Coming to you from one of the most racial strife-filled cities of the late 60's and early 70's, and just down the road from where MLK was shot, I can tell you that MLK marched into the face of vitriolic opposition and certain danger by coming here when he did. No matter how awry the black leadership have gone since then, their cause was a just one at that time, and lead to new civil rights legislation and desegregation.
There has been extremely significant inter-racial healing since that time. There is not universal support for shutting government offices and taking off work for MLK Day. But there is an acknowledgement that recognizing MLK Day is a continued part of that healing process. Blacks in general at the time were so bereft of education and socio-economic advancement here that they also suffered a crisis of identity. I don't pretend to be a psychologist, but it appears that rallying around MLK Day allows them a hero that helps them have a sense of pride that spills over into their everday accomplishments. You can be as logical as you want about it, but what little boy or girl doesn't need a hero to make them feel proud about who they are. And which of our heros were perfect humans?
"Certainly not a racist Marxist terrorist like Mandela."
How do you figure that Mandela is a "racist Marxist terrorist"? If you can provide quotes or something I would appreciate it, if not then you are at the same level of maturity as this demented old asswipe.
Batman, "You can be as logical as you want about it, but what little boy or girl doesn't need a hero to make them feel proud about who they are."
Who exactly is "they"? American? Human? Or do you want people identifying themselves by the colour of their skin? You expect that to cause healing? Sounds like a recipe for permanent division to me.
BTW, I said I agreed with equal rights for blacks. No point telling me that things were wrong back then. I didn't disagree.
"And which of our heros were perfect humans?"
Sure. But make it clear whenever you hold someone up that they were full of flaws, some extremely serious like being a racist selfish sociopath.
nonadas, "How do you figure that Mandela is a "racist Marxist terrorist"?"
Which bit do you dispute?
racist - not caring about the human rights of white Zimbabweans, or Iraqis etc. Railing against America for unspecified crimes instead of Saddam for a holocaust. Not being very careful about allowing incompetent blacks taking over from competent whites like happened in every other African country. Not caring about dictatorship in other African countries so long as the leader was black. Not acknowledging that "dictatorship of whites" in South Africa was a hell of a lot better (constraints on abuse of power) than dictatorship of one goon in the various African dictatorships, or the communists in the Soviet Union etc. That sort of thing tends to give the game away.
Marxist - read this.
terrorist - I can go and pull up the pictures of some of the victims of his terrorism if you want, if you dispute that. You could try a google search the same as I found them the first time.
"If you can provide quotes or something I would appreciate it, if not then you are at the same level of maturity as this demented old asswipe."
And perhaps if you wait for my response to your request for additional information instead of making preemptive judgements yourself, you would come across as less of an arsewipe yourself.
Batman, "There has been extremely significant inter-racial healing since that time."
BTW, how's that healing going along of the ridiculous amount of black on white crime that blacks never acknowledge or condemn or seek to rectify? Some "healing". What I see is prominent blacks covering for black criminals. Rioting in favour of a known criminal like Rodney King or supporting a probable murderer like that rich black guy (sports hero/actor?), can't remember his name, just because of the colour of their skin. Some "healing". The problem emanating from blacks is not even on the table to be addressed. Just as the problem of racism and religious bigotry from the Middle East wasn't on the table until THANKFULLY Osama put it there so we can begin to work the problem (and solve that, and you'll almost certainly solve the black problem too).
Paul, o KING OF CONTRADICTION, I answered your bigoted comment lambasting King under your last post, but since you're pontificating further, I guess you want to keep the subject open.
Well, let's examine YOUR heroes first.
Please explain wolfowitz's attempt to free Arabs. He was an asshole of a lying undersecretary of defense, then took over the world bank, a predatory lending institution that would make the sub-prime lenders here who are helping send us to a recession awestruck. While there, wolfowitz promoted and overpaid his girlfriend, demoralizing and just pissing off the rest of the staff at the wb.
bush doesn't seek to liberate anyone, just look at Gaza, the West Bank, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Objectively, not through the lens that rupert murdoch gives you. bush let osama bin-laden get away twice, and worked with the taliban to try to secure gas and oil pipeline routes. After it was determined that the taliban were too unreliable, we switched to the northern alliance rapists, who must have understood that the US was coming in and taking what it wants, so it might benefit them to help out, or not stand in the way at least. Check where the pipelines are planned and see if the US bases aren't along their route.
Last year bush said something like "the Iraqis need to make progress, they need to pass the oil law," maybe you remember the debate on this when Critical One Third mopped up the floor with you. Now they are using ethnic cleansing as a method to bring stability to Iraq, making three countries basically so they can finally get control of that precious oil. Everyone knows dick cheney's secret energy task force meeting had Iraq divided up into oil fiefdoms, basically, with different multinationals controling the oil in different sections of the country. Unfortunately for your heroes, the parliament doesn't seem to want to turn it's nation's resources over to vultures, I'm sure there's a lot of pressure on them from crocker and other US officials to get in line. Hopefully they'll continue their stand.
Now, your attack on King, whether you want to admit it or not, is merely because he's 1. Considered to be on the liberal/democrat side, which you are adamantly opposed to. 2. You claim he should have been concerned in bringing more benefits to non blacks, and not worry about blacks only. Well, I explained that he did in fact try to include poor whites and native Americans. Whether he succeeded or not, I don't now. But with his own people being by far the most discriminated against, at least in areas where they had a substantial population such as the south and northern cities, was he supposed to abandon them for people with less severe problems? Only in your bizarre twisted world.
Why do you even discuss King when he supposedly lived before the world was formed but, in your view, was merely a computer simulation awaiting your grand entrance? Because, either you don't believe your own garbage, or you are, as I submit, the KING OF CONTRADICTION.
And as far as the Vietnam war, it wasn't to free anyone, and the tet offensive was a hoax.
buh, "Paul, o KING OF CONTRADICTION"
No buh, you have never found a single contradiction. All you have ever done is invent fantasies.
"I answered your bigoted comment"
You don't realise that you are the bigot, buh.
"Please explain wolfowitz's attempt to free Arabs."
Simple, he believes everyone has the right to live under a liberal democracy, the same as he does. He's not a selfish prick like you, buh. I'm not going to bother responding to your fantasies about Wolfowitz causing sub-prime mayhem etc etc.
"bush doesn't seek to liberate anyone, just look at Gaza, the West Bank, Afghanistan, and Iraq."
Gaza will not be liberated from the Hamas terrorists because that's what the people of Gaza actually want. It will take some time to get there.
The West Bank will not be liberated from the Fatah terrorists, because that's what the people in the West Bank actually want. It will take some time to get there.
Afghanistan and Iraq are already liberated. They're not up to western standards, but they do have a semblance of freedom of speech, especially political speech, and they most certainly have freedom to start parties to compete for elections. So do the people of the West Bank in fact. Not sure about Gaza anymore. You would be better concentrating your concerns on somewhere like North Korea, where only one party is allowed. But of course, that would require a degree of honesty, something which would contradict your comfortable fantasy world.
"Objectively, not through the lens that rupert murdoch gives you."
Pathetic attempt at ad hominem just demonstrating that you lose yet again. I rarely watch TV at all, buh. I get my news from the BBC News website, you know, left-wing. I just ignore the spin. I like the format.
"bush let osama bin-laden get away twice"
Not sure how you reckon that. His Afghan allies POSSIBLY allowed him to escape into Pakistan ONCE. Regardless, freeing 25 million Afghans was FAR more important than catching Osama. And we wanted the Afghans to demonstrably free themselves, rather than just have freedom handed to them on a plate by honkeys.
"and worked with the taliban to try to secure gas and oil pipeline routes."
Rubbish. Bush hadn't even been elected when that PRIVATE consortium was TALKING about doing that.
"After it was determined that the taliban were too unreliable, we switched to the northern alliance rapists"
It must be fun in your "brain" making this crap up as you go along. There was always a desire for the Northern Alliance to win because they weren't fundamentalist nutcases like the Taliban. It was 9/11 that prompted the US to get behind the Northern Alliance in a semi-serious manner. I say semi-serious, because they didn't want a new dictatorship, nor a new civil war, with a prick like Rabbani in charge. The Northern Alliance is actually disbanded now, buh. Time to update your fantasy world to add yet another fantasy to the mix to explain that
(rather than totally revamp your sick worldview).
"who must have understood that the US was coming in and taking what it wants"
The US came in bringing aid. It didn't take a damn thing except casualties for other people's freedom.
