| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
CURSE OSAMA
I curse you.
I relieve myself upon the bones of your ancestors, beginning with your grandfathers and back unto the founder of your line. I cleanse myself with your mother's wedding dress. I spit upon your sire, and I curse the foul act he committed which quickened you, thereby inflicting your obscene presence upon this world. I curse your filthy mewling syphilytic spawn unto the seventh generation; may they be club- footed, slow-witted, misshapen, coarse of feature, hirsute, jaundiced, dim, and foul of breath. I vomit upon the lowborn bitch who might whelp such a brood. As for you, may you fear small noises in the night; may you sense movement at the edge of your vision, turn, and see nothing. May mothers hide their children at your approach; may men spit upon you, and dogs bare their teeth at you. May you run gibbering in fear from the light of day. May your shadow be your only companion, and may you die at the bottom of some pestilential third-world latrine, covered with flies and spitting blood. May your putrid corpse become a portion for the vermin which inhabit such a place. Lastly, I pray to almighty God that I shall never chance to encounter you in the flesh, as I should not wish to shorten the time of your suffering upon this earth by as much as a single second. I curse you from the very core of my being. Satan rot you for the craven coward that you are. May you burn in the foulest pit of Hell for all eternity. I so say. Lord Valve American |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 07:40:01 GMT, Lord Valve
wrote: I curse you. I relieve myself upon the bones of your ancestors, beginning with your grandfathers and back unto the founder of your line. I cleanse myself with your mother's wedding dress. I spit upon your sire, and I curse the foul act he committed which quickened you, thereby inflicting your obscene presence upon this world. I curse your filthy mewling syphilytic spawn unto the seventh generation; may they be club- footed, slow-witted, misshapen, coarse of feature, hirsute, jaundiced, dim, and foul of breath. I vomit upon the lowborn bitch who might whelp such a brood. As for you, may you fear small noises in the night; may you sense movement at the edge of your vision, turn, and see nothing. May mothers hide their children at your approach; may men spit upon you, and dogs bare their teeth at you. May you run gibbering in fear from the light of day. May your shadow be your only companion, and may you die at the bottom of some pestilential third-world latrine, covered with flies and spitting blood. May your putrid corpse become a portion for the vermin which inhabit such a place. Lastly, I pray to almighty God that I shall never chance to encounter you in the flesh, as I should not wish to shorten the time of your suffering upon this earth by as much as a single second. I curse you from the very core of my being. Satan rot you for the craven coward that you are. May you burn in the foulest pit of Hell for all eternity. I so say. That should really worry Al Qaeda........... Unfortunately, despite your flowery copying of a typically inventive Arab cursing style, most of the Islamic world feels exactly that way about America. Nice to see that you're taking such good care of your own in the South.......................... -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lord Valve wrote: I curse you. I relieve myself upon the bones of your ancestors, Snip a pile of hate. There are seven virtues, and seven vices, and the ten commandments, and the message of Christ. I do believe Lord Valve's expressed hate is a vice, not a virtue. Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone. Now why would LV post such a pile of hate on a tube crafting group? It does seem to me that GOD has caused rather a lot of terror in and around New Orleons over the past couple of weeks, and now what does Mr Valve have to say on God's actions? Patrick Turner. |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
A most entertaining pastiche of an Arabic style, my lord Valve (your
post in full below). However, would you expect even such a curse to cause any improvement in an ill-bred dog? Of course you will not be so foolish. The problem with Osama bin Laden is that he has had terrorism bred into him by 14 centuries of a vicious religion called Islam. He cannot help what he is. He cannot be improved by example or admonition. He can only be put down. It is a misnomer to describe Islam as a religion, as I do above merely for the sake of conformity to contemporary usage. Bertrand Russell, no friend of libertarians, and a man with a close firsthand experience of the Russian totalitarian system as an honored guest of Stalin himself, classed as religions Christianity, Buddism, and so on. He classed as political ideologies Communism and Islamism. Even a cursory reading of the Koran will convince you Russell was right. That he remains right is indicated by the fact that every Muslim authority in the world agrees that the time for interpreting the Koran (and associated records, which have almost equal value) passed many centuries ago. In other words, Sharia (Muslim religious *and* secular law) is set in stone forever. Any Muslim who tells you there is a moderate Islam is either politically correct (i.e. stupid or easily deluded or both) or a very bad Muslim who will be punished by his co-religionists as soon as they think they can get away with it. There are no Muslim fanatics. Bin Laden does precisely what his *mainstream* religion tells him to do. There is no attempt from the "moderate" Muslims to argue with the precepts of his jihad, because to do so would be to betray their religion. Muslim preachers everywhere, in the cities of the West no less than in Teheran, preach jihad against the West. Their congregations of "moderate" Muslims do nothing about it. The key idea of Mohammedanism is that there is the faithful and the dead. A Muslim is tasked as a duty by his faith to give you, and everyone else, three choices. They are conversion to Islam, death or subjugation. There are no alternatives. According to an Iraqi mullah described by your own State Department as "a moderate", in a list of dirty things you, all of us unbelievers, rank eight, below pig urine but two above the sweat of your coonhounds. Subjugation means that the non-Muslim are tolerated if they pay higher taxes than Muslims and bear multiple other humiliations; that is why the dhimmi as these underclasses are called, are so small in Muslim lands. Islam is a "faith" that has historically spread only by conquest and force. (Contrast the spread of all other faiths that preach love rather than hatred: they spread by conviction.) Therefore Islam is a political system. I can multiply the examples, and the parallels with communist totalitarianism. But to an intelligent audience, a single telling example will suffice: Christians are admonished to treat the stranger as they would be treated themselves. Communists are admonished to prefer the nash, who are totalitarian U-folk, to the non-nash. Islam goes further. The Koran instructs the faithful to have no friends or helpers from the unbelievers except deceitfully to further the cause of Islam. A lot of our conceptual and legal problems with the