Obama

Any old topic will do, I suppose.

Obama

Postby Omphalos » Wed Jun 11, 2008 12:59 pm

Found this in my inbox today, and it looks like its getting around quickly. Interesting.....


The Obama Campaign exposes a weakness in the evangelical church

By Tony Liston

This is not about politics - not directly, anyhow. Nor is it about
Obama, though my personal opinion of him will probably be obvious. This
is not a political endorsement nor hack job, but a moment of
introspection for the church. (I will probably just hit this in a
cursory fashion and come back to it after I've had more time to think it
through.)

I visited with an Obama campaign volunteer a few days ago. She was
interested in me as a pastor and curious about my view of the (not so)
Reverend Wright stuff (which I don't even wanna start into at this
moment). My conversation with her left me stunned and thinking.

One of her OBVIOUS talking points was how gracious Obama was and how he
acknowledged McCain's accomplishments even if McCain did not acknowledge
Obama's. I'm not a McCain fan (in the interest of full disclosure, I
must admit that I'm heavily leaning toward sitting out the presidential
portion of the ballot this November), but her statement made me curious.
The conversation went like this:

"What accomplishments does Obama have that McCain is not acknowledging?"
I asked.
"He's brought out new voters and has restored hope for change," she
answered.
"That's not really something you elect a president for. What has he
actually done that shows what he'll do as president?"
"He's re-energized the process. He's bringing people hope for the
future."
"I understand that he's campaigning well, but what political
accomplishments does he have? In his history as a senator, what has he
done?"
"Obama is not about the past. He's a break from the past. He's about the
future."

We chased our tail in that conversation for several more minutes until I
finally said, "Explain to me some of his policies."
"His policies are about change, about making real progress for people."
(She was getting frustrated, which placed her about six steps behind
me.)
"What do you actually know about his policies?"
"You'd hafta talk to the campaign staff about his policies. All of that
will be forthcoming after he's formally nominated."
"So, you're 100% for Obama?"
"Yes. Absolutely."
"But you don't know any of his policies?" (I feigned shock.)
"That's irrelevant. All of that will come out later."
"But you don't know any of his policies?"
"Not in detail, no."
"So how can you support someone whose policies you don't know?"
"Because what draws me to Obama is his youthful appeal. He's
post-boomer. He brings hope for change, for something new." (She said
this with an almost tearful appeal.)
"So you don't really want to get into the details with me or you don't
know them?"
"All I know is that I can only share with you what draws me to the Obama
Campaign. I don't wanna get into the policy stuff. He's a uniter, not a
divider."

That's when it hit me. For years the Democrats and Libs have fought,
maligned, mocked, and denigrated evangelical Christianity. Now they've
copied it. They are evangelizing.

Most of my ministry life, I've heard people accuse, saying, "The church
is copying the world's marketing practices!" Actually, that's an
ignorant statement. If you honestly know anything about history, you
realizing that the church was the first massive advertising and
marketing effort in history. The premise was simple:

You've got a problem you can't solve on your own (sin).
We've got the answer (a Messiah).
Here's how to acquire the solution (salvation).

That's the formula for marketing.

Back to Obama's Campaign: I remember hearing it at an evangelism
conference years ago: "Don't get into doctrine with people. Stay away
from theology and all the divisive stuff. People will grow into that on
their own. Just share what the Jesus experience has done for you. Share
what draws you to Him."

Wham bam. There it is.

The Obama Campaign Marketing plan:

You have a problem you can't solve on your own (the political status
quo).
We've got the answer (Obama - the political Messiah).
Here's how to acquire the solution (Join the Obama Campaign).

Here's the Obama Personal Evangelism Mantra for it's volunteers:

"Don't get into policies with people. Stay away from concrete answers
and all the divisive stuff. People will grow into that on their own.
Just share what the Obama experience has done for you. Share what draws
you to Him."

As I look at the naivete' and shallowness of the Obama Flock and how it
lacks any real substance on which to base itself or its optimism, I look
at the evangelical church and see the very same things: It's a mile
wide, and an inch deep. And we wonder why its people struggle and make
poor decisions that don't reflect a godly reality.

I'd say that the Obama Campaign is about to go through the same
struggles, failures, collapses and divisions that the evangelical church
has been experiencing...followed by the same long-run impotence.

It's gonna be interesting to watch...
Something is about to happen, Hal. Something wonderful!

-James C. Harwood, Science Fiction Writer, Straight (March 5, 1956 - May 25, 2010)



The Omphalos Umbrella Page
User avatar
Omphalos
Alien Overlord
 
Posts: 5678
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:24 pm
Location: The Mighty Central Valley of California

Postby Phaedrus » Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:52 pm

I like Obama. One of the things I keep reminding myself:

He's a politician. He's a politician. HE'S A POLITICIAN. And he's running for president. He's charismatic, he's a great speaker, and all the things people say about him.

But he's a politician. Charisma in a politician is dangerous and scary. We could easily elect the man and never know what he thinks about most of the issues. We know he's for universal health care, we know he's against the Iraq War. We know that, "Yes, we can." But we can what? It's easy to say, "Well, he's different, he's energetic, he's not like McCain or Hillary." But in a way, he is, because he's running for the presidency too.

What was it Douglas Adams said? Anyone capable of getting himself elected president should on no counts be allowed to do the job? I just keep telling myself that.

I still support him, because of things like this. But I don't think he's perfect, and I'm sure we'll end up being pretty disappointed when he turns out to be just another politician. I just think that he's better than McCain, who I don't think I would vote for at all.
User avatar
Phaedrus
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:18 am

Postby orald » Wed Jun 11, 2008 2:05 pm

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Obama's_Iraq_Speech
:lol: Good one.

The whole thing is, like with Hillary, about trendiness.
"Look s/he is a woman/black, lets for for her/him!"
"Brian! Brian! Brian!" goes the refrain. "A million deaths were not enough for Brian!"

I'm awake! God help me, I'm awake!
User avatar
orald
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:31 am
Location: Maximum Security Mental Hospital

Postby Liege-Killer » Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:18 pm

Sure, that's an interesting point the guy makes in that article. However, I suspect the campaign volunteer he was talking to is the exception and not the rule. I think most voters you'd talk to would have some idea of their candidate's policy positions, perhaps not in great detail, but some idea at least. Or maybe I'm being too optimistic. At any rate, Obama is hardly the first politician to identify himself as the candidate of "change."
Last edited by Liege-Killer on Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"I'm being ironic. Don't interrupt a man in the midst of being ironic, it's not polite." -- Bradbury, The Martian Chronicles
User avatar
Liege-Killer
 
Posts: 432
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2007 10:06 am

Postby Phaedrus » Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:22 pm

orald wrote:The whole thing is, like with Hillary, about trendiness.
"Look s/he is a woman/black, lets for for her/him!"


With that level of analysis, you could be a media analyst for Fox News. :roll:
User avatar
Phaedrus
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:18 am

Postby A Thing of Eternity » Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:50 pm

Too bad you were'nt born in the states then Orald, you'd be a shoe-in, double minority and all.
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
 
Posts: 2070
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 1:22 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta

Postby SandChigger » Wed Jun 11, 2008 4:32 pm

Had lunch with a Texan friend/colleague yesterday (Hey, Teg, that topic didn't come up. It must be you being around that does it! :D ) and we got to talking about the election. We kinda both decided (again) that, when it comes down to it, based on the attitudes of a lot of the people we know, there ain't no way America is gonna elect a black man.

I hope we're wrong, because I think McCain will be another disaster. :cry:
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby Mr. Teg » Wed Jun 11, 2008 7:14 pm

SandChigger wrote:Had lunch with a Texan friend/colleague yesterday (Hey, Teg, that topic didn't come up. It must be you being around that does it! :D ) and we got to talking about the election.


He never breached the topic last time did he, only farted around the issue. :wink:
Narf!
Combine Herbert Ober Anderson Mercantile
User avatar
Mr. Teg
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:21 am

Postby Tleilax Master B » Wed Jun 11, 2008 7:58 pm

A Thing of Eternity wrote:Too bad you were'nt born in the states then Orald, you'd be a shoe-in, double minority and all.


I don't think "pedophile" counts as a minority :P
Image
User avatar
Tleilax Master B
 
Posts: 308
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 9:44 pm

Postby A Thing of Eternity » Wed Jun 11, 2008 8:06 pm

Tleilax Master B wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:Too bad you were'nt born in the states then Orald, you'd be a shoe-in, double minority and all.


I don't think "pedophile" counts as a minority :P


I would hope it does, maybe not in the Catholic church... :wink:
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
 
Posts: 2070
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 1:22 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta

Postby orald » Thu Jun 12, 2008 12:27 am

Oh yes, being revulted by smelly, nose-picking kids sure makes me a pedo', doesn't it? :roll:

Phaedrus wrote:With that level of analysis, you could be a media analyst for Fox News. :roll:

I know it's hard hearing the truth. I'm sorry for your loss of innocence here. :(
"Brian! Brian! Brian!" goes the refrain. "A million deaths were not enough for Brian!"

I'm awake! God help me, I'm awake!
User avatar
orald
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:31 am
Location: Maximum Security Mental Hospital

Postby Freakzilla » Thu Jun 12, 2008 4:04 am

Tleilax Master B wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:Too bad you were'nt born in the states then Orald, you'd be a shoe-in, double minority and all.


I don't think "pedophile" counts as a minority :P


I think everyone likes young girls/boys, they just don't admit it.
They were destroyed because they lied pretentiously. Have no fear that my wrath
will fall upon you because of your innocent mistakes.

~Leto II, God Emperor
User avatar
Freakzilla
Archivist
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:56 pm
Location: Duluth, Georgia, USA

Postby Phaedrus » Thu Jun 12, 2008 5:52 am

orald wrote:
Phaedrus wrote:With that level of analysis, you could be a media analyst for Fox News. :roll:

I know it's hard hearing the truth. I'm sorry for your loss of innocence here. :(

Loss of innocence? So, I lost my innocence the first time I watched Fox News? Actually, that might be true in a way you don't know.

Actually, I'm saying that a bright fifth grader could say that people vote for minorities because it's "popular." On the other hand, I live in Alabama(you know, something about civil rights, segregation, history of racial tension that goes through the roof), and I'm entirely certain that you're just wrong. I couldn't tell you how many people voted AGAINST Clinton or Obama because of race/gender. And it's not something unique to Alabama, even if the difference is defined here.

I think it's funny that you think people vote for him BECAUSE he's black, while SC and others, who are much more familiar with the US and its political system, doubt he'll get elected for the same reason.

The fact is, being a minority doesn't get you the kind of following that either Clinton or Obama got in this race, and saying that's why people vote for them is childish and insulting to both candidates and everyone who supports either of them.
User avatar
Phaedrus
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:18 am

Postby Freakzilla » Thu Jun 12, 2008 6:15 am

You know why the trees in Georgia lean to the West?














'Cause Alabama sucks!


:P
They were destroyed because they lied pretentiously. Have no fear that my wrath
will fall upon you because of your innocent mistakes.

~Leto II, God Emperor
User avatar
Freakzilla
Archivist
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:56 pm
Location: Duluth, Georgia, USA

Postby Phaedrus » Thu Jun 12, 2008 6:29 am

Yes, yes it does. Can I leave yet?

(Luckily, the trees in Alabama ALSO lean to the west. :wink: )
User avatar
Phaedrus
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:18 am

Postby Freakzilla » Thu Jun 12, 2008 6:36 am

Where would you rather live?

I think the trees do that until you get to Texas, after that there's just a big hole.
They were destroyed because they lied pretentiously. Have no fear that my wrath
will fall upon you because of your innocent mistakes.

~Leto II, God Emperor
User avatar
Freakzilla
Archivist
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:56 pm
Location: Duluth, Georgia, USA

Postby Freakzilla » Thu Jun 12, 2008 6:49 am

I don't think he'll win but if he does it won't be the first time someone was elected soley on rhetoric.
They were destroyed because they lied pretentiously. Have no fear that my wrath
will fall upon you because of your innocent mistakes.

~Leto II, God Emperor
User avatar
Freakzilla
Archivist
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:56 pm
Location: Duluth, Georgia, USA

Postby orald » Sat Jun 14, 2008 5:49 am

Phaedrus wrote:I think it's funny that you think people vote for him BECAUSE he's black, while SC and others, who are much more familiar with the US and its political system, doubt he'll get elected for the same reason.

Is there supposed to be a contradiction in this paragraph? :?

I don't know much about Obama's doings(does anybody at all know?), but I haven't heard Hillary was any better, yet she got lots of support...though I wonder, why have two weak and obviously gender/race dependant candidates been the democratic party's main line of assault?
Is it because they thought Bush fucked up the republicans so hard they could put a poodle named "Fluffy" in their lead and still win?

Where have all the serious, "heavy weight" and proven demo' veterens gone this time round I wonder?


The fact is, being a minority doesn't get you the kind of following that either Clinton or Obama got in this race, and saying that's why people vote for them is childish and insulting to both candidates and everyone who supports either of them.

I'm sorry, I'm not in the habit of not saying the truth just to not offend someone.

Once democrats see there are only two candidates(and how much did they really have to pull to their side before defeating the other ones anyway? was there any strong opposition? who did they fight against?) then most would vote for one or the other, and then to the one who gets to be leader of the party(or nominee for presidency? is that same as leader of the party in the USA?).
The voters stick with the party mostly, not the person.

The main thing their race/gender mattered for them to get well into the race was in the start, now that they're the only options to vote for if you're a demo'.
"Brian! Brian! Brian!" goes the refrain. "A million deaths were not enough for Brian!"

I'm awake! God help me, I'm awake!
User avatar
orald
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:31 am
Location: Maximum Security Mental Hospital

Postby Freakzilla » Sat Jun 14, 2008 8:51 am

You have to also take into account the demographics of the people that actually get off their ass and vote.
They were destroyed because they lied pretentiously. Have no fear that my wrath
will fall upon you because of your innocent mistakes.

~Leto II, God Emperor
User avatar
Freakzilla
Archivist
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:56 pm
Location: Duluth, Georgia, USA

Postby Phaedrus » Sun Jun 15, 2008 3:10 am

Orald, your naivety concerning race and gender relations in the US, the political system in the US, and people in general convinces me that discussing this any further with you is a waste of time and effort.

My point, which you missed, is that it's incredible that a black man and a woman got as far as they have, given that there's NEVER been anything other than white men with even a decent chance for the presidency.

If you're actually naive enough about the real nature of people's prejudices against minorities to think that people would vote for someone simply BECAUSE they're black/female, is simply fucking ridiculous.
User avatar
Phaedrus
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:18 am

Postby orald » Sun Jun 15, 2008 8:42 am

I've seen fringe parties get strong(and undeserved) support in the past, there's no problem for people like Hillary, with her political connections, to get funding and support from the demo' party. Especially when they probably figure they're getting half of Bill in the bargain.

I've never heard of Obama before(have YOU?) he started the race, and I have no idea who originally upjumped him and why(seriously, he should've waited a bit to get higher up with more credentials to prove himself better).

Are you telling me now that if Obama gets alot of black votes it isn't race based? Sure, just black votes wouldn't buy him shit(but you've got other minorities who might join), but those are still alot of people.

Please show me what's so great about Obama that you've been taken under his spell. Or is it the lack of choice and having to choose only between hillary and him?
"Brian! Brian! Brian!" goes the refrain. "A million deaths were not enough for Brian!"

I'm awake! God help me, I'm awake!
User avatar
orald
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:31 am
Location: Maximum Security Mental Hospital

Postby Mandy » Sun Jun 15, 2008 12:00 pm

Most of the people who vote for Obama will do so because he's a Democrat, and they don't care what color he is. A few will vote for him simply because he is black. A lot of people won't vote for him because he is black, and it wouldn't matter to them how much experience he has in politics.
User avatar
Mandy
 
Posts: 935
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:28 pm

Postby Omphalos » Thu Jul 24, 2008 2:48 pm

What is everyone thinking about this trip of Obama's to the Middle East? This looks like some pretty transparent grand-standing to me, where Obama gets some nice photos of his press conferences from a mountain top. Actually, Im a little worried that Obama is starting to believe his own press. I hope his head doesnt get too big. What do you all think?
Something is about to happen, Hal. Something wonderful!