"Check where the pipelines are planned and see if the US bases aren't along their route."
What a crock of shit. The biggest base is actually Bagram. You may as well say that America is trying to become communist, so is emulating the Soviet Union by occupying the base that the USSR used to occupy. Also, all of this is actually temporary. When the ANA is ready and the US pulls out (same as it pulled out of say the Philippines), let me guess - rather than reevaluate your worldview and say "well, it looks like the American government did exactly like it said it was going to do all along, I really stuffed that one up", you're going to add a new fantasy to explain the lack of Americans, right? ie that there were more important gas lines in (the next country) that forced the US to abandon Afghanistan. Right, buh? Yes, buh, that's you to a T.
"Last year bush said something like "the Iraqis need to make progress, they need to pass the oil law,""
Yes, buh, the US government wants the Sunnis to get a cut of the oil so that they can make political progress and vamoose. There's nothing sinister about that except in your twisted mind.
"maybe you remember the debate on this when Critical One Third mopped up the floor with you."
buh, the only place where you lefties ever "mop the floor" with me is in your pathetic fantasy worlds. In the real world, I win every time, as you resort to logical fallacies and complete fantasies to prop up your ridiculous positions.
"Now they are using ethnic cleansing as a method to bring stability to Iraq, making three countries basically so they can finally get control of that precious oil."
Again with a complete fantasy. The US isn't ethnically cleansing anyone. Various people are returning to areas where OTHERS had forced them out. As the Iraqi government forces increase in strength, the militias who do that sort of cleansing are being eliminated.
"Everyone knows dick cheney's secret energy task force meeting had Iraq divided up into oil fiefdoms"
It's a secret, yet everyone knows? Only in your fantasy world are such things possible.
"basically, with different multinationals controling the oil in different sections of the country."
Last I looked the oil was pumped according to the wishes of the democratically-elected government. The only reason you are obsessed with oil (or gas pipelines) is because YOU would never do something for someone else unless there was something in it for you. You then project your own mercenary attitude onto Republicans.
"Unfortunately for your heroes, the parliament doesn't seem to want to turn it's nation's resources over to vultures"
Can you please reconcile this statement with the one from ot
other lefties about Iraq's government being puppets controlled by the US government? It would be nice seeing you loonies debate each other for a change (and possibly arrive at a conclusion that it was the space aliens who are ultimately responsible) rather than waste the time of sensible people on the right?
"I'm sure there's a lot of pressure on them from crocker and other US officials to get in line. Hopefully they'll continue their stand."
I'm sure they, like Bush, will continue to do whatever their space alien masters tell them to do.
"Now, your attack on King"
Or perhaps my response to King's attack on the people trying to free Vietnam.
"whether you want to admit it or not"
Translated - Paul's opinion doesn't make sense in my fantasy world, so no problem, I'll just subsitute his often-stated opinion with one I just made up myself. That should allow me to win! I'm sure no-one will notice.
"is merely because he's 1. Considered to be on the liberal/democrat side, which you are adamantly opposed to."
Actually, buh, I am a neocon. I actually believe in social security, abortion, things that are traditionally left. Whenever I do those "political position" things I'm normally in the centre. However, when you're an insane lefty, like you are, everyone to the right of Stalin appears to be a "Fox News plant". It is specific things from the left that I will attack. E.g. not appreciating what the rich are giving them and demanding more, or interfering with market forces to run a short-term scam, or not caring about human rights of others.
"2. You claim he should have been concerned in bringing more benefits to non blacks, and not worry about blacks only. Well, I explained that he did in fact try to include poor whites and native Americans."
Those are not the words I used. I just said that it's not that noble fighting for your own race as it is for others, and when it came to the crunch, he harmed the Vietnamese because they were just "yellow scum" to him.
"Whether he succeeded or not, I don't now. But with his own people being by far the most discriminated against"
This is the whole problem with you buh, and it shows your racism. You like to say "his own people", excluding him from your own race. Just like you excluded the poor Arabs under Saddam. They're only useful to you as tools for your political objectives.
"at least in areas where they had a substantial population such as the south and northern cities, was he supposed to abandon them for people with less severe problems?"
No Buh. I've already explained that I support equality for blacks or anyone else. I'm just saying it's not that noble when he's one of the beneficiaries, and that when it came to yellow scum, he proved what a racist he was. And copyrighting his work showed his mercenary side.
"Only in your bizarre twisted world."
It's you that lives in a bizarre twisted world, buh. You can't see that, b
but that's why you think others do, when all they're doing is describing reality.
"Why do you even discuss King when he supposedly lived before the world was formed but, in your view, was merely a computer simulation awaiting your grand entrance?"
He was there in 1967, buh. Besides which, that's just the MOST LIKELY EXPLANATION for the universe, it's not written in stone. And regardless, even if it is fabricated, it is being used as part of history. And as such, the lessons learned are relevant today. As such, you need to learn those lessons, and explain the failings of a racist sociopath. This applies to all things too. Even if the entire evolutionary history is completely fabricated, which it almost certainly is, you should act as if it were true, because that is where you will find solutions to today's problems.
"Because, either you don't believe your own garbage, or you are, as I submit, the KING OF CONTRADICTION."
No buh. You just lack the intellect to understand that there is no contradiction.
"And as far as the Vietnam war, it wasn't to free anyone, and the tet offensive was a hoax."
Wrong buh. The Vietnam was was to make the South Vietnamese people freer than they would be under North Vietnamese dictatorship AND protect the free world, and the only hoax about Tet was idiots in the west claiming that it was a communist victory instead of the complete and utter disaster it was for them.
Don't you just LOVE it when people who seemed to support Paul's views suddenly realise what a twisted psychotic lunatic (and twice locked up for it) he is and start attacking him too!
Paul
Surprise surprise! You are the author of yet another delicious irony. You complain about Martin Luther King copyrighting his speeches (why on earth should he not, if he wants to?), yet complete miss the point that Wolfowitz (whom you admire so much) just happened to be appointed Head of the World Bank, after leaving Bush's administration. If you are to be consistent about people making money out of their jobs, how come we don't see you complaining about the cronyism which got Wolfowitz his job?
In any case - and quite rightly too - Wolfowitz had to leave after a short while for breaching the Bank's ethics rules). What a fine upstanding character he has proved himself to be. And if you want more proof, read about his time as US Ambassador to Indonesia, and see how much he tried to do for human rights and democracy there during his tenure.
Foddy, "Don't you just LOVE it when people who seemed to support Paul's views suddenly realise what a twisted psychotic lunatic (and twice locked up for it) he is and start attacking him too!"
Foddy, don't you just love it when you have to quickly resort to ad hominem attacks and other logical fallacies when you don't have a leg to stand on? You lose before you've even started.
"Surprise surprise! You are the author of yet another delicious irony."
No Foddy. You're just too stupid to understand, as usual.
"You complain about Martin Luther King copyrighting his speeches (why on earth should he not, if he wants to?)"
It's not really a complaint. Of course he is well within his rights to copyright his work and make money from it, instead of making it public domain like I do with my software. However, just point out that this is a mercenary, not a hero, and there's no problem.
"yet complete miss the point that Wolfowitz (whom you admire so much) just happened to be appointed Head of the World Bank, after leaving Bush's administration."
People with high public profile tend to get jobs like that. They don't go to your next-door neighbour. People like Tiger Woods get paid heaps for wearing hats too. If you don't like our political system, vote for someone different.
"If you are to be consistent about people making money out of their jobs"
I am consistent, Foddy. If King just said "my job is making money out of speeches designed to scam money out of white folk for use by blacks and to hell with the yellow scum of Vietnam", I wouldn't have such a problem. I'd still have a problem with him, but it's the hero status that is difficult to swallow. Again, Wolfowitz is far better.
"how come we don't see you complaining about the cronyism which got Wolfowitz his job?"
For the same reason I've never complained about Tiger Woods getting his. That's just the free market at work.
"read about his time as US Ambassador to Indonesia, and see how much he tried to do for human rights and democracy there during his tenure."
Would that be when he was protecting the free world from the threat of communism? Sounds like he has his priorities right to me. Unlike King.
So let's have another go. Martin Luther King was an opportunist who figured out how to make money out of the civil rights movement, while simultanenously scamming other people's money (mainly white people) for use for his race, so that he could get some benefit, while simultaneously throwing yellow people's rights to the dogs, as it was interfering with his scam, and instead of promoting a wealth-generating system like capitalism which would actually allow people to get out of poverty, he instead gave comfort to communism, which benifitted no-one except a few dictators and their family.
