. Again, the Oracle is a creature of logic and reason. The Oracle must accept the reality of the situation. Despite what you may think to the contrary, it does not pain the Oracle to say these things. The Oracle accepts these facts in a non-emotional manner. The Oracle hopes that one day you may be able to analyze facts in a non-emotional manner as well.

On what basis do you judge the worth of a person? Cranium thickness? Intelligence quota? Skin coulour? We have been taught since our youth that one should not judge a book by its cover. Sometimes this is true. However, if a book’s cover has a picture of bestiality on it, you can be relatively certain it does not contain nursery rhymes. The same holds true for race. If one looks at an individuals dark skin color, you can be relatively certain a Negro is lurking inside.

There are black doctors that devote themselves to saving white people's lives. One of the most remarkable things about humans is their capacity to give without expectation of a reward. You could say it is what makes people human. Some of what you say is true and the Oracle again is incapable of telling you otherwise. There are black doctors who devote themselves to saving white people. Oh, if you were only as honest with the Oracle as He is with you, we could arrive at an agreement. However, your second sentence of this quote infers that this Negro doctor gave without expectation of reward is quite a stretch. The Oracle hopes you were not leading the gentle readers into believing your black doctor was not to be paid by the white patient and had only altruistic motives. Your black doctor did not give away his services, he fully expected to be financially compensated. To follow a different path with this: There must be fewer black doctors than white doctors. Remember, the Negro has long been stating they are never given a chance. How do you explain the existence of black doctors, or black inventors if no Negro was given the opportunity to become one in the first place? Someone is lying and it most likely is the Negro. Again, if any Negro is able to achieve success it is not because they overcame obstacles placed by the white man, because these obstacles were never there in the first place. It is the Oracle’s contention that the only obstacle to the Negro was the Negro himself. Instead of playing by the rules, he decided instead to play by his own. He insisted on keeping his own culture and racial identity. Have you never heard of the term Afro- American? They have placed themselves as a separate subset that is distinct from the rest of the population. What is interesting is that this minority population expects the majority population to concede certain concessions. At no time has the Negro offered to concede any concessions as part of their equality. Which brings us to….

One of the most remarkable things about humans is their capacity to give without expectation of a reward. You could say it is what makes people human. As far as I can tell, you have given nothing. I could say, therefore, according to my own argument that you are not human. You are a member of another species. Here again what you state is true and the Oracle must acknowledge this. The white man bestowed equality on the Negro without any strings attached. The Negro took this equality without giving anything away from their side. The white man is always expected to give to the Negro without expecting a reward, yet the Negro always takes and never offers to give anything back in return. As always, if you believe the Oracle to be wrong, you invited to compile a list of concessions the Negro gave away at the time he was bestowed equality. At this time the Oracle would like to use a quote of yours. It will, of course, be paraphrased to accommodate the situation. “As far as I can tell, the Negro has given nothing for his equality. I could say, therefore, according to YOUR own argument that the Negro is not human. They are a member of another species.”

You are a member of another species. An inferior offshoot of homo sapiens known as "racists" charicterised by their narrow mindedness and unwillingness to except points of view that are not based around selfishness and and an unreasoning sense of self-superiority. Here your editorial misses the mark. The Oracle is most open-minded. On many occasions He has stated He is willing to review any facts that prove the Negro race to be equal to the white race. So far, He has received none. What you are failing to see is that we are discussing not individual characteristics, but group characteristics. You may cite as many examples where individuals of either race are successful. You may go so far as to say two individuals are not equal to one another. In that, the Oracle agrees due to His logical progression of determining equality between two entities. (In case you have not read this, the Oracle directs your kind attention to where it can be found on the Lusenet board entitled Can I Join the KKK Even Though I’m Black? signed by the Oracle and dated August 10, 2004. Feel free to use this progression to compare any two entities.) It is merely because the Oracle has determined that one race MUST, by non-emotional logic and facts, be better than another He is labeled a Racist. The Oracle cares not whether you believe the white race or the Negro is superior. All the Oracle asks is that you acknowledge that equality, whether it concerns individuals or groups, does not exist in Reality. Equality is a myth. If you believe that individuals are unequal to one another, how can you explain how the groups, to which these unequal individuals belong, are magically equal? This question cannot be answered by you, nor any Negro or Negro Sympathizer and still maintain a consistent philosophy. If you find your philosophy to be inconsistent, perhaps it is time for you to change.

You are an evolutionary throwback,fit for nothing more than a place in the anthropological museum,in a small glass box labelled "EXTINCT." And unless you re-evaluate your whole outlook and challenge your pre-conceptions about race {As you are constantly urging others to do),then that is what you will be. If you have read any of My messages, perhaps you came across one of My analogies concerning a flat Earth. At one time all of the Earth’s inhabitants believed the world was flat. Even when shown scientific evidence the world was round, many did not believe it could be so. They held onto their Emotional belief and disregarded the facts. The church dictated it was flat and this belief was validated by everyone’s perception that the Earth was flat. Remember, you cannot see the curvature of the Earth from any point on it.) For the population of the Earth to undergo the 180-degree outlook from flat Earth to round Earth took exactly what you suggested. A total re-evaluation of preconceived ideas. After looking at the facts even the church, without the benefit of air travel and the ability to visually confirm the existence of a round world, had to concede the Reality of the situation. Had this new revelation about the world changed anything at that time? Only slightly. Life went onward. The only difference was a new perspective. People’s daily lives did not change dramatically unless the curvature of the Earth was involved. In this example the Oracle was comparing the believers of racial equality to the flat Earthers. It is not by science, facts, logic or reason they believe what they do, but on emotion alone. The Oracle can prove by facts and logic that the races are not equal. Are you prepared to prove the races equal? Again, if you are unable to do so, perhaps you should re-think your philosophy.

The Oracle has dealt with your posting in its entirety. The Oracle has left no question unanswered, no stone unturned. He has done so to clarify His position. The Oracle has publicly acknowledged His agreement with you. The Oracle has once again maintained His philosophy in a consistent manner. You are at this time invited to answer My questions posed to you and in a manner that is consistent with YOUR philosophy. This is asked of you to clarify your position. Please do not disappoint the Oracle and the gentle readers of this forum. We are anxiously awaiting your answers. If you fail to return with an adequate posting addressing these issues, not only is your name of no importance, but your ideas as well.

-- Oracle (sitdown@backofthebus.com), August 17, 2004.

Once again the Boracle fails to answer any question directly and makes demands of others. Pathetic.

-- Garret Ford (Parallax281457689@Yahoo.com), August 18, 2004.

To The Oracle,

-- my name is of no importance (anarchicpolo@hotmail.com), August 18, 2004.

Sorry about that.

-- my name is of no importance (anarchicpolo@hotmail.com), August 18, 2004.

