Re: The Baltics *Have* Emulated the UK

In article <1124353878.773132.164730@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"vello" <vellokala@xxxxxx> wrote:

> Eugene Holman wrote:
> > In article <1124341714.702384.199030@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,

<deletions>
> >
> > I wonder if Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Poles, northern Russians,
> > northern Germans, and other blond-haired, blue-eyed individuals should be
> > regarded as 'Nordics'. Additionally, a substantial portion of the English
> > population of Anglo-Saxon stock has these physical traits.
>
> Here is one linguistic problem for me - I don't know exactly the
> meaning of word nordic probably. In Estonian, "p=F5hjarahvad" means all
> nations living in north so just context shows are we talking about
> norvegians or maris. There is also "p=F5hjala" (pohjola suomeksi),
> describing ancient half-mythological settlers of north, covering
> Estonians-finns at first, then for sure norvegians. Swedes and danes
> are not so northern in estonian tradition. There is also modern word
> P=F5hjamaad - to describe Scandinavia anf Finland as some political
> unity. Is meaning of "nordic" the same as for Northern europeans - or
> even just Northern people - or is it "political" term to mark just
> Scandinavia + Finland? Anyway my point was that being criminal in loose
> red-head white, all red-head whites would be in some danger that they
> might be mistaken as that criminal. Brasilians like arabs are
> southern-looking.

For those English-speaking people who know something about Europe and the
types of people who live there, Nordic means tall, lanky, blond or
light-brown haired, blue or gray eyed, generally, perhaps, narrow-faced
and long-skulled. Northern Slavs and eastern Finns tend to have rounder
features and shorter frames, thus making them different loking from the
classical Nordic type for those who know something about physical
anthropology.

> But to talk about "hunt towards dark-skinned" is by
> me unjustified, coz also afroamericans are dark-skinned, but for sure
> there was no threat that one afroamerican would be mistaken as arab
> terrorist.

I'm not so sure. The term "Arab" covers a wide range of anthropological
types. Anwar Sadat, Yasser Arafat, Muamar Qaddafy, and Sadan Hussein are
all arguably Arabs. Sadat and Qaddafy could certainly be regarded as
Afro-Americans on the basis of their appearance.


<deletions>

> Is there some support in British media? One may understand that nerves
> of police were too tight after terrorist explosions, but it seems
> impossible to support such fatal mistakes?

The british media that I follow is enraged at the degree to which the
officials have been lying. The terrorist attck was officially a "power
surge" up until the bus bombing. Now the stories that the police fed the
public about the reasons that Mr. Menezes was killed have turned out to be
fabrications.

<deletions>
>
> You are basically right by me that terrorism is "double trouble":
> direct victims at first and unwanted changes in society then. But
> please do not take "brasilian case" as racial thing: as I say, if there
> would be hunt to red-hair white serial killer, my advice to all
> innocent red-hair whites would be: stay home for a while.

It is not a racial thing, but rather a racial profiling thing. Certainly
the police have a right and the responsibility to classify people on the
basis of their physical appearance, but a description of someone as
"red-haired and white" has a far greater basis in reality trhanb a
description as an "Arab" or "southerner".

<deletions>

Regards,
Eugene Holman
.

Relevant Pages