And this is what America trumps as a hero?
And they wonder why they have problems, including severe racial problems?
Good grief.
BTW, OJ Simpson is the guy who I was referring to earlier as a probable murderer. It's a pity that I don't know of a better system of justice to solve problems like that.
Paul,
"It's not really a complaint. Of course he is well within his rights to copyright his work and make money from it, instead of making it public domain like I do with my software. However, just point out that this is a mercenary, not a hero, and there's no problem."
He was mainly concerned about making money for his family's future, and that concern was well grounded, if you recall what happened to him. He was not around to provide for them.
Why on earth do you make the stupid false dichotomy between mercenary or hero? Your hero Churchill made a fair bit of money out of writing; do you regard him as a mercenary too? How strange that you still accuse others of false argumentative techniques, yet resort to them yourself. Is it because you don't think we will notice?
And your comments about King and Vietnam are just plain silly. King opposed the war in Vietnam, as, eventually, did the majority of Americans. Rather like the Pope opposed the invasion of Iraq, just like the majority of Eurpopeans, Australians, Canadians and Americans now do. Just because you feel different doesn't make King or the Pope wrong.
Paul,
Good job arguing with buh. He is so stupid I'm beginning to think he is a neocon agent trying to destroy the opposition from within by going undercover as a far-left anti-American, reality denying, emotionaly crippled, lying, delusional, idiotic dickhead. 
This demented dickhead tells you to look at things objectively when in the same post he writes some conspiracy bullsh1t about the US using ethnic cleansing to "bring stability" and divide Iraq to get oil. What? We haven't stolen any oil, you pathetic piece of sh1t. Stop lying you deranged, delusional 9-11 denying, closet Muslim conspiracy nut.
Buh is a fn headcase or a plant or something.
"Don't you just LOVE it when people who seemed to support Paul's views suddenly realise what a twisted psychotic lunatic he is and start attacking him too!"
Then Foddy sais this. First of all, I'm not attacking Paul. I have said all along that the God delusion is crap. But the people on this blog make him look perfectly sane.
By the way, when are you going to stop supporting buh's sick views and realise what a psychotic lunatic he is and attack him? Probably because you are too, and don't want to contradict your boyfriend. Your a fn hypocrite.
BTW, Paul. Thanks for clarifying about Nelson Mandela. I don't have any desire to defend one of buhddy's immature probable heros so thanks. And now I will sum up my post by saying:
What a waste of humanity.
By the way Paul,
It's a shame you can't add smilies for these comments. This blog just NEEDS this one.
http://thumbsnap.com/images/KWFUmu3X.gif
U jut dunt wanna admit buh & foddy is rite cuz u hav bin defeatit every time by him & hes rite. Ur a stoopid repub n4z1.
BTW, gud goin buh & foddy. U debunk em. finaly sum1 who agees w/me! :D
nonadas
Hey, let's get some smilies! They would be quite suitable for your childish level of debate. This is quite typical of your lack of understanding of the big picture:
"What? We haven't stolen any oil, you pathetic piece of sh1t."
The war was never about "stealing oil"; to the extent it was about oil, it was about being able to control (or at least greatly influence) what was done with the oil. Saddam could have sold the oil wherever he liked. Now the Iraqi government will not sell it where the US doesn't like.
Paul
"First of all, the struggle for racial equality is something I totally support. If I had been around at that time, I would have been equally outraged at any laws or social bigotry against blacks (or any other race). However, if I were a black myself, and had a personal benefit in getting those changes, then it's not really noble. It's just getting something for yourself."
You really have to laugh at crap like this! In other words, people who are oppressed have to sit around and wait until someone else takes action to help them. It's not noble to try to help yourself. What a load of complete and utter nonsense. Does this apply not only to racist oppression? What about citizens being oppressed by their government? For example, would it be noble for Iranians to rebel against Ahmadinejad? They would be getting something for themselves by getting rid of him, so will they have to wait until someone from outside - with no personal agenda, of course - does something to help them?
That's what I thought I said too, Foddy.
Gee, nonadas, I thought you were starting to be civil. Now it's shonet, fin moron and all of your other code talk, so take cheney's profane advice to Patrick Leahy that he was discrete enough to say when the senate was in session, I believe, back in 2004. You and paul are the stupid, deluded one's, believing everything you hear from liars like bush, cheny, and wolfowitz (him), and looking ony for bad from an entire religion so you can justify your sadistic desire to "kill muscaums" (you.)
Nothing I wrote was made up by me, and I get news from a variety of sources. I used to think carter and clinton were good presidents, but after seeing their careers through several more independent lenses, it's pretty obvious that they were basically working towards the same ends as the republicans, and unfortunately hillary or obama will probably be the same, though I would prefer them over all repubs except ron paul.
paul, bush says we could be in Iraq for decades.
paul, a man was sentenced in Afghanistan, to death, I think, because he insulted Islam, without getting a fair trial. Just like we do here in the US (Jose Padilla.)
paul, you are the KING OF CONTRADICTION, and a flagship reason is that on 1-13 in a haloscan comment you said that the halocaust was not real, but part of a computer simulation, then told that to a jewish neighbor! Being god doesn't cure you of asshole-ism, huh.
Then, then, on 1-19, you talk about whether or not the Germans gassed the Jews democratically or not....
I call that high contradiction!
I've come up with part of a song called "King of Contradiction."
If one commenter here at A-S would like to hear it, I will finish the song and print it here, with (hopefully) a link to the original song that I took the music from.
buh,
Sorry - I didn't have time to read all the comments here. Clearly great minds think alike!
Without wishing to be thought "anti-American" in any way, I just came across the following interesting comments (from the excellent website of Craig Murray, former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan):
"I think we underestimate how different and dangerous the US now is. Last year I delivered a talk on Central Asia at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. As I sat preparing my lecture, I had the television on low in my hotel room because I don't like complete silence. Gradually I found myself listening intently to an evangelical preacher, telling his TV congregation that they should not worry about casualties in Iraq because the Bible showed us that there had to be a great and bloody conflict in the Middle East before the Second Coming of Christ. So the more people who died in these wars, the closer we are to Jesus.
Now that message would be acceptable to very few people in the UK - just Tony Blair and his immediate friends, really. I related this astonishing thing I had heard to some American lecturers over lunch. They told me that at least a third of their students would believe this stuff. And this was Ann Arbor, not the Deep South. It is essential that we all wake up now to the fact that the US is a deeply disturbed and psychotic society, and by far the biggest danger to world peace."
Another excellent anaylysis by Brian Barder (another former British Ambassador) here, from which an extract:
"It's sad because it's another example of the steadily widening gulf between the political culture in the US and that in the rest of the west, exemplified by the Iraq war (leaving aside, if possible, the UK's culpable complicity in it), the so-called "war on terror" and its implications for civil liberties, extraordinary rendition and Guantanamo Bay, the role of religion, attitudes to capital punishment and the treatment of prisoners, demonstrative patriotism, and now the role of the US sub-prime market in bringing about the impending recession which will engulf the rest of us as well as the United States. Alas, it's no longer the case that the rest of the civilised world looks to the US as its moral and political leader. And I fear that the causes of this ever-widening gulf go much deeper than just the consequences of the catastrophic presidency of G W Bush: whoever succeeds him will not be able to build a durable bridge across it. Many of us small-L liberals used to feel that we had more in common with our American cousins than with our historical enemies just across the English Channel, the French and the Germans, and even our slightly more distant historical friends, the Scandinavians and the Dutch. I don't think that's true any more."
I guess my hopes for change of guard in Iran have been dashed. I read that every potential reformer has again been vetted and prohibited from standing in the upcoming elections. Most of the candidates, in fact.
Foddy, Where do you find such bullshit things to quote? I live in the heart of the South, surrounded by evangelical Christians, and I don't know anyone as bizarre as the caricature you attempt to create.
Batman
Your wish is my command:
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/
And if you check polls, you will find a huge number of Americans believe that the Bible is historically accurate.
"In the NEWSWEEK poll, 93 percent of Americans say they believe Jesus Christ actually lived and 82 percent believe Jesus Christ was God or the Son of God. Fifty-two percent of all those polled believe, as the Bible proclaims, that Jesus will return to earth someday; 21 percent do not believe it. Fifteen percent believe Jesus will return in their lifetime; 47 percent do not, the poll shows."