-James C. Harwood, Science Fiction Writer, Straight (March 5, 1956 - May 25, 2010)



The Omphalos Umbrella Page
User avatar
Omphalos
Alien Overlord
 
Posts: 5678
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:24 pm
Location: The Mighty Central Valley of California

Postby Nekhrun » Thu Jul 24, 2008 3:05 pm

I think he should be campaigning here, but I think a lot of what he "learned" on his trip will be brought up in the debates. He's a pretty sharp guy, so I'm guessing he has some kind of plan to use this trip later on. I do like the idea that so many people in other countries are excited about him. It can't hurt to get them back on our side, or to reassure them that the end of this administration is near.

So I guess I'm taking the wait and see approach. I'm really hoping this John Edwards mistress/love child story turns out to be nothing and he can still be VP.
User avatar
Nekhrun
Archivist
 
Posts: 1405
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 3:12 pm

Postby A Thing of Eternity » Thu Jul 24, 2008 3:08 pm

I'm not much of a politician myself, so insert grain of salt where needed here.

Watching him from the outside, I have to say it's been a bit sad seeing his transformation into a "real" politician. I thought he was much more sincere when he was just gunning for senate (congress? I don't recall) and that he's starting to sound like the usual politician. And I agree, his trip could be considered a shallow attempt to build some credibility into his worldliness.

That said - I don't think he has much of a choice. I honestly don't think he stands a chance of winning without becoming a politician, because despite the fact that everyone intelligent always talks about wanting a more sincere politician, most people are stupid, and will vote for whoever sounds more concrete. If he gave honest answers all the time he'd have to give some wishy washy ones for questions that don't have real answers - and that would loose him the election. People like having strong leadership and are more likely to vote for someone who picks a position and defends it to the death, even if that position is wrong.

Whether he's starting to actually change on the inside and this isn't just a play to get into power? Who knows, vote him in and see what he does. :)

EDIT TO ADD:
Nekhrun wrote:I do like the idea that so many people in other countries are excited about him. It can't hurt to get them back on our side, or to reassure them that the end of this administration is near.


I've actually seen a pretty good improvement in the anti-american sentiments up here since Obama came into them media. (By improvement I meant, less anti-american talk :) ) I think allot of people are reaaaaaallly looking forward to him winning (not Orald though - don't worry buddy, he'll still back you guys up when you shoot at the "towelheads" no matter how liberal he is he's not about to go all pacifist on you, that'd be un-american :D ).
I deleted some of your posts because they were derailing the topic and not focusing on the issues asked, and instead going after the authors or their material. That's why. ~ BM
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
 
Posts: 2070
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 1:22 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta

Postby Phaedrus » Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:36 pm

I can only pray it's just grandstanding and political maneuvering. If the Obama on TV is the real deal, we're pretty much screwed no matter who we pick.

Summer is usually the "off season" for political stuff, right? I mean, don't people care more about vacations and the Olympics this time of election year?
User avatar
Phaedrus
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:18 am

Postby SandChigger » Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:52 pm

Off season?

Stupidity, mon vieux, like rust, never sleeps. 8)
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby Phaedrus » Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:28 pm

Rust can't sleep. Or be awake.
User avatar
Phaedrus
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:18 am

Postby Rakis » Thu Jul 24, 2008 9:45 pm

He was in Germany today with around 200,000 people listening to his speach...interesting visibility...

Meanwhile, McCain was in a German restaurant in the USA... :shock:
Neutrinos watch alert !

Image
User avatar
Rakis
 
Posts: 450
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 9:07 pm
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Postby SandChigger » Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:46 pm

Phaedrus wrote:Rust can't sleep. Or be awake.

Oh yeah? Well, you be the one to go tell Neil, then.

I hear he bit a nipple off the last smartass tried it. :twisted:
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby Omphalos » Fri Jul 25, 2008 9:37 am

Rakis wrote:He was in Germany today with around 200,000 people listening to his speach...interesting visibility...

Meanwhile, McCain was in a German restaurant in the USA... :shock:


I thought that was hilarious. WTF did he go to the Wiener Hut for?

That poor guy is doddering. He doesnt have a chance. I wish they had picked somebody livelier.
Something is about to happen, Hal. Something wonderful!

-James C. Harwood, Science Fiction Writer, Straight (March 5, 1956 - May 25, 2010)



The Omphalos Umbrella Page
User avatar
Omphalos
Alien Overlord
 
Posts: 5678
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:24 pm
Location: The Mighty Central Valley of California

Postby Rakis » Fri Jul 25, 2008 8:49 pm

Omphalos wrote:
Rakis wrote:He was in Germany today with around 200,000 people listening to his speach...interesting visibility...

Meanwhile, McCain was in a German restaurant in the USA... :shock:


I thought that was hilarious. WTF did he go to the Wiener Hut for?

That poor guy is doddering. He doesnt have a chance. I wish they had picked somebody livelier.


...or less of a wiener... :twisted:
Neutrinos watch alert !

Image
User avatar
Rakis
 
Posts: 450
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 9:07 pm
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Postby Robspierre » Fri Jul 25, 2008 9:18 pm

Omphalos wrote:
Rakis wrote:He was in Germany today with around 200,000 people listening to his speach...interesting visibility...

Meanwhile, McCain was in a German restaurant in the USA... :shock:


I thought that was hilarious. WTF did he go to the Wiener Hut for?

That poor guy is doddering. He doesnt have a chance. I wish they had picked somebody livelier.



The rethugs probably think that all his viagra popping he does to bang his trophy wife will provide enough vitality.

Rob
Friends are the family we choose.

http://kiltedrobspub.blogspot.com/
User avatar
Robspierre
Archivist
 
Posts: 959
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:52 am
Location: The Cascades of Oregon

Postby Eyes High » Fri Jul 25, 2008 9:18 pm

What about the Obama campaign signs that were put up in Israel near a holy site. That's smells of nothing but a cheap publicity stunt. They knew it would get air time and therefore some free media campainging.

Doesn't seem like too much of a change to me. I do think he had a strong beginning but now it seems like he has just fallen into the same ole campaign dance routine.
I shall lift up my eyes unto the glory of the Lord.
Image

Safety's just danger out of place.
User avatar
Eyes High
Momma Eyes
 
Posts: 1219
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2008 1:39 pm
Location: between the worlds of men and make believe

Postby SandChigger » Fri Jul 25, 2008 9:19 pm

Wiener Hut? :shock:

You're making THAT up, right? :?

I just listened to the quikclips on CNNj, didn't actually watch, so I didn't see where he was exactly, but it was in Columbus, right? He was probably in German Village (They used to [mistakenly?] call it "German Town" in that family sitcom with Michael J. Fox, whatever it was called).

Listen, Omph, DON'T FRICKIN' DISS THE EATS IN GERMAN VILLAGE!!! :evil:

:P

Seriously, though. It's been a good ten or fifteen years since I've been, but there used to be some fantastic, "to die for" (and FROM :shock: ) food served there. And you could still, at least while I was at State, often hear German being spoken among the local regulars.

Ah...heart-cloggin' GOOD. :D
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby Phaedrus » Fri Jul 25, 2008 10:18 pm

SandChigger wrote:
Phaedrus wrote:Rust can't sleep. Or be awake.

Oh yeah? Well, you be the one to go tell Neil, then.

I hear he bit a nipple off the last smartass tried it. :twisted:


Ugh. Obscure references to music that was popular ten years before my birth aren't fair.
User avatar
Phaedrus
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:18 am

Postby SandChigger » Sat Jul 26, 2008 12:16 am

A HA HA HA HA! :lol:

Take that, yoonk shnipperwhapper! :D

Image
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby Omphalos » Sat Jul 26, 2008 12:23 am

SandChigger wrote:Wiener Hut? :shock:

You're making THAT up, right? :?

I just listened to the quikclips on CNNj, didn't actually watch, so I didn't see where he was exactly, but it was in Columbus, right?


I already deleted the evening news, but I'm pretty sure that he was in Pennsylvania.
Something is about to happen, Hal. Something wonderful!

-James C. Harwood, Science Fiction Writer, Straight (March 5, 1956 - May 25, 2010)



The Omphalos Umbrella Page
User avatar
Omphalos
Alien Overlord
 
Posts: 5678
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:24 pm
Location: The Mighty Central Valley of California

Postby SandChigger » Sat Jul 26, 2008 12:51 am

(Hmm. OK. Half-an-ear syndrome again, maybe. I thought I heard Columbus. Next time you're there, though, DO check out German Village. :) )
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby Omphalos » Sat Jul 26, 2008 12:54 am

SandChigger wrote:(Hmm. OK. Half-an-ear syndrome again, maybe. I thought I heard Columbus. Next time you're there, though, DO check out German Village. :) )


Ill probably not be in Ohio again until next year, or maybe even the next. Not until I have a case that justifies a trip there for something.
Something is about to happen, Hal. Something wonderful!

-James C. Harwood, Science Fiction Writer, Straight (March 5, 1956 - May 25, 2010)



The Omphalos Umbrella Page
User avatar
Omphalos
Alien Overlord
 
Posts: 5678
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:24 pm
Location: The Mighty Central Valley of California

Postby A Thing of Eternity » Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:23 am

Phaedrus wrote:
SandChigger wrote:
Phaedrus wrote:Rust can't sleep. Or be awake.

Oh yeah? Well, you be the one to go tell Neil, then.

I hear he bit a nipple off the last smartass tried it. :twisted:


Ugh. Obscure references to music that was popular ten years before my birth aren't fair.


If Neal Young is obscure in your books who isn't?
I deleted some of your posts because they were derailing the topic and not focusing on the issues asked, and instead going after the authors or their material. That's why. ~ BM
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
 
Posts: 2070
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 1:22 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta

Postby Phaedrus » Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:19 pm

A Thing of Eternity wrote:If Neal Young is obscure in your books who isn't?


I don't listen to pop music, sorry. I don't even know what's currently popular, because I haven't bothered to turn on a television or radio in months.

But to answer your question, yeah, I guess my perception is a bit warped. There's this ridiculous amount of pop culture stuff that I know nothing about, thank god.
User avatar
Phaedrus
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:18 am

Postby orald » Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:32 pm

Nekhrun wrote:I do like the idea that so many people in other countries are excited about him. It can't hurt to get them back on our side, or to reassure them that the end of this administration is near.

Oh yes, Obama can't wait for Osama! :D

Or did I type this backwards? Seems OK to me. :wink:


Osama will probably end up like Bill Clinton, minus the fat mistresses(i.e achieving nothing really but maybe some hollow peace papers that aren't worth their ink and paper).
"Brian! Brian! Brian!" goes the refrain. "A million deaths were not enough for Brian!"

I'm awake! God help me, I'm awake!
User avatar
orald
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:31 am
Location: Maximum Security Mental Hospital

Postby Mandy » Sat Jul 26, 2008 4:04 pm

There was an article in the paper today about someone stealing his prayer from the prayer wall and giving it to the media. What's the scoop Orald?
User avatar
Mandy
 
Posts: 935
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:28 pm

Postby A Thing of Eternity » Sat Jul 26, 2008 4:23 pm

Phaedrus wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:If Neal Young is obscure in your books who isn't?


I don't listen to pop music, sorry. I don't even know what's currently popular, because I haven't bothered to turn on a television or radio in months.

But to answer your question, yeah, I guess my perception is a bit warped. There's this ridiculous amount of pop culture stuff that I know nothing about, thank god.


Ouch, you brought out the big insults! :lol: There's pop that's called pop because it becomes popular and the there's pop that's called pop because it's "product" designed to sell. Them's fighten words if you put him in the second group.

I can't recall what your musical tastes are but I'm going to make a bold statement and say that I'm a bit more of an authority on what is and isn't pop (the shite commercialized pop) - just a wild guess but I'm thinking that what you would call underground I call radio rock pop. Could be wrong, but like I said; them's fighten words.
I deleted some of your posts because they were derailing the topic and not focusing on the issues asked, and instead going after the authors or their material. That's why. ~ BM
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
 
Posts: 2070
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 1:22 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta

Postby Phaedrus » Sat Jul 26, 2008 8:30 pm

A Thing of Eternity wrote:Ouch, you brought out the big insults! :lol: There's pop that's called pop because it becomes popular and the there's pop that's called pop because it's "product" designed to sell. Them's fighten words if you put him in the second group.

I can't recall what your musical tastes are but I'm going to make a bold statement and say that I'm a bit more of an authority on what is and isn't pop (the shite commercialized pop) - just a wild guess but I'm thinking that what you would call underground I call radio rock pop. Could be wrong, but like I said; them's fighten words.


I don't care how many other people listen to the music I like. I listen to what I think is good. If it happens to be popular, so be it. If not, that's OK, too.

I've heard the name Neil Young before, but I've never listened to his music, and I don't know the names of the albums or songs(obviously). Since the name was familiar, I assumed it was popular at some point in time, and thus, pop. Not meant to be an insult, just not really what I listen to a lot of.

((For the record, I don't use the term 'underground.' But I just compiled a list of some bands I like, available now for your(or anyone else's) judgment:

the Animal Collective, the Arcade Fire, the Arctic Monkeys, the Avett Brothers, the Beatles, Beirut, the Black Keys, Bob Dylan, Bright Eyes, Cake, the Decemberists, the Hold Steady, the Killers, Kings of Leon, Minus the Bear, Modest Mouse, the Mountain Goats, the Raconteurs, Radiohead, Rage Against the Machine, Rush, Ryan Adams, the Shins, Spoon, the Strokes, Sublime, System of a Down, the White Stripes, the Who, Wilco

There's plenty of stuff that's pretty popular in there. Like I said, that's not the point, it's good to the ears. I recently discovered that I like the album Graduation by Kanye West, the first rap/hip-hop artist/album I've ever really enjoyed, and I know that he's popular. But I still enjoy it, and that's what counts.))
User avatar
Phaedrus
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:18 am

Postby Omphalos » Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:47 pm

Neil Young's album Harvest is IMHO one of the best albums ever made. The Needle and the Damage done has been covered by lots of people, and Im sure its run isnt done yet. A Man Needs a Made and especially Heart of Gold are two incredibly complex but simply performed songs probably in the history of rock. And nobody puts themselves into a song like Young. Phaedrus, if you have never heard of this album you should download it or buy it. Lots and lots of music that is played today really comes from Young, and this album in particular. Hes made albums for just about every single genre too, so you probalby can find something you like, but this one I think is best.
Something is about to happen, Hal. Something wonderful!

-James C. Harwood, Science Fiction Writer, Straight (March 5, 1956 - May 25, 2010)



The Omphalos Umbrella Page
User avatar
Omphalos
Alien Overlord
 
Posts: 5678
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:24 pm
Location: The Mighty Central Valley of California

Postby Phaedrus » Sat Jul 26, 2008 10:05 pm

I'll look into it. I'm always looking for something new to listen to.

EDIT: Wow, I just listened to a couple songs on YouTube from that album, and I have to say I'm impressed. I officially retract any statements against Neil Young I've ever made; he's good in my book.
User avatar
Phaedrus
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:18 am

Postby SandChigger » Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:02 am

8)
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby orald » Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:22 am

Mandy wrote:There was an article in the paper today about someone stealing his prayer from the prayer wall and giving it to the media. What's the scoop Orald?

Uhh...I have to read the news, don't I? :oops: Frankly I was too bored of it when he came(that was a few days ago, right? not even sure when) so I didn't bother.
Besides, such articles about election propoganda are just the sort of thing I tend not to click on.
"Brian! Brian! Brian!" goes the refrain. "A million deaths were not enough for Brian!"