To the Oracle,

Thank you once again for providing such a well thought-out answer {Even if your habit of talking about yourself in the third person is a bit irritating to Us Mere Mortals in Personal Pronoun Land.}

Your arguments are very similar to those used in the famous book "the Bell Curve" In that you identify certain weaknesses in various different static racial groups and then use those weaknesses to "Prove" that that particular group is "Inferior" {For example the I.Q's and crime rates in the American black population} But what you fail to take into account is the fact that there are racial groups that are superior to Caucasians in respect of I.Q's {for example Japanese and Chinese} and that black people tend to have far greater strength and agility as well as hand-eye co- ordination {An aspect of cognitive functioning and mental ability that is not really taken into account in standard I.Q. testing.} If this is the case then why are you not acknowledging the Asian "Mental Elite?" It would be both presumptuous and rude for me to try to answer this question for you,but I have to say that if you attempted to answer it by claiming that the Asians were "Savages" or somehow less technically advanced before there "western masters" came and conquered and/or assimilated them would be untrue as the Chinese in particular were building things like canals,railways,gunpowder e.c.t, whilst we were doing nothing more constructive than squabbling amongst ourselves and hitting each other with axes. This argument would be an irrelevance anyway,as the technical and cultural advancement of any group of people,regardless of race or creed is surely a socio-economic issue and therefore contrary to the hard facts and pure science on which your own perfectly good arguments are based.

Next we come to the issue of human equality. I don't know weather you think that human equality would be good or beneficial to humanity as a whole, but I certainly think that it would be and it was generally assumed by most clear thinking people that "All men {were} created equal" until some "scientists" armed only with only slide-rules, a deeply flawed intelligence testing system and a grudge against anyone different from them set out to "prove" otherwise. {I may have lost my sense of objectivity there, but what the hell; The people that wrote "The Bell Curve" didn't seem too bothered about it either} Also, despite what you say about Humans being unequal at the present time,it is possible {very difficult perhaps} but possible too make everyone equal. The solution is simple: Complete racial integration. Whites marry and have children with Asians or Blacks {Or any of the thousands of other ethnic groups} Asians with Blacks or whites,Blacks with whites or Asians.{You get the idea} It does not have to be a formal structure,it just needs to be enough to re- distribute the positive attributes of each racial group more fairly. I thought this method might appeal to someone who likes too talk about averages and "racial characteristics" so much. Many people {Yourself included, I expect} will almost certainly find this idea abborant. Many people will want a group that they can discriminate against and oppress, but I personally think it is wrong to discriminate against any scentient,being regardless of how high the average I.Q. of their ethnic group is or for some crime that they themselves have not committed. How can you say that the negative actions of of black people as an ethnic group provide an acceptable reason not to allow a black person to enter your neighbourhood just because they are slightly more likely to have committed a criminal offence than some one who is white? This sort of thing sticks me as a kind of petty “mass character assassination” in order to justify childish finger pointing and to stop black people from achieving there full potential. But if I am wrong {As I could be} then I think that my "ignorance" is a lot less harmful than your "understanding"

{I apologise for the page formatting,i went too save it and it got all screwed up}

-- my name is of no importance (anarchicpolo@hotmail.com), August 18, 2004.

To my name is of no importance: Greetings from the Oracle. The Oracle humbly accepts your gratitude for the answers He provided you. You are most gracious. As you have undoubtedly noticed in an above posting, Mr. Garret Ford is of the opinion that the Oracle failed to answer any question of yours. His lack of insight is the main reason why the Oracle enjoys having him around. He provides the much needed comic relief to what otherwise would be considered a dry subject. Perhaps you could drop him a line and express your gratitude for the valuable service he renders as well.

In your posting you alluded that the Oracle had not taken into account the IQ’s of Asians. Your quote, But what you fail to take into account is the fact that there are racial groups that are superior to Caucasians in respect of I.Q's {for example Japanese and Chinese} Closely followed by, If this is the case then why are you not acknowledging the Asian "Mental Elite?"

Allow the Oracle to direct your attention to a posting on the “Can I join the KKK even though I’m black” board. This posting was addressed to Bella and dated June 22, 2004. It is up near the top of the board, so you need not scroll too far to find it. The Oracle was commenting on a study by Dr. Richard Lynn.

Dr. Lynn’s Homepage

Among the information provided is: “My major discovery is that the Oriental peoples of East Asia have higher average intelligence by about 5 IQs points than Europeans and peoples of European origin in the United States and elsewhere.” This is not surprising, as it has long been known that the Asians of the Pacific Rim are extremely intelligent. Also the continent of Asia is not bogged down with a great number of Negroes.

If you will notice that the Oracle already has provided this acknowledgement of Asian mental superiority and offered a reasonable explanation for it as well. The Oracle cannot understand how some posters still to this day believe the Oracle is a Racist when He clearly stated the fact that Asians are superior in the characteristic of mental acumen. A word of caution: You need to be careful, my name is of no importance, lest YOU be labeled a Racist for your view of Asian mental superiority. Anytime anyone says one race is better than another in anything is fodder for these unenlightened individuals.

Your quote, …the Chinese in particular were building things like canals,railways,gunpowder e.c.t, whilst we were doing nothing more constructive than squabbling amongst ourselves and hitting each other with axes.

The Oracle hopes that you were not serious and was a bit of tongue-in- cheek humor when you claim the Chinese built railroads in ancient times.

Your quote, This argument would be an irrelevance anyway,as the technical and cultural advancement of any group of people,regardless of race or creed is surely a socio-economic issue and therefore contrary to the hard facts and pure science on which your own perfectly good arguments are based.

In this you the Oracle awards you partial credit. Technical and cultural advancement is dependant upon the NEED to advance. This “need” can take more than one form. One form of “need” addresses the immediate requirements for daily living. A second “need” addresses the internal drive to advance for advancement’s sake. In other words, advancement can take place because you have to, and advancement can take place because you want to. Here if one entity takes less advantage of either of these two reasons for “need” than the other, it therefore falls into the category of hard facts and a comparison between the two entities can be made. We, of course, can delve into this subject at a later date if you desire.

Your next paragraph deals with human equality. Your quote, it was generally assumed by most clear thinking people that "All men {were} created equal." You used an interesting word in this quote. Can you detect it without the Oracle’s help? The Oracle is certain that you can, but for those with limited ability, the Oracle shall point it out for them. The word is “assumed.” Again, equality was based on an assumption even if the people were clear thinking. As for “All men created equal”, this is of course a Manmade Mandate and not based on the Natural Order of Things. Man merely assumed equality, Nature in Its wisdom, does not view Reality in an emotional manner. Her Laws do not change on Her whim. Remember, man is able to dam mighty rivers, and alter his environment, but in time Nature will win out. In time, dams will crumble. Nature is more powerful that we as humans can ever hope to be. We cannot stop floods, earthquakes or droughts. We cannot flout Nature’s Laws for very long before Nature slaps us back into place.

