The jinx of the north

[Mags 112]

"locky locky".

Take your pick.

Pick the lock?

i thought about posting that but i was afraid i'd draw the ire of mags

The Ire Of Mags. I like the sound of that.

[Stabu 0]

Are there any non-white (natural) blondes?

Well it depends if you see White as a race or white as a skin color. If you see it as a race, yes, since there are Blacks with albinism. If you think of it as white as skin color I have to confess that I don't know, but probably not.

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

... associated with being almost against any group of people, even if these wouldn't be races by any means (such as say Muslims, gays, blonds or what not).

Are there any non-white (natural) blondes?

do you consider Hispanics a race? if so, then the answer is yes.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

non-white Hispanics?

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

"locky locky".

Take your pick.

Pick the lock?

i thought about posting that but i was afraid i'd draw the ire of mags

The Ire Of Mags. I like the sound of that.

like a Magic card?

Daniel

:energetic:

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Are there any non-white (natural) blondes?

Well it depends if you see White as a race or white as a skin color. If you see it as a race, yes, since there are Blacks with albinism. If you think of it as white as skin color I have to confess that I don't know, but probably not.

Were you a bit at odds with your countrymen in Finland, ideologically speaking?

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

non-white Hispanics?

I would not know.

Daniel

:energetic:

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

In any case, regarding OP, I am with Stabu on this one. I don't think history applies here. The article bases its logic on a statistical curiosity.

My money is on Hillary(dem) or Guilliani (rep)

Daniel

:energetic:

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

If Bush has any political brains left he will take care of Iran after the general election and before the next president comes into office.

Right. Like it can be "taken care of" in a less than 3 month window? I've heard something similar before somewhere. Oh yes, back around the end of 2002 / early 2003 when we geared up to take care of Iraq real quick. Few weeks. Six months tops I remember the administration saying. Last I checked - more than 4 and a half years or more than the duration of WWII later - we were still there...

Besides, Bush has no political brains left. His political brain quit, remember?

Edited September 5, 2007 by Mr. Big Dog

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

If Bush has any political brains left he will take care of Iran after the general election and before the next president comes into office.

Right. Like it can be "taken care of" in a less than 3 month window? I've heard something similar before somewhere. Oh yes, back around the end of 2002 / early 2003 when we geared up to take care of Iraq real quick. Few weeks. Six months tops I remember the administration saying. Last I checked - more than 4 and a half years or more than the duration of WWII later - we were still there...

Besides, Bush has no political brains left. His political brain quit, remember?

yeppers. The question now is how will any action or non action influences the elections.

Daniel

:energetic:

[Stabu 0]

Were you a bit at odds with your countrymen in Finland, ideologically speaking?

I'm not really sure if I understand your point, but my example of the blond hair came purely from all the blond jokes around. But yes, Finland has the most blonds in the world, between 50 and 80% have blond hair. I'm personally not a blond though. What ever I say about race has nothing to do with any neo-Nazi, far right, enviromentalist or islamist ideology (or what ever other ideologies there are which are more or less based on hate). I defend very strongly everyone's absolute rights to their life, liberty and property. This includes the right for free speach of a scientist who studies politically incorrect things such as the correlation between IQ and race, and it includes the businessman's right to fire or not hire any employees for what ever reason they see fit.

[no name 1]

In any case, regarding OP,

My money is on Hillary(dem) or Guilliani (rep)

Daniel

:energetic:

Edited September 5, 2007 by devilette

[no name 1]

double post. oopsie.

Edited September 5, 2007 by devilette

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Were you a bit at odds with your countrymen in Finland, ideologically speaking?

I'm not really sure if I understand your point, but my example of the blond hair came purely from all the blond jokes around. But yes, Finland has the most blonds in the world, between 50 and 80% have blond hair. I'm personally not a blond though. What ever I say about race has nothing to do with any neo-Nazi, far right, enviromentalist or islamist ideology (or what ever other ideologies there are which are more or less based on hate). I defend very strongly everyone's absolute rights to their life, liberty and property. This includes the right for free speach of a scientist who studies politically incorrect things such as the correlation between IQ and race, and it includes the businessman's right to fire or not hire any employees for what ever reason they see fit.

I was asking because of your very libertarian views. Coming from Finland, I'm assuming that you had always had health care, your schooling was free or mostly paid for, etc.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

(And it's not an ad hominem to point to someone's crazy views as evidence of their views being crazy. Just in case it comes up again.)

...but it is an ad hominem to point out that because of some of my (according to him objectable) views my other non-related views would be objectable on the same grounds. It's presicely an ad hominem to say "don't listen to Stabu regarding anything related to racism or raciality because he thinks that the White men produced the civilization" this is identical to the famous "don't listen to any of Nietzsche's views on religion because Nietzsche is an atheist". The argument pointed this out rather clearly (and even Number 6 admitted that his argument was an ad hominem, like it would prove anything but still).

The argument also failed to see the difference in a specific race taking credit for the rise of civilization when: (i) the peoples' back then looked rather different than people today, (iii) so-called "white civilizations" built upon advances made by previous civilizations, like the Persians and the Chinese; and (iii) taking credit for the fruits of civilization is in any way analagous to a specifically American subculture less than 200 years old.

It seems the idea is - if you perceive racism from a minority quarter it therefore it gives you the right to be 'more racist' merely to make a point of general principle. Rather immature IMO.