Pioneer1

If you look at it in isolation, it's not so obvious. But when you look at that location AND the number of long walls and fortresses that have been built AROUND that location that encircles it. Great Wall of China Wall of Gorgan Wall of Bukhara ....walls and fortresses that have been built at different periods of history, all support some sort of effort to CONTAIN people and PROTECT one's territory from being overran by outsiders. Infact, much of the history of Caucasians being "contained" in this region is actually buried in mythology. The "Watchers" you read about in non-canon Christian and Jewish literature like the Book of Enoch actually is based on these Black guards who were sent to that central Asia region to "watch" over the White people who were driven up there.

Replace that word "faggot" with "sissy" and that saying would make more sense.

richardmurray Pioneer, where are you from? You do realize that supermarket chain owners sign contracts with stipulations? Legal agreements are sometimes signed for certain food items with stipulations on how to care. Let alone that city/state/federal laws may state what can or can not happen? The FDA doesn't allow the interstate sale of butter so... what other laws are there. Where are you from? Do you own a business? Man, what's wrong with you....I just TOLD you to pardon me for not knowing the laws of New York and quite frankly the laws and policies governing grocery stores and food in general. I'm not a restaurant or supermarket owner, so how am I supposed to just "know" what the rules and regulations are???? I know there are laws that regulate how food is HANDLED and STORED but not necessarily how it's PORTIONED for sales. You're acting like this shit is common sense or something you learn in elementary school...lol They sell APPLES in bags or individually, don't they? They sell YOUGURT in packs or individually, don't they? They sell POP, POTATO CHIPS, CANDY, FRUIT, VEGETABLES, PORTIONS OF MEAT...already packaged or in individual portions in most grocery stores and supermarkets I've been in around the country. So how am I supposed to know there's a law PROHIBITING them from doing so with a gotdamn stick of butter? BTW, Wal-Mart sends semi-trucks FULL of butter, cheese, milk, meat, and other foods constantly cross state lines and across the nation so I'm not sure what you're talking about. so that is why you ask questions answered in the post, well thank you, i now fully comprehend the quality of your statements in the forum. Ofcourse. People have other things to do, besides come on here and read a whole 6 page THESIS on something that can be summed up in 3 paragraphs. I don't want to read Mamdani's entire Manifesto for the City of New York from A-Z just to answer a couple questions -that I really ALREADY know the answers to. I don't have time for it, nor do I have a desire to do so if I did. Mamdani hasn't even got his plan accepted. and like before all you offer is judgement, no ideas, no positive quality. You are like one of those rush limbaugh style podcasters just through text. Man, are you serious? Offer ideas???? He ain't running no damn high school talent show! People aren't sitting around in circles offering "positive ideas"! These folks have an AGENDA. They DON'T WANT your "positive ideas" because Mamdani and the people who PUT him in office already have THEIR IDEAS to push THEIR AGENDA! But Mamdani needs results so he is being more forceful than obama or fellow obamite elected officials in trying to get something done. It doesn't matter how many starry eyed niggas voted for him thinking they'll really get some sort of change We pretty much KNOW his Administration is going to follow the same path the others before him have followed, which means catering to the billionaires and elite of New York and the further marginalization of the AfroAmerican populace. If you disagree, let me ask you...do you have some sort of magic mirror or crystal ball where you can see into the future and see something DIFFERENT? If not, what's with all the head scratching and confusion about what the hell that man is going to do or who he's going to help? "Laaaawd ham'mercy we just elected a new Mayor! Hush up now and be positive! Let's see what he gonna do!" You KNOW the man is not Jesus! You KNOW he's not a miracle worker. So besides having a funny-ass name, what makes HIM any different than the other characters who occupied that seat?

Alright now..... Don't stir up no ole shit between me and the frankster...lol. I think you popped into that old thread a few times and saw us wrestling over that one....lol.

