--- Wojtek Sokolowski <sokol at jhu.edu> wrote:
>
> But I strongly suspect that your reaction to my
> posting is caused not by the
> real or perceived contradictions, but by the fact
> that it undercuts the
> central tenet of a religious faith - to which you
> seem to subscribe - that
> if it is dark-skinned, poor, and rioting it must be
> good and worthy "our"
> sympathy.
What are those suspicions based upon? Who is projecting on whom here? You or me. Do you deny the facts about the dire circumstances of these youths? Do you deny that they have been largely ignored and left to fester in grubby HLMs and cites?
I dont think you deny the above. The question you did not answer is what were they supposed to do? How are they supposed to bring about change? You did not answer that.
Are they supposed to just fester forever? Perhaps they should have waited until a study was done on their plight.
Sorry to disappoint
> you, but I simply have
> zero respect for skinheads of any skin color.
Who told you they were skinheads? Or are you projecting....AGAIN.
I
> think the rioters are what
> Mr. Sarkozy called them
Ahah, strike the last question you answered it yourself. Mr Sarkozy told you.
- albeit I also think that
> Mr. Sarkozy's language
> was inappropriate because it antagonized people
> without helping the
> situation.
How kind of you to be so compromising! Sweet.
-Thomas
__________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com