The nation of Islam is not Muslims. Its a cult, they believe Elijah Mohammed is a messiah whose real name is Wallace D. Fard Muhammad who faked his death and came back as Elijah Mohammed.

They believe blacks are the lost tribe of Israel. That Arabs are not true Muslims. And white race was created by Lucifer.

They also have a suicide pact as well as they are organized crime lime mafia and have performed many assassinations.

Ice they assassinated Malcolm who was "2nd" they replaced him with Louis Farrakhan who has admitted he killed Malcolm.

>> ^sepatown:

someone punch that cackler.


There always has to be one obnoxious laugh in the crowd, doesn't there?

No. I searched for it for quite a while earlier today with no luck. But there is a promo for the dvd out so I'm sure somebody will upload it eventually.>> ^JiggaJonson:

anyone got the rest of the debate?

Saul Alinsky is glowing!
Vote for BO and join the ranks of Louis Farrakhan, William Ayers, Frank Marshall Davis, and Jeremiah Wright.

This is the guy who thinks the US Constitution is defective.

Sad day for this country.

Father Michael Pfleger. This guy is a real hero in Chicago. And he frequently pisses of the local Catholic heirarchy. I believe it was another Chicago local, Louis Farrakhan, who started the whole 'goverment injecting Blacks with Aids virus' thing.

Here's some questions for both Dem frontrunners, via columnist Lawrence Elder. Why does the mainstream media focus on this fluff while issues with real impact go unaddressed?

Don't Obama supporters also deserve straight answers?

As of March 2008, kids applying for a job at Burger King have been given tougher interview questions (+ a drug test) than Clintobama.


1. Sen. Clinton, you oppose the Bush tax cuts because they unfairly benefit the rich. Since the top 1 percent of taxpayers -- those making more than $364,000 annually -- pay 39 percent of all federal income taxes, don't all across-the-board tax cuts, by definition, "unfairly" benefit the rich?

2. Sen. Obama, you also oppose Bush tax cuts, and claim that they take money away from the Treasury. But President Kennedy signed across-the-board tax cuts in the 1960s and said, "It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low -- and the soundest way to raise revenues in the long run is to cut rates now." Was he wrong?

3. Sen. Clinton, you criticize President Bush for inheriting a surplus and turning it into a deficit. The National Taxpayers Union added up your campaign promises, and they came to an increase of over $218 billion per year. What would this do to the deficit?

4. Sen. Obama, if elected, you promised to raise minimum wage every single year. But isn't it true that most economists -- 90 percent, according to one survey -- believe that raising minimum wages increases unemployment and decreases job opportunities for the most unskilled workers? What makes you right, and the majority of economists wrong?

5. Sen. Clinton, you want universal health care coverage for all Americans -- every man, woman and child. When, as First Lady, you tried to do this, 560 economists wrote President Clinton, and said, "Price controls produce shortages, black markets and reduced quality." One economist who helped gather the signatures explained, "Price controls don't control the true costs of goods. People pay in other ways." Are those 560 economists wrong?

6. Sen. Obama, you once said you understand why senators voted for the Iraq war, admitted that you were "not privy to Senate intelligence reports," that it "was a tough question and a tough call" for the senators, and that you "didn't know" how you would have voted had you been in the Senate. And over a year after the war began, you said, "There's not much of a difference between my position and George Bush's position at this stage." How, then, can you say that you consistently opposed the war from the start?

7. Sen. Clinton, you want to begin withdrawing the troops within the first 60 days of your administration, with all the troops out within a year. Former Secretary of State Jim Baker of the Baker-Hamilton report said that such a precipitous withdrawal in Iraq would create a staging ground for al-Qaida, increase the influence of Iran over Iraq, and result in "the biggest civil war you've ever seen." What would you like to say to Secretary Baker?

8. Sen. Obama, the church you attend, according to its Web site, pursues an Afrocentric agenda. Your church rejects, as part of their "Black Value System," "middleclassness" as "classic methodology" of white "captors" to "control subjugated" black "captives." Your pastor, Jeremiah Wright, recently called the Nation of Islam's Minister Louis Farrakhan -- a man many consider anti-Semitic -- a person of "integrity and honesty." What would happen to a Republican candidate who attended a Caucasian-centric church, and who praised David Duke as a man of "integrity and honesty"?

9. Sen. Clinton, you recently criticized NAFTA, the free trade agreement signed into law by President Clinton. The conservative Heritage Foundation says that NAFTA-like free trade benefits the economies of the United States, Canada and Mexico, resulting in increased trade, higher U.S. exports and improved living standards for American workers. Explain how President Clinton and the Heritage Foundation got it wrong then, but that you are right now.

10. Sen. Obama, this question is about global warming, something about which you urge extreme action to fight. You criticize President Bush for going to war in Iraq, even though all 16 intelligence agencies felt with "high confidence" that Saddam Hussein possessed stockpiles of WMDs. Critics of Bush say he "cherry-picked" the intelligence. Hundreds, if not thousands, of scientists consider concerns about global warming overblown. Isn't there far more dissent among credible scientists about global warning than there was among American intelligence analysts about Iraq? If so, as to the studies on global warming, why can't you be accused of cherry-picking?

The phrase "talking out of your arse" is not an insult. Telling a person to shove something up one's arse might be considered an insult, though. That said, I think my reply was reasonable considering your immediately preceding one-liner which was empty of any explanation.

Mink wrote: "i am just saying he wasn't attacking her femininity, he was attacking her appalling record. so there's a difference."

Wow, you're quite the contortionist! I'm impressed. He didn't say a single word about her "record". He did make a pun about her clitoris, though. Perhaps where you come from "record" has an anatomical meaning I'm not aware of.

And you still don't get it. (lol!) Let me make it even more simple for you. Choggie doesn't like Hillary Clinton's politics. (Neither do I; I think she's ridiculously dishonest, a right-wing warhawk, and shamelessly power-hungry.) Choggie, rather than criticizing her politics embarks on a very sexualized and degrading rant. That is sexism. The language was, by definition, sexist. To reconstruct here a near-perfect analogy for your benefit, imagine if I were commenting on a Louis Farrakhan sift. There are many things that disturb me about Farrakhan. I feel that he's racist, anti-semitic and disturbingly authoritarian. Now, to make the analogy, it would be deeply racist of me to attack Farrakhan's specific ethnic physical features rather than the features of his ideology that I find disturbing.

It's irrelevant whether "your girl" (omg!) feels offended by Choggie's vile comments. (She probably didn't even see them as he edited his post pretty quickly.)

Like I said earlier, I feel it's the responsibility of people to confront racism, sexism, homophobia etc., when it occurs.

Choggie has edited out the worst of the sexist language from his post before I could copy/paste it. And I disagree with your reasoning and your narrow definiton of sexism. Once again I ask you, would you claim that it was NOT racist - merely ethnic-specific - for someone to attack, say Louis Farrakhan, not for his IDEAS, but for his racially-specific features? Come on. Your rationalizing here is a load of bs.

Well they're both making principled stances here, and both have fallen into obscurity.
Vanilla Ice's 15 minutes of fame came and went, and Arsenio's principles led to his invitation of Louis Farrakhan on the show leading to his cancellation.