I'm awake! God help me, I'm awake!
User avatar
orald
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:31 am
Location: Maximum Security Mental Hospital

Postby Mandy » Sun Jul 27, 2008 10:40 am

Well, click on it so you can tell us what they're saying about over there. The paper made it seem like it was a big deal to steal a prayer from the wall. :P
User avatar
Mandy
 
Posts: 935
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:28 pm

Postby A Thing of Eternity » Sun Jul 27, 2008 11:25 am

Phaedrus wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:Ouch, you brought out the big insults! :lol: There's pop that's called pop because it becomes popular and the there's pop that's called pop because it's "product" designed to sell. Them's fighten words if you put him in the second group.

I can't recall what your musical tastes are but I'm going to make a bold statement and say that I'm a bit more of an authority on what is and isn't pop (the shite commercialized pop) - just a wild guess but I'm thinking that what you would call underground I call radio rock pop. Could be wrong, but like I said; them's fighten words.


I don't care how many other people listen to the music I like. I listen to what I think is good. If it happens to be popular, so be it. If not, that's OK, too.

I've heard the name Neil Young before, but I've never listened to his music, and I don't know the names of the albums or songs(obviously). Since the name was familiar, I assumed it was popular at some point in time, and thus, pop. Not meant to be an insult, just not really what I listen to a lot of.

((For the record, I don't use the term 'underground.' But I just compiled a list of some bands I like, available now for your(or anyone else's) judgment:

the Animal Collective, the Arcade Fire, the Arctic Monkeys, the Avett Brothers, the Beatles, Beirut, the Black Keys, Bob Dylan, Bright Eyes, Cake, the Decemberists, the Hold Steady, the Killers, Kings of Leon, Minus the Bear, Modest Mouse, the Mountain Goats, the Raconteurs, Radiohead, Rage Against the Machine, Rush, Ryan Adams, the Shins, Spoon, the Strokes, Sublime, System of a Down, the White Stripes, the Who, Wilco

There's plenty of stuff that's pretty popular in there. Like I said, that's not the point, it's good to the ears. I recently discovered that I like the album Graduation by Kanye West, the first rap/hip-hop artist/album I've ever really enjoyed, and I know that he's popular. But I still enjoy it, and that's what counts.))


That's the correct answer. :D I usually try to get people into a pissing match of who listens to more obscure bands and hates more popular ones, if they get into it I know they're a waste of time. I agree, doesn't matter if a band has one fan or if they're the best selling band ever. I assumed that you were calling Neil pop as an insult, I'm glad to hear that I jumped the gun.
I deleted some of your posts because they were derailing the topic and not focusing on the issues asked, and instead going after the authors or their material. That's why. ~ BM
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
 
Posts: 2070
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 1:22 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta

Postby orald » Sun Jul 27, 2008 2:16 pm

Mandy wrote:Well, click on it so you can tell us what they're saying about over there. The paper made it seem like it was a big deal to steal a prayer from the wall. :P

Well, I could've told you that without clicking on it.
Of course it's a great sin to read someone's prayer note, as is with everything private(not to mention theft, desecration of the holiest of places etc- in short, a few millenia on the coals in hell :wink: ).

Frankly I think it's bullshit. It was all propoganda anyway, and what does he have to do with the Jewish God and the West Wall anyway?
Wearing a cheap kipah doesn't make him Jewish, and I think the sacraliege is him putting the note in the first place.
Next the bastard will be off to the Ka'aba to pray to Allah...if they let him(you see, they're smarter in that respect- they don't let anyone piss on their religion, unlike the pussyfest Jews).
"Brian! Brian! Brian!" goes the refrain. "A million deaths were not enough for Brian!"

I'm awake! God help me, I'm awake!
User avatar
orald
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:31 am
Location: Maximum Security Mental Hospital

Postby Mandy » Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:19 pm

I thought Christians and Jews worshiped the same God :)

Well the whole trip is a form of propaganda, because he wouldn't be doing it if he wasn't campaigning. All politicians do it. I was wondering if prayer notes get stolen very often when the person leaving the note is a celebrity?
User avatar
Mandy
 
Posts: 935
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:28 pm

Postby Phaedrus » Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:28 pm

A Thing of Eternity wrote:That's the correct answer. :D I usually try to get people into a pissing match of who listens to more obscure bands and hates more popular ones, if they get into it I know they're a waste of time. I agree, doesn't matter if a band has one fan or if they're the best selling band ever. I assumed that you were calling Neil pop as an insult, I'm glad to hear that I jumped the gun.


Dude, I've got so much indie cred, I haven't even heard of the bands I listen to. Hell, the bands I listen to have never even heard of themselves, this shit is so obscure. You'll never be as cool as I am.

Uhm...more on topic, I thought anyone was allowed to pray at the wall? Don't Jews, Christians, and Muslims all worship the same God? Something about...respecting the beliefs of others? I don't know, this is all so confusing.
User avatar
Phaedrus
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:18 am

Postby A Thing of Eternity » Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:41 pm

Phaedrus wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:That's the correct answer. :D I usually try to get people into a pissing match of who listens to more obscure bands and hates more popular ones, if they get into it I know they're a waste of time. I agree, doesn't matter if a band has one fan or if they're the best selling band ever. I assumed that you were calling Neil pop as an insult, I'm glad to hear that I jumped the gun.


Dude, I've got so much indie cred, I haven't even heard of the bands I listen to. Hell, the bands I listen to have never even heard of themselves, this shit is so obscure. You'll never be as cool as I am.


:D Good stuff.

Uhm...more on topic, I thought anyone was allowed to pray at the wall? Don't Jews, Christians, and Muslims all worship the same God? Something about...respecting the beliefs of others? I don't know, this is all so confusing.


The Christians worship the same god as the Jews and the Muslims but the Jews and the Muslims don't worship all the same gods as the Christians :? :? :? (I believe both the Jews and Islamists call Xians polythiests and idolators).

Or some other BS similar to the BS I just posted.
I deleted some of your posts because they were derailing the topic and not focusing on the issues asked, and instead going after the authors or their material. That's why. ~ BM
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
 
Posts: 2070
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 1:22 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta

Postby orald » Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:48 pm

Jeez, you seculer, agnostic types are so ignorant about religions sometimes...


Yea, basically the Judeo-Christian god is the same, Allah is the same as well...so what? Will a Christian be welcomed to eat pork on Yom Kipur/ramadan in a synagoge/mosque?
You shoudl try it, Phaed. Preferablly in a mosque.

If you don't get the idea that a Christian praying at the West Wall(not to mention a hyprocretical politician to whom it means jack shit like Obama) might be offensive to a religeous Jew then it explains alot of your views.


And if they identify the guy who stole and sold it he's gonna be soooo boycaughted by his community for it(assuming it wasn't a disguise...who knows? it's really unusual for a religious person to do such a sacriligious thing in the holiest of places to his religion).
"Brian! Brian! Brian!" goes the refrain. "A million deaths were not enough for Brian!"

I'm awake! God help me, I'm awake!
User avatar
orald
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:31 am
Location: Maximum Security Mental Hospital

Postby A Thing of Eternity » Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:06 pm

orald wrote:Jeez, you seculer, agnostic types are so ignorant about religions sometimes...


Aren't you athiest or agnostic? That's the impession I got anyways.

I can see why you'd call that sacrilegious, and I agree, but I'd have to say it should probably rank pretty low on most people's blastphemy-o-meters (compared to say, an athiest pissing on said wall). But then again, I'm an Athiest, so my blasphemy-o-meter hasn't been calibrated in a while.
I deleted some of your posts because they were derailing the topic and not focusing on the issues asked, and instead going after the authors or their material. That's why. ~ BM
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
 
Posts: 2070
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 1:22 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta

Postby chanilover » Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:21 pm

Obama is all style and no substance. He was in the UK over the last few days but the visit was pretty low-key.
Image
chanilover
 
Posts: 481
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 2:52 pm

Postby SandChigger » Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:24 pm

They're not the same fucking god; that's just PR, to try to entice believers to one side of the lines or the others. Only some of the idiots worshiping them actually believe it.

How could they be the same? Judaism and Islam are monotheistic, Christianity is crypto-polytheistic. (The Trinity alone is enough to justify that statement, and in Catholicism you get all the "saint" minor deities.) You maybe could make a case for Yahweh and Allah being the same except for the problem of the Covenant with Israel: if it still holds, then why would Yahweh reveal himself to the guy scratching his fleas in that cave?

(Seriously, the Jewish and ChristoPaulian gods were the same until the later trifuckated...I mean, trifurcated himself into Papa, Sonny & Spook. Now behold while I show you a mystery: 1+1+1=1. Shazam!)

Isn't it nice, though, that this silliness still gives us something to while away the hours speculating on? :roll:
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby chanilover » Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:31 pm

Muslims say the revelations to Muhammad were made to restore the original faith of Abraham which had been corrupted by Jews and Christians. Jews and Christians are referred to as 'People of the Book' and had a protected status in Islamic society. The Wahabbis in Saudi Arabia publish most of the world's Qurans and have tinkered with it, inserting sidenotes which effectively revoke this protected status and make it fair game to treat Jews and Christians as unbelievers.

Well, fancy that.
Image
chanilover
 
Posts: 481
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 2:52 pm

Postby Phaedrus » Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:36 pm

orald wrote:Jeez, you seculer, agnostic types are so ignorant about religions sometimes...


I'm an atheist, thank you.

Yea, basically the Judeo-Christian god is the same, Allah is the same as well...so what? Will a Christian be welcomed to eat pork on Yom Kipur/ramadan in a synagoge/mosque?
You shoudl try it, Phaed. Preferablly in a mosque.


Being an atheist, I'm pretty sure I don't qualify for any of that stuff. Something about blasphemy, I hear.

If you don't get the idea that a Christian praying at the West Wall(not to mention a hyprocretical politician to whom it means jack shit like Obama) might be offensive to a religeous Jew then it explains alot of your views.


I can sort of understand it...but it reminds me of the crazy fundamentalist Christians that are around here, and some of their fanaticism...like the judge in this state that decided to stick a huge copy of the ten commandments in a courtroom, then called persecution when they got rid of his theocratic ass. We had an entire state defending something that's obviously unconstitutional, because they're all insane nutcases. It's a Wall, guys. He's talking to God. Does it really matter if you don't think it's the same guy as your Pal in the Sky?
User avatar
Phaedrus
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:18 am

Postby Mandy » Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:40 pm

Christians don't eat pork in their own churches very often, so why would they do it at a synagogue? lol.

If Christians believe they are worshiping the same god as teh Jews then they are.. it's all in their heads anyway. I don't think I know any Catholics personally, so none of my religious family/friends actually pray to saints and from what I remember the Catholic saints aren't recognized in the Baptist church.. unless they're specifically mentioned in the bible. Shit, I don't remember much of what I was taught in the church.
User avatar
Mandy
 
Posts: 935
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:28 pm

Postby SandChigger » Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:51 pm

Doesn't matter. You're going to Hell already anyway! :lol:
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby Mandy » Sun Jul 27, 2008 5:32 pm

I'll be in good company :)


I think I should sneak some bacon into a mosque.. oh yeah, women aren't allowed into them anyway, are they? I don't know how anyone can be anti-bacon!
User avatar
Mandy
 
Posts: 935
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:28 pm

Postby Phaedrus » Sun Jul 27, 2008 6:17 pm

Mandy wrote:I'll be in good company :)


I think I should sneak some bacon into a mosque.. oh yeah, women aren't allowed into them anyway, are they? I don't know how anyone can be anti-bacon!


That's certainly a mystery.
User avatar
Phaedrus
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:18 am

Postby Omphalos » Sun Jul 27, 2008 6:39 pm

Mandy wrote:I don't know how anyone can be anti-bacon!


Hey, sewer rat may taste like pumpkin pie, but I'd never know 'cause I wouldn't eat the filthy motherfucker. Pigs sleep and root in shit. That's a filthy animal. I ain't eat nothin' that ain't got enough sense enough to disregard its own feces.
Something is about to happen, Hal. Something wonderful!

-James C. Harwood, Science Fiction Writer, Straight (March 5, 1956 - May 25, 2010)



The Omphalos Umbrella Page
User avatar
Omphalos
Alien Overlord
 
Posts: 5678
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:24 pm
Location: The Mighty Central Valley of California

Postby Rakis » Sun Jul 27, 2008 8:23 pm

Mandy wrote:I'll be in good company :)


I think I should sneak some bacon into a mosque.. oh yeah, women aren't allowed into them anyway, are they? I don't know how anyone can be anti-bacon!


Hmmm...if they actually allowed bacon and women in the mosque,i may convert... :P
Neutrinos watch alert !

Image
User avatar
Rakis
 
Posts: 450
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 9:07 pm
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

SOOO-WEEEEEY!

Postby SandChigger » Sun Jul 27, 2008 11:59 pm

Image

Oor, this leedle peegy had roast beef.... :shock:
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby Mandy » Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:52 am

Aw, he's cute.
User avatar
Mandy
 
Posts: 935
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:28 pm

Postby Phaedrus » Mon Jul 28, 2008 12:24 pm

But not cute enough to be spared the slaughterhouse and being eaten, right?
User avatar
Phaedrus
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:18 am

Postby Mandy » Mon Jul 28, 2008 1:58 pm

Hell no, he looks delicious.
User avatar
Mandy
 
Posts: 935
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:28 pm

Postby SandChigger » Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:39 pm

Deess leedle Mandy ate roast peeg.... :D

(He is so ugly he's kinda cute, though.)
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby Omphalos » Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 pm

I can think of a few doggies that would love his ears, all nice and dried up.
Something is about to happen, Hal. Something wonderful!

-James C. Harwood, Science Fiction Writer, Straight (March 5, 1956 - May 25, 2010)



The Omphalos Umbrella Page
User avatar
Omphalos
Alien Overlord
 
Posts: 5678
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:24 pm
Location: The Mighty Central Valley of California

Postby tanzeelat » Tue Jul 29, 2008 8:20 am

Mandy wrote:oh yeah, women aren't allowed into them anyway, are they?


Depends on the mosque. And the sect of Islam. Some mosques are single-sex, some separate the sexes, and some allow them to worship side by side. The Sufis, for example, don't segregate the sexes.
User avatar
tanzeelat
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:34 am

Postby Freakzilla » Tue Jul 29, 2008 8:40 am

I heard a guy on the radio this morning on my way to work saying that he picked Obama up in a bar, gave him head and smoked crack with him.

Good, family entertainment. :lol:
They were destroyed because they lied pretentiously. Have no fear that my wrath
will fall upon you because of your innocent mistakes.

~Leto II, God Emperor
User avatar
Freakzilla
Archivist
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:56 pm
Location: Duluth, Georgia, USA

Postby SandChigger » Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:44 pm

Oh, OK, it's not enough that he's an off-white crypto-Muslim, he also has to be secretly gay?

This is going to get really stupid really fast, isn't it? :roll:


There are times when it's difficult to be proud to be an American. :cry:
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby Freakzilla » Tue Jul 29, 2008 5:42 pm

SandChigger wrote:Oh, OK, it's not enough that he's an off-white crypto-Muslim, he also has to be secretly gay?

This is going to get really stupid really fast, isn't it? :roll:


There are times when it's difficult to be proud to be an American. :cry:


Don't forget about the drugs!
They were destroyed because they lied pretentiously. Have no fear that my wrath
will fall upon you because of your innocent mistakes.

~Leto II, God Emperor
User avatar
Freakzilla
Archivist
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:56 pm
Location: Duluth, Georgia, USA

Postby SandChigger » Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:08 pm

Freakzilla wrote:Don't forget about the drugs!

:lol:

Ahem:

Oh, OK, it's not enough that he's an off-white crypto-Muslim, he also has to be secretly gay AND a drug fiend?