Further down in the same paragraph you state, How can you say that the negative actions of black people as an ethnic group provide an acceptable reason not to allow a black person to enter your neighbourhood just because they are slightly more likely to have committed a criminal offence than some one who is white?

Here the Oracle directs you attention to My posting to the Oral-Kill dated August 15, 2004, and found on the board entitled “To the Oracle: Greetings from the Penis”. Inside this long posting you will find the topic of discussion revolving around segregated seating on buses. You invited to read this if you have not already. In it the Oracle explained that the Negro insisted on sitting with the white passengers. The Negro never took into account that maybe the white passengers did not want them to sit with them. The Negro placed their own needs ahead of the white man.

In your example you are placing a Negro’s right to enter My neighborhood ahead of My right to have My family live in a safer area. In both instances, the bus seating arrangement and the neighborhood invasion, the Negro has the right to freely associate with whom he chooses; yet that very same right is denied to the white man. One can only come to the conclusion that a Negro has more rights that a white man. Again, how can we be equal to one another when one group has more rights than another? By Manmade Mandate alone it was deemed that the Negro’s need for free association was greater and more important than the same need in the white man.

The Oracle asks all gentle readers if He has misrepresented or misinterpreted anything in this posting? If so, you are invited to disprove My analysis.

-- Oracle (sitdown@backofhtebus.com), August 18, 2004.

To All: Greetings from the Oracle: Unfortunately the embedded link in the above posting does not work as intended. You are invited to cut and paste the following into your browser.

http://www.rlynn.co.uk/index.html

The Oracle apologizes for any inconvenience this may have caused you.

-- Oracle (sitdown@backofthebus.com), August 18, 2004.

the Orackkkle is a pile of manure. His postings are nothing but emptiness, just like his "soul".

-- Prayer Warrior (Jesus is @Lord.com), August 19, 2004.

Please, explain your point of view.

-- Lt. Alexander (M4socom@aol.com), August 19, 2004.

To The Oracle,

The anctient chinese did have railways {They were horse drawn.} Allso I strongly suggest you read "The bell curve." It makes one of the best cases for your argument about the Logical Progression of Determining Equaulity Between two Entities,using sutably long winded and confusing language.I allso agree that within certain logical and scientific constraints your argument is allmost perfect. It uses a simple hipothosis, based on simple statistics and taken to it's logical conclusion. Why then don't you use it as much as you can instead of picking out your own "edited highlights" of my writings and crudeley using them to your own devices simply by putting it in "big letters" instead of addressing the whole text.

And just because I am appreciative of the structure of your argument does not mean I agree with it. Why,in the process of all your dilligent snippity-snipping,did you see fit to put up my post my points about "my {ignorance} being less harmfull than your {understanding}?" or the bit about my beleif that it doing any thing that will in any way {directly or indirectly} harm others is wrong? {if i have not expressed this belief clearly before now, then i now confirm that it is}This is my theory, and it is called utilitarianism. Although it is not a fancy, tailor made philosophy like yours, many prominent philosophers have found it sound enough. Of cause,you can never completeley eliminate suffering. Suffering is an inevitable bi-product of an indifferent universe, ruled by the laws of probability and the survival of the fittest instead of compasson. The seemingly cruel nature of reality trancends what is "right" or "wrong"; It is simply a fact of life. That is why one of the eight noble truths of Bhuddism is "All Life Is Suffering" {Although "life creates suffering" is perhaps more accurate}

How then, do we seek to minimize suffering? Suffering can be brought about either "Directly",or "Indirectly." As the indirect negative causes of your actions are so numerous, and allmost infinateley far reaching and dificult to trace to their origional causes, it would be much easyer to start by identifying the "Most direct" causes and their effects. In any given event,their is allways a "CAUSE" and an "EFFECT." Sometimes ther may allso be more than one effect. I shall call these "SUBSEQUENT EFFECTS" and the final conclusions "END EFFECTS." The structure is allways like this:

CAUSE--->{Leads to}--->SBSEQUENT EFFECTS--->{Leads to}--->END EFFECT/s

The negative rammifications of your discrimination against black people are easy to predict. Some one would soon use your arguments to justify, and possibly even carry out, acts of violence against black people. Even though it is unlikeley that anyone would acctually cite YOU as insparation for a racialy aggravated attack, there are far more influential and powerfull people than you who have used EXACTLY THE SAME ARGUMENT to do JUST THAT. Allso, just by expressing your veiws you are making more people aware that your arguements and thus increacing the likeleyhood that they will mis-understand or mis- enterpret them and possibly use them as an excuse to carry out acts of violence. You cannot say the same of my philosophy. Do you beleve in any of the values expressed by the philosophy of utilitarianism? Can you prove me wrong using my own argument? I hope you take the time to read and reply to my questions in full.

-- my name is of no importance (anarchicpolo@hotmail.com), August 19, 2004.

Here is a properly grammar corrected version of the above text, provided for the convenience of the reader.

To The Oracle,

The anchient chinese did have railways {They were horse drawn.} Allso I strongly suggest you read "The bell curve." It makes one of the best cases for your argument about the Logical Progression of Determining Equaulity Between two Entities,using sutably long winded and confusing language.I allso agree that within certain logical and scientific constraints your argument is allmost perfect. It uses a simple hipothosis, based on simple statistics and taken to it's logical conclusion. Why then don't you use it as much as you can instead of picking out your own "edited highlights" of my writings and crudeley using them to your own devices simply by putting it in "big letters" instead of addressing the whole text.

And just because I am appreciative of the structure of your argument does not mean I agree with it. Why,in the process of all your dilligent snippity-snipping,did you see fit to put up my post my points about "my {ignorance} being less harmfull than your {understanding}?" or the bit about my beleif that it doing any thing that will in any way {directly or indirectly} harm others is wrong? {if i have not expressed this belief clearly before now, then i now confirm that it is}This is my theory, and it is called utilitarianism. Although it is not a fancy, tailor made philosophy like yours, many prominent philosophers have found it sound enough. Of cause,you can never completeley eliminate suffering. Suffering is an inevitable bi-product of an indifferent universe, ruled by the laws of probability and the survival of the fittest instead of compasson. The seemingly cruel nature of reality trancends what is "right" or "wrong"; It is simply a fact of life. That is why one of the eight noble truths of Bhuddism is "All Life Is Suffering" {Although "life creates suffering" is perhaps more accurate}

How then, do we seek to minimize suffering? Suffering can be brought about either "Directly",or "Indirectly." As the indirect negative causes of your actions are so numerous, and allmost infinateley far reaching and dificult to trace to their origional causes, it would be much easyer to start by identifying the "Most direct" causes and their effects. In any given event,their is allways a "CAUSE" and an "EFFECT." Sometimes ther may allso be more than one effect. I shall call these "SUBSEQUENT EFFECTS" and the final conclusions "END EFFECTS." The structure is allways like this:

CAUSE--->{Leads to}--->SBSEQUENT EFFECTS--->{Leads to}--->END EFFECT/s

The negative rammifications of your discrimination against black people are easy to predict. Some one would soon use your arguments to justify, and possibly even carry out, acts of violence against black people. Even though it is unlikeley that anyone would acctually cite YOU as insparation for a racialy aggravated attack, there are far more influential and powerfull people than you who have used EXACTLY THE SAME ARGUMENT to do JUST THAT. Allso, just by expressing your veiws you are making more people aware that your arguements and thus increacing the likeleyhood that they will mis-understand or mis- enterpret them and possibly use them as an excuse to carry out acts of violence. You cannot say the same of my philosophy. Do you beleve in any of the values expressed by the philosophy of utilitarianism? Can you prove me wrong using my own argument? I hope you take the time to read and reply to my questions in full.

