Re: [SG] Islamic Bombers

Of course, you are right.  It was not literally racist.

It was just a narrow-minded and extremely ignorant statement.  I stand 
corrected.

Scott

>From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
>To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
>Subject: Re: [SG] Islamic Bombers
>Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 14:53:33 -0800 (PST)
>
>
>--- Scott Clinton <grumbling_grognard@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
> > >>	Besides, that last sentence only makes sense if
> > your
> > culture places value on human life.  We're talking
> > about Muslims, so that's not a factor.
> >
> >
> > Ah for God's sake!!
> >
> > Lets NOT go here.  These sorts of ignorant, racist
> > statement needs to be
> > keep off list <period>
>
>Point of Fact:
>
>Islam is a religion.
>
>Arabic is an ethnicity.
>
>Semetic is a race.
>
>At no point have I made a statement about "Semetic"
>peoples because there are very few statements that
>apply to even a majority of them.
>
>I have made impolite statements about Arabs in
>general.  There's a lot to say on that subject--with
>the caveat that I have met more than a few who are
>Antiochian Orthodox Christians who are good people who
>I like.
>
>However, a statement about Islam and it's warping
>effects on it's followers is not racist.  There are
>Muslims of every racial category.  To include John
>Walker, who is (near as I can tell) another Northern
>European-descended American like myself.
>
>And he is anathema to me, just as is Mohammad and all
>his other followers.
>
>John
>
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions!
>http://auctions.yahoo.com

_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.