Castro, we live on graduate student stipends. I'm still reeling from last week's birthday gift (an iPod, what else?) and I may end up not paying the utilities on time. I know it's hard for you to envision, but some of us live paycheck to paycheck, and dining out is a treat. Besides, I thought you would be bemoaning the capitalist system that seeks to cash-in on public sentiment, not razing me for being cheap. You bloated bourgeois sell-out, you.

Good on them.

Sour grapes, I say. Only ppl without a valentine hate Valentine's Day. <--Going to Red Lobster with baby, bought card and flowers and yes a watch

LOL@Fay, hopefully the pilot will say Caucasian instead of White... Castro, just raid their bathroom medicine cabinets, you're bound to find jars of "Diana" or hair relaxer of choice. Brandish it. If they haven't called the cops, you may have made your point. 'Course they'll never invite you to their homes again...

You're mama's so fat when she stepped on the scale it read 90210. Or alternatively, the scale read "To be Continued..."

Hello Kooleey, Originally posted by Kooleey: Calypso; Really, really believe it? Or are you saying this because your already black, have no choice in the matter, and its much better to accept than wish for something you will never get? No, I really really believe it. I can't explain how dismayed I am that you offer the other possibility. Are you suggesting that, given the choice, you'd rather be White? And that this is the norm for the Blacks you know? Which Black people do you associate with? I'm asking because when people tell me these lines of 'black is beautiful' and 'the blacker the berry, the sweeter the juice' I keep asking them questions till they admit that they'd rather be any other colour than black. I'd ask if you could be any race which one would you be, they'd say somali. Don't you wonder why no one says 'I'd love to be sudanese, or west african'. Trust me, deep down inside people are terrified of being pitch black with kinky hair. The true black look. Okay, there are a couple of issues here. One, if you ask a Black person reared in White racist America, which devalues Blacks insidiously in every possible way, whether they'd rather be Black or White, don't be surprised if they are a little confused on the subject. If I grew up in this kind of environment I would be ambivalent about my race too, especially if I did not have intelligent mentors that let me see through to what's important. But their confusion has no bearing on what I believe, which is that black is indeed beautiful. Sometimes to distraction... Another issue you've raised is the question of the "true black look". Who told you that having pitch-black skin and kinky hair is true blackness, and anything different is somehow not the genuine article? There are more variations of appearance in Africa than in any other continent, and the Somali/Ethiopean look is as authentically Black as the Sudanese/West African look. Somali isn't a race, it's a nationality, and Somalis are Black. If they weren't, they wouldn't be trying to look white by lightening their skin with hydroquinone and treating their hair with lye. As for which look one prefers, humans have a deep-seated attraction to the "mulatto" look and always pick a person of mixed racial features as being the most attractive. Few want to be at the extremes when it comes to physical appearance. That your acquaintances would rather have the Somali look is a reflection of this desire to exhibit hybrid vigor, but no doubt it's combined with an inferiority complex few are wise enough to overcome.

Hi Kooleey, Relax, this is different. Fool me once...

I love your mama jokes. Keep them coming!

Originally posted by Kooleey: quote:Originally posted by Callypso: Black is beautiful! Do you really believe that or your just repeating the line? Of course I believe it. Don't you?

Johnny, It's a new 'theory' but with the same basic age-old principles: 1)An immeasurably powerful entity/entities not only created humans, but also keeps a watchful and paternal eye on our doings. How comforting. 2) A few have been selected by the entity for personal attention (prophetic visions vs. alien abductions). 3) This personal attention, while harrowing, also elevates the fortunate few so that they feel it necessary to inform the rest of humans of their experiences and what they mean. 4) The select few offer no evidence, but what they say sounds good and reasonable (obviously humans are the most important thing in the cosmos, and obviously we are fascinating to extraterrestrial beings) so they gain followers. 5) Skeptics are hard-hearted scum of the earth with no idea what they are talking about. Interestingly enough, I read this paper in a history journal that related how, during the European settling of the Americas, white women would claim that a Red Indian warrior snuck into their bedrooms and had their way with the damsels in distress, only to disappear with the dawn. But in Dark Ages Europe, women would attribute this "experience" to succubi, sex demons mentioned in the Bible. Nowadays it's alien abductions. I find the underlying psychology far more fascinating than the culturally extant explanations. Why do people sense a presence in their bedrooms in the middle of the night, a presence that terrifies but which the sleeper feels powerless to evade? Ever had this sensation that something heavy is sitting on your torso and holding you immobile? Apparently it's very common, and those with wild imaginations may create stories around it, but the sensation is probably physiological!

Hello ThePoint, I think the point being made Kashafa is that it shouldn't be surprising that violence happened. It's wrong but not suprising given the inflamed passions and those pouring fuel on those flames. But the violence isn't surprising only if your thesis is that Muslims are to be expected to react in predictably needless violence at the drop of a hat. Exactly what those who published those editorial cartoons--and Muslim-bashers in general-- are editorializing. Muslims shouldn't internalize the perceptions of others so much, and they ought to know when they are being led by the nose.