-- my name is of no importance (anarchicpolo@hotmail.com), August 19, 2004.

To my name is of no importance: Greetings from the Oracle. Your quote: The seemingly cruel nature of reality trancends what is "right" or "wrong"; It is simply a fact of life. Here the Oracle agrees. Please re-read My most recent message to you.

Where we diverge is mankind’s futile ability to undermine Nature. If in the Natural Order of Things Nature deems something is better or worse, who is man to argue? Nature has the ultimate say in the matter. Man, as a subservient creature of Nature, must abide by Her rules. We may not always like Her directives, but we must obey.

Nor should we attempt to alter, or interpret Her rules to fit our agenda. Imagine if we were Nature’s butlers. If Nature dictates that only Her knives be polished and the forks left unpolished, this does not necessarily mean that Nature will look favorably upon us if we polish both utensils. There was a good reason why She wanted only the knives polished. Our polishing the forks, which to our minds seemed only proper to do, we only wanted them to be equally as shiny, nevertheless went against our Mistress’ explicit instructions.

Your argument concerning the minimization of suffering entails the involvement and interference of man.

-- Oracle (sitdown@backofthebus.com), August 19, 2004.

all that writing and the only answer you need is this: there are black bastards and there are white bastards. i've had enough disagreements with both white and black people not to care about physical characteristics. both are equally fucked up. you cant just go around sayin you hate negroes because mayn go around commiting crime since there are plenty of white people who do the same. in the area i live at least 70% of crime is commited by white smack addicts.

-- -- -- (mentalitynotskin@equallyfucked.com), August 20, 2004.

To the oracle,

Okay, i may have drawn a blank with my last arguement. We can come back to it later. What I would like to concentrate on now is some of the contradictions that lie in the heart of your arguement. You say that the best way to prove that two entities are unequal is by using a system of logical progression. You also use the classical understanding that value judgments are an irelivance as they do not in any way compliment a logical mode and are contrary to natural law. But do not the words "equal" and "un-equal" constitute value judgements? The phraise "un-equal" is simply a collection af value judgements in which the atributes of one entity are defined as "good" or "bad" or "better" or "worse" when compaired to those of another entity.All you need to do is add moral attributes and you have "right" and "wrong." The one way to avoid using value judgements would be to say that two entities are "Different." Allthough "equal" and "the same" are basicly the same thing "un-eaqual" and "different" are not. The only conclusion that a truly unbiased and classical mind would be able to come to is not that one entity may be considered "superior" over another but that they are both simply "different."

You allso seem to have a somewhat skewed understanding of risk assesment. Take these statistics for example. 4,808 american padestrians were killed on u.s roads in 2002. In the same year 1600 whites were murdered by black people. This is still an unacceptable number of murders, but you still stand a far greater chance of being run over on your way to the supermarket. You shoudn't be worrying about being murdered by black "hoods";You should be worrying about road safety! Of course the safest thing to would be to simply avoid crossing roads, but you will never get anywhere with that mentality.

-- my name is of no importance (anarchicpolo@hotmail.com), August 27, 2004.

OraKKKle:

Since human beings are of natural origin, it follows that our free will is no less natural. It is our natural ability to transcend instinct that allows us to define good or evil, or to enter into mutually beneficial social contracts, wherein we acknowledge that while everyone is different, all lives are sacred, and are entitled to be lived with dignity and equal rights. It is nonsense to assert that human life must be nasty, brutish, and short because it is natural that it be so. Reason is also natural, and it is the sleep of reason that produces monsters—such as your irrational, stupid, selfish, destructive, simplistic, evil racial theory, and the underlying violent intent that accompanies all such hateful ideologies. You may be no more than a malevolent little troll (gosh, I’m getting the most peculiar feeling of déjà vu..), but like mosquitoes, people like you have killed thousands and millions of innocent people throughout human history, and your hatefulness has been as deadly a pestilence to humanity as any virus spread by any other parasitic insect.

-- Omaha Normandy (Decentralized@sos.com), September 02, 2004.

Since OraKKKle is once again citing Richard Lynn, and the conclusions he drew from “the Bell Curve,” this seems like an opportune time for a “reprint” from another Bboard http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl? msg_id=00C2TC
where I responded to his citation of Richard Lynn as an academic resource.

OraKKKle:

In response to the link you provided to the web page of Richard Lynn, dohttp://www.rlynn.co.uk/index.html whom you describe as “a professor at the University of Ulster, a most prestigious institute of higher learning” adding “To put this into a context so any Negro reader, who has read this far, can continue to follow our conversation, the term prestigious institute of higher learning means like a really good trade school.”

Let us look into this person, who, not surprisingly, is the source of the racial IQ figures you are so fond of spouting, and his work. Evidently, OraKKKle, the scientific community at large does not hold Richard Lynn in such high esteem as you do. He is recognized as an academic racist by, among others:

• The Institute for the Study of Academic Racism at Ferris State University
• Southern Poverty Law Center

Leon J. Kamin, a professor of psychology at Northeastern University in Boston, in critiquing Lynn’s evaluation of data and his conclusions, as presented in Herrnstein and Murray’s book “The Bell Curve,” (Free Press, 1994) commented in the February 1995 issue of Scientific American that:

“Lynn's distortions and misrepresentations of the data constitute a truly venomous racism, combined with scandalous disregard for scientific objectivity. Lynn is widely known among academics to be an associate editor of the racist journal "Mankind Quarterly" and a major recipient of financial support from the nativist, eugenically oriented Pioneer Fund. It is a matter of shame and disgrace that two eminent social scientists, fully aware of the sensitivity of the issues they address, take Lynn as their scientific tutor and uncritically accept his surveys of research.”