That better? :P


(Sorry...I thought "smoking crack" was some gay slang or other. :( )
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby Purge » Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:42 pm

There is a difficulty in saying Christians and Jews worship or believe in the same God, because so many Christians worship Jesus as a god, which is completely antithetical to the Torah and the God of the Hebrew Bible. This doesn't account for all Christians, but it would certainly seem to be the majority.

As for the status of people of the book in Islamic societies, the "freedom" Jews received under Muslims is largely exaggerated and over-stated. Jews have been persecuted by Muslims since the beginning of Islam. For a time maybe Jews were comparatively better left-alone for certain short periods under Islam than under the Christians, but it didn't take long at all for Islam to perpetuate some of the same persecutions and blood libels as the Christians did.

Yathrib (Medina) was created by Jews after the destruction of Jerusalem, when some Jews fled to the Arabian coasts. When the Jews of Medina refused to accept Islam they were slaughtered, and excuses and apologetics made to justify their murder. The Koran calls Jews descendants of apes and pigs, so any notion the Jews are or have ever been a protected people by Muslims is pretty skewed.

There were a few Muslim leaders who were relatively decent to Jews despite Islam's stance on Jews (Saladin, who also happened to be a Kurd rather than Arab), but they were few and far between.


As for the talk in Israel about Obama and "the note" I have read that apparently Obama released his note to a number of media outlets the day before he even went to/deposited it at the Kotel. Some may see it as cynical, but I've read more than a few news stories painting the whole story as deliberate on the part of the Obama camp, which is aided by the generic PC nature of the note.

Who knows what the real story is. I doubt Israelis are that enthusiastic about Obama becoming president. I don't think there really is a win-situation for Israelis. Bush has been called one of the most Israel-friendly presidents of all time, yet his and Condi's policies are and have been disasterous to Israeli security. Bush has aided Israel's enemies more than he has aided Israel. Perhaps he didn't mean for it to turn out that way, but it has, and he and Condi show no signs of altering their path to doom Israel. Some friends.
Purge
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:06 pm

Postby A Thing of Eternity » Tue Jul 29, 2008 8:13 pm

Purge wrote: The Koran calls Jews descendants of apes and pigs, so any notion the Jews are or have ever been a protected people by Muslims is pretty skewed.


That sounds unlikely, where did you hear that?

EDIT - not to say that you're wrong about the persecution, but everything I know about Muhammed points to him having respect for Jews.
I deleted some of your posts because they were derailing the topic and not focusing on the issues asked, and instead going after the authors or their material. That's why. ~ BM
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
 
Posts: 2070
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 1:22 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta

Postby SandChigger » Tue Jul 29, 2008 8:36 pm

Sure that wasn't grapes and figs?

Seriously, how about a sura reference?

I assume you would back up a claim about the Jewish or Xian scriptures with a definite chapter and verse reference, yes? Kindly do the same for the Koran/Qur'an.
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby tanzeelat » Tue Jul 29, 2008 11:33 pm

Purge wrote:There is a difficulty in saying Christians and Jews worship or believe in the same God, because so many Christians worship Jesus as a god, which is completely antithetical to the Torah and the God of the Hebrew Bible. This doesn't account for all Christians, but it would certainly seem to be the majority.


Jesus was declared the Son of God at the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. Since then his divinity has been Christian doctrine.

Purge wrote:As for the status of people of the book in Islamic societies, the "freedom" Jews received under Muslims is largely exaggerated and over-stated. Jews have been persecuted by Muslims since the beginning of Islam.


Not true. Non-Muslims - Jews and Christians - had to pay a tax but they were free to worship. Muslims consider Islam an extension of Judaism and Christianity. They worship the same God and revere the same prophets.

Purge wrote:Yathrib (Medina) was created by Jews after the destruction of Jerusalem, when some Jews fled to the Arabian coasts. When the Jews of Medina refused to accept Islam they were slaughtered, and excuses and apologetics made to justify their murder.


Sadly, this is true. And yes, Muslim history has tended to whitewash the affair. But, you know, glass houses... There are plenty of atrocities in the history of Christianity, and the Jews were slaughtering innocents as late as, well, earlier this year...

Purge wrote:The Koran calls Jews descendants of apes and pigs, so any notion the Jews are or have ever been a protected people by Muslims is pretty skewed.


Again, not true. Quote the Qur'an please. And not the Wahhabi version. That's been "edited".

Purge wrote:As for the talk in Israel about Obama and "the note" I have read that apparently Obama released his note to a number of media outlets the day before he even went to/deposited it at the Kotel. Some may see it as cynical, but I've read more than a few news stories painting the whole story as deliberate on the part of the Obama camp, which is aided by the generic PC nature of the note.


Did you read that on the Conservapedia?
User avatar
tanzeelat
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:34 am

Postby Purge » Wed Jul 30, 2008 5:49 am

SandChigger wrote:Sure that wasn't grapes and figs?

Seriously, how about a sura reference?

I assume you would back up a claim about the Jewish or Xian scriptures with a definite chapter and verse reference, yes? Kindly do the same for the Koran/Qur'an.


One of my Muslim friends whom I discuss this religious stuff with often cited to me 2:65, 5:60, and 7:160 as referring to Jews being turned into apes and pigs.
Purge
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:06 pm

Postby tanzeelat » Wed Jul 30, 2008 6:07 am

2:65 And well ye knew those amongst you who transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath: We said to them: "Be ye apes, despised and rejected."

5:60 Say: "Shall I point out to you something much worse than this, (as judged) by the treatment it received from Allah? those who incurred the curse of Allah and His wrath, those of whom some He transformed into apes and swine, those who worshipped evil;- these are (many times) worse in rank, and far more astray from the even path!"

7:160 We divided them into twelve tribes or nations. We directed Moses by inspiration, when his (thirsty) people asked him for water: "Strike the rock with thy staff": out of it there gushed forth twelve springs: Each group knew its own place for water. We gave them the shade of clouds, and sent down to them manna and quails, (saying): "Eat of the good things We have provided for you": (but they rebelled); to Us they did no harm, but they harmed their own souls.


No mention of Jews there. The Wahhabis might have stuck something in, but the Arabic (which they dare not change) certainly makes no mention of Jews.

However - I've just been doing a bit of reading around the subject - the sura are repsonses to events around the time of writing, when Mohammed was at odds with several Jewish tribes in and around Medina. I can't see a direct reference to "People of the Book" (i.e., Jews and Christians) but it seems clear they were the targets. Or rather, those People of the Book who failed to observe their own religious practices, or to admit the right of Islam. Which is, let's face it, no different to the first commandment. Or the fourth.
User avatar
tanzeelat
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:34 am

Postby Purge » Wed Jul 30, 2008 6:27 am

Jesus was declared the Son of God at the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. Since then his divinity has been Christian doctrine.


Almost unanimously so. However, that doesn't mean that the belief suddenly came out of thin air in 325 AD.

Not true. Non-Muslims - Jews and Christians - had to pay a tax but they were free to worship. Muslims consider Islam an extension of Judaism and Christianity. They worship the same God and revere the same prophets.


Jews were made subordinant to Muslims. Being made to pay a tax to escape death and expulsion =/= tolerance. They were infidels perpetually in the place of having to acknowledge Muslim superiority. In fact it was Islam in the 9th century who first made Jews first wear distinctive yellow badges to make it easier to identify them (as there was a long list of things Jews weren't legally allowed to do) as the medival Christians and later Nazis eventually did.

The notion of some golden age of tolerance under Islam is a myth. Unfortunately Jews have helped in perpetuatuating this myth as well, so I am not blaming it on Muslims.

Again, I am not saying that it was always bad, but Jews were never secure in Muslim lands, and rarely enjoyed long periods of stability and safety. Just like in Europe, one day they were invited in, the next they were turned against and blamed for one thing or another.

Freedom of worship? That's debateable. Perhaps freedom not to be converted to Islam, but even that was not always the case as was the case with the Almohads, in Yemen, Morocco, and Baghdad among others.

As for them revering the same prophets, that is not the case. Neither Muhammad nor Jesus are Jewish prophets, and Muhammad is the most exalted prophet in Islam, while Jesus has a very exalted status in Islam too as the messiah and will descend from heaven to aid the Mahdi in war.

In Islam's defense that are purely monotheistic, which can't be said for all of Christianity.

Sadly, this is true. And yes, Muslim history has tended to whitewash the affair. But, you know, glass houses... There are plenty of atrocities in the history of Christianity, and the Jews were slaughtering innocents as late as, well, earlier this year...


:roll:

Again, not true. Quote the Qur'an please. And not the Wahhabi version. That's been "edited".


I cited the verses in my previous post. They don't literally say Jews are descendants of apes and pigs so I admit to not having quoted it precisely, as I didn't have it in front of me.

Did you read that on the Conservapedia?


Never heard of it. No, I am speaking of the claims of a certain Israeli paper.

Ma'ariv, the paper which has come under fire for publishing the note has claimed: "Obama's note was published in Maariv and other international publications following his authorization to make the content of the note public. Obama submitted a copy of the note to media outlets when he left his hotel in Jerusalem."
Purge
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:06 pm

Postby Purge » Wed Jul 30, 2008 6:38 am

tanzeelat wrote:
2:65 And well ye knew those amongst you who transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath: We said to them: "Be ye apes, despised and rejected."

5:60 Say: "Shall I point out to you something much worse than this, (as judged) by the treatment it received from Allah? those who incurred the curse of Allah and His wrath, those of whom some He transformed into apes and swine, those who worshipped evil;- these are (many times) worse in rank, and far more astray from the even path!"

7:160 We divided them into twelve tribes or nations. We directed Moses by inspiration, when his (thirsty) people asked him for water: "Strike the rock with thy staff": out of it there gushed forth twelve springs: Each group knew its own place for water. We gave them the shade of clouds, and sent down to them manna and quails, (saying): "Eat of the good things We have provided for you": (but they rebelled); to Us they did no harm, but they harmed their own souls.


No mention of Jews there. The Wahhabis might have stuck something in, but the Arabic (which they dare not change) certainly makes no mention of Jews.

However - I've just been doing a bit of reading around the subject - the sura are repsonses to events around the time of writing, when Mohammed was at odds with several Jewish tribes in and around Medina. I can't see a direct reference to "People of the Book" (i.e., Jews and Christians) but it seems clear they were the targets. Or rather, those People of the Book who failed to observe their own religious practices, or to admit the right of Islam. Which is, let's face it, no different to the first commandment. Or the fourth.


Sabbath observance only applies to Jews, as no other people observes or is commanded to observe it. The first line couldn't realistically be applied to anyone else but Jews (Christians do not observe the Sabbath in any way shape or form).

Also, I mistakenly wrote 160, I meant 7:165.

And no, speaking of Jews being turned into apes and pigs is nothing like the first and fourth commandments.

Neither of the commandments you mentioned have anything to do with turning people into apes and pigs. Any punishment for not observing certain commandments can only be carried out by a Jewish Sanhedrin while the Temple stands, which needless to say neither were in effect in Yathrib in the 7th century (even if some Jews were violating Shabbat, a claim which I take with a grain of salt).
Purge
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:06 pm

Postby The Phantom » Wed Jul 30, 2008 6:59 am

Purge wrote:Sabbath observance only applies to Jews, as no other people observes or is commanded to observe it. The first line couldn't realistically be applied to anyone else but Jews (Christians do not observe the Sabbath in any way shape or form).


"the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath."

Christians, for the most part, still observe a day of rest upon which they break from their regular work and spend the day in worship and fellowship with fellow believers. the Jewish sabbath laws and ritual observance were Talmudic not Mosaic law, and are therefore justly ignored by Christians.
User avatar
The Phantom
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:06 pm
Location: Toronto

Postby tanzeelat » Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:07 am

Purge wrote:Sabbath observance only applies to Jews, as no other people observes or is commanded to observe it. The first line couldn't realistically be applied to anyone else but Jews (Christians do not observe the Sabbath in any way shape or form).


Er, "sabbath" means day of rest. For Christians, it's Sunday, for Muslims, it's Friday. All People of the Book observe a day of rest.

(Um, the Arabic actually says as-sabbat, which means "Saturday" not "Sabbath". So, clearly a reference to Qurayza et al.)

Purge wrote:Also, I mistakenly wrote 160, I meant 7:165.


This one?

When they disregarded the warnings that had been given them, We rescued those who forbade Evil; but We visited the wrong-doers with a grievous punishment because they were given to transgression.


Purge wrote:And no, speaking of Jews being turned into apes and pigs is nothing like the first and fourth commandments.


The transgressions mentioned in the sura are those covered by those two commandments - worship no other god but me, and observe the sabbath.

But, and it's a point worth making many times, no religion is free of sin, and no religion should be characterised by the beliefs of its extremists. I don't believe all Jews belong to Irgun, I don't believe all Christians are Branch-Dravidians, I don't believe all Muslims are fully paid-up members of Al-Qa'eda. And people who do believe any of those should know better.
User avatar
tanzeelat
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:34 am

Postby tanzeelat » Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:21 am

Purge wrote:Jews were made subordinant to Muslims. Being made to pay a tax to escape death and expulsion =/= tolerance. They were infidels perpetually in the place of having to acknowledge Muslim superiority.


So, that's be like the way Jews treat Arabs in Israel, then.

Purge wrote:The notion of some golden age of tolerance under Islam is a myth. Unfortunately Jews have helped in perpetuatuating this myth as well, so I am not blaming it on Muslims.


It is apparently no myth according to The Middle East by Bernard Lewis.

Purge wrote:Freedom of worship? That's debateable. Perhaps freedom not to be converted to Islam, but even that was not always the case as was the case with the Almohads, in Yemen, Morocco, and Baghdad among others.


Isolated incidents do not make a global policy. People of the Book were free to worship for much of the period of the Islamic Empire.

Purge wrote:As for them revering the same prophets, that is not the case. Neither Muhammad nor Jesus are Jewish prophets, and Muhammad is the most exalted prophet in Islam, while Jesus has a very exalted status in Islam too as the messiah and will descend from heaven to aid the Mahdi in war.


I meant that Islams reveres Judaic and Christian prophets. AFAIK, no religion is backwards-compatible, so it's no surprise Judaism doesn't revere Christian or Muslim prophets. Likewise, Christianity and Mohamed.

Purge wrote:Ma'ariv, the paper which has come under fire for publishing the note has claimed: "Obama's note was published in Maariv and other international publications following his authorization to make the content of the note public. Obama submitted a copy of the note to media outlets when he left his hotel in Jerusalem."


Not that I have any stake in the US presidential election, or even any real interest in it, but I would prefer Obama to win - he'd be safer for the planet as a whole, I think. Having said that, Ma'ariv's claim sounds like typical right-wing smear tactics.
User avatar
tanzeelat
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:34 am

Postby Purge » Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:37 am

Baraka Bryan wrote:
Purge wrote:Sabbath observance only applies to Jews, as no other people observes or is commanded to observe it. The first line couldn't realistically be applied to anyone else but Jews (Christians do not observe the Sabbath in any way shape or form).


"the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath."

Christians, for the most part, still observe a day of rest upon which they break from their regular work and spend the day in worship and fellowship with fellow believers. the Jewish sabbath laws and ritual observance were Talmudic not Mosaic law, and are therefore justly ignored by Christians.


That is a quote from the Christian bible, not from the Hebrew Bible, and Christianity never has and never will dictate what constitutes Sabbath observance.

Sabbath observance was never commanded to the gentile nations. It was only commanded to the Jews who accepted the Torah as their obligation. The commandments begin "I am Hashem your God Who brought you out from the land of Egypt, from the house of slavery..." a reference which does not refer to any other people except those who are Jews or become Jews.

The importance of Sabbath observance is found throughout the Torah. Christians believing they are not obligated to observe it and telling Jews and others they don't have to either is amusing considering it was never a command to them, but it is absolutely such for a Jew.

