I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
first!!!!!
first!!!!!
Every time you think they hit rock bottom....
Every time you think they hit rock bottom....
not real surprising
not real surprising
Don't you mean "inter-racial", given that Malkin is Filipino descent and she wrote about those of Japanese descent, likely motivated in part by what the Japanese had done to the Filipinos?
Don't you mean "inter-racial", given that Malkin is Filipino descent and she wrote about those of Japanese descent, likely motivated in part by what the Japanese had done to the Filipinos?
Another all-too-appropriate response the next time someone doubts the accuracy of the FASCIST label for neocons...
Another all-too-appropriate response the next time someone doubts the accuracy of the FASCIST label for neocons...
God you're stupid.
God you're stupid.
Michelle isn't worth the stroke of a letter on the keyboard.
Michelle isn't worth the stroke of a letter on the keyboard.
Mr. Pipes will come to have reason to regret his imprudence and, frankly, his demonic implication
I hope, given enough rope and overreach, these asshole will finally hang themselves.
Mr. Pipes will come to have reason to regret his imprudence and, frankly, his demonic implication
I hope, given enough rope and overreach, these asshole will finally hang themselves.
To the Neocons there is no punishment too awful for the enemies of Israel.
To the Neocons there is no punishment too awful for the enemies of Israel.
For those who don't want to go through the bother of registering, here's the column.
For those who don't want to go through the bother of registering, here's the column.
There hasn't been a more offensive major newspaper editorial this year, certainly a notable, if dubious, accomplishment in 2004.
There hasn't been a more offensive major newspaper editorial this year, certainly a notable, if dubious, accomplishment in 2004.
Meanwhile in other news, when it comes to compassion nobody beats the followers of Alice Rosenbaum
Meanwhile in other news, when it comes to compassion nobody beats the followers of Alice Rosenbaum
No, Atrios.
It's you who are stupid.
No, Atrios.
It's you who are stupid.
On the topic of odius...Clarence Thomas, judge the justice, by the company he takes perks from...and WTF? Greased Pig Catching?
On the topic of odius...Clarence Thomas, judge the justice, by the company he takes perks from...and WTF? Greased Pig Catching?
Atrios,
I just got word from the invisible cloud being that God's feeling ill, and Lucifer's subbing for him today.
Atrios,
I just got word from the invisible cloud being that God's feeling ill, and Lucifer's subbing for him today.
Tim McVeigh was in the military, wasn't he?
I support internment for all US military personnel and their families.
Tim McVeigh was in the military, wasn't he?
I support internment for all US military personnel and their families.
Don't you mean "inter-racial", given that Malkin is Filipino descent and she wrote about those of Japanese descent, likely motivated in part by what the Japanese had done to the Filipinos?
UBH = DUH
Don't you mean "inter-racial", given that Malkin is Filipino descent and she wrote about those of Japanese descent, likely motivated in part by what the Japanese had done to the Filipinos?
UBH = DUH
Why not the worst?
Why not the worst?
UBH = DUH
Sinclair First
By "DUH" do you mean that my obsevation was so simple that it did not need to be stated?
Or are you attempting to articulate some other disatisfaction with my observation?
UBH = DUH
Sinclair First
By "DUH" do you mean that my obsevation was so simple that it did not need to be stated?
Or are you attempting to articulate some other disatisfaction with my observation?
Leftist and Islamist organizations have so successfully intimidated public opinion that polite society shies away from endorsing a focus on Muslims.
Oh,I get it. Leftists and Islamists are united.
Leftist and Islamist organizations have so successfully intimidated public opinion that polite society shies away from endorsing a focus on Muslims.
Oh,I get it. Leftists and Islamists are united.
The terrorists are virtually all Arab Muslim fanatics. It's ridiculous to insist law enforcement not profile for them. Obviously, internment is wrong.
The terrorists are virtually all Arab Muslim fanatics. It's ridiculous to insist law enforcement not profile for them. Obviously, internment is wrong.
I hope, given enough rope and overreach, these asshole will finally hang themselves.
bigvic
That looks like the only hope we have left. Before the election, I had hope that the American people would come to their senses and consciences, but alas...
I hope, given enough rope and overreach, these asshole will finally hang themselves.
bigvic
That looks like the only hope we have left. Before the election, I had hope that the American people would come to their senses and consciences, but alas...
My stomach feels filled with lead shot. I hate these people. It's becoming genuine hate.
My stomach feels filled with lead shot. I hate these people. It's becoming genuine hate.
"Also encouraging, the survey finds the more people follow TV news, the more likely they are to support these common-sense steps."
"Also encouraging, the survey finds the more people follow TV news, the more likely they are to support these common-sense steps."
I've been wondering why this comment has gone so unremarked in the media today.
I've been wondering why this comment has gone so unremarked in the media today.
The terrorists are virtually all Arab Muslim fanatics. It's ridiculous to insist law enforcement not profile for them. Obviously, internment is wrong.
dj
But what about Ted K? Or Tim McV?
They were white, one a Harvard grad, the other a veteran.
Shouldn't law enforcement also profile all Ivy Leaguers and vets?
The terrorists are virtually all Arab Muslim fanatics. It's ridiculous to insist law enforcement not profile for them. Obviously, internment is wrong.
dj
But what about Ted K? Or Tim McV?
They were white, one a Harvard grad, the other a veteran.
Shouldn't law enforcement also profile all Ivy Leaguers and vets?
Put everyone in concentration (re-education) camps that disagrees with me. First all progressives and Muslims.
Next all blacks except Condi and Blackwell.
Dictator Bush
Put everyone in concentration (re-education) camps that disagrees with me. First all progressives and Muslims.
Next all blacks except Condi and Blackwell.
Dictator Bush
Ahhh, Concentration Camps...
The biggest new trend.
The hottest buzz in the most haute of Neo-Fascist salons and parlors nation-wide. The new concept that is keeping the Flying Ditto Monkey Blogger Division tap-tappity-tappin' through the night.
It's simply sick that these jokers even get the light of day cast upon them.
***sigh*** Our Liberal Media...
Tony B.
Ahhh, Concentration Camps...
The biggest new trend.
The hottest buzz in the most haute of Neo-Fascist salons and parlors nation-wide. The new concept that is keeping the Flying Ditto Monkey Blogger Division tap-tappity-tappin' through the night.
It's simply sick that these jokers even get the light of day cast upon them.
***sigh*** Our Liberal Media...
Tony B.
I wish every man, woman and child would read that Pipes screed. Those lunatics need to be exposed for the pigs they are. Shame is not possible for Pipes and his ilk.
I wish every man, woman and child would read that Pipes screed. Those lunatics need to be exposed for the pigs they are. Shame is not possible for Pipes and his ilk.
That the Revisionist-Zionist extremist Daniel Pipes has fond visions of rounding up Muslim Americans and putting them in concentration camps isn't a big surprise.
I didn't see where Pipes advocated the internment of Muslim Americans in the article.
Did I miss something, or is Cole making shit up?
That the Revisionist-Zionist extremist Daniel Pipes has fond visions of rounding up Muslim Americans and putting them in concentration camps isn't a big surprise.
I didn't see where Pipes advocated the internment of Muslim Americans in the article.
Did I miss something, or is Cole making shit up?
None of the terrorist were actually citizens of this great country, a fact that people like Pipes are unconcerned with.
None of the terrorist were actually citizens of this great country, a fact that people like Pipes are unconcerned with.
Don't you mean "inter-racial", given that Malkin is Filipino descent and she wrote about those of Japanese descent, likely motivated in part by what the Japanese had done to the Filipinos?
If you've read anything by Malkin, you'd know that that isn't the issue. Try reading anything she's written (if you can stand it) on immigrants and all the criminals we've allegedly let into the country. Or really anything else she's written or said.
While I might be sympathetic to someone perhaps motivated by anger at the Japanese because of their war crimes (for example, the late great Iris Chang), that's not Malkin's motivation. Locking people up because of their ancestry is idiotic.
And I say that as someone who is NOT sympathetic at all to the Japanese civilians killed by U.S. bombs in World War II. War is ugly; you start a war, you and your people are going to pay.
That goes for all of us.
Don't you mean "inter-racial", given that Malkin is Filipino descent and she wrote about those of Japanese descent, likely motivated in part by what the Japanese had done to the Filipinos?
If you've read anything by Malkin, you'd know that that isn't the issue. Try reading anything she's written (if you can stand it) on immigrants and all the criminals we've allegedly let into the country. Or really anything else she's written or said.
While I might be sympathetic to someone perhaps motivated by anger at the Japanese because of their war crimes (for example, the late great Iris Chang), that's not Malkin's motivation. Locking people up because of their ancestry is idiotic.
And I say that as someone who is NOT sympathetic at all to the Japanese civilians killed by U.S. bombs in World War II. War is ugly; you start a war, you and your people are going to pay.
That goes for all of us.
Anything which uses a defense of indefensible internment as a starting place for justifying racial profiling does in fact involve fond visions of rounding people up.
Anything which uses a defense of indefensible internment as a starting place for justifying racial profiling does in fact involve fond visions of rounding people up.
OT -
...But I wanted to wish everybody a Real Gorilla Happy New Year!
OT -
...But I wanted to wish everybody a Real Gorilla Happy New Year!
Hmm...I can certainly understand a vicious critique of this Pipes' article, but it doesn't help to misstate what he said (I should emphasize that Cole did it, not you).
It should be sufficient to criticize the idea of profiling that Pipes advocates (and the "registering" thing), rather than building a "modern-day concentration camp" straw man, I think.
Hmm...I can certainly understand a vicious critique of this Pipes' article, but it doesn't help to misstate what he said (I should emphasize that Cole did it, not you).
It should be sufficient to criticize the idea of profiling that Pipes advocates (and the "registering" thing), rather than building a "modern-day concentration camp" straw man, I think.
Pipes (and Perle, Malkin, et al) probably have significant investments in the ever growing number of private sector prison management companies.
With crime rates declining, can you blame the guy for trying to drum up some exrra bidness?
Pipes (and Perle, Malkin, et al) probably have significant investments in the ever growing number of private sector prison management companies.
With crime rates declining, can you blame the guy for trying to drum up some exrra bidness?
Editoress - I don't think MM would come right out and say, "Hey! Guess what? My book is rooted in the hatred I inherited for Japanese people!"
But I think that the motivation is likely there despite the lack of outright admission.
When you tell people about the FEMA camps already set up in Amerika and the plans in place for more, they treat you like an Alex Jonestown escapee, even though they do exist.
I'm just saying that using people like MM seems likely, whether she knows it or not.
PS - She knows.
Editoress - I don't think MM would come right out and say, "Hey! Guess what? My book is rooted in the hatred I inherited for Japanese people!"
But I think that the motivation is likely there despite the lack of outright admission.
When you tell people about the FEMA camps already set up in Amerika and the plans in place for more, they treat you like an Alex Jonestown escapee, even though they do exist.
I'm just saying that using people like MM seems likely, whether she knows it or not.
PS - She knows.
You know, we've had trolls around here lately telling us that, as progressives and liberals, soon we'll be rounded up for camps. Seriously.
To me, those comments have been very disturbing.
Is that what they expect to do?
You know, we've had trolls around here lately telling us that, as progressives and liberals, soon we'll be rounded up for camps. Seriously.
To me, those comments have been very disturbing.
Is that what they expect to do?
I would bravely say that I would register as a Muslim, but I'm frightened as heck for my son. He was born here, but with a name like Mohammed...
I would bravely say that I would register as a Muslim, but I'm frightened as heck for my son. He was born here, but with a name like Mohammed...
Keep your legs cross, Paul!
Keep your legs cross, Paul!
It is mind blowing that the Neo Conartists and the howling wingnuttery are the ones calling liberals Un-American. Hoo boy, talk about pretzel logic.
It is mind blowing that the Neo Conartists and the howling wingnuttery are the ones calling liberals Un-American. Hoo boy, talk about pretzel logic.
You fundies should be tossed into camps,
Where your nuts are constricted by clamps.
Pain is good for your souls,
You obnoxious assholes.
You'll get charged when they turn up the amps.
You fundies should be tossed into camps,
Where your nuts are constricted by clamps.
Pain is good for your souls,
You obnoxious assholes.
You'll get charged when they turn up the amps.
Best comment from the link provided by Sinclair First: "Read the Constitution!"
Best comment from the link provided by Sinclair First: "Read the Constitution!"
You know, I'll admit my naievite. I didn't realize there was this great, hidden desire to start throwing people into concentration camps. Silly me, I imagined that we'd all seen that such things were terrifying, and terrible, and only done by bad people who ultimately lose in the end. Now, every time I turn around some troll is threatening to put people in concentration camps and licking his chops while doing so. Who knew?
You know, I'll admit my naievite. I didn't realize there was this great, hidden desire to start throwing people into concentration camps. Silly me, I imagined that we'd all seen that such things were terrifying, and terrible, and only done by bad people who ultimately lose in the end. Now, every time I turn around some troll is threatening to put people in concentration camps and licking his chops while doing so. Who knew?
Leftists and Islamists are united.
Sometimes, the shoe fits.
Not always, sometimes.
Leftists and Islamists are united.
Sometimes, the shoe fits.
Not always, sometimes.
I have to say that I've always found an internal contradiction in the criticism of the internment of Japanese-Americans during the Second World War.
We had a draft at that time.
That means the government, at its discretion, could draft you, stick you in a uniform, and tell you to stand in the Utah desert and guard a pile of rocks. For the duration of the war.
Isn't that essentially what was done to the Japanese? Granted, the semantic difference between "drafted" and "interred" carries a lot of psychological weight - but in terms of the actual infringement on their autonomy, it's not that different.
Especially when you consider that the government could also tell draftees, "Charge that machinegun post and keep charging until either you or they are dead." You didn't have to do that if you were interred somewhere.
I have to say that I've always found an internal contradiction in the criticism of the internment of Japanese-Americans during the Second World War.
We had a draft at that time.
That means the government, at its discretion, could draft you, stick you in a uniform, and tell you to stand in the Utah desert and guard a pile of rocks. For the duration of the war.
Isn't that essentially what was done to the Japanese? Granted, the semantic difference between "drafted" and "interred" carries a lot of psychological weight - but in terms of the actual infringement on their autonomy, it's not that different.
Especially when you consider that the government could also tell draftees, "Charge that machinegun post and keep charging until either you or they are dead." You didn't have to do that if you were interred somewhere.
I'll say it again--read her book on immigration and you'll see she's got real issues with immigrants, an amazing fact given her own background. I wish her problems were specific to the Japanese--as I said, I'd have perhaps a bit of sympathy. But go back and read her book
Invasion: How America Still Welcomes Terrorists Criminals & Other Foreign Menaces to Our Shores
and you'll see what I mean.
I'll say it again--read her book on immigration and you'll see she's got real issues with immigrants, an amazing fact given her own background. I wish her problems were specific to the Japanese--as I said, I'd have perhaps a bit of sympathy. But go back and read her book
Invasion: How America Still Welcomes Terrorists Criminals & Other Foreign Menaces to Our Shores
and you'll see what I mean.
These brownshirts and blackshirts like Pipes are disgusting. The neocons all seem to have a police state impulse.
These brownshirts and blackshirts like Pipes are disgusting. The neocons all seem to have a police state impulse.
Yay Lime Rickey!
Yay Lime Rickey!
Pipes is a fascist asshole and Michele Malkin is an irredeemable piece of human filth.
And if this country starts concentration camps for Muslims, then we're all dead. Want terror? That's a damned good way to get it.
Pipes is a fascist asshole and Michele Malkin is an irredeemable piece of human filth.
And if this country starts concentration camps for Muslims, then we're all dead. Want terror? That's a damned good way to get it.
In fairness, shouldn't you link to Daniel Pipes own statements instead of to Juan Cole's remarks about him? Cole is hardly a neutral bystander in this kind of debate.
In fairness, shouldn't you link to Daniel Pipes own statements instead of to Juan Cole's remarks about him? Cole is hardly a neutral bystander in this kind of debate.
This Malkin issue reminds me of something I've been meaning to ask:
have all the rightwing nutjobs bloviating on TV always been like this? I sometimes get the feeling that some of them don't believe a word they're spewing; they're just riding a popular wave. Has anyone seriously explored some of these clowns' backgrounds? Are some of them closet Democrats?
This Malkin issue reminds me of something I've been meaning to ask:
have all the rightwing nutjobs bloviating on TV always been like this? I sometimes get the feeling that some of them don't believe a word they're spewing; they're just riding a popular wave. Has anyone seriously explored some of these clowns' backgrounds? Are some of them closet Democrats?
Now, every time I turn around some troll is threatening to put people in concentration camps and licking his chops while doing so. Who knew?
Hecate
I know exactly ~ it's scary. And they think it's amusing, as if we deserved it for not buying into the Swift Boat crap or whatever the Bush marching orders of the day are.
I, though, do not find it funny. I find it a disturbing trend that tells me that we ain't seen nothing with regard to intolerance yet.
Now, every time I turn around some troll is threatening to put people in concentration camps and licking his chops while doing so. Who knew?
Hecate
I know exactly ~ it's scary. And they think it's amusing, as if we deserved it for not buying into the Swift Boat crap or whatever the Bush marching orders of the day are.
I, though, do not find it funny. I find it a disturbing trend that tells me that we ain't seen nothing with regard to intolerance yet.
Lime Rickey, that was definitely one of your best...a notable accomplishment.
Lime Rickey, that was definitely one of your best...a notable accomplishment.
Pentimenti,
Don't do it!!!!! They are already abusing the registration process and deporting folks for simple errors in Immigration process.
Don't DO IT!
I'm not saying everything at this link about FEMA and camps is accurate, but it deserves attention.
Pentimenti,
Don't do it!!!!! They are already abusing the registration process and deporting folks for simple errors in Immigration process.
Don't DO IT!
I'm not saying everything at this link about FEMA and camps is accurate, but it deserves attention.
Fat Sammy - Isn't that essentially what was done to the Japanese? Granted, the semantic difference between "drafted" and "interred" carries a lot of psychological weight - but in terms of the actual infringement on their autonomy, it's not that different.
Yeah, I suppose there isn't any difference between going into the service and going to jail?
You are a blithering idiot. That was a breathtakingly stupid comment.
Fat Sammy - Isn't that essentially what was done to the Japanese? Granted, the semantic difference between "drafted" and "interred" carries a lot of psychological weight - but in terms of the actual infringement on their autonomy, it's not that different.
Yeah, I suppose there isn't any difference between going into the service and going to jail?
You are a blithering idiot. That was a breathtakingly stupid comment.
Just dropped by to wish all my fellow Eschatonists a Happy New Year. May 2005 be everything you wish for & may it be the beginning of the progressive's take back of America.
The 2006 election is approaching & 2005 would be a good time to start getting involved. I strongly recommend that people write Democrats, who lost closely contested Congressional races, urging them to run again. I emailed Lois Murphy, who lost a squeaker out in the Philadelphia suburbs, urging her to run again. She emailed me back recently saying she was considering it.
Party for the New Year. Drink moderately & drive, or vice versa.
Just dropped by to wish all my fellow Eschatonists a Happy New Year. May 2005 be everything you wish for & may it be the beginning of the progressive's take back of America.
The 2006 election is approaching & 2005 would be a good time to start getting involved. I strongly recommend that people write Democrats, who lost closely contested Congressional races, urging them to run again. I emailed Lois Murphy, who lost a squeaker out in the Philadelphia suburbs, urging her to run again. She emailed me back recently saying she was considering it.
Party for the New Year. Drink moderately & drive, or vice versa.
the problem is not the weirdos who come up with the thinking...
the problem is the Good Germans raised on a steady diet of materialism and teevee.
it is the good germans who turn a blind eye once the furnaces are heated up...
it is the good germans who put peppermint oil on the upper lips to avoid the stench of burning flesh...
keep 'em ignant and fed ---> good germans are created this way!
the problem is not the weirdos who come up with the thinking...
the problem is the Good Germans raised on a steady diet of materialism and teevee.
it is the good germans who turn a blind eye once the furnaces are heated up...
it is the good germans who put peppermint oil on the upper lips to avoid the stench of burning flesh...
keep 'em ignant and fed ---> good germans are created this way!
But go back and read her book
Invasion: How America Still Welcomes Terrorists Criminals & Other Foreign Menaces to Our Shoresand you'll see what I mean.
Editoress
No, thanks. But let me guess: She's very critical of Project Paperclip, right?
But go back and read her book
Invasion: How America Still Welcomes Terrorists Criminals & Other Foreign Menaces to Our Shoresand you'll see what I mean.
Editoress
No, thanks. But let me guess: She's very critical of Project Paperclip, right?
Pipes, Perle, Malkin, Coulter,
They are the whack-a-moles of modern anti-intellectualism. The moment you beat down one dyspeptic, vile argument from one, another sprouts up as they plumb the depths of cruel idiocy.
Pipes, Perle, Malkin, Coulter,
They are the whack-a-moles of modern anti-intellectualism. The moment you beat down one dyspeptic, vile argument from one, another sprouts up as they plumb the depths of cruel idiocy.
Isn't that essentially what was done to the Japanese? Granted, the semantic difference between "drafted" and "interred" carries a lot of psychological weight - but in terms of the actual infringement on their autonomy, it's not that different.
Why do conservatives hate private property?
Japanese American farmers had to sell their property in a matter of days, for pennies on the dollar. In these cases, the land speculators who bought the land made huge profits. In addition, California's Alien Land Act, which prohibited non-citizens from owning property in that state, contributed to Japanese American property losses. Because they were barred from owning land, many older Japanese American farmers were tenant farmers and therefore lost their rights to those farm lands. To compensate these losses, the US Congress, on July 2, 1948 passed the "American Japanese Claims Act ", stated that all claims for war losses not presented within 18 months "shall be forever barred". Approximately $147 million in claims were submitted, 26,568 settlements to family groups totaling more than $38 million were disbursed.
Isn't that essentially what was done to the Japanese? Granted, the semantic difference between "drafted" and "interred" carries a lot of psychological weight - but in terms of the actual infringement on their autonomy, it's not that different.
Why do conservatives hate private property?
Japanese American farmers had to sell their property in a matter of days, for pennies on the dollar. In these cases, the land speculators who bought the land made huge profits. In addition, California's Alien Land Act, which prohibited non-citizens from owning property in that state, contributed to Japanese American property losses. Because they were barred from owning land, many older Japanese American farmers were tenant farmers and therefore lost their rights to those farm lands. To compensate these losses, the US Congress, on July 2, 1948 passed the "American Japanese Claims Act ", stated that all claims for war losses not presented within 18 months "shall be forever barred". Approximately $147 million in claims were submitted, 26,568 settlements to family groups totaling more than $38 million were disbursed.
Well, if they come for me, we're all in big trouble. I have a son whose dad is from elsewhere, but my family has been here -- hm, some of them since the land bridge between Asia and North America. Most from the 1600's. Some as late as the Revolutionary War.
Well, if they come for me, we're all in big trouble. I have a son whose dad is from elsewhere, but my family has been here -- hm, some of them since the land bridge between Asia and North America. Most from the 1600's. Some as late as the Revolutionary War.
Two Clear GOP Strategic Memes:
1.) "TV News Is GOOOOOD"
--Also encouraging, the survey finds the more people follow TV news, the more likely they are to support these common-sense steps. Those who are best informed about current issues, in other words, are also the most sensible about adopting self-evident defensive measures.
2.) "Those Evil Liberals Have Corrupted Our (Neo-Fascist) Public Opinion"
--That's the good news; the bad news is the near-universal disapproval of this realism. Leftist and Islamist organizations have so successfully intimidated public opinion that polite society shies away from endorsing a focus on Muslims.
---
Very clever turns of phrasing. His writing sounds so factual, and authortarian and all that horseshit. I especially like how he, in 21 words, imparts this message: Liberals = Al Qaida. Man, here's a guy who reaaaaalllly studied his Goebbles. This trend IS growng in the Right. Neo-Fascism is here. Stop looking for it.
Tony B.
Two Clear GOP Strategic Memes:
1.) "TV News Is GOOOOOD"
--Also encouraging, the survey finds the more people follow TV news, the more likely they are to support these common-sense steps. Those who are best informed about current issues, in other words, are also the most sensible about adopting self-evident defensive measures.
2.) "Those Evil Liberals Have Corrupted Our (Neo-Fascist) Public Opinion"
--That's the good news; the bad news is the near-universal disapproval of this realism. Leftist and Islamist organizations have so successfully intimidated public opinion that polite society shies away from endorsing a focus on Muslims.
---
Very clever turns of phrasing. His writing sounds so factual, and authortarian and all that horseshit. I especially like how he, in 21 words, imparts this message: Liberals = Al Qaida. Man, here's a guy who reaaaaalllly studied his Goebbles. This trend IS growng in the Right. Neo-Fascism is here. Stop looking for it.
Tony B.
who brought the stupids out today
who brought the stupids out today
Racial profiling = internment/concentration camps is an obvious slippery slope fallacy.
Racial profiling = internment/concentration camps is an obvious slippery slope fallacy.
I imagine a lot of people who were drafted considered it the moral equivalent of imprisonment.
The bottom line is that the government could order you to go where they wanted you to be.
If they had called it "The Great Japanese-American Service Corps" and had the WACs hand out donuts as you got on the train, are you saying that would somehow have made it better?
That's why I say it's contradictory. Although I realize that the source of the contradiction probably rests on the "draft" side - you think that being drafted into a war isn't that bad, and that therefore comparing being drafted to imprisonment is breathtakingly stupid. Unfortunately, you really have to compare the two from the perspective of someone who doesn't want to go. If you WANT to fight in the war, naturally they seem like quite different potentialities. If you don't, they don't. And if you consider only the mechanics of the events, without the recruitment-poster glamour, they are pretty similar. You also have to consider the fact that if a draft is acceptable under certain emergency circumstances, than you've established a framework for government power in that emergency that would seem to include internment as well: if you can deploy citizens to tasks that get them killed, you should be able to deploy citizens to "tasks" that inconvenience or humiliate them.
I imagine a lot of people who were drafted considered it the moral equivalent of imprisonment.
The bottom line is that the government could order you to go where they wanted you to be.
If they had called it "The Great Japanese-American Service Corps" and had the WACs hand out donuts as you got on the train, are you saying that would somehow have made it better?
That's why I say it's contradictory. Although I realize that the source of the contradiction probably rests on the "draft" side - you think that being drafted into a war isn't that bad, and that therefore comparing being drafted to imprisonment is breathtakingly stupid. Unfortunately, you really have to compare the two from the perspective of someone who doesn't want to go. If you WANT to fight in the war, naturally they seem like quite different potentialities. If you don't, they don't. And if you consider only the mechanics of the events, without the recruitment-poster glamour, they are pretty similar. You also have to consider the fact that if a draft is acceptable under certain emergency circumstances, than you've established a framework for government power in that emergency that would seem to include internment as well: if you can deploy citizens to tasks that get them killed, you should be able to deploy citizens to "tasks" that inconvenience or humiliate them.
it isn't slippery slope if you've used one (internment) to justify the other
it isn't slippery slope if you've used one (internment) to justify the other
Very clever turns of phrasing. His writing sounds so factual, and authortarian and all that horseshit. I especially like how he, in 21 words, imparts this message: Liberals = Al Qaida. Man, here's a guy who reaaaaalllly studied his Goebbles. This trend IS growng in the Right. Neo-Fascism is here. Stop looking for it.
What Pipes is doing is phrasing his call for concentration camps in a way that it has plausible deniability.
"Oh I'm not calling for internment. I'm just calling for more aggressive law enforcement".
And this allows him to get the message out there (even in the form of his little brownshirt followers delaring anybody who calls him on it a "conspiracy theorist").
And while everybody's arguing a significant percentage of the American population will say "hmm, concentration camps. Good idea."
Very clever turns of phrasing. His writing sounds so factual, and authortarian and all that horseshit. I especially like how he, in 21 words, imparts this message: Liberals = Al Qaida. Man, here's a guy who reaaaaalllly studied his Goebbles. This trend IS growng in the Right. Neo-Fascism is here. Stop looking for it.
What Pipes is doing is phrasing his call for concentration camps in a way that it has plausible deniability.
"Oh I'm not calling for internment. I'm just calling for more aggressive law enforcement".
