Talk:Immortal Technique/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Misogyny

"And to the niggaz that write this website with friend requests one day and then talk shit to my staff the next day because I'm making moves and can't talk to you personally...grow up nigga. Big L said it best "You fuckin male groupie you oughta be ashamed of yourself." I only work on music, hood power moves, and Revolutionary projects with soldiers, not bitches. And I don't mean 'bitches' as in women. Because women are strong, they are beautiful, intelligent, they have carried us through all our hardships and they gave birth to Revolution. I mean bitches like ya'll niggaz ain't a men or a women, you're like the fuckin' dogs described in Qu'ran, animals that eat food off the floor and carry germs. Little Shaytan dicksucking ass niggaz. Fuck outta here. If I had the time I'd burn your mothers house down you half a fag fruit pop mandarin name droppin no talent fake fuck. I hope you talk the talk when you see me in person and don't try to get close to me trying to act like you down with this movement." - taken from http://www.immortal-technique.com/home.html

There, he actually posted that message concerning some tour he was on, I hope you dumbasses can finally get that in hip hop bitches isn't always used as an insult to women.

PS- For some reason, it wouldn't let me post this comment because it said all myspace links were blacklisted so I had to remove them, if there is a way to post comments without removing them, then I'm sorry, but I do not know how and it said I should just remove all of the links that lead to the blacklisted sites. --- Efil4tselaer (talk · contribs) 23:06, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Also I found this from the same website,

"... It is a progressive step and a life changing process that forever restructures an individual such as Malcolm-X- and founding members of the Zulu Nation. However, a Revolutionary that becomes a gangsta is usually one that has become corrupted by power. A gangsta is in the business of extortion, gambling, murder, and prostituting our greatest resource and the soul of our people, our women. ...".

He says women are our greatest resource and the soul of our people, honestly, you guys take lyrics much too seriously. --- Efil4tselaer (talk · contribs) 23:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Archived page

Moved dated discussion to archive pages.--NPswimdude500 01:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Updated Upcoming projects and events

I added that Immortal Technique will be on the Rock The Bells tour this summer. -Bruno

User: 87.186...

I do not understand why you keep reverting my edits, I added categories, fixed some links such as [[2001]] to [[2001 in music]], added a link to the theory of the controlled demolition of the WTC, and a few other things. Why do you keep reverting to an old version? What you are doing is you are trying to take possession of this article, which is wrong. You keep reverting to a previous version of the page because you don't like how the "External links" section is made. Now, to show you that there is no need for how you formatted the "External links", or that it is actually wrong, I am going to use the Dr. Dre article as an example:

• You change [http://www.viperrecords.com/ Viper Records official website] to [http://www.viperrecords.com/ viperrecords.com] Viper Records official website. What is the point of doing that? Here, look at how Dr. Dre's article links to his Aftermath Entertainment label (I am not the one that made it like that, in fact, I barely edit the article): [http://aftermath-entertainment.com/ Aftermath Entertainment website]. There, another article uses it like that, why do you keep changing it to where it says "Viper Records official website" outside those brackets?

• You change [http://www.babygrande.com/artists.jsp?artist=14 Biography of Immortal Technique at Babygrande.com] with a free MP3 download of "Bin Laden" to [http://www.babygrande.com/artists.jsp?artist=14 babygrande.com page] with free mp3 download of ''Bin Laden'' (you used to put "Bin Laden" Pt. 1, until I told you there's only "Bin Laden", and "Bin Laden (Remix)"). First of all, when I first read that, I thought it might be something like some MySpace page or something like that, like an unofficial website or whatever, but when I checked to see what it is, I saw it is just a biography of Coronel. That is why I changed it, because it describes it better, it tells you it is a biography, not just the rather vague "babygrande.com page". Also, I am telling you to write "MP3", as "MP3", not "mp3", look at the MP3 article, it writes it as "MP3" all the time, so maybe we should write it like that article does, if they wanted to write it like "mp3", we could write it like that, but since they are writing it like "MP3", then we should use it as they are using it. I for one trust that article more than I trust you.