Hello Khayr, Maala uqdaadh baa deenta kaa qaabta, laakin, ummadha Nabi Muhammmed (sallahu caliyhe wasilm) badankayna, baan kaatirsanaxey! Now, I know my grasp of af Soomali is not the best, and there may be dialect issues here, but I don't understand what the above sentence means. Often when someone is intruded upon say a mother is threatened that her 'cubs'/children might be attacked, or will be attacked or have been attacked, that mother takes on characters of a LIONESS and becomes overwhelmed with RAGE and Anger. Now if someone found out the storyline behind that mother's RAGE i.e. Children have been attacked to PISS HER OFF etc., would there be room for SYMPATHY for that mother? Khayr, are we comparing attacks on defenseless children who can actually be injured/killed, with editorial cartoons lampooning a man you believe to be far above human interactions? Are some Muslims organizing violent protests because they feel Muhammed is in immediate danger of physical harm? If not physical harm, then do the cartoons hurt his feelings? If the answer is no, then shouldn't some sort of introspection allow a Muslim (no matter how angry) to reason that there are better ways to counter these offensive cartoons than to behave even more offensively?

Originally posted by DraGon: Bank teller??? Whats that??? I do all my banking online, I get my pay direct deposit, pay my bills online and if I need cash I use ATM'S or credit cards. I was thinking the same thing, except I don't even use ATMs all that often (the local xawalad even takes credit cards!). I can't remember the last time I actually walked in to a bank. What if there's a hold-up? Or worse, a queue!?

Colored, because it's inaccurate. It means you're mulatto (mixed). Black is beautiful!

Hello Kashafa, I'm not condoning the way the protests were carried out. But they were inevitable. Basic Human Nature 101. You don't poke a lion in the eye and when he starts going after every animal in sight, say: "Gee, now why'd he do that ? That was uncalled for." Don't poke him in the eye in the first place, and if you just can't resist it, well man up and deal with the consequences. As Colin Powell said about the Iraq war: You break it, you own it. You say that the reaction to the cartoons is basic human nature, but then use an animal as a metaphor. People generally understand that there's a division between animals and humans, such that a human can curtail their reactions in response to aggravation. Not suggesting turn the other cheek or something, but how does burning embassies and killing or maiming innocents prove that Muhammed was not a terrorist? If the reaction was not intended to achieve that goal, then I can indeed see why you used an animal as a metaphor to explain Muslim sensibilities.

I wonder if the Jewish populations of Europe will burn down Muslim embassies in retaliation.

Go Steelers!!! 10 - 14 Damn Hasselbeck.

Originally posted by NGONGE: It’s possible that the paper was worried about the legality of its actions and wanted to see what such a risk would bring it. Well, judging by the reactions! The paper got world, fame, extra revenue and the more important knowledge that if it decided to do this again the Danish government is not going to prosecute. This also set a precedent for newspapers and media outlets in all of the democracies of the world to follow and act upon. So, as you can clearly see, this experiment was far from bogus. Like clockwork, some European papers have duplicated the cartoons to show solidarity. Some people never learn.

The smaller the difference the better. I tend to look at it from the long term: when you're a fit and fun-seeking 50 year old, will he be a doddering senior citizen? Men have a distressing tendency to die fast, and who wants to outlive their beloved?

It is a worrying curtailment of liberty and an ominous extension of state power. 'Nuff said.

Castro, there is a distinct whiff of intolerance nowadays, but honestly, this just does not qualify. The woman clearly had a dumb blonde moment, but just as clearly she meant no harm. The reaction she's garnered is hardly rational. The Danish newspaper's decision to offend Muslims in the worst way possible is another matter entirely. Incidentally, The Kenyan gov't recently spent £7 million (that's upwards of $12 million dollars US) by splurging on a fleet of Mercedes and SUVs. Are they having a "Let them eat cake" moment, or what?

^Atheer what's wrong with you? Pittsburgh is great! I don't live there but my best friend does, so I've visited it more than any other US city (except Minneapolis, of course). Last year I got to watch the Three Rivers Regatta, the most fun a adult can have in public fully clothed. Speaking of which, you ever try making out on a hot air balloon? It's wicked, I tell ya. I also gave a poster presentation at the University of Pittsburgh. Lovely campus! And something about the working class ethic of Pitts produces some decent and friendly folk. I've been a lukewarm Steelers fan ever since my freshman days, but this year I am going all out. Go Steelers!

Here we go Here we go Here we go Steelers, Here we go Pittsburgh's going to the Super Bowl Here we go GOOOOOO STEELERS!!!!

an offer of food aid from a New Zealand dog food manufacturer The "offer" is from a private NZ citizen, not the government. Some of you are acting like Christine Drummond = New Zealand. What gives? As for the offer itself: It's insulting, certainly, but methinks the lady doth protest too much. Drummond makes it clear that she herself eats the stuff, gross as it sounds. Are starving Africans above eating what wealthy Kiwis eat?

This is urinal stall talk?