And this allows him to get the message out there (even in the form of his little brownshirt followers delaring anybody who calls him on it a "conspiracy theorist").
And while everybody's arguing a significant percentage of the American population will say "hmm, concentration camps. Good idea."
Nancy, Atrios' standard M.O. is to buffer any potentially harmful links with several layers of unflattering commentary and inaccurate paraphrase.
Nancy, Atrios' standard M.O. is to buffer any potentially harmful links with several layers of unflattering commentary and inaccurate paraphrase.
"I didn't realize there was this great, hidden desire to start throwing people into concentration camps"
When I learned that this country imprisons more people than any other country in the world (per capita)including Russia and China with apparent approval of the masses, it didn't take me long to figure it out.
"I didn't realize there was this great, hidden desire to start throwing people into concentration camps"
When I learned that this country imprisons more people than any other country in the world (per capita)including Russia and China with apparent approval of the masses, it didn't take me long to figure it out.
"To The People Of Islam:
Just think: If we'd invaded your countries, killed your leaders and converted you to Christianity YOU'D ALL BE OPENING CHRISTMAS PRESENTS RIGHT ABOUT NOW!
Merry Christmas"
-- from Ann Coulter's website.
I've said it before. Coulter is doing performance art. No one could be that nuts.
"To The People Of Islam:
Just think: If we'd invaded your countries, killed your leaders and converted you to Christianity YOU'D ALL BE OPENING CHRISTMAS PRESENTS RIGHT ABOUT NOW!
Merry Christmas"
-- from Ann Coulter's website.
I've said it before. Coulter is doing performance art. No one could be that nuts.
his call for concentration camps
lol
his call for concentration camps
lol
If they had called it "The Great Japanese-American Service Corps" and had the WACs hand out donuts as you got on the train, are you saying that would somehow have made it better?
Once more, are you aware of the value of Japanese property stolen during this "draft"?
As far as I know, no white person who was drafted had his family's farm confiscated (or his family locked away).
If they had called it "The Great Japanese-American Service Corps" and had the WACs hand out donuts as you got on the train, are you saying that would somehow have made it better?
Once more, are you aware of the value of Japanese property stolen during this "draft"?
As far as I know, no white person who was drafted had his family's farm confiscated (or his family locked away).
That's clever - calling for concentration camps by not calling for them. He had me fooled!
Seriously, aren't there enough criticisms that can be based on what he actually said? For example, "registering their whereabouts" is much more sinister than mere profiling. Pretty fucking creepy and wrong
It's still not concentration camps, however.
That's clever - calling for concentration camps by not calling for them. He had me fooled!
Seriously, aren't there enough criticisms that can be based on what he actually said? For example, "registering their whereabouts" is much more sinister than mere profiling. Pretty fucking creepy and wrong
It's still not concentration camps, however.
This is all such nonsense!
We'll just elect a government of intelligent, fair, just and tolerant representatives of the people, and none of this will ever become reality.
Sheesh, you guys act like we're living in the Dark Ages.
This is all such nonsense!
We'll just elect a government of intelligent, fair, just and tolerant representatives of the people, and none of this will ever become reality.
Sheesh, you guys act like we're living in the Dark Ages.
Tip o' the hat to Lime Ricky that is truly one for your "Best Of" Anthology...
When are you planning on publishing? And will woot's boobies be worked in as illustration?
Tony B.
Tip o' the hat to Lime Ricky that is truly one for your "Best Of" Anthology...
When are you planning on publishing? And will woot's boobies be worked in as illustration?
Tony B.
Well, we Jews critical of Israel are often accused of being self-hating Jews; maybe that's just more projection by the whack jobs on the Right (since Malkin is obviously a self-hating immigrant). And since we know that most of the Right's charges about the Left are projection...
Well, we Jews critical of Israel are often accused of being self-hating Jews; maybe that's just more projection by the whack jobs on the Right (since Malkin is obviously a self-hating immigrant). And since we know that most of the Right's charges about the Left are projection...
Atrios, no one has advocated internment of Muslims, not Malkin, not Pipes.
Atrios, no one has advocated internment of Muslims, not Malkin, not Pipes.
Malkin
1. Originally, a kitchenmaid; a slattern.
2. A mop made of clouts, used by the kitchen servant.
3. A scarecrow.
4. A mop or sponge attached to a jointed staff for swabbing out a cannon.
Malkin
1. Originally, a kitchenmaid; a slattern.
2. A mop made of clouts, used by the kitchen servant.
3. A scarecrow.
4. A mop or sponge attached to a jointed staff for swabbing out a cannon.
I'm serious about internment of the US military, though.
Those are scary, dangerous people who need to be watched 24/7.
I'm serious about internment of the US military, though.
Those are scary, dangerous people who need to be watched 24/7.
if you consider only the mechanics of the events, without the recruitment-poster glamour, they are pretty similar
So twice in one day I'm having to admit my ignorance. I was totally unaware that we drafted women and children and old people during WWII. I thought it was only men within a certain age range. And now I find out that we drafted babies and grandmothers and pregnant women. Just like the internment camps. Who knew?
if you consider only the mechanics of the events, without the recruitment-poster glamour, they are pretty similar
So twice in one day I'm having to admit my ignorance. I was totally unaware that we drafted women and children and old people during WWII. I thought it was only men within a certain age range. And now I find out that we drafted babies and grandmothers and pregnant women. Just like the internment camps. Who knew?
talk about not feeding the trolls!
Is there a serious controversy over what Pipes means? I, for one, can't find it.
Couching a discussion of racial profiling in terms of the most embarassing and egregiously un-Constitutional action of World War II is NOT calling for Muslim internment camps, or anything else so wildly inappropriate?
What part of the Supreme Court ruling on Gitmo does Pipes (like the Administration) not understand?
And we are arguing with people who think Pipes is making a valid point?
Never argue with a fool. People won't be able to tell the difference.
Pipes is a fool. His column is QED on that point. End of discussion.
talk about not feeding the trolls!
Is there a serious controversy over what Pipes means? I, for one, can't find it.
Couching a discussion of racial profiling in terms of the most embarassing and egregiously un-Constitutional action of World War II is NOT calling for Muslim internment camps, or anything else so wildly inappropriate?
What part of the Supreme Court ruling on Gitmo does Pipes (like the Administration) not understand?
And we are arguing with people who think Pipes is making a valid point?
Never argue with a fool. People won't be able to tell the difference.
Pipes is a fool. His column is QED on that point. End of discussion.
"And if this country starts concentration camps for Muslims, then we're all dead. Want terror? That's a damned good way to get it."
The fact is that the Bushies have not only broken the hornet's nest but they have lit the fuse of hell upon us. I am afraid that we will have terror unlike we have ever known, whatever we do. (But I share your rage in this event of concentration camps). I am still enraged at the people who are STILL imprisoned without benefit of attorney, etc.
"And if this country starts concentration camps for Muslims, then we're all dead. Want terror? That's a damned good way to get it."
The fact is that the Bushies have not only broken the hornet's nest but they have lit the fuse of hell upon us. I am afraid that we will have terror unlike we have ever known, whatever we do. (But I share your rage in this event of concentration camps). I am still enraged at the people who are STILL imprisoned without benefit of attorney, etc.
A couple of things being reported the past days deserve mention: 1) House Republicans are planning to revamp the procedures on ethics violations so that investigations on House members will be extremely difficult 2) the Washington Post has been analyzing 2004 election campaigning.
The paper reports that the Bush/Republican campaign effort was much more cohesive & adept at targeting potential voters than the Democrats & their allies. Specifically, the Bush/Repub campaign was able to use segmented marketing - targeting people of religious conviction, people focused on terrorism, people primarily focused on tax cuts & sway them with the appropriate message.
I got a sense that Democrats & their allies lacked a cohesive campaign when I witnessed Move On, ACT, the Democratic Party all duplicating their efforts at registering & getting out the vote here in Philadelphia. From what I've been told, there was close to zero effort in those counties where Democrats were not in the majority. My recollection is that they're about 3000 counties nationwide. That means we didn't go after a few million voters we could have had.
A couple of things being reported the past days deserve mention: 1) House Republicans are planning to revamp the procedures on ethics violations so that investigations on House members will be extremely difficult 2) the Washington Post has been analyzing 2004 election campaigning.
The paper reports that the Bush/Republican campaign effort was much more cohesive & adept at targeting potential voters than the Democrats & their allies. Specifically, the Bush/Repub campaign was able to use segmented marketing - targeting people of religious conviction, people focused on terrorism, people primarily focused on tax cuts & sway them with the appropriate message.
I got a sense that Democrats & their allies lacked a cohesive campaign when I witnessed Move On, ACT, the Democratic Party all duplicating their efforts at registering & getting out the vote here in Philadelphia. From what I've been told, there was close to zero effort in those counties where Democrats were not in the majority. My recollection is that they're about 3000 counties nationwide. That means we didn't go after a few million voters we could have had.
Well, we Jews critical of Israel are often accused of being self-hating Jews;
It seems to me that in any religious/ethnic group there are two impulses.
1.) The desire to defend your own when they're threatened.
2.) A universalist impulse, the way your religion morally obligates you to defend the oppressed against the majority.
Conservatives don't like impulse #2 (see Rand, Ayn).
Although I'm touched that Michelle Malkin obviously likes my group (white Protestant Americans) more than she likes her own (Asians).
It's almost touching. Thanks Michelle.
Well, we Jews critical of Israel are often accused of being self-hating Jews;
It seems to me that in any religious/ethnic group there are two impulses.
1.) The desire to defend your own when they're threatened.
2.) A universalist impulse, the way your religion morally obligates you to defend the oppressed against the majority.
Conservatives don't like impulse #2 (see Rand, Ayn).
Although I'm touched that Michelle Malkin obviously likes my group (white Protestant Americans) more than she likes her own (Asians).
It's almost touching. Thanks Michelle.
Couching a discussion of racial profiling in terms of the most embarassing and egregiously un-Constitutional action of World War II is NOT calling for Muslim internment camps, or anything else so wildly inappropriate?
Nope, it's NOT calling for internment camps. So why not just focus on the un-Constitutional act of profiling/registering? Is that not a "hot" enough story, for chrissakes?
Couching a discussion of racial profiling in terms of the most embarassing and egregiously un-Constitutional action of World War II is NOT calling for Muslim internment camps, or anything else so wildly inappropriate?
Nope, it's NOT calling for internment camps. So why not just focus on the un-Constitutional act of profiling/registering? Is that not a "hot" enough story, for chrissakes?
Seriously, aren't there enough criticisms that can be based on what he actually said? For example, "registering their whereabouts" is much more sinister than mere profiling. Pretty fucking creepy and wrong
Absolutely correct!
Seriously, aren't there enough criticisms that can be based on what he actually said? For example, "registering their whereabouts" is much more sinister than mere profiling. Pretty fucking creepy and wrong
Absolutely correct!
Fat Sammy - you are breathtakingly stupid. You are really stretching that analogy to make it seem plausible, but you are working from premises that do not support your irrational conclusions.
You could make the same argument about marriage, you loon. If someone gets married, theoretically much of their freedom is taken away - they aren't supposed to fuck other people, they are supposed to share their wealth and so forth.
Now are you going to insist that that is the same thing as being locked up in a camp or prison?
Jesus, man, think.
Fat Sammy - you are breathtakingly stupid. You are really stretching that analogy to make it seem plausible, but you are working from premises that do not support your irrational conclusions.
You could make the same argument about marriage, you loon. If someone gets married, theoretically much of their freedom is taken away - they aren't supposed to fuck other people, they are supposed to share their wealth and so forth.
Now are you going to insist that that is the same thing as being locked up in a camp or prison?
Jesus, man, think.
UBH, I don't give a flying fuck WHAT her motivation is. I don't care that she wasn't loved enough as a child and that she sekritly hates everybody because of it ... you do not get to be taken seriously when you start talking like she does.
And don't scream censorship ... she can say anything she wants ... it just scares the shit out of me that people listen to her.
A.
UBH, I don't give a flying fuck WHAT her motivation is. I don't care that she wasn't loved enough as a child and that she sekritly hates everybody because of it ... you do not get to be taken seriously when you start talking like she does.
And don't scream censorship ... she can say anything she wants ... it just scares the shit out of me that people listen to her.
A.
Nope, it's NOT calling for internment camps.
Reading Comprehension 101, people. Back to class for some of you.
The entire essay focusses on Malkin's "analysis" (I use the term loosely), and concludes with this:
Malkin has done the singular service of breaking the academic single-note scholarship on a critical subject, cutting through a shabby, stultifying consensus to reveal how, "given what was known and not known at the time," FDR and his staff did the right thing.
She correctly concludes that, especially in time of war, governments should take into account nationality, ethnicity, and religious affiliation in their homeland security policies and engage in what she calls "threat profiling."
If that isn't a call to arms for "whatever means necessary" (including internment camps, like Gitmo; they exist now, if you hadn't noticed), then it's nothing at all.
Nope, it's NOT calling for internment camps.
Reading Comprehension 101, people. Back to class for some of you.
The entire essay focusses on Malkin's "analysis" (I use the term loosely), and concludes with this:
Malkin has done the singular service of breaking the academic single-note scholarship on a critical subject, cutting through a shabby, stultifying consensus to reveal how, "given what was known and not known at the time," FDR and his staff did the right thing.
She correctly concludes that, especially in time of war, governments should take into account nationality, ethnicity, and religious affiliation in their homeland security policies and engage in what she calls "threat profiling."
If that isn't a call to arms for "whatever means necessary" (including internment camps, like Gitmo; they exist now, if you hadn't noticed), then it's nothing at all.
What's wrong with camp?
Singing songs bt the fire, canoeing, making wallets.
We should have it so good!
What's wrong with camp?
Singing songs bt the fire, canoeing, making wallets.
We should have it so good!
I don't want to argue with the trolls but suggest a way to counter Pipes.
There *have* to be Christian and Jewish clergyman who will oppose this. A march on Washington of even 10-15 thousand Ministers, Priests, and Rabbis will shot through the press like a lightning bolt.
I'm not a member of any church but it seems to me that the first way to organize a resistence to Pipes's suggestion is to do it through your own religious organizations.
Some kind of "March for Religious Freedom".
I don't want to argue with the trolls but suggest a way to counter Pipes.
There *have* to be Christian and Jewish clergyman who will oppose this. A march on Washington of even 10-15 thousand Ministers, Priests, and Rabbis will shot through the press like a lightning bolt.
I'm not a member of any church but it seems to me that the first way to organize a resistence to Pipes's suggestion is to do it through your own religious organizations.
Some kind of "March for Religious Freedom".
"So twice in one day I'm having to admit my ignorance. I was totally unaware that we drafted women and children and old people during WWII. I thought it was only men within a certain age range. And now I find out that we drafted babies and grandmothers and pregnant women. Just like the internment camps. Who knew?"
So what?
The government drafted certain citizens for military service because those were the citizens they can USE for military service.
If the government can claim young male citizens for emergency involuntary servitude, why can't they claim everyone else?
You all seem to think I'm saying that the internment was a good thing, and I'm not. I'm just saying that in the context of other government actions at that time, in terms of the power over the citizenry being claimed, the internment really isn't that exceptional.
The Japanese loss of property during the internment actually could be said to be exceptional. That's true. Of course, many people who were drafted for military service lost their lives. I imagine if you asked those people if they would have liked their life back, in exchange for their house, a lot of them would have said Yes.
"So twice in one day I'm having to admit my ignorance. I was totally unaware that we drafted women and children and old people during WWII. I thought it was only men within a certain age range. And now I find out that we drafted babies and grandmothers and pregnant women. Just like the internment camps. Who knew?"
So what?
The government drafted certain citizens for military service because those were the citizens they can USE for military service.
If the government can claim young male citizens for emergency involuntary servitude, why can't they claim everyone else?
You all seem to think I'm saying that the internment was a good thing, and I'm not. I'm just saying that in the context of other government actions at that time, in terms of the power over the citizenry being claimed, the internment really isn't that exceptional.
The Japanese loss of property during the internment actually could be said to be exceptional. That's true. Of course, many people who were drafted for military service lost their lives. I imagine if you asked those people if they would have liked their life back, in exchange for their house, a lot of them would have said Yes.
Gitmo for you!
Gitmo for me!
Gitmo for everyone!
Keep America Free!
Gitmo for you!
Gitmo for me!
Gitmo for everyone!
Keep America Free!
If reading comprehension requires making shit up in my head that wasn't said or even implied (note the summation, "threat profiling" rather than the "whatever means necessary" you insert), that perhaps I did miss that day in class.
If reading comprehension requires making shit up in my head that wasn't said or even implied (note the summation, "threat profiling" rather than the "whatever means necessary" you insert), that perhaps I did miss that day in class.
"threat profiling" = "whatever means necessary"??
Robert M. Jeffers, that is a slippery slope error of the worst kind.
"threat profiling" = "whatever means necessary"??
Robert M. Jeffers, that is a slippery slope error of the worst kind.
Specifically, the Bush/Repub campaign was able to use segmented marketing - targeting people of religious conviction
It is my opinion, though, that this targeted marketing effort is on the slippery slope to violation of separation of church and state. The political parties should stay the hell out of churches. It's pandering. It sets up a false sense within the masses that the government, or one party or the other, endorses a particular religious philosophy. Not good.
Specifically, the Bush/Repub campaign was able to use segmented marketing - targeting people of religious conviction
It is my opinion, though, that this targeted marketing effort is on the slippery slope to violation of separation of church and state. The political parties should stay the hell out of churches. It's pandering. It sets up a false sense within the masses that the government, or one party or the other, endorses a particular religious philosophy. Not good.
This is just one of many things that you don't want to be able to say "I told you".
This is just one of many things that you don't want to be able to say "I told you".
So twice in one day I'm having to admit my ignorance. I was totally unaware that we drafted women and children and old people during WWII. I thought it was only men within a certain age range. And now I find out that we drafted babies and grandmothers and pregnant women. Just like the internment camps. Who knew?
Hecate
HA! Yes, Hecate, and of course, we steal the property and the jobs of all the draftees. Don't you remember that in the 1960s? 
Geesh, can't we get a reading requirement here? Can't the people comparing the draft to the internment of American citizens, and the people who mouth off about Malkin be required to read something before posting?
sigh. It's the last day of the year. Maybe 2005 will be better.
So twice in one day I'm having to admit my ignorance. I was totally unaware that we drafted women and children and old people during WWII. I thought it was only men within a certain age range. And now I find out that we drafted babies and grandmothers and pregnant women. Just like the internment camps. Who knew?
Hecate
HA! Yes, Hecate, and of course, we steal the property and the jobs of all the draftees. Don't you remember that in the 1960s?
Geesh, can't we get a reading requirement here? Can't the people comparing the draft to the internment of American citizens, and the people who mouth off about Malkin be required to read something before posting?
sigh. It's the last day of the year. Maybe 2005 will be better.
There *have* to be Christian and Jewish clergyman who will oppose this. A march on Washington of even 10-15 thousand Ministers, Priests, and Rabbis will shot through the press like a lightning bolt.
You mean like the millions world-wide who protested the war before it started?
Unless the protest is headed by Jerry Falwell and Dobson, the media will dismiss them all as "fringe elements."
Even 10,000 of 'em....
There *have* to be Christian and Jewish clergyman who will oppose this. A march on Washington of even 10-15 thousand Ministers, Priests, and Rabbis will shot through the press like a lightning bolt.
You mean like the millions world-wide who protested the war before it started?
Unless the protest is headed by Jerry Falwell and Dobson, the media will dismiss them all as "fringe elements."
Even 10,000 of 'em....
"You could make the same argument about marriage, you loon. If someone gets married, theoretically much of their freedom is taken away - they aren't supposed to fuck other people, they are supposed to share their wealth and so forth."
Tena, your argument was better before.
People get married voluntarily.
If the government was sending people letters in the mail and ordering them to marry people they didn't want to marry, I would indeed compare that action to imprisonment.
"You could make the same argument about marriage, you loon. If someone gets married, theoretically much of their freedom is taken away - they aren't supposed to fuck other people, they are supposed to share their wealth and so forth."
Tena, your argument was better before.
People get married voluntarily.
If the government was sending people letters in the mail and ordering them to marry people they didn't want to marry, I would indeed compare that action to imprisonment.
SWR - I think that's a brilliant idea, myself. I would love to see more liberal christians and jews in this country stand up for what is right. Religious freedom for everyone, and that means muslims, too, is right.
SWR - I think that's a brilliant idea, myself. I would love to see more liberal christians and jews in this country stand up for what is right. Religious freedom for everyone, and that means muslims, too, is right.
Pipes refers to similarities between WW II and the War on Terror.
Pearl Harbor - an avoidable tragedy that the US Gov't stood down for in order to rally public support for war.
9/11 - an avoidable tragedy that the US Gov't stood down for in order to rally public support for war.
Hitler - a fascist ideologue supported by the Bush and Kennedy patriarchs until making war with his followers was more profitable than supporting him.
Bin Laden - a religious ideologue supported by Democrat and Republican administrations until making war with his followers was more profitable than supporting him.
Really, there are a number of similarites that Pipes could have explored.
Pipes refers to similarities between WW II and the War on Terror.
Pearl Harbor - an avoidable tragedy that the US Gov't stood down for in order to rally public support for war.
9/11 - an avoidable tragedy that the US Gov't stood down for in order to rally public support for war.
Hitler - a fascist ideologue supported by the Bush and Kennedy patriarchs until making war with his followers was more profitable than supporting him.
Bin Laden - a religious ideologue supported by Democrat and Republican administrations until making war with his followers was more profitable than supporting him.
Really, there are a number of similarites that Pipes could have explored.
Sheesh. Although Pipes does not explicitly say, "We should build internment camps for Muslim citizens of the United States," it is absolutely clear that the point of the column is a justification for doing so if it were deemed to be in the interest of national security; and furthermore he strongly implies that it just might be.
Also, Cole linked to the column. There is nothing dishonest about Atrios or Juan Cole in this matter.
I strongly endorse the following link, which I believe tells the essential truth about al Qaeda, important context for this discussion (and many others):
BBC documentary
Sheesh. Although Pipes does not explicitly say, "We should build internment camps for Muslim citizens of the United States," it is absolutely clear that the point of the column is a justification for doing so if it were deemed to be in the interest of national security; and furthermore he strongly implies that it just might be.
Also, Cole linked to the column. There is nothing dishonest about Atrios or Juan Cole in this matter.
I strongly endorse the following link, which I believe tells the essential truth about al Qaeda, important context for this discussion (and many others):
BBC documentary
"threat profiling" = "whatever means necessary"??
Robert M. Jeffers, that is a slippery slope error of the worst kind.
I didn't say it. Pipes did.
Explain to me why the context of his column is internment camps, if he means to turn away from that extreme, or avoid the "slippery slope," as you put it.
There are better ways to argue for increased security, decreased civil liberties, than supporting the crackpot historical analysis of the Japanese internment camps. But that's what Pipes does.
That, you cannot explain away, try as you might.
"threat profiling" = "whatever means necessary"??
Robert M. Jeffers, that is a slippery slope error of the worst kind.
I didn't say it. Pipes did.
Explain to me why the context of his column is internment camps, if he means to turn away from that extreme, or avoid the "slippery slope," as you put it.
There are better ways to argue for increased security, decreased civil liberties, than supporting the crackpot historical analysis of the Japanese internment camps. But that's what Pipes does.
That, you cannot explain away, try as you might.
My local radio wingnut went from wanting a muslim apology to voluntary registration with the government to mandatory registration and jailing all muslims who dont register.All in the space of twenty minutes time.
My local radio wingnut went from wanting a muslim apology to voluntary registration with the government to mandatory registration and jailing all muslims who dont register.All in the space of twenty minutes time.
"The intrepid Malkin, a specialist on immigration..."
Yeah...and "The intrepid Coulter, a specialist on liberalism...", "The intrepid Savage, a specialist on homosexuality...", "The intrepid Limbaugh, a specialist on the Clintons...", "The intrepid David Irving, a specialist on the Holocaust...", etc. ad nauseum.
"The intrepid Malkin, a specialist on immigration..."
Yeah...and "The intrepid Coulter, a specialist on liberalism...", "The intrepid Savage, a specialist on homosexuality...", "The intrepid Limbaugh, a specialist on the Clintons...", "The intrepid David Irving, a specialist on the Holocaust...", etc. ad nauseum.
SWR - I think that's a brilliant idea, myself. I would love to see more liberal christians and jews in this country stand up for what is right. Religious freedom for everyone, and that means muslims, too, is right.
Tena | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 11:58 am | #
I'm talking specifically about clergyman. I'm guessing the cops would be less likely to beat the crap out of a 50 year old Lutheran Minister or Rabbi than a 20 year old college kid.
True, the media would pick out a few chosen organizers with leftist backgrounds (and we'd have to look at endless clips of Al Shartpon on the news) but I honestly think that if the liberal Protestant churches, black churchs, and the liberal Jewish organizations get on this now, they could do some good.
Paging Al Sharpton and Michael Lerner....
SWR - I think that's a brilliant idea, myself. I would love to see more liberal christians and jews in this country stand up for what is right. Religious freedom for everyone, and that means muslims, too, is right.
Tena | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 11:58 am | #
I'm talking specifically about clergyman. I'm guessing the cops would be less likely to beat the crap out of a 50 year old Lutheran Minister or Rabbi than a 20 year old college kid.
True, the media would pick out a few chosen organizers with leftist backgrounds (and we'd have to look at endless clips of Al Shartpon on the news) but I honestly think that if the liberal Protestant churches, black churchs, and the liberal Jewish organizations get on this now, they could do some good.
Paging Al Sharpton and Michael Lerner....
HA! Yes, Hecate, and of course, we steal the property and the jobs of all the draftees. Don't you remember that in the 1960s?
Well, not to mention that we kept all the draftees locked up and only let them out to fight for us, just like the Japanese Americans in WWII.
Jesus on a Segway - where do these loons get their educations?
HA! Yes, Hecate, and of course, we steal the property and the jobs of all the draftees. Don't you remember that in the 1960s?
Well, not to mention that we kept all the draftees locked up and only let them out to fight for us, just like the Japanese Americans in WWII.
Jesus on a Segway - where do these loons get their educations?
SWR - I meant the clergy, too - not the congregations, though as always, the more the merrier.
SWR - I meant the clergy, too - not the congregations, though as always, the more the merrier.
"Geesh, can't we get a reading requirement here? Can't the people comparing the draft to the internment of American citizens"
Again, you seem to think I'm saying:
"Draft is good" therefore "Internment is good".
I'm not.
I'm saying:
"Internment was bad" and "Draft was bad too, and they're similar enough that if you don't complain about one, you shouldn't complain about the other."
"Geesh, can't we get a reading requirement here? Can't the people comparing the draft to the internment of American citizens"
Again, you seem to think I'm saying:
"Draft is good" therefore "Internment is good".
I'm not.
I'm saying:
"Internment was bad" and "Draft was bad too, and they're similar enough that if you don't complain about one, you shouldn't complain about the other."
WWII: Defense and Agression.
War on Terror: Agression.
It seems to me the US escalated the thing without doing anything about the root causes of the social, economic and cultural problems faced by so many groups.
Thus, justifications for action based on WWI logic have no basis in the War on Terror, becasue, it's not a war.
I think.
WWII: Defense and Agression.
War on Terror: Agression.
It seems to me the US escalated the thing without doing anything about the root causes of the social, economic and cultural problems faced by so many groups.
Thus, justifications for action based on WWI logic have no basis in the War on Terror, becasue, it's not a war.
I think.
What is significant about this Pipes article is Pipes' ties to the administration. They could always try to write off Malkin as some nut who's opinion didn't matter but Pipes has direct ties to the administration and has been appointed to a temporary vacancy at the United States Institute of Peace by Bush.
What is significant about this Pipes article is Pipes' ties to the administration. They could always try to write off Malkin as some nut who's opinion didn't matter but Pipes has direct ties to the administration and has been appointed to a temporary vacancy at the United States Institute of Peace by Bush.
And Fat Sammy, what we are saying is that there is no comparison, you idjit.
If you don't believe that, then why is it, do you suppose, that when offered the choice between jail or the army, most will pick the army?
Could it be because the army is not a prison? Maybe, you suppose?
Come on man, you are not going to be able to torture your idea enough to make it work because it is unworkable.
And Fat Sammy, what we are saying is that there is no comparison, you idjit.
If you don't believe that, then why is it, do you suppose, that when offered the choice between jail or the army, most will pick the army?
Could it be because the army is not a prison? Maybe, you suppose?
Come on man, you are not going to be able to torture your idea enough to make it work because it is unworkable.
SWR - I meant the clergy, too - not the congregations, though as always, the more the merrier.
Tena | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:02 pm | #
I can almost see the "Protest Warrior" signs.
"Mass Internment has Never Done Any Good, except for helping Stalin modernize Russia and the Chinese to build a society that lets you have that cheap computer".
SWR - I meant the clergy, too - not the congregations, though as always, the more the merrier.
Tena | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:02 pm | #
I can almost see the "Protest Warrior" signs.
"Mass Internment has Never Done Any Good, except for helping Stalin modernize Russia and the Chinese to build a society that lets you have that cheap computer".
Why weren't German Americans interred during WWII? Pipes and Maglagang don't answer that. There were many "disloyal" GA's, like Lindberg, whom Americans continued to revere, despite their opposition to the war.
Pipes citing of Maglagang's factoid about two Japanese American spies in Hawaii is a pretty thin basis for interning a whole ethnic group. I'm sure there were GA spies too. Germany sure as hell tried to recruit them.
The raacism of this is transparent.
Why weren't German Americans interred during WWII? Pipes and Maglagang don't answer that. There were many "disloyal" GA's, like Lindberg, whom Americans continued to revere, despite their opposition to the war.
Pipes citing of Maglagang's factoid about two Japanese American spies in Hawaii is a pretty thin basis for interning a whole ethnic group. I'm sure there were GA spies too. Germany sure as hell tried to recruit them.
The raacism of this is transparent.
cervantes - thanks for the link to that BBC doc. I'd seen a mention of it in a NYRB review of several "war on terror" books. Sounded over-the-top from the comments I read, but I want to see it for myself and it'll NEVER be shown here on TV.
cervantes - thanks for the link to that BBC doc. I'd seen a mention of it in a NYRB review of several "war on terror" books. Sounded over-the-top from the comments I read, but I want to see it for myself and it'll NEVER be shown here on TV.
RMJ, Pipes' [stupid] article cites Malkin's [stupid] book in defense of her point regarding racial profiling, which you might agree is a far cry from concentration camps. There is no clear implication Pipes advocates the wholesale internment of Muslims. The article is dumb enough without Cole's distortion.
RMJ, Pipes' [stupid] article cites Malkin's [stupid] book in defense of her point regarding racial profiling, which you might agree is a far cry from concentration camps. There is no clear implication Pipes advocates the wholesale internment of Muslims. The article is dumb enough without Cole's distortion.
"Well, not to mention that we kept all the draftees locked up and only let them out to fight for us, just like the Japanese Americans in WWII."
The actual conditions of military service were at the government's discretion. Once they had you.
They could give you leaves if they wanted to. Or not. Generally they did so to the extent that it was of benefit to the service. They didn't give leaves because you had a "right" to them.
Whether you like it or not, the theoretical status of draftees and internees, relative to their rights as citizens, were very similar - although their practical experiences were naturally very different.
"Well, not to mention that we kept all the draftees locked up and only let them out to fight for us, just like the Japanese Americans in WWII."
The actual conditions of military service were at the government's discretion. Once they had you.
They could give you leaves if they wanted to. Or not. Generally they did so to the extent that it was of benefit to the service. They didn't give leaves because you had a "right" to them.
Whether you like it or not, the theoretical status of draftees and internees, relative to their rights as citizens, were very similar - although their practical experiences were naturally very different.
Germany sure as hell tried to recruit them.
The raacism of this is transparent.
There were actually German Americans who out and out supported Hitler.
Most of the Japanese Americans interned were farmers. They didn't even work in sensitive industries.
There's no question that German Americans were a lot more of a threat.
Germany sure as hell tried to recruit them.
The raacism of this is transparent.
There were actually German Americans who out and out supported Hitler.
Most of the Japanese Americans interned were farmers. They didn't even work in sensitive industries.
There's no question that German Americans were a lot more of a threat.
There is no clear implication Pipes advocates the wholesale internment of Muslims.
Again, clear enough to me, else why cite Malkin's reprehensible work? there are plenty of other grounds for arguing, as I said, for limiting civil liberties. The Bush Administration, and others, have made many of them.
Few have cited Malkin's work as a basis for such arguments.
You want to slice this thin enough that it only has one side. That, you cannot do.
Keep trying, though.
There is no clear implication Pipes advocates the wholesale internment of Muslims.
Again, clear enough to me, else why cite Malkin's reprehensible work? there are plenty of other grounds for arguing, as I said, for limiting civil liberties. The Bush Administration, and others, have made many of them.
Few have cited Malkin's work as a basis for such arguments.
You want to slice this thin enough that it only has one side. That, you cannot do.
Keep trying, though.
Don't forget the Italians and their facist dreams of making Americans with pizza!
No one put pizza in camps!
Don't forget the Italians and their facist dreams of making Americans with pizza!
No one put pizza in camps!
I>there are plenty of other grounds for arguing, as I said, for limiting civil liberties. The Bush Administration, and others, have made many of them.
I should make clear: none of those arguments hold water. But this is worse by several degrees, and founded on a "factual basis" that is actually laughable.
I>there are plenty of other grounds for arguing, as I said, for limiting civil liberties. The Bush Administration, and others, have made many of them.
I should make clear: none of those arguments hold water. But this is worse by several degrees, and founded on a "factual basis" that is actually laughable.
Part of what's interesting to me about Pipe's article is the anxiety behind it.
If our glorious leader's war in Iraq is making us so much safer, then why the need to even talk about things like this?
I think the hard right knows they're fucking up and (read the Ayn Rand trolls coming out with their comparisons of concentration camps to a draft) they're also starting to float trial balloons in the media for the coming draft.
They're going to escalate in Iraq. I can feel it.
Part of what's interesting to me about Pipe's article is the anxiety behind it.
If our glorious leader's war in Iraq is making us so much safer, then why the need to even talk about things like this?
I think the hard right knows they're fucking up and (read the Ayn Rand trolls coming out with their comparisons of concentration camps to a draft) they're also starting to float trial balloons in the media for the coming draft.
They're going to escalate in Iraq. I can feel it.
Paul Verhoeven - I didn't see where Pipes advocated the internment of Muslim Americans in the article.
"...that government authorities should direct special attention toward Muslims living in America, either by registering their whereabouts, profiling them, monitoring their mosques, or infiltrating their organizations."
Pipes moved effortlessly from that opening proposition to a full blown defense and endorsement of the internment of Japanese during WWII. Either it's just an unforgivable non sequitur or he's arguing that internment is the natural and reasonable course.
But, perhaps you're right, and Pipes is not advocating internment camps for American Muslims. On strict reading, it might be fair to say that he's really only up to mandating that all Muslims wear a yellow crescent prominently displayed on their clothing.
It's a little thing really in the name of national security. While we're passing out the crescents, it would probably be prudent to prepare the patches for the gays, the non-Christians and the liberals.
Paul Verhoeven - I didn't see where Pipes advocated the internment of Muslim Americans in the article.
"...that government authorities should direct special attention toward Muslims living in America, either by registering their whereabouts, profiling them, monitoring their mosques, or infiltrating their organizations."
Pipes moved effortlessly from that opening proposition to a full blown defense and endorsement of the internment of Japanese during WWII. Either it's just an unforgivable non sequitur or he's arguing that internment is the natural and reasonable course.
But, perhaps you're right, and Pipes is not advocating internment camps for American Muslims. On strict reading, it might be fair to say that he's really only up to mandating that all Muslims wear a yellow crescent prominently displayed on their clothing.
It's a little thing really in the name of national security. While we're passing out the crescents, it would probably be prudent to prepare the patches for the gays, the non-Christians and the liberals.
Kay,
Perhaps you missed my "fucking creepy and wrong" assessment of Pipes' suggestions.
Mr. Jeffers,
It's my understanding that Malkin is arguing for racial profiling, not for modern-day internment. Therefore, it just may be possible that Pipes cites her because he is advocating...racial profiling? I don't know, call me crazy.
Kay,
Perhaps you missed my "fucking creepy and wrong" assessment of Pipes' suggestions.
Mr. Jeffers,
It's my understanding that Malkin is arguing for racial profiling, not for modern-day internment. Therefore, it just may be possible that Pipes cites her because he is advocating...racial profiling? I don't know, call me crazy.
If the government was sending people letters in the mail and ordering them to marry people they didn't want to marry, I would indeed compare that action to imprisonment.
Well, that would be one more piece of evidence of Rev. Moon's growing influence on the administration...
If the government was sending people letters in the mail and ordering them to marry people they didn't want to marry, I would indeed compare that action to imprisonment.
Well, that would be one more piece of evidence of Rev. Moon's growing influence on the administration...
And being a minor is like being in your parents' internment camp, I suppose, Fat Sammy. And being told where your office is going to be is like being in jail, I suppose, Fat Sammy. And being grounded is the same thing as being in a concentration camp. And not being released from the hospital when you want to go home is just like being in Manzanar. Except that you aren't allowed to sign up for the army and be released, like the Japanese Americans were.
You cannot make this analogy that any curtailment of freedoms is the same thing as being locked up.
It is not. Government action or no, the only thing analogous to being locked up is being locked up.
And being a minor is like being in your parents' internment camp, I suppose, Fat Sammy. And being told where your office is going to be is like being in jail, I suppose, Fat Sammy. And being grounded is the same thing as being in a concentration camp. And not being released from the hospital when you want to go home is just like being in Manzanar. Except that you aren't allowed to sign up for the army and be released, like the Japanese Americans were.
You cannot make this analogy that any curtailment of freedoms is the same thing as being locked up.
It is not. Government action or no, the only thing analogous to being locked up is being locked up.
I wrote to the Star-Telegram earlier this morning, after seeing Attaturk's link to this story.
And everyone, don't waste your energy responding to these moronic trolls who are pretending Pipes is not pushing the internment idea while hiding behind MM's skirts. Otherwise why drag a book about Japanese internment 60 years ago into a column about the threat of radical Islam today?
Once you accept the idea that Pipes is praising so highly, that "civil liberties are not sacrosant", the Constitution is in the trash, and any action can be justified.
I wrote to the Star-Telegram earlier this morning, after seeing Attaturk's link to this story.
And everyone, don't waste your energy responding to these moronic trolls who are pretending Pipes is not pushing the internment idea while hiding behind MM's skirts. Otherwise why drag a book about Japanese internment 60 years ago into a column about the threat of radical Islam today?
Once you accept the idea that Pipes is praising so highly, that "civil liberties are not sacrosant", the Constitution is in the trash, and any action can be justified.
It's my understanding that Malkin is arguing for racial profiling, not for modern-day internment. Therefore, it just may be possible that Pipes cites her because he is advocating...racial profiling? I don't know, call me crazy
This is obviously a "trial balloon" they're floating in the media.
Phrase it ambiguously and see how it flies.
If you can't see that you're dangerously simple minded and overly literalist in your reading.
It's a trial balloon. The outrage it's going to cause is all part of the plan. It's free publicity because for every liberal who's pissed off some redneck's going to say "hey that Daniel Pipes is one smart feller. Maybe we should start lockin up those ragheads".
And why are they floating it? Why? Isn't the war in Iraq making us safer?
You mean Howard Dean was right? That we *are no safer* after Saddam was captured.
It's my understanding that Malkin is arguing for racial profiling, not for modern-day internment. Therefore, it just may be possible that Pipes cites her because he is advocating...racial profiling? I don't know, call me crazy
This is obviously a "trial balloon" they're floating in the media.
Phrase it ambiguously and see how it flies.
If you can't see that you're dangerously simple minded and overly literalist in your reading.
It's a trial balloon. The outrage it's going to cause is all part of the plan. It's free publicity because for every liberal who's pissed off some redneck's going to say "hey that Daniel Pipes is one smart feller. Maybe we should start lockin up those ragheads".
And why are they floating it? Why? Isn't the war in Iraq making us safer?
You mean Howard Dean was right? That we *are no safer* after Saddam was captured.
How can you racially profile a Muslim?
How can you racially profile a Muslim?
It's my understanding that Malkin is arguing for racial profiling, not for modern-day internment.
Which is of course dishonest, as she is using a justification of internment to argue for racial profiling. Thus she may not be "arguing for" internment, only that we should do all the prelimninary work and should leave the option open if we feel like using it, is just a specious attempt to invoke a kind of hate-rhetoricus-interruptus. Which can still result in some twisted progeny.
People who do not want to be accused of clearing the grounds for a reintroduction of internment should not be fucking writing books justifying internment.
It's my understanding that Malkin is arguing for racial profiling, not for modern-day internment.
Which is of course dishonest, as she is using a justification of internment to argue for racial profiling. Thus she may not be "arguing for" internment, only that we should do all the prelimninary work and should leave the option open if we feel like using it, is just a specious attempt to invoke a kind of hate-rhetoricus-interruptus. Which can still result in some twisted progeny.
People who do not want to be accused of clearing the grounds for a reintroduction of internment should not be fucking writing books justifying internment.
you're dangerously simple minded and overly literalist
No, you are dangerously sloppy in your reading. The article is bad enough on its own merits. We do not need Cole's embellishments or RMJ's slippery slopes. You will not convince many people Pipes is an imbecile if you misrepresent his actual positions again & again.
you're dangerously simple minded and overly literalist
No, you are dangerously sloppy in your reading. The article is bad enough on its own merits. We do not need Cole's embellishments or RMJ's slippery slopes. You will not convince many people Pipes is an imbecile if you misrepresent his actual positions again & again.
nur-al-cubicle - How can you racially profile a Muslim?
Thank you for that. Wonderful wonderful comment. I guess if they are brown but don't speak Spanish, then off they go.
Really, what does a Muslim look like?
nur-al-cubicle - How can you racially profile a Muslim?
Thank you for that. Wonderful wonderful comment. I guess if they are brown but don't speak Spanish, then off they go.
Really, what does a Muslim look like?
How can you racially profile a Muslim?
nur al-cubicle
Think Aladdin: anybody who talks to a monkey, or has a long, hawkish nose, with a luxuriant moustache undeneath it?
Or sumpin...
How can you racially profile a Muslim?
nur al-cubicle
Think Aladdin: anybody who talks to a monkey, or has a long, hawkish nose, with a luxuriant moustache undeneath it?
Or sumpin...
Pipes said "focus".
What the fuck makes you think we're all not being focused on? Experian is sure the hell focusing on you.
Why do some resist denying certain forms of registration for illegals, like drivers licenses.
They ARE focusing! Sign up, delcare who you are and where you're from and you're on the radar.
We are all in the intrement camp of the paranoid USA, fenced in by the loss of personal freedom and privacy.
Pipes said "focus".
What the fuck makes you think we're all not being focused on? Experian is sure the hell focusing on you.
Why do some resist denying certain forms of registration for illegals, like drivers licenses.
They ARE focusing! Sign up, delcare who you are and where you're from and you're on the radar.
We are all in the intrement camp of the paranoid USA, fenced in by the loss of personal freedom and privacy.
Therefore, it just may be possible that Pipes cites her because he is advocating...racial profiling? I don't know, call me crazy.
Paul Verhoeven
And that's where you'd be wrong.
Malkin advocated NATIONAL profiling; if you're Japanese (not merely 'Asian') then you're suspet.
Pipes is advocating RELIGIOUS profiling; if you're Muslim then you're suspect.
But, more specifically, Malkin and Pipes both advocate more than mere 'discrimination'.
They both advocate BIGOTRY.
Understand?
Why Japanese but not Germans?
Why Muslims but not Christians?
Why not discriminate against US military personnel because of Tim McVeigh?
Therefore, it just may be possible that Pipes cites her because he is advocating...racial profiling? I don't know, call me crazy.
Paul Verhoeven
And that's where you'd be wrong.
Malkin advocated NATIONAL profiling; if you're Japanese (not merely 'Asian') then you're suspet.
Pipes is advocating RELIGIOUS profiling; if you're Muslim then you're suspect.
But, more specifically, Malkin and Pipes both advocate more than mere 'discrimination'.
They both advocate BIGOTRY.
Understand?
Why Japanese but not Germans?
Why Muslims but not Christians?
Why not discriminate against US military personnel because of Tim McVeigh?
No, you are dangerously sloppy in your reading. The article is bad enough on its own merits. We do not need Cole's embellishments or RMJ's slippery slopes. You will not convince many people Pipes is an imbecile if you misrepresent his actual positions again & again.
You didn't address my point.
The article is a trial balloon. It's seeing how far they can go.
And it's an indication they're going to escalate in Iraq. If the war in Iraq were going well, they'd be crowing about their victory.
They wouldn't be laying the groundwork to squash dissent when they bring back the draft and escalate the troop levels in Iraq.
As I said, you're dangerously simple minded and literalistic. Just the kind of audience they have in mind.
No, you are dangerously sloppy in your reading. The article is bad enough on its own merits. We do not need Cole's embellishments or RMJ's slippery slopes. You will not convince many people Pipes is an imbecile if you misrepresent his actual positions again & again.
You didn't address my point.
The article is a trial balloon. It's seeing how far they can go.
And it's an indication they're going to escalate in Iraq. If the war in Iraq were going well, they'd be crowing about their victory.
They wouldn't be laying the groundwork to squash dissent when they bring back the draft and escalate the troop levels in Iraq.
As I said, you're dangerously simple minded and literalistic. Just the kind of audience they have in mind.
"If you can't see that you're dangerously simple minded and overly literalist in your reading."
Being "overly literalist" is probably a result of me hating it when people suggest I've said something that I've neither said nor implied.
Hey, I can appreciate subtext...I did notice that the black guy in Forrest Gump bought the farm, while the more severely retarded white guy ended up rich and happy.
You can argue "steps like these could eventually lead to internment," but you can't argue that the author said or implied that. 'Cause he didn't.
"If you can't see that you're dangerously simple minded and overly literalist in your reading."
Being "overly literalist" is probably a result of me hating it when people suggest I've said something that I've neither said nor implied.
Hey, I can appreciate subtext...I did notice that the black guy in Forrest Gump bought the farm, while the more severely retarded white guy ended up rich and happy.
You can argue "steps like these could eventually lead to internment," but you can't argue that the author said or implied that. 'Cause he didn't.
How can you racially profile a Muslim?
Same way Hitler racially profiled Jews, even though they're both religions, not racial groups. That's the idiocy of it.
How can you racially profile a Muslim?
Same way Hitler racially profiled Jews, even though they're both religions, not racial groups. That's the idiocy of it.
They both advocate BIGOTRY.
Understand?
Yep...do you understand that I've made no effort to defend profiling here? Apparently not.
They both advocate BIGOTRY.
Understand?
Yep...do you understand that I've made no effort to defend profiling here? Apparently not.
You can argue "steps like these could eventually lead to internment," but you can't argue that the author said or implied that. 'Cause he didn't.
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:28 pm | #
Address the point. What does this trial balloon say about how well the war in Iraq is going?
You can argue "steps like these could eventually lead to internment," but you can't argue that the author said or implied that. 'Cause he didn't.
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:28 pm | #
Address the point. What does this trial balloon say about how well the war in Iraq is going?
I see "Verhoeven" and Cumberdale continue to dodge the point with poorly chosen metaphors or outright silence.
Why base your argument for decrased civil liberties on Malkin's arugment that internment camps weren't that bad, if you don't advocate internment camps, implicitly if not explicitly?
Who introduced this "slippery slope" into the discussion? Answer: it wasn't me.
I see "Verhoeven" and Cumberdale continue to dodge the point with poorly chosen metaphors or outright silence.
Why base your argument for decrased civil liberties on Malkin's arugment that internment camps weren't that bad, if you don't advocate internment camps, implicitly if not explicitly?
Who introduced this "slippery slope" into the discussion? Answer: it wasn't me.
Thanks, Paul, for your attention to ann Coulter's recent heinousness.
I too have been wondering how that shocking piece of hate has been under the So-Called-Liberal-Media
radar
Thanks, Paul, for your attention to ann Coulter's recent heinousness.
I too have been wondering how that shocking piece of hate has been under the So-Called-Liberal-Media
radar
Yep...do you understand that I've made no effort to defend profiling here? Apparently not.
Paul Verhoeven
I never suggested that you had tried to defend profiling, and you're welcome to attempt to point to a comment I've made that does. Good luck.
I noted that you incorrectly accused Malkin and Pipes of RACIAL profiling, when in fact they were encouraging profiling NATIONALITY and RELIGION.
Do you understand?
Yep...do you understand that I've made no effort to defend profiling here? Apparently not.
Paul Verhoeven
I never suggested that you had tried to defend profiling, and you're welcome to attempt to point to a comment I've made that does. Good luck.
I noted that you incorrectly accused Malkin and Pipes of RACIAL profiling, when in fact they were encouraging profiling NATIONALITY and RELIGION.
Do you understand?
Address the point. What does this trial balloon say about how well the war in Iraq is going?
Huh? I didn't realize you were asking this question.
I'm hopeful for things going well in Iraq, but they sure aren't going well right now.
I don't see the relevance of Pipes "trial balloon" as a barometer of how well things are going, since: What the fuck does he know?
RMJ,
I would guess both Pipes and use it to justify profiling (point taken on my "racial" slip, typing without thinking there) because they want profiling, and think if you can justify the past internment, modern-day profiling wouldn't seem so bad.
Address the point. What does this trial balloon say about how well the war in Iraq is going?
Huh? I didn't realize you were asking this question.
I'm hopeful for things going well in Iraq, but they sure aren't going well right now.
I don't see the relevance of Pipes "trial balloon" as a barometer of how well things are going, since: What the fuck does he know?
RMJ,
I would guess both Pipes and use it to justify profiling (point taken on my "racial" slip, typing without thinking there) because they want profiling, and think if you can justify the past internment, modern-day profiling wouldn't seem so bad.
Address the point. What does this trial balloon say about how well the war in Iraq is going?
Huh? I didn't realize you were asking this question.
Well you realize it now so answer it.
Address the point. What does this trial balloon say about how well the war in Iraq is going?
Huh? I didn't realize you were asking this question.
Well you realize it now so answer it.
UBH,
Just saw your last comment; I had already apologized for my error in my last comment.
never suggested that you had tried to defend profiling, and you're welcome to attempt to point to a comment I've made that does. Good luck.
How about your comment where you quote me, then say that all types of profiling equate to bigotry, then ask me if I understand? If you weren't using the "understand?" to suggest that I didn't, your comment had no real point at all.
UBH,
Just saw your last comment; I had already apologized for my error in my last comment.
never suggested that you had tried to defend profiling, and you're welcome to attempt to point to a comment I've made that does. Good luck.
How about your comment where you quote me, then say that all types of profiling equate to bigotry, then ask me if I understand? If you weren't using the "understand?" to suggest that I didn't, your comment had no real point at all.
Once again for the trolls, why is Pipes talking about this now?
I thought capturing Saddam made us all so much safer.
I thought we were on the verge of turning Iraq into a gloriously free market, pro-Israel bastian of "democracy".
Why is Pipes floating this?
Once again for the trolls, why is Pipes talking about this now?
I thought capturing Saddam made us all so much safer.
I thought we were on the verge of turning Iraq into a gloriously free market, pro-Israel bastian of "democracy".
Why is Pipes floating this?
What does this trial balloon say about how well the war in Iraq is going?
HUh? This is a pretty weird non sequitur.
What does this trial balloon say about how well the war in Iraq is going?
HUh? This is a pretty weird non sequitur.
and think if you can justify the past internment, modern-day profiling wouldn't seem so bad.
Nor, finally, would internment.
Which has been my point all along.
and think if you can justify the past internment, modern-day profiling wouldn't seem so bad.
Nor, finally, would internment.
Which has been my point all along.
Who introduced this "slippery slope" into the discussion? Answer: it wasn't me.
Robert, don't you like animals and think we should be nice to them?
I hope so. Now, despite the harping of crazed liberals, I have a friend who thinks it's a great idea to force people to live with elephants in their living rooms.
Now, I'm not explicitly saying that we should force people to live with elephants in their living rooms. All I'm saying is that we shuld be nice to animals.
Frankly, I resent your attempts to draw attention to elephants in living rooms. You really are one wacky dude! Why this obesession with elephants, anyway?
Who introduced this "slippery slope" into the discussion? Answer: it wasn't me.
Robert, don't you like animals and think we should be nice to them?
I hope so. Now, despite the harping of crazed liberals, I have a friend who thinks it's a great idea to force people to live with elephants in their living rooms.
Now, I'm not explicitly saying that we should force people to live with elephants in their living rooms. All I'm saying is that we shuld be nice to animals.
Frankly, I resent your attempts to draw attention to elephants in living rooms. You really are one wacky dude! Why this obesession with elephants, anyway?
What does this trial balloon say about how well the war in Iraq is going?
HUh? This is a pretty weird non sequitur.
Hubert Cumberdale | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:37 pm | #
So you're saying that the war in Iraq *has nothing to do with making us safer from terrorism*?
Glad you're on board.
What does this trial balloon say about how well the war in Iraq is going?
HUh? This is a pretty weird non sequitur.
Hubert Cumberdale | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:37 pm | #
So you're saying that the war in Iraq *has nothing to do with making us safer from terrorism*?
Glad you're on board.
why is Pipes talking about this now?
"I read there might be snow tomorrow. I guess Yahoo weather is trying to change the subject AGAIN!"
Such incredible self absorption...
why is Pipes talking about this now?
"I read there might be snow tomorrow. I guess Yahoo weather is trying to change the subject AGAIN!"
Such incredible self absorption...
SWR,
I'm not sure why you're (apparently) labeling me a troll, as my points have been:
1) Pipes bad.
2) Profiling/registering bad.
3) Limit criticism to what someone actually says.
If that is trolling, whatever.
Take care.
SWR,
I'm not sure why you're (apparently) labeling me a troll, as my points have been:
1) Pipes bad.
2) Profiling/registering bad.
3) Limit criticism to what someone actually says.
If that is trolling, whatever.
Take care.
Don't you mean "inter-racial", given that Malkin is Filipino descent and she wrote about those of Japanese descent, likely motivated in part by what the Japanese had done to the Filipinos?
UBH
how conveniently overlooking the vastly longer, equally bloody history of white/US oppression....
Don't you mean "inter-racial", given that Malkin is Filipino descent and she wrote about those of Japanese descent, likely motivated in part by what the Japanese had done to the Filipinos?
UBH
how conveniently overlooking the vastly longer, equally bloody history of white/US oppression....
I'm not sure why you're (apparently) labeling me a troll, as my points have been:
Because you're ignoring the obvious questions and dodging them when they're put right in your face.
Once again, why is Pipes floating this *now*?
Are you saying the war in Iraq *hasn't* made us safer?
I'm not sure why you're (apparently) labeling me a troll, as my points have been:
Because you're ignoring the obvious questions and dodging them when they're put right in your face.
Once again, why is Pipes floating this *now*?
Are you saying the war in Iraq *hasn't* made us safer?
Pipes, the slimy neocon, advances Malkin in a slimy way, since any other way would scare the horses. Typical.
Pipes, the slimy neocon, advances Malkin in a slimy way, since any other way would scare the horses. Typical.
Paul, SWR simply doesn't like to be contradicted. Don't take it the wrong way.
Paul, SWR simply doesn't like to be contradicted. Don't take it the wrong way.
How about your comment where you quote me, then say that all types of profiling equate to bigotry, then ask me if I understand? If you weren't using the "understand?" to suggest that I didn't, your comment had no real point at all.
Paul Verhoeven
I don't think I said that "all types of profiling equate to bigotry". I said that Malkin and Pipes were advocating bigotry because they fail to hold all Nationalities and Religions equally accountable for the actions of members and instead attempt to justify holding certain Nationalities and certain Religions to higher standards.
If either had said, "Since Americans/Christians have committed atrocities, then they should not be exempt from profiling" they would have perhaps been less bigoted, though perhaps no more correct.
In any case, I'm glad to see that you understand and admit your error.
How about your comment where you quote me, then say that all types of profiling equate to bigotry, then ask me if I understand? If you weren't using the "understand?" to suggest that I didn't, your comment had no real point at all.
Paul Verhoeven
I don't think I said that "all types of profiling equate to bigotry". I said that Malkin and Pipes were advocating bigotry because they fail to hold all Nationalities and Religions equally accountable for the actions of members and instead attempt to justify holding certain Nationalities and certain Religions to higher standards.
If either had said, "Since Americans/Christians have committed atrocities, then they should not be exempt from profiling" they would have perhaps been less bigoted, though perhaps no more correct.
In any case, I'm glad to see that you understand and admit your error.
People who do not want to be accused of clearing the grounds for a reintroduction of internment should not be fucking writing books justifying internment.
As always, much better than I could have said it,and in less words. It must be a joy to be able to express oneself so clearly.
And people like Pipes, if they don't want to be accused of promoting internment, should not be writing fucking columns praising someone who makes a career out of justifying it.
People who do not want to be accused of clearing the grounds for a reintroduction of internment should not be fucking writing books justifying internment.
As always, much better than I could have said it,and in less words. It must be a joy to be able to express oneself so clearly.
And people like Pipes, if they don't want to be accused of promoting internment, should not be writing fucking columns praising someone who makes a career out of justifying it.
Paul, SWR simply doesn't like to be contradicted. Don't take it the wrong way.
Hubert Cumberdale | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:43 pm | #
I'm going to keep asking this question.
Why is Pipes talking about this?
Do you mean that Bush hasn't made us safer?
Paul, SWR simply doesn't like to be contradicted. Don't take it the wrong way.
Hubert Cumberdale | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:43 pm | #
I'm going to keep asking this question.
Why is Pipes talking about this?
Do you mean that Bush hasn't made us safer?
how conveniently overlooking the vastly longer, equally bloody history of white/US oppression....
WoodyGuthrie'sGuitar (aka konopelli)
How so?
how conveniently overlooking the vastly longer, equally bloody history of white/US oppression....
WoodyGuthrie'sGuitar (aka konopelli)
How so?
SWR,
For fuck's sake, I'm not dodging anything.
You previously asked:
"What does this trial balloon say about how well the war in Iraq is going?"
Which I clearly answered. Now, I'll repeat my answer, which will address your modified question: Nothing, because what the fuck does Pipes know?
Happy?
SWR,
For fuck's sake, I'm not dodging anything.
You previously asked:
"What does this trial balloon say about how well the war in Iraq is going?"
Which I clearly answered. Now, I'll repeat my answer, which will address your modified question: Nothing, because what the fuck does Pipes know?
Happy?
Same way Hitler racially profiled Jews, even though they're both religions, not racial groups.
Jews are an ethnic group, aren't they. If not, the news will come as surprise to Likkud.
Islam is open to all, which make the notion of "racial" profiling all the more absurd.
Same way Hitler racially profiled Jews, even though they're both religions, not racial groups.
Jews are an ethnic group, aren't they. If not, the news will come as surprise to Likkud.
Islam is open to all, which make the notion of "racial" profiling all the more absurd.
Which I clearly answered. Now, I'll repeat my answer, which will address your modified question: Nothing, because what the fuck does Pipes know?
Happy?
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:44 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
You dodged it again.
What does this say about how the "war on terror" is going?
Why do we even need this "profiling" now?
Why is Pipes talking about it?
Which I clearly answered. Now, I'll repeat my answer, which will address your modified question: Nothing, because what the fuck does Pipes know?
Happy?
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:44 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
You dodged it again.
What does this say about how the "war on terror" is going?
Why do we even need this "profiling" now?
Why is Pipes talking about it?
So you're saying that the war in Iraq *has nothing to do with making us safer from terrorism*?
SWR, showing again how no one out-trolls the trolls like certain regulars. Changing the subject, slippery slopes, straw men; he's working his way through the fallacies of irrelevance until he runs out and then he'll start over again.
So you're saying that the war in Iraq *has nothing to do with making us safer from terrorism*?
SWR, showing again how no one out-trolls the trolls like certain regulars. Changing the subject, slippery slopes, straw men; he's working his way through the fallacies of irrelevance until he runs out and then he'll start over again.
SWR,
You mistake a refusal to accept your premises (i.e., that the timing of what Daniel Pipes does is a reliable barometer of progress in the WoT) as a refusal to answer your question.
How about this: To satisfy you, I will say that GWB is the worst president ever, has made us immeasurably less safe, and is likely out buggering defenseless grandmother now.
None of which is really related to Pipes "trial balloon."
SWR,
You mistake a refusal to accept your premises (i.e., that the timing of what Daniel Pipes does is a reliable barometer of progress in the WoT) as a refusal to answer your question.
How about this: To satisfy you, I will say that GWB is the worst president ever, has made us immeasurably less safe, and is likely out buggering defenseless grandmother now.
None of which is really related to Pipes "trial balloon."
SWR, showing again how no one out-trolls the trolls like certain regulars. Changing the subject, slippery slopes, straw men; he's working his way through the fallacies of irrelevance until he runs out and then he'll start over again.
Hubert Cumberdale | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:47 pm | #
Why do *you* think Pipes is bringing this up now?
SWR, showing again how no one out-trolls the trolls like certain regulars. Changing the subject, slippery slopes, straw men; he's working his way through the fallacies of irrelevance until he runs out and then he'll start over again.
Hubert Cumberdale | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:47 pm | #
Why do *you* think Pipes is bringing this up now?
Fortunately it is possible to believe that Pipes is an idiot AND SWR is an idiot (and for many of the same reasons!)
Fortunately it is possible to believe that Pipes is an idiot AND SWR is an idiot (and for many of the same reasons!)
So I'm half Arab, and my draft-age son is 1/4. I was thinking about buying us some trench coats and nose glasses (for a Disguise), but now I'm just thing about double-barreled 16 gauge shotguns and kevlar. We could have a little Ruby Ridge here in our hometown. Do you think the militia people would support us against the evil Man?
So I'm half Arab, and my draft-age son is 1/4. I was thinking about buying us some trench coats and nose glasses (for a Disguise), but now I'm just thing about double-barreled 16 gauge shotguns and kevlar. We could have a little Ruby Ridge here in our hometown. Do you think the militia people would support us against the evil Man?
You mistake a refusal to accept your premises (i.e., that the timing of what Daniel Pipes does is a reliable barometer of progress in the WoT) as a refusal to answer your question.
So give me your reasoned opinion.
I thought the war in Iraq made us all so much safer. Why are Malkin and Pipes bringing this up?
I thought we won a great victory in Iraq?
I mean, we weren't talking about interning Japanese Americans in 1946 were we?
You mistake a refusal to accept your premises (i.e., that the timing of what Daniel Pipes does is a reliable barometer of progress in the WoT) as a refusal to answer your question.
So give me your reasoned opinion.
I thought the war in Iraq made us all so much safer. Why are Malkin and Pipes bringing this up?
I thought we won a great victory in Iraq?
I mean, we weren't talking about interning Japanese Americans in 1946 were we?
A bigot looking for a reason, perhaps?
His article:
And so, I was encouraged by a just-released Cornell University opinion survey that finds nearly half the U.S. population agreeing with this proposition.
A bigot looking for a reason, perhaps?
His article:
And so, I was encouraged by a just-released Cornell University opinion survey that finds nearly half the U.S. population agreeing with this proposition.
Do you think the militia people would support us against the evil Man?
Of course they would!
Do you think the militia people would support us against the evil Man?
Of course they would!
Pipes is dry pimping Malkin to make concentration camps an issue, bring it out from the cold, dis-inoculate it.
What more do you expect from a neocon?
Pipes is dry pimping Malkin to make concentration camps an issue, bring it out from the cold, dis-inoculate it.
What more do you expect from a neocon?
Fortunately it is possible to believe that Pipes is an idiot AND SWR is an idiot
I'd call it a logical necessity.
Fortunately it is possible to believe that Pipes is an idiot AND SWR is an idiot
I'd call it a logical necessity.
...anybody who talks to a monkey...
I must be slow today, but I don't get it. Personally, I talk to my cats, so monkeys? What the hell. Why not.
...anybody who talks to a monkey...
I must be slow today, but I don't get it. Personally, I talk to my cats, so monkeys? What the hell. Why not.
A bigot looking for a reason, perhaps?
His article:
And so, I was encouraged by a just-released Cornell University opinion survey that finds nearly half the U.S. population agreeing with this proposition.
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:50 pm | #
So why didn't Pipes just say "well these people are misguided since our victory in Iraq has made us safe to the point where we don't need to talk about racial profiling"?
Why did he find it "encouraging"?
A bigot looking for a reason, perhaps?
His article:
And so, I was encouraged by a just-released Cornell University opinion survey that finds nearly half the U.S. population agreeing with this proposition.
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:50 pm | #
So why didn't Pipes just say "well these people are misguided since our victory in Iraq has made us safe to the point where we don't need to talk about racial profiling"?
Why did he find it "encouraging"?
How so, UBH? You need to read some history if you want to understand what people here are talking about.
How so, UBH? You need to read some history if you want to understand what people here are talking about.
Maybe Pipes just wants some prison luv.
Maybe Pipes just wants some prison luv.
So give me your reasoned opinion.
I thought the war in Iraq made us all so much safer. Why are Malkin and Pipes bringing this up?
It is strange to talk to you.
I have not claimed that we're safer.
Malkin and Pipes could be motivated by fear of Muslims, paranoia or whatever. Do you think that if everything was going swimmingly in Iraq, they still wouldn't be recommending this?
And don't try for a triumphant "see, Iraq has nothing to do with the WoT," 'cause I'm not arguing that issue either.
You're drawing a causality line where none has been demonstrated.
So give me your reasoned opinion.
I thought the war in Iraq made us all so much safer. Why are Malkin and Pipes bringing this up?
It is strange to talk to you.
I have not claimed that we're safer.
Malkin and Pipes could be motivated by fear of Muslims, paranoia or whatever. Do you think that if everything was going swimmingly in Iraq, they still wouldn't be recommending this?
And don't try for a triumphant "see, Iraq has nothing to do with the WoT," 'cause I'm not arguing that issue either.
You're drawing a causality line where none has been demonstrated.
And don't try for a triumphant "see, Iraq has nothing to do with the WoT," 'cause I'm not arguing that issue either.
So yes or no, the war in Iraq has made us safer from Islamic radicalism in the US?
What do *you* think?
And don't try for a triumphant "see, Iraq has nothing to do with the WoT," 'cause I'm not arguing that issue either.
So yes or no, the war in Iraq has made us safer from Islamic radicalism in the US?
What do *you* think?
Karin, it wasn't clear from what WGG said as to whether he was refering to Malkin or me.
Did Malkin forgive the US because they bombed the fuck out of Japan? I don't know, but given her mentality it wouldn't surprise me.
I know my history, bitch.
It was the context of the comment I wasn't clear on.
'Kay?
Karin, it wasn't clear from what WGG said as to whether he was refering to Malkin or me.
Did Malkin forgive the US because they bombed the fuck out of Japan? I don't know, but given her mentality it wouldn't surprise me.
I know my history, bitch.
It was the context of the comment I wasn't clear on.
'Kay?
nur al cubicle - Jews are an ethnic group, aren't they. If not, the news will come as surprise to Likkud.
Islam is open to all, which make the notion of "racial" profiling all the more absurd.
This is what I've always believed. People can convert to Judaism, but they aren't Jews, according to what I've always believed is the case. Only people born of Jewish mothers are Jews. Is that not the criterion?
If that is so, and I believe it is, then it is correct to speak of Jews as an ethnicity. However, it is clear that even where that criterion isn't met, those who discriminate will discriminate anyway. In other words, I think the Nazis considered any amount of Jewishness to be enough to get someone locked up or killed.
nur al cubicle - Jews are an ethnic group, aren't they. If not, the news will come as surprise to Likkud.
Islam is open to all, which make the notion of "racial" profiling all the more absurd.
This is what I've always believed. People can convert to Judaism, but they aren't Jews, according to what I've always believed is the case. Only people born of Jewish mothers are Jews. Is that not the criterion?
If that is so, and I believe it is, then it is correct to speak of Jews as an ethnicity. However, it is clear that even where that criterion isn't met, those who discriminate will discriminate anyway. In other words, I think the Nazis considered any amount of Jewishness to be enough to get someone locked up or killed.
So why didn't Pipes just say "well these people are misguided since our victory in Iraq has made us safe to the point where we don't need to talk about racial profiling"?
I don't know what you're trying to prove here.
Even the most zealous neocon that thinks AQ was headquartered in Iraq in 2001 doesn't claim that Iraq is the entire WoT, so what's you're point?
So why didn't Pipes just say "well these people are misguided since our victory in Iraq has made us safe to the point where we don't need to talk about racial profiling"?
I don't know what you're trying to prove here.
Even the most zealous neocon that thinks AQ was headquartered in Iraq in 2001 doesn't claim that Iraq is the entire WoT, so what's you're point?
I don't know what you're trying to prove here.
Even the most zealous neocon that thinks AQ was headquartered in Iraq in 2001 doesn't claim that Iraq is the entire WoT, so what's you're point?
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:56 pm | #
Yes or No.
Do you think the war in Iraq has made us safer against Islamic terrorism in the United States?
I don't know what you're trying to prove here.
Even the most zealous neocon that thinks AQ was headquartered in Iraq in 2001 doesn't claim that Iraq is the entire WoT, so what's you're point?
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:56 pm | #
Yes or No.
Do you think the war in Iraq has made us safer against Islamic terrorism in the United States?
Who gives a fuck about Pipes's nuanced positions? He's pimping Malkin. And the reason he's pimping Malkin is because she's a fellow neocon, and anything that stirs up hatred between muslims and non muslims is what neocons like Pipes are all about.
Who gives a fuck about Pipes's nuanced positions? He's pimping Malkin. And the reason he's pimping Malkin is because she's a fellow neocon, and anything that stirs up hatred between muslims and non muslims is what neocons like Pipes are all about.
Given that the southern islands of the Philippines are brimming with terrorist and using Malkin's logic. We should also round up all Philippinos and put them all in concentration camps.
Given that the southern islands of the Philippines are brimming with terrorist and using Malkin's logic. We should also round up all Philippinos and put them all in concentration camps.
I think the Nazis considered any amount of Jewishness to be enough to get someone locked up or killed.
Tena
Unless they were compliant and useful.
There were Jewish Nazis, ya know.
I think the Nazis considered any amount of Jewishness to be enough to get someone locked up or killed.
Tena
Unless they were compliant and useful.
There were Jewish Nazis, ya know.
So yes or no, the war in Iraq has made us safer from Islamic radicalism in the US?
That's an easy specific question. I don't think it has made us safer from Islamic radicalism in the U.S. in the present day.
If democracy takes hold in the region, it could lead to more safety in the long run. Have to wait and see (a loooong time).
So yes or no, the war in Iraq has made us safer from Islamic radicalism in the US?
That's an easy specific question. I don't think it has made us safer from Islamic radicalism in the U.S. in the present day.
If democracy takes hold in the region, it could lead to more safety in the long run. Have to wait and see (a loooong time).
Jews are an ethnic group, aren't they. If not, the news will come as surprise to Likkud.
Likkud got that idea from Hitler.
Jews are an ethnic group, aren't they. If not, the news will come as surprise to Likkud.
Likkud got that idea from Hitler.
That's an easy specific question. I don't think it has made us safer from Islamic radicalism in the U.S. in the present day.
If democracy takes hold in the region, it could lead to more safety in the long run. Have to wait and see (a loooong time).
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:58 pm | #
Yes or no, did you support the invasion of Iraq in 2003?
That's an easy specific question. I don't think it has made us safer from Islamic radicalism in the U.S. in the present day.
If democracy takes hold in the region, it could lead to more safety in the long run. Have to wait and see (a loooong time).
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 12:58 pm | #
Yes or no, did you support the invasion of Iraq in 2003?
UBH - No, there weren't "Jewish Nazis." There were Jews who cooperated with the Nazis, but if there were "Jewish Nazis," then the Nazis weren't aware that they were Jewish.
And they met the same fate as their brethren.
UBH - No, there weren't "Jewish Nazis." There were Jews who cooperated with the Nazis, but if there were "Jewish Nazis," then the Nazis weren't aware that they were Jewish.
And they met the same fate as their brethren.
Limit criticism to what someone actually says.
Which is where your case falls apart, because you're arbitrarily declaring even very obvious context and insinuation out of bounds and rather pompously claiming that someone can skate away scot-free on very reasonable charges of monstrousness on a rhetorical technicality.
Limit criticism to what someone actually says.
Which is where your case falls apart, because you're arbitrarily declaring even very obvious context and insinuation out of bounds and rather pompously claiming that someone can skate away scot-free on very reasonable charges of monstrousness on a rhetorical technicality.
Paul Verhoeven:
You seem not to be a complete cretin.
I presume you act here in good faith (though perhaps this is not justified by your replies).
SO here it is:
The thing about text is: Once it leaves the pen, and hits the page of the pixel, it becomes altogether NOT what its 'author' means or thinks s/he means or intends to mean; but rather what the reader makes of it.
Derrida said text makes a promise it can never fulfill: it promises to close out discusssion by rendering meaning in some way concrete. But words are too evanescent for such assertions of certainty and concretion.
That means, no matter what the author thinks s/he means, the meaning is not in the words themselves but in the infereences, implicatures and entailments which are embodied in the text, and which find their expression in the readings of the texts--the work of reading--with which each reader completes the transaction.
Pipes' discourse does yield to the interpretations that some readers have ascribed to it; in particular, when coupled with other parts of his 'ouvre'--the key word here is 'intertextuality.' All texts are linked by the network of other texts among which they appear as additions or emendations.
Pipes has a history of extreme animosity against anyoneot thing which he interprets as hostile to the interests of zionist fascism. He interprets ALL Muslims aas being in that category, and has said so repeatedly. Ergo, it is not a stretch, or an illegeitimate expansion of his text to include within it the implicatures to which it also refers...
you following this at all?
Paul Verhoeven:
You seem not to be a complete cretin.
I presume you act here in good faith (though perhaps this is not justified by your replies).
SO here it is:
The thing about text is: Once it leaves the pen, and hits the page of the pixel, it becomes altogether NOT what its 'author' means or thinks s/he means or intends to mean; but rather what the reader makes of it.
Derrida said text makes a promise it can never fulfill: it promises to close out discusssion by rendering meaning in some way concrete. But words are too evanescent for such assertions of certainty and concretion.
That means, no matter what the author thinks s/he means, the meaning is not in the words themselves but in the infereences, implicatures and entailments which are embodied in the text, and which find their expression in the readings of the texts--the work of reading--with which each reader completes the transaction.
Pipes' discourse does yield to the interpretations that some readers have ascribed to it; in particular, when coupled with other parts of his 'ouvre'--the key word here is 'intertextuality.' All texts are linked by the network of other texts among which they appear as additions or emendations.
Pipes has a history of extreme animosity against anyoneot thing which he interprets as hostile to the interests of zionist fascism. He interprets ALL Muslims aas being in that category, and has said so repeatedly. Ergo, it is not a stretch, or an illegeitimate expansion of his text to include within it the implicatures to which it also refers...
you following this at all?
SWR,
OK, last time I'll answer your off-topic questions; I don't care to be your "ANSWER MY QUESTION" bitch all day.
Yep, I supported the invasion.
Now, what does my opinion have to do with Pipes' article supporting profiling?
SWR,
OK, last time I'll answer your off-topic questions; I don't care to be your "ANSWER MY QUESTION" bitch all day.
Yep, I supported the invasion.
Now, what does my opinion have to do with Pipes' article supporting profiling?
Of course you supported the invasion. To bring democracy to Iraq and get rid of the Middle East Hitler.
Bwahahahahahaaaaaa!
Of course you supported the invasion. To bring democracy to Iraq and get rid of the Middle East Hitler.
Bwahahahahahaaaaaa!
Which is where your case falls apart, because you're arbitrarily declaring even very obvious context and insinuation out of bounds and rather pompously claiming that someone can skate away scot-free on very reasonable charges of monstrousness on a rhetorical technicality.
An example:
"Look I'm not saying that all Jews in the government favor the interests of Israel over the interests of the United States. I'm merely suggesting that perhaps we should consider religion and ethnicity as a factor in our hiring practices".
I'm curious to know if Paul would think that statement anti-semitic.
Which is where your case falls apart, because you're arbitrarily declaring even very obvious context and insinuation out of bounds and rather pompously claiming that someone can skate away scot-free on very reasonable charges of monstrousness on a rhetorical technicality.
An example:
"Look I'm not saying that all Jews in the government favor the interests of Israel over the interests of the United States. I'm merely suggesting that perhaps we should consider religion and ethnicity as a factor in our hiring practices".
I'm curious to know if Paul would think that statement anti-semitic.
And they met the same fate as their brethren.
By that, I meant those Jews who cooperated with the Nazis. The Kapos in the ghettos all went to concentration camps with the rest of the Jewish populations in Germany and Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe.
And they met the same fate as their brethren.
By that, I meant those Jews who cooperated with the Nazis. The Kapos in the ghettos all went to concentration camps with the rest of the Jewish populations in Germany and Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe.
Which is where your case falls apart, because you're arbitrarily declaring even very obvious context and insinuation out of bounds and rather pompously claiming that someone can skate away scot-free on very reasonable charges of monstrousness on a rhetorical technicality.
Pompously? I don't feel pompous today.
I don't like the "insinuation" thread of criticism; it stinks of Cultural Revolution-type attacks. "You said this, but you meant this!"
WoodyGuthrie'sGuitar,
Interpretation on the part of the reader does not lead to the unfettered freedom to ascribe any desired meaning/motivation to the author.
Which is where your case falls apart, because you're arbitrarily declaring even very obvious context and insinuation out of bounds and rather pompously claiming that someone can skate away scot-free on very reasonable charges of monstrousness on a rhetorical technicality.
Pompously? I don't feel pompous today.
I don't like the "insinuation" thread of criticism; it stinks of Cultural Revolution-type attacks. "You said this, but you meant this!"
WoodyGuthrie'sGuitar,
Interpretation on the part of the reader does not lead to the unfettered freedom to ascribe any desired meaning/motivation to the author.
No, fucknuts, context and recent history does.
No, fucknuts, context and recent history does.
I'm curious to know if Paul would think that statement anti-semitic.
SWR | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 1:05 pm | #
Of course? How many times to I have to criticize Pipes before your hear me?
I'm curious to know if Paul would think that statement anti-semitic.
SWR | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 1:05 pm | #
Of course? How many times to I have to criticize Pipes before your hear me?
No, fucknuts, context and recent history does.
hammurabi | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 1:08 pm | #
Great argument!
No, fucknuts, context and recent history does.
hammurabi | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 1:08 pm | #
Great argument!
Of course? How many times to I have to criticize Pipes before your hear me?
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 1:09 pm | #
OK. So you consider the statement anti-semitic. Good. So do I?
Do you consider Pipes an "anti-Muslim bigot"? The moral equivalent of an anti-semite?
Of course? How many times to I have to criticize Pipes before your hear me?
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 1:09 pm | #
OK. So you consider the statement anti-semitic. Good. So do I?
Do you consider Pipes an "anti-Muslim bigot"? The moral equivalent of an anti-semite?
Karin - Likkud got that idea from Hitler.
I'm not sure of that at all. The criterion of being born of a Jewish mother is something that I think was already in place. It has been part and parcel of the diaspora and the attempt to prevent the loss of identity through assimilation.
IIRC.
Karin - Likkud got that idea from Hitler.
I'm not sure of that at all. The criterion of being born of a Jewish mother is something that I think was already in place. It has been part and parcel of the diaspora and the attempt to prevent the loss of identity through assimilation.
IIRC.
UBH - No, there weren't "Jewish Nazis." There were Jews who cooperated with the Nazis, but if there were "Jewish Nazis," then the Nazis weren't aware that they were Jewish.
And they met the same fate as their brethren.
Tena
Well, the Nazis killed Christians, too.
Read Byron Mark Rigg's Hitler's Jewish Soldiers, University of Kansas Press, 2002.
UBH - No, there weren't "Jewish Nazis." There were Jews who cooperated with the Nazis, but if there were "Jewish Nazis," then the Nazis weren't aware that they were Jewish.
And they met the same fate as their brethren.
Tena
Well, the Nazis killed Christians, too.
Read Byron Mark Rigg's Hitler's Jewish Soldiers, University of Kansas Press, 2002.
Glad you liked it. It's all your bleating about personal interpretation warrants.
Glad you liked it. It's all your bleating about personal interpretation warrants.
Once again Paul. Do you consider Pipes to be the moral equivalent of an anti-semite?
The "nuances" of his "arguments" notwithstanding, do you think it's fair to call him a "bigot"?
Once again Paul. Do you consider Pipes to be the moral equivalent of an anti-semite?
The "nuances" of his "arguments" notwithstanding, do you think it's fair to call him a "bigot"?
Peggy Noonan can pick out the Muslims to be profiled-- and perhaps interned, although at this point the less said about that the better.
First of all, they are swarthy. And they don't look you in the eye, but keep their noses buried in almanacs. And sometimes they carry cameras and other recording devices, and point them at big buildings and other public structures in a suspicious manner that is markedly different from the way decent Americans or honest tourists behave.
And, like nuns, they usually travel in pairs.
Simple, really.
Peggy Noonan can pick out the Muslims to be profiled-- and perhaps interned, although at this point the less said about that the better.
First of all, they are swarthy. And they don't look you in the eye, but keep their noses buried in almanacs. And sometimes they carry cameras and other recording devices, and point them at big buildings and other public structures in a suspicious manner that is markedly different from the way decent Americans or honest tourists behave.
And, like nuns, they usually travel in pairs.
Simple, really.
Yep, he seems to be a bigot. Your point?
Yep, he seems to be a bigot. Your point?
Yep, he seems to be a bigot. Your point?
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 1:13 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
He "seems" to be a bigot.
Do *you* think I'm being fair when I say this:
Daniel Pipes is a bigot.
Am I making a reasonable statement?
Yep, he seems to be a bigot. Your point?
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 1:13 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
He "seems" to be a bigot.
Do *you* think I'm being fair when I say this:
Daniel Pipes is a bigot.
Am I making a reasonable statement?
Glad you liked it. It's all your bleating about personal interpretation warrants.
hammurabi | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 1:12 pm | #
Thanks, cunt!
Hey, you're right, that does feel good!
Glad you liked it. It's all your bleating about personal interpretation warrants.
hammurabi | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 1:12 pm | #
Thanks, cunt!
Hey, you're right, that does feel good!
SWR,
I guess you missed my attempted sarcasm through understatement. Pipes is an idiotic bigot.
Clear?
SWR,
I guess you missed my attempted sarcasm through understatement. Pipes is an idiotic bigot.
Clear?
Oops, that Bryan Mark Rigg.
Oops, that Bryan Mark Rigg.
300,000,000 Muslims of which 5,000 could be al Qaeda members with a few more thousand sympathizers. Yet we hear talk of radical Islam as if it were something you could go to war with. Imagine some nation declaring war on the US over "radical Scientologists."
300,000,000 Muslims of which 5,000 could be al Qaeda members with a few more thousand sympathizers. Yet we hear talk of radical Islam as if it were something you could go to war with. Imagine some nation declaring war on the US over "radical Scientologists."
Interpretation on the part of the reader does not lead to the unfettered freedom to ascribe any desired meaning/motivation to the author.
Paul Verhoeven
Yes, unfortunately it does; though within certain broad parameters, including sufficient grounds for justified true belief...
that's just the way Text is. to pretend otherwise is to subscribe to the essentialist, fundamentalis ideology of literalism, the same grounds which permit US talibanistas to declare homosexuality odious in the sight of god.
Biggest problem here, of course, is what is, in fact the sight of god and what are the grounds for justified true belief? God seems unable to communicate, for the literalist, except through text. But which one? The bible? the Gitas, sutras, the book of the dead?
See, Paul, it gets complex, and complicated; and the simple nostrums of literalism are an ideological screen behind which all manner of oppressions are completed and rationalized...
sorry to upset your epistemological project so late in life, but, hey, life is short and then you die...
Interpretation on the part of the reader does not lead to the unfettered freedom to ascribe any desired meaning/motivation to the author.
Paul Verhoeven
Yes, unfortunately it does; though within certain broad parameters, including sufficient grounds for justified true belief...
that's just the way Text is. to pretend otherwise is to subscribe to the essentialist, fundamentalis ideology of literalism, the same grounds which permit US talibanistas to declare homosexuality odious in the sight of god.
Biggest problem here, of course, is what is, in fact the sight of god and what are the grounds for justified true belief? God seems unable to communicate, for the literalist, except through text. But which one? The bible? the Gitas, sutras, the book of the dead?
See, Paul, it gets complex, and complicated; and the simple nostrums of literalism are an ideological screen behind which all manner of oppressions are completed and rationalized...
sorry to upset your epistemological project so late in life, but, hey, life is short and then you die...
Wrong gender. But pretty good effort, nevertheless.
Wrong gender. But pretty good effort, nevertheless.
I guess you missed my attempted sarcasm through understatement. Pipes is an idiotic bigot.
Clear?
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 1:15 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Good. We agree. Do you think that Pipes should be rejected from serving in the US government in any capacity based on his obvious bigotry?
Bush nominated him for a position on the Board of Directors of the United States Institute of Peace.
Do you agree with me that Pipes is not fit to serve in the US government?
I guess you missed my attempted sarcasm through understatement. Pipes is an idiotic bigot.
Clear?
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 1:15 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Good. We agree. Do you think that Pipes should be rejected from serving in the US government in any capacity based on his obvious bigotry?
Bush nominated him for a position on the Board of Directors of the United States Institute of Peace.
Do you agree with me that Pipes is not fit to serve in the US government?
In this instance, Pipes is a pimp. And what he's pimping is Malkin's drivel. Reason. It's neocon drivel.
In this instance, Pipes is a pimp. And what he's pimping is Malkin's drivel. Reason. It's neocon drivel.
UBH - Well, the Nazis killed Christians, too.
So? What does that have to do with anything? You said there were Jewish Nazis. There were not. Not, at least, any that the Nazis were aware of because Jews were not allowed to be Nazis. Some Jews cooperated with the Nazis, but they ended up in concentration camps just like those who didn't cooperate.
What the fuck does that have to do with the christians, gypsies, and homosexuals that were interned? I mean, really - what the hell are you trying to say?
UBH - Well, the Nazis killed Christians, too.
So? What does that have to do with anything? You said there were Jewish Nazis. There were not. Not, at least, any that the Nazis were aware of because Jews were not allowed to be Nazis. Some Jews cooperated with the Nazis, but they ended up in concentration camps just like those who didn't cooperate.
What the fuck does that have to do with the christians, gypsies, and homosexuals that were interned? I mean, really - what the hell are you trying to say?
I actually assumed you were a guy, where the insult's more effective. I sure shocked the shit out of a young boy crank caller with it one time.
WoodyGuthrie'sGuitar,
You can continue your more-scholarly-than-thou pontification, but it doesn't change the fact that there are limits to interpretation. And insisting that criticism of Pipe's article be confined to what it said or implied does not constitute some sort of blind literalism.
If you want to talk epistemology and sound intelligent, let's hit Kant. I don't know if anyone else is interested, though.
UBH - Well, the Nazis killed Christians, too.
So did Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill (see, Dresden the bombing of).
But they didn't kill them *because they were Christians*
Got it?
I actually assumed you were a guy, where the insult's more effective. I sure shocked the shit out of a young boy crank caller with it one time.
WoodyGuthrie'sGuitar,
You can continue your more-scholarly-than-thou pontification, but it doesn't change the fact that there are limits to interpretation. And insisting that criticism of Pipe's article be confined to what it said or implied does not constitute some sort of blind literalism.
If you want to talk epistemology and sound intelligent, let's hit Kant. I don't know if anyone else is interested, though.
UBH - Well, the Nazis killed Christians, too.
So did Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill (see, Dresden the bombing of).
But they didn't kill them *because they were Christians*
Got it?
the simple nostrums of literalism are an ideological screen behind which all manner of oppressions are completed and rationalized...
English translation: "Nothing" "means" "anything" so people are free to read whatever bullshit their fancy allows into any written statement. "Truth" is a patriarchal construct, including this sentence and all others.
the simple nostrums of literalism are an ideological screen behind which all manner of oppressions are completed and rationalized...
English translation: "Nothing" "means" "anything" so people are free to read whatever bullshit their fancy allows into any written statement. "Truth" is a patriarchal construct, including this sentence and all others.
Tena, you're right, I was being a bit sarcastic. Jews did consider the religion passed through from the mother's side, but Hitler considered anyone a Jew with even a fraction of Jewish descent, on either side.
Tena, you're right, I was being a bit sarcastic. Jews did consider the religion passed through from the mother's side, but Hitler considered anyone a Jew with even a fraction of Jewish descent, on either side.
SWR,
I told you, I'm not your question bitch.
I've directly addressed all of your questions relating to this article.
You'll have to self-stimulate from here on out.
SWR,
I told you, I'm not your question bitch.
I've directly addressed all of your questions relating to this article.
You'll have to self-stimulate from here on out.
But why thank me, Paul? Is it because I gave you the opportunity to call me a cunt?
You're easily diddled, aren't you.
But why thank me, Paul? Is it because I gave you the opportunity to call me a cunt?
You're easily diddled, aren't you.
English translation: "Nothing" "means" "anything" so people are free to read whatever bullshit their fancy allows into any written statement. "Truth" is a patriarchal construct, including this sentence and all others.
Hubert Cumberdale
Naaaahh! I'd call that a "Dumbfuck" translation, an oversimplification indicative of an 'intelligence' of such astounding shallowness as to require no further reply...
I've directly addressed all of your questions relating to this article.
Do you agree with this statement, yes or no?
Daniel Pipes is a bigot who's unfit to serve in the US government in any capacity.
English translation: "Nothing" "means" "anything" so people are free to read whatever bullshit their fancy allows into any written statement. "Truth" is a patriarchal construct, including this sentence and all others.
Hubert Cumberdale
Naaaahh! I'd call that a "Dumbfuck" translation, an oversimplification indicative of an 'intelligence' of such astounding shallowness as to require no further reply...
I've directly addressed all of your questions relating to this article.
Do you agree with this statement, yes or no?
Daniel Pipes is a bigot who's unfit to serve in the US government in any capacity.
You're easily diddled, aren't you.
If you get me drunk enough, genius.
You're easily diddled, aren't you.
If you get me drunk enough, genius.
You're easily diddled, aren't you.
If you get me drunk enough, genius.
You're easily diddled, aren't you.
If you get me drunk enough, genius.
Just as the principled right is saddled with quasi bigots like Pipes, the left is stuck with obscurantists like WoodyGuthriesGuitar and reactonaries like SWR. Oh well.
Just as the principled right is saddled with quasi bigots like Pipes, the left is stuck with obscurantists like WoodyGuthriesGuitar and reactonaries like SWR. Oh well.
So? What does that have to do with anything?
It shows that they didn't just kill Jews, but killed those who wouldn't cooperate with them, which some Jews were willing to do, as demonstrated in the book I provided a link about.
One reviewer said:
"The revelation that Germans of Jewish blood, knowing the Nazi regime for what it was, served Hitler as uniformed members of his armed forces must come as a profound shock. It will surprise even professional historians of the Nazi years." --John Keegan, author of The Face of Battle and The Second World War
So, I'm not shocked that you don't know the facts of the matter, but that doesn't make the facts any different.
Just like there are Gay Republicans, there were Jewish Nazis.
Yes, many wound up dead anyway, as did some Christians who had been willing to do as they were told.
My point?
Your comment suggested that no exceptions were made by the Nazis for Jews who were willing to cooperate.
But, reality proves otherwise.
So? What does that have to do with anything?
It shows that they didn't just kill Jews, but killed those who wouldn't cooperate with them, which some Jews were willing to do, as demonstrated in the book I provided a link about.
One reviewer said:
"The revelation that Germans of Jewish blood, knowing the Nazi regime for what it was, served Hitler as uniformed members of his armed forces must come as a profound shock. It will surprise even professional historians of the Nazi years." --John Keegan, author of The Face of Battle and The Second World War
So, I'm not shocked that you don't know the facts of the matter, but that doesn't make the facts any different.
Just like there are Gay Republicans, there were Jewish Nazis.
Yes, many wound up dead anyway, as did some Christians who had been willing to do as they were told.
My point?
Your comment suggested that no exceptions were made by the Nazis for Jews who were willing to cooperate.
But, reality proves otherwise.
I sure shocked the shit out of a young boy crank caller with it one time.
Like this time? Did you come?
I sure shocked the shit out of a young boy crank caller with it one time.
Like this time? Did you come?
"C'mon, Tonto. Our work here is done. Heigh-ooooo Silver(heels), Awwwaaaayyy"!!!!!!11
"C'mon, Tonto. Our work here is done. Heigh-ooooo Silver(heels), Awwwaaaayyy"!!!!!!11
SWR,
Do you agree with the fact that you're trying to pick a fight on an issue where we actually agree? That you're trying to dig into the subject until you find some (hoped for) limit where I won't agree, so you can go AHA! 'Cause you ain't gonna find it on the subject of Pipes, aside from our differences on the specific interpretation of his article.
Yes or no?
SWR,
Do you agree with the fact that you're trying to pick a fight on an issue where we actually agree? That you're trying to dig into the subject until you find some (hoped for) limit where I won't agree, so you can go AHA! 'Cause you ain't gonna find it on the subject of Pipes, aside from our differences on the specific interpretation of his article.
Yes or no?
Like this time? Did you come?
hammurabi | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 1:26 pm | #
Twice.
Like this time? Did you come?
hammurabi | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 1:26 pm | #
Twice.
Karin - Got you. I'm a bit sensitive to this issue of Jewishness through the mother.
If you really feel the need to know why, email me and I'll discuss it with you.
Karin - Got you. I'm a bit sensitive to this issue of Jewishness through the mother.
If you really feel the need to know why, email me and I'll discuss it with you.
Twice.
So, little boys do it for you, eh?
Twice.
So, little boys do it for you, eh?
Yep, that's why I like you already, sweetcheeks.
Yep, that's why I like you already, sweetcheeks.
Do you agree with the fact that you're trying to pick a fight on an issue where we actually agree? That you're trying to dig into the subject until you find some (hoped for) limit where I won't agree, so you can go AHA!
No. I actually find it encouraging that you agree with me that Pipes was unift to serve on the Board of Directors of the United States Institute of Peace, that he's the moral equivalent of an anti-semite.
Good for you. Now I'll let you diddle about with the "nuances" in his language to your hearts content.
Happy hair splitting. I'm off now knowing that I'm safe because brave patriots like Michelle Malkin are guarding my white Christian ass against scary brown people like herself.
Touching really.
Do you agree with the fact that you're trying to pick a fight on an issue where we actually agree? That you're trying to dig into the subject until you find some (hoped for) limit where I won't agree, so you can go AHA!
No. I actually find it encouraging that you agree with me that Pipes was unift to serve on the Board of Directors of the United States Institute of Peace, that he's the moral equivalent of an anti-semite.
Good for you. Now I'll let you diddle about with the "nuances" in his language to your hearts content.
Happy hair splitting. I'm off now knowing that I'm safe because brave patriots like Michelle Malkin are guarding my white Christian ass against scary brown people like herself.
Touching really.
See, there you go assuming shit again, fucknuts. Are you still in school?
See, there you go assuming shit again, fucknuts. Are you still in school?
Now I'll let you diddle about with the "nuances" in his language to your hearts content.
Until the next thread, where Pipes the Straw Man will no doubt be used to represent all Christendom in SWR's mythical War on Islam.
Now I'll let you diddle about with the "nuances" in his language to your hearts content.
Until the next thread, where Pipes the Straw Man will no doubt be used to represent all Christendom in SWR's mythical War on Islam.
Paul, you can't please the Atribots.
Unless and until you bow down and repeat everything Dunkin' says with a comment like, "You're the best, Atrios!", you can expect shit smears like SWR to behave as demonstrated above.
But you know this.
Paul, you can't please the Atribots.
Unless and until you bow down and repeat everything Dunkin' says with a comment like, "You're the best, Atrios!", you can expect shit smears like SWR to behave as demonstrated above.
But you know this.
Nope.
I'm saying "little boy" as in "you talk like a little boy, so I'll make that assumption." Sweetcheeks.
Perhaps I should return to school, though, so I could achieve your obvious "fucknuts" level of erudition.
Have a great day!
Nope.
I'm saying "little boy" as in "you talk like a little boy, so I'll make that assumption." Sweetcheeks.
Perhaps I should return to school, though, so I could achieve your obvious "fucknuts" level of erudition.
Have a great day!
Perhaps you should return to school. Then, you can have all the little boys you want. Oh happy day for you! Fucknuts.
Perhaps you should return to school. Then, you can have all the little boys you want. Oh happy day for you! Fucknuts.
And I should know about little boys! I'm about to have one for lunch!
Yummy!
And I should know about little boys! I'm about to have one for lunch!
Yummy!
Next up: Ann Coulter says something offensive...Some guy on LGF posted something bigoted...so much territory to revisit for the gazillionth time. So many adams apple jokes left untold. So many dumb acronyms to toss around and lame web-jargon to invent and deploy.
Next up: Ann Coulter says something offensive...Some guy on LGF posted something bigoted...so much territory to revisit for the gazillionth time. So many adams apple jokes left untold. So many dumb acronyms to toss around and lame web-jargon to invent and deploy.
UBH - you still are avoiding answering what that has to do with what is under discussion.
This is a red herring. It has nothing to do with anything.
I don't give a shit about Jews who fooled the Nazis (one wonders just how they hid the proof of their Jewishness, since it was evident for anyone to see when they weren't dressed,) I don't see what it has to do with anything except splitting hairs with me over nothing.
UBH - you still are avoiding answering what that has to do with what is under discussion.
This is a red herring. It has nothing to do with anything.
I don't give a shit about Jews who fooled the Nazis (one wonders just how they hid the proof of their Jewishness, since it was evident for anyone to see when they weren't dressed,) I don't see what it has to do with anything except splitting hairs with me over nothing.
Ha ha. Thick as a plank and twice as dumb. The neocons resort to name trolling.
Sweeeeeeet!
Ha ha. Thick as a plank and twice as dumb. The neocons resort to name trolling.
Sweeeeeeet!
But Hubert you forgot about all the Z's there are to type.
As in:
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...
But Hubert you forgot about all the Z's there are to type.
As in:
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...
Thirteen of the nineteen paragraphs of Pipes's column pimp Malkin's defense of internment. The final paragraph says appropriate Homeland Security policies today may "entail bothersome or offensive measures" but would be preferable to "being incinerated at your office desk by a flaming hijacked plane." Pipes's intent could not be more clear for anyone who reads with open eyes.
tb
Thirteen of the nineteen paragraphs of Pipes's column pimp Malkin's defense of internment. The final paragraph says appropriate Homeland Security policies today may "entail bothersome or offensive measures" but would be preferable to "being incinerated at your office desk by a flaming hijacked plane." Pipes's intent could not be more clear for anyone who reads with open eyes.
tb
I had read and commented on the Pipes piece (to his website)...and noted that he had used that right wing babe to support his notion that internment not a bad idea. She thought it good during WWII. That said: why didn't we bother to intern Eisenhower and Adm Nimitz, both German-Americans...their ancestral roots with the Axis(Germany).
I had read and commented on the Pipes piece (to his website)...and noted that he had used that right wing babe to support his notion that internment not a bad idea. She thought it good during WWII. That said: why didn't we bother to intern Eisenhower and Adm Nimitz, both German-Americans...their ancestral roots with the Axis(Germany).
Pompously? I don't feel pompous today.
I don't like the "insinuation" thread of criticism; it stinks of Cultural Revolution-type attacks. "You said this, but you meant this!"
You don't like this school, but you sure have paid tuition there. Put down the fear of incipient Maoism before you hurt yourself.
In your world, then, THIS is fair play: "I call your mother is a whore, but she sure looks like one." What fun. See, nobody technically called your mother a whore, so you're not allowed to be mad if omeone said this to you. You live in a dumb world.
If Pipes and Malkin want to go to the well of internment, they have to take responsibility for the water they're carrying. Your desire to get them off on a technicality doesn't make you Clarence Darrow, bwana. Rather, it makes you a tool. Congratulations!
Pompously? I don't feel pompous today.
I don't like the "insinuation" thread of criticism; it stinks of Cultural Revolution-type attacks. "You said this, but you meant this!"
You don't like this school, but you sure have paid tuition there. Put down the fear of incipient Maoism before you hurt yourself.
In your world, then, THIS is fair play: "I call your mother is a whore, but she sure looks like one." What fun. See, nobody technically called your mother a whore, so you're not allowed to be mad if omeone said this to you. You live in a dumb world.
If Pipes and Malkin want to go to the well of internment, they have to take responsibility for the water they're carrying. Your desire to get them off on a technicality doesn't make you Clarence Darrow, bwana. Rather, it makes you a tool. Congratulations!
Signs That Rage Has Turned Into An Addiction.
Signs That Rage Has Turned Into An Addiction.
UBH - you still are avoiding answering what that has to do with what is under discussion.
Tena
You're the one who said that Jewishness can be spoken of as an ethnicity, but then claimed that any amount of Jewishness would get one killed.
Therefore, you misspoke or weren't aware of the facts.
1) Not all Jews were killed for being Jews.
2) Some Jews were Nazis.
3) Some were allowed to work on behalf of the Nazi's despite the fact they were (racially, if one believes in racial Judaism, as you seem to) Jewish.
You're welcome to clarify your position, but the fact remains that there were Jewish Nazis.
In essence, you're wrong or you misspoke.
You pick.
UBH - you still are avoiding answering what that has to do with what is under discussion.
Tena
You're the one who said that Jewishness can be spoken of as an ethnicity, but then claimed that any amount of Jewishness would get one killed.
Therefore, you misspoke or weren't aware of the facts.
1) Not all Jews were killed for being Jews.
2) Some Jews were Nazis.
3) Some were allowed to work on behalf of the Nazi's despite the fact they were (racially, if one believes in racial Judaism, as you seem to) Jewish.
You're welcome to clarify your position, but the fact remains that there were Jewish Nazis.
In essence, you're wrong or you misspoke.
You pick.
Thersites,
I would say that your world must be rather dumber, if you can describe my "desire to get them off on a technicality" after my repeated attacks on Pipes and his thoughts.
When you read my comments, at least give the literal meaning a stab before attributing some false desire to me, eh? That's the problem when one relies too heavily on interpretation. You end up falling back on mental shorthand and assumptions that are not actually supported by evidence.
Thersites,
I would say that your world must be rather dumber, if you can describe my "desire to get them off on a technicality" after my repeated attacks on Pipes and his thoughts.
When you read my comments, at least give the literal meaning a stab before attributing some false desire to me, eh? That's the problem when one relies too heavily on interpretation. You end up falling back on mental shorthand and assumptions that are not actually supported by evidence.
And P.S.: My mother actually is a whore, though I don't know how you guessed.
And P.S.: My mother actually is a whore, though I don't know how you guessed.
UBH - Are you trying to say that the Nazis spared some Jews because they were Jewish Nazis?
Because if you are trying to say that, you are not right, I don't care what fucking book says so. Not all books are correct, either, bud.
I do believe that Jews themselves have established an ethnic criterion for who is Jewish. I also believe that the Nazis interned and killed many people who were only partly Jewish, or not Jewish at all by the standard of having a Jewish mother.
If there were exceptions, they were truly exceptional. In fact, they had to have hidden it if they were circumcised. You can continue to insist that I am wrong, but I'm not. You are making some kind of strange argument that all but attempts to deny the Holocaust. Or you are saying: "It wasn't that bad, and it wasn't just Jews." And that is anti-semitic.
UBH - Are you trying to say that the Nazis spared some Jews because they were Jewish Nazis?
Because if you are trying to say that, you are not right, I don't care what fucking book says so. Not all books are correct, either, bud.
I do believe that Jews themselves have established an ethnic criterion for who is Jewish. I also believe that the Nazis interned and killed many people who were only partly Jewish, or not Jewish at all by the standard of having a Jewish mother.
If there were exceptions, they were truly exceptional. In fact, they had to have hidden it if they were circumcised. You can continue to insist that I am wrong, but I'm not. You are making some kind of strange argument that all but attempts to deny the Holocaust. Or you are saying: "It wasn't that bad, and it wasn't just Jews." And that is anti-semitic.
Your desire to get them off on a technicality doesn't make you Clarence Darrow, bwana.
Nobody is arguing to let them off. Their argument was flagrantly (and unnecessarily!) misrepresented. The rest of it is just defensive posturing. Get over yourselves!!!
Your desire to get them off on a technicality doesn't make you Clarence Darrow, bwana.
Nobody is arguing to let them off. Their argument was flagrantly (and unnecessarily!) misrepresented. The rest of it is just defensive posturing. Get over yourselves!!!
Well, I have to agree with Paul Verhoeven and Hubert Cumberdale here -- Pipes didn't advocate bringing back internment camps in his column. Furthermore, neither Verhoeven nor Cumberdale defend its contents -- quite the contrary, both criticized the column. Their main point is that Professor Cole (whom I greatly admire) attributes to Pipes something that is absent from his column. Fair point, in my judgment.
I have little regard for Pipes because he often makes arguments based on anecdotal evidence and half-truths, and he appears to harbor a deep-seated hatred for those with whom he disagrees -- which is why I can understand how Atrios and others here can readily see the link between a defense of an argument that internment camps were proper in World War II with the possibility of advocating their use in the near future.
That said, however, Verhoeven and Cumberdale have made a valid observation and I for one respect it -- for whatever that's worth.
Well, I have to agree with Paul Verhoeven and Hubert Cumberdale here -- Pipes didn't advocate bringing back internment camps in his column. Furthermore, neither Verhoeven nor Cumberdale defend its contents -- quite the contrary, both criticized the column. Their main point is that Professor Cole (whom I greatly admire) attributes to Pipes something that is absent from his column. Fair point, in my judgment.
I have little regard for Pipes because he often makes arguments based on anecdotal evidence and half-truths, and he appears to harbor a deep-seated hatred for those with whom he disagrees -- which is why I can understand how Atrios and others here can readily see the link between a defense of an argument that internment camps were proper in World War II with the possibility of advocating their use in the near future.
That said, however, Verhoeven and Cumberdale have made a valid observation and I for one respect it -- for whatever that's worth.
You end up falling back on mental shorthand and assumptions that are not actually supported by evidence.
So really what you're saying is that all ragheads should be rounded up and killed, eh? As is the trademark, wont and fashion among LGF cretins and their fiendish bigoted ringleader. Eep! Orp!
You end up falling back on mental shorthand and assumptions that are not actually supported by evidence.
So really what you're saying is that all ragheads should be rounded up and killed, eh? As is the trademark, wont and fashion among LGF cretins and their fiendish bigoted ringleader. Eep! Orp!
Bless you, Amigo. That's all I was looking for.
I'll stop sucking up bandwidth. Have a good New Year.
Bless you, Amigo. That's all I was looking for.
I'll stop sucking up bandwidth. Have a good New Year.
Same to you, Paul, and to everyone else.
Same to you, Paul, and to everyone else.
I would say that your world must be rather dumber, if you can describe my "desire to get them off on a technicality" after my repeated attacks on Pipes and his thoughts.
Sorry you're having so much trouble remembering what you've said that I'm disagreeing with. Here is your attempt to press a technicality to get them off on a specific charge:
It's my understanding that Malkin is arguing for racial profiling, not for modern-day internment. Therefore, it just may be possible that Pipes cites her because he is advocating...racial profiling? I don't know, call me crazy..
They are making insinuations. Very clear, dishonest, and very dangerous ones. It is perfectly reasonable to assume that two authors who spend the bulk of the specific texts in question defending a specific policy would have no problem with having that policy reintroduced. If they do not like the charge that they are not advocating the reintroduction of this policy but rather one which is less severe than the first, they should either unequivocally repudiate the first policy or just not fucking bring it up in the first place.
You want to give them an out on the internment question on purely theoretical, technical, and abstract grounds. That is stupid.
I would say that your world must be rather dumber, if you can describe my "desire to get them off on a technicality" after my repeated attacks on Pipes and his thoughts.
Sorry you're having so much trouble remembering what you've said that I'm disagreeing with. Here is your attempt to press a technicality to get them off on a specific charge:
It's my understanding that Malkin is arguing for racial profiling, not for modern-day internment. Therefore, it just may be possible that Pipes cites her because he is advocating...racial profiling? I don't know, call me crazy..
They are making insinuations. Very clear, dishonest, and very dangerous ones. It is perfectly reasonable to assume that two authors who spend the bulk of the specific texts in question defending a specific policy would have no problem with having that policy reintroduced. If they do not like the charge that they are not advocating the reintroduction of this policy but rather one which is less severe than the first, they should either unequivocally repudiate the first policy or just not fucking bring it up in the first place.
You want to give them an out on the internment question on purely theoretical, technical, and abstract grounds. That is stupid.
Nobody is arguing to let them off. Their argument was flagrantly (and unnecessarily!) misrepresented.
Uh, no. They are playing a rhetorical, racist shell game on the internment question and you want to let them skate on it.
Nobody is arguing to let them off. Their argument was flagrantly (and unnecessarily!) misrepresented.
Uh, no. They are playing a rhetorical, racist shell game on the internment question and you want to let them skate on it.
Re the Ayn Rand Institute col-yoom, i found this bit priceless:
...private organizations and individuals are scrambling to send out money and goods to help the victims. Such help may be entirely proper, especially considering that most of those affected by this tragedy are suffering through no fault of their own.
I guess we should withold medical care from anyone who "asked for it" by having too much body fat, smoking, etc etc.
i wanted to bitch-slap EVERY character in "The Fountainhead." There's writin' for ya.
Re the Ayn Rand Institute col-yoom, i found this bit priceless:
...private organizations and individuals are scrambling to send out money and goods to help the victims. Such help may be entirely proper, especially considering that most of those affected by this tragedy are suffering through no fault of their own.
I guess we should withold medical care from anyone who "asked for it" by having too much body fat, smoking, etc etc.
i wanted to bitch-slap EVERY character in "The Fountainhead." There's writin' for ya.
There is no clear implication Pipes advocates the wholesale internment of Muslims.
But isn't the obvious point here that Pipes conspicuously fails to qualify his recommendations?
Pipes argues that interning an entire group of people during a time of war is morally justified. He makes no distinction that I can see between the Japanese-Americans during WWII and American Muslims today. How are we NOT supposed to draw the inference that we would be justified in interning Muslims today? If we are NOT supposed to draw that conclusion, given how extraoardinary it is, shouldn't Pipes go on record in this column explaining why that would be a bad idea, or, at minimum, why it shouldn't be implemented right away?
In general, if you argue that all A are B, and then you say that that fellow over there is an A, aren't you pretty much implying that you think he's a B as well, unless you start to qualify your original premise?
There is no clear implication Pipes advocates the wholesale internment of Muslims.
But isn't the obvious point here that Pipes conspicuously fails to qualify his recommendations?
Pipes argues that interning an entire group of people during a time of war is morally justified. He makes no distinction that I can see between the Japanese-Americans during WWII and American Muslims today. How are we NOT supposed to draw the inference that we would be justified in interning Muslims today? If we are NOT supposed to draw that conclusion, given how extraoardinary it is, shouldn't Pipes go on record in this column explaining why that would be a bad idea, or, at minimum, why it shouldn't be implemented right away?
In general, if you argue that all A are B, and then you say that that fellow over there is an A, aren't you pretty much implying that you think he's a B as well, unless you start to qualify your original premise?
"You want to give them an out on the internment question on purely theoretical, technical, and abstract grounds."
Yes, the technical out I wish to give Pipes on the internment question is holding him only to what he himself has written, not to what you and others here desperately wish to believe he implied. What you call a 'technical out' some people might call 'factual rigor.' Pipes' discussion of internment is confined to a defense of ethnic profiling. Nowhere in any of his writings has he advocated internment camps.
"You want to give them an out on the internment question on purely theoretical, technical, and abstract grounds."
Yes, the technical out I wish to give Pipes on the internment question is holding him only to what he himself has written, not to what you and others here desperately wish to believe he implied. What you call a 'technical out' some people might call 'factual rigor.' Pipes' discussion of internment is confined to a defense of ethnic profiling. Nowhere in any of his writings has he advocated internment camps.
Malkin herself has expressly claimed she doesn't support the internment of Muslims. Ascribing this belief to Pipes for merely referencing her book seems slighly ridiculous.
Malkin herself has expressly claimed she doesn't support the internment of Muslims. Ascribing this belief to Pipes for merely referencing her book seems slighly ridiculous.
What you call a 'technical out' some people might call 'factual rigor.' Pipes' discussion of internment is confined to a defense of ethnic profiling. Nowhere in any of his writings has he advocated internment camps.
But you are failing to pay heed to logical rigor. As I pointed out above, it would most certainly seem to follow from the general assertions that Pipes argues for that interning Muslims today would be justified.
How can you claim that he isn't implying that that is so?
Are you seriously going to argue that Pipes is not aware of the implications of his argument? Are you seriously going to claim that he purposely did NOT qualify his statements so that the implication of justified Muslim internship was just left hanging out there? Don't you realize that virtually every writer or pundit or politician ALWAYS makes qualifications like these when necessary, precisely so that they would not be seen to be implying what their general statements do entail purely on logical grounds?
All Pipes had to do is say something to the effect that, we aren't at a stage in the war on terror where we have to think about interning Muslims, because their case is different from that of Japanese Americans because of blah blah blah.
He, again, conspicuously failed to do so. And that tells you what you need to know about what he really is advocating.
What you call a 'technical out' some people might call 'factual rigor.' Pipes' discussion of internment is confined to a defense of ethnic profiling. Nowhere in any of his writings has he advocated internment camps.
But you are failing to pay heed to logical rigor. As I pointed out above, it would most certainly seem to follow from the general assertions that Pipes argues for that interning Muslims today would be justified.
How can you claim that he isn't implying that that is so?
Are you seriously going to argue that Pipes is not aware of the implications of his argument? Are you seriously going to claim that he purposely did NOT qualify his statements so that the implication of justified Muslim internship was just left hanging out there? Don't you realize that virtually every writer or pundit or politician ALWAYS makes qualifications like these when necessary, precisely so that they would not be seen to be implying what their general statements do entail purely on logical grounds?
All Pipes had to do is say something to the effect that, we aren't at a stage in the war on terror where we have to think about interning Muslims, because their case is different from that of Japanese Americans because of blah blah blah.
He, again, conspicuously failed to do so. And that tells you what you need to know about what he really is advocating.
"How are we NOT supposed to draw the inference that we would be justified in interning Muslims today?"
It's pretty hard not to draw said inference after reading what Pipes wrote, franklyO, which is why I said that it's easy to make the link. If one approves its use then, it's likely one would approve it now.
But it doesn't necessarily follow logically. One could approve an action under one set of circumstances, yet still disapprove of it in future circumstances -- even if they should be similar -- because of other factors not present the first time around. For example, in World War II the nation of Japan attacked us; this time around, no nation-state did. Instead, a group of terrorists, unaffiliated with any particular nation, did the attacking It's possible, therefore, that Pipes could defend the argument for internment camps then, while opposing their use now because of the different set of circumstances I offer in my hypothetical.
"How are we NOT supposed to draw the inference that we would be justified in interning Muslims today?"
It's pretty hard not to draw said inference after reading what Pipes wrote, franklyO, which is why I said that it's easy to make the link. If one approves its use then, it's likely one would approve it now.
But it doesn't necessarily follow logically. One could approve an action under one set of circumstances, yet still disapprove of it in future circumstances -- even if they should be similar -- because of other factors not present the first time around. For example, in World War II the nation of Japan attacked us; this time around, no nation-state did. Instead, a group of terrorists, unaffiliated with any particular nation, did the attacking It's possible, therefore, that Pipes could defend the argument for internment camps then, while opposing their use now because of the different set of circumstances I offer in my hypothetical.
But you are failing to pay heed to logical rigor.
Logical rigor rejects arguments from imagination. Your "obvious implications" are NOT obvious or necessary, and the fact that he didn't address them hardly proves he believes them.
But you are failing to pay heed to logical rigor.
Logical rigor rejects arguments from imagination. Your "obvious implications" are NOT obvious or necessary, and the fact that he didn't address them hardly proves he believes them.
I really like this Hubert Cumberdale fellow and this Paul Verhoeven guy.
As I've always said, people miss the nuances in my positions. For the record, I do not advocate hatred of blacks. I'm only "concerned" about affirmative action and I only want to promote white pride.
Paul. Defend me sometime too. I could use a good mouthpiece like you.
I really like this Hubert Cumberdale fellow and this Paul Verhoeven guy.
As I've always said, people miss the nuances in my positions. For the record, I do not advocate hatred of blacks. I'm only "concerned" about affirmative action and I only want to promote white pride.
Paul. Defend me sometime too. I could use a good mouthpiece like you.
paul,ubh,hubert:
trolling is as trolling does.
yes amigo, these are more literate than the usuals, yet their verbosity doth protest too much??
oderint dum metuant
paul,ubh,hubert:
trolling is as trolling does.
yes amigo, these are more literate than the usuals, yet their verbosity doth protest too much??
oderint dum metuant
Malkin herself has expressly claimed she doesn't support the internment of Muslims. Ascribing this belief to Pipes for merely referencing her book seems slighly ridiculous.
And that is a dishonest claim. Again, if you do not like being accused of justifying a policy of internment, do not write a book justifying a policy of internment. If you do not think the hideous historical precedent is necessarily relevant in different historical circumstances, do not bring it up while defending it.
What you call a 'technical out' some people might call 'factual rigor.'
What you call "factual rigor" is in fact "weaselly bullshit." He brought up internment himself and if he is NOT trying to lay out grounds where such a policy might be justified in the future, there was no point in talking about it at all. If you want to throw open a door to the cesspit, dont whine that you haven't technically stepped through it when people notice the stench.
Malkin herself has expressly claimed she doesn't support the internment of Muslims. Ascribing this belief to Pipes for merely referencing her book seems slighly ridiculous.
And that is a dishonest claim. Again, if you do not like being accused of justifying a policy of internment, do not write a book justifying a policy of internment. If you do not think the hideous historical precedent is necessarily relevant in different historical circumstances, do not bring it up while defending it.
What you call a 'technical out' some people might call 'factual rigor.'
What you call "factual rigor" is in fact "weaselly bullshit." He brought up internment himself and if he is NOT trying to lay out grounds where such a policy might be justified in the future, there was no point in talking about it at all. If you want to throw open a door to the cesspit, dont whine that you haven't technically stepped through it when people notice the stench.
David Duke,
It would be promising, except I label idiotic bigots as such. See my comments above.
Don't get sucked in, remember to check the literal meaning...like when I call someone an idiotic bigot. You see, that doesn't mean the opposite of what I say, it means exactly what I'm saying. That I don't like bigots. Like Pipes. Or you.
yet their verbosity doth protest too much??
Dude, I'm not the one paraphrasing Shakespeare.
David Duke,
It would be promising, except I label idiotic bigots as such. See my comments above.
Don't get sucked in, remember to check the literal meaning...like when I call someone an idiotic bigot. You see, that doesn't mean the opposite of what I say, it means exactly what I'm saying. That I don't like bigots. Like Pipes. Or you.
yet their verbosity doth protest too much??
Dude, I'm not the one paraphrasing Shakespeare.
Amigo,
I don't necessarily disagree with some of what you've said. Your point that the same action which is justified in one set of circumstances may not be justified in others is certainly true. But if those circumstances are similar under all relevant criteria, then I don't see how both actions don't stand or fall in their justification together.
Of course, what are the relevant criteria here?
The deep problem is that Pipes, obviously purposely, does NOT in any way qualify his support of internment. We are left with an entirely open-ended support for internment of peooples during times of war. Pipes only argues that indeed we are today at war, and that the Muslims represent a threat every bit as real and virulent as the Japanese-Americans during WWII. He says NOTHING to suggest that the case with Muslims is less extreme than that of the Japanese. Does anyone seriously think that it did not occur to Pipes that he would be understood to suggest that Muslims can, justly, be interned?
Again, all Pipes had to do was to qualify the open-ended justification of interning peoples during time of war in order to stop this inference. He failed to do so.
To say that it's unfair to accuse Pipes of implying that interning Muslims is justified is just wrong.
It's just naive to believe that Pipes failure to scotch the accusation is not fully deliberate.
Amigo,
I don't necessarily disagree with some of what you've said. Your point that the same action which is justified in one set of circumstances may not be justified in others is certainly true. But if those circumstances are similar under all relevant criteria, then I don't see how both actions don't stand or fall in their justification together.
Of course, what are the relevant criteria here?
The deep problem is that Pipes, obviously purposely, does NOT in any way qualify his support of internment. We are left with an entirely open-ended support for internment of peooples during times of war. Pipes only argues that indeed we are today at war, and that the Muslims represent a threat every bit as real and virulent as the Japanese-Americans during WWII. He says NOTHING to suggest that the case with Muslims is less extreme than that of the Japanese. Does anyone seriously think that it did not occur to Pipes that he would be understood to suggest that Muslims can, justly, be interned?
Again, all Pipes had to do was to qualify the open-ended justification of interning peoples during time of war in order to stop this inference. He failed to do so.
To say that it's unfair to accuse Pipes of implying that interning Muslims is justified is just wrong.
It's just naive to believe that Pipes failure to scotch the accusation is not fully deliberate.
Paul. Defend me sometime too. I could use a good mouthpiece like you.
David Duke
I think Humbert's your better bet...or mebbe Amigo...
Paul. Defend me sometime too. I could use a good mouthpiece like you.
David Duke
I think Humbert's your better bet...or mebbe Amigo...
Christ, why insult Amigo? Must you cast aspersions on someone who (from my observation) is one of the most polite and rational commenters around?
Stick to insulting me.
Christ, why insult Amigo? Must you cast aspersions on someone who (from my observation) is one of the most polite and rational commenters around?
Stick to insulting me.
It should be pretty obvious that I'm on the opposite side of the political aisle from both Verhoeven and Cumberdale. That doesn't mean that I'm going to oppose a fair point from them simply because of where they stand politically.
Their observation was sound; their logic proper. There is nothing wrong in pointing that out.
Whether or not either or both of them are trolls (and I certainly don't find their arguments here "trollish") isn't relevant to the point they made. And I have no qualms about pointing out that what they say is essentially accurate.
I've debated conservatives on various sites pretty vigorously (including here). Some of them obtuse and profane; others knowledgable and honest. In each exchange I've endeavored to be factual, honest, polite and thoughtful. I may not have always succeeded -- but it wasn't for lack of effort. And, throughout all of these exchanges, I have maintained my respect for those conservatives who have argued in the same way. Verhoeven and Cumberdale made a valid point and defended it well. I respect that -- even if they are conservatives.
It should be pretty obvious that I'm on the opposite side of the political aisle from both Verhoeven and Cumberdale. That doesn't mean that I'm going to oppose a fair point from them simply because of where they stand politically.
Their observation was sound; their logic proper. There is nothing wrong in pointing that out.
Whether or not either or both of them are trolls (and I certainly don't find their arguments here "trollish") isn't relevant to the point they made. And I have no qualms about pointing out that what they say is essentially accurate.
I've debated conservatives on various sites pretty vigorously (including here). Some of them obtuse and profane; others knowledgable and honest. In each exchange I've endeavored to be factual, honest, polite and thoughtful. I may not have always succeeded -- but it wasn't for lack of effort. And, throughout all of these exchanges, I have maintained my respect for those conservatives who have argued in the same way. Verhoeven and Cumberdale made a valid point and defended it well. I respect that -- even if they are conservatives.
Having read a lot of what Pipes has written, franklyO, I tend to agree with how you feel. It's my guess that you're correct in your observations.
But that's all it is -- a guess. And when participating in a discussion of an issue, I strive to maintain basic principles of evidence and logic. Which is why I find that Verhoeven and Cumberdale's point is valid.
Just the other day, on a different web site, I pointed out to a couple of conservatives their use of propaganda tactics and their lack of logic and evidence. I took them to task pretty hard. Can't do that here; Verhoeven's and Cumberdale's point is a solid onelogically. Some here may not like that I say that, but it's true. And that's all that matters to me.
Having read a lot of what Pipes has written, franklyO, I tend to agree with how you feel. It's my guess that you're correct in your observations.
But that's all it is -- a guess. And when participating in a discussion of an issue, I strive to maintain basic principles of evidence and logic. Which is why I find that Verhoeven and Cumberdale's point is valid.
Just the other day, on a different web site, I pointed out to a couple of conservatives their use of propaganda tactics and their lack of logic and evidence. I took them to task pretty hard. Can't do that here; Verhoeven's and Cumberdale's point is a solid onelogically. Some here may not like that I say that, but it's true. And that's all that matters to me.
David Duke,
It would be promising, except I label idiotic bigots as such. See my comments above.
But Paul (I may call you Paul right?) you will help these poor misguided liberals understand the fact that I have never actually come out and said I hated blacks or Jews right?
You will help them understand that I don't hate anybody, that I'm just standing up for the rights of White Christians.
Because people don't normally see that nuance in me. They usually just label me a hate monger and I don't think that's fair.
David Duke,
It would be promising, except I label idiotic bigots as such. See my comments above.
But Paul (I may call you Paul right?) you will help these poor misguided liberals understand the fact that I have never actually come out and said I hated blacks or Jews right?
You will help them understand that I don't hate anybody, that I'm just standing up for the rights of White Christians.
Because people don't normally see that nuance in me. They usually just label me a hate monger and I don't think that's fair.
Uh, David Duke, you haven't been sufficiently careful in past remarks.
Uh, David Duke, you haven't been sufficiently careful in past remarks.
It should be pretty obvious that I'm on the opposite side of the political aisle from both Verhoeven and Cumberdale.
From the evidence of this thread (which, by the logic and theory of both 'Paul' & 'Hubert,' is all we're able or entitled to consider or to employ), i do not find that 'obvious' at all.
"David Duke" alludes to the real one who, according to his admirers in Louisiana, says what needs to be said, despite perhaps not being the proper or most attractive proponent of those views...
Which is why I suggested you for the role of defender of the Right, whether you actually concur, or agree, or not...
It should be pretty obvious that I'm on the opposite side of the political aisle from both Verhoeven and Cumberdale.
From the evidence of this thread (which, by the logic and theory of both 'Paul' & 'Hubert,' is all we're able or entitled to consider or to employ), i do not find that 'obvious' at all.
"David Duke" alludes to the real one who, according to his admirers in Louisiana, says what needs to be said, despite perhaps not being the proper or most attractive proponent of those views...
Which is why I suggested you for the role of defender of the Right, whether you actually concur, or agree, or not...
Look at Amigo's first comment:
Well, I have to agree with Paul Verhoeven and Hubert Cumberdale here -- Pipes didn't advocate bringing back internment camps in his column. Furthermore, neither Verhoeven nor Cumberdale defend its contents -- quite the contrary, both criticized the column. Their main point is that Professor Cole (whom I greatly admire) attributes to Pipes something that is absent from his column. Fair point, in my judgment.
I have little regard for Pipes because he often makes arguments based on anecdotal evidence and half-truths, and he appears to harbor a deep-seated hatred for those with whom he disagrees -- which is why I can understand how Atrios and others here can readily see the link between a defense of an argument that internment camps were proper in World War II with the possibility of advocating their use in the near future.
Do you really want to turn on this guy? Jesus, Woody, you really are a prick to anyone who dares question the dogma.
Look at Amigo's first comment:
Well, I have to agree with Paul Verhoeven and Hubert Cumberdale here -- Pipes didn't advocate bringing back internment camps in his column. Furthermore, neither Verhoeven nor Cumberdale defend its contents -- quite the contrary, both criticized the column. Their main point is that Professor Cole (whom I greatly admire) attributes to Pipes something that is absent from his column. Fair point, in my judgment.
I have little regard for Pipes because he often makes arguments based on anecdotal evidence and half-truths, and he appears to harbor a deep-seated hatred for those with whom he disagrees -- which is why I can understand how Atrios and others here can readily see the link between a defense of an argument that internment camps were proper in World War II with the possibility of advocating their use in the near future.
Do you really want to turn on this guy? Jesus, Woody, you really are a prick to anyone who dares question the dogma.
I knew where you were coming from with your previous remark, kono. And if my political beliefs aren't obvious to you, that's your problem. I don't feel the need to present you with a set of bona fides. Believe what you will and good luck to you.
I knew where you were coming from with your previous remark, kono. And if my political beliefs aren't obvious to you, that's your problem. I don't feel the need to present you with a set of bona fides. Believe what you will and good luck to you.
Just the other day, on a different web site, I pointed out to a couple of conservatives their use of propaganda tactics and their lack of logic and evidence. I took them to task pretty hard. Can't do that here; Verhoeven's and Cumberdale's point is a solid onelogically. Some here may not like that I say that, but it's true. And that's all that matters to me.
But vile insinuation snuck into discourse behind the cover of technical accuracy is a classic propaganda technique. Granting the technical accuracy is at best to quibble and at worst to be party to mostrousness. It is NOT, however, to valiantly defend the heights of Truth against the evil legions of Dogma.
Just the other day, on a different web site, I pointed out to a couple of conservatives their use of propaganda tactics and their lack of logic and evidence. I took them to task pretty hard. Can't do that here; Verhoeven's and Cumberdale's point is a solid onelogically. Some here may not like that I say that, but it's true. And that's all that matters to me.
But vile insinuation snuck into discourse behind the cover of technical accuracy is a classic propaganda technique. Granting the technical accuracy is at best to quibble and at worst to be party to mostrousness. It is NOT, however, to valiantly defend the heights of Truth against the evil legions of Dogma.
Amigo, I'm afraid they're right. No true Scotsman would accept the point as logical...
Amigo, I'm afraid they're right. No true Scotsman would accept the point as logical...
Except, Thersites, that neither Verhoeven nor Cumberdale defended what Pipes wrote; they simply made the logical observation that Coles injected something that Pipes had not said. And it's that logical observation I defend, because it is correct.
In the play A Man For All Seasons, Thomas More says to his future son-in-law William Roper something like "Yes, I would give the devil the benefit of law for my own safety's sake."
I adhere to that principle. So did John Adams when he defended the British soldiers who fired on a Boston crowd in 1770.
Neither Verhoeven nor Cumberdale should be equated either with Satan or the British soldiers in the examples I offer above; rather I seek to equate the principle that one can defend something unpopular because, as in this case, it is true.
Except, Thersites, that neither Verhoeven nor Cumberdale defended what Pipes wrote; they simply made the logical observation that Coles injected something that Pipes had not said. And it's that logical observation I defend, because it is correct.
In the play A Man For All Seasons, Thomas More says to his future son-in-law William Roper something like "Yes, I would give the devil the benefit of law for my own safety's sake."
I adhere to that principle. So did John Adams when he defended the British soldiers who fired on a Boston crowd in 1770.
Neither Verhoeven nor Cumberdale should be equated either with Satan or the British soldiers in the examples I offer above; rather I seek to equate the principle that one can defend something unpopular because, as in this case, it is true.
Paul, I don't recall having debated with you before, but I wish to thank you for your kind words here. I fear that saying this will only be another indicator to some here that I am an undercover right-wing troll. Nevertheless, I am grateful.
Watch out, though, we may be crossing swords in the future...
Paul, I don't recall having debated with you before, but I wish to thank you for your kind words here. I fear that saying this will only be another indicator to some here that I am an undercover right-wing troll. Nevertheless, I am grateful.
Watch out, though, we may be crossing swords in the future...
Amigo, I have no doubt that we disagree on some (many?) issues, just as I'm certain that you'd trounce me if we debated them, so I'll avoid it. 
You should have your own blog. I'm not saying that because you agreed with one of my points; you're very disciplined and eloquent in your arguments.
Ah well, I'm off to get drunk. Have fun/be safe.
Amigo, I have no doubt that we disagree on some (many?) issues, just as I'm certain that you'd trounce me if we debated them, so I'll avoid it.
You should have your own blog. I'm not saying that because you agreed with one of my points; you're very disciplined and eloquent in your arguments.
Ah well, I'm off to get drunk. Have fun/be safe.
Except, Thersites, that neither Verhoeven nor Cumberdale defended what Pipes wrote; they simply made the logical observation that Coles injected something that Pipes had not said. And it's that logical observation I defend, because it is correct.
But Pipes most certainly did and does imply it, and his deliberate coyness is in its way especially disgusting. You are not on the side of the angels when you defend the devil's right to quote scripture.
Except, Thersites, that neither Verhoeven nor Cumberdale defended what Pipes wrote; they simply made the logical observation that Coles injected something that Pipes had not said. And it's that logical observation I defend, because it is correct.
But Pipes most certainly did and does imply it, and his deliberate coyness is in its way especially disgusting. You are not on the side of the angels when you defend the devil's right to quote scripture.
I'm on the side of reason here. A valid logical point was made. I defended it. It is illogical to extend that defense to a defense of what Pipes wrote. That's the kind of argument I usually get from some of the conservatives I debate. Your assertion simply does not follow logically, Thersites. It. Doesn't.
I'm on the side of reason here. A valid logical point was made. I defended it. It is illogical to extend that defense to a defense of what Pipes wrote. That's the kind of argument I usually get from some of the conservatives I debate. Your assertion simply does not follow logically, Thersites. It. Doesn't.
In the play A Man For All Seasons, Thomas More says to his future son-in-law William Roper something like "Yes, I would give the devil the benefit of law for my own safety's sake."
And this is not a question of law, but of whether or not Pipes is to be held accountable for his rhetorical slipperiness on the specific question of internment. Apparently, you do not think so, and also seem to believe that there is something heroic in this, particularly if it involves the tremendous moral fortitude it takes to brave a hiostile comments section on an anoymous blog. Both of these propositions are silly.
In the play A Man For All Seasons, Thomas More says to his future son-in-law William Roper something like "Yes, I would give the devil the benefit of law for my own safety's sake."
And this is not a question of law, but of whether or not Pipes is to be held accountable for his rhetorical slipperiness on the specific question of internment. Apparently, you do not think so, and also seem to believe that there is something heroic in this, particularly if it involves the tremendous moral fortitude it takes to brave a hiostile comments section on an anoymous blog. Both of these propositions are silly.
I'm on the side of reason here. A valid logical point was made. I defended it.
But why don't you and your friend Paul go around defending what I have actually said, which is that I don't hate blacks or Jews at all.
I'm only standing up for the rights of white people. You do monitor leftist websites for anybody who might fail to see the nuances in my position, right?
I actually admire Jews. They stand up for their own kind. They don't want blacks living in their neighborhoods so why should *we* be any different.
I also admire Pipes. He's rightfully pointing out that Western Civilization is in trouble from immigration and on that issue I support him.
All I know is I'm glad he have guy like Paul in my corner.
Paul, you rock dude.
I'm on the side of reason here. A valid logical point was made. I defended it.
But why don't you and your friend Paul go around defending what I have actually said, which is that I don't hate blacks or Jews at all.
I'm only standing up for the rights of white people. You do monitor leftist websites for anybody who might fail to see the nuances in my position, right?
I actually admire Jews. They stand up for their own kind. They don't want blacks living in their neighborhoods so why should *we* be any different.
I also admire Pipes. He's rightfully pointing out that Western Civilization is in trouble from immigration and on that issue I support him.
All I know is I'm glad he have guy like Paul in my corner.
Paul, you rock dude.
It is illogical to extend that defense to a defense of what Pipes wrote.
No. It. Isn't. Because. It. Involves. Denying. That. Pipes. Leaves. The door. Open. To. The. Possibility. Of. Internment. Which is. Morally reprehensible.
It is illogical to extend that defense to a defense of what Pipes wrote.
No. It. Isn't. Because. It. Involves. Denying. That. Pipes. Leaves. The door. Open. To. The. Possibility. Of. Internment. Which is. Morally reprehensible.
Popping by to wish a Happy New Year to you all... Except you America's Memory/Pinkie Green... yes, it's obvious to me you are still here, you obsessional fuckwit... You can just go crawl off and die. It is, after all, the only reason you have for going out today anyway... No New Year Party for you again, eh?
But honestly Eschaton guys and galls, can't you spot it's him again...? Michelle Malkin threads always bring him out even worse than usual, and he's almost action for action repeating the last one I got him to gloriously crash and burn on; Multiple trolling identities, pretending to be different people, but eventually merging into the same arguments as he loses track of what he's said as who... Hell, all he's changed since I stopped coming here regularily is that he's now posing as TWO supposedly sane but brand new posters, as well as the lunatic one. And they are all, as usual, the only ones positively responding to each other... He's a true one trick pony, who thinks repeating the trick over and over is the same as learning new ones.
And why haven't any of you pointed out what Michelle Malkins book is actually titled?. You know, the author Pipes defends, the one who wrote "In Defense Of Internment"? He's been blathering on insanely for ages, and you could have cut him off right from the start...
Cheebus, now I'd have gotten him to attack his own argument by now, and then collapse into complete insane rage... instead you guys don't even seem to realise that it's just the same old obsessional fool. Well, apart from our gracious host, who nobbled one point of his deranged triangle of weasalry much, 300 odd posts ago. And if that wasn't a clue as to who was off his meds again, I don't know what is!
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to help the brand new Incognito move to Canada. Yes, he's really going in 2005. Really. He said so. He's all packed and ready to go. Honesty...
Well, until next time then, when ever that might be...
*wanders off sighing*
Popping by to wish a Happy New Year to you all... Except you America's Memory/Pinkie Green... yes, it's obvious to me you are still here, you obsessional fuckwit... You can just go crawl off and die. It is, after all, the only reason you have for going out today anyway... No New Year Party for you again, eh?
But honestly Eschaton guys and galls, can't you spot it's him again...? Michelle Malkin threads always bring him out even worse than usual, and he's almost action for action repeating the last one I got him to gloriously crash and burn on; Multiple trolling identities, pretending to be different people, but eventually merging into the same arguments as he loses track of what he's said as who... Hell, all he's changed since I stopped coming here regularily is that he's now posing as TWO supposedly sane but brand new posters, as well as the lunatic one. And they are all, as usual, the only ones positively responding to each other... He's a true one trick pony, who thinks repeating the trick over and over is the same as learning new ones.
And why haven't any of you pointed out what Michelle Malkins book is actually titled?. You know, the author Pipes defends, the one who wrote "In Defense Of Internment"? He's been blathering on insanely for ages, and you could have cut him off right from the start...
Cheebus, now I'd have gotten him to attack his own argument by now, and then collapse into complete insane rage... instead you guys don't even seem to realise that it's just the same old obsessional fool. Well, apart from our gracious host, who nobbled one point of his deranged triangle of weasalry much, 300 odd posts ago. And if that wasn't a clue as to who was off his meds again, I don't know what is!
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to help the brand new Incognito move to Canada. Yes, he's really going in 2005. Really. He said so. He's all packed and ready to go. Honesty...
Well, until next time then, when ever that might be...
*wanders off sighing*
Thersites, please. What kind of argument are you offering here? It is illogical, and frankly uncalled for. Is this the way you normally argue? You remind me of a conservative on another web site (who called himself Keyser) -- no rationality; just heat.
Since logic appears alien to you, here's something to help you out. Follow the bouncing ball, fella:
One can make a point of logic regardless of whether one agrees with an argument or not.
Said point of logic can be valid regardless of whether the argument in which it is brought up is good, bad, or otherwise.
In bringing up said point of logic, the person who does so may, or may not be validating or invalidating the argument.
To date, you have shown me little in the way of rational thought. You make leaps of logic that breathtaking in their scope ("you are not on the side of the angels, etc."), and assumptions concocted out of whole cloth ("Pipes is to be held accountable for his rhetorical slipperiness on the specific question of internment. Apparently, you do not think so, and also seem to believe that there is something heroic in this"). You, sir, are as obtuse as Keyser, and just as irrational.
Thersites, please. What kind of argument are you offering here? It is illogical, and frankly uncalled for. Is this the way you normally argue? You remind me of a conservative on another web site (who called himself Keyser) -- no rationality; just heat.
Since logic appears alien to you, here's something to help you out. Follow the bouncing ball, fella:
One can make a point of logic regardless of whether one agrees with an argument or not.
Said point of logic can be valid regardless of whether the argument in which it is brought up is good, bad, or otherwise.
In bringing up said point of logic, the person who does so may, or may not be validating or invalidating the argument.
To date, you have shown me little in the way of rational thought. You make leaps of logic that breathtaking in their scope ("you are not on the side of the angels, etc."), and assumptions concocted out of whole cloth ("Pipes is to be held accountable for his rhetorical slipperiness on the specific question of internment. Apparently, you do not think so, and also seem to believe that there is something heroic in this"). You, sir, are as obtuse as Keyser, and just as irrational.
Thersites, here is what I said, " in the examples I offer above; rather I seek to equate the principle that one can defend something unpopular because, as in this case, it is true."
It's not the law I was pointing out; it is the principle of defending something unpopular. As I said before, you are obtuse.
Thersites, here is what I said, " in the examples I offer above; rather I seek to equate the principle that one can defend something unpopular because, as in this case, it is true."
It's not the law I was pointing out; it is the principle of defending something unpopular. As I said before, you are obtuse.
America's Nemesis - Missed you! Happy New Year, and come back, please.
America's Nemesis - Missed you! Happy New Year, and come back, please.
Thersites obtuse? Oh boy...
Thersites obtuse? Oh boy...
Yeah, Tena, how dare I think that a statement such as ""Pipes is to be held accountable for his rhetorical slipperiness on the specific question of internment. Apparently, you do not think so, and also seem to believe that there is something heroic in this" is illogical, irrational and obtuse? Oh boy, indeed.
Yeah, Tena, how dare I think that a statement such as ""Pipes is to be held accountable for his rhetorical slipperiness on the specific question of internment. Apparently, you do not think so, and also seem to believe that there is something heroic in this" is illogical, irrational and obtuse? Oh boy, indeed.
I'm not finding you the sharpest tool in the shed either, though it is clear you enjoy preening yourself on your highmindedness. Your skin is also pretty damn thin. If my identity were as tied as yours seems to be at following some Bloggerly Code of the Rhetorically Righteous, I'd point out that you were the one who went to personal insult first, declare victory, and stick my tongue out at you.
Now, take notes. The specific issue at hand is whether or not Cole was doing something outrageous in saying that Pipes supports internment. You take the line that the ref should throw a flag at Cole for a flagrant personal foul. Very well. Yes, technically Pipes does not say that he supports internment. I say, this is not a fucking game and it is perfectly fair to state that Pipes gives every reason in the world to believe that he does in fact support internment. Indeed, I say that his coyness about internment is morally reprehensible in its own specially noxious way. But you would still stand there and point to the yellow flag on the turf, shaking your head and saying, "no, technically, we cannot draw this pretty obvious inference." You also think you are Sir Thomas Fucking More for insisting upon only allowing the validity of a technical accuracy and not the reality of what Pipes is saying or doing.
I'm not finding you the sharpest tool in the shed either, though it is clear you enjoy preening yourself on your highmindedness. Your skin is also pretty damn thin. If my identity were as tied as yours seems to be at following some Bloggerly Code of the Rhetorically Righteous, I'd point out that you were the one who went to personal insult first, declare victory, and stick my tongue out at you.
Now, take notes. The specific issue at hand is whether or not Cole was doing something outrageous in saying that Pipes supports internment. You take the line that the ref should throw a flag at Cole for a flagrant personal foul. Very well. Yes, technically Pipes does not say that he supports internment. I say, this is not a fucking game and it is perfectly fair to state that Pipes gives every reason in the world to believe that he does in fact support internment. Indeed, I say that his coyness about internment is morally reprehensible in its own specially noxious way. But you would still stand there and point to the yellow flag on the turf, shaking your head and saying, "no, technically, we cannot draw this pretty obvious inference." You also think you are Sir Thomas Fucking More for insisting upon only allowing the validity of a technical accuracy and not the reality of what Pipes is saying or doing.
Amigo, your attempts at being logical with the Eschaton Peanut Gallery is noble, but ultimately doomed.
Remember: This is just a Blue FreeRepublic.
Logic is lost on them, and misunderstanding is cherished.
Paul is right. You should start a blog, but your efforts here, while futile in terms of educating Eschatonians, serves a greater purpose and is therefore appreciated by some.
Amigo, your attempts at being logical with the Eschaton Peanut Gallery is noble, but ultimately doomed.
Remember: This is just a Blue FreeRepublic.
Logic is lost on them, and misunderstanding is cherished.
Paul is right. You should start a blog, but your efforts here, while futile in terms of educating Eschatonians, serves a greater purpose and is therefore appreciated by some.
Oh boy, indeed.
Amigo
I had you pegged for a fuckwit at first reading a couple of hours ago, and nothing i have read since has altered my opinion. As I have absolutely no regard for your opinion of me, one way or the other, i feel no compunction about urging you enthusiastically to go fuck yourself...
Oh boy, indeed.
Amigo
I had you pegged for a fuckwit at first reading a couple of hours ago, and nothing i have read since has altered my opinion. As I have absolutely no regard for your opinion of me, one way or the other, i feel no compunction about urging you enthusiastically to go fuck yourself...
Fine, Thersites. Now take notes yourself.
!) I said that Verhoeven's and Cumberland's point was a fair one logically. It is. You can't deny it.
2) This is no "penalty flag" on Cole because;
3)I also told franklyO that "It's pretty hard not to draw said inference after reading what Pipes wrote... which is why I said that it's easy to make the link. If one approves its use then, it's likely one would approve it now." And,
4) "which is why I can understand how Atrios and others here can readily see the link between a defense of an argument that internment camps were proper in World War II with the possibility of advocating their use in the near future.".
So, Thersites, all that you claim I did, I didn't.
More logic for you:
to make a point of logic doesn't necessarily imply criticism of someone (Coles, in this case).
And to make a point of logic is not to lose sight of the argument, or to play a game.
You're hung up on Pipes. Fine. I don't blame you for feeling as you do about him. I feel the same way. In fact, I've taken issue with some of his previous inflammatory points with the man himself.
Now, I don't care whether you, Tena, or anyone else here believes me when I say this. Irrelevant. But if you're going to argue with me, argue using reason and logic, and avoid making leaps of logic and false assumptions. Those are the tactics of irrational people. And, obtuse ones, too.
Fine, Thersites. Now take notes yourself.
!) I said that Verhoeven's and Cumberland's point was a fair one logically. It is. You can't deny it.
2) This is no "penalty flag" on Cole because;
3)I also told franklyO that "It's pretty hard not to draw said inference after reading what Pipes wrote... which is why I said that it's easy to make the link. If one approves its use then, it's likely one would approve it now." And,
4) "which is why I can understand how Atrios and others here can readily see the link between a defense of an argument that internment camps were proper in World War II with the possibility of advocating their use in the near future.".
So, Thersites, all that you claim I did, I didn't.
More logic for you:
to make a point of logic doesn't necessarily imply criticism of someone (Coles, in this case).
And to make a point of logic is not to lose sight of the argument, or to play a game.
You're hung up on Pipes. Fine. I don't blame you for feeling as you do about him. I feel the same way. In fact, I've taken issue with some of his previous inflammatory points with the man himself.
Now, I don't care whether you, Tena, or anyone else here believes me when I say this. Irrelevant. But if you're going to argue with me, argue using reason and logic, and avoid making leaps of logic and false assumptions. Those are the tactics of irrational people. And, obtuse ones, too.
In fact, I've taken issue with some of his previous inflammatory points with the man himself.
Dammit. So Paul/Amigo is saying that Pipes is better than me.
I...Resent...That....
Why can't Paul/Amigo be my champion as well?
I'm hurt.
In fact, I've taken issue with some of his previous inflammatory points with the man himself.
Dammit. So Paul/Amigo is saying that Pipes is better than me.
I...Resent...That....
Why can't Paul/Amigo be my champion as well?
I'm hurt.
UBH, I disagree with your words to wit: "This is just a Blue FreeRepublic." I used to comment here frequently and have seen a lot of contributors who argue using their minds instead of their emotions, as is the case here.
But I thank you for your kind words, nonetheless. Usually, the insults and emotion I receive comes form conservatives and the support from liberals. Today it's the other way around -- simply because I said something that was true but unpopular. Life is such. Happy new year.
UBH, I disagree with your words to wit: "This is just a Blue FreeRepublic." I used to comment here frequently and have seen a lot of contributors who argue using their minds instead of their emotions, as is the case here.
But I thank you for your kind words, nonetheless. Usually, the insults and emotion I receive comes form conservatives and the support from liberals. Today it's the other way around -- simply because I said something that was true but unpopular. Life is such. Happy new year.
Okay, the Blue FreeRepublic was a bit of hyperbole...but not by much IMHO.
All of the piss, but none of the vinegar.
Happy New Year.
Okay, the Blue FreeRepublic was a bit of hyperbole...but not by much IMHO.
All of the piss, but none of the vinegar.
Happy New Year.
Paul, I don't recall having debated with you before, but I wish to thank you for your kind words here. I fear that saying this will only be another indicator to some here that I am an undercover right-wing troll. Nevertheless, I am grateful.
Watch out, though, we may be crossing swords in the future...
Amigo | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 4:23 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Amigo, I have no doubt that we disagree on some (many?) issues, just as I'm certain that you'd trounce me if we debated them, so I'll avoid it.
You should have your own blog. I'm not saying that because you agreed with one of my points; you're very disciplined and eloquent in your arguments.
Ah well, I'm off to get drunk. Have fun/be safe.
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 4:26 pm | #
Look at the sentence structure and the paragraphs.
They're the same guy.
Check the IPs.
Paul, I don't recall having debated with you before, but I wish to thank you for your kind words here. I fear that saying this will only be another indicator to some here that I am an undercover right-wing troll. Nevertheless, I am grateful.
Watch out, though, we may be crossing swords in the future...
Amigo | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 4:23 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Amigo, I have no doubt that we disagree on some (many?) issues, just as I'm certain that you'd trounce me if we debated them, so I'll avoid it.
You should have your own blog. I'm not saying that because you agreed with one of my points; you're very disciplined and eloquent in your arguments.
Ah well, I'm off to get drunk. Have fun/be safe.
Paul Verhoeven | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 4:26 pm | #
Look at the sentence structure and the paragraphs.
They're the same guy.
Check the IPs.
Derrida, that was funny.
Derrida, that was funny.
Check the IPs.
Derrida
oy.
Check the IPs.
Derrida
oy.
First sentence of both.
(name) (independent clause that nevertheless implies the next clause) (conjunction) (clause)
Exact same structure.
Look at the last sentence of each.
(watch our) or (Ah well), clause. Sentence.
Exact same guy.
Troll status is thus confirmed.
First sentence of both.
(name) (independent clause that nevertheless implies the next clause) (conjunction) (clause)
Exact same structure.
Look at the last sentence of each.
(watch our) or (Ah well), clause. Sentence.
Exact same guy.
Troll status is thus confirmed.
You're hung up on Pipes
You mean, I'm hung up on the topic of the thread? Gosh, I am WAY out of line.
I said that Verhoeven's and Cumberland's point was a fair one logically. It is. You can't deny it.
You came late to the thread and seem a bit confused about what the team you just signed up for has actually been saying.
I never denied that they had a "point." Nobody else did either. I've been saying that they have glommed on to something that is "technically true" and have used it to have deny something that is obviously true.
Let's look at some of your boys' posts:
It's my understanding that Malkin is arguing for racial profiling, not for modern-day internment.
Atrios, no one has advocated internment of Muslims, not Malkin, not Pipes.
I didn't see where Pipes advocated the internment of Muslim Americans in the article.
You're hung up on Pipes
You mean, I'm hung up on the topic of the thread? Gosh, I am WAY out of line.
I said that Verhoeven's and Cumberland's point was a fair one logically. It is. You can't deny it.
You came late to the thread and seem a bit confused about what the team you just signed up for has actually been saying.
I never denied that they had a "point." Nobody else did either. I've been saying that they have glommed on to something that is "technically true" and have used it to have deny something that is obviously true.
Let's look at some of your boys' posts:
It's my understanding that Malkin is arguing for racial profiling, not for modern-day internment.
Atrios, no one has advocated internment of Muslims, not Malkin, not Pipes.
I didn't see where Pipes advocated the internment of Muslim Americans in the article.
Epimenides:
"This statement is false." --Eubilides
Epimenides:
"This statement is false." --Eubilides
As I have absolutely no regard for your opinion of me, one way or the other, i feel no compunction about urging you enthusiastically to go fuck yourself...
Weren't you ignoring him/her/us four or five hours ago? Nothing sillier than overwrought soliloquies about how little you care what we think.
*rolling eyes like Regan in the Exorcist*
As I have absolutely no regard for your opinion of me, one way or the other, i feel no compunction about urging you enthusiastically to go fuck yourself...
Weren't you ignoring him/her/us four or five hours ago? Nothing sillier than overwrought soliloquies about how little you care what we think.
*rolling eyes like Regan in the Exorcist*
Hence, Amigo, if you can concede that you missed a good deal of the context of an argument you walked into late, I'll concede that I overstated your position. I hope you can see where I was coming from though, because I most certainly did have reasons for saying what I have said about the stance taken by these two commenters, which I will continue to insist is basically dishonest.
Hence, Amigo, if you can concede that you missed a good deal of the context of an argument you walked into late, I'll concede that I overstated your position. I hope you can see where I was coming from though, because I most certainly did have reasons for saying what I have said about the stance taken by these two commenters, which I will continue to insist is basically dishonest.
"atrios" you are such an idiot.
Why don't you go and actually read Pipe's damn column? Cole was lying his head off about it and now you have his egg on your face.
Sheesh.
"atrios" you are such an idiot.
Why don't you go and actually read Pipe's damn column? Cole was lying his head off about it and now you have his egg on your face.
Sheesh.
Pipe's damn column
Who is Daniel Pipe? Porn star?
Pipe's damn column
Who is Daniel Pipe? Porn star?
Pipes is one of these raving Nazis making money like a mint because he's attacking the "right" target, and if people actually grow to understand this instead of just hearing that he's an academic with abbreviations after his name, maybe something good will be accomplished.
Pipes is one of these raving Nazis making money like a mint because he's attacking the "right" target, and if people actually grow to understand this instead of just hearing that he's an academic with abbreviations after his name, maybe something good will be accomplished.
When I said you're hung up on Pipes, Thersites, I was referring to your complaints about what I wrote.
Look, I'm not defending Paul Verhoeven or anyone else -- he isn't "my guy." To assume that he is is to make another false assumption (you're full of them today, aren't you?).
Logically, he is correct: Pipes didn't advocate internment in the article in question. That doesn't mean he isn't leaving the door open to just such a thing in the future (which is why I agreed with franklyO), but it can't be argued logically that he is advocating internment. We can suspect it (Icertainly do), we may even choose to predict it will happen, but within the boundaries of reason and logic, we can't assert it as fact. Which is why all of your sound and fury directed against me on this issue is nothing else but sound and fury, spurred by your irrational anger at me for daring to say that their point was valid.
Argue reason, Thersites -- don't assume that because someone says something, they are either this, that, or the other. Therein lies the territory of the propagandist. It's because people generally don't use logic or reason that the Rove propaganda machine has proven so successful to date.
If it were in my power, I would mandate that the basic principles of reason and logic be a part of the regular curriculum. Then people would be less likely to respond emotionally and to make false assumptions.
I've seen reason and logic employed here before on this site, and I expect I'll see it again. But your comments today don't fit in that category and neither do those of some of your supporters.
When I said you're hung up on Pipes, Thersites, I was referring to your complaints about what I wrote.
Look, I'm not defending Paul Verhoeven or anyone else -- he isn't "my guy." To assume that he is is to make another false assumption (you're full of them today, aren't you?).
Logically, he is correct: Pipes didn't advocate internment in the article in question. That doesn't mean he isn't leaving the door open to just such a thing in the future (which is why I agreed with franklyO), but it can't be argued logically that he is advocating internment. We can suspect it (Icertainly do), we may even choose to predict it will happen, but within the boundaries of reason and logic, we can't assert it as fact. Which is why all of your sound and fury directed against me on this issue is nothing else but sound and fury, spurred by your irrational anger at me for daring to say that their point was valid.
Argue reason, Thersites -- don't assume that because someone says something, they are either this, that, or the other. Therein lies the territory of the propagandist. It's because people generally don't use logic or reason that the Rove propaganda machine has proven so successful to date.
If it were in my power, I would mandate that the basic principles of reason and logic be a part of the regular curriculum. Then people would be less likely to respond emotionally and to make false assumptions.
I've seen reason and logic employed here before on this site, and I expect I'll see it again. But your comments today don't fit in that category and neither do those of some of your supporters.
"logic" & "reason" = singing HaTikvah at attention, wrapped in one flag and standing on another
"logic" & "reason" = singing HaTikvah at attention, wrapped in one flag and standing on another
FROM PIPES' WEBSITE
Dec. 29, 2004 update: The response to this column prompts two clarifying comments from me: (1) I am encouraged by the results of the Cornell survey because it means that many Americans understand the need to focus on the segment of the population that is engaged in Islamist activities; I do not specifically endorse its notion of Muslims having to register their whereabouts.
(2) I raised the subject of the Japanese internment because it "still matters" in its influence on the U.S. public debate, and not because I advocate the internment of anyone today.
Can we please put this dumb thread to bed now??
FROM PIPES' WEBSITE
Dec. 29, 2004 update: The response to this column prompts two clarifying comments from me: (1) I am encouraged by the results of the Cornell survey because it means that many Americans understand the need to focus on the segment of the population that is engaged in Islamist activities; I do not specifically endorse its notion of Muslims having to register their whereabouts.
(2) I raised the subject of the Japanese internment because it "still matters" in its influence on the U.S. public debate, and not because I advocate the internment of anyone today.
Can we please put this dumb thread to bed now??
You can insist on their dishonesty all you want, Thersites -- you seem to be more familiar with them than I. And, believe me, when I tell you I have the greatest sympathy for your stance against Pipes. My only point was that their point here was a valid one.
I'll tell you what: I will retract my derogatory statements directed against you and apologize for having said them. I went too far. I won't do that again.
Happy New Year, Thersites. I hope we can find our way to become allies in the future -- because unbeknownst to you I am on your side.
You can insist on their dishonesty all you want, Thersites -- you seem to be more familiar with them than I. And, believe me, when I tell you I have the greatest sympathy for your stance against Pipes. My only point was that their point here was a valid one.
I'll tell you what: I will retract my derogatory statements directed against you and apologize for having said them. I went too far. I won't do that again.
Happy New Year, Thersites. I hope we can find our way to become allies in the future -- because unbeknownst to you I am on your side.
He used "Islamist activities" in a way that would never work (or should never) for "Jewish activities" or "African activities," and exactly who can get away with saying they didn't advocate or endorse rounding up the blood-sucking knife-sharpeners per se, they just brought it up because it's so germaine? The first and most consistent thing you come across in Nazi policy history besides sociopathic brutality is exactly this lawyerly mincing over what exactly was said at exactly what time.
Even in a "cap" to the thread, the rightist ilk can't resist getting in a few cheap shots at the brown mass that's gonna swallow us all.
WAKE UP WHITE PEOPLE! [White] Jews are your friends, and they're not even sticking around now that they have their own Heimat!
He used "Islamist activities" in a way that would never work (or should never) for "Jewish activities" or "African activities," and exactly who can get away with saying they didn't advocate or endorse rounding up the blood-sucking knife-sharpeners per se, they just brought it up because it's so germaine? The first and most consistent thing you come across in Nazi policy history besides sociopathic brutality is exactly this lawyerly mincing over what exactly was said at exactly what time.
Even in a "cap" to the thread, the rightist ilk can't resist getting in a few cheap shots at the brown mass that's gonna swallow us all.
WAKE UP WHITE PEOPLE! [White] Jews are your friends, and they're not even sticking around now that they have their own Heimat!
Amigo, nobody here likes Pipes. Everyone agrees he's a douche. The question was whether it was fair to imagine Pipes advocates rounding up Muslims for internment because he doesn't deny it in the cited editorial (though he does on his webpage). Also whether Malkin wants the same thing, though she too denies it on her web page. Basically an excuse for the regulars to get in a lather over something they might have cleared up by reading a primary source for a change. Quelle surprise.
Amigo, nobody here likes Pipes. Everyone agrees he's a douche. The question was whether it was fair to imagine Pipes advocates rounding up Muslims for internment because he doesn't deny it in the cited editorial (though he does on his webpage). Also whether Malkin wants the same thing, though she too denies it on her web page. Basically an excuse for the regulars to get in a lather over something they might have cleared up by reading a primary source for a change. Quelle surprise.
Amigo, ixnay on the hombre: motherfucker said "camps" and all of a sudden he gets a second chance to clarify what he said because of what wine-tasting he goes to. Teach a course at Columbia and you get dragged through the mud, keep your sights on the right people and you'll never lose.
Amigo, ixnay on the hombre: motherfucker said "camps" and all of a sudden he gets a second chance to clarify what he said because of what wine-tasting he goes to. Teach a course at Columbia and you get dragged through the mud, keep your sights on the right people and you'll never lose.
Teach a course at Columbia and you get dragged through the mud,
Voice of experience? News flash: tenured Columbia profs say worse shit than Pipes does every day of every week. Sounds like you know all about it, though.
Teach a course at Columbia and you get dragged through the mud,
Voice of experience? News flash: tenured Columbia profs say worse shit than Pipes does every day of every week. Sounds like you know all about it, though.
Columbia profs say worse shit than Pipes does every day of every week.
You mean there are Columbia professors who advocate interning muslims in camps and say it directly?
Which ones?
Columbia profs say worse shit than Pipes does every day of every week.
You mean there are Columbia professors who advocate interning muslims in camps and say it directly?
Which ones?
"The Jews are not a nation.…The Jewish state is a racist state that does not have a right to exist."
While you hair split about an existential threat!
"The Jews are not a nation.…The Jewish state is a racist state that does not have a right to exist."
While you hair split about an existential threat!
Derrida, I know up is down and right is wrong in deconstructo-land, but Pipes himself denies saying or believing any such thing. My quote is ACCURATE.
Derrida, I know up is down and right is wrong in deconstructo-land, but Pipes himself denies saying or believing any such thing. My quote is ACCURATE.
So criticizing the Israeli government is racist and advocating locking up Muslims is a nuanced position that requires openmindedness?
OK. That clears up where you're coming from.
So criticizing the Israeli government is racist and advocating locking up Muslims is a nuanced position that requires openmindedness?
OK. That clears up where you're coming from.
There is no escaping the unfortunate fact that Muslim government employees in law enforcement, the military, and the diplomatic corps need to be watched for connections to terrorism, as do Muslim chaplains in prisons and the armed forces. Muslim visitors and immigrants must undergo additional background checks. Mosques require a scrutiny beyond that applied to churches, synagogues, and temples. Muslim schools require increased oversight to ascertain what is being taught to children.
--Daniel Pipes, Jerusalem Post, Jan 22, 2003. p.9 here
See how he's looking out for Rudolph, McVeigh, Atomic Dog, et al? Nothing sinister about using religion as the criterion for general suspicion, nothing to blow up in a Jew's face at all.
There is no escaping the unfortunate fact that Muslim government employees in law enforcement, the military, and the diplomatic corps need to be watched for connections to terrorism, as do Muslim chaplains in prisons and the armed forces. Muslim visitors and immigrants must undergo additional background checks. Mosques require a scrutiny beyond that applied to churches, synagogues, and temples. Muslim schools require increased oversight to ascertain what is being taught to children.
--Daniel Pipes, Jerusalem Post, Jan 22, 2003. p.9 here
See how he's looking out for Rudolph, McVeigh, Atomic Dog, et al? Nothing sinister about using religion as the criterion for general suspicion, nothing to blow up in a Jew's face at all.
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Derrida, I know up is down and right is wrong in deconstructo-land, but Pipes himself denies saying or believing any such thing. My quote is ACCURATE.
Somehow I'm betting "Marjory" isn't quite as "nuanced" about Noam Chomsky as she is about Pipes.
Just a guess.
Why is it wrong to say the Israeli government is "racist" btw?
Why is criticizing a government out of bounds?
The government of Mississippi was racist in 1960. The New Jersey state police had a racist policy of profiling blacks in the 1990s.
Why is pointing out the racism of the Israeli government (and they do have a law on the books denying citizenship to Arabs who marry Israeli Arabs)?
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Derrida, I know up is down and right is wrong in deconstructo-land, but Pipes himself denies saying or believing any such thing. My quote is ACCURATE.
Somehow I'm betting "Marjory" isn't quite as "nuanced" about Noam Chomsky as she is about Pipes.
Just a guess.
Why is it wrong to say the Israeli government is "racist" btw?
Why is criticizing a government out of bounds?
The government of Mississippi was racist in 1960. The New Jersey state police had a racist policy of profiling blacks in the 1990s.
Why is pointing out the racism of the Israeli government (and they do have a law on the books denying citizenship to Arabs who marry Israeli Arabs)?
Interesting tidbit: Joseph Massad speaks not one word of Hebrew, while even the vile Pipes is fluent in Arabic. Telling.
Interesting tidbit: Joseph Massad speaks not one word of Hebrew, while even the vile Pipes is fluent in Arabic. Telling.
Marjory, why do you think it's "anti-semitic" to say that the Israeli government is, in some ways, "racist".
Isn't that just a statement of fact.
Marjory, why do you think it's "anti-semitic" to say that the Israeli government is, in some ways, "racist".
Isn't that just a statement of fact.
locking up Muslims is a nuanced position that requires openmindedness?
Dipshit, saying it over and over again like dorothy does not make it so....
And massad's not just saying its racist, he's saying it has no right to exist!
locking up Muslims is a nuanced position that requires openmindedness?
Dipshit, saying it over and over again like dorothy does not make it so....
And massad's not just saying its racist, he's saying it has no right to exist!
And massad's not just saying its racist, he's saying it has no right to exist!
Marjory Stewart-Baxter | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 7:19 pm | #
He's saying it has "no right to exist" as an apartheid state.
It doesn't mean he hates Jews.
The government of Mississppi in 1964 had "no right to exist" as an apartheid state.
Funny how you lose your sense of nuance.
And massad's not just saying its racist, he's saying it has no right to exist!
Marjory Stewart-Baxter | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 7:19 pm | #
He's saying it has "no right to exist" as an apartheid state.
It doesn't mean he hates Jews.
The government of Mississppi in 1964 had "no right to exist" as an apartheid state.
Funny how you lose your sense of nuance.
I mean, I'm just asking you to apply the same hairspiting sense of "nuance" to everybody.
To critics of Israel as well as to Pipes.
But you won't because you're a hypocrite.
I mean, I'm just asking you to apply the same hairspiting sense of "nuance" to everybody.
To critics of Israel as well as to Pipes.
But you won't because you're a hypocrite.
Marjory really is a worthless piece of lying Nazi Shit: not only does Massad teach part of his class around Hebrew readings, the most entertaining part of his recent complaint centers around the famous ignorance of the Fearful about Hebrew. A rightist student of his conflated zayin (cock) with Tsion (what we call Zion).
So there's two Hebrew words Massad knows for you to suck on, Marj Bat Zona!
Marjory really is a worthless piece of lying Nazi Shit: not only does Massad teach part of his class around Hebrew readings, the most entertaining part of his recent complaint centers around the famous ignorance of the Fearful about Hebrew. A rightist student of his conflated zayin (cock) with Tsion (what we call Zion).
So there's two Hebrew words Massad knows for you to suck on, Marj Bat Zona!
He is saying the Jewish state has no right to be a jewish state, that the idea of a jewish state is racist, and perhaps you agree with him !
... and slippery k/y makes noises about existential threats. I wont hold my breath waiting for atrios to post a joseph massad thread, btw.
He is saying the Jewish state has no right to be a jewish state, that the idea of a jewish state is racist, and perhaps you agree with him !
... and slippery k/y makes noises about existential threats. I wont hold my breath waiting for atrios to post a joseph massad thread, btw.
He is saying the Jewish state has no right to be a jewish state, that the idea of a jewish state is racist, and perhaps you agree with him !
It doesn't. Jews who were born in Israel have every right to live there and practice their religion but do not have the right to a state that favors their relgion over Islam or Christianity.
That's racist by very definition (well, not necessarily racist but certainly not Democratic).
It's not "racist" to advocate that Israel become a secular state with a separation of religion and the state (just like the United States).
It doesn't mean "driving the Jews into the sea".
It only means equal citizenship for Jews and non Jews.
But you miss that nuance don't you?
He is saying the Jewish state has no right to be a jewish state, that the idea of a jewish state is racist, and perhaps you agree with him !
It doesn't. Jews who were born in Israel have every right to live there and practice their religion but do not have the right to a state that favors their relgion over Islam or Christianity.
That's racist by very definition (well, not necessarily racist but certainly not Democratic).
It's not "racist" to advocate that Israel become a secular state with a separation of religion and the state (just like the United States).
It doesn't mean "driving the Jews into the sea".
It only means equal citizenship for Jews and non Jews.
But you miss that nuance don't you?
At least we're off the topic of whether Pipes wants to intern Muslims when he has said he doesn't. Now we're on the more interesting topic of why Israel has a right to exist, only as a non-Jewish state. thats progress.
Pay attention "2-state" atrios denizens: in massad land all Zionists ('revisionist' and otherwise) are filthy racist pigs.
At least we're off the topic of whether Pipes wants to intern Muslims when he has said he doesn't. Now we're on the more interesting topic of why Israel has a right to exist, only as a non-Jewish state. thats progress.
Pay attention "2-state" atrios denizens: in massad land all Zionists ('revisionist' and otherwise) are filthy racist pigs.
And Pipes being "fluent in Arabic" set off alarm bells: there were hundreds of Americans, really all of them spending time longer than a vacation in Japan, who claimed fluency that in reality wouldn't bring a katsu to their dinner table, largely because there exists no standard or way of checking unless you're "fluent" yourself. Juan Cole recently mentioned being at a party with a neoke who claimed (hell, he still does claim) fluency in Farsi but who couldn't get through two words (Juan actually lived in that part of the world for a while). And of course Condi is supposedly a genius in Kremlinology, including the fluent Russian that used to mean so much (for Larry Hagman in Fail Safe, eg).
Given their honesty elsewhere we have a feeling that if any standard were imposed a lot of people would admit that serious, inevitable obligations to their Country made them awfully rusty...
And Pipes being "fluent in Arabic" set off alarm bells: there were hundreds of Americans, really all of them spending time longer than a vacation in Japan, who claimed fluency that in reality wouldn't bring a katsu to their dinner table, largely because there exists no standard or way of checking unless you're "fluent" yourself. Juan Cole recently mentioned being at a party with a neoke who claimed (hell, he still does claim) fluency in Farsi but who couldn't get through two words (Juan actually lived in that part of the world for a while). And of course Condi is supposedly a genius in Kremlinology, including the fluent Russian that used to mean so much (for Larry Hagman in Fail Safe, eg).
Given their honesty elsewhere we have a feeling that if any standard were imposed a lot of people would admit that serious, inevitable obligations to their Country made them awfully rusty...
derrida also wants to boycott the UK until it disestablishes, as well as the 60-odd other countries with actual official religions (unlike Israel which has none.) HAH!
derrida also wants to boycott the UK until it disestablishes, as well as the 60-odd other countries with actual official religions (unlike Israel which has none.) HAH!
Marj Bat Zona, think fast: does any "Christian state" have a right to exist, or should it seek to become secular, pluralistic and tolerant? Any Muslim state?
Marj Bat Zona, think fast: does any "Christian state" have a right to exist, or should it seek to become secular, pluralistic and tolerant? Any Muslim state?
No. What we're arguing for is the maintenance of the United States as a secular state that's as fair to Muslims as it is to Christians and Jews.
Pipes is suggesting that Muslims should have fewer rights under the law than non-Muslims.
That's where you're slippery slope lies. Even if he's not advocating interning Muslims, he's certainly advocating stricter measures of surveillance against them than Christians.
And that violates the First Amendment and the establishment clause.
No. What we're arguing for is the maintenance of the United States as a secular state that's as fair to Muslims as it is to Christians and Jews.
Pipes is suggesting that Muslims should have fewer rights under the law than non-Muslims.
That's where you're slippery slope lies. Even if he's not advocating interning Muslims, he's certainly advocating stricter measures of surveillance against them than Christians.
And that violates the First Amendment and the establishment clause.
It doesn't. Jews who were born in Israel have every right to live there
Ahh so perhaps refugees born in the West Bank don't? Or they do, cause they're not Jews, they're Arabs ?
It doesn't. Jews who were born in Israel have every right to live there
Ahh so perhaps refugees born in the West Bank don't? Or they do, cause they're not Jews, they're Arabs ?
kei & yuri I dont have a bug up my ass about the fact that the queen of england is coronated in a cathedral by a christian bishop, no. And neither do you.
kei & yuri I dont have a bug up my ass about the fact that the queen of england is coronated in a cathedral by a christian bishop, no. And neither do you.
derrida also wants to boycott the UK until it disestablishes, as well as the 60-odd other countries with actual official religions (unlike Israel which has none.) HAH!
As far as I knew the UK doesn't discriminate against Catholics any more, but if it still did, I'd advocate boycotting it.
As far as I know the UK doesn't have a law like this on the books.
Components of the law also include the following:
• Palestinians will be excluded from obtaining citizenship or residency. Anyone else who marries an Israeli will be entitled to Israeli citizenship.
• Israeli Arabs who marry Palestinians from the West Bank or Gaza Strip will either have to move to the occupied territories, or live apart from their husband or wife.
• Children of these unions will also be affected: from the age of 12 they will be denied citizenship or residency and forced to move out of Israel. The statute is a direct reversal of one of the provisions of the ten-year old Oslo Agreement, which allowed family reunions for Arabs inside Israel. In fact, many marriages of Palestinian Arabs with Israeli Arabs did occur. In practice, the Palestinian spouse was automatically eligible for Israeli citizenship and it was understood that Israeli citizenship would be denied in only very extreme cases.
derrida also wants to boycott the UK until it disestablishes, as well as the 60-odd other countries with actual official religions (unlike Israel which has none.) HAH!
As far as I knew the UK doesn't discriminate against Catholics any more, but if it still did, I'd advocate boycotting it.
As far as I know the UK doesn't have a law like this on the books.
Components of the law also include the following:
• Palestinians will be excluded from obtaining citizenship or residency. Anyone else who marries an Israeli will be entitled to Israeli citizenship.
• Israeli Arabs who marry Palestinians from the West Bank or Gaza Strip will either have to move to the occupied territories, or live apart from their husband or wife.
• Children of these unions will also be affected: from the age of 12 they will be denied citizenship or residency and forced to move out of Israel. The statute is a direct reversal of one of the provisions of the ten-year old Oslo Agreement, which allowed family reunions for Arabs inside Israel. In fact, many marriages of Palestinian Arabs with Israeli Arabs did occur. In practice, the Palestinian spouse was automatically eligible for Israeli citizenship and it was understood that Israeli citizenship would be denied in only very extreme cases.
finland, denmark, iceland, norway, fascist theocracies I say!!!
finland, denmark, iceland, norway, fascist theocracies I say!!!
The queen of england is anything but a figurehead, regularly kills innocent people and especially aid workers, forces Catholics to self-identify by ghettoization, immigration-style labor practices approaching slavery and special color-coded license plates? Really? Biz is doing that?
The queen of england is anything but a figurehead, regularly kills innocent people and especially aid workers, forces Catholics to self-identify by ghettoization, immigration-style labor practices approaching slavery and special color-coded license plates? Really? Biz is doing that?
Is a Lutheran from the United States entitled to automatic Swedish citizenship?
Didn't think so Marjory.
Is a Italian Catholic from the United States entitled to automatic Italian citizenship and (thus) EU citizenship.
Didn't think so.
Is a Lutheran from the United States entitled to automatic Swedish citizenship?
Didn't think so Marjory.
Is a Italian Catholic from the United States entitled to automatic Italian citizenship and (thus) EU citizenship.
Didn't think so.
Irish pregnant women in labor are dying at queenly checkpoints? Really? Do you have any idea how people will look back at you guys?
Irish pregnant women in labor are dying at queenly checkpoints? Really? Do you have any idea how people will look back at you guys?
Wasn't that vandalism dust-up in Sweden about an Israeli artist living there because he's happier and safer there under the golden cross?
Wasn't that vandalism dust-up in Sweden about an Israeli artist living there because he's happier and safer there under the golden cross?
Irish pregnant women in labor are dying at queenly checkpoints? Really? Do you have any idea how people will look back at you guys?
kei & yuri | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 7:38 pm | #
Of course there's no denying that the British government practiced discriminatory policies against the Irish (and other ethnic groups) in the past.
But it's never been considered to be "racism againt Anglo Saxons" to point it out.
Nobody's going to get on a David Horowitz or Daniel Pipes hit list for advocating that the UK get rid of the Queen and adopt a more American or French style separation of church and state.
Irish pregnant women in labor are dying at queenly checkpoints? Really? Do you have any idea how people will look back at you guys?
kei & yuri | Email | Homepage | 12.31.04 - 7:38 pm | #
Of course there's no denying that the British government practiced discriminatory policies against the Irish (and other ethnic groups) in the past.
But it's never been considered to be "racism againt Anglo Saxons" to point it out.
Nobody's going to get on a David Horowitz or Daniel Pipes hit list for advocating that the UK get rid of the Queen and adopt a more American or French style separation of church and state.
There's no denying that past European evil marks the definition of inhumanity, particularly one twelve-year manifestation in particular which does not even need to be named: nevertheless the year is 2004 and we are not talking about Cromwell or the Reconquista or the Corso. Israel, like its former sister and good ally apartheid South Africa, is a zombie Victorian state founded on already outdated in their time Victorian racial ideas by warmed-over Victorian racists. Its citizens deserve the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.
There's no denying that past European evil marks the definition of inhumanity, particularly one twelve-year manifestation in particular which does not even need to be named: nevertheless the year is 2004 and we are not talking about Cromwell or the Reconquista or the Corso. Israel, like its former sister and good ally apartheid South Africa, is a zombie Victorian state founded on already outdated in their time Victorian racial ideas by warmed-over Victorian racists. Its citizens deserve the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.
Its citizens deserve the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.
And Americans deserve to keep their seperation of church and state (whether they want to or not). They owe it to their children.
It would be destructive in the extreme to pass laws that in any way discriminate against a religion thas has as many members as Islam does.
You'd be cripping your childrens ability to deal internationally.
Its citizens deserve the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.
And Americans deserve to keep their seperation of church and state (whether they want to or not). They owe it to their children.
It would be destructive in the extreme to pass laws that in any way discriminate against a religion thas has as many members as Islam does.
You'd be cripping your childrens ability to deal internationally.
Where's Marj?!
Where's Marj?!
Probably calling for reinforcements at LGF.
Probably calling for reinforcements at LGF.
well, we must drink.
There was a time when we read threads here and got frightened that utter unpolished lies (about a certain Middle Eastern country where they speak Hebrew, you know, in their Knesset) were going to be sincerely pronounced...and then believed, without question. The most insidious of these is none in particular but a presumption that certan lines of inquiry equate to the very conspiracy theories that caused the British Government to support Herzl in the first place. It comes from the same people who, seconds after dismissing reasonable questions as appeals for racist mass murder, proceed to parrot the exact canards they just warned against, especially regarding the famous puppeteer and antichrist, George MASSSSSTER Soros, who is even now commanding that we lay off and get tipply.
Anyway, we no longer have that fear. We must go (He likes 'em Asian & in stereo). Happy new year!
well, we must drink.
There was a time when we read threads here and got frightened that utter unpolished lies (about a certain Middle Eastern country where they speak Hebrew, you know, in their Knesset) were going to be sincerely pronounced...and then believed, without question. The most insidious of these is none in particular but a presumption that certan lines of inquiry equate to the very conspiracy theories that caused the British Government to support Herzl in the first place. It comes from the same people who, seconds after dismissing reasonable questions as appeals for racist mass murder, proceed to parrot the exact canards they just warned against, especially regarding the famous puppeteer and antichrist, George MASSSSSTER Soros, who is even now commanding that we lay off and get tipply.
Anyway, we no longer have that fear. We must go (He likes 'em Asian & in stereo). Happy new year!
It would be destructive in the extreme to pass laws that in any way discriminate against a religion thas has as many members as Islam does.
Yes, it would be wrong to protest the 20 odd Islamic republics and threaten them with boycotts. Quite wrong.
It would be destructive in the extreme to pass laws that in any way discriminate against a religion thas has as many members as Islam does.
Yes, it would be wrong to protest the 20 odd Islamic republics and threaten them with boycotts. Quite wrong.
Marjory Stewart-Baxter
AKA Large Marge?
Marjory Stewart-Baxter
AKA Large Marge?
The Pipes article is an outright call for internment. There is no way of nicing it up or making it into something else. It is called "Why the Japanese internment still matters".
Here are the last 3 paragraphs
Malkin has done the singular service of breaking the academic single-note scholarship on a critical subject, cutting through a shabby, stultifying consensus to reveal how, "given what was known and not known at the time," FDR and his staff did the right thing.
She correctly concludes that, especially in time of war, governments should take into account nationality, ethnicity, and religious affiliation in their homeland security policies and engage in what she calls "threat profiling."
These steps may entail bothersome or offensive measures but, she argues, they are preferable to "being incinerated at your office desk by a flaming hijacked plane."
Does it sound like he's talking about or defending Japanese internment here? No, he's defending the idea of internment for people of the same "nationality, ethnicity, and religious affiliation" as those who have hijacked planes.
The Pipes article is an outright call for internment. There is no way of nicing it up or making it into something else. It is called "Why the Japanese internment still matters".
Here are the last 3 paragraphs
Malkin has done the singular service of breaking the academic single-note scholarship on a critical subject, cutting through a shabby, stultifying consensus to reveal how, "given what was known and not known at the time," FDR and his staff did the right thing.
She correctly concludes that, especially in time of war, governments should take into account nationality, ethnicity, and religious affiliation in their homeland security policies and engage in what she calls "threat profiling."
These steps may entail bothersome or offensive measures but, she argues, they are preferable to "being incinerated at your office desk by a flaming hijacked plane."
Does it sound like he's talking about or defending Japanese internment here? No, he's defending the idea of internment for people of the same "nationality, ethnicity, and religious affiliation" as those who have hijacked planes.
Ahh so perhaps refugees born in the West Bank don't? Or they do, cause they're not Jews, they're Arabs ?
Marjory Stewart-Baxter
I would submit that they have MORE right to than said Brooklynite.
Ahh so perhaps refugees born in the West Bank don't? Or they do, cause they're not Jews, they're Arabs ?
Marjory Stewart-Baxter
I would submit that they have MORE right to than said Brooklynite.
I wont hold my breath waiting for atrios to post a joseph massad thread, btw.
Marjory Stewart-Baxter
Why should he? pipes' desire to lock away muslims in THIS country deserves more exposure than massad's statement that zionism is racist and an apartheid israel shouldn't exist.
I wont hold my breath waiting for atrios to post a joseph massad thread, btw.
Marjory Stewart-Baxter
Why should he? pipes' desire to lock away muslims in THIS country deserves more exposure than massad's statement that zionism is racist and an apartheid israel shouldn't exist.
Malkin['s accomplishment is]...cutting through a shabby, stultifying consensus to reveal how, "given what was known and not known at the time," FDR and his staff did the right thing.
wow. there is no way around that.
Malkin['s accomplishment is]...cutting through a shabby, stultifying consensus to reveal how, "given what was known and not known at the time," FDR and his staff did the right thing.
wow. there is no way around that.
There were early internment camps. They are known as reservations.
There were early internment camps. They are known as reservations.
they were concentration camps. they were for concentrating people of interest by ethnicity (or religion, or etc). "concentration camps" actually go back to the spanish in the caribbean, and all the great powers used them in various places. a horse is a horse is a horse, and pipes is a nazi.
they were concentration camps. they were for concentrating people of interest by ethnicity (or religion, or etc). "concentration camps" actually go back to the spanish in the caribbean, and all the great powers used them in various places. a horse is a horse is a horse, and pipes is a nazi.
The contentious tone and quagmire-like nature of the majority of debate on this thread serves only to obscure the real issue.
Water muddying 101:
Nominally agree with an overall premise, then quibble ad infinitum about a peripheral detail...
Hopefully:
a; Teperatures will rise... Heated and ill advised statements will be made...
b; Reasonable discussion of the original topic will degenerate into a series of often acrimonious recriminations, preferably below the belt and off-putting.
Hopeful result:
A dilution ,and by association a tainting of the merit of the of the real issue at hand.
ps
Pipes is a scary asshole.
Happy New Year!
The contentious tone and quagmire-like nature of the majority of debate on this thread serves only to obscure the real issue.
Water muddying 101:
Nominally agree with an overall premise, then quibble ad infinitum about a peripheral detail...
Hopefully:
a; Teperatures will rise... Heated and ill advised statements will be made...
b; Reasonable discussion of the original topic will degenerate into a series of often acrimonious recriminations, preferably below the belt and off-putting.
Hopeful result:
A dilution ,and by association a tainting of the merit of the of the real issue at hand.
ps
Pipes is a scary asshole.
Happy New Year!
pipes' desire to lock away muslims in THIS country
For the zillionth time: can't you motherfuckers read?
; I do not specifically endorse its notion of Muslims having to register their whereabouts.
(2) I raised the subject of the Japanese internment because it "still matters" in its influence on the U.S. public debate, and not because I advocate the internment of anyone today.
Jesus H. Christ
pipes' desire to lock away muslims in THIS country
For the zillionth time: can't you motherfuckers read?
; I do not specifically endorse its notion of Muslims having to register their whereabouts.
(2) I raised the subject of the Japanese internment because it "still matters" in its influence on the U.S. public debate, and not because I advocate the internment of anyone today.
Jesus H. Christ
PS nads:
"massad's statement that zionism is racist and an apartheid israel shouldn't exist." is complete shit. Massad does not qualify his israel hatred. He says Israel has no right to exist as a jewish state. If you believe this too, come out and say it.
PS nads:
"massad's statement that zionism is racist and an apartheid israel shouldn't exist." is complete shit. Massad does not qualify his israel hatred. He says Israel has no right to exist as a jewish state. If you believe this too, come out and say it.
about a certain Middle Eastern country where they speak Hebrew, you know, in their Knesset
Oh my god, they speak Hebrew in their Knesset those FUCKING KIKES!
kei & yuri sometimes you do me proud you do.
about a certain Middle Eastern country where they speak Hebrew, you know, in their Knesset
Oh my god, they speak Hebrew in their Knesset those FUCKING KIKES!
kei & yuri sometimes you do me proud you do.
Gosh, if Hitler had only killed 5,999,999 Jews and not 6 million everything would have been alright. But when he killed that 6 millionth one, well that was too much.
See, no point getting upset about Pipes.
Gosh, if Hitler had only killed 5,999,999 Jews and not 6 million everything would have been alright. But when he killed that 6 millionth one, well that was too much.
See, no point getting upset about Pipes.
(2) I raised the subject of the Japanese internment because it "still matters" in its influence on the U.S. public debate, and not because I advocate the internment of anyone today.
"I got caught."
(2) I raised the subject of the Japanese internment because it "still matters" in its influence on the U.S. public debate, and not because I advocate the internment of anyone today.
"I got caught."
"massad's statement that zionism is racist and an apartheid israel shouldn't exist." is complete shit. Massad does not qualify his israel hatred. He says Israel has no right to exist as a jewish state. If you believe this too, come out and say it.
Marjory Stewart-Baxter
massad said nothing about hating israel. he called zionism racist, and opined that israel shouldn't exist as its existence is based on a racist premise.
but again ... you're far too willing to extend pipes credit for what he didn't explicitely say, and back up your defense with some whining about how IF I had checked his webpage, he'd have a chance to clarify. sorry ... I try not to give web hits to likudnik nazi sites, and pipes' qualifies.
feel free to look up massad's clarification about whether his statements have been misconstrued, as well ... just to be fair.
"massad's statement that zionism is racist and an apartheid israel shouldn't exist." is complete shit. Massad does not qualify his israel hatred. He says Israel has no right to exist as a jewish state. If you believe this too, come out and say it.
Marjory Stewart-Baxter
massad said nothing about hating israel. he called zionism racist, and opined that israel shouldn't exist as its existence is based on a racist premise.
but again ... you're far too willing to extend pipes credit for what he didn't explicitely say, and back up your defense with some whining about how IF I had checked his webpage, he'd have a chance to clarify. sorry ... I try not to give web hits to likudnik nazi sites, and pipes' qualifies.
feel free to look up massad's clarification about whether his statements have been misconstrued, as well ... just to be fair.
(2) I raised the subject of the Japanese internment because it "still matters" in its influence on the U.S. public debate, and not because I advocate the internment of anyone today.
whoa ... hey, can't you guys take a joke??? ... college prank ... anybody???
(2) I raised the subject of the Japanese internment because it "still matters" in its influence on the U.S. public debate, and not because I advocate the internment of anyone today.
whoa ... hey, can't you guys take a joke??? ... college prank ... anybody???
Paul - it's quite clear that they are arguing for internment. If you want to make another argument or criticism, write about it at your own blog and link to it here. If it's worthy of consideration, people will read it. If it's junk, well it'll still be your junk.
In the meantime these non-academic loons will try to minimise the importance of academic review and press their revisionist history. And try to make open racism acceptable once again.
In the meantime Furious George and the Busheviks pursue an electronic internment now in Fallujah via registration and collection of biometric data. Not sure about electronic tags/bracelets, YET.
Paul - it's quite clear that they are arguing for internment. If you want to make another argument or criticism, write about it at your own blog and link to it here. If it's worthy of consideration, people will read it. If it's junk, well it'll still be your junk.
In the meantime these non-academic loons will try to minimise the importance of academic review and press their revisionist history. And try to make open racism acceptable once again.
In the meantime Furious George and the Busheviks pursue an electronic internment now in Fallujah via registration and collection of biometric data. Not sure about electronic tags/bracelets, YET.
The torture became non-torture becasue of twisted logic like this. The war was based on twisted lies and insinuations like this. the moronic half of america still associates saddam with 9/11 because of twisted words like this.
this motherfucker is arguing for internment. in america. again. ... and you're pathetically apologising for it.
... good german!! have a cookie.
The torture became non-torture becasue of twisted logic like this. The war was based on twisted lies and insinuations like this. the moronic half of america still associates saddam with 9/11 because of twisted words like this.
this motherfucker is arguing for internment. in america. again. ... and you're pathetically apologising for it.
... good german!! have a cookie.
Another alarm diversion to take the spotlight off chimpy.
Pipes? A two-bit player and right wing wise guy, outside of the inner circle of the neo-con cabal.
Keep an eye on Chimpy. The "talk" is that all this internment rubbish, and registration is to make Chimpy look like "The Great American" defending the Constitution for all.
Like everything else with this corrupt administration it will be a fraud and lie.
Oh, and the camps shown on the wbsite from way upthread are FEMA disaster relocation camps.....could they be used for control of the public? Considering the overly broad nature of FEMA powers, it would be naive to say no.
But Pipes? He's voiced his opinion...that is all. We need only say NO to Pipes and his jail fixations.
Another alarm diversion to take the spotlight off chimpy.
Pipes? A two-bit player and right wing wise guy, outside of the inner circle of the neo-con cabal.
Keep an eye on Chimpy. The "talk" is that all this internment rubbish, and registration is to make Chimpy look like "The Great American" defending the Constitution for all.
Like everything else with this corrupt administration it will be a fraud and lie.
Oh, and the camps shown on the wbsite from way upthread are FEMA disaster relocation camps.....could they be used for control of the public? Considering the overly broad nature of FEMA powers, it would be naive to say no.
But Pipes? He's voiced his opinion...that is all. We need only say NO to Pipes and his jail fixations.
"I got caught."
whoa ... hey, can't you guys take a joke??? ... college prank ... anybody???
Should I bookmark that link to the Eschaton archive for the definition of disinglennuousness?
Pipes provides another perfect example... but the Bushevik appointee also proves how important it is to hit back at the Red Guard when they start waving copies of this Little Lulu Book.
"I got caught."
whoa ... hey, can't you guys take a joke??? ... college prank ... anybody???
Should I bookmark that link to the Eschaton archive for the definition of disinglennuousness?
Pipes provides another perfect example... but the Bushevik appointee also proves how important it is to hit back at the Red Guard when they start waving copies of this Little Lulu Book.
So opining that Israel shouldn't exist cuz it based on a racist premise is totally cool. Good to know, so that in the future when kei & yuri claim the "existential threat" is an elaborate fiction, I can maybe remind them that the nads and massads of the world DO want to do away with "the jewish state." And that bullshit about secular governments fools no-one -- kei & yuri & nads & derrida don't give 2 shits about Iran Libya, Egypt etc etc etc much less the Christian nations and you won't find them picketing an of those governments.
So opining that Israel shouldn't exist cuz it based on a racist premise is totally cool. Good to know, so that in the future when kei & yuri claim the "existential threat" is an elaborate fiction, I can maybe remind them that the nads and massads of the world DO want to do away with "the jewish state." And that bullshit about secular governments fools no-one -- kei & yuri & nads & derrida don't give 2 shits about Iran Libya, Egypt etc etc etc much less the Christian nations and you won't find them picketing an of those governments.
Paul - it's quite clear that they are arguing for internment.
Oh yes, quite clear. We can believe anything if we all join hands and repeat it often enough it'll come true. Never say "Pipes said no such thing" because every time you do, a deconstructionist falls down dead.
Paul - it's quite clear that they are arguing for internment.
Oh yes, quite clear. We can believe anything if we all join hands and repeat it often enough it'll come true. Never say "Pipes said no such thing" because every time you do, a deconstructionist falls down dead.
Pipes and Malkin - two bigots.
What the right is all about!
Pipes and Malkin - two bigots.
What the right is all about!
For the zillionth time: can't you motherfuckers read?
Classy, Marjory.
Real classy!
Kiss your mother with that mouth, do you?
For the zillionth time: can't you motherfuckers read?
Classy, Marjory.
Real classy!
Kiss your mother with that mouth, do you?
"You know, we've had trolls around here lately telling us that, as progressives and liberals, soon we'll be rounded up for camps. Seriously.
To me, those comments have been very disturbing.
Is that what they expect to do?
Vicki"
Vicki:
They're the ones I laugh at: the little cockroaches who sit in their parents' basement, who have NO real power at all, making all kinds of threats that they CANNOT back up.
The ones who can't even spell.
It's pathetic because their lives are apparently SO empty that they live vicariously through Preznit Jerkoff and his gang (who don't give a rat's ass about the likes of THEM).
THEY'RE going to round US up - yeah, riiiiiight.
"You know, we've had trolls around here lately telling us that, as progressives and liberals, soon we'll be rounded up for camps. Seriously.
To me, those comments have been very disturbing.
Is that what they expect to do?
Vicki"
Vicki:
They're the ones I laugh at: the little cockroaches who sit in their parents' basement, who have NO real power at all, making all kinds of threats that they CANNOT back up.
The ones who can't even spell.
It's pathetic because their lives are apparently SO empty that they live vicariously through Preznit Jerkoff and his gang (who don't give a rat's ass about the likes of THEM).
THEY'RE going to round US up - yeah, riiiiiight.
kei & yuri & nads & derrida don't give 2 shits about Iran Libya, Egypt etc etc etc much less the Christian nations and you won't find them picketing an of those governments.
Marjory Stewart-Baxter
well ... I care, and I assume that K&Y and derrida do, as well. BUT ... we aren't funding them and their ethnic cleansing with OUR tax dollars, so Israel gets the brunt of my complaints.
kei & yuri & nads & derrida don't give 2 shits about Iran Libya, Egypt etc etc etc much less the Christian nations and you won't find them picketing an of those governments.
Marjory Stewart-Baxter
well ... I care, and I assume that K&Y and derrida do, as well. BUT ... we aren't funding them and their ethnic cleansing with OUR tax dollars, so Israel gets the brunt of my complaints.
making all kinds of threats that they CANNOT back up.
familiar with recruitment for the military and intel services? the guy who tramples your grandfather's set of Dickens will be a former basement-dweller.
making all kinds of threats that they CANNOT back up.
familiar with recruitment for the military and intel services? the guy who tramples your grandfather's set of Dickens will be a former basement-dweller.
bonus casino deposit bonus casino deposit bonus casino deposit. withdrawal xanax withdrawal xanax withdrawal xanax.
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