ProfD There's nothing honorable about leading a prison gang. It depends on the audience doing the judging. IN PRISON...a gang leader gets much respect and honor. Failure to do so could cost you your life. Even on the outside, it would be wise to show gangsters and gang leaders their due respect Men honor other men who are strong, courageous, and have respect among peers....regardless as to whether it's in the boardroom or on the prison yard. Masculine principles are masculine principles regardless of time, place, or circumstances. Many people in society look at prisoners and ex-cons as losers. Some do. Others see them as "regular" people who were doing the same thing they and other people are doing but was just unfortunate enough to get CAUGHT and SENTENCED doing it. Just because you caught up in a cell block somewhere drinking homemade pruno with Puff Daddy, doesn't necessarily mean you didn't have other things going on in your life before you got caught up. Right. Men are ultimately responsible for being providers and protectors. If a man cannot fulfill his role as the apex human being, he may be considered a loser. He may be considered as such in a society where the roles of men are CLEARLY DEFINED as protectors and providers and he can do neither. However that isn't the case in THIS society anymore. What it means to be a "man" period isn't even clearly defined anymore, let alone "good" one or a "winning" one. While in one society a man must be able to protect and provide for his family and failure to do so would get him labeled a loser; in THIS society you have men who can't protect OR provide for themselves and live off of others, but they're good at sex or being the "life of the party". This prevents them from being labeled a loser by contemporary standards. A woman strung out on drugs and/or unable to take care of her children will be considered a loser. Lol.... You just described half of the "trophy wives" married to mutli-millionaires and billionaires! There's a reason most rich men tend to hire nannies to take care of their children instead of relying on their wives to do so. *Actually 2 reasons...lol. But that a whole 'nother conversation.

I think most of the people who voted for Trump do, also. They KNEW that his Administration would bring chaos and a disruption of the system, which is what they wanted in the first place. For various reasons.

frankster Lol....actually they ARE a contradiction in terms because Caucasians were named as such because of their physical structure. The Caucasus mountains were named after the Caucasians who were sent there, not the other way around. However as suggested, the HISTORY of Black people in the Caucasus area goes back far beyond 200 years or even the Ottoman Empire. It goes back further than that Colchians also. The history of Black people in the Caucasus region goes back over 6000 years ago when Caucasians were driven into that region and Black troops were sent there to keep them contained and bound in that mountain range. The Colchians and other "native" Black tribes of the Caucasus region were the DESCENDANTS of those troops who were stationed there for hundreds of years to keep the Caucasians contained.

ProfD Amercians are clearly aware of what it means to be a loser. One man's "loser" is another man's "champ". A person may consider their brother who ended up in prison a "loser" and a disgrace to the family. However that same brother may be one of the leaders of a prison gang and be highly respected and looked up to in prison. Most Americans may agree on the term being an INSULT, but as to what defines an actual LOSER...there is not too much agreement. Another thing I notice is that the term "loser" is almost exclusively applied to MEN. When was the last time you heard a woman referred to as a "loser"? As Arsenio Hall used to say, things that make you go: Hmmmmm......

richardmurray Take a look at YOUR Affordability Plan in action:

richardmurray Your comment is full of complaint and judgement, but lacks any ideas to solve anything, now the reason is one of two things. You don't have one, for whatever reason. You can't share one, for whatever reason. Well, according to what you've just written....there's NO NEED to "solve" it, because there's no problem to solve! You said: If most people....as you suggest...already have the money and transportation to get to the supermarkets and buy what they need or have it shipped fresh and direct, there's NO NEED to open up government owned stores with "affordable" prices. There's really no need for the stores that already exist to start selling food at "affordable" prices or in "affordable" quantities. Based on what you just said, these store would operate more out of convenience than necessity. My suggestion is a law that allows stores to sell food in more affordable quantities . Pardon my ignorance on NYC laws and statues, especially with regard to food sales and consumption.... However what law is STOPPING them from doing this already? If a supermarket wants to only sell ONE stick of butter or even HALF a stick of butter at a time, as long as it's properly handled and packaged...are they not allowed to? Please learn to read better, the articles in the post clearly state in Mamdani's plan they will be government owned stores, not subsidized. It's not a matter of better READING because I didn't bother reading the entire thing in the first place....lol. Rather than sitting down and reading an entire thesis, I figured I'd save a lot of time and photons by just asking YOU DIRECTLY the questions I'm interested in knowing concerning these utopian plans. But anyway..... Again, this raises questions on multiple levels: -Because NYC is such a huge market....needless to say whoever the suppliers for these stores are, will make a killing as the City of New York foots the bill. -Will suppliers get their contracts through bidding with the city, like construction contractors do? -We know there are Black farmers. Who will ensure THEY get their fair share of the contracts as suppliers? -Again, who ensures that AfroAmericans get our fair share of jobs....including management positions....in these stores? All of this must be taken into consideration when you talk about promoting government owned and operated stores.