• You change [http://not-in-our.name/redir/immortaltechnique/ Immortal Technique discography website] complete list of recordings to [http://not-in-our.name/redir/immortaltechnique/ Immortal Technique Discography Site] complete list of recordings. First, it is not "Site", it is "Website", so again you are wrong. Second, if we do not capitalize "Viper Records official website", then we do not capitalize "Immortal Technique discography website". You do not capitalize those words. See here [http://www.dubcc.com/forum/index.php?topic=30148.0/ Dr. Dre productions @ Dubcc.com], it only capitalizes his name, but not productions, so just leave it like that.

• Also, you removed all of my categories (although there are other things I can say that you removed while you reverted, this is the most important one):
  • Category:Rappers known by pseudonyms
  • Category:People from Manhattan
  • Category:Freestyle rappers
  • Category:Rappers
  • Category:Underground hip hop musicians
  • Category:Hip hop musicians

You even have the nerve to call my edits vandalism. I mean, no matter what, MY edits are not vandalism, even if I am not right and you might be right about how you write those external links, my edits are certainly not vandalism, for one, if they are wrong, you did not show me any proof, or anything, and second, I am using another article as an example, so the way I am writing it is used by other articles too. Also, you are the one who is vandalizing because you removed the categories. I suggest you stop, and stop using rude, vulgar, and insulting summaries, like when you said I'm "stupid as fuck". --- Efil4tselaer 20:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

all you do is vandalisimg the article. i wont get further into it, just one thing: its "site" not "website", are you not only retarded but also illiterate?! --87.186.33.22 13:05, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Funny, but, you are wrong, and you are the one that is illiterate, "vandalisimg"? "its"? (maybe it's) "wont"? Damn your grammar is horrid. Also no, it is not "site", where do you think you get "site"... "website" maybe? Anyway, I am not the one vandalizing, no one really cares about what you have to say since you are a pathetic vandal. You are the reason why the article has been semi-protected, I guess that means that you vandalized. You are the one that keeps vandalizing the article, not me, and now you will be blocked forever until you stop vandalizing this article. --- 74.109.26.185 00:59, 28 April 2007 (UTC)Immortal anakubalika sana bongoPlease kama atapata ujmbe huu He better hurry and visit this Third World Country.sO THat he can see a European viruses.Its Mozee of 0713970870 Tanzania

Marxist?

"Many of his views align closely with contemporary Marxism, as can be seen in the song "The Poverty of Philosophy" from Revolutionary Vol. 1." - Can someone please explain what exactly Felipe says in "The Poverty of Philosophy" that aligns him closely with contemporary Marxism. I have listened to the song and read the lyrics and I can find no connection. —User:Christopher Mann McKay 02:36, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

"The povery of philosophy" is an essay by Marx in response to Proudhon's "the philosophy of poverty". Numerous songs by tech make reference to socialism, and socialist ideals, but whether its of the marxist strain is a largely academic question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Immanuel goldstein (talk • contribs) 23:29, 12 May 2007

From what I can tell from his lyrics, he holds some socialist views favorably, but I wouldn't go so far to say his views "align closely with contemporary Marxism." There needs to be a source for this statement, else I'll reword it. —Christopher Mann McKay^{user talk} 22:16, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Marxist? HA!-FM (talk) 08:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

He talks about poor and rich. And that he doesn't follow the mass!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.28.206.189 (talk) 15:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