Anyway, I digress. Shabbat is a very particular day entailing very particular observances, ones which Christians do not and never have observed. Thus, a reference to Shabbat (the name of the day) is not the same as a reference to the Christian day of rest on Sunday (which is called yom rishon).
Purge
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:06 pm

Postby Purge » Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:19 am

So, that's be like the way Jews treat Arabs in Israel, then.


If you mean better than they are treated in their own countries, then no, they are very much different. The situations couldn't be any more different. Israel unfortunately has allowed no shortage of Jew-haters to fill the Knesset with the type of anti-semitic garbage which is often found in the UN.

There are also no shortage of Arab groups within Israel who daily call for the destruction of the nation they live in, while Jews are banned from praying at the most holy site the Temple Mount for fear of offending Muslims. No, there was never any such situation for Jews in Muslim lands.

It is apparently no myth according to The Middle East by Bernard Lewis.


Unfortunately the claim of this golden age was largely perpetuated by Heinrich Graetz and has pretty much continued to be perpetuated by Jews despite the body of evidence to the contrary. The claim that Jews were often better off living under Islam than Jews living at the same time under Christians isn't fantastic.

In many cases that was true and it would've been difficult for Muslims to treat their Jews worse. Jews often found ways to rise to somewhat productive positions in both the Muslim and Christian worlds, but there was always a reaction to it which had repercussions for the entire Jewish communities.

The fact is Jews were second class citizens at best, they could not do many things Muslims could do, and were punished if they did. Regardless of what some may think of Israel, their policies and treatment of Arabs comes nowhere near how Jews were treated under Muslim rule up until Israel was founded and most left and were kicked out.

Isolated incidents do not make a global policy. People of the Book were free to worship for much of the period of the Islamic Empire.


Conversion attempts may have been somewhat isolated, however general disgust towards and mistreatment of Jews was widespread throughout all of the Muslim empire.

I meant that Islams reveres Judaic and Christian prophets. AFAIK, no religion is backwards-compatible, so it's no surprise Judaism doesn't revere Christian or Muslim prophets. Likewise, Christianity and Mohamed.


Fair enough.

Not that I have any stake in the US presidential election, or even any real interest in it, but I would prefer Obama to win - he'd be safer for the planet as a whole, I think. Having said that, Ma'ariv's claim sounds like typical right-wing smear tactics.


Ma'ariv is pretty far from right wing. They are considered to be somewhat middle of the road, while their main editors are actually pretty far to the left.
Purge
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:06 pm

Postby orald » Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:25 am

Yom rishon... :roll: Just tell him it's a normal Sunday to us.

Now, did anyone here, not Jewish, knew that to start a fire or work etc on Saturday entails a death sentence by the Torah(not Talmudic, direct biblical refrence)?

Frankly, I piss on Christianity and the mock it made of the Jewish religion.
It's like comparing canonical Dune(in terms of Dune=hard to read/Judaism=hard to follow) and New Dung(opposite).

First things Paul in his wisdom changed were all the annoying kosher/shabbath/circumcision etc laws so all the gentiles could join(and the day of rest moved to Sunday to distinguish between the two).
"Brian! Brian! Brian!" goes the refrain. "A million deaths were not enough for Brian!"

I'm awake! God help me, I'm awake!
User avatar
orald
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:31 am
Location: Maximum Security Mental Hospital

Postby tanzeelat » Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:41 am

Purge wrote:If you mean better than they are treated in their own countries, then no, they are very much different. The situations couldn't be any more different. Israel unfortunately has allowed no shortage of Jew-haters to fill the Knesset with the type of anti-semitic garbage which is often found in the UN.


First, the UN is not anti-semitic. Neither are Arabs. They are anti-Zionist. Arabs are semites, the same as Jews.

Purge wrote:There are also no shortage of Arab groups within Israel who daily call for the destruction of the nation they live in, while Jews are banned from praying at the most holy site the Temple Mount for fear of offending Muslims. No, there was never any such situation for Jews in Muslim lands.


I'm not sure what point you're arguing here. Jews were treated as second-class citizens in the Islamic Empire. Arabs are treated as second-class citizens in Israel. Spot the difference.

Purge wrote:Jews often found ways to rise to somewhat productive positions in both the Muslim and Christian worlds, but there was always a reaction to it which had repercussions for the entire Jewish communities.


True enough. Jews have been historically treated badly everywhere. And not only due to religious differences. The York massacre of Jews in 1190 was as much a result of Jewish wealth as it was religious panic.

Purge wrote:Regardless of what some may think of Israel, their policies and treatment of Arabs comes nowhere near how Jews were treated under Muslim rule up until Israel was founded and most left and were kicked out.


I don't recall any caliphates building bloody great huge walls to keep the Jews out of their cities.

Purge wrote:Conversion attempts may have been somewhat isolated, however general disgust towards and mistreatment of Jews was widespread throughout all of the Muslim empire.


Citations, please. Statements like that are not supportable.

Purge wrote:Ma'ariv is pretty far from right wing. They are considered to be somewhat middle of the road, while their main editors are actually pretty far to the left.


Point taken.
User avatar
tanzeelat
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:34 am

Postby orald » Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:53 am

Tan, stuff your "oh poor Arabs are being massacred by the evil Jews" down your A-hole. There's no massacre, there are no bodies, mass graves etc.
-They have full worship rights(they actually have access and control over some of the holiest[including THE holiest] sites to Judaism- I can't visit those places without their authorisation, even for, say, archiological purposes- how's that for freedom of fucking worship in my own friggin' country?).
-They get reserved places in universities and have their passing grades lowered.
-There's not much policing of structural diviations(i.e buildings/extra rooms built without permit like the rest of us need to get) and yet they cry "murder" whenever the cops are sent to demolish a building.

Maybe you heard about the new blood libel, the "murdered" kid the bad Israeli nazi-soldiers butchered in a peaceful, loving demonstration?
Well, we've heard about their dead kids and massacres before, haven't we? :roll:

You don't need to spell out J-E-W to understand the Quran is saying alot of bad things about them, unless you try to intentionally ignore it(as you seem to do with your KJA-speak).

Jews had a great time in Muslim countries as they had in Christian ones, right? Oh, sure, the odd pogrom and blood libel here and there, but nothing much, eh?

Oh, and Ma'ariv putting out right-wing propoganda...funny that. :lol:
"Brian! Brian! Brian!" goes the refrain. "A million deaths were not enough for Brian!"

I'm awake! God help me, I'm awake!
User avatar
orald
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:31 am
Location: Maximum Security Mental Hospital

Postby orald » Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:05 am

Ah, I see, he's an ignorant lil' runt, ain't he? Walls to keep the poor Arabs from the Jews. :cry:
"Brian! Brian! Brian!" goes the refrain. "A million deaths were not enough for Brian!"

I'm awake! God help me, I'm awake!
User avatar
orald
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:31 am
Location: Maximum Security Mental Hospital

Postby Purge » Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:34 am

First, the UN is not anti-semitic. Neither are Arabs. They are anti-Zionist. Arabs are semites, the same as Jews.


Zionism can't be detached from its Jewishness. It is at its heart the 2,000 year old desire on the part of those Jews whose families were forcefully driven from the land (many other Jews remained all this time) to return to the land of their heritage. Regardless of whether or not Christians suddenly decided in the last century or two that they support Jews living in the land does not change the fact that Zionism in its truest meaning is a distinctly Jewish thing.

Anti-Zionist is nothing but a catch phrase, because it is much more acceptable than outright claiming to be anti-Jewish, which is what anti-Zionist ultimately amounts to.

And the logic behind them not being anti-semitic because "Arabs are semites" is fallacious. Anti-semitism was coined specifically as a reference to Jews, not to a broad general group of languages, or to the biblical notion of Yisraeli and Yishmaeli alike descending from Shem thru Avraham.

The fact is they are anti-Jewish. Both the UN and the Arab League on the whole have demonstrated officially for decades.

I'm not sure what point you're arguing here. Jews were treated as second-class citizens in the Islamic Empire. Arabs are treated as second-class citizens in Israel. Spot the difference.


No matter how badly you wish there to be a correlation between Muslim treatement of Jews and Israeli treatment of Arabs it will never work or be anywhere near equivilent. At no point in history were Jewish rights put ahead of Muslim rights such as is the case with most of the holiest sites in Judaism in Israel. Jews cannot offer prayers on the Temple Mount, Jews have handed over and seen the tombs of Joseph and Joshua destroyed and desecrated with excrement.

The Israeli government allows their Muslim citizens to carry out these things so as not to upset the Muslim world (which doesn't work, mind you, because existing is the biggest insult of them all). Arabs are able to be voted into the Knessett where they spend their time condemning Jews and calling for the fall of Israel, for it to be conquered by the Arabs.

What most people who decry Israeli treatment of Arabs ignore is the fact that for the large majority of time since 67 movement and checkpoints throughout Israel was relaxed and simple for Arabs and Jews alike to traverse the entirety of the land. It was this lax security which the PLO mocked in the 60s and 70s, which allowed it to travel to Golan, to Galilee, to Gaza, to Tel Aviv, anywhere in the territory. Not until the Arab uprisings did security increase to the points they are today.

True enough. Jews have been historically treated badly everywhere. And not only due to religious differences. The York massacre of Jews in 1190 was as much a result of Jewish wealth as it was religious panic.


Wealth is just an excuse and an attempt to dejudaize anti-semitism. The fact is that one is born a Jew whether they choose to follow the religion or not. Poor Jews have often faced the brunt of massacres despite having no wealth or pull or sway over anything. The fact that these Jews were rich has ultimately little to do with why they were slaughtered, as the town didn't go around slaughtering its wealthy gentile-folk.

I don't recall any caliphates building bloody great huge walls to keep the Jews out of their cities.


I don't recall Jews blowing themselves up to kill caliphates and Muslim citizens in general, nor engaging in war against the countries and nations they lived in. Persecution of and murder of Jews on the parts of Muslims and Christians happened on a whim, not for the sake of security, or based on any crime or wrong committed against them by their Jewish subjects. The Jews were not an enemy within, but they were always treated as such. Again, your equivilency has no legs.

Citations, please. Statements like that are not supportable.


There are records of the treatment of Jews from pretty much every period. It is not easily supportable, because no matter what source I provide you will say that it doesn't cover all lands, and I admit that I probably can't find a source for every year of every land over the last 1,300 years. You can look at the treatment of Jews as recently as the early 20th century in any Arab and/or Muslim country and trace it back. You will find ample evidence to support the claim that Jews were treated with contempt and mistreated as dhimmis all throughout the Muslim and Arab worlds, lands some of us had lived in for 2,500 years.
Last edited by Purge on Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
Purge
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:06 pm

Postby tanzeelat » Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:34 am

orald wrote:Tan, stuff your "oh poor Arabs are being massacred by the evil Jews" down your A-hole. There's no massacre, there are no bodies, mass graves etc.


Either discuss the subject like an adult, or shtok.
User avatar
tanzeelat
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:34 am

Postby tanzeelat » Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:53 am

Purge wrote:Anti-Zionist is nothing but a catch phrase, because it is much more acceptable than outright claiming to be anti-Jewish, which is what anti-Zionist ultimately amounts to.


Absolute rubbish. It's quite easy to be anti-Zionist - opposed to the political aims of the Zionist movement - while not being anti-Judaism or anti-Jew. Zionism is a political movement, not a race or a religion.

Purge wrote:And the logic behind them not being anti-semitic because "Arabs are semites" is fallacious. Anti-semitism was coined specifically as a reference to Jews, not to a broad general group of languages, or to the biblical notion of Yisraeli and Yishmaeli alike descending from Shem thru Avraham.


The logic is only fallacious inasmuch ignorant people believe it applies only to Jews. Using a word inaccurately still won't change its meaning.

Jewish rights not put ahead of Muslim rights? Er, how about Israeli settlers building on land mandated to the Palestinian Authority? How about Arabs not being given Israeli passports, but instead having "travel papers" which they had to renew every five years - or their property would be confiscated. How about cars owned by Arabs having different number plates to those owned by Jews, so the army knew who to stop at checkpoints?

Purge wrote:Wealth is just an excuse and an attempt to dejudaize anti-semitism. The fact is that one is born a Jew whether they choose to follow the religion or not. Poor Jews have often faced the brunt of massacres despite having no wealth or pull or sway over anything. The fact that these Jews were rich has ultimately little to do with why they were slaughtered, as the town didn't go around slaughtering its wealthy gentile-folk.


Again, rubbish. Because usury was a sin for Christians, but not in Judaism (providing the lendee wasn't a Jew), the Jews became moneylenders. Which in turn led to them being wealthy. I'm not saying the York massacre, or other pogroms, was driven entirely by envy of Jewish merchants' wealth. But it was certainly a factor. Holding up the anti-semitism card as a catch-all condemnation is unhelpful.

Purge wrote:I don't recall Jews blowing themselves up to kill caliphates, nor engaging in war against the countries and nations they lived in.


I do. The King David Hotel bomb. The massacre at Deir Yassin.

Purge wrote:It is not easily supportable, because no matter what source I provide you will say that it doesn't cover all lands, and I admit that I probably can't find a source for every year of every land over the last 1,300 years.


If you can't find sources for all lands and all times, then you can't say it happened all the time. That's just common sense.
User avatar
tanzeelat
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:34 am

Postby A Thing of Eternity » Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:42 am

orald wrote:Yom rishon... :roll: Just tell him it's a normal Sunday to us.

Now, did anyone here, not Jewish, knew that to start a fire or work etc on Saturday entails a death sentence by the Torah(not Talmudic, direct biblical refrence)?

Frankly, I piss on Christianity and the mock it made of the Jewish religion.
It's like comparing canonical Dune(in terms of Dune=hard to read/Judaism=hard to follow) and New Dung(opposite).

First things Paul in his wisdom changed were all the annoying kosher/shabbath/circumcision etc laws so all the gentiles could join(and the day of rest moved to Sunday to distinguish between the two).


Let's let Tanz and Purge debate this one eh? They're much more eloquent than you or I, and it's very informative and interesting to read. I would hate to see the debate end because of someone injecting inflammatory remarks and turning it into a flame war.

I agree with you though, the only sequel with more inconsistencies than a new Dune book is the new testament. :D I used to have a big cross-referenced list of every passage where it directly contradicted the old books - good for laughs.
I deleted some of your posts because they were derailing the topic and not focusing on the issues asked, and instead going after the authors or their material. That's why. ~ BM
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
 
Posts: 2070
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 1:22 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta

Postby Freakzilla » Wed Jul 30, 2008 11:56 am

A Thing of Eternity wrote:I used to have a big cross-referenced list of every passage where it directly contradicted the old books - good for laughs.


Skeptics Annotated Bilble - Contradictions by Book
They were destroyed because they lied pretentiously. Have no fear that my wrath
will fall upon you because of your innocent mistakes.

~Leto II, God Emperor
User avatar
Freakzilla
Archivist
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:56 pm
Location: Duluth, Georgia, USA

Postby Omphalos » Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:18 pm

Internet Bible = Immediate trust. :P
Something is about to happen, Hal. Something wonderful!

-James C. Harwood, Science Fiction Writer, Straight (March 5, 1956 - May 25, 2010)



The Omphalos Umbrella Page
User avatar
Omphalos
Alien Overlord
 
Posts: 5678
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:24 pm
Location: The Mighty Central Valley of California

Postby Freakzilla » Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:30 pm

I love it. Apart from contradictions you can also sort through absurdities, injustices, cruelties and violence, intolerances, science and history, interpretations, family values, women, good stuff, prophecies, sex, language and homosexuality as topics.

It also has the Quran and Book of Mormon

Preface
For nearly two billion people, the Bible is a holy book containing the revealed word of God. It is the source of their religious beliefs. Yet few of those who believe in the Bible have actually read it.

