On Wed, 10 Jan 1996, Futplex wrote:
Adam Shostack writes:
There is also a difference between stopping skinheads and stopping blacks, in that the skinheads decided to wear clothing and tattoos that identify them as skinheads, and thus may more fairly be asked to bear the consequences.
Sorry, but from where I stand there's nothing "wrong" with wearing clothing, bearing tattoos, etc., any more than there's anything "wrong" with having a particular level of skin pigmentation. When you decide that only clothing, tattoos, etc. that display particular colors, emblems, words, etc. are "wrong", then you are stifling free expression.
guess I dare not to go to Portland.... age 55, no grey hairs on a full head to past my shoulder blades, full reddish brown beard with some white in it past my neck (what there is of it <g>), 300 lb gorilla with tattoo of the "Ace of Swords" on left arm, dressed in all black whether t-shirt/jeans or hand-tailored suit, and black leather flat rim "assassin's" hat... often seen arriving on a big bore outlaw chopper. Considered armed and dangerous.... oh, I almost forgot: with an attitude....
Futplex <futplex@pseudonym.com> "Freedom...oh freedom...that's just some people talking" -Eagles
__________________________________________________________________________ go not unto usenet for advice, for the inhabitants thereof will say: yes, and no, and maybe, and I don't know, and fuck-off. _________________________________________________________________ attila__