terrorists will disappear if we start countering their strategies rather than their tactics, in some cases merely their tools. But the confirmation hearing of Dr Rice, a golden opportunity to clarify muddy Administration thinking, never even touched on this subject, strengthening the suspicion among thinking people that all Democrats are stupid and that Republicans with brains go into business rather than into public service. (It is pretty obvious that the smarts in the present Administration belong to those with substantial careers elsewhere before they were called to serve rather than to the career pols. But Congress each term gets more and more stuffed with careerists.) The Muslim strategy is written out in full in the Koran, just like Hitler's strategy was written out in full in Mein Kampf. Osama bin Laden is not a fanatic, he is within his "religion" not an extremist, he has substantial support even among American Muslims--because he is doing what his holy books tell him to do. Leaders of the Muslim community in America before 9/11 used to say openly that they would like to replace the Constitution by Sharia Law. That's like Stalin saying that of course the Poles could vote, as long as they voted for him, and that single vote was the last vote ever. Sharia would make every American who didn't convert a humiliated member of an underclass whose word would be worth only a quarter of a Muslim's word in court, who can be struck with impunity by a Muslim, who will pay higher taxes than Muslims -- and in your case, Willie, since you have a beard, will be ritually pulled forward by the beard by the tax collector and slapped on both cheeks to emphasize that you should be grateful that higher taxes permit you to remain alive. A good start on countering terrorist strategy rather than mere tactics can be made by declaring Islam a political system and subjecting it to all the normal laws and tests of a political party. Muslims who wish to live in a country should be required to declare that they will obey the laws of the country above all others. (Instead Mr Blair, the British Prime Minister, for political advantage, tried to give Muslims special rights; in America there are a number of documented cases of the FBI and other authorities declaring murders clearly inspired by Muslim jihad theology to be something else ("road rage" in one case in which a Muslim killed a bunch of Jewish students) for fear of public reaction to Muslims in the community. In the State of Victoria in Australia Muslims are protected species to the extent that correctly quoting verses from the Koran can get anyone else fined or jailed; in other words it has become an offence in law to discuss the fabric of the philosophy. As both an Irishman and an Australian, I am ashamed to say that the judge who perpetrated this stupidity is called Michael Higgins.) In foreign parts the war on terrorism can best be fought right there in NY by cleaning up the hypocrisy at the United Nations. For a start, the Western democracies can announce that they will not give any financial or technical aid or diplomatic services to Muslim nations until the non-Muslims in their countries (the dhimmi described above) enjoy the same rights, privileges and protections as Muslim citizens. (The Muslims have met twice in the last quarter-century to draw up their own Declaration of Human Rights. It essentially gives Muslims the right to discriminate against everyone else. It does not forbid Muslims to kill anyone else.) It's a simple test with truly tremendous consequences because it goes to the root of Muslim belief. Sharia law, a theocratic dictatorship, is fundamentally incompatible with democracy. It declared war on all other values in 622 and hasn't changed course since. It is an enemy of democracy and decency and humanity in exactly the same way communism was -- and should be eradicated the same way, with guns and butter, the carrot and the stick, and simple straightforward righteousness. Also, we Westerners are a lot smarter than Muslims, because centuries of repression must eventually have an effect, because the Christian heritage delivers a mode of free thought which the repressive Muslim heritage does not. The key here is that Allah is so all-powerful that mere goodness will constrain his power, and thus he is unpredictable; whereas the Christian God is good, and therefore consistent and predictable. This difference in outlook has huge implications for the resulting societies and their attitudes to art, science and commerce; over a few centuries the difference compounds into the difference between civilization and the barbarities of Saudi Arabia and Iran. In the final analysis, what Osama bin Laden fights for is to bring back the Khalifa, the caliphate, the single Muslim authority abolished by Kemal Ataturk in the 1920s as a necessary precondition to bringing democracy and decent values to Turkey. The key value of the caliphate is that it unites all Muslims into a force that can subjugate and conquer the world for Allah. Your curse will not deter bin Laden from a duty in which, according to the huge majority of his religious authorities, every fellow religionist must support him, and in which we know from polls he has the majority of Muslims worldwide behind him. There is no reason for Muslim hatred of America, of the West, of Democracy, of anyone who isn't like them. The only reason is that the others don't believe in Allah, and should therefore be killed or enslaved. To them it is a rational reason. Any old politically correct reason will do for a cover, with the benefit that PC whores everywhere will lie back and open their legs to be raped. "I like knowing my enemies, so I read Mein Kampf, Das Kapital and the Koran," I said in a speech to the Union, 1965, "Liberty is indivisible", delivered to constant heckling by the same people who, having wasted forty years on the chimera of multiculturalism, are now screeching that the government should stop all immigration... Now I find myself politically to the left of the jeerers and sneerers who didn't do their homework by reading the key texts. God certainly works in strange ways. Why, m'lord, your curse might even bring bin Laden to the path of mercy and righteousness. Of course, he will first have to forswear Islam, because it is a religion without mercy and withouy righteousness even to its own, never mind to the rest of us. Verses from the Koran to prove all my points on request. Someone is bound to be thick enough and politically correct enough to try and argue even with a guy who *has* done his homework. Andre Jute Lord Valve wrote: I curse you. I relieve myself upon the bones of your ancestors, beginning with your grandfathers and back unto the founder of your line. I cleanse myself with your mother's wedding dress. I spit upon your sire, and I curse the foul act he committed which quickened you, thereby inflicting your obscene presence upon this world. I curse your filthy mewling syphilytic spawn unto the seventh generation; may they be club- footed, slow-witted, misshapen, coarse of feature, hirsute, jaundiced, dim, and foul of breath. I vomit upon the lowborn bitch who might whelp such a brood. As for you, may you fear small noises in the night; may you sense movement at the edge of your vision, turn, and see nothing. May mothers hide their children at your approach; may men spit upon you, and dogs bare their teeth at you. May you run gibbering in fear from the light of day. May your shadow be your only companion, and may you die at the bottom of some pestilential third-world latrine, covered with flies and spitting blood. May your putrid corpse become a portion for the vermin which inhabit such a place. Lastly, I pray to almighty God that I shall never chance to encounter you in the flesh, as I should not wish to shorten the time of your suffering upon this earth by as much as a single second. I curse you from the very core of my being. Satan rot you for the craven coward that you are. May you burn in the foulest pit of Hell for all eternity. I so say. Lord Valve American |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bloody hell, Patrick, you really have a terminal case of the disease of