The full text of this critique can be found at: http://www.du.edu/~psh erry/bellcrv.html

Another scientist, William J Matthews, Ph.D. in his article “A Review of the Bell Curve: Bad Science Makes for Bad Conclusions,”

http://goinside.com/98/3 /postmod.html

questions the methodology, motivation, and conclusions of Lynn, Herrnstein, and Murray in “The Bell Curve,” writing:

“..I will direct my criticism towards a few of the main flaws in the Bell Curve itself and invite readers to review the primary source material themselves. Herrnstein and Murray's assessment of race and class differences, while not inherently illogical, rest on 4 very questionable premises which they simply do not discuss much less defend.

They assume that intelligence must be: (1) depictable as a single number; (2) capable of rank ordering people in a linear order; (3) primarily genetically based; and (4) essentially immutable.

He also notes that:

“However, there is general agreement among psychometricans in the belief that intelligence test scores taken alone ignore other important aspects of mental ability. There are other quite legitimate notions of intelligence for which there is empirical research.

Howard Gardner proposes the notion of 'multiple intelligences', while Robert Sternberg suggests a triarchic theory of intelligence (i.e. analytic, creative, practical). In a different line of inquiry on intelligence, Piaget proposed the notion of a developmentally based intelligence, while Russian psychologist, Lev Vygotsky, argues in favor of a socially developed intelligence.”

This suggests that there is no universally agreed upon method of evaluating human intellect, contrary to what Lynn, Herrnstein, Murray, and their parrot, OraKKKle, would have one believe, and that human intellect, and the factors which affect it, are far too complex to be quantified into a single number. Yet, as Kamin writes in his Scientific American article, Richard Lynn, in his 1991 paper comparing intelligence scores of African Blacks with American Blacks, and in which he cites a 1989 study by Ken Owen as “the best single study of the Negroid intelligence” derives IQ figures from this study (which used the “nonverbal” Raven’s Progressive Matrices test) despite the fact that the test developer himself, John Raven, repeatedly insists that results on this test CANNOT be converted into IQs, because Matrices scores, unlike IQ’s, are not symmetrical around their mean, and that there is no meaningful way to convert an average of raw Matrices scores into an IQ.

More glaring examples of Lynn’s lack of scientific objectivity appear in the article, such as his willingness to throw out data that doesn’t corroborate his racial theories.

I highly suggest following the above links for anyone who wishes to read the full texts of these critiques, which reveal the work of Richard Lynn for what it is: Bad Science Which Makes for Bad Conclusions. In addition, further highly recommended reading is Stephen Jay Gould’s (who actually is a highly respected scientist) “The Mismeasure of Man: The definitive refutation to the argument of The Bell Curve.”

-- Omaha Normandy (decentralized@sos.com), July 18, 2004.

-- Omaha Normandy (decentralized@sos.com), September 03, 2004.

Another test of your logical progression: I have a bucket full of sand. Please order them from the most superior grain to the most inferior.

-- Omaha Normandy (decentralized@sos.com), September 03, 2004.

Omaha,

Your bucket of sand metaphor isn't as "out there" as you imply. I GUARANTEE you that if you had a bucket of Diamonds, someone would be happy to line them up from best to worst, especially if you let them keep what they felt were the 3 best for themselves as a fee. If one type of rock can be graded, others could too. The only trouble with sand, then, is that people don't currently value it enough to take the time to grade it, and not that it isn't gradeable per se. Same thing with snow. The Eskimos apparently have at least 7 different words for snow, we just have "snow". The snow is the same, just the importance of grading it is different. We grade people all the time in test-taking, salary, athletics, etc. We grade animals, eggs, rocks, you name it. LOL, I think I'm wandering off track, but will post anywho.

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), September 03, 2004.

Indeed. Value being the operative word here. What I'm saying is that value is not an innate, or intrinsic quality. It is subjective, and exists in our minds, and does not represent a natural order of things.

-- Omaha Normandy (decentralized@sos.com), September 03, 2004.

And indeed, the point is that WE grade things. WE project OUR values upon things, and the value that we project upon things is not innate to the object, & does not exist at all without us.

-- Omaha Normandy (decentralized@sos.com), September 03, 2004.

The value is also situational. For example, a professional killer might not be rated that highly to work in a daycare, but might be the top choice of the Mafia. Value depends on human interpretation of worth. Even things that are NOT highly regarded by the majority of society may still have a great deal of value to some.

BAzooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), September 03, 2004.

To All: Greetings from the Oracle. It appears that My logical progression for determining the equality between two entities is being misinterpreted by many on this and other boards. At this time He wishes to clarify. In the third question: Can any identifiable shared characteristics be measured and assigned a value?, the definition of the term “value” is intended to be a numerical value. A value whose meaning is generally agreed upon and cannot be disputed.

For example, time and distance. Most everyone is familiar with days, hours, minutes and seconds; as well as miles, meters, feet, and inches. One test of determining the equality between two entities might be to determine whether a Negro can carry a television set under his arm and run a pre-determined distance faster than a white man. The number of steps across this distance could also be a shared characteristic that can be measured. In these shared characteristics alone the Negro will undoubtedly be superior to the white man. It must be noted here that style points for this event were not awarded. That would be yet another shared characteristic that would require an agreed upon system of measurement, much like Olympic events in gymnastics. One could theoretically lose the race and still come out ahead with the inclusion of style points.

Another example of a measured numerical value might be how many gallons of water from a high-pressure hose are required to break up a protest march.

Household incomes can be compared between the average white family living in the U.S. and an average Negro family living in the Sudan. While both groups use different monetary units, an agreed upon correction factor (exchange rate) can be used.

The point is that the parameter measured can be assigned a numerical value, and the system of measurement is the same for both groups.

The problem the Oracle foresees is that a system of measurement cannot be agreed upon. Where a system of measurement cannot be agreed upon, logic and reason must take its place. For example, look at the trouble caused by Pi in earlier arguments.

It is generally agreed among us on this board that Pi in infinite. There is no set value for Pi. This fact cannot be disputed. The Oracle desires that all partake in the following experiment. This will test whether logic and reason can replace reality. The experiment is as follows:

Find a piece of paper and draw a circle. It can be of any size. It does not have to be a perfect circle, but let us assume that it is.

Look at the circle you have just drawn. You have defined the area within the line as a certain area. The area appears to be of a certain size does it not? It is only as big as you have made it.

Now, let us measure and determine the area of your circle. The formula for this is: Area = Pi times the radius squared.

The radius squared is a finite number. When multiplied by an infinite number, the product becomes infinite as well. This means that the area of the circle you have just drawn is infinite in size.

Again, look at your circle. Does your circle appear to be infinite, or are your eyes deceiving you? While an accurate and definitive measurement cannot be obtained, you can see with your own eyes that you have defined a certain area within your circle.

Now, for the fun part, draw a second circle that you determine to be larger or smaller than the first. Perform the same calculation for area on this circle. As before, the area of your newest circle is as infinite as the first. Yet strangely, one of your circles is clearly larger than the other. Even without complete accuracy you can see for yourself than one is larger than the other.

Therefore, even with the absence of an agreed upon system of measurement one can determine the superiority of one circle over another by use of logic and reason.

