squirrelgrease said:

murph said:

Nah...it says alot for the fans....Actually, it's kind of hilarious...

Maybe those that find the org and it's bitter, yet hilarious members' opinions hard to take need to "bow out gracefully".

Hell, if we all did that, there wouldn't be much of the Org left...

Rorywan said:

Brain, how about you? Is that as clever a response that you can come up with? Lol. You are very entertaining.

You have posted some of the most ignorant crap on this topic that I have seen in a long time.

Apparently, you know nothing about U.S. History or African-Americans and have decided there is no reason to read some of the excellent responses to your nosense. I think you know what you use to think with and my response was not only clever but spot on.

marxisreal said:

Alamine said:

What are you talking about?

I'm talking about the idiots coming in here shitting n the legacy and value of a magazine like Ebony, but what should you expect from readers of Out magazine.

[Edited 6/6/10 10:33am]

[Edited 6/6/10 10:34am]

Eh, the values of Ebony? Well in their last issue they are celibrating the number of black CEO's in US companies. Now black capitalists can lay off black, white and latino workers alike in the current crisis. Enormous progress has been made: taking over the dominant pro-capitalist bootstrap mentality which oppresses, economically, most black people in the US.

I'm white but not gay, btw.

"I'm white but not gay, btw. "

That is exactly why you need to stay off of the topic of Ebony. You are clueless about this magazine, U.S. History as it pertains to civil rights and are so clueless that you don't think successful black CEO's should be celebrated to counter all of the negative sterotypes that are seen in mainstream media. Perhaps Ebony should have did an article showing welfare receipts, drug dealers, and crack hos. Get a fucking clue.

Seriously, some of you need to chill and stop getting pissed off because Prince agreed to be interviewed by the Ebony Magazine staff. Secondly, the man makes no bones or denial that he is part of the Black community in the interview, so should he deny every black person or agency who requests an interview from him , because some of his fans have a problem with him associating with those of his race/ethnicity or how he chooses to define himself? Why? Fact is, the man is black. He never denied it, it's many of his fans that refuse to accept his race/ethnicity for their own selfish and personal reasons.

How about focusing on him as a musican and not his race/ethncity or who he chooses to be interviewed by? How about not trying to think you can pick and choose who he should date and associate with, again, based on his race/ethnicity. He is who he is, and no one can change that.

I find it stupid that people are now complaning about a magazine's name because of the demographics whose lifestyles it focuses on and shares it with the population. Should we stop all cultural mags in circulation that choose to share the llifestyles of a particular demographic with those of its likeness or to share that info with people outside of a particular group?

The magazine does not limit itself to who can purchase it. It's available to subscribe to or purchase online, so how is it not accessible? It's specifically states it's an "international" magazine, and it is up to vendors (stores/supermarket chains/news stands, etc.) who agree to subscribe to particular magazines to make available to consumers in the areas they do business with, and that decision is mostly based on the demographics of its community. I can go to a neighborhood that has predominantly white residents, and will not find one magazine highlighting black culture/lifestyle or black celebrities, I may have an interest in reading about. Most consumers buy mags that they know may be in the interests of the demographics of the community they serve, and know will sell. We all know communities change down the road, and so it takes time for many business owners to be aware of that.

The magazine itself is not limited or should be blamed for who chooses not to subscribe or buy their product, nor should it be condemned for sharing knowledge of a particular groups' lifestyle/culture. There's nothing offensive about Ebony magazine's name because it highlights the lifestyles/cultures of a particular group.

I find it ridiculous that some fans think that Prince should limit himself to who should interview him. He's been in many magazines, some not available in specific demographics, but don't blame artists for that, they're not responsible for which vendors choose not to supply specific magazines within their community for their consumers. Not every vendor, in every community have a supply of all every magazine circulated around the world on their shelves, which is why many magazines now make their product available online as well. So don't be mad at Prince for accepting the invitation for Ebony magazine to interview him. Speak with your community vendor about supplyiing the mag if you really have an interest in it, as many did not before you found out Prince was going to be in it. Nothing wrong with that, to each their own.

I think people forget that they don't "own" Prince and have absolutely no right to tell him how he should live his life and who he should speak to or associate with. If you like the interview, then fine, if not, well then that is your personal choice. Life moves on.

[Edited 6/6/10 11:24am]

Nevermind. Off topic.

