Abortion in any Christian society...." Presumably, then, you're okay with the aborting of non-Christian foetuses? AliceBG 10:49, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
Hi, I don't care for what people do in their own countries. Eg in Saudi Arabia, that is their business and they can govern their country in a Muslim way.
Alfred123 10:53, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
- So I guess "love your neighbour" doesn't extend to fellow human beings in other countries? Philip J. Rayment 10:57, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
- Phil, as far as this guy is concerned, "love your neighbour" doesn't even extend to the people in your own country if they don't have the same skin colour as you -- see his user page for his advocacy of a white Boer homeland. AliceBG 11:03, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
- What fellowship can light have with darkness, Philip? (I might be paraphrasing a little).GHolland 11:27, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
Advocating the rights of a nation of people does not make me a racist.
And I respect the right of non-Christians to do as they please.
If you were to start dictating to non-Christian nations what they should do then it would make the threat of Muslim extremist terrorism even greater. It is best to just leave them to deal with things in their own way.
Alfred123 11:21, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
You say "advocating the rights of a nation of people does not make me a racist". True - except it might if you advocate one group's rights entirely at the expense of another group's rights, especially when the group whose rights you dismiss (black South Africans) are in fact the indigenous people of the area in question.PeteSC 11:31, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
Wrong. The Voortrekkers arrived in the Transvaal and Orange Free State first, long before the Bantus came down from their kingdoms to the north.
Only the Zulus were there and the trekkers, after being betrayed by Zulu King Dingaan, negotiated land rights with the Zulus in return for returning some cattle to the Zulu King which was stolen from him by a lesser Chief.
Alfred123 11:36, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
- I might go along with leaving them to their own ends for reasons of practicality, sovereignty, and diplomacy, but not because "I don't care". Philip J. Rayment 11:33, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
PeterSC if you dispute what I say then I'll suggest some reading material for you to go and read, because it is a common myth that Blacks populated the Boer republics before the Boers.
Alfred123 11:37, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
I'm not interested in reading materials at the moment, but I'd still be very interested to hear what you suggest.
The Bantu were just one tribal group out of a number. The legal documents of the racist SA government during apartheid used the word as a general term to describe all blacks, a bit like describing all British people as "English". You seem to have adopted their technique. So the Zulu were there first? Thanks for the confirmation, I'm glad we agree on that point. PeteSC 11:49, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
Hi. The Zulu were not in what is now known as the Transvaal or Orange Free State (they were empty) they were in the Natal, so my argument holds true that the Boers were there first.
Well calling the South African government racist is highly disputable, they were racialists yes, but not racists.
Alfred123 11:55, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
And Bantu was not a tribal group, it was a word used to signify all Black African tribes from the equator downwards (source- Apartheid:A History by Brian Lapping).
Alfred123 11:56, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
As for reading materials I recommend:
- The Afrikaners by GHL Le May
- Apartheid: A History by Brian Lapping
- The Boer War by Thomas Pakenham
- The Scramble for Africa by Thomas Pakenham
- The Boer War by Gregory Fremont-Barnes
So how was the apartheid system anything but racist? I'm sure our American friends on this site wouldn't hesitate in condemning the way many African Americans were treated for much of the 20th century as racist, and even that wasn't as extreme as apartheid. Exactly what are you views on the position of black Americans during this period. And, for that matter, what are your views on apartheid??? PeteSC 12:05, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
Apartheid, I don't feel I need to clarify my view on that, as you are all clever enough to have deduced where I stand.
As for the mistreatment of Black Americans, it was wrong, but I am not responsible, so I don't feel any guilt for it.
Alfred123 12:10, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
I did think that I had deduced where you stood on apartheid, but wanted you to clarify because I thought I had to be mistaken. Evidently not. PeteSC 13:38, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
Where did you think I had stood on Apartheid?
Alfred123 13:39, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
I'd quite like you to answer my original question before I answer your later question, thanks. But as you seem to want to avoid answering it: I think you stand exactly where you expect me to have "deduced" your position to be. PeteSC 13:43, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
I support Apartheid, but not the human rights abuses commited against people under it (eg those tortured by the Security Branch of the police) and the land distribution to the Blacks should have been fairer (not 13% of the land, more like 50%).
So, to me, Apartheid was good in principle, but bad in practice.
Alfred123 13:45, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
I see. In answer to your question, I had you down as an apartheid supporter.PeteSC 13:50, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
No worries. Seeing as how Conservapedia doesn't ban on the basis of ideology.
Alfred123 14:04, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
- "Conservapedia doesn't ban on the basis of ideology"????
- Please excuse me while I laugh hysterically.
- Oh god, my sides. I think I've ruptured a lung...
- Warn me when you're gonna say something that clueless! GHolland 14:14, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
It's in the conservapedia guidelines.