moral equivalence. Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone. How can you compare Lord Valve, who lashes fools with words, to Osama bin Laden, who wants to kill millions without negotiation or warning? That you then find it in yourself to condemn Valve while saying not a word of condemnation of bin Laden tells us you are either stupid or malicious. Since you didn't get it first time round, let me spell it out for you: you are condemning Valve for a sharp tongue while letting bin Laden go scotfree after mass murders, and claiming the "sins" are equal. What has God, a natural disaster in New Oleans, to do with Osame bin Laden? Is this more sick-pop moral equivalence? Or merely slack thinking? Put your mind in gear man. You're in public now. We expect a higher level of logic from those who presume to instruct others in the use of lethal voltages. Andre Jute Patrick Turner wrote: Lord Valve wrote: I curse you. I relieve myself upon the bones of your ancestors, Snip a pile of hate. There are seven virtues, and seven vices, and the ten commandments, and the message of Christ. I do believe Lord Valve's expressed hate is a vice, not a virtue. Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone. Now why would LV post such a pile of hate on a tube crafting group? It does seem to me that GOD has caused rather a lot of terror in and around New Orleons over the past couple of weeks, and now what does Mr Valve have to say on God's actions? Patrick Turner. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Lord Valve" wrote
I curse you. ...[reams of blether about Bin Laden] Republicans must be feeling desperate. We'll send the food and blankets anyway. Some americans might be human, and even poodles need feeding. cheers, Ian |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 00:54:38 GMT, "Ian Iveson"
wrote: We'll send the food and blankets anyway. Some americans might be human, and even poodles need feeding. We Americans have plenty of food and blankets. If it seems like we haven't got the sense God gave ****-ants, as expressed by the OP, that too is sometimes true. What we really need from all y'all fuzzy little fur'ners is a good *believable* external enemy. And I don't mean some pathetic excuse like Saddam Hussein, who could only look like an enemy to a drug-addled talk show host or a child with ADD or the president. I mean a *real* external enemy. Something at least remotely credible. Otherwise we revert to eating our young. Don't laugh, because when we get done with them, we'll be coming after you. Time to get inventive. Can't somebody start some little war or something? Is that too much to ask? 'Course, it's gotta be White People involved, or it won't matter. Natch. Y'all just do yer best. It's very much in yer own interest. Chris Hornbeck |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Andre Jute wrote: A most entertaining pastiche of an Arabic style, my lord Valve (your post in full below). However, would you expect even such a curse to cause any improvement in an ill-bred dog? Of course you will not be so foolish. The problem with Osama bin Laden is that he has had terrorism bred into him by 14 centuries of a vicious religion called Islam. He cannot help what he is. He cannot be improved by example or admonition. He can only be put down. It is a misnomer to describe Islam as a religion, as I do above merely for the sake of conformity to contemporary usage. Bertrand Russell, no friend of libertarians, and a man with a close firsthand experience of the Russian totalitarian system as an honored guest of Stalin himself, classed as religions Christianity, Buddism, and so on. He classed as political ideologies Communism and Islamism. Even a cursory reading of the Koran will convince you Russell was right. That he remains right is indicated by the fact that every Muslim authority in the world agrees that the time for interpreting the Koran (and associated records, which have almost equal value) passed many centuries ago. In other words, Sharia (Muslim religious *and* secular law) is set in stone forever. Any Muslim who tells you there is a moderate Islam is either politically correct (i.e. stupid or easily deluded or both) or a very bad Muslim who will be punished by his co-religionists as soon as they think they can get away with it. There are no Muslim fanatics. Bin Laden does precisely what his *mainstream* religion tells him to do. There is no attempt from the "moderate" Muslims to argue with the precepts of his jihad, because to do so would be to betray their religion. Muslim preachers everywhere, in the cities of the West no less than in Teheran, preach jihad against the West. Their congregations of "moderate" Muslims do nothing about it. The key idea of Mohammedanism is that there is the faithful and the dead. A Muslim is tasked as a duty by his faith to give you, and everyone else, three choices. They are conversion to Islam, death or subjugation. There are no alternatives. According to an Iraqi mullah described by your own State Department as "a moderate", in a list of dirty things you, all of us unbelievers, rank eight, below pig urine but two above the sweat of your coonhounds. Subjugation means that the non-Muslim are tolerated if they pay higher taxes than Muslims and bear multiple other humiliations; that is why the dhimmi as these underclasses are called, are so small in Muslim lands. Islam is a "faith" that has historically spread only by conquest and force. (Contrast the spread of all other faiths that preach love rather than hatred: they spread by conviction.) Therefore Islam is a political system. I can multiply the examples, and the parallels with communist totalitarianism. But to an intelligent audience, a single telling example will suffice: Christians are admonished to treat the stranger as they would be treated themselves. Communists are admonished to prefer the nash, who are totalitarian U-folk, to the non-nash. Islam goes further. The Koran instructs the faithful to have no friends or helpers from the unbelievers except deceitfully to further the cause of Islam. A lot of our conceptual and legal problems with the terrorists will disappear if we start countering their strategies rather than their tactics, in some cases merely their tools. But the confirmation hearing of Dr Rice, a golden opportunity to clarify muddy Administration thinking, never even touched on this subject, strengthening the suspicion among thinking