ctembreull

Sure. Would you like some statistical breakdowns on the ratios of Arabs to Jews? Your sidestepping aside, you have advocated a clearly racist position, namely the depopulation of a certain region upon the basis of an unprovable assertion linked to race. Look at it this way: Your statement is by far more demonstrably racist than anything Cruz Bustamante has ever said, done, or probably even thought. Frankly, I don't care if you don't like it, sixate, because from what I see reading you, you're not one to admit a truth that clashes with your inch-wide worldview, even if it's sitting right in front of your nose. I'll wager that I'm conversant with quite a few more languages than you. But that's another issue, innit? Fact is, that your "language" is apparently spoken only in another dimension of reality inhabited only by you. That's nice, dear. Now prove that every Arab supports terrorist behavior. You said it, now back it up. Ah, you can't prove it. Even better, you've admitted that you are willing to commit genocide in order to eliminate a political stance that you disapprove of, regardless of how many innocents get swept up in your great pogrom. It's another word for what you're advocating. Sorry if you don't like it, but it certainly shouldn't pose a problem for someone who thinks it's okay to kill a billion or so people just to get at a few terrorists, now, should it? I don't understand why you're so squeamish here. Your position is ethically comparable to Streicher's (and his compatriots'). But you deny the similarity and quibble over what words we should use to describe your efforts in the direction of global population reduction. Why so touchy over words? You've already proposed cleansing the Middle East, why should you care how it's described back to you? Speaking of remote emplacement of polysyllabic language constructs... You know, if Bustamante had actually said it and then refused to apologize for it, along the lines of Trent Lott last year, or you just a month or so ago, then I might even agree with you. But the fact is that he spent several weeks moving around the state apologizing personally to everyone who expressed offense. He responded as someone who was ashamed of himself for making the mistake he did. If he hadn't done all that, then I might concede your point. But he did. And you know what? Once he'd done that, pretty much everyone involved or within earshot (short of maybe Fox News, whose objectivity is highly suspect) forgave him, accepted that he is not a racist, and moved on. In fact, he won reelection to the Lieutenant Governorship last year with what was estimated as an overwhelming majority of the black vote. So maybe instead of listening to me, you should pay attention to California voters. We don't forget slights. But they - we - forgave Bustamante. What does this tell you? Ooooh, look, physical intimidation! Yes, in fact, yes I would talk precisely the same way if I were standing in front of you. The base fact is that I really didn't wanna check the thread later on and see that a mod had had at my post with the snippers. But to believe that I wouldn't think what I think or say what I say if I were standing in front of you is just about the height of arrogance. Seriously, get over yourself. Sure. You want to hold an opinion that runs counter to an overwhelming preponderance of evidence, you just go ahead and do that. Just don't expect me to stand back here and let you get away with stating that opinion as a fact: Have a nice day.

__________________
Mac
"If it's nae Scottish, it's crap!