[Edited 6/6/10 11:25am]

laurarichardson said:

marxisreal said:

Eh, the values of Ebony? Well in their last issue they are celibrating the number of black CEO's in US companies. Now black capitalists can lay off black, white and latino workers alike in the current crisis. Enormous progress has been made: taking over the dominant pro-capitalist bootstrap mentality which oppresses, economically, most black people in the US.

I'm white but not gay, btw.

"I'm white but not gay, btw. "

That is exactly why you need to stay off of the topic of Ebony. You are clueless about this magazine, U.S. History as it pertains to civil rights and are so clueless that you don't think successful black CEO's should be celebrated to counter all of the negative sterotypes that are seen in mainstream media. Perhaps Ebony should have did an article showing welfare receipts, drug dealers, and crack hos. Get a fucking clue.

what about the white staff at ebony ?

lol i kid i kid

but i understand where your coming from

ebony is a plays a important role in the black community and history

everybody think about it like this

Aside from the black Magazines, who would have reported on these successful black people back in 1945?

Rorywan said:

Brain, how about you? Is that as clever a response that you can come up with? Lol. You are very entertaining.

Rory for some reason I'm getting the impression from your posts that you're more angry at Prince agreeing to do an interview with a black-owned publication, moreso than being angry at the name of the mag. But get this, Prince pretty much includes himself as being part of the Black population during the interview, so what's the problem? Ebony committed no crime and neither did Prince in sharing an interview for the general public to read. Now do you think you can focus more on Prince the musician and his 30-year plus career as a muscian, than worry yourself about the race of any individual or the name of a publication, who chooses to interview Prince?

[Edited 6/6/10 11:36am]

laurarichardson said:

FonkAy said:

Was havin a really down day (year even)....

....Then I found the magazine in the store !!!! It was a nice little sign from up above 2 sho that things R gonna get better.... Nd I really need it 2....

THANK GOD !!!! (We kno who/what we're talkin about hear.... right?)

It was a nice read with some good laughs....

Thank U

it's sure is

[Edited 6/6/10 11:39am]

PicklesMcMillan said:

laurarichardson said:

"I'm white but not gay, btw. "

That is exactly why you need to stay off of the topic of Ebony. You are clueless about this magazine, U.S. History as it pertains to civil rights and are so clueless that you don't think successful black CEO's should be celebrated to counter all of the negative sterotypes that are seen in mainstream media. Perhaps Ebony should have did an article showing welfare receipts, drug dealers, and crack hos. Get a fucking clue.

what about the white staff at ebony ?

lol i kid i kid

but i understand where your coming from

ebony is a plays a important role in the black community and history

everybody think about it like this

Aside from the black Magazines, who would have reported on these successful black people back in 1945?

Black writers are employed at magazines that have no stories on blacks as well. So I don't know why some folks are having issues with Ebony's name and articles written on black lifestyles, culture, history, entertainment and culture. I mean since when does black people have to raise their hands and get permission to share stories about the culture/lifestyles, etc., of the black community? Last time I checked outside my door, I didn't see a sign that said "Plantation South".

This is all so silly people arguing over the name of a magazine that brings no harm to anyone and has existed for more than 40 years.

[Edited 6/6/10 11:42am]

[Edited 6/6/10 11:43am]

2elijah said:

PicklesMcMillan said:

what about the white staff at ebony ?

lol i kid i kid

but i understand where your coming from

ebony is a plays a important role in the black community and history

everybody think about it like this

Aside from the black Magazines, who would have reported on these successful black people back in 1945?

Black writers are employed at magazines that have no stories on blacks as well. So I don't know why some folks are having issues with Ebony's name and articles written on black lifestyles, culture, history, entertainment and culture. I mean since when does black people have to raise their hands and get permission to share stories about the culture/lifestyles, etc., of the black community? Last time I checked outside my door, I didn't see a sign that said "Plantation South".

This is all so silly people arguing over the name of a magazine that brings no harm to anyone and has existed for more than 40 years.

