You're right, Matt.
I should have checked the sources directly before remembering that post from awhile back. In discussing what to do with Muslims in England after the bombings, you did not indeed use the word "subhuman." You rather said the "the Eloi (British) live well but do not react when their fellow Eloi are hurt" and described Muslims as the "Morlocks that feast on the flesh of the Eloi" and ask the question "Why don't the Eloi deport them?"
In retrospect, I think the mere adjective "subhuman" is much nicer, but in the name of accuracy, I retract what I said, having spoken in error. You just likened Muslims to creatures that feast on human flesh who should be deported.
My bad. You didn't say Muslims were "subhuman" – you just described them as such. Or am I missing something in that when you describe a whole group of people with captions under a picture of green humanoid beasts with glowing eyes who live underground, beneath the blonde, white "British" people you captioned as being represented in the picture above, that's not describing them as "subhuman"?
The Eloi (British) live well but do not react when their fellow Eloi are hurt.
Morlocks that feast on the flesh of the Eloi. Why dont the Eloi deport them?
Yeah – you're not a racist. But I am for calling you one because of obviously racist drivel such as this? Oooook. My question is: just what the heck does someone have to do these days to "allowed" to describe someone as such?
These are the days when a defendant in a hate crime case actually said he used the word "nigger" as a term of endearment, even as he beat the victim with a baseball bat.
