The above replies did not mention an ethnic group, rather a geographical area. The main ethnic group in that area is also very present in north Africa, and there is much less general "mistrust" (or negative feelings) towards that area than to the other.
Not sure if "geographic discrimination" is in any way better than "racism" but using terms correctly is required for good communication.
The implication of using "632 CE" appears to be a reference to the proliferation of Islam after the death of Muhammad (I didn't know this until I Googled)
So if that individuals distrust towards the Arabian peninsula begins in the exact year Islam began to spread, it wouldn't be a stretch to assume that OP is an Islamaphobe (and it would include a number of North African countries as well)
I have a problem when governments decide it is perfectly alright to interfere in how citizens should conduct their religion or even what religion they should follow, which I believe is a deeply personal affair. I have a problem when there is no separation of state and religion, and when said governments regularly criminalise (up to capital punishment) things like apostasy and blasphemy, which are decidedly mediaeval attitudes.
It so happens that the large majority of these governments are in Muslim-majority countries, where Islam is the 'state religion' (I have a problem with 'state religions' too). Therefore, a reasonable conclusion: it is that particular religion that demands these of its adherents (and worse, non-adherents), and therefore, I mistrust it.
> a number of North African countries as well
For the record, I have little problem with Tunisia.
> criminalise (up to capital punishment) things like apostasy and blasphemy, which are decidedly mediaeval attitudes.
Another HN post today motivated me to look up the history of British blasphemy law and it turns out it was not medieval. Criminal blasphemy laws appeared right at the end of the Middle Ages (at least in England and Wales) so are mostly modern. Before that the punishment for blasphemy was excommunication.
I never mentioned "an ethnic group". I mentioned "main" and "very present" - neither absolutes. The main point: comment was not racist. It was discriminatory based on other topics than race (geography or religion).
No. It's neither about race nor ethnicity; it's about culture and religion. It's not about the people, either, since the differences from person to person are as pronounced there as everywhere. It is, though, about the society built with the culture in question as a foundation. You can criticize societies everywhere, starting from your own - it's normal, healthy, and has nothing to do with racism.
I'll be frank: I have a deep mistrust of any culture present in the Arabian peninsula since about 632 CE.