[Edited 6/6/10 11:42am]

[Edited 6/6/10 11:43am]

it really is silly because were so off the original topic i thought this was about princi-pal

[Edited 6/6/10 12:20pm]

2elijah said:

Seriously, some of you need to chill and stop getting pissed off because Prince agreed to be interviewed by the Ebony Magazine staff. Secondly, the man makes no bones or denial that he is part of the Black community in the interview, so should he deny every black person or agency who requests an interview from him , because some of his fans have a problem with him associating with those of his race/ethnicity or how he chooses to define himself? Why? Fact is, the man is black. He never denied it, it's many of his fans that refuse to accept his race/ethnicity for their own selfish and personal reasons.

How about focusing on him as a musican and not his race/ethncity or who he chooses to be interviewed by? How about not trying to think you can pick and choose who he should date and associate with, again, based on his race/ethnicity. He is who he is, and no one can change that.

I find it stupid that people are now complaning about a magazine's name because of the demographics whose lifestyles it focuses on and shares it with the population. Should we stop all cultural mags in circulation that choose to share the llifestyles of a particular demographic with those of its likeness or to share that info with people outside of a particular group?

The magazine does not limit itself to who can purchase it. It's available to subscribe to or purchase online, so how is it not accessible? It's specifically states it's an "international" magazine, and it is up to vendors (stores/supermarket chains/news stands, etc.) who agree to subscribe to particular magazines to make available to consumers in the areas they do business with, and that decision is mostly based on the demographics of its community. I can go to a neighborhood that has predominantly white residents, and will not find one magazine highlighting black culture/lifestyle or black celebrities, I may have an interest in reading about. Most consumers buy mags that they know may be in the interests of the demographics of the community they serve, and know will sell. We all know communities change down the road, and so it takes time for many business owners to be aware of that.

The magazine itself is not limited or should be blamed for who chooses not to subscribe or buy their product, nor should it be condemned for sharing knowledge of a particular groups' lifestyle/culture. There's nothing offensive about Ebony magazine's name because it highlights the lifestyles/cultures of a particular group.

I find it ridiculous that some fans think that Prince should limit himself to who should interview him. He's been in many magazines, some not available in specific demographics, but don't blame artists for that, they're not responsible for which vendors choose not to supply specific magazines within their community for their consumers. Not every vendor, in every community have a supply of all every magazine circulated around the world on their shelves, which is why many magazines now make their product available online as well. So don't be mad at Prince for accepting the invitation for Ebony magazine to interview him. Speak with your community vendor about supplyiing the mag if you really have an interest in it, as many did not before you found out Prince was going to be in it. Nothing wrong with that, to each their own.

I think people forget that they don't "own" Prince and have absolutely no right to tell him how he should live his life and who he should speak to or associate with. If you like the interview, then fine, if not, well then that is your personal choice. Life moves on.

[Edited 6/6/10 11:24am]

You got a point there because if you don't know a person you don't know what they struggle against.

You're right Prince is his own person , and no one should "own' him. who he should speak to or associate with. quote 2elijah If you like the interview, then fine, if not, well then that is your personal choice.

Is long prince is a star you are going to have some in his life look at this your statement condictradict yourself. Because we are on a fansite

jeez

how about somebody actually giving us a gist of content-anything new-anything at all?????????

instead of this...

rubbish:-o

[img:$uid]http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n276/squirrelgrease/AnimatedGifs-3/BillyHeadshake.gif[/img:$uid]

polkadotbliss said:

jeez

how about somebody actually giving us a gist of content-anything new-anything at all?????????

instead of this...

rubbish:-o

No NOTHING new. Talks about his religion mostly.

thankyou

polkadotbliss said:

thankyou

He does perfom a new song for the Ebony staff called (Stand up & B strong).

Disorder said:

squirrelgrease said:

[img:$uid]http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n276/squirrelgrease/AnimatedGifs-3/BillyHeadshake.gif[/img:$uid]

Seriously smh @ this topic, how did it get like this because it's in EBONY? Wow.

squirrelgrease said:

[img:$uid]http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n276/squirrelgrease/AnimatedGifs-3/BillyHeadshake.gif[/img:$uid]

Squirrel, ur hilarious u've made me laugh a few times already today with ur craziness amongst all the depressing crap on here u really make this org a brighter place!

laurarichardson said:

marxisreal said:

Eh, the values of Ebony? Well in their last issue they are celibrating the number of black CEO's in US companies. Now black capitalists can lay off black, white and latino workers alike in the current crisis. Enormous progress has been made: taking over the dominant pro-capitalist bootstrap mentality which oppresses, economically, most black people in the US.

I'm white but not gay, btw.