So? How does that make him a Marxist?-FM (talk) 21:20, 7 June 2008 (UTC)FM

Are you kidding me? What was the last non communist revolution in South/Central America? He talks about US puppet governments like they were the embodiment of all evil. He praises Che and Fidel and speaks in defense of nationalizing the industry. If you are going to deny that he is a communist, you are insane. Maybe, rather than saying that he can't be a communist because you don't like communists, you should consider the views of communism and see why he supports them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.189.133.20 (talk) 02:17, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, he could, without knowing much about his views, still be an anarchist, with a, somewhat, blinded faith in Che and Fidel. As an anarchists, I know that those people who believe that Che, Fidel and anarchism is mergeable, do exist. --194.182.175.51 (talk) 09:09, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Past Activites

Based on a song of his - Dance with the Devil: http://youtube.com/watch?v=0dRgYd5Mxs0 He claims he was part of a gang who raped and then murdered a woman. Was he just saying that for effect? 76.17.124.152 14:52, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Most likely he made it all up. Probably just to get his message across, about trying to be a thug and everything. --- Realest4Life 18:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Does he say it about himself or somebody else. Listen Listen —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.28.206.189 (talk) 15:39, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Someone else then adds that he was part of the group —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.87.172.51 (talk) 16:34, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, but I think the whole song is a symbol. The woman is Billy, a ghetto-raised child's innocence. If you look at it that way, the entire song makes sense not as an antecdote, but the cookie-cut path every gang member ultimately follows.

I went to a show recently in San Luis Obispo, and he sang that song live. At the end of the song he stated that "I get alot of questions from niggas asking me 'Is that song true?' or 'Did you really do that?' And I answer them 'Of corse its true, this type of shit happens every day, chances are its happening right now..." Not sure if this helps the credibility of his involvement or the fact that its a true story or not, but he does seem to avoid questions about his past convictions and early involvement in gangs or other criminal activities, but from what I've gathered he keeps it real and honest, so chances are its a true event. I think it should have atleast a mention in the article, but state somewhere that the credibility of the story are still unconfirmed. Aridnyk 14:31, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Who supports conspiracy theories?

I’ve edited this article. I took out references to Immortal Technique supporting and promoting "conspiracy theories". I did this because I believe the term "conspiracy" has become redundant and to accuse an artist of supporting a conspiracy theory trivializes and misrepresents his lyrics. I haven't altered, removed or added any of the content or substance of the article and my changes do not affect any other text. Don't agree? Do Agree? E-mail me I’d be happy to discuss it.

L.D. 27 July 2007 loathsomedog@yahoo.co.uk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.57.237.226 (talk • contribs)

OK, sir, please do not make any major changes without discussing first (you did it the other way around, which is still better than not discussing at all). I reverted your edits until we can reach some consensus regarding his beliefs. By the way, I'm neutral regarding this issue. --- Realest4Life 13:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

REPLY FROM L.D. I apologise, perhaps it would be better to restrict access to the editing facility? Are you an administrator for this website? If you are neutral does this mean you will not discuss the issue? If there is no objection after a certain time are my changes then incorporated into the article? L.D. 30 July 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.57.237.226 (talk • contribs)

No, I am not an administrator, yes, that means I am not going not discuss (although you are probably right), yes, if a week from now, no one objects, then you can change the article, and no, I don't think editing should be restricted. --- Realest4Life 12:01, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Suggested Article Change - Conspiracy Theory

Hello,

Firsty, thank you Realest4life for explaining how this works to me! I’d like to change this article for the following reasons…

I object to the expression “conspiracy theory” in any serious discussion because it undermines and trivializes the viewpoint of the writer. As soon as you read the word “conspiracy” you immediately think of the X-Files and promptly ignore the “theorists” point of view as insane ramblings

Also, I believe the word is used in language as a political tool to weaken radical or subversive points of view without having to respond with any logical argument. While I’m not suggesting this is the case here, I want the words removed form the article so that Wikipedia can not be accused of propagating political viewpoints

Also, I want to change the following paragraph…

[Extract from the article] “The song [Bin Laden] is controversial; it blames the Reagan Doctrine (under which the U.S. provided aid to the mujahideen in Afghanistan) and U.S. president George W. Bush for his administration's supposed involvement in the September 11, 2001 attacks (for example, the belief of a controlled demolition of the World Trade Center)”

Please read the lyrics to the song “Bin Laden” and ask yourself where this occurs. The only line I found that could cause some confusion is “Bush blew up the towers” (a sample from “Why” by Jadakiss). This lyric however is clearly a rhetorical figure of speech, a hyperbole. If you take it literally without consulting the writers actual views, you are making assumptions. Rhetoric is a literary technique; it gives artistic freedom and has been used since language began.