WHO is sounding "foolish" around here????? Either you're too lazy to proof read your posts, or English is obviously not your first language...lol.

Excuse me but did you intend to post THIS here? Sounds like some "self reflection" shit. It reads like it was something meant for your online diary or personal journal.

Well lady, I hope the THEME of this thread will make you reconsider your OTHER "pass times" when not loitering on this site. You may want to find a much safer and less embarrassing (for you family) hobby to "pass the time".

It was approx. 19 hours between your previous post and this one you just posted. Uhhhh...... "It took you nearly a DAY to come up with that bullshit?"

Government shutdown updates: USDA tells states to 'undo' issuing any SNAP benefits Government shutdown updates: USDA tells states to 'undo' issuing any SNAP benefits -How do you "undo" benefits that were issued out? Especially if they've been spent?

ProfD It's usually used as an insult, but you have a lot of young men who are walking around thinking they really ARE losers in life because they haven't achieved "this" or "that". Or they think they have "bad luck" or some other sort of misfortune. The question is..... Did they arrive at this conclusion on their own through logical thinking, or have they been PROGRAMMED by society (especially social media) to feel that if they haven't achieved "this goal" or "that material" that they are somehow "losers" in life? Why would a 25 year old Black man in perfect health with a car and job think he's a "loser" in life JUST because he isn't married, doesn't have a degree, or doesn't have women chasing him around the block? Social Media

We also need to look at the role some of our own women play in the feminization of Black men. You have some Black women who publicly condemn masculinity in Black men but will turn around and PRAISE the very same traits and characteristics in White and Latino men! When a Black man is acting dominant, sexually potent, and tough....you criticize him as being misogynistic, chauvinistic, and call his masculinity "toxic". However when a Latino man exhibits the very same traits or even acts in a much more sexist and chauvinistic way...you call him a "sexy Latin lover" or talk about how "macho" he is. His jealous and controlling behavior of women is often either ignored or excused as being "protective" and "traditional". For example..... How many Latina women are coming on social media with grins on their faces praising Black men for how well they dress, how tall and muscular they are, or for how big their dick is?

aka Contrarian At the local level women were and are very instrumental in the unions that fought for and won equal rights in the workplace. Growing up in Detroit which was a Union Dominated city I can say based on my observations, many of the female union members didn't understand the value or purpose of labor unions and SELL OUT the rights and benefits that were fought for generations ago. -Most of them don't attend Union meetings -Many of them see nothing wrong with having intimate relationships with members of management, especially for PERSONAL benefit -Even females in Union leadership don't seem to fight as hard and are more likely to compromise when it comes to pay and benefits You do have exceptions to this obviously and you have women who are strong union advocates; but that's just what they are....EXCEPTIONS, not the norm. Sexual harassment does continue to be a problem, however, because men think with their penises. Sexual harassment isn't faulted just by the men, but also from the women who ENABLE it by using THEIR sexuality to seek favors from management. Although rape and sexual assault DOES happen from time to time, the vast majority of sexual encounters in the workplace come from women who VOLUTARILY choose to have sexual relationships with co-workers and management for their own benefit. One of the by-products of these sexual relationships and exchanges is some of these men begin to think ALL women are willing to have sexual relations with them for benefits instead of realizing that just like SOME will...SOME won't. But to a certain degree....the women who WILL encourage that type of thinking. * Having said that, let me state for the record that I personally have NO PROBLEM with a woman (or man) using sex and sexuality for their own personal benefit AS LONG AS IT'S VOLUNTARY. It's harassment only if it's UNWANTED.