With figures like this (52% believing that Jesus will return to earth and 15% believing it will happen in their lifetimes!), it's not hard to accept what the lecturers told Murray.
Since large numbers of these people think that the world is only 6,000 years old, what on earth (no pun intended) do these people think of scientists the world over who are constantly making discoveries about the history of the planet. Is anyone who makes a discovery of something over 6,000 years old part of a massive conspiracy to discredit Christianity?
Batman
Craig Murray is also author of the excellent book "Murder in Samarkand", which details his experiences as Ambassador in Uzbekistan. Uzbekistan, you may recall, was part of the Coalition of the Willing, which led the US to conveniently overlook its appalling human rights record. Murray, on the other hand, did not.
I thoroughly recommend the book. If you can wait, a film based on it is under development, to be directed by the excellent Michael Winterbottom.
Foddy, "He was mainly concerned about making money for his family's future, and that concern was well grounded, if you recall what happened to him. He was not around to provide for them."
Sure. I don't begrudge the man a living. This is capitalism, and he is a capitalist. Pity he didn't bestow the same rights to the Vietnamese.
"Why on earth do you make the stupid false dichotomy between mercenary or hero?"
I don't. I just don't like people like King or Mother Theresa or Saddam being paraded as perfect people we should follow.
"Your hero Churchill made a fair bit of money out of writing; do you regard him as a mercenary too?"
He's my hero? I agree with him on a lot of points. And, like King, I don't begrudge him making money from writing.
"How strange that you still accuse others of false argumentative techniques, yet resort to them yourself."
No I haven't, Foddy.
"Is it because you don't think we will notice?"
No Foddy. It's because except in your fantasy world, I don't.
"And your comments about King and Vietnam are just plain silly."
No they're not, Foddy. You are. As always.
"King opposed the war in Vietnam, as, eventually, did the majority of Americans."
Just as the majority of Germans supported Hitler.
"Rather like the Pope opposed the invasion of Iraq"
Exactly like that in fact.
"just like the majority of Eurpopeans, Australians, Canadians and Americans now do."
Yes, Foddy. Just like the Germans supported Hitler.
"Just because you feel different doesn't make King or the Pope wrong."
No Foddy. Objective morality does that.
"to the extent it was about oil, it was about being able to control (or at least greatly influence) what was done with the oil."
No it wasn't, Foddy.
"Saddam could have sold the oil wherever he liked."
And he was welcome to. No-one cares except you, Foddy.
"Now the Iraqi government will not sell it where the US doesn't like."
The US doesn't give a damn about where the Iraqi government sells its oil, because, unlike you, they are smart enough to realise that oil is a fungible commodity. However, by virtue of the fact that the US doesn't give a damn, you could potentially argue that the Iraqi government is not selling it to places that the US doesn't approve of.
"In other words, people who are oppressed have to sit around and wait until someone else takes action to help them."
No Foddy. I didn't say that. King had every right to do something that he personally benefitted from, and indeed, I would expect him to have his own human rights very high, if not the top, of his priorities. That is perfectly rational. Just not the actions of a noble hero. For that, you need Wolfowitz etc.
"It's not noble to try to help yourself."
That's actually the very definition of selfish actually.
"What a load of complete and utter nonsense."
Only in your Orwellian world.
"Does this apply not only to racist oppression? What about citizens being oppressed by their government? For example, would it be noble for Iranians to rebel against Ahmadinejad?"
Yes, dying for the freedom of others is indeed noble. And King facing death to get rights for himself and others, is indeed brave.
However, it pales in comparison to those same Iranians then deciding to use their new-found freedom to go and invade Pakistan to protect India (different race, religion, nationality). THAT would be truly noble.
"They would be getting something for themselves by getting rid of him, so will they have to wait until someone from outside - with no personal agenda, of course - does something to help them?"
Not at all, Foddy. Everyone does, and should, do things for themselves. It just shouldn't be a reason to get a public holiday.
BTW, I do the same thing with America. When I hear them saying that it's in their national interest to go and remove a dictator, my heart sinks.
"Bible showed us that there had to be a great and bloody conflict in the Middle East before the Second Coming of Christ."
And although it is indeed patently mad to believe this stuff with the evidence they have available, and the only moral course of action is atheism, they did happen to be right after all. The Iraq war was vital. Message 666 wouldn't have been possible without it, and I would never have known who I was.
"the US is a deeply disturbed and psychotic society, and by far the biggest danger to world peace."
And pricks like you and him are by far the biggest danger to human freedom.
"do these people think of scientists the worl
"do these people think of scientists the world over who are constantly making discoveries about the history of the planet."
No idea. But if they think that the scientists are discovering planted evidence, to fool them, you, and even me (for decades), they'd probably be right.
nonadas, "I have said all along that the God delusion is crap."
Wanna debate? Which bit of the logic is above your ability to understand? You do have the moral foundation required to see that stopping Saddam from raping women and chopping out men's tongues is a noble deed, right? And protecting Americans is also a bloody important thing to do. Right?
And this also applies to human rights for people in places like say Zimbabwe.
Batman, "I guess my hopes for change of guard in Iran have been dashed. I read that every potential reformer has again been vetted and prohibited from standing in the upcoming elections. Most of the candidates, in fact."
You're being played for a fool. There's not even elections for the guard that counts - the Supreme Ayatollah. The Iranians already elected reformers. They couldn't do a damn thing because of the Ayatollah.
How the hell did you miss that? The "elected" president is just a side-show for gullible people. I didn't expect you to be one of them.
War, my friend. Soon. Very very soon.
buh, "You and paul are the stupid, deluded one's, believing everything you hear from liars like bush, cheny, and wolfowitz (him)"
Buh, you still don't get it. I don't let others do my thinking for me. I don't just parrot Wolfowitz like you parrot the Socialist Layabout. I specifically chose Wolfowitz because his view came closest to my own personal view. And I select Iraqi bloggers for the same reason. And I listen to these people, and their logic is sound, because it's the same logic I use. Sometimes they even assist me with my own logic. E.g. at one point someone was able to say to me "when Saddam came to power, he didn't just say ha ha, I'm in charge and there's no a damn thing you can do about it". I hadn't realised that before.
"and looking ony for bad from an entire religion"
Like most decent Americans, he's hoping in vain for the Muslims to denounce the cretins in their midst, call Osama a kaffir, say that the Quran is not the literal word of God, that sort of thing. When it didn't pan out that way, he presumably tends towards the "we gave them a chance, time for genocide". That was my default position up until I realised that Muslims weren't actually evil, they were just natural animals, and that I could simply join them without any military penalty.
"so you can justify your sadistic desire to "kill muscaums" (you.)"
That would probably be you projecting your sadism to "skin the rich" who you falsely accuse of crimes that you would commit if you were rich.
"Nothing I wrote was made up by me, and I get news from a variety of sources."
Yeah, Socialist Layabout volume 1 AND volume 2 AND volume 3. When you have a source such as the US Whitehouse press releases, you dismiss it out of hand while you wait for SL vol 4 to tell you what to think next.
"paul, bush says we could be in Iraq for decades."
You should keep a small force there. Or at least in Turkey. You need to guard against military coups, which is the only way Iraq's democracy can be toppled. I'm about to post about that shortly. There's been a wonderful development.
"paul, a man was sentenced in Afghanistan, to death, I think, because he insulted Islam, without getting a fair trial."
Yep, it's tragic. The Afghans have a LONG way to go to reach western standards. But did you really expect them to become Switzerland overnight? I thought they could do better than the Taliban, and they did.
"Just like we do here in the US (Jose Padilla.)"
Buh, as usual you are completely sick, comparing the innocuous document-reading of one man with a terrorist. You belittle the Afghan tragedy when you do that.
"paul, you are the KING OF CONTRADICTION"
No Buh, you're still just stupid.
"you said that the halocaust was not real"
That's the most likely explanation, yes.
"then told that to a jewish neighbor!"
Deliberately omitting the fact that I didn't know she was Jewish.
"Being god doesn't cure yo
you of asshole-ism, huh."
That is probably true, but not for the reason you cited. I regretted having spoken to her about that. If I was an arsehole like you, I would have been happy about it.
"Then, then, on 1-19, you talk about whether or not the Germans gassed the Jews democratically or not. I call that high contradiction!"