-- Oracle (sitdown@backofthebus.com), September 04, 2004.

But again, it is the person who is deciding which is bigger, the larger or the smaller. Let's say you drew 2 circles, one with a 6" diameter, and one with a 10' diameter. If I told you you had to pay a tax and fill one or the other with 100 dollar bills, I'd bet you'd say the smaller was superior -- for you. The government otoh would say the larger was better.

It's human values that determine "superiority", things themselves just ARE.

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), September 04, 2004.

deciding which is bigger, the larger or the smaller?

Oops, change that to:

deciding which is SUPERIOR, the larger or the smaller

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), September 04, 2004.

To Bazooka Joe: Greetings from the Oracle. The Oracle fully understands the point you and others are making concerning the situational aspect of superiority. However, let Me ask you, in what situation would you find higher intelligence NOT superior to a lesser one? Having a greater amount of intelligence is always preferable to ignorance. There is a saying,” Ignorance is bliss.” Perhaps this is why Negroes are happy people always dancing and singing over the smallest of achievements.

In your posting you said this: It's human values that determine "superiority", things themselves just ARE.

Again, in this you are correct. The Oracle will add to your assessment and state, It's human values that determine "equality", things themselves just ARE. You may recall My term Manmade Mandate used elsewhere on these Lusenet boards. We are in total agreement with each other. You and the Oracle understand it was man who determined the Negro was equal to the white man, not Nature. We cannot artificially elevate the Negro to a status that Nature had not intended. Negroes are what they are and no amount of Manmade Mandate can alter what Nature brings our way.

One might as well enact laws against Nature to ensure that hurricanes, earthquakes and drought bother us no more. By Manmade Mandate we can banish Nature’s control of the weather and force Her to our will. Will our laws stop natural disasters from occurring? Of course not. These events will continue to occur with or without our approval.

Nature made the Negro different from the white. Different means not the same. Not the same means not equal. It is that plain. It is that simple.

The Oracle finds it curious that He is severely admonished for using subjective terms such as “superiority” and “inferiority”. Some feel these words should be banished from My vocabulary. “Equality” is also a subjective term is it not? Yet there are those who are free to use this subjective term as they see fit. Again, another example of hypocrisy from the Oracle’s opposition.

Equality is in the eye of the beholder. Do we bestow equality on Mina birds because they can be trained to talk? No. There are other valid reasons why do not. Merely because you can train a Negro to perform a white man’s tasks is not valid reason enough to award equality. If you doubt the validity of My last statement you are invited to provide examples where the Negro trained the white man in subjects of worth that are distinctively Negro in nature. Sorry, tap dancing is not a subject of worth. You must remember that important information and vital knowledge flows in one direction and one direction only. From the white man to the Negro. Again, this observation is not made through hatred, but by the careful analysis of what is.

-- Oracle (sitdown@backofthebus.com), September 05, 2004.

“To Bazooka Joe: Greetings from the Oracle. The Oracle fully understands the point you and others are making concerning the situational aspect of superiority. However, let Me ask you, in what situation would you find higher intelligence NOT superior to a lesser one?”

You are begging the question, OraKKKle, by asking BJ his OPINION on this issue.

-- Omaha Normandy (decentralized@sos.com), September 06, 2004.

“Again, this observation is not made through hatred, but by the careful analysis of what is.”
-- Oracle (sitdown@backofthebus.com), September 05, 2004.

First of all, OraKKKle, your referral to your “careful analysis of what IS,” implies that you didn’t analyze anything, but cherry-picked through your available information to find that which supported your position, ignoring that which didn’t.

Second, your “analysis” lacks scientific rigor. Since there are no “racial” control groups (groups which could be observed under conditions which eliminate any external factors which could skew the data) on which you could have based your conclusions, you would need to eliminate, or otherwise account for ALL external factors which could skew your results. In order to arrive at any conclusions regarding the relative intelligence of the “races” you MUST have done extensive research in the areas of: genetics, neurology, behavioral science, geographic anthropology, language, history, social science, political science, educational science, statistics, anthropology, economics, psychology, environmental science, and toxicology, to name but a very few. By extension, any test which claims to evaluate the relative intelligence of the “races” MUST be the result of such research.

I’m sorry OraKKKle, but your Plato’s Cave rationality—the notion that you can truly understand a complex situation without empirical information—lacks scientific rigor, as does your referral to academic racists like Richard Lynn, who, like you, arrive at their conclusions through “careful analysis of what is.”

-- Omaha Normandy (decentralized@sos.com), September 06, 2004.

Orakle,

However, let Me ask you, in what situation would you find higher intelligence NOT superior to a lesser one?

Occupation for one. The world does employ some people in very repetitive jobs, such as sealing envalopes or elevator operators. Having a high intelligence would make one go nuts in these occupations, but someone has to do them, thererfore there ARE situations where it is preferable to have a lower intelligence.

Having a greater amount of intelligence is always preferable to ignorance.

This makes no sense. Intelligence and ignorance are two totally different things, One can be both quite intelligent and completely ignorant, or vice versa.

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), September 06, 2004.

Hey, BJ! If you're interested I've posted a question about life, the universe, and everything at, http://hv.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=007CyH I'd appreciate your input!

-- Omaha Normandy (decentralized@sos.com), September 06, 2004.

To Omaha Normandy: Greetings from the Oracle. In your most recent posting to Me you stated:

In order to arrive at any conclusions regarding the relative intelligence of the “races” you MUST have done extensive research in the areas of: genetics, neurology, behavioral science, geographic anthropology, language, history, social science, political science, educational science, statistics, anthropology, economics, psychology, environmental science, and toxicology, to name but a very few. By extension, any test which claims to evaluate the relative intelligence of the “races” MUST be the result of such research.

Madam, the reverse can also be said concerning YOUR position could it not? For one to claim the Negro is equal to the white man, one must, by your standards, not Mine, be well versed, if not the ultimate authority, in these subjects. If one is NOT the ultimate authority in all of the subjects you mentioned, how can that individual even claim equality exists? Where is YOUR empirical information? Where is YOUR scientific rigor? Equality is a Myth without fact. By using the same standard you use against the Oracle, you assisted in proving My point very well. Thank You.

A curious fact about the standards your side uses in their attempt to paint the Oracle a fool is that they tend to backfire.

Do you recall a posting or two concerning how dreary the world would be without certain Negro inventions? The Oracle does. To refresh your memory, allow the Oracle to direct your attention to a posting by Unknown dated August 10, 2004 and found on the board entitled “Can I Join the KKK Even Though I’m Black”. The Oracle is certain you are familiar with it as you posted a message immediately after the one in question.

