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.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (94406)	4/17/2003 11:17:06 PM
From: kumar	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

For purposes of discussion, let's reduce the LA riots to a race conflict, white people and black people fighting each other. Now, hypothetically, imagine that Mexico was a nation entirely composed of black people. Imagine further that the black people in Mexico were firmly convinced that their brethren in the US were being violently repressed, and that the white people in the US were as convinced that the black people in Mexico were the ones stirring up the violence. Imagine that the black people in Mexico had a nuke or two. Imagine that there was a powerful black power movement active in Mexico, and that there was a real possibility of that movement taking over the country. Don't you think that would complicate matters just a little bit? I believe my comparison was valid - in the US its race related, in India its religion related. Whats the difference, I ask ? The hypothesis described above does not withstand scrutiny in my books. With 18% of the Indian population practicing the muslim faith, it is not a "minority that can be ignored or trampled upon". BTW, India has had 2 muslim Presidents - the current President, and a previous one - Dr Zakir Hussain, since 1947. India also has had a female Prime Minister since 1947. Show me a Black President, or a female President in the US since 1776.