"I'm white but not gay, btw. "

That is exactly why you need to stay off of the topic of Ebony. You are clueless about this magazine, U.S. History as it pertains to civil rights and are so clueless that you don't think successful black CEO's should be celebrated to counter all of the negative sterotypes that are seen in mainstream media. Perhaps Ebony should have did an article showing welfare receipts, drug dealers, and crack hos. Get a fucking clue.

I'm not saying Ebony doesn't have interesting historical articles about the emancipation movement or interesting stories about black people doing well in American society. I'm saying I don't agree with their general approach and philosophy. That is: the idea of self advancement through individual determination, as in the case of holding up "black CEO's" as a model, not through class action of black workers together with working people of all "races" (I think self organisation of an oppressed people is good btw, if it's also based on seeking solidarity with other working class people in order to change the system). Some feminists in the UK maybe thought Margaret Thatcher was a good role model for women "making it" in society, but her policies were an unmitigated social disaster for most working class women in the UK.

The same goes for these black CEO's and the whole philosophy behind it: as if there are not structural factors holding back the economic advancement of most black people in the US, in the most serious economic crisis since the 1930's. An honest assessment of the roots of these degrading social conditions would show that the problems are systemic. But as I said, this doesn't seem to be the approach of Ebony. So yes, I lean more towards the Black Panther way of analysing things - they had a class ideology - than the Ebony/Bill Cosby way of "individual self emancipation" which is unfortunately, consciously or unconsciously, a ruling elite ideology.

So where Ebony points to or celibrates the need for collective struggle, I think this is a positive element, but mixing it up with a capitalist bootstrap ideology in crisis is, imo, self defeating for most black people in the US.

marxisreal said:

laurarichardson said:

"I'm white but not gay, btw. "

That is exactly why you need to stay off of the topic of Ebony. You are clueless about this magazine, U.S. History as it pertains to civil rights and are so clueless that you don't think successful black CEO's should be celebrated to counter all of the negative sterotypes that are seen in mainstream media. Perhaps Ebony should have did an article showing welfare receipts, drug dealers, and crack hos. Get a fucking clue.

I'm not saying Ebony doesn't have interesting historical articles about the emancipation movement or interesting stories about black people doing well in American society. I'm saying I don't agree with their general approach and philosophy. That is: the idea of self advancement through individual determination, as in the case of holding up "black CEO's" as a model, not through class action of black workers together with working people of all "races" (I think self organisation of an oppressed people is good btw, if it's also based on seeking solidarity with other working class people in order to change the system). Some feminists in the UK maybe thought Margaret Thatcher was a good role model for women "making it" in society, but her policies were an unmitigated social disaster for most working class women in the UK.

The same goes for these black CEO's and the whole philosophy behind it: as if there are not structural factors holding back the economic advancement of most black people in the US, in the most serious economic crisis since the 1930's. An honest assessment of the roots of these degrading social conditions would show that the problems are systemic. But as I said, this doesn't seem to be the approach of Ebony. So yes, I lean more towards the Black Panther way of analysing things - they had a class ideology - than the Ebony/Bill Cosby way of "individual self emancipation" which is unfortunately, consciously or unconsciously, a ruling elite ideology.

So where Ebony points to or celibrates the need for collective struggle, I think this is a positive element, but mixing it up with a capitalist bootstrap ideology in crisis is, imo, self defeating for most black people in the US.

Not really. marxisreal, but I see your point somewhat. But, seeing how Blacks, as a whole, and coming from various ethnic/cultural groups, blended together in the U.S., and are all individuals with their own opinions, lifestyles, cultures, religious/non-religious beliefs, I doubt any magazine, whether it's Ebony or Essence that writes, showcase or promote the type of ideology you speak of, will have a "sefl-defeating" effect on Blacks as a whole. What may be of interest to one, will not affect/effect another the same way.

Since we're individuals, we all see the world and live in it as individuals, living in various/social/economic situations, and having different political opinions regarding what we feel is best for us as a people, on a general basis. As you mentioned the ideology of the Black Panthers whereas individuals like Bill Cosby may have a totally different opinion about the social/economic conditions of Blacks in America. Ebony is not the bible for the entire Black population nor is one particular, African-American's opinion the end-all, be all for the voice of all Blacks in America. We've come this far as a people, still a lot of work to be done, and as a whole, we're not at the end of our road yet.