Unknown’s message consisted of a listing of Negroes who supposedly invented something of worth like the elevator. (Perform a Google search for elevator inventor and see if the true inventor is different than what Unknown claims. The Oracle is reluctant to label Unknown a liar. As you have no such qualms, perhaps, if you are truly interested in accuracy, you will do the Oracle’s dirty work for Him. Then again, perhaps not. As long as this individual takes your side you will not be too enthusiastic in correcting him.) To continue. The main thrust of Unknown’s argument was to show examples where Negroes had actually beaten the white race to certain discoveries. This was somehow intended to show equality with the white man. Quite possibly you agree with Unknown that this proves the Negro is the white man’s equal. However, something is missing here.

What is missing is logic. Again, it is quite possible that some individuals might be tempted to view the Negro as the white man’s equal AFTER these inventions. However, the more important point is the Negro must not have been considered equal BEFORE these inventions. You must remember that if these inventions are the required “proof” of Negro equality then the absence of them is “proof” of Negro inequality.

When white explorers left their bustling ports filled with commerce and civilization and discovered the Negro (Notice the absence of Negro explorers who discovered white people) they found primitive societies of naked black bodies whose only claim to fame was the invention of mud and pointed sticks.

A fair question to ask of you, Omaha, is if you feel these first explorers were correct in their assessment that the newly discovered Negroes were an inferior race or should they have been considered equal to the white man from the get-go?

As the newly discovered Negro was not capable of producing inventions that rivaled the white man’s, by the standards set forth by Unknown, and the standards you presumably agree with since you have not objected to this standard, one would have to conclude that the Negro was rightfully delegated to inferior status. You are invited to state your agreement with the Oracle’s assessment or provide reasons why the newly discovered Negro should have automatically and without argument, been awarded equality with those who discovered him. Were Negroes always equal, or did they become equal after they were brought up to speed and learned from the white man?

What the Oracle wants to know is at what point in time did the Negro become equal with the white man.

The Oracle urges you to be careful with your answer.

-- Oracle (sitdown@backofthebus.com), September 06, 2004.

To Bazooka Joe: Greetings from the Oracle. In your most recent message to Me you stated:

The world does employ some people in very repetitive jobs, such as sealing envalopes or elevator operators. Having a high intelligence would make one go nuts in these occupations, but someone has to do them, thererfore there ARE situations where it is preferable to have a lower intelligence.

As He has never seen a Negro elevator operator “go nuts” the Oracle must conclude you are correct in that he has lower intelligence and he is right for the task assigned to him. If you believe the Oracle is wrong in this assessment, please cite the undoubtedly multiple examples where Negro elevator operators did in fact “go nuts” due to their higher intelligence.

-- Oracle (sitdown@backofthebus.com), September 06, 2004.

What a retard.

-- 2 (1@3.4), September 06, 2004.

Your assertion that a hierarchy must necessarily exist between all dissimilar individuals, groups, and "races" is entirely false. The notions of "inferiority" and "superiority" are entirely subjective values which are NOT subject to quantification.

-- Omaha Normandy (decentralized@sos.com), July 19, 2004.

 “Equality” is also a subjective term is it not?
”Equality is in the eye of the beholder.”

--Oracle (sitdown@backofthebus.com), September 05, 2004.

Hi, OraKKKle!

I’m glad to see you finally admit that your racial views represent your own values and opinions, and are subjective. 

-- Omaha Normandy (decentralized@sos.com), September 07, 2004.

To Omaha Normandy: Greetings from the Oracle. Madam, you misinterpret a point made by the Oracle to be a concession. For future reference, the Oracle would greatly appreciate your usage of My quotations in the context in which it was made. You do not only yourself a disservice, but a disservice to the gentle readers of these boards as well. What you have mistakenly took for the Oracle’s agreement with you was in actuality a device the Oracle has used effectively in the past with other posters. To defeat the misconception of racial equality the Oracle, at times, uses the same ammunition and strategies His opposition fires against Him.

You, Omaha, had made the statement that superiority and inferiority were subjective terms. By your standards, it stands to reason that without the absolute, scientific, and qualitative proof the Oracle requested from you, equality also falls into that category as well. You were given multiple opportunities in which to provide your evidence that the Negro race is equal to the white race and have failed to provide one fact that supports your claim. Therefore, by your standards and not Mine, equality is as subjective and nebulous a term as either superiority or inferiority.

According to you, if equality cannot be defined, why have you as a Negro demanded it? According to you, if equality cannot be defined, how will you know if and when you receive it? You claim the Negro and white are equal, yet curiously, according to you equality cannot be defined. How can equality exist without a clear definition? The answer to this should be quite obvious to you by now, Omaha. Equality does not exist. The non-existence of equality has been one of My many themes throughout. This is why the Oracle has repeatedly asked for your side’s evidence of Negro equality. Your side returned empty handed every time. Again, Negro equality does not exist. Never has, and never will. Your absence of proof along with your own standard of subjectivity prove and validate My point. Perhaps now you are willing to accept the fact that equality is a Myth. The Oracle welcomes you if you do. If you are of the mind to continue fantasizing your race is the white man’s equal, again, you are invited to provide your proof under the same standards you place on the Oracle. Is the Oracle being unfair to you when He asks you to do these things?

All the Oracle can be found guilty of is applying your standards against you. When the Oracle holds a mirror to you and shows you your, hypocrisy, foolishness and hatred for all to see, you despise the Oracle all the more because you know in your dark heart He is right. If you were one of the rare honest Negroes, you would admit to your double standard. You would admit your foolishness that by your own definition equality fails to exists. You would admit your hatred toward those who are different than yourself. You, My dear, are guilty of the same actions you accuse the Oracle and His students. You expect the Oracle and His followers to show love for the Negro while you show little but unbridled hatred towards us. You expect the Oracle and His followers to accept the Negro as our equal while you show distain towards us. You expect the Oracle and His supporters to understand your point of view when you have no clear picture what your point of view is. We have been labeled, among others as homosexuals, losers, troglodytes, and scum of the earth by you and yours all in the name of morality. We have been subjected to desires of eternal damnation, harm to our persons and threats to our property all in the name of decency. If your cause expects tolerance and understanding from others, do you think it unreasonable or unfair for the Oracle to believe you should be living up to your own standards as well? Are you exempt from your standards and do they only apply to your dealings with the Oracle? If your actions define a decent person, you must forgive the Oracle if He begs to go another route.

Before one is honest with others it is imperative that one be honest with oneself first. Would you not agree this is the wisest course? All the Oracle asks is that you look deep inside yourself and confirm what He says about you is true. The Oracle does not expect you to publicly admit to your failings as a human being. It is not the Oracle’s desire to see more humiliation heaped upon you. What the Oracle DOES require from you is to address Him in a manner more respectful and contrite than what you have shown in the past. A few “Yes, sir’s” interspersed in your messages will be sufficient for the Oracle to know you have learned your lesson. You are well on your way to becoming one of the Oracle’s Oreos. Crusty and black on the outside yet deliciously white on the inside.