Anyway where do you fit into this, have you made a constructive contribution to this discussion or are you here as a spectator?
Alfred123 14:32, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
- I know it's in the guidelines. It's a "lie". And for my part, I am a harmless sea creature :)
- Incidentally, I think Metapedia would be a more suitable wiki for you. GHolland 19:59, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
No, I can always go to Stormfront if I feel like rubbing shoulders with fellow White men. But to edit Metapedia would be preaching to the choir, as would posting to Stormfront, because everybody already agrees with me!
Alfred123 20:05, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
Besides, my opinions are immaterial because I am here to contribute to Conservapedia articles in a constructive and fair way, not to discuss my opinions. But, thankfully, you are all now aware of where I stand on some issues, so there will be no need for further explanation.
Why are my opinions coming under such scrutiny anyway?
Alfred123 20:09, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
- Because you're suspected of being a parodist. Nationalistic editors often are, so lay it on thinly, OK? :) GHolland 20:13, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
"Parodist"? What are you talking about? And thanks for the advice, but you guys brought up my opinions, if you hadn't I would never have revealed my opinions, because they are pretty irrelevent.
Alfred123 20:17, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
- Parodist = an editor who feigns a particular political affiliation purely to amuse themselves.
- Good luck to you, then. GHolland 20:27, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
Ah, I see, as in like a parody?
Alfred123 20:58, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
Yes. "Parodist." As in "Parody." Aren't you the clever one. AliceBG 21:04, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
Aren't you the clever one needs a question mark after it, seen as how it is a question.
Alfred123 21:10, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
I have noticed how you have failed to respond to my question posed to you on the Nelson Mandela talk page. So I assume you will not be challenging my edits on that article any longer?
Alfred123 21:12, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
Done.AliceBG 21:23, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
Can I say...
Allow me to say that I am new here, but I have in the 20 hours I've been here offered a lot of work to Conservapedia and have created two long articles, all of which were supported by references from reliable sources.
Yet a lot of people are launching vitriolic attacks against me, calling me racist and a troll. I didn't think this was the correct way of putting your views across.
I have cited sources for the things I have written in articles and you are all more than welcome to check up on those sources, they are all reliable. So why are a lot of you attacking me for simply re-iterating what another person has said?
Alfred123 11:40, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
Why do very few people on Conservapedia cite their sources? I just made an edit to the Desmond Tutu page and I was the only one to cite a source.
Alfred123 11:59, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
...and then undermined it with POV unsuitable for an encyclopedia. PeteSC 12:07, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
Excuse me? Tutu said was pleased about Whites fighting, yet he claimed to be a man of peace. Contradiction???
Alfred123 12:09, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
I notice you are studying law? I'm considering that as a career , I've been reading law books since I was 9, and find it fascinating. Although our current legal system is awash with liberalisms that need to be stamped out by a truly nationalistic government.
I know you may disagree but I think there is a call for tougher sentencing on all crimes.
Alfred123 12:13, 5 June 2008 (EDT)
Your comments about him being willing to fight whites stem from a complete misinterpretation of his statement. It is not fact, it is your point of view and as such shouldn't be allowed on the page. By all means quote him, but your interpretation of the quote shouldn't tint the entry. I don't pretend to have the authority to do anything about it, I just think it's an important thing to mention. PeteSC 06:23, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
Have you been to South Africa?
Are you a south african? have you been to South Africa? The comments you make are in extremely poor taste, incorrect and are totally inappropriate. I met a lovely (white) South african woman, have been welcomed into her family and heard their shame about being a part of that awful era. I have traveled through South Africa many times. From Jo-Burg to Cape Town and everywhere inbetween. I have spoken to blacks and whites. Been to slums and massive mansions and they all revere Mandela as a National Hero. I have been to the museums and heard the stories and you attitude would be entirely unwelcome in South Africa. And, if you were in S.Africa and you called a black man a Bantu, you would probably be beaten AdenJ 01:28, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
Hi, my interest in South Africa stems from a friend I met when I started secondary school, he was born in Bloemfontein, but his family was forced to leave in 1996 due to the fact that the ANC government was screwing everything up. I decided to research what he had said and just become more and more curious as to how a European, civilised nation could crumble under a Marxist regime so easily and in such a short period of time.
Your opinion of my comments is utterly irrelevant to anything on here, and I find your comments inappropriate, so I guess it works both ways.
There is people who revere Mandela as a hero of South Africa and a lot who hate his guts, it just depends on who you prefer, I prefer the latter group.
My attitude would be unwelcome amongst some people there yes, but a lot would agree with me. Hence the AWB growing at an unprecedented rate, why? Simply because Whites are tired of seeing South Africa ruined by an incompetant regime, with farm murders, high crime rates, AIDS, Black Economic Empowerment, governmental corruption, power failures and the list goes on.