Anyway, getting back on topic....who would have thought Prince giving an interview in Ebony magazine would cause all these emotions in this thread to arise? Geez.

[Edited 6/6/10 13:36pm]

2elijah said:

Seriously, some of you need to chill and stop getting pissed off because Prince agreed to be interviewed by the Ebony Magazine staff. Secondly, the man makes no bones or denial that he is part of the Black community in the interview, so should he deny every black person or agency who requests an interview from him , because some of his fans have a problem with him associating with those of his race/ethnicity or how he chooses to define himself? Why? Fact is, the man is black. He never denied it, it's many of his fans that refuse to accept his race/ethnicity for their own selfish and personal reasons.

How about focusing on him as a musican and not his race/ethncity or who he chooses to be interviewed by? How about not trying to think you can pick and choose who he should date and associate with, again, based on his race/ethnicity. He is who he is, and no one can change that.

I find it stupid that people are now complaning about a magazine's name because of the demographics whose lifestyles it focuses on and shares it with the population. Should we stop all cultural mags in circulation that choose to share the llifestyles of a particular demographic with those of its likeness or to share that info with people outside of a particular group?

The magazine does not limit itself to who can purchase it. It's available to subscribe to or purchase online, so how is it not accessible? It's specifically states it's an "international" magazine, and it is up to vendors (stores/supermarket chains/news stands, etc.) who agree to subscribe to particular magazines to make available to consumers in the areas they do business with, and that decision is mostly based on the demographics of its community. I can go to a neighborhood that has predominantly white residents, and will not find one magazine highlighting black culture/lifestyle or black celebrities, I may have an interest in reading about. Most consumers buy mags that they know may be in the interests of the demographics of the community they serve, and know will sell. We all know communities change down the road, and so it takes time for many business owners to be aware of that.

The magazine itself is not limited or should be blamed for who chooses not to subscribe or buy their product, nor should it be condemned for sharing knowledge of a particular groups' lifestyle/culture. There's nothing offensive about Ebony magazine's name because it highlights the lifestyles/cultures of a particular group.

I find it ridiculous that some fans think that Prince should limit himself to who should interview him. He's been in many magazines, some not available in specific demographics, but don't blame artists for that, they're not responsible for which vendors choose not to supply specific magazines within their community for their consumers. Not every vendor, in every community have a supply of all every magazine circulated around the world on their shelves, which is why many magazines now make their product available online as well. So don't be mad at Prince for accepting the invitation for Ebony magazine to interview him. Speak with your community vendor about supplyiing the mag if you really have an interest in it, as many did not before you found out Prince was going to be in it. Nothing wrong with that, to each their own.

I think people forget that they don't "own" Prince and have absolutely no right to tell him how he should live his life and who he should speak to or associate with. If you like the interview, then fine, if not, well then that is your personal choice. Life moves on.

[Edited 6/6/10 11:24am]

Indeed, you're right. Strange you have to argue that point.

marxisreal said:

laurarichardson said:

"I'm white but not gay, btw. "

That is exactly why you need to stay off of the topic of Ebony. You are clueless about this magazine, U.S. History as it pertains to civil rights and are so clueless that you don't think successful black CEO's should be celebrated to counter all of the negative sterotypes that are seen in mainstream media. Perhaps Ebony should have did an article showing welfare receipts, drug dealers, and crack hos. Get a fucking clue.

I'm not saying Ebony doesn't have interesting historical articles about the emancipation movement or interesting stories about black people doing well in American society. I'm saying I don't agree with their general approach and philosophy. That is: the idea of self advancement through individual determination, as in the case of holding up "black CEO's" as a model, not through class action of black workers together with working people of all "races" (I think self organisation of an oppressed people is good btw, if it's also based on seeking solidarity with other working class people in order to change the system). Some feminists in the UK maybe thought Margaret Thatcher was a good role model for women "making it" in society, but her policies were an unmitigated social disaster for most working class women in the UK.

The same goes for these black CEO's and the whole philosophy behind it: as if there are not structural factors holding back the economic advancement of most black people in the US, in the most serious economic crisis since the 1930's. An honest assessment of the roots of these degrading social conditions would show that the problems are systemic. But as I said, this doesn't seem to be the approach of Ebony. So yes, I lean more towards the Black Panther way of analysing things - they had a class ideology - than the Ebony/Bill Cosby way of "individual self emancipation" which is unfortunately, consciously or unconsciously, a ruling elite ideology.