-- Oracle (sitdown@backofthebus.com), September 09, 2004.

The Boracle is still posting his racist bull**** without regard to the truth as always. Beating a dead, decomposing horse is just an exercise in futility and fanatacism.

-- (Scary@Kerry.com), September 10, 2004.

To the Anonymous Author of the Above Posting: Greetings from the Oracle. You claim the Oracle has no regard for the truth. You cannot be less accurate. You see, My nameless friend, the Oracle has, at all times, sought after and acknowledged the truth whatever the truth may be. Wherever truth is, you will find the Oracle close by.

The Oracle abhors lies and deceptions and exists solely to set the record straight. That is why the Oracle is responding to your message.

As you claim to hold the truth, perhaps you would be willing to share your knowledge with the rest of us poor unenlightened souls. If what you say is the absolute truth it should stand the light of the Oracle’s scrutiny. Are you that afraid that your beliefs cannot withstand such a test? If this is so, perhaps you are not as devoted to your cause as you have deluded yourself into thinking. Perhaps you know in your heart of hearts your beliefs are built upon a foundation of sand and you have consciously decided it was best not to divulge your side of the story.

As for your comment that My beating a dead horse is an exercise in futility, you are correct. It truly is frustrating to have some gentle readers, like yourself, fail to recognize Reality when it is placed before them. Maintaining your belief system makes you “feel” more human. However, living a lie is no way to go through life. Living with a lie is much like having some imposter, some malignancy, deep inside of you that prevents you from achieving the potential that acknowledging the truth can only bring. The truth is always the preferred path to take.

And what is the truth?

The truth is there is no equality between the races. If equality existed it would be easy for you or anyone to prove. The Oracle has many times asked that this proof be presented before Him. To this date none have answered My call. At no time has any poster provided any evidence that withstands the Eye of the Oracle.

Why should your evidence be any different? As the Oracle has dispatched His opposition with ease, so too would the Oracle find fatal flaws in your argument. The answer to your dilemma is simple. If your belief system is flawed, adopt one that is flawless.

Adopting the Oracle’s stance on racial equality does not require one to hate or despise. There are no laws, written or unwritten that state you MUST hate Negroes if you believe them to be inferior. All that IS required from you is to acknowledge that racial equality does not exist. Again, if your claim remains that the Negro race is equal to the white race you are invited to provide your proof. Saying something is so does not make it so. The facts are what make it so.

Do you recall the time when you were told that Santa Claus was real? Someone, most likely one of your parents, actually sat you down and told you the whole story of Santa Claus. You believed in him with all your heart. You were presented many “facts” about him as well. You were told among other things that he was an ageless man who with his overweight and gray haired wife lived at the North Pole. Under his direct supervision unisexed elves did little but make toys for little or no pay. On only one night per year he would assemble his flying reindeer and circumnavigate the globe and distribute these elf-made toys free of charge. Your sole function was to provide a listing of your required toys, leave a tip of milk and cookies to cover Santa’s time and trouble and unwrap your booty the next morning. When your parents told you these things you eagerly lapped them up. How could he not exist when you saw the results every December twenty-fifth? You asked for certain toys, you received certain toys, and the cookies and milk had disappeared overnight. How can he not exist when you have photographic evidence of him with you sitting in his lap? With all this “proof”, how could you not believe?

Later you learned the truth about Santa Claus. Santa Claus was a Myth. Everything you were told was a lie. There are no flying reindeer and there is no bottomless sack of toys. Everything that made perfect sense and that you could confirm with physical evidence was exposed and was disintegrated before your very eyes once a reasonable and logical explanation was given to you.

Do you hate your parents for deceiving you? Of course not. Neither should you hate the Negro after you learn he has deceived you into thinking he was your equal.

Do your presents cease arriving? Of course not. However, you now look upon these gifts in a different light.

Do you still believe in the Myth of Santa Claus after the logical explanation was given to you? Of course not. So too the Oracle hopes that you do not still believe in the Myth of Negro equality after His logical explanation. It would be wise for you to look upon both of these Myths in their proper perspective and place them on the same shelf of your mind.

Some may say the Myth surrounding Santa Claus is harmless to small children. That this is merely a mild diversion. To this the Oracle asks what good has resulted from lying to them? The same can be said concerning Negro equality. You may ask, even if Negro equality is a Myth, what harm can it cause? Again, no true good can arise from a lie.

-- Oracle (sitdown@backofthesleigh.com), September 11, 2004.

Oh lookie here! Mr. Dyslexia is jumping on the bandwagon again! How predictable!

How boring!

-- feklnggepingeoingorngpoiwn46ng-'95jrwfvnwpring0ui5pgnrsgp'rgjnetpinfg;'wrkgip'nelkeamngi4yjht0[=ovntkbkmv,pnbyr;lkvbpsnkgoihbntep'brjm;wslvmsdngk;tengpirfnmsdp (lgkg;lfjgws;knmg;lwknfwnfkwlkf.@rwkgjnrk.com), September 11, 2004.

Not as annoying as know-it-all little pricks like yourself there, junior.

Don't worry, your voice will change someday and that acne will go away too.

Of course, the dyslexia might always be there, but hey, so you're not perfect!

You'll probably get a job someplace. Remember, we all need ditch diggers too.

-- rtfdlkhngfdlkndsf;lkgnm;lkgsnd;lkgfdsn;lgk (dslknssgnksfgnlkdsgnlkdsg@lkngfs;lkgn.com), September 12, 2004.

Like you Jake. And the OraKKle. You're both trailer park trash and the rest of the world is slowly seing you both for what you two really are... the dregs of society.

-- (no@spam.com), September 15, 2004.

click this yall, its good!
http://f5.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/AGdIQe1d2NLoZPa-4-juyOdGcOoYdUcoGik7gag-NWXfiqvQHOmhKfhLmOIKvAUj4ZUQDUnyTPKCeK05ApMI3hVCsYO2JzGXLL-vaI4gIQzwkw/HotBlondePeesAllOverFloorThenShits%21.mpeg

-- (hereY@go.now), September 15, 2004.

To the Oracle,

Lets say you are stood on an incredibly large peice of paper. It is sixteen thousand miles across. There are about 6 billion small circles on it. They do not have to be perfect circles, but for the sake of argument let's assume they are. There are white circles, black circles and yellow circles and millions of subtle colour variations in between. So, in the interest of truth and science, you set out with a ruler and a calculator to measure the sise of each and every one of these circles and grade them according to coulour.Every time you fing a black circle that is bigger than an average white circle, you disgaurd it, as it goes agianst a generalisation that you would hapily uphold as absolute truth. Why? Because you are a sad, pathetic little person. Have fun measuring.

-- my name is of no importance (anarchicpollo@hotmail.com), September 19, 2004.

*YAWN*

-- CANEY CREEK (Annunaki_Bukkake@fairys.net), December 11, 2004.