This must seem strange to those who have never read the Bible. But anyone who has struggled through its repetitious and tiresome trivia, seemingly endless genealogies, pointless stories and laws, knows that the Bible is not an easy book to read. So it is not surprising that those that begin reading at Genesis seldom make it through Leviticus. And the few Bible-believers that survive to the bitter end of Revelation must continually face a disturbing dilemma: their faith tells them they should read the Bible, but by reading the Bible they endanger their faith.

When I was a Christian, I never read the Bible. Not all the way through, anyway. The problem was that I believed the Bible to be the inspired and inerrant word of God, yet the more I read it, the less credible that belief became. I finally decided that to protect my faith in the Bible, I'd better quit trying to read it.

I think most Bible-believers find themselves in that position -- although few will admit it. Not even to themselves.

The most popular solution to this problem is to leave the Bible reading to the clergy. The clergy then quote from the Bible in their writings and sermons, and explain its meaning to the others. Extreme care is taken, of course, to quote from the parts of the Bible that display the best side of God and to ignore those that don't. That this approach means that only a fraction of the Bible is ever referenced is not a great problem. Because although the Bible is not a very good book, it is a very long one.

But if so little of the Bible is actually used, then why isn't the rest deleted? Why aren't the repetitious passages -- which are often contradictory as well -- combined into single, consistent ones? Why aren't the hundreds of cruelties and absurdities eliminated? Why aren't the bad parts of the "Good Book" removed?

Such an approach would result in a much better, but much smaller book. To make it a truly good book, though, would require massive surgery, and little would remain. For nearly all passages in the Bible are objectionable in one way or another. But with a little luck and much careful editing, perhaps a small pamphlet could be produced from the Bible -- one that could honestly be called good.

Perhaps. But to the Bible-believer the entire Bible is inspired, and has God as its author. Each passage contains a message from God that must not be altered or deleted. So the believer is simply stuck with the Bible. He or she has no choice but to call it good, true, beautiful, and perfect. When the Bible seems otherwise, as it nearly always does, the problem lies with the believer's interpretation of the Bible -- not with the Bible itself.

The believer's defense of the Bible is assisted by those who publish it. They are invariably believers as well, and are interested in promoting and defending the Bible. They do so in many ways, but their efforts usually include at least some of the following:

Point out consistencies between the redundant passages, while never mentioning the contradictions.

Provide explanations and excuses for the absurdities, cruelties, vulgarities, and insults to women -- when they choose not to ignore them entirely.

Emphasize the relative few passages that present a decent image of God.

Attach footnotes to explain away any difficulties.
Millions of such Bibles are published and distributed each year by believers in their tireless and tiresome effort to propagate their beliefs. Consequently, nearly everyone, whether believer or skeptic, has at least one copy in his or her possession. Among these Bibles will be found many different versions, but all have one thing in common: all are believer-friendly editions that support, promote, and defend the Bible.

The Skeptic's Annotated Bible attempts to remedy this imbalance. It includes the entire text of the King James Version of the Bible, but without the pro-Bible propaganda. Instead, passages are highlighted that are an embarrassment to the Bible-believer, and the parts of the Bible that are never read in any Church, Bible study group, or Sunday School class are emphasized. For it is these passages that test the claims of the Bible-believer. The contradictions and false prophecies show that the Bible is not inerrant; the cruelties, injustices, and insults to women, that it is neither good nor just.

The SAB will help those who believe in the Bible to honestly reconsider that belief. It will help those who are unfamiliar with the Bible to resist the temptation to believe. And it will help those who have already rejected the Bible defend their position.

It is time for us all to stop believing in, or pretending to believe in, a book that is so unworthy of belief.
They were destroyed because they lied pretentiously. Have no fear that my wrath
will fall upon you because of your innocent mistakes.

~Leto II, God Emperor
User avatar
Freakzilla
Archivist
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:56 pm
Location: Duluth, Georgia, USA

Postby Freakzilla » Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:31 pm

Some of my other favorite "religious" sites:

www.bettybowers.com

www.landoverbaptist.org

:wink:
They were destroyed because they lied pretentiously. Have no fear that my wrath
will fall upon you because of your innocent mistakes.

~Leto II, God Emperor
User avatar
Freakzilla
Archivist
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:56 pm
Location: Duluth, Georgia, USA

Postby A Thing of Eternity » Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:44 pm

Freakzilla wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:I used to have a big cross-referenced list of every passage where it directly contradicted the old books - good for laughs.


Skeptics Annotated Bilble - Contradictions by Book


Ha! That's the one! Thanks Freak. I used to just love picking random contradictions and emailing them to religious groups when I was kid. Ah memories... never did get any responses.
I deleted some of your posts because they were derailing the topic and not focusing on the issues asked, and instead going after the authors or their material. That's why. ~ BM
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
 
Posts: 2070
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 1:22 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta

Postby The Phantom » Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:59 pm

Freakzilla wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:I used to have a big cross-referenced list of every passage where it directly contradicted the old books - good for laughs.


Skeptics Annotated Bilble - Contradictions by Book



k i took a look. I'm not one of the Christians that will argue there is nothing contradicting within the translated bible, but a lot of those are stretches. they come down to interpretation of a word or nuance... a little stretched.
User avatar
The Phantom
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:06 pm
Location: Toronto

Postby A Thing of Eternity » Wed Jul 30, 2008 1:27 pm

Baraka Bryan wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:I used to have a big cross-referenced list of every passage where it directly contradicted the old books - good for laughs.


Skeptics Annotated Bilble - Contradictions by Book



k i took a look. I'm not one of the Christians that will argue there is nothing contradicting within the translated bible, but a lot of those are stretches. they come down to interpretation of a word or nuance... a little stretched.


True, (and if you check out the rest of the sections Freak listed, many passages are taken a bit out of context) but a lot aren't too.
I deleted some of your posts because they were derailing the topic and not focusing on the issues asked, and instead going after the authors or their material. That's why. ~ BM
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
 
Posts: 2070
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 1:22 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta

Postby The Phantom » Wed Jul 30, 2008 1:35 pm

A Thing of Eternity wrote:
Baraka Bryan wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:I used to have a big cross-referenced list of every passage where it directly contradicted the old books - good for laughs.


Skeptics Annotated Bilble - Contradictions by Book



k i took a look. I'm not one of the Christians that will argue there is nothing contradicting within the translated bible, but a lot of those are stretches. they come down to interpretation of a word or nuance... a little stretched.


True, (and if you check out the rest of the sections Freak listed, many passages are taken a bit out of context) but a lot aren't too.


no doubt. my view is translators arent inspired and mistakes are easily done. that and since the newest versions we have of most of the OT is still thousands of years after the source, mistakes would easily be amplified over time. i choose to look at the overall message rather than nitpick at the minor details.
User avatar
The Phantom
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:06 pm
Location: Toronto

Postby A Thing of Eternity » Wed Jul 30, 2008 1:42 pm

Baraka Bryan wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:
Baraka Bryan wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:I used to have a big cross-referenced list of every passage where it directly contradicted the old books - good for laughs.


Skeptics Annotated Bilble - Contradictions by Book



k i took a look. I'm not one of the Christians that will argue there is nothing contradicting within the translated bible, but a lot of those are stretches. they come down to interpretation of a word or nuance... a little stretched.


True, (and if you check out the rest of the sections Freak listed, many passages are taken a bit out of context) but a lot aren't too.


no doubt. my view is translators arent inspired and mistakes are easily done. that and since the newest versions we have of most of the OT is still thousands of years after the source, mistakes would easily be amplified over time. i choose to look at the overall message rather than nitpick at the minor details.


That would be the way to do it. I know some people who honestly think that the bible remains unchanged from thousands of years ago... lets just say that would really require divine intervention to be true. :wink:

There is also the possibility though that many of those inconsitancies were present in the original text.
I deleted some of your posts because they were derailing the topic and not focusing on the issues asked, and instead going after the authors or their material. That's why. ~ BM
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
 
Posts: 2070
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 1:22 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta

Postby Purge » Wed Jul 30, 2008 1:57 pm

Absolute rubbish. It's quite easy to be anti-Zionist - opposed to the political aims of the Zionist movement - while not being anti-Judaism or anti-Jew. Zionism is a political movement, not a race or a religion.


Trying to frame Zionism as a movement seperate from Jewishness is faulty from the get-go. Zionism is the Jewish historical connection, laws, God with the land of Eretz Yisrael. It is the 1,900 year-old yearning of those Jews whose families were driven out (many families remained through the millenia and have never exprienced the diaspora, though lived under foreign rulers who took over the land) to return to the land of their heritage.

Jewishness is not a race or religion. One can be born a Jew but never practice the mitzvot (though that obviously isn't the ideal). Someone can be born a non-Jew anywhere in the world and become a Jew by accepting the obligations of the Torah. The Jews are a nation. The laws of the Torah are the laws of a nation. The land is the home of our nation, where hundreds of laws applicapable nowhere else in the world are obligatory. Calling it Judaism and a religion is a modern designation that does not capture what being Jewish is an entails.

Anti-Zionism is nothing but an internationally acceptable form of anti-Jewishness. If you knew anything about Jewish prayers, the prayers we have been saying for 2,000 years, some of which we had begun saying 500 years earlier during the Babylonian Exile, our wedding ceremonies, our funerals, every facet of our lives, you would know the role and place Israel and Jerusalem have to Jews. They have been foremost in our thoughts, prayers, and actions since long before Europe had a clue about cleanliness and civilization, and before Islam was a kernal in the mind of Muhammad. Jews and the Land (Zionism) cannot be seperated to the point where you can oppose one but not the other.

The logic is only fallacious inasmuch ignorant people believe it applies only to Jews. Using a word inaccurately still won't change its meaning.


The term was specifically coined as a reference to Jews. If you want to redefine the word go for it, but it means what it means. It is all semantic BS anyway, because it's just a nice way of saying anti-Jewish. The UN as a tool for Muslims, and the Arab League and many non-Arab Muslim states are anti-Jewish. That's accurate.

They didn't drive over a million Jews from the lands they had lived in for almost three thousand years because they were part of some Zionist political part. They did it because they were Jews, and because they are anti-Jewish.

Jewish rights not put ahead of Muslim rights? Er, how about Israeli settlers building on land mandated to the Palestinian Authority? How about Arabs not being given Israeli passports, but instead having "travel papers" which they had to renew every five years - or their property would be confiscated. How about cars owned by Arabs having different number plates to those owned by Jews, so the army knew who to stop at checkpoints?


Jews are the most religiously persecuted people in Israel, Gaza (not anymore, since it is now Judenrein), and Judea/Samaria. Jews cannot ascend and pray on the Temple Mount, the single holiest site in Judaism, so that the Muslim world is not upset. The Muslim Wakf has carried out unauthorized construction, destroying numerous artifacts, digging all over the Temple Mount and dumping them in the Kidron Valley like trash heaps with no repercussion. The sites of the tombs of Joseph and Joshua have been burned and desecrated with excrement in the hands of the Arabs. Jews rarely are allowed to visit these sites since they went to the PA, and only every numerous months in the middle of the night with large groups do visits to these places take place for Jews.

As for the difficulty of Arabs traveling between the territories, what is often ignored about this is the fact that such security is only extremely recent. For the majority of the time since 67 Arabs, Jews, Christians, etc. were able to travel from Gaza to Israel to Golan to the West Bank with relatively little trouble. This was never a problem for anyone, everyone had easy access between all of these no matter who or what they were. The PLO mocked Israel for this for decades, as they could easily move throughout the whole of the land with little trouble. Not until the Arab uprisings did security become as it has. Not until the frequent suicide bombings, and the targeting of civillians. In all their days the PLO never engaged in a battle with the IDF. Only against civillians did the PLO act.

So today we have the situation we have.

As for the settlements, most of them are re-built Jewish communities which existed before the Arab riots and pogroms in the 20s-30s and the Arab armies invasion in the 40s. But to the international community it is perfectly acceptable that Gaza and Judea/Samaria be Judenrein while nearly a quarter of Israel is Muslim and Arab.

As far as I am concerned the biggest mistake Israel has made (or one of them) was not annexing the entirety of Samaria/Judea. One war was not enough, two were not enough, nor was three. And this after already receiving 80% of the mandate the British were given for the purpose of established the Jewish state. There is no purpose for another Arab state, especially one which the Arabs have rejected at every stop. If they can't live in a Jewish state which treats them better than any of their home nations, they can return to Egypt, Syria, Arabia, etc.

As for passports, Israeli Arabs are able to obtain Israeli passports. Arabs who become Israeli citizens are able to obtain Israeli passports.

Again, rubbish. Because usury was a sin for Christians, but not in Judaism (providing the lendee wasn't a Jew), the Jews became moneylenders. Which in turn led to them being wealthy. I'm not saying the York massacre, or other pogroms, was driven entirely by envy of Jewish merchants' wealth. But it was certainly a factor. Holding up the anti-semitism card as a catch-all condemnation is unhelpful.


This is absolutely incorrect. Jews were restricted from most jobs. They were forced to work jobs that people despised such as being a collecter. When the Torah was written most nations did not have laws against interest. Since they collected interest from Jews, Jews were in turn allowed to collect interest from them. We were required to follow the policy of reciprocating the laws of the nation being dealt with in terms of interest. Thus if they outlawed charging us interest we were not to charge them interest.

The fact is that poor Jews have historically bore the brunt of persecution, not wealthy Jews. Persecution of Jews had nothing to do with wealth but with the fact that we are Jews. It's not like the people of York killed their Jews and then went looking for their wealthy gentiles. No, because wealth was not the reason they sought to murder. All throughout Europe Jews were being murdered at that same time, not because of wealth or lack of it, but because they were Jews.

It's ridiculous to deny this. Today people want to dejudaize Jewish persecution, to come up with other factors and excuses, but we have the longest history of persecution, and while there are various outlets or excuses which can be given, it ultimately comes down to us being Jews.

I do. The King David Hotel bomb. The massacre at Deir Yassin.


The Jews in question didn't live in someone elses' country, they lived in their own land, one which they had the obligation and duty to defend, and that is what they did. The British were restricting Jewish immigration to the Jewish homeland while allowing Arabs to funnel in non-stop. As history has shown nobody else looks out for the best interest of the Jews except for the Jews. Even an ally today (numerous Jews fought and died for the British in WWI and WWII) may be an enemy tomorrow (yet the Jewish people were in the end betrayed constantly by them).

That was not the case for 1,900 years in all the Arab, Christian, Muslim, etc. countries they lived in. They were not an army, they were not a revolution, they did not threaten their "masters". The Christian and Muslim persecutions of Jews were not a response to a dangerous insurgent or unruly populations of Jews, they were the result of anti-Jewishness. Unprovoked. Of an engrained opposition to Jews.

The attacks and threats Israel faces today from Arabs both outside and inside their land is not anything the Christian and Muslim nations which relentlessly persecuted Jews experienced. Arabs in Israel are not treated like Jews in Muslim lands were treated. Jews in Muslim lands could not be voted to the main council of assembly and make daily attacks on the Muslim nation, to call for Jewish uprisings against the Muslim empire, and Jewish invasion and destruction of the Muslim state or land. This is unfortunately a daily occurence in the Knesset.

And until they began the uprisings they had much freer movement through all territories and faced very little of the delays they may face today trying to go between territory and Israel.

Don't even get me started on Deir Yassin. The most popular retelling of the incident is full of fantasy. If people want to believe the Jews went in and slaughtered an un-armed neutral helpless village of Arabs, so be it, let them.

If you can't find sources for all lands and all times, then you can't say it happened all the time. That's just common sense.


More like semantic non-sense. The historical record of Jews in Muslim Arab, Almohad, Turkish, Ottoman, Africa, etc. lands is quite extensive. It is not the mythic picture of tolerance and glittering gold some make it out to be.
Purge
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:06 pm

Postby Freakzilla » Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:59 pm

A Thing of Eternity wrote:
Baraka Bryan wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:
Baraka Bryan wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:I used to have a big cross-referenced list of every passage where it directly contradicted the old books - good for laughs.