So where Ebony points to or celibrates the need for collective struggle, I think this is a positive element, but mixing it up with a capitalist bootstrap ideology in crisis is, imo, self defeating for most black people in the US.

I agree with alot of your points and I think Ebony does insult the intelligence of people looking for more challenging or left-of-center viewpoints. But Ebony is not competing with the Black Panthers or Time magazine for that matter. They are trying to stay alive in a market dominated by People, InStyle and Us magazines. As a person of color, I too bemoan the lack of intellectual diversity in the media and specifically in the black media. But the truth is, as a minority demographic, the appeal to the broad and base concerns (i.e. Tyler Perry, BET, Oprah, Tom Joyner) are a successful economic model. Ebony does not have the luxury of tailoring their reach to a niche market.

And remember, the Black Panthers ended by cannibalizing themselves with internal backbiting, outdated philosophies and esposing the same institutional sexism and xenophobic views of the power structure.

But I sympathize with your viewpoint and wish there more mult-media outlets for truly independent voices from the many diverse views of African-Americans. Where is our Sundance Channel, Independent cinema, and alt culture space?

2elijah said:

marxisreal said:

I'm not saying Ebony doesn't have interesting historical articles about the emancipation movement or interesting stories about black people doing well in American society. I'm saying I don't agree with their general approach and philosophy. That is: the idea of self advancement through individual determination, as in the case of holding up "black CEO's" as a model, not through class action of black workers together with working people of all "races" (I think self organisation of an oppressed people is good btw, if it's also based on seeking solidarity with other working class people in order to change the system). Some feminists in the UK maybe thought Margaret Thatcher was a good role model for women "making it" in society, but her policies were an unmitigated social disaster for most working class women in the UK.

The same goes for these black CEO's and the whole philosophy behind it: as if there are not structural factors holding back the economic advancement of most black people in the US, in the most serious economic crisis since the 1930's. An honest assessment of the roots of these degrading social conditions would show that the problems are systemic. But as I said, this doesn't seem to be the approach of Ebony. So yes, I lean more towards the Black Panther way of analysing things - they had a class ideology - than the Ebony/Bill Cosby way of "individual self emancipation" which is unfortunately, consciously or unconsciously, a ruling elite ideology.

So where Ebony points to or celibrates the need for collective struggle, I think this is a positive element, but mixing it up with a capitalist bootstrap ideology in crisis is, imo, self defeating for most black people in the US.

Not really. marxisreal, but I see your point somewhat. But, seeing how Blacks, as a whole, and coming from various ethnic/cultural groups, blended together in the U.S., and are all individuals with their own opinions, lifestyles, cultures, religious/non-religious beliefs, I doubt any magazine, whether it's Ebony or Essence that writes, showcase or promote the type of ideology you speak of, will have a "sefl-defeating" effect on Blacks as a whole. What may be of interest to one, will not affect/effect another the same way.

Since we're individuals, we all see the world and live in it as individuals, living in various/social/economic situations, and having different political opinions regarding what we feel is best for us as a people, on a general basis. As you mentioned the ideology of the Black Panthers whereas individuals like Bill Cosby may have a totally different opinion about the social/economic conditions of Blacks in America. Ebony is not the bible for the entire Black population nor is one particular, African-American's opinion the end-all, be all for the voice of all Blacks in America. We've come this far as a people, still a lot of work to be done, and as a whole, we're not at the end of our road yet.

Anyway, getting back on topic....who would have thought Prince giving an interview in Ebony magazine would cause all these emotions in this thread to arise? Geez.

[Edited 6/6/10 13:36pm]

I'm just waiting for this bad boy to get moved to Politics&Religion, where it belongs. The last 5 pages of discussion are on the essence of Ebony, (pun intended) and not one gushing, fawning, over exaggerated review of what Prince actually had to say in the article?

This thread should have been moved!

.

[Edited 6/6/10 14:21pm]

Giovanni777 said:

...and through the cluttered chatter of chit-chat and banter, a Voice of Reason came and penetrated hard... asking simply: Is it possible or even plausible that those within this thread that have the magazine could elaborate on what they have read? Peace?

What were some quotes from the article about his beliefs?