I have a number of thoughts about this: First of all Richard, is that Mamdani's plan....or YOUR plan? The thread in the link seems to suggest it is YOUR plan that you PROPOSED to him. But more to the Plan itself...... From what I see, that plan looks like a Socialist oriented plan. And like many Socialist ideas...it looks good on paper but when you try to implement it in real life a number of problems often arise. ---It appears to be trying to deal with the "food desert" conditions that exist in many urban areas not just in New York but in Urban areas around the nation. But it doesn't address some of the underlaying CAUSES of these "food deserts". One of the causes is the fact that many people DON'T WANT fresh foods. They LIKE the hot cheetos and junk food that they get from these bodegas and liquor stores because although they aren't healthy....they're cheap and tasty. You remove the cheap ghetto food and replace it with healthy fresh food that is more expensive and a lot of people will have problems with THAT. ---It talks about NYC Ran grocery stores. So will those grocery stores actually be OWNED by the City of New York, or will they be private stores SUBSIDIZED by the City of New York? Because like Section 8....why should the government pick and choose who THEY decide to subsidize and make rich? They are picking CERTAIN stores and giving them millions of dollars to feed the people mean while OTHER stores don't get that same benefit, which means it's actually TARGETED VAMPIRE CAPITALISM. And even if NYC actually OWNS these grocery stores, will the managers and employees be city workers? Will NYC ensure that there is no discrimination in who gets to manage and run these stores? The Mayor Elect is of Indian descent. We know that Indians own a disproportionate number of 7-11s, corner stores, and even bodegas around the nation.....so this is bound to benefit them.

I think some people use that word "loser" a little too loosely (no pun intended...lol). In THIS society....how many actual "losers" make it past 40 unless they are institutionalized and taken care of; e.g. -prison, mental hospital, etc.....? If you're a Black man and manage to survive past 40 in THIS society on your own....again without being housed in some sort of institution sheltering and supporting you....you could be anything BUT a loser.

ProfD Sure. Black men are a viable alternative. It goes the other way too. Black women are looking at non-Black men. Facts. .....for different reasons. But facts, none the less. I just don't believe our mere presence in the vicinity keeps non-Black men in check when it comes to women of their race or culture. Because I don't know for sure what's going on in the minds of these other non-Black men, perhaps our mere presence doesn't. However there is EVIDENCE (by deductive reasoning) that it does. What do I mean? Keep in mind I'm talking about FBA men...not all or any Black man. These other groups could care less about African men because many African men will keep their head down and pretend not to see their women being abused or mistreated. Also keep in mind that when I say "FBA men" I'm also including Black Caribbeans like Jamaicans and Haitians because they also descended from Slavery and share similar experiences and traditions. In countries where FBA men AREN'T there in noticeable numbers, you see more abuse and traditional hardline treatment of women of all groups. However in countries where FBA men DO exist in large numbers...like the United States obviously, but also Canada, England, and France....all women tend to be treated better regardless of race or ethnicity. They experience more respect, more sexual freedom, and tend to be more outspoken. Some would say one has little or nothing to do with the other. But having closely examined some of these societies...I would argue differently and say that the confidence these women have is as a DIRECT result of our presence among them.

Who is what to who???

Interestingly, many learned this during WWII when they started letting large numbers of women into the workforce to run the factories while the men were off fighting. They discovered that not only were female employees more docile and easier to control, but they also demanded less money and were more likely to put up with unfavorable working conditions without complaining.

ProfD Slow down bro. Most women are raised in a culture where they accept being 2nd to men. While this is true, it doesn't contradict or conflict with the point I just made about us (Black men) being a viable alternative that the men of their community consider when dealing with their women in America. The main reason a non-Black woman leaves an abusive man and runs into the arms of another man is for security and protection. Agreed. OR....to just get away from the abuse; even if the man she runs to isn't very protective. When folks ask why would a child run away from home and live on the streets, maybe they need to understand how abusive and violent the situation that child faced AT home. The streets may be harsh and callous but STILL better than the constant violence they faced at home. Likewise..... A woman running into the arms of a Black man who makes less money and doesn't offer her much protection may be a whole lot better than staying with a wealthy man who is extremely insecure, accusatory, and whooping her ass every day and threatening to kill her. S8x is not a woman's highest priority. Survival which includes security and protection comes first. Depends on the woman....lol...but I understand your point. There's a reason white women don't say too much against white men and vote the way they do as well. You're talking about MOST White women. Keep in mind that a large minority of them: a) Seek out and prefer Black men b) Vote Democrat/Liberal and often for Black politicians like Obama or Harris There are multiple reasons for this, but one of which is Black men usually offer that viable alternative to the more dominant domineering ultra-controlling and abusive White man.