Skeptics Annotated Bilble - Contradictions by Book



k i took a look. I'm not one of the Christians that will argue there is nothing contradicting within the translated bible, but a lot of those are stretches. they come down to interpretation of a word or nuance... a little stretched.


True, (and if you check out the rest of the sections Freak listed, many passages are taken a bit out of context) but a lot aren't too.


no doubt. my view is translators arent inspired and mistakes are easily done. that and since the newest versions we have of most of the OT is still thousands of years after the source, mistakes would easily be amplified over time. i choose to look at the overall message rather than nitpick at the minor details.


That would be the way to do it. I know some people who honestly think that the bible remains unchanged from thousands of years ago... lets just say that would really require divine intervention to be true. :wink:

There is also the possibility though that many of those inconsitancies were present in the original text.


It's true that some of those things are based on interpretation but so are most of the sermons on Sunday morning.

You still have to think for yourself a little bit.
They were destroyed because they lied pretentiously. Have no fear that my wrath
will fall upon you because of your innocent mistakes.

~Leto II, God Emperor
User avatar
Freakzilla
Archivist
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:56 pm
Location: Duluth, Georgia, USA

Postby A Thing of Eternity » Wed Jul 30, 2008 3:08 pm

Freakzilla wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:
Baraka Bryan wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:
Baraka Bryan wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:I used to have a big cross-referenced list of every passage where it directly contradicted the old books - good for laughs.


Skeptics Annotated Bilble - Contradictions by Book



k i took a look. I'm not one of the Christians that will argue there is nothing contradicting within the translated bible, but a lot of those are stretches. they come down to interpretation of a word or nuance... a little stretched.


True, (and if you check out the rest of the sections Freak listed, many passages are taken a bit out of context) but a lot aren't too.


no doubt. my view is translators arent inspired and mistakes are easily done. that and since the newest versions we have of most of the OT is still thousands of years after the source, mistakes would easily be amplified over time. i choose to look at the overall message rather than nitpick at the minor details.


That would be the way to do it. I know some people who honestly think that the bible remains unchanged from thousands of years ago... lets just say that would really require divine intervention to be true. :wink:

There is also the possibility though that many of those inconsitancies were present in the original text.


It's true that some of those things are based on interpretation but so are most of the sermons on Sunday morning.

You still have to think for yourself a little bit.


You're telling me? You:Preacher Me:Choir :wink:
I deleted some of your posts because they were derailing the topic and not focusing on the issues asked, and instead going after the authors or their material. That's why. ~ BM
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
 
Posts: 2070
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 1:22 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta

Postby tanzeelat » Wed Jul 30, 2008 3:13 pm

Purge wrote:Jewishness is not a race or religion. One can be born a Jew but never practice the mitzvot (though that obviously isn't the ideal). Someone can be born a non-Jew anywhere in the world and become a Jew by accepting the obligations of the Torah. The Jews are a nation. The laws of the Torah are the laws of a nation. The land is the home of our nation, where hundreds of laws applicapable nowhere else in the world are obligatory. Calling it Judaism and a religion is a modern designation that does not capture what being Jewish is an entails.


If a person is opposed to political aims of the Zionist movement, then they are an anti-Zionist. Not all Jews are Zionists, not all those who practice Judaism were born Jews, not all those who were born Jews practice Judaism. If the three are so inextricably linked, it seems strangely easy to "break" those links (figuratively speaking, that is).

Purge wrote:Anti-Zionism is nothing but an internationally acceptable form of anti-Jewishness.


See above.

Purge wrote:The UN as a tool for Muslims, and the Arab League and many non-Arab Muslim states are anti-Jewish. That's accurate.


Given the situation regarding Palestine, it's no surprise the Arab League is anti-Zionist. But how is the UN anti-Jewish? Are you referring to its initial refusal to accept the unilateral declaration of statehood by Israel? Because they would have refused any unilateral declaration of statehood by an occupying force - as the Israelis had extended past the boundaries of the land mandated to them under Partition.

Besides, the UN itself can't be anti-Jewish. It's composed of 192 nation states. It'd be an impressive achievement for anything to be systemic in the UN given that.

Purge wrote:As for the difficulty of Arabs traveling between the territories, what is often ignored about this is the fact that such security is only extremely recent.


Yes, travel between towns was easier in the 1970s and 1980s. But the Arabs still had different number plates, and they were still treated as second-class citizens.

Purge wrote:As for the settlements, most of them are re-built Jewish communities which existed before the Arab riots and pogroms in the 20s-30s and the Arab armies invasion in the 40s. But to the international community it is perfectly acceptable that Gaza and Judea/Samaria be Judenrein while nearly a quarter of Israel is Muslim and Arab.


The League of Nations mandated territory to Israel. And yet the Israelis refuse to accept when territory is mandated to Palestine? If "most of" the settlements are re-built, then some are new. And that's still theft of land mandated to another nation.

Purge wrote:There is no purpose for another Arab state, especially one which the Arabs have rejected at every stop.


As well say there's no purpose for a Jewish state. After all, the Arabs were occupying the land when the Jewish Aliyah began. For their help against the Ottomans in WWI, the British and French made promises to the Hashemite Arabs on self-rule in Palestine. They then reneged on that promise and gave the land to the Zionists.

Purge wrote:If they can't live in a Jewish state which treats them better than any of their home nations, they can return to Egypt, Syria, Arabia, etc.


Now that is fantasy. Have you ever lived in an Arab state? Statements like that are not helping the discussion.

Purge wrote:As for passports, Israeli Arabs are able to obtain Israeli passports. Arabs who become Israeli citizens are able to obtain Israeli passports.


That may be true now, but it wasn't always the case. I know Christian Arabs (from Bethlehem) who had their houses confiscated because they didn't return in due time to have their travel papers renewed.

Purge wrote:This is absolutely incorrect.


No it's not. Usury was a sin to Christians. So they could not lend money. But there is always a need for money-lenders.

Purge wrote:Jews were restricted from most jobs. They were forced to work jobs that people despised such as being a collecter.


Not true. Tax collectors in England were, and always have been, English gentiles. The Jews were money-lenders and goldsmiths. The gold-smiths became bankers - in fact, they invented modern banking. Gold-smithery (or whatever the noun is) can hardly be described as a job that people would despise.

Purge wrote:When the Torah was written most nations did not have laws against interest.


Straw man. When the Torah was written, most nations didn't even exist.

Purge wrote:The fact is that poor Jews have historically bore the brunt of persecution, not wealthy Jews.


This I can't dispute. But it's always been easier to persecute the poor than it has the rich. You see it happening every day around the world now.

Purge wrote:Persecution of Jews had nothing to do with wealth but with the fact that we are Jews. It's not like the people of York killed their Jews and then went looking for their wealthy gentiles. No, because wealth was not the reason they sought to murder. All throughout Europe Jews were being murdered at that same time, not because of wealth or lack of it, but because they were Jews.


Argue the point, please. I said wealth was not the chief reason. But it was a factor.

Purge wrote:It's ridiculous to deny this. Today people want to dejudaize Jewish persecution, to come up with other factors and excuses, but we have the longest history of persecution, and while there are various outlets or excuses which can be given, it ultimately comes down to us being Jews


Again. I never denied that Jews have been persecuted throughout history. All I pointed out was that we are all of us - Jew, Christian, Muslim - guilty of religious persecution, in the past and in the present. We are also guilty of persecution on racial or non-religious grounds. As individuals, as peoples, as nations, as religious groups... To a large extent or to a small extent. No one group can say they're better than any other.

Purge wrote:The Jews in question didn't live in someone elses' country, they lived in their own land, one which they had the obligation and duty to defend, and that is what they did.


It wasn't their land at the time, although they claimed it. Israel isn't the Palestinians' land, but they claim it. Same argument.

Purge wrote:Even an ally today (numerous Jews fought and died for the British in WWI and WWII) may be an enemy tomorrow (yet the Jewish people were in the end betrayed constantly by them).


It was the British who had the Balfour Declaration written into the Sèvres Treaty. Of course, this was after we'd betrayed the Arabs...

Purge wrote:Jews in Muslim lands could not be voted to the main council of assembly and make daily attacks on the Muslim nation, to call for Jewish uprisings against the Muslim empire, and Jewish invasion and destruction of the Muslim state or land. This is unfortunately a daily occurence in the Knesset.


Straw man. The Islamic empire was not democratic. However, several Jewish scholars did rise to positions of eminence, and advised various caliphs. (I'll have to hunt through my books to find names and dates, though.)

Purge wrote:Don't even get me started on Deir Yassin. The most popular retelling of the incident is full of fantasy. If people want to believe the Jews went in and slaughtered an un-armed neutral helpless village of Arabs, so be it, let them.


A massacre is a massacre. Over 100 Arabs were killed. 3 members of Irgun were killed.

Purge wrote:More like semantic non-sense. The historical record of Jews in Muslim Arab, Almohad, Turkish, Ottoman, Africa, etc. lands is quite extensive. It is not the mythic picture of tolerance and glittering gold some make it out to be.


You still refuse to argue the point. You assert that Jews were mistreated in the Islamic empire throughout its 550 years, and the Ottoman throughout its 700 years. But that's all it is: an assertion.
User avatar
tanzeelat
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:34 am

Postby The Phantom » Wed Jul 30, 2008 3:30 pm

A Thing of Eternity wrote:That would be the way to do it. I know some people who honestly think that the bible remains unchanged from thousands of years ago... lets just say that would really require divine intervention to be true.

There is also the possibility though that many of those inconsitancies were present in the original text.


agreed on the first, we'll probably just have to disagree on the second ;)

Freakzilla wrote:[It's true that some of those things are based on interpretation but so are most of the sermons on Sunday morning. You still have to think for yourself a little bit.


trust me I do. I'm one of those annoying guys at a church that will always argue with a pastor after the service on a point of doctrine. we had this one guest preacher come in and say how we're a brother and sister to the trees and the bugs etc etc (crazy hippie with really long hair) and most people just assumed it was true cuz heck it was preached from the pulpit but i argued with him for quite a while afterwards and told the council I never wanted to see him at the church again :P (sorry to any hindus or new age folk out there that believe that we are their siblings... I just don't want to hear it in my church :D) I have my doubts and listen to them and rationalize through them for sure.

A Thing of Eternity wrote:You're telling me? You:Preacher Me:Choir :wink:


i'm going to go on the assumption that freak was talking to me there.
User avatar
The Phantom
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:06 pm
Location: Toronto

Postby A Thing of Eternity » Wed Jul 30, 2008 3:41 pm

Baraka Bryan wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:That would be the way to do it. I know some people who honestly think that the bible remains unchanged from thousands of years ago... lets just say that would really require divine intervention to be true.

There is also the possibility though that many of those inconsitancies were present in the original text.


agreed on the first, we'll probably just have to disagree on the second ;)


Agreed - we will dissagree. :) (I can see that from your point of veiw it wouldn't make much sense to believe that any of the mistakes were there in the beginning if god controlled the writing)

Freakzilla wrote:[It's true that some of those things are based on interpretation but so are most of the sermons on Sunday morning. You still have to think for yourself a little bit.


trust me I do. I'm one of those annoying guys at a church that will always argue with a pastor after the service on a point of doctrine. we had this one guest preacher come in and say how we're a brother and sister to the trees and the bugs etc etc (crazy hippie with really long hair) and most people just assumed it was true cuz heck it was preached from the pulpit but i argued with him for quite a while afterwards and told the council I never wanted to see him at the church again :P (sorry to any hindus or new age folk out there that believe that we are their siblings... I just don't want to hear it in my church :D) I have my doubts and listen to them and rationalize through them for sure.

A Thing of Eternity wrote:You're telling me? You:Preacher Me:Choir :wink:


i'm going to go on the assumption that freak was talking to me there.


I figured that, but since I was the poster he was last responding too I felt the need to make sure it was documented that I agreed with him.
I deleted some of your posts because they were derailing the topic and not focusing on the issues asked, and instead going after the authors or their material. That's why. ~ BM
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
 
Posts: 2070
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 1:22 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta

Postby Freakzilla » Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:07 pm

I wasn't pointing the finger at anyone in particular.
They were destroyed because they lied pretentiously. Have no fear that my wrath
will fall upon you because of your innocent mistakes.

~Leto II, God Emperor
User avatar
Freakzilla
Archivist
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:56 pm
Location: Duluth, Georgia, USA

Postby chanilover » Thu Jul 31, 2008 11:06 am

The Wahabbis are at it again!

Not content with distorting the Muslim world with their puritannical interpretation of Islam, they're now inserted "interpolations" into translations of the Quran. Of course, not even the Wahabbis would dare to tinker with the Arabic text, but check out these:

Sura 8, ayat 60, on unbelievers: 'Make ready against them all you can of power, including steeds of war (tanks, planes, missiles, artillery) to threaten the enemy of Allah.

Another ayat about those who have earned Allah's anger and gone astray, now features, in brackets - 'such as the Jews' and 'such as the Christians'.

Surah 5, ayat 69, says regarding righteous Jews and Christians that 'no fear should come upon them'. Apparently there's now a footnote saying this was cancelled by a later verse which claims that those of any religion other than Islam will never be accepted.

I did a quick internet check but couldn't find any references to them. It was on a TV programme about the Quran a few weeks ago. Here's a clear example of how texts can be altered, even by accident. There's an explanatory footnote from the Middle Ages to one of the books of the Bible which ended up accidentally being included in the text, but I can't remember which one it is. I'll have to dig a bit about that as well.
Image
chanilover
 
Posts: 481
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 2:52 pm

Postby orald » Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:00 pm

Discussing this like adults is too dumb, Tanz. Should I discuss Dune politely with the likes of Arnoloco? Because that's how bad you are in this topic. You're full of bullshit.

And you're wasting your time, Purge, the likes of him will go on and on with their cheap TV, "anti-zionist" propoganda.
"Brian! Brian! Brian!" goes the refrain. "A million deaths were not enough for Brian!"

I'm awake! God help me, I'm awake!
User avatar
orald
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:31 am
Location: Maximum Security Mental Hospital

Postby tanzeelat » Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:21 pm

Grow up.
User avatar
tanzeelat
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:34 am

Postby GamePlayer » Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:39 pm

This thread is legendary :)
"What are we to call him, this Player of Games?"

"The books of Kevin J Anderson and Brian Herbert lie in a realm of uncertainty between self-conscious absurdity and genuine failure"
User avatar
GamePlayer
 
Posts: 1156
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 1:38 pm
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Postby SandChigger » Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:51 pm

(Had to look up shtok. That'll come in handy. :D )
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby The Phantom » Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:18 am

GamePlayer wrote:This thread is legendary :)



yup. gotta love when it comes down to who's more childish than the other.
gotta agree to disagree on some things guys :D
User avatar
The Phantom
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:06 pm
Location: Toronto

Postby SandChigger » Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:31 am

:lol:

(OK, Charlie, run the clip of the mushrooms with "Smile" playing in the background!)
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby tanzeelat » Fri Aug 01, 2008 8:30 am

Baraka Bryan wrote:yup. gotta love when it comes down to who's more childish than the other.


Be fair. Purge and myself were discussing the subject like adults.

Then orald steps in and thinks childishly insulting one party is a valid means of discourse. I'm surprised his carer lets him near a computer.
User avatar
tanzeelat
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:34 am

Postby The Phantom » Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:18 am

tanzeelat wrote:
Baraka Bryan wrote:yup. gotta love when it comes down to who's more childish than the other.


Be fair. Purge and myself were discussing the subject like adults.

Then orald steps in and thinks childishly insulting one party is a valid means of discourse. I'm surprised his carer lets him near a computer.


true. your debate was quite informative. my underlying point is that these differences are deeper than just a disagreement and you won't be convincing each other of any major points, so try to keep it from falling from its current high-level discourse :D
User avatar
The Phantom
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:06 pm
Location: Toronto

Postby Omphalos » Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:32 am

tanzeelat wrote:Be fair. Purge and myself were discussing the subject like adults.