people that all Democrats are stupid and that Republicans with brains go into business rather than into public service. (It is pretty obvious that the smarts in the present Administration belong to those with substantial careers elsewhere before they were called to serve rather than to the career pols. But Congress each term gets more and more stuffed with careerists.) The Muslim strategy is written out in full in the Koran, just like Hitler's strategy was written out in full in Mein Kampf. I am not so sure the peaceful muslims I know would agree. I think many muslims in Iraq wouldn't mind a McDonalds in every village; its as if they don't much care about the religion; they'd just like to get on with life and without the extremists of quite a large variety spoiling their day by conducting wars around their homes, interupting electricity supplies and damaging sewerage pumps and occasionally killing children and their young brothers in law. But there's oil in Iraq, and that is the ONLY reason the US sent an army overseas to secure a whole country for the security of the US in future. If there was no oil, ther'd have been no invasion, no fight, and far les reason for the terrorists to focus on getting even with the US. But of course Andre, 10% of muslims **are** fanatic enough to fight for what they believe in, so we are stuck with them. Osama bin Laden is not a fanatic, he is within his "religion" not an extremist, he has substantial support even among American Muslims--because he is doing what his holy books tell him to do. If Osama isn't fanatic, who is? Leaders of the Muslim community in America before 9/11 used to say openly that they would like to replace the Constitution by Sharia Law. That's like Stalin saying that of course the Poles could vote, as long as they voted for him, and that single vote was the last vote ever. Sharia would make every American who didn't convert a humiliated member of an underclass whose word would be worth only a quarter of a Muslim's word in court, who can be struck with impunity by a Muslim, who will pay higher taxes than Muslims -- and in your case, Willie, since you have a beard, will be ritually pulled forward by the beard by the tax collector and slapped on both cheeks to emphasize that you should be grateful that higher taxes permit you to remain alive. A good start on countering terrorist strategy rather than mere tactics can be made by declaring Islam a political system and subjecting it to all the normal laws and tests of a political party. Muslims who wish to live in a country should be required to declare that they will obey the laws of the country above all others. (Instead Mr Blair, the British Prime Minister, for political advantage, tried to give Muslims special rights; in America there are a number of documented cases of the FBI and other authorities declaring murders clearly inspired by Muslim jihad theology to be something else ("road rage" in one case in which a Muslim killed a bunch of Jewish students) for fear of public reaction to Muslims in the community. In the State of Victoria in Australia Muslims are protected species to the extent that correctly quoting verses from the Koran can get anyone else fined or jailed; in other words it has become an offence in law to discuss the fabric of the philosophy. As both an Irishman and an Australian, I am ashamed to say that the judge who perpetrated this stupidity is called Michael Higgins.) I am not so sure that someone can be fined, arrested, detained, jailed or prosecuted if you quote the Koran in a public place or privately to another person. But in the last few days, some "peace activist" was detained by the latest use of the special anti terrorist legislation. His friends can't explain why he was detained. Politicians are very nervous here and they expect a bombing by some wacko muslim extremists who see themselves being attacked by the new laws and by society's rejection of and vilification of Islam. We are drifting slowly towards a police state. So I would not be surprised to see myself blown to peices one evening while attending a movie in a theatre some place. There are simply hundreds of easy targets in the West. A bomber can conceal enough explosives on his person; a fat man doesn't look at all strange in our world, and then he can walk into a theatre with 500 present and bingo, he gets maybe 100 christians. The more we conduct wars in arab countries, and express hatred toward Islam, and the more we strengthen laws against extremism the more likely we will be bombed. I don't advocate doing nothing though, and this is definately the hard part. In foreign parts the war on terrorism can best be fought right there in NY by cleaning up the hypocrisy at the United Nations. For a start, the Western democracies can announce that they will not give any financial or technical aid or diplomatic services to Muslim nations until the non-Muslims in their countries (the dhimmi described above) enjoy the same rights, privileges and protections as Muslim citizens. (The Muslims have met twice in the last quarter-century to draw up their own Declaration of Human Rights. It essentially gives Muslims the right to discriminate against everyone else. It does not forbid Muslims to kill anyone else.) A clean up is definately a hard part of the action to better the world. It's a simple test with truly tremendous consequences because it goes to the root of Muslim belief. Sharia law, a theocratic dictatorship, is fundamentally incompatible with democracy. It declared war on all other values in 622 and hasn't changed course since. It is an enemy of democracy and decency and humanity in exactly the same way communism was -- and should be eradicated the same way, with guns and butter, the carrot and the stick, and simple straightforward righteousness. In Canada they are proposing to allow moslems to apply sharia law with regard to marriage and other laws among their own kind by volantary consent. Probably it would facilitate a man dumping a wife and getting a new one from his home country. I don't know if it will allow hands to be cut off theives......... Also, we Westerners are a lot smarter than Muslims, because centuries of repression must eventually have an effect, because the Christian heritage delivers a mode of free thought which the repressive Muslim heritage does not. The key here is that Allah is so all-powerful that mere goodness will constrain his power, and thus he is unpredictable; whereas the Christian God is good, and therefore consistent and predictable. This difference in outlook has huge implications for the resulting societies and their attitudes to art, science and commerce; over a few centuries the difference compounds into the difference between civilization and the barbarities of Saudi Arabia and Iran. In the final analysis, what Osama bin Laden fights for is to bring back the Khalifa, the caliphate, the single Muslim authority abolished by Kemal Ataturk in the 1920s as a necessary precondition to bringing democracy and decent values to Turkey. The key value of the caliphate is that it unites all Muslims into a force that can subjugate and conquer the world for Allah. Your curse will not deter bin Laden from a duty in which, according to the huge majority of his religious authorities, every fellow religionist must support