Sean McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Elucidate: you are saying that there is a genetic basis for diseases like
Tay-Sachs and sickle cell anemia among certain ethnic groups, but there is a
not a genetic basis for mental and personality traits among certain groups? Do
I misunderstand you?
REPLY
You understand perfectly. How does the reality a genetic basis for Tay-Sachs or
sickle cell anemia translate into there being "a genetic basis for mental and
personality traits among certain groups." That is so illogical as to not even
qualify as bad science (or, as some science nerds say, it "not even wrong."
note also, in your statment, you are positing that there ARE "mental and
personality traits among certain groups." Sez who?
Sean McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Of course one can Google up many thousands of solid and reputable scientific
articles exploring the genetic basis of mind, personality and culture -- right?
Do I need to Google up all the cites here, or do you acknowledge this?
REPLY
Actually, if youre talking about serious research on a genetic basis for any of
those things among a specific group, no, I dont acknowledge it. Google away.
Sean McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
With regard to MacDonald: this discussion would be much more meaningful to me
if you and Tim anchored your disagreements around particular direct quotes from
MacDonald.
REPLY
Quotes mean nothing to me; I'm not interested in a textual analysis of someone
claiming to be doing science. I'm interested in proof of their scientific
claims. Macdonald has zero.
Sean McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In general, I find MacDonald, even in his white ethnic nationalist mode, to be
less offensive and dangerous than militant Jewish ethnic nationalists like
David Horowitz and Daniel Pipes, who have access to the mainstream media.
REPLY
Sean, if you can consider a white fascist like Macdonald--who represents the
dominant ethnic group in America to be less dangerous than ideologues who
happen to be member of a tiny minority group, and who (please try to wrap your
brain around this) do not speak for that minority group (Jews), then I dont
know what to tell ya.
Sean McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Have you actually compared MacDonald's language to their hate speech against
Muslims? I know naked incitement to genocide when I see it. The Israeli
government and the Israel lobby are not only permitting this kind of hate
speech among pro-Israel extremists in America, but are actively encouraging it.
REPLY
The vast majority of hate speech (and violence) against Muslims is committed by
non-Jews (including fellow Muslims). Coming in a distant third are the
Zionists.
Sean McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
MacDonald is strictly small change compared to this xenophobic political
machine, in terms of representing an immediate extremist threat to humanity.
And he has the virtue of being much smarter than Horowitz and Pipes. The
neocons are uniformly the dumbest group of pseudo-intellectuals on the American
scene, pure agitprop bots.
REPLY
Make up your mind. The neocons have held power for a decade; Macdonald is, you
claim, "small change." Whose the dummy?
Sean McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:I strongly condemn, it goes without
saying, attempts by anyone to use MacDonald's writings to stir up hatred
against Jews or any other ethnic groups, or to use them to violate the civil
rights of anyone.
REPLY
Disingenuous. MacDonald's writings ARE hatred against Jews.
---------------------------------
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha!
Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
