<B>shanna: how many scotches would you order if you climbed on board a plane tomorrow and saw half a dozen or so Middle Easterners seated throughout the plane?! </B> Better yet, a greater percentage of white people in the US are murderers than Middle Easterners are terrorists. Maybe you <I>should</I> be wary of all white people.
Ummm, none. I don't have a psychotic fear of Middle Easterners. The fact that people do is quite disturbing to me. I think it is less psychotic fear and more an opportunity. How often do you get to be both racist and patriotic at the same time?
Actually, I wouldn't want to see a big group of men huddled together in first class anyway. You <b>know</b> a big group of rich men like that have to be up to no good. Funny how some of you turned the original statement of 'no Arabs on the plane' to 'a big group of Middle Easterners huddled together in first class'. Is there really that much of a need to find a way to justify such a statement?
In this case, it has a negative connotation. Sometimes negative stereotypes lead to racism. What Groh said was a sterotype, and I feel it is very negative. Even though his comment wasn't racist per se, it certainly was negative. I feel it was inappropriate, but maybe I'm being a little too PC.
I know. And I'm glad he did. Just angry that thoughts like that actively roam many people's mind...All the time.
This would be a pretty nice world to live in if that was as dark as mens thoughts became. It was a slip of the tounge in a very emotional time for everyone,nothing more.
Space Ghost, Ummm, it is racial stereotyping, and that is a form of racism. Had he said that there wouldn't be any Muslims on the plane, then it wouldn't be "racism", it would've been religious bigotry. But, since he singled out a race, what else can you friggin' call it? ---------------------------- 4chuckie, "Thinking" and "saying" are two different things. When you "think" something, it doesn't affect those around you. When you "say" something, people hear it and are affected by it, and the person who spoke must take responsibility for what they have forced someone else to hear. Also, we as humans tend to categorize things. It's just how we think. When someone sees a young black man dressed in today's fashionable hiphop clothes, one might wonder if he is a member of a gang. I might, you might, black people might, white people might. But, the racism and bigotry is determined on how you react to those circumstances. Another major part of racism is what you think of a certain group (race) of people. If you think they are dirtier, dumber, smarter (and envious of that belief), fatter, uglier, etc., if you apply those images to all or most or even some of that certain group of people then you are racist. --------------------------- RichRocket, NO, that's not what he said at all. He said that since there weren't going to be any Arabs on the flight then they shouldn't worry about a hijacking. He implied that if there were going to be a hijacking that it would be committed by Arabs and if there were Arabs on the flight, then there was a risk of a hijacking. How, can you people defend IDIOTIC statements like this? It truly sickens me. --------------------------- DAROckets, If you people want to defend him and not come off like Grand Dragons of the KKK, then you can say is, "He apologized. It was inappropriate.". How hard is that? So, lemme see, the next time a black man rapes the wife of a white man, will it be "okay" in that very emotional time for him to call the rapist a nigg*r? No, it won't. And, this coach's comments were way out of line. I haven't said he should get the damn gas chamber, but give me a freakin' break. Let him take responsibility for what he said. He said it. He apologized. Let him take the public condemnation that comes along with racial epitaphs. Those who are defending his words are really really starting to irritate me.
There is a report on MSNBC television that passengers on a plane leaving Salt Lake City refused to allow the plane to leave because there were three Arabic men sitting together on board the flight. Apparently the men agreed to leave the plane and take another flight.
This wasn't a slip of the tongue, except in the sense that he probably regrets saying it on national tv. Slips of the tongue happen when two words are similar. Last I checked, "hijacker" and "arab" aren't too close. No, this was the worst kind of racial stereotyping. He should be fired. Remember when Jimmy the Greek got fired for saying that blacks played football well because they were bred for it? Well, this is worse. Jimmy's comment betrayed a stereotype of blacks... but at least it didn't portray them as evil bastards. This did.
DAROckets, Very well thought out response, but you failed to answer my question. So, lemme see, the next time a black man rapes the wife of a white man, will it be "okay" in that very emotional time for him to call the rapist a nigg*r?
The fact of the matter is, the recent attacks were the reason for increased concern about hi-jacking. Those attacks were said to have been carried out by members of an Arab terrorist group. It stands to reason that while not all Arabs are hi-jackers, as far as the comman man is concerned, based on the recent tragedy, hi-jackers seem to all be Arabs. Now this is not really the case, but only Arab hi-jackers would seem to be more of a danger now than before the attack. Groh may not have put that much thought into this and could have been making a blanket statement that all Arabs are terrorists, in his view, but there is a way to view his statement as logical.
I can't believe that with all that is happening,this topic is getting so much action. It was late and I was ready for bed Where did I ever say,what the coach said was ok ?? The comparison doesn't fit.He didn't use a racial slur,he just said arab.
Not really, since there's nothing logically barring a non-Arab from hijacking a plane. That rules out deductive logic. And since the percentage of hijackers among Arabs is astronomically small, that means that an inductive syllogism would be fantastically weak. It's not logical... if you meant more undertandable, well, perhaps you're right. But it's still just the type of thought that needs to be avoided.
Racial stereotyping is not always bad. Let's look at politics for example. If I assume that a black person is going to vote Democratic, is that racist? Of course not--blacks vote 90+% for Democrats. It's an educated guess that is backed up with facts. As for the original quote...there was no hatred in it in my opinion, although since I didn't actually hear or see the man speak, I can't be sure of that. Now I myself would never say such a thing, and I would be quick to correct anyone around me that did--however, are there facts to support his assumption about the probability of a plane being hijacked today by a person of non-Arabic descent? That's a legitimate question. If we're going to practice "moral relativism", we need to recognize that the majority of Americans feel the same way as the person who made this statement. So many people want to "understand the enemy", however they don't seem to want to understand American citizens.
The Department of Education is coming out with a new aptitude test for high school seniors. It has a series of five questions written in this form: "If you were being interviewed on television or for a newspaper article, which of the following things would you avoid saying?" For each question, the list of options looks basically like this, with variations: a) It was a tough loss, but we're walking out of here with our heads held high. b) I thought our defense was the difference in the game. c) We're not taking anything for granted. We're just going to enjoy this one for the next 48 hours. d) Every time we play these guys in their house, it's a war. e) Next time that hook-nosed towelhead quarterback tries throwing a bomb on us, we're gonna knock him right off his camel. If you get more than 3 out of 5 answers wrong, the guidance counselor advises you to become a college football coach.