I would certainly say so.
Something is about to happen, Hal. Something wonderful!

-James C. Harwood, Science Fiction Writer, Straight (March 5, 1956 - May 25, 2010)



The Omphalos Umbrella Page
User avatar
Omphalos
Alien Overlord
 
Posts: 5678
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:24 pm
Location: The Mighty Central Valley of California

Postby A Thing of Eternity » Fri Aug 01, 2008 10:00 am

Omphalos wrote:
tanzeelat wrote:Be fair. Purge and myself were discussing the subject like adults.


I would certainly say so.


Apparently that's too dumb though. :wink: Should've been discussing it like children.
I deleted some of your posts because they were derailing the topic and not focusing on the issues asked, and instead going after the authors or their material. That's why. ~ BM
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
 
Posts: 2070
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 1:22 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta

Postby orald » Fri Aug 01, 2008 10:58 am

Purge- Jews have been prosecuted for millenia in the Arab world.
Tanz- Nuh uh! Bring quotations from 50 books that state it!

Purge- Arab terrorists are killing Israeli citizens(oh yes, Arabs are being killed as well) and that's why they're building a wall, have checkpoints and all the security.
Tanz- Nuh uh! It's...it's segregation! Think of the poor, innocent palastinians! :cry:

Purge- Every faction that goes against "Zionism" somehow teaches and spreads antisemitic propoganda(though he might've not mentioned that, so I'll do it for him) in TV, radio, newspapers and rallies.
Tanz- Nuh uh! It's not antisemitic because the Arabs are semites too!
And those long, curved noses, "peot" and ultra-orthodox suits the Zionists put on are not caricatures of Jews at all! I've seen them describe lots of different peoples...like, uh...

Oh yes, so informative. And it's also very adult-like to pretend that anti-semitic doesn't mean anti-Jewish, or believe shit reported by terrorists who are proven time and again to be false.
But hey, if the headline shows something, it must be true, right?

Go bugger with Muhammad al-Dura in his "grave".
"Brian! Brian! Brian!" goes the refrain. "A million deaths were not enough for Brian!"

I'm awake! God help me, I'm awake!
User avatar
orald
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:31 am
Location: Maximum Security Mental Hospital

Postby GamePlayer » Fri Aug 01, 2008 11:31 am

Like clockwork :) :P
"What are we to call him, this Player of Games?"

"The books of Kevin J Anderson and Brian Herbert lie in a realm of uncertainty between self-conscious absurdity and genuine failure"
User avatar
GamePlayer
 
Posts: 1156
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 1:38 pm
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Postby Phaedrus » Fri Aug 01, 2008 12:08 pm

Orald, you're biased. Horribly.

You couldn't find objectivity with two hands and a flashlight.

So, for once, just shut up.
User avatar
Phaedrus
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:18 am

Postby A Thing of Eternity » Fri Aug 01, 2008 12:25 pm

orald wrote:Purge- Jews have been prosecuted for millenia in the Arab world.
Tanz- Nuh uh! Bring quotations from 50 books that state it!

Purge- Arab terrorists are killing Israeli citizens(oh yes, Arabs are being killed as well) and that's why they're building a wall, have checkpoints and all the security.
Tanz- Nuh uh! It's...it's segregation! Think of the poor, innocent palastinians! :cry:

Purge- Every faction that goes against "Zionism" somehow teaches and spreads antisemitic propoganda(though he might've not mentioned that, so I'll do it for him) in TV, radio, newspapers and rallies.
Tanz- Nuh uh! It's not antisemitic because the Arabs are semites too!
And those long, curved noses, "peot" and ultra-orthodox suits the Zionists put on are not caricatures of Jews at all! I've seen them describe lots of different peoples...like, uh...

Oh yes, so informative. And it's also very adult-like to pretend that anti-semitic doesn't mean anti-Jewish, or believe shit reported by terrorists who are proven time and again to be false.
But hey, if the headline shows something, it must be true, right?

Go bugger with Muhammad al-Dura in his "grave".


Man, did you even read his posts? Aside from the last point you made it really doesn't look like you did.

All Tanz was saying (from what I saw, sorry to speak for you Tanz, but orald's driving me up the wall) is that Israel isn't exactly innocent - not that they are wrong overall, or that the extremist Arabs are in the right - just that Israel has committed some atrocities of their own. Its called an academic fucking discussion. Whether you want to hear it or not, there is more than one side to situations like this, and each side has some right and some wrong. Always.

Honestly, why can't you calm down whenever people point out that Israel isn't perfect and have a serious (or at least not childish) discussion about it? No one has said that it should be given back to the Palestinians, or that the Jews should be killed off, or any other similar retarded statements. Gods man, if someone insults Canada I get a little upset, but I'll openly admit our failings - hell, I can list atrocities committed by Canada all fucking day - but you can't even admit that maybe, just maybe, there are times Israel has been less than perfect? I know, I know, you've done this and this, they defecated on a holy site, and you can't pray at the temple mount etc; no one's saying Israel hasn't done good things, or taken a lot of shit, because they have and they have.

I haven't heard anyone say that the extremist Muslims aren't assholes who deserve to be shot. At the end of the day I'm on your side - that doesn't mean I can't have issues with your methods. Just because someone points out a country's failings doesn't mean that they hate that country, or that they love that country's enemies, and I'd really like for you to stop insinuating that I'm pro-terrorist because I'm really, really not. Hell, I have terrible things to say about the US but I'm still on their side. I have terrible things to say about my own country, every country has done terrible shit - including yours. Going into denial about it and flinging insults doesn't really make that go away.



Rant is over now.
I deleted some of your posts because they were derailing the topic and not focusing on the issues asked, and instead going after the authors or their material. That's why. ~ BM
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
 
Posts: 2070
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 1:22 pm
Location: Calgary Alberta

Postby SandChigger » Fri Aug 01, 2008 5:30 pm

Something that I've wondered about more than once recently is how this history is taught in Israeli schools.

Here in Japan, MEXT (The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science & Technology...isn't the acronym clever? :roll: ) provides the primary and secondary schools with a list of approved textbooks. I haven't looked into them myself, but I've heard that they fairly whitewash Japan's role in WW II. (I've also heard that coverage of WW II in the last year of high school is scheduled to coincide with the university entrance exam period when many students are absent or have their minds on other things.)

Orald, you could actually contribute to the discussion by describing the history classes you have taken in school and how they were taught. :wink:
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby GamePlayer » Fri Aug 01, 2008 8:52 pm

SandChigger wrote:Here in Japan, MEXT (The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science & Technology...isn't the acronym clever? :roll: ) provides the primary and secondary schools with a list of approved textbooks. I haven't looked into them myself, but I've heard that they fairly whitewash Japan's role in WW II. (I've also heard that coverage of WW II in the last year of high school is scheduled to coincide with the university entrance exam period when many students are absent or have their minds on other things.)


As I understand it, that's a big part of the reason Japan-China relations have remained so strained ever since the war and show no signs of easing any time soon. Japan's imperialistic policies during that era of Japanese history have apparently become almost taboo or conveniently sidelined. Had a friend who worked in Osaka for several years with Sanyo and he learned a whole lot about what passed for history in Japan. His stories on the subject were very interesting :)
"What are we to call him, this Player of Games?"

"The books of Kevin J Anderson and Brian Herbert lie in a realm of uncertainty between self-conscious absurdity and genuine failure"
User avatar
GamePlayer
 
Posts: 1156
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 1:38 pm
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Postby SandChigger » Fri Aug 01, 2008 10:59 pm

And not really knowing a lot about the background of the war and some of the things their countrymen did during it, a lot of them wonder why Japan was attacked, and why so many Chinese still hate them, when all Japan was trying to do was to defend Asia from Western Imperialism!

Europe has its Holocaust deniers, and we have our share of right-wing idiots denying Nanjing and other atrocities.

And it always gets interesting this time of year with the back-to-back anniversaries of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Not that anyone has ever been directly nasty or threatening to me personally, mind you. But the rhetoric in the media is sometimes fun.

Poor little Japan...the only nation in history to suffer an atomic attack!

So far.

Banzai! :roll:
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby Omphalos » Sat Aug 02, 2008 12:49 am

Heh. My dad grew up there right after the war. His favorite hobby is bitch-slapping Japanese who say shit like "how could they have done that to us???"
Something is about to happen, Hal. Something wonderful!

-James C. Harwood, Science Fiction Writer, Straight (March 5, 1956 - May 25, 2010)



The Omphalos Umbrella Page
User avatar
Omphalos
Alien Overlord
 
Posts: 5678
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:24 pm
Location: The Mighty Central Valley of California

Postby Robspierre » Sat Aug 02, 2008 1:26 am

Omphalos wrote:Heh. My dad grew up there right after the war. His favorite hobby is bitch-slapping Japanese who say shit like "how could they have done that to us???"


My grandfather was on Okinawa during the taking of the island, he never talked about it.

Rob
Friends are the family we choose.

http://kiltedrobspub.blogspot.com/
User avatar
Robspierre
Archivist
 
Posts: 959
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:52 am
Location: The Cascades of Oregon

Postby Freakzilla » Sat Aug 02, 2008 11:23 am

Robspierre wrote:
Omphalos wrote:Heh. My dad grew up there right after the war. His favorite hobby is bitch-slapping Japanese who say shit like "how could they have done that to us???"


My grandfather was on Okinawa during the taking of the island, he never talked about it.

Rob


Mine was a CB on Okinawa.
They were destroyed because they lied pretentiously. Have no fear that my wrath
will fall upon you because of your innocent mistakes.

~Leto II, God Emperor
User avatar
Freakzilla
Archivist
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:56 pm
Location: Duluth, Georgia, USA

Postby tanzeelat » Sat Aug 02, 2008 3:28 pm

My grandfather was in the Home Guard, then he joined a 25-pounder crew in Germany in the closing weeks of the war. He stayed on afterwards, helping the MPs, and ended up as a clerk at Nuremberg.
User avatar
tanzeelat
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:34 am

Postby SandChigger » Sat Aug 02, 2008 4:51 pm

Fortunately the Japanese I watched the fireworks show with last night (great BBQ, too! :D ) are all my age or a few years older and have a better grip on the world and history.

Well...sorta. The family whose house we were at are MAJORLY into fengshui. The man works in construction and gardening and it was interesting talking to him about the latter (I'm into rocks and "water features" snort!). The wife has dreams and a friend who interprets them. A bit out there, but they're fun people.

We eventually got round to bashing Souka Gakkai, The Unification Church, and Scientology. I couldn't help wondering how much money that coulple spends on fengshui consultations and dream interpretations...but wisely did not ask. ;)
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen

Postby Robspierre » Sat Aug 02, 2008 6:05 pm

tanzeelat wrote:My grandfather was in the Home Guard, then he joined a 25-pounder crew in Germany in the closing weeks of the war. He stayed on afterwards, helping the MPs, and ended up as a clerk at Nuremberg.


My other grandfather when he was sent to Germany ended up leading officers on hunting trips on Hitler's private game preserve in between hunting down nazi's.

Rob
Friends are the family we choose.

http://kiltedrobspub.blogspot.com/
User avatar
Robspierre
Archivist
 
Posts: 959
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:52 am
Location: The Cascades of Oregon

Postby tanzeelat » Sun Aug 03, 2008 1:04 am

My other two grandfathers were in reserved occupations and worked down the pit. I don't know if they fought. I don't think they did.
User avatar
tanzeelat
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:34 am

Postby Freakzilla » Mon Aug 04, 2008 7:04 am

I have an ancestor who faught for the U.S. Confederacy in the Civil War. He was either captured or surrendered to U.S.A. troops who offered him pardon if he would fight for the U.S.A., which he did. He was too ashamed to ever go back to his wife. Years later she went to collect his veteran's pension and was denied because he was considered a traitor by the state of Louisiana.

:lol:
They were destroyed because they lied pretentiously. Have no fear that my wrath
will fall upon you because of your innocent mistakes.

~Leto II, God Emperor
User avatar
Freakzilla
Archivist
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 12:56 pm
Location: Duluth, Georgia, USA

Postby Omphalos » Mon Aug 04, 2008 9:20 am

My 3xGreat Grandfather was the Secretary of the Treasury for the Confederacy. He was a blockade runner and privateer during the Civil War, and funded the last two years of that conflict entirely, as the Confederate Government was completely bankrupt.

Lots of people also think that he was the inspiration for Rhett Butler in Gone With the Wind. There are all kinds of bits of anecdotal evidence for the claim. For example, he did fund the war effort on his own; he lived in a house that looked out onto Fort Sumpter; We have an ancestral home in SC called Ashley Hall that used to sit on Wilkes Blvd; one of his biggest capers was running shiploads of pins and needles across the Union blockade, etc, etc. His name is George Alfred Trenholm, if anyone is interested.

I went to Jefferson Davis' "retirement" home in Biloxi, Beauvoir, once and found a ton of old Confederate war notes with his signature lithographed onto them. There is a legend that Trenholm made off with the remaining Confederate bullion (which actually was his) and dumped it somewhere near the Pee-Dee river when the Union soldiers were pursuing him and the rest of the Confederate Cabinet. the legend is that they all knew that they would eventually be caputred, so Trenholm separated from the rest of them when they crossed the river. He was the first one found by the Union, and when they caught him he supposedly did not have any gold on him. Some think that the Union officers made off with it though. If anyone ever finds it, I get a share under State and Federal Trover law!!! (unless of course the story is bullshit :( ).
Something is about to happen, Hal. Something wonderful!

-James C. Harwood, Science Fiction Writer, Straight (March 5, 1956 - May 25, 2010)



The Omphalos Umbrella Page
User avatar
Omphalos
Alien Overlord
 
Posts: 5678
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:24 pm
Location: The Mighty Central Valley of California

Postby The Phantom » Tue Aug 05, 2008 8:44 am

well my great great grandfather was a dutch farmer... in holland... who spoke dutch. I think his name was Cornelius.
User avatar
The Phantom
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:06 pm
Location: Toronto

Postby SandChigger » Tue Aug 05, 2008 6:51 pm

War stories and records and that sort of thing were never that big a thing in my family, so I assume that means there wasn't much (good?) to talk about. :?

My maternal great grandmother's second husband fought at Château-Thierry (and possibly earlier at Verdun as well), but he never would talk about it with us kids. Neither of my grandfathers served that I know of. The maternal one was a musician and lady's man and went out for a loaf of bread one day and never came back; the other was a railroad engineer on the C&O and worked hard all his life. (Drank hard, too, when younger, but had given it up by the time I knew him.) My mother's three brothers all put some time in during the '50s, but I'm not sure in what capacity. I saw pics at my grandmother's from their boot camps days, but have never really talked to them about it.

And then of course there was dear ole dad. Who ran away from home when he was 17, lied about his age and got into the Air Force. By the time they figured out what he'd done, he was old enough to join legally anyway so they kept him...but made it clear they were pissed off: he spent the Korean War stateside guarding hangars.

Ahp, a fine military tradition we have.

ANYWAY, back on topic: before leaving home this morning I caught the sound bites of Obama and McCain's latest back-and-forth. I REALLY liked the "Pride in Ignorance" bit. :lol:

(Oh, yeah: I remember my grandmother and great-aunt talking about someone way back up the tree called "Cap'n Jack". Seems he was a captain in the Union Army that went renegade and was later hung as a horse thief. Or something like that. :shock: )
"Chancho...sometimes when you are a man...you wear stretchy pants...in your room...alone."

"Politics is never simple, like the sand chigger of Arrakis, one is rarely truly free of its bite."

Arrakeen is an unawakened ghola.
User avatar
SandChigger
Archivist
 
Posts: 4577
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Sietch Tigr, near Arrakeen


Return to General Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron