Thanks, you made this identical post earlier up to me, which I responded to.

I am not suggesting that you are being misleading. Again you keep seeing ghosts that are not there relative to what we are discussing. I'm simply pointing out that some of what you said would not be taken into account in my reply, because it was added in or amended after I replied - that's all.

In response to your post on birdie, I'm not certain of why you are getting so apparently worked up. These comment threads are about today's article, correct? We are not commenting on past articles. You said that birdie, in his original post that we are replying to today, referred to Majority Rule Day. Look at the post - where do you see Majority Rule Day mentioned? It is not there - that is what we are discussing. Yet you have engaged in a rant on something he may have said at some time in the past, and what you seem to think I should have seen or acknowledged at some point in the past unknown to me. It is regrettable that you are getting so seemingly irate here, or perhaps you just express yourself passionately. Either way, no one is here to attack you, so put the sword and shield away.

And on your foundational points, you and I do not disagree.

Minnis was indeed absolutely wrong, but he is intrinsically wrong as a person, so need we be surprised? He is blatantly and shamelessly making moves against the interests of his own party and by extension, the country at large. This is just the latest in a string of such moves.

Ironically, what Haiti became was due strictly to race! Just a little history tidbit; not intended to argue any point you raised.

I have had a gun pointed at me actually. But that does not make any point being made here more or less cogent in my opinion.

As for a ghetto person or a thug, unless you are a violent criminal or you are acting in a lawless fashion, I don't have a reason to label you as either of the two. But that ofcourse is subjective, which is why I asked your perspective on it.

And you regrettably keep standing on the defensive or reading into what I am saying when there is no need. I cannot make you anything you are not, hence there would be no need on my part to even attempt it - and I am not attempting it. If I wanted to call you something, I would. We are simply having a discussion as far as I am concerned. This isn't a battle.

I'm aware of those arguments and the basis of them. Some of the arguments are actually not illogical at all and the solid arguments among them are not advocating hatred, but it is true that no matter where we are from in the world, we should not hate or violate people simply because of the color of their skin.

You inserted "ghetto...etc " after I replied - that was not what you originally posted Sir. And I did not say "all" in any event, I referred to the racial group you were obviously speaking of, and subsets within that group that you added in later on upon editing your comment.

Moving away from assumptions, black Bahamians are overwhelmingly the victims of crime in Nassau compared to any other group, so while we all fear whatever we fear, perhaps the fear should, based on the facts, be based on the fact that crime is out of control in the nation's capitol.

Incidentally, what is a ghetto black person? Is it where they live, or how they are dressed, etc?