Brushwud, Re: "If an Ethiopian were burning Uncle Sam in effigy on CNN, I might say he was an "angry African" and I'm pretty sure I'd argue that the word "angry" isn't racist in any context."
You didn't answer my question.
I asked, "Would you call a black person an "angry African", and then argue that the word "angry" isn't racist?"
It's important to differentiate what you consider to be racist, and what the world generally accepts as being a racist comment. However much you consider Tony intolerant or Paul insane, Albert made the racist generalization of using these qualities as adjectives before the ethnicities of Italy and Germany - and then you try and defend it!
What made it even more obviously obscene is that he likened it to to the mind-set of Italy and Germany in the 1930's. Reread his post. It wouldn't break your balls to acknowledge when something has been said that's inappropriate.
All I ever hear is how bad Paul is, and how everything he says is sooo offensive. Yet at the same time, you AMDroids make mistakes, too, and then try to cover it up. You sweep it under the rug so that it's forgotten, and then point the finger back at Paul. There's no need to generalize, either. The regulars on this thread already know who the rejects are that I'm talking about.
I may be an angry geek, but I'm only that way because I have to deal with idiotic scum such as yourself.
wanna_bmw |