him, and in which we know from polls he has the majority of Muslims worldwide behind him. But is there real evidence the majority of muslims support Bin Laden? Sure many would, like the westerners of the 1960's did by pinning up a poster of Che Guavre in their loungerooms. These people got the publicity, but were in fact a very small minority. Most of those long haired socialists discovered capitalism, and got a hair cut, got married, and paid a mortgage. Some have joined extremist christian right churches, which is a real worry. There is no reason for Muslim hatred of America, of the West, of Democracy, of anyone who isn't like them. The only reason is that the others don't believe in Allah, and should therefore be killed or enslaved. To them it is a rational reason. Any old politically correct reason will do for a cover, with the benefit that PC whores everywhere will lie back and open their legs to be raped. Hasn't Osama cited the problems of Palestine being enough reason to conduct a war on the US? Didn't Israel steal Palestine with US support? Its not religion, its not politics, its land&country stealing. "I like knowing my enemies, so I read Mein Kampf, Das Kapital and the Koran," I said in a speech to the Union, 1965, "Liberty is indivisible", delivered to constant heckling by the same people who, having wasted forty years on the chimera of multiculturalism, are now screeching that the government should stop all immigration... Now I find myself politically to the left of the jeerers and sneerers who didn't do their homework by reading the key texts. God certainly works in strange ways. Why, m'lord, your curse might even bring bin Laden to the path of mercy and righteousness. Of course, he will first have to forswear Islam, because it is a religion without mercy and withouy righteousness even to its own, never mind to the rest of us. Verses from the Koran to prove all my points on request. Someone is bound to be thick enough and politically correct enough to try and argue even with a guy who *has* done his homework. Andre Jute There are many areas of the world where religions of different kinds have co-existed for many years. If the secrets of such happy co-existance a lost, we will all be poorer for it, and our hate would not improve matters. But religions and or political beliefs have propelled many wars; all such notions are potential dangers. Consumerism might just triumph over all that has preceded, and bibles and korans may gather layers of dust. Consumerism by everyone on the planet at the same levels of nth america will surely bring eventual ruination to our environment and to our species though. We look set to replace spiritual happiness with keepin up with the neighbours. There is an unlimited supply of only one thing.................. its demand. Every ******* wants some damn thing. So nothing works longterm is really is the answer. Many of the sons and daughters of muslim immigrants to Australia don't much care about their religion, becomeing moderates allows them to integrate far more easily; they get more out of being easy on the christians surrounding them. Methinks conviction wins them to moderacy, even virtual abandonment of their islamic faith. Most people here don't practice any religion, and have a very inconsistent set of values, and they sin everyday. But not many pools of blood here due to troubles like they have elsewhere. The road toll is by far a greater real problem to us than terrorism is ever likely to be. Apparently in Iran, about 50,000 die on their roads, about the same number as in the US which has 6 times the population. Teaching immigrant Iranians to drive properly should be the priority rather than say we hate them for coming because they believe in Allah, and expecting them to renounce their religion. I will be happy to die when i do, no more worries. Patrick Turner. |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Andre Jute wrote: Bloody hell, Patrick, you really have a terminal case of the disease of moral equivalence. Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone. I have not got the feintest idea of what is " a terminal case of the disease of moral equivalence" . I only am aware of the words that form themselves in my brain from my experience. How can you compare Lord Valve, who lashes fools with words, to Osama bin Laden, who wants to kill millions without negotiation or warning? Yes, the two men are very different, but just two guys all the same. That you then find it in yourself to condemn Valve while saying not a word of condemnation of bin Laden tells us you are either stupid or malicious. I have on other occasions said binLaden was stupid since he could achieve more with peaceful protest in favour of his cause to better his followers rather like Ghandi, but methinks binLaden sees that a general strike by all muslims to deny the west their oil and the cessation of financial co-operation of muslims would simply result in millions of deaths by machine gun. So now its a case of may the best man win. An official state of war exists against binLaden and his followers. Since you didn't get it first time round, let me spell it out for you: you are condemning Valve for a sharp tongue while letting bin Laden go scotfree after mass murders, and claiming the "sins" are equal. Did I say there was equality of sins of binLaden and LV? My simple view is that we should fight binLaden and his followers, but there is no need to hate. The hate is a waste of time, and takes us to a low level of being. The evil doer can be cut down, no need to do more. But where is binLaden? How come they haven't found the critter? What has God, a natural disaster in New Oleans, to do with Osame bin Laden? Is this more sick-pop moral equivalence? Or merely slack thinking? What I virtually asked was is "is God a terrorist?" Because He does more damage than Osama, we should hate him more than LV hates Osama. So should LV have two pages of hate for God the Killer, and a sentence for Osama the killer, he'd be more consistent and logical? I don't blame God for anything; **** just happens, eh. Don't fukkin complain to God about it. Maybe More **** will happen if you do. God sent Christ to give us a method to deal with **** when it happens. That's all. He said it will happen, you may count on it. No apologies in advance were given. Don't hate, He said. Practice love instead. Some dude said war is ok, God is on our side. Another old oz Prime Minister said "Life wasn't meant to be easy" he got voted out soon after that. But I just cannot see what purpose there is for posting a page of hate for one's worst imagined enemy. As living people in our society surviving on the roads means we face an enemy each day. The real enemy is Other People In Cars. ( OPIC ). Where is the page of hate for OPIC? I'd really like to be able curse some drivers... May your arms shrivel to the size of tadpole tails, and you never be able to drive, feed yourself, or wank again, May your engine seize up in a thousand places, and your exhaust pipe become blocked forever. May your brakes fail just as you approach a cliff... Put your mind in gear man. You're in public now. We expect a higher level of logic from those who presume to instruct others in the use of lethal voltages. Well I do always leave my car in gear, with the handbrake well applied when i step out of it to address the huge crowds on high voltages. I will say I think there is at least one trouble with Islam, be it a religion or political agenda or whatever, it doesn't have a sense of humour. Not a single joke. Have ye not noticed, all the extremists can't laugh. Hitler never smiled in public. Stalin sort of leered, from contemplating millions he killed. Mao didn't really smile as we may have seem him smile, asians like to laugh a little while whisking some poor bugger's head off; it relieves the tension. Haha, you die, haha, me live, haha. But doesn't Mao make binLaden look like a struggling beginner? Mao killed on a huge scale; didn't he throw away of 10% of china's population to modernise it? First thing I do when I get elected to Prime Minister is tell a few jokes. Everyone is taking themself two seriously, even three or four seriously. They swan about thinking their **** don't stink, but it does. They refuse to gaze in the mirror, and ask "Who the farnarkle is That?" Patrick Turner. Andre Jute Patrick Turner wrote: Lord Valve wrote: I curse you. I relieve myself upon the bones of your ancestors, Snip a pile of hate. There are seven virtues, and seven vices, and the ten commandments, and the message of Christ. I do believe Lord Valve's expressed hate is a vice, not a virtue. Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone. Now why would LV post such a pile of hate on a tube crafting group? It does seem to me that GOD has caused rather a lot of terror in and around New Orleons over the past couple of weeks, and now what does Mr Valve have to say on God's actions? Patrick Turner. |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
Chris Hornbeck wrote:
Can't somebody start some little war or something? Is that too much to ask? 'Course, it's gotta be White People involved, or it won't matter. Natch. Chris Hornbeck Don't joke about such things! ****ed off at being stuck in a cocktail party in the city when I wanted to be on my ship, practising for the Newport race, I shot off at the mouth about the inhumane suffering of the rats being killed in the sewers right under Park Avenue. Of course I made it up as I went. Ruined everyone's canape. But the most attractive woman in the room took me up on it. What shall we do about it, she cried. Next thing I knew, still shooting off at the mouth, I was organizing a fundraising drive for The Humane Treatment of Sewer Rats. I hired a hall, sent out invitations on one of our mailing lists (it was shareholders in a subsidiary in which we consulted to the Pentagon but I told the girl it was a mailing list of known humanitarians). Bunch of little old ladies turned up, started crying as I spoke movingly about the torment of the rats, which I had meanwhile discovered the city were attacking with flamethrowers (well, they had once, and a Post journalist had promised me photographic proof). Soon I had 112 thousand dollars just out of that one meeting -- for the humane treatment of sewer rats. That girl was dewey-eyed on my arm. She worked for weeks to raise about thirty bucks to save the field hares somewhere in Connecticut where her folk went on weekends, and here, for a couple of hours of work, I raised real money for the humane treatment of sewer rats being incinerated under our feet as I spoke, I said, a fate not even the Nazis visited on Jews (little old ladies gagging on embroidered hankies, writing second, bigger cheques). I think you can guess the upshot. I had to find a way to spend 112 thousand dollars on the humane treatment of sewer rats or I was looking a fraud charge squarely in the eye. As the president of my ad agency said to me, Just imagine the view the judge will take of you stealing 112 thousand dollars from little old ladies because you wanted to get into the bimbo's pants; the judge won't find you as amusing as women do. The city health authorities were ****ed of at the way I had dragged them in for the flamethrower incident, which had been a legitimate last resort; they were gloating over my trouble, not offering help, calling up the DA's office to dob me in. (They were already ****ed off at me for another little matter, where I got away with three thousand parking tickets and the cops, who thought they had me dead to rights, were reprimanded by the judge for being being fascist persecutors of innocent, harmless, charming executives.) I spent several bloody, bloody days, with my partners and clients breathing down my neck and screaming in my ears that they didn't pay me to waste time playing practical jokes, dealing with lawyers, trying to give that money away to someone, anyone, who wanted to treat sewer rats humanely. This was before Osama bin Laden but I think I can state with absolute certainty that, until bin Laden came along, sewer rats had an even worse reputation that bin Laden. (All my posts are on-topic, of course.) No one, except the crazed bimbo and the little old ladies who thought i was cuddly, wanted to treat sewer rats humanely. In the end I had a brilliant idea. Why not just give the money to the guys who already work with rats every day and, for perfectly good professional and legal reasons, treat them humanely anyway, at least until they killed them. So I gave the money as a research grant to a couple of swots I knew in college (they used to write the first drafts of my papers for me), who developed a chemical to sterilize sewer rats, clearly a perfectly humane way of saving the little rats from the torch because they wouldn't even be born. They threw a super party with the last of that accursed money when I persuaded a city (which had better be nameless because I may want to go back there) to try out the concoction on their sewer rats. The experiment ended there because quite a few city employees got bitten by these big male rats they had to catch and hold for the injections to the genitals, a circumstance I had been careful not to explain to the guys in comfortable offices I cut the deal with. Rabies injections are just slightly less painful than a spinal tap... Don't, please, make any jokes about small wars. Next to the humane treatment of sewer rats... Beware, you may receive your wish! Andre Jute Practical joker, retired PS What I actually started out to tell you: John Braine wrote in a review of one of my books in the Telegraph, the most reliable of the London broadsheets, that I "travelled across Africa like a moving smallscale war". It wasn't quite so amusing when people daily shot at me. I tend to take that sort of thing personally. Thank God I'm past the age of reckless adventures. But yeah, you want a small war started, if you have the money I'd be happy to introduce you to people who can start one. The fall of Salvador Allende cost as little as eight million American, no white men dead, no link no scandal (no, there isn't a comma missing, one says it all as one phrase, though more commonly as: no link no exposure), so even with inflation something a little less than a small war but bigger than an insurrection can be had for very modest money if you know where to shop. Details on request but very likely to start an endless flame war with the usual opinion-vomiters looking for someone to bore to death. |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 11 Sep 2005 15:35:52 -0700, "Andre Jute" wrote:
Verses from the Koran to prove all my points on request. Someone is bound to be thick enough and politically correct enough to try and argue even with a guy who *has* done his homework. No need to debate with a putrid sack of fascist **** like you, one need only observe the historical facts regarding the treatment of unbelievers by so-called Christian countries over the last two thousand years. The American Civil war, if you'll recall, was largely fought over slavery, a matter of no importance to right-thinking Christians, as these were only heathens. Also consider the bringing of the True Faith to South America, and the untold devastation that caused to the locals. Then we have the attempted genocide of Australian aboriginals by fine upstanding Christians. As ever, your putrid outpourings are a mere sham. Consider also the Golden Age of Jewish culture, which took place under centuries of Islamic rule in Spain - then go crawl back under your rock. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 11 Sep 2005 22:17:15 -0700, "Andre Jute" wrote:
Chris Hornbeck wrote: Can't somebody start some little war or something? Is that too much to ask? 'Course, it's gotta be White People involved, or it won't matter. Natch. Chris Hornbeck Don't joke about such things! snip reams of fanciful self-aggrandisement by the lunatic Jute Jeez, that guy's delusions are getting worse by the minute! Lest we forget, he's really a South African, from a fine God-fearing Christian country which has always treated its non-Christian population with love and care........................ The hypocrisy of clowns like Jute would be absolutely hilarious, if it didn't make you gag. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
That is a kickass piece of solid truth, Andre. Most of these
things I have said before here on AGA, bit by bit, but it's enlightening (and in no small measure entertaining) to see it all in one place at the same time. You will not *believe* the flack you will garner from the jerks on AGA (and RAT, too) who carry Osama's (and Castro's, and Chavez's, and Mugabe's, and a not inconsiderable number of other nasty creeps') water on a daily basis. These people have already capitulated; they are bin Laden's property, and as soon as Osama gets around to instructing them, they will purchase prayer rugs and put their beaten asses into the air five times daily. I'll die first. Lord Valve American Andre Jute wrote: A most entertaining pastiche of an Arabic style, my lord Valve (your post in full below). However, would you expect even such a curse to cause any improvement in an ill-bred dog? Of course you will not be so foolish. The problem with Osama bin Laden is that he has had terrorism bred into him by 14 centuries of a vicious religion called Islam. He cannot help what he is. He cannot be improved by example or admonition. He can only be put down. It is a misnomer to describe Islam as a religion, as I do above merely for the sake of conformity to contemporary usage. Bertrand Russell, no friend of libertarians, and a man with a close firsthand experience of the Russian totalitarian system as an honored guest of Stalin himself, classed as religions Christianity, Buddism, and so on. He classed as political ideologies Communism and Islamism. Even a cursory reading of the Koran will convince you Russell was right. That he remains right is indicated by the fact that every Muslim authority in the world agrees that the time for interpreting the Koran (and associated records, which have almost equal value) passed many centuries ago. In other words, Sharia (Muslim religious *and* secular law) is set in stone forever. Any Muslim who tells you there is a moderate Islam is either politically correct (i.e. stupid or easily deluded or both) or a very bad Muslim who will be punished by his co-religionists as soon as they think they can get away with it. There are no Muslim fanatics. Bin Laden does precisely what his *mainstream* religion tells him to do. There is no attempt from the "moderate" Muslims to argue with the precepts of his jihad, because to do so would be to betray their religion. Muslim preachers everywhere, in the cities of the West no less than in Teheran, preach jihad against the West. Their congregations of "moderate" Muslims do nothing about it. The key idea of Mohammedanism is that there is the faithful and the dead. A Muslim is tasked as a duty by his faith to give you, and everyone else, three choices. They are conversion to Islam, death or subjugation. There are no alternatives. According to an Iraqi mullah described by your own State Department as "a moderate", in a list of dirty things you, all of us unbelievers, rank eight, below pig urine but two above the sweat of your coonhounds. Subjugation means that the non-Muslim are tolerated if they pay higher taxes than Muslims and bear multiple other humiliations; that is why the dhimmi as these underclasses are called, are so small in Muslim lands. Islam is a "faith" that has historically spread only by conquest and force. (Contrast the spread of all other faiths that preach love rather than hatred: they spread by conviction.) Therefore Islam is a political system. I can multiply the examples, and the parallels with communist totalitarianism. But to an intelligent audience, a single telling example will suffice: Christians are admonished to treat the stranger as they would be treated themselves. Communists are admonished to prefer the nash, who are totalitarian U-folk, to the non-nash. Islam goes further. The Koran instructs the faithful to have no friends or helpers from the unbelievers except deceitfully to further the cause of Islam. A lot of our conceptual and legal problems with the terrorists will disappear if we start countering their strategies rather than their tactics, in some cases merely their tools. But the confirmation hearing of Dr Rice, a golden opportunity to clarify muddy Administration thinking, never even touched on this subject, strengthening the suspicion among thinking people that all Democrats are stupid and that Republicans with brains go into business rather than into public service. (It is pretty obvious that the smarts in the present Administration belong to those with substantial careers elsewhere before they were called to serve rather than to the career pols. But Congress each term gets more and more stuffed with careerists.) The Muslim strategy is written out in full in the Koran, just like Hitler's strategy was written out in full in Mein Kampf. Osama bin Laden is not a fanatic, he is within his "religion" not an extremist, he has substantial support even among American Muslims--because he is doing what his holy books tell him to do. Leaders of the Muslim community in America before 9/11 used to say openly that they would like to replace the Constitution by Sharia Law. That's like Stalin saying that of course the Poles could vote, as long as they voted for him, and that single vote was the last vote ever. Sharia would make every American who didn't convert a humiliated member of an underclass whose word would be worth only a quarter of a Muslim's word in court, who can be struck with impunity by a Muslim, who will pay higher taxes than Muslims -- and in your case, Willie, since you have a beard, will be ritually pulled forward by the beard by the