I call it Buh being his usual stupid self, seeing contradictions and grand conspiracies where none exist, while being unable to see his hand in front of his face.
E.g. at one point someone was able to say to me "when Saddam came to power, he didn't just say ha ha, I'm in charge and there's no a damn thing you can do about it". I hadn't realised that before.
--------
He didn't have to say anything. He had everyone that would oppose him killed on the first day.
Foddy,
Once a religion is divorced from government and accepts that it is not its place to impose its particular dogma on others, then it generally becomes a powerful force for good. That is pretty much what we have in America.
Most religious people here have turned their focus from dogma to good works. Churches here are primarily concerned with providing a safe haven, fellowship, and support for their members and others, especially providing activities for children, building schools, hospitals and clinics, outreach to the poor and sick, and other charitable works. I know Baptists in particular, and I think most Christian denominations, have a long history of sending field teams to help impoverished people all over the world by building schools, clinics, etc. Just as one example, I know that religious organizations at our local medical school annually send large teams of doctors to South America, Africa, and other places where there is inadequate health care.
This ability to overcome dogma is why I see Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Hindi, and even some Muslims able to work together, with each other and with atheists, to improve society.
This is why I believe it is worth making every possible effort to bring Muslims from the ME into the fold, before nuking them if they continue to pose a threat. That is why we are in Iraq instead of simply wiping it away with brute force. Which, bizarrely, is what your ilk would accuse of doing.
I certainly don't agree with religious extremists of any stripe that want to infringe on the rights of others. But as a group, people of religion don't get it wrong any more often than atheist groups do, particularly considering secular, liberal academia, which is often far more likely to be off the rails.
You won't find me defending everything that religious people do, but I am frankly disgusted by the slanderous, gross miscaricature that you and others, especially in Europe, try to paint them out to be.
"Gee, nonadas, I thought you were starting to be civil."
I treat you like a rational human being when you act like one.
"You and paul are the stupid, deluded one's,"
This coming from the idiot who believes the Israel lobby "keeps us in line", that America isn't free, that al-Qaeda doesn't exist, that Hezbollah and Hamas are freedom fighters, and that Israel is genociding Palestinians. All this from the Muslim apologist who needs anti-American hate sites like Third World Traveler, Global Research, Information Clearing House and What Really Happened to represent himself.
Get a grip.............
"believing everything you hear from liars like bush, cheny, and wolfowitz"
There are no lies, you delusional dumb fk. You have yet to prove even a single lie from the Bush administration. Meanwhile, you believe all of the lies printed on stalinist websites.
"Nothing I wrote was made up by me,"
Sorry. I guess you aren't thinking for yourself that much after all. It's the stalinist websites you frequent that is doing your thinking for you.
"and I get news from a variety of sources."
When you show me a source that isn't far left anti-American then I might take it seriously. The only lies are within these assinine websites that do your thinking for you.
Get a fn clue....................
"Which bit of the logic is above your ability to understand?"
I guess its the 666 message. How does posting a message with a superstitious number make you God? Also, I believe in God, but not any of the religions. I don't allow powerless, evil men like Muhammad and Moses to fool me into thinking they can lead me to God. I certainly don't accept that a powerless human is God.
"You do have the moral foundation required to see that stopping Saddam from raping women and chopping out men's tongues is a noble deed, right?"
What does this have to do with you being God?
By the way, yes what Saddam did was horrible. That's why I supported the war in Iraq in 2003 and voted for Bush again in 2004. Heck, I'd vote for Bush again in 2008 if I could just to pis off idiots like buh.
However, once Iraq was liberated, these subhuman scum sucking swine that call themselves Muslims immediately went to killing the US. Thanks for nothing, dickheads! We saved you from Saddam! I don't care about these pigs anymore.
The Iraq war was not a mistake by any measure of logic. It exposed these crap bags for what they really are. It got millions of Muslims busy killing eachother instead of focusing on us. Although trying to install democracy was a great idea, perhaps staying there isn't. I say we just pull out, get the popcorn and have fun watching these pig-felating scum murder eachother.
We can't save these pigs and bring them democracy. Their sh1t-filled minds can't understand basic things such as human rights and love. The people who can't see this are people who are blinded by over-optimistic reality like you and Bush, or anti-American dip-sh1ts like buh and foddy.
They will not win................
Sorry, my bad:
"over-optimistic reality" should have been overly optimistic ideology.
"Like most decent Americans, he's hoping in vain for the Muslims to denounce the cretins in their midst, call Osama a kaffir, say that the Quran is not the literal word of God, that sort of thing. When it didn't pan out that way, he presumably tends towards the "we gave them a chance, time for genocide"."
That's exactly correct. I labored under the delusion that the Muslims wanted a better life for themselves and a better future for their chilren just like real humans do ever since I was born until I woke up in 2006. The Muscums have brought death and hopelessness wherever they rule, and they want to bring the whole world under their empire.
It thought that by giving Iraq and Afghanistan democracy, they would be on their way to becoming modern. I was wrong, they fought the liberators and the brave US soldiers that supported the government they voted in. They wanted Saddam. Even the so called "moderates" supported what they called "resistence", as did the Iraqis who got their children killed by the so called "resistence".
I don't want to genocide anyone, but if they keep pressing their luck, we will strike back, or at least Israel will sooner or later. We must kill them for the same reason we had to kill Germans to destroy Hitler. Their movement has far more followers then Hitler could have hoped for, though not yet the military capabilities, thank God.
Anyway, thank you for doing well to sum up my thoughts in a few easy sentences.
Batman
"Once a religion is divorced from government and accepts that it is not its place to impose its particular dogma on others, then it generally becomes a powerful force for good. That is pretty much what we have in America."
With respect that is absolute and utter nonsense! A Muslim or professed atheist would have a snowball's chance in hell being elected President of the US. As it is, every candidate has to pretend to be a committed Christian (maybe Jewish is OK at a pinch) even if he/she is not. Look at the tripe Hillary Clinton has had to come up with to give the impression she is religious! Politicians in the US are SCARED STIFF about the power of the religious lobby.
"You won't find me defending everything that religious people do, but I am frankly disgusted by the slanderous, gross miscaricature that you and others, especially in Europe, try to paint them out to be."
No, we have it dead right! Look at the scorn which was quite rightfully heaped on Tony Blair for his religiosity. We don't want people representing us who have a loyalty to anything/anyone other than their country and electorate. We don't want "God" telling our politicians what to do. If you are Christian/Jewish/Buddhist/Muslim or whatever, keep it to yourself; don't bring it into politics.
Paul
You said that the holocaust didn't happen?
Seriously?
Batman
I fully agree with you that many Christians do good works (although most of them with the ulterior motive of conversion).
However, that does not translate into Christianity being something which should be in any shape or form related to government. As it is now in the US, with Christian agenda being pushed very heavily in many areas (both in and outside the US).
Paul
"The Iraq war was vital. Message 666 wouldn't have been possible without it, and I would never have known who I was."
Yet another reason why the invasion of Iraq was a total disaster.
You really have to get your head around the idea that NO-ONE in the world could care less about your stupid message 614 or 666 or 722 or whatever it was. I'm half tempted to go to that topic and count up the messages - if yours really isn't 666, what are you going to do? Maybe someone deleted one earlier on?
nonadas, I don't make up news, are you saying that you do? I form my own opinions based on facts, not emotion like you.
bush went to war because of his insistance that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. They didn't, only ann coulter still believes that they did, unless you do too.
Here are 935 bush and co. lies from those stalinists at yahoo news.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/
20080...formation_study
Also, for a look at the state of the union message and the situation in Iraq from the viewpoint of a real Iraqi:
http://raedinthemiddle.blogspot.com/
Hey, paul, if you want to call anyone
stupid, look in the mirror, you delusional pathetic charlatan!
Paul,
Martin Luther King laid his life on the line for his cause and ultimately lost it - how much more noble can you get than that? If I saw Wolfowitz or Bush taking even the slightest personal risk, I might change my mind about their nobility. But no, they just skulk around in the background, surrounded by security and bodyguards.
nonadas, congratulations on being one of the few to actually challenge the logic. It's refreshing.
"I guess its the 666 message. How does posting a message with a superstitious number make you God?"
It's a long story. First of all, what's the correct action for a perfectly rational, moral actor to make in response to:
1. The Soviets enslaving eastern europe.
2. Saddam raping Iraqi women.
3. Christians believing that if they say "I'm a Christian" they get to go to Heaven while atheists are tortured for eternity.
