Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: long-gone who wrote (89654)	9/16/2002 11:46:52 AM
From: Richnorth	Respond to of 116779

>>Really, there was an entire compnay of Turkish Americans which fought in the Civil War so don't give me that tripe about "Moslems came here much later".<< The Civil War began in 1861. Whereas the U.S. began to be actively populated by Europeans ever since 1620 or thereabouts. Some of course will argue that it was earlier than that. To be sure, the Turks did not come to these shores as early as, or in about comparable numbers, as the Europeans did. Up to the time of the Civil War, the population of America was essentially homogeneous. It was after the Civil War that torrents of people of all descriptions came to make the population a heterogeneous one. In fact, it was recorded at that time: "Out of 1000 Americans, 435 were native-born whites of native parentage, 292 native-born whites of foreign or mixed parentage, 144 foreign born whites, 127 negroes; one Indian and one Chinaman rounded the number." And that was what I meant. (By the way, though Turkey is in the Middle East region, the Turks have always been more "European" in the outlook and more acceptable to Westerners than their Arab neighbors, in spite of their religion.) Remember Aria??? <ggg> I am still right in saying that Sept. 11 is linked with Christian-Moslem confrontations through the ages........... It goes without saying that in any confrontation each side strives to be the victor and remain supreme. It may well be the case that Chretien was indirectly attempting to placate the extremist Moslems. But, as always, whenever a person happens to be a leader or in some prominent position, motives are more often than not associated with his/her remarks. However, what he said has a historical ring of truth and there lies the rub.