Please don't come and tell me South Africa is some kind of paradise since Apartheid collapsed because we all, you included, know that it is a worse place than it was under Apartheid.
I dunno where you are located but on BBC 1 some months ago there was a program called No More Mandelas, and in it a Black man who was hungry and unemployed said he wanted the National Party (yes the White regime) to come back, the show's presenter said, "That was a White government that oppressed you" and the Black man replied that at least under Apartheid he could get a job and was not hungry. I rest my case.
Alfred123 05:43, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
Also your comment about a Black man would beat me if I called him a Bantu, well I don't care really, it would just be more proof of my suspicions about the Blacks. Besides making a comment like you did is akin to all these idiots on forums who say, "If you said that to my face in real life I would knock you out", which is childish and ignorant, for a start it shows they are incapable of reasoned debate.
Alfred123 05:49, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
I am in absolute agreement about the corruptness of the ANC now, I met my girl because her family moved here to get away from it! However there is no excuse for your blanket racism either. Between the white rule and when Mandela resigend there was hope. What has come to pass now is no excuse for your blanket statements. AdenJ 06:02, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
I should add, Alfred123, you have not been there. I have and one thing I can tell you is everyone is sick of the crime but, also, everyone is happy for the end of such discrimination. AdenJ 06:13, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
I don't know whether because I'm 15 you think you can speak to me like I'm a child, saying things like "no excuse for" my behaviour, please stop talking like you are my teacher, it's ridiculous. Stop trying to say what is or is not appropriate to say.
Well if the current rate of miscenegation carries on then I guess within 100 years South Africa will have no Whites, and that is the disappearance of 4 million people. As Nick Griffin, another personal hero of mine, said, "Why should the world be reduced to a monoracial coffeee coloured society"? And he was 100% right.
Maintaining boundaries between the races is not bad, it prevents the world becoming a cultureless, mono-racial place. Do you want that?
Alfred123 11:18, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
- Here you agreed with me that there is only one race, but just above you claim that there are different races. Also, you seem to overlook that God originally created mankind as a "monoracial cofeee (sic) coloured society". Genetically (perhaps that's why you should study it) Adam and Eve must have been mid-brown, and they being the only two people, it was definitely monoracial. Philip J. Rayment 11:40, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
AdenJ is trying to get me banned, which is a cowardly tactic. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alfred123 (talk)
- So how long have you studied genetics?JPohl 11:23, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
I have not studied genetics, but it does not take a geneticisit to see that absolute race mixing is wrong. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alfred123 (talk)
- Well nobody's suggesting absolute race-mixing (except for you). Also, thanks to factors such as vitamin D intake, environmental factors, sexual selection and genetic mutations, your nightmare scenario of will never come to fruition.JPohl 11:31, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
- Huh? What's wrong about "race"-mixing? We are all of one blood. Philip J. Rayment 11:40, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
Nothing on a small scale. I had a friend who was half Black half White, but it does not mean that I would do what his mother and father did.
I am not advocating some KKK-style ban on race mixing, but I am saying it should not be overly-promoted to an impressionable public, not that it is wrong on a small scale. People who love one another have the right to show that love through marraige and having children, but if everyone married someone of a different colour what would we all be?
Alfred123 11:44, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
- Better off? You really haven't explained yourself. I asked what's wrong with it, and your answer amounts to "nothing on a small scale", which leaves unanswered what's wrong with it on a large scale. Philip J. Rayment 12:16, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
Philip I agreed with you there because I was not looking for upset anybody with my, admittedly controversial, opinions, but by constantly probing me about my views you have forced them out of me, and now you all turn around and call me racist, well people asked for my opinion on things and I gave them an honest one.
Alfred123 11:46, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
Besides we could argue all day long about whether God intended for racial barriers to be maintained, we are not going to agree are we?
Alfred123 11:47, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
- I don't know. Aren't we? You're still young and probably haven't researched this much, so I'd suggest that it's premature of you to have such fixed views. Try reading this (short version) and this (long version). Philip J. Rayment 12:16, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
Explain this man
Hendrik Verwoerd. I want you to explain this man on this page for us. Karajou 03:19, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
- Explain what this man did in South Africa, and why he's a personal hero to you. Karajou 11:22, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
He is my hero because he allowed a disenfranchised people, the Bantus, to have their own countries, and he was a great humanitarian for doing this.
Alfred123 11:45, 6 June 2008 (EDT)
- That's what I thought you'd say. You're making a hero out of a racist; you're spinning his racial policies into something that seems sweet and nice; you're clouding up the racism that apartheid was and spinning it into your own stange concept. I and everyone else here is not going to tolerate racism at all; we're not going to tolerate those who defend it. Think about that fact while you're gone. Karajou 11:54, 6 June 2008 (EDT)