4. 9/11.
"Also, I believe in God, but not any of the religions."
That's a good start. But first. Where's your evidence for any god, and how do you explain God being one sick bastard who would allow Saddam to rape women etc etc?
"I don't allow powerless, evil men like Muhammad and Moses to fool me into thinking they can lead me to God."
Believe it or not, without Mohammed churning out pure evil, it would not have been possible to solve the problem of crime in the west (by non-Muslims).
PE:"You do have the moral foundation required to see that stopping Saddam from raping women and chopping out men's tongues is a noble deed, right?"
"What does this have to do with you being God?"
It's a long story. I thought I had laid it out on my website (www.mutazilah.org). But apparently the logic is too complex. So, let's go through it slowly.
"By the way, yes what Saddam did was horrible. That's why I supported the war in Iraq in 2003 and voted for Bush again in 2004."
That's great. You're a wonderful person. You wanted to protect innocent people regardless of race/religion/sex/nationality. You wouldn't believe how rare that is. I thought it was commonplace, as a result of decades of indoctrination about how wonderful people of other races/religions/etc were, especially compared to us. I was shocked to find ordinary Australians not giving a monkey's arse about some foreign woman getting raped.
"However, once Iraq was liberated, these subhuman scum sucking swine that call themselves Muslims immediately went to killing the US."
Did you notice long queues forming to join the Iraqi security forces, even though Iraq was under foreign military occupation? You're calling those people scum? I call them the bravest most trusting intelligent people on the planet. Despite decades of indoctrination about how bad America was, they turned against all that, turned against Al Jazeera, and despite American incompetence at not providing protection for these people in the queues, they came back again and again and again no matter how many times the queues were blown up. They are amazing people. All that folklore you make up about the brave American revolutionaries, you can see in reality in Iraq.
Now the question becomes - why were some Iraqis so wonderful while others were such scum? Don't you think that was an interesting question to solve?
"Thanks for nothing, dickheads! We saved you f
from Saddam! I don't care about these pigs anymore."
You are treating all Iraqis as pigs just because some of them are pigs. That's actually racist. Even if it's a majority (and it's not clear that it is), that's no reason to abandon the minority. The moral thing to do is to arm the minority and genocide the majority, together. Unless another solution is available, anyway, which was still in the process of being sought.
"The Iraq war was not a mistake by any measure of logic. It exposed these crap bags for what they really are."
It exposed what percentage of the population they were, anyway, and allowed you to contrast with other countries like Australia and Saudi Arabia. And then figure out what was causing scumbags in ALL these countries.
Afghanistan was split 88/11 in favour of liberation. Did you expect that? Their scumbag Muslims too, aren't they? Did you expect Iraqis to be smarter or dumber than Afghans?
"It got millions of Muslims busy killing eachother instead of focusing on us."
Yep. Arming good Muslims against bad ones is exactly the right thing to do.
"Although trying to install democracy was a great idea"
You needed that just to find out what the hell was actually there. Even the Iraqis themselves didn't know what the hell was there. They found out in 2005 the same as us.
"perhaps staying there isn't."
Staying there makes sure that the deaths are one-sided against the bad Muslims. Sounds good to me.
"I say we just pull out, get the popcorn and have fun watching these pig-felating scum murder eachother."
And then when the bad Muslims win, after you've abandoned the good Muslims, your Plan B is what? Nevermind the immorality of Plan A.
"We can't save these pigs and bring them democracy."
This is the funny thing. You don't need to bring them democracy. You need to bring them rational, humanist, non-subjugating government. The good Muslims are the ones who can run such a thing and do the necessary security. You just need to help them get organized. Or at least, this is what you need to do in Syria etc. It is strategic to leave Iraq as a democracy, for experimental purposes if nothing else. If you can demonstrate a superior Syrian dictatorship, you can see what the Iraqis think of that. Maybe they'll vote for Alusi. We don't yet fully understand these people.
"Their sh1t-filled minds can't understand basic things such as human rights and love."
Some do, some don't. Iraq is not a monolith, and it is racist of you to consider it to be. Some Iraqis lay down their lives for others, and would lay down their life for you too. Why can't you supply these wonderful people with arms?
"The people who can't see this are people who are blinded by over-optimistic ideology like you and Bush"
You have no idea what Bush thinks. His actions are completely strategic. Whether by coincidence or not, I have no idea. Let's see you try to point out where my ideology is over-
over-optimistic. Show me something I said that was wrong. Show me where I said that Iraq would turn into Switzerland (or Australia) overnight. I'll show you where I said "I have no idea what these people will do and I want to find out".
PE:"Like most decent Americans, he's hoping in vain for the Muslims to denounce the cretins in their midst, call Osama a kaffir, say that the Quran is not the literal word of God, that sort of thing. When it didn't pan out that way, he presumably tends towards the "we gave them a chance, time for genocide"."
"That's exactly correct."
You have made an assumption that I don't think the same way. All of you are too early to have known me on the Iraqi blogs in 2004. I was initially hated by the Americans because I was calling for genocide against all Muslims. Actually I didn't really want genocide against them. What I wanted was to find out what reasons people had for NOT genociding them. To allow an enemy to breathe.
"I labored under the delusion that the Muslims wanted a better life for themselves and a better future for their chilren just like real humans do ever since I was born until I woke up in 2006."
Different Muslims want different things. Just like Christians and atheists. The world is not divided between Muslims and non-Muslims. The actual divisions are those outlined in message 666. It took me 25 years to find those divisions, but there they are, all laid out for you. I'm on the right side of every division.
"The Muscums have brought death and hopelessness wherever they rule, and they want to bring the whole world under their empire."
Many certainly do. The majority even. But let's explore that minority. What makes them so different? And why are Christians so different (majority)? What caused Christians to burn heathens at the stake, and then stop?
"It thought that by giving Iraq and Afghanistan democracy, they would be on their way to becoming modern."
Both countries have made huge advances. Have you seen how many political parties both countries have? It's out of this world. Compare it to the year 2000.
"I was wrong, they fought the liberators and the brave US soldiers that supported the government they voted in."
The number of insurgents was estimated to be something like 20,000. In a population of 27 million. Don't tell me you've just gone and judged Iraq, not by the 70% who braved terrorist threats to vote, not by the 500,000 who joined the Iraqi security forces, but by the 20,000 scumbags. What's the population of American jails by the way?
"They wanted Saddam."
The poll I saw soon after liberation gave him 5% support. Where did you get your figure that "they" (presumably 50%? or are you claiming 100%?) wanted Saddam? Does that include the 100,000 that rose up against him in 1991 and got slaughtered? And does it include the Kurds (Muslims) too?
"Even the so called "moderates" supported what they called "resistence""
Da
Data please. What exactly is "support"? The vast majority of Iraqis support their own security forces, which are assisting America. Does that count? Or is that an inconvenient fact?
"as did the Iraqis who got their children killed by the so called "resistence"."
Not sure what you're talking about there. Iraqis support having their kids killed by terrorists? Actually it's a big complaint.
"I don't want to genocide anyone"
You should have. That should have been your default position. There is NO REASON to allow a threat to Americans to stand. If you have correctly identified the enemy as "Islam" then you MUST kill EVERY single one. That includes American Muslims too. Reality is that you've misidentified the enemy though. If you want to know who the enemy is, read message 666. Carefully.
"but if they keep pressing their luck, we will strike back"
It's already time to strike back. If you aren't inspired by images of Americans jumping from skyscrapers to annihilate every single anti-American scumbag in the world, then please get off my blog.
"or at least Israel will sooner or later."
You shouldn't let a country of 6 million or whatever they are, do the work of a country of 300 million. That is bloody lazy.
"We must kill them for the same reason we had to kill Germans to destroy Hitler."
Not really. You can easily overthrow every dictator in the Middle East and replace him. That won't solve the problem. You need to do the step after that. You need to de-Nazify them. THAT is what you did in Germany. The question remains exactly how you go about doing that though. What do you propose teaching the Muslims to de-Nazify them? Guess what? The answer is not in the bible. It's in message 666. Again.
"Their movement has far more followers then Hitler could have hoped for, though not yet the military capabilities, thank God."
It's been designed that way, so that you can actually solve the problem in your lifetime.
"Anyway, thank you for doing well to sum up my thoughts in a few easy sentences."