"Bush blew up the towers" means the same as "Bush has blood on his hands" You can not make assumptions about either statement.

The sentence in the article in brackets... “(for example, the belief of a controlled demolition of the World Trade Center)” is an assumption; and in my opinion it is a damaging one. At no point in the song does Immortal Technique suggest there was a controlled demolition of the World Trade Centre. And, as I’ve said above, the U.S. administration’s involvement in the attacks of 9/11 are suggested rhetorically, not literally.

I would welcome your comments and would ask that if no one objects I be allowed to change this article to reflect the above comments.

Regards, L.D. 7 August 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.57.237.226 (talk • contribs)

OK, well, since no one else participated in this discussion, I think you are allowed to change the page to a version that does not mention conspiracy theories. --- Realest4Life 14:12, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, it is done.

Loathsome Dog, 16 august 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.57.237.226 (talk • contribs)

All right, looks good. --- Realest4Life 14:14, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Cheers matey, I've managed to create an account now as well, I should read the whole page in future and do this thing properly ! Loathsome Dog 07:53, 17 August 2007 (UTC) 17 Aug 2007. Thank you again for your help my friend.

No problem. --- Realest4Life 14:16, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Please wake up and take it literally. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.28.206.189 (talk) 15:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I believe at one point he does say "I saw those towers come crumbling down, like they was full of explosives" ... don't remember which song though 134.197.22.10 (talk) 10:11, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Thepointofnoreturn.jpg

Image:Thepointofnoreturn.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:07, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

"Indigenous" ?

What does "of Afro-Peruvian and indigenous descent" mean? Indigenous could mean any number of backgrounds... this should be clarified. 82.108.42.66 (talk) 21:24, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

• Indigenous would mean Amerindian. So it seems he's a Zambo. Funkynusayri (talk) 21:12, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

It means one of his parents is latino and the other one is black. Or pherphaps some one in his family is black. This is very common in south america —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.74.54 (talk) 00:30, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

The Middle Passage is up for deletion

As said in the title, The upcoming IT album is up for deleteion. Let's see if we can save it. The disscussion is here Johan Rachmaninov (talk) 06:00, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

So since the article has been deleted and the discussion closed is there anything we can do to bring it back. The discussion is full of fallacy and false logic and just poor arguments such as "he could be dropped from his label." Seeing as he is VP this is impossible and even if the label were to go under he could "bootleg" with a computer for minimal cost. The idea that since it doesn't exist and it may never exist it shouldn't be represented is ridiculous since plenty of disagreeing scientific theories are on wikipedia (i.e. one has to be wrong and never has or never will exist) and haven't been deleted. As long as the article has the caveat that it is a planned album with no release date there is no issue.
Otherwise we are leaving out information on the artist. Whether he is lying or is ever going to come out with the album or not is not the issue the fact that he said he is makes it relevant information in an encyclopedia article. If someone knows how to recreate the article so it won't instantly be deleted please provide some feedback. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.235.66.52 (talk) 03:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, right now the only option is to wait and recreate the page when the album is released. you could make a different article for the album, using sources so people won't be so hasty in deleting it. Johan Rachmaninov (talk) 01:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

This page is suffering from vandalism not only has The Middle Passage been deleted but half of this page is gone only 3 weeks after the release of his new album. If thats not vandalism I don't know what is. I'm sure his discography is relevant to this page if anyone knows how to revert please do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.235.66.52 (talk) 02:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3