Be very careful about assuming what my thoughts are. How do you think I could so easily sum up your thoughts?
Foddy, "You said that the holocaust didn't happen? Seriously?"
Foddy, do you know anything about computer programming? Can you think of how you would design a computer simulation? How difficult do you think it would be to fake this sort of thing? Even fake what the earth is made of. Go and read www.simulation-argument.com. I didn't write that. It is someone else outlining how he would go about fooling humans. Even reversing time if required. It's a piece of piss, Foddy.
"You really have to get your head around the idea that NO-ONE in the world could care less about your stupid message 614 or 666 or 722 or whatever it was."
It hasn't been widely published yet. There are intelligent people who say "wow" when they read it. Haven't run across a combination of someone who says "wow" with someone who owns a newspaper yet. As such, you have a sneak preview of the greatest scientist achievement in human history. Of course, just like understanding the Theory of Relativity, you're in the camp of dumb planks who can't understand it.
"I'm half tempted to go to that topic and count up the messages - if yours really isn't 666, what are you going to do? Maybe someone deleted one earlier on?"
You can't delete haloscan comments. I saw the number when I posted it. That's why I wrote message 667, quite shocked about what had just happened. It was news to me that the other commenters hadn't been trying to derive exactly the same thing. I just thought that an atheist had beaten them to the finishing line. So I was in for a second shock.
"Martin Luther King laid his life on the line for his cause and ultimately lost it - how much more noble can you get than that?"
Simple - lay your life on the line for a cause that doesn't personally benefit you. Something for complete strangers. Different race, different religion, different nationality.
"If I saw Wolfowitz or Bush taking even the slightest personal risk, I might change my mind about their nobility. But no, they just skulk around in the background, surrounded by security and bodyguards."
If you want to hold up the US soldiers in esteem instead, that's fine by me. There's a hell of a lot of them to go through until you get to King.
But the thing is, the bottleneck is not the soldiers. We have plenty of soldiers. Even if we didn't, we would just need to hire some Gurkhas. The bottleneck is exactly political and it is people like Wolfowitz who need to carry the day. They need to stand up to you left-wing ratbags and do the right thing. Even if they lose office because of immoral Americans. They are doing all that, Foddy.
buh, "I don't make up news, are you saying that you do?"
No, he said that others did your thinking for you.
"I form my own opinions based on facts, not emotion like you."
No you don't, buh. You make up crap, or copy other people's crap, and then form opinions based on that crap, or copy those crap opinions.
"bush went to war because of his insistance that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction."
That was certainly the most prominent reason given. Would you have preferred he say "hey, there's a whole lot of scumbag Muslims over there, and we were attacked by scumbag Muslims, so how about we just go over there, kick a few scumbag Muslims in the arse, and see what the hell happens?"? You should be thankful he didn't just push the red button and have the problem solved in 10 minutes.
"They didn't, only ann coulter still believes that they did, unless you do too."
They used to. They were unaccounted for. No-one except Saddam knew that he had unilaterally destroyed them. No-one except Saddam knew that the reason he was acting coy was because of a huge cultural misunderstanding.
"Here are 935 bush and co. lies from those stalinists at yahoo news."
I had a quick look. It isn't lies. It is incorrect statements. And in fact, it's just the one incorrect statement, repeated 935 times. A bit like when your ancestors went around saying that the sun revolved around the earth. By your own standards, you apparently come from a long line of habitual liars.
"Also, for a look at the state of the union message and the situation in Iraq from the viewpoint of a real Iraqi"
That's the thing about Iraqis, buh. Some of them are as dumb as you. Some of them are as smart as Wolfowitz.
"Hey, paul, if you want to call anyone
stupid, look in the mirror, you delusional pathetic charlatan!"
You're projecting again, buh. As for the "charlatan" quip, let's see you try to back that with evidence and logic.
Paul
"There are intelligent people who say "wow" when they read it."
I'm one of them. I'm an intelligent person - I'll let you know my educational background and qualifications if you like - and I went "wow!". In fact "Wow, what a load of crap!".
In any case, if we follow your silly argument that the holocaust was part of a computer simulation, then Saddam Hussein and rape in Iraq may have been too. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
"I don't make up news, are you saying that you do? I form my own opinions based on facts, not emotion like you."
Once again, displaying one of the many facets of your mental instability, you accuse others of what you do all the time. Rant on buh... rant on............
"Here are 935 bush and co. lies from those stalinists at yahoo news."
Thats crap. Paul Edwards is right that it is just a few false statements repeated over and over again. Furthermore, this study was made by the "Center for Public Integrity". It is a George Soros funded group..........
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Cen...om_George_Soros
See also a counter argument:
http://news.aol.com/newsbloggers...bush-didnt-lie/
Nice try buh.............
"Also, for a look at the state of the union message and the situation in Iraq from the viewpoint of a real Iraqi:"
I don't give a rat's ass about what these sub-human pigs think. Don't you get it that every time you post one of these "Muslims hate America" articles you only strengthen my argument, not yours?
"Hey, paul, if you want to call anyone
stupid, look in the mirror, you delusional pathetic charlatan!"
Another outburst by the delusional child accusing others of being exactly what he is.
Get some help.....................
I don't see what this has to do with "message 666" but I'll answer.
1. Winning the cold war
2. Nothing. Those ingrateful sub-human bitches attacked the people saving them from the raping.
3. Nothing. As long as they hurt no one, they have the freedom to believe any stupid crap they want.
4. Track down and kill the murderous pig felating scum that kill in the name of allah.
"how do you explain God being one sick who would allow Saddam to women etc etc?"
That and the fact that there are so many people as stupid as the Muslims and buh/foddy is is the best evidense we have against the existence of a benevolent, loving God.
"That's great. You're a wonderful person. You wanted to protect inocent people regardless of race/religion/sex/nationality. You wouldn't believe how rare that is."
I know I found it amazing how people like buh, Michael Moore, Ted Rall and all the other asswipes can justify and rationalize evil.
"Did you notice long queues forming to join the Iraqi security forces"
Yeah I saw. There is still some good Muslims no doubt, but they are a tiny minority.
"Now the question becomes - why were some Iraqis so wonderful while others were such scum?"
Its because they have a murderous ideology that teaches them to hate other people and eachother. They hate everyone.
"You are treating all Iraqis as pigs just because some of them are pigs."
Sure there are a few honest people like Alaa, Omar and Muhammad. But the vast majority of them are sub human nazi muzzy scum. Something like 60% support attacks on Americans and also a large number actually believe Americans are there for oil.
"Afghanistan was split 88/11 in favour of liberation. Did you expect that?"
What? Do you mean 88% support with only 11% oppose the liberation from the Taliban? I would like to see the source, please.
"You needed that just to find out what the hell was actually there."
Giving them democracy and trying to help them was a great idea. When they rejected it and called us murderers and evil, that exposed them for what they really want.
"Staying there makes sure that the deaths are one-sided against the bad Muslims. Sounds good to me."
That is correct. The anti-American left would have you believe that our troops are just "target practice" for the enemy and that they are being easily destroyed. In the real world where us grown ups dwell, ther is many times more sub human scum are being killed then Americans.
"Some Iraqis lay down their lives for others, and would lay down their life for you too."
I doubt it. Most of them would lay down their lives to kill me.
"Let's see you try to point out where my ideology is over-optimistic."
You keep believing you can bring democracy to people who clearly don't want it, and bring human rights to sub-humans.
Hey, I just noticed it was the 40th anniversary of the Tet offensive. You know, the one that was faked by the globalist ruling class of Jews that are keeping us in line..........
nonadas
"Hey, I just noticed it was the 40th anniversary of the Tet offensive. You know, the one that was faked by the globalist ruling class of Jews that are keeping us in line........."
No, it wasn't faked, it was all a computer simulation (or don't you believe that crap either?).
Hurray!!
Paul
You won me some money by coming up with your stupid "oil is a fungible commodity" argument (I predicted to my friend that you would). The fungibility of oil in this context is quite meaningless. Oil in itself may be fungible (insofar as one drop of oil in Venezuela is identical to one drop of oil in Saudi Arabia and one could be exchanged for the other), but here we are talking about the ownership of the oil and the revenue for the sale of that oil. If the owner of one barrel of Iraqi oil sells it, he will get the money for it, not some guy in Venezuela or Saudi Arabia. Now do you get it?
"No, it wasn't faked, it was all a computer simulation (or don't you believe that crap either?)."
Actually, it was a reference to one of buh's wonderful insights into our history.
"And as far as the Vietnam war, it wasn't to free anyone, and the tet offensive was a hoax."
Foddy, you're absolutely right about bush, wolfowitz and co. A bunch of chickenhawk cowards, I sure hope that we don't have to provide wolfowitz with secret service anymore. We shouldn't as he voluntarily quit.
paul, you racist scumbag, if that's the way you want to talk, here's a tidbit I picked up today on Australia.
Seems that Rudd's government is going to apologive to the aboriginals. Jenny Macklin, Federal Minister for indigenous Affairs, said no compensation would be given to those who suffered from the governments past policies. Tens of thousands died from disease, warfare and dispossesion. Indigenous Australians could not vote in national elections until 1962.
Worst of all, between 10 and 30 percent of indigenous children were removed from their homes to be placed with white families or in state run institutions, to assimilate them into the dominant culture. Source: INN World Report.
paul and nonadas, you guys say, evidently, that anyone who thinks as you do are independent thinkers, while anyone who disagrees with you is either crazy or just mindlessly parroting someone elses line.
Bullshit! People like you, who evidently look down on anyone who doesn't believe mass murder is good foreign policy, cause polarization at the very least. You are the reason, you and your like thinking rulers; why we don't talk to Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah. Incidently, saddam wasn't the only one who knew there no weapons of mass destruction. The UN inspectors, Mohammed al-Baradei, Hans Blix, and former US Marine (I believe) and 2000 bush voter Scott Ritter plus everyone else on the team knew. The German government certainly did not think "curveball" was credible. colin powell, didn't really want to give his speech at the UN, knowing it was full of holes. Actually, the administration tried unsuccessfully, repeatedly, to tie Iraq to 9-11. They even said it before the invasion when everyone knew THAT was a lie. The story about "saddam hussein has sought nucular (bush speaking) materials from Africa" (I wish bush would have attempted to say the name of the country in question) was actually pieced together by Italian intellegence agents with dates that didn't match the day of the week, such as saying Sunday, June 1, whatever year, when that date actually fell on a wednesday, proving these notes had to be cobbled at a later date. Other signs of obvious forgery and lying were apparent as well. You scoff at anyone doubting the state story on 9-11, but anyone should have been able to see an administration eager to thwart investigation, destroy evidence, and not show anywhere near the concern, let alone spend as much money, as was spent on investigating the monica lewinski affair.
I'm sorry, I made a mistake in recalling the event in the Viet Nam war that was a false flag. It wasn't the tet offensive, it was the gulf of Tonkin incident, which got the US much deeper into the war. So I accept your ridicule here. Let's see YO
YOU own up to yor mistakes! OH, that's right you don't make any. Her is one of many links exposing the gulf of Tonkin:
http:www.fair.org/index.php?page=2261
Earlier. I meant "Seems like Rudd"s government is going to apologize."
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2261
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Afghanistan risks reverting to a failed state and a haven for global terrorism without new U.S. and international efforts to win the war and deliver economic development, two studies said on Wednesday
LOL Afghanistan is ALREADY a failed state : the Failed States Index 2007
Some very good news :
"Ready to Quit Afghanistan, Canada PM Tells Bush "
End of military occupation ! Power to the afghan people ! US go home !
The Department of State continues to strongly warn U.S. citizens against travel to Afghanistan. There is an ongoing threat to kidnap and assassinate U.S. citizens and Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) workers throughout the country. The ability of Afghan authorities to maintain order and ensure the security of citizens and visitors is very limited. Remnants of the former Taliban regime and the al-Qa’ida network, and other groups hostile to the (PUPPET) Afghan and U.S. governments, remain very active. NATO-led military operations continue, with the involvement of U.S. forces. Travel in all areas of Afghanistan, including the capital, Kabul, is unsafe due to military operations, landmines, banditry, armed rivalry among political and tribal groups, and the possibility of terrorist attacks, including attacks using vehicular or other improvised explosive devices (IEDs). The security environment remains volatile and unpredictable. No part of Afghanistan should be considered immune from violence, and the potential exists throughout the country for hostile acts, either targeted or random, against American nationals at any time.
Attacks on international organizations, international aid workers, and foreign interests have continued since June 2006. The number of attacks in the south and southwestern areas of the country continues to increase as a result of insurgent and drug-related activity. There were more than 130 suicide bomber and vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (VBIEDs) attacks throughout the country in 2006. Kabul was particularly hard hit by militant attacks, such as several detonations of a remote-controlled IED and VBIED on Jalalabad Road, a suicide bomber attack upon a U.S. military convoy near Massoud Circle and the U.S. Embassy compound, a body-borne IED detonation against an ISAF convoy traveling to Kabul International Airport, and a magnetic bomb explosion in the vicinity of the Intercontinental Hotel in western Kabul. These incidents resulted in many deaths and injuries of U.S. and coalition personnel and local civilians.
Incidents have occurred with higher frequency on the Kabul-Jalalabad Road (commonly called Jalalabad Road) since June 2006. Because of an increase in information over the past several months about potential attacks on this road, its use is highly restricted for Embassy employees and, if the security situation warrants, sometimes is curtailed completely.
Since mid-2006 foreigners throughout the country continued to be targeted for violent attacks and kidnappings, whether motivated by terrorism or criminality. A Pakistani construction contractor in Zabul province was kidnapped and a Colombian NGO employee in Wardak province disappeared; neither has been found. Two German journalists were kidnapped and killed while traveling between Baghlan and Bamiyan provinces. An Italian journalist was abducted from a public bus traveling between Lashkar Gah and Kandahar and held by gunmen for three
From a recent interview with Hamid Karzai, President of Afghanistan.
"Q. How much influence does Iran have in your country right now, Mr. President?
A. We have had a particularly good relationship with Iran the past six years. It's a relationship that I hope will continue. We have opened our doors to them. They have been helping us in Afghanistan. The United States very wisely understood that it is our neighbor and encouraged that relationship. I hope Iran would also understand that the United States is a great ally of ours and that we value that alliance with the United States. So that is the foundation of our relations with them, and I hope that it will continue as it is."
Hmm, seems a slightly different assessment to Bush's! Maybe that's why the US isn't so keen in providing further military help in Afghanistan?
Foddy,
PE:"There are intelligent people who say "wow" when they read it."
"I'm one of them. I'm an intelligent person"
Unfortunately not, Foddy. You're as dumb as a lamp post. You can't see your long string of logical fallacies, you can't see that you fabricate evidence all the time, you can't see that you're completely immoral. Even after it has all been explained to you in great detail. You just don't get it.
"I'll let you know my educational background and qualifications if you like"
It's as meaningless as the Muslim terrorists who also have degrees. Yes, you have the ability to pass exams. But no, you aren't in the least intelligent. And you're no more moral than them either. In fact, in some ways you are more immoral than Saddam himself. Because you should have known better. Saddam has an excuse that he was indoctrinated since he was born. You have no such excuse. You lived in a free society with a modern education.
"and I went "wow!". In fact "Wow, what a load of crap!"."
Yep, it clearly went over your head.
"In any case, if we follow your silly argument that the holocaust was part of a computer simulation, then Saddam Hussein and rape in Iraq may have been too. Put that in your pipe and smoke it."
I already said that is exactly what is probably happening, and is the best answer to how there could possibly be a benevolent god. I made up that best answer, Foddy. Another achievement that went way over your head. However, in the absence of incontrovertible PROOF that that is what is happening, a rational, moral actor should assume it is real and act accordingly. And immoral actors (that would be you, Foddy) should find any excuse to keep Saddam raping.
"The fungibility of oil in this context is quite meaningless."
No it isn't, Foddy. It's just yet another thing that goes way over your head (or at least, you pretend that it does).
"Oil in itself may be fungible (insofar as one drop of oil in Venezuela is identical to one drop of oil in Saudi Arabia and one could be exchanged for the other), but here we are talking about the ownership of the oil and the revenue for the sale of that oil. If the owner of one barrel of Iraqi oil sells it, he will get the money for it, not some guy in Venezuela or Saudi Arabia. Now do you get it?"
You've completely missed the other part of the equation. Iraq gets exactly the same price for its oil whether it sells it to the nicest democracy in the world, or the worst dictatorship in the world. Oil is sold at world prices, and it doesn't matter a damn except in your fantasy world.
Thick as a lamp post, Foddy.
Foddy, "Hmm, see