tax collector and slapped on both cheeks to emphasize that you should be grateful that higher taxes permit you to remain alive. A good start on countering terrorist strategy rather than mere tactics can be made by declaring Islam a political system and subjecting it to all the normal laws and tests of a political party. Muslims who wish to live in a country should be required to declare that they will obey the laws of the country above all others. (Instead Mr Blair, the British Prime Minister, for political advantage, tried to give Muslims special rights; in America there are a number of documented cases of the FBI and other authorities declaring murders clearly inspired by Muslim jihad theology to be something else ("road rage" in one case in which a Muslim killed a bunch of Jewish students) for fear of public reaction to Muslims in the community. In the State of Victoria in Australia Muslims are protected species to the extent that correctly quoting verses from the Koran can get anyone else fined or jailed; in other words it has become an offence in law to discuss the fabric of the philosophy. As both an Irishman and an Australian, I am ashamed to say that the judge who perpetrated this stupidity is called Michael Higgins.) In foreign parts the war on terrorism can best be fought right there in NY by cleaning up the hypocrisy at the United Nations. For a start, the Western democracies can announce that they will not give any financial or technical aid or diplomatic services to Muslim nations until the non-Muslims in their countries (the dhimmi described above) enjoy the same rights, privileges and protections as Muslim citizens. (The Muslims have met twice in the last quarter-century to draw up their own Declaration of Human Rights. It essentially gives Muslims the right to discriminate against everyone else. It does not forbid Muslims to kill anyone else.) It's a simple test with truly tremendous consequences because it goes to the root of Muslim belief. Sharia law, a theocratic dictatorship, is fundamentally incompatible with democracy. It declared war on all other values in 622 and hasn't changed course since. It is an enemy of democracy and decency and humanity in exactly the same way communism was -- and should be eradicated the same way, with guns and butter, the carrot and the stick, and simple straightforward righteousness. Also, we Westerners are a lot smarter than Muslims, because centuries of repression must eventually have an effect, because the Christian heritage delivers a mode of free thought which the repressive Muslim heritage does not. The key here is that Allah is so all-powerful that mere goodness will constrain his power, and thus he is unpredictable; whereas the Christian God is good, and therefore consistent and predictable. This difference in outlook has huge implications for the resulting societies and their attitudes to art, science and commerce; over a few centuries the difference compounds into the difference between civilization and the barbarities of Saudi Arabia and Iran. In the final analysis, what Osama bin Laden fights for is to bring back the Khalifa, the caliphate, the single Muslim authority abolished by Kemal Ataturk in the 1920s as a necessary precondition to bringing democracy and decent values to Turkey. The key value of the caliphate is that it unites all Muslims into a force that can subjugate and conquer the world for Allah. Your curse will not deter bin Laden from a duty in which, according to the huge majority of his religious authorities, every fellow religionist must support him, and in which we know from polls he has the majority of Muslims worldwide behind him. There is no reason for Muslim hatred of America, of the West, of Democracy, of anyone who isn't like them. The only reason is that the others don't believe in Allah, and should therefore be killed or enslaved. To them it is a rational reason. Any old politically correct reason will do for a cover, with the benefit that PC whores everywhere will lie back and open their legs to be raped. "I like knowing my enemies, so I read Mein Kampf, Das Kapital and the Koran," I said in a speech to the Union, 1965, "Liberty is indivisible", delivered to constant heckling by the same people who, having wasted forty years on the chimera of multiculturalism, are now screeching that the government should stop all immigration... Now I find myself politically to the left of the jeerers and sneerers who didn't do their homework by reading the key texts. God certainly works in strange ways. Why, m'lord, your curse might even bring bin Laden to the path of mercy and righteousness. Of course, he will first have to forswear Islam, because it is a religion without mercy and withouy righteousness even to its own, never mind to the rest of us. Verses from the Koran to prove all my points on request. Someone is bound to be thick enough and politically correct enough to try and argue even with a guy who *has* done his homework. Andre Jute Lord Valve wrote: I curse you. I relieve myself upon the bones of your ancestors, beginning with your grandfathers and back unto the founder of your line. I cleanse myself with your mother's wedding dress. I spit upon your sire, and I curse the foul act he committed which quickened you, thereby inflicting your obscene presence upon this world. I curse your filthy mewling syphilytic spawn unto the seventh generation; may they be club- footed, slow-witted, misshapen, coarse of feature, hirsute, jaundiced, dim, and foul of breath. I vomit upon the lowborn bitch who might whelp such a brood. As for you, may you fear small noises in the night; may you sense movement at the edge of your vision, turn, and see nothing. May mothers hide their children at your approach; may men spit upon you, and dogs bare their teeth at you. May you run gibbering in fear from the light of day. May your shadow be your only companion, and may you die at the bottom of some pestilential third-world latrine, covered with flies and spitting blood. May your putrid corpse become a portion for the vermin which inhabit such a place. Lastly, I pray to almighty God that I shall never chance to encounter you in the flesh, as I should not wish to shorten the time of your suffering upon this earth by as much as a single second. I curse you from the very core of my being. Satan rot you for the craven coward that you are. May you burn in the foulest pit of Hell for all eternity. I so say. Lord Valve American |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
Patrick Turner wrote:
Andre Jute wrote: A most entertaining pastiche of an Arabic style, my lord Valve (your post in full below). However, would you expect even such a curse to cause any improvement in an ill-bred dog? Of course you will not be so foolish. The problem with Osama bin Laden is that he has had terrorism bred into him by 14 centuries of a vicious religion called Islam. He cannot help what he is. He cannot be improved by example or admonition. He can only be put down. It is a misnomer to describe Islam as a religion, as I do above merely for the sake of conformity to contemporary usage. Bertrand Russell, no friend of libertarians, and a man with a close firsthand experience of the Russian totalitarian system as an honored guest of Stalin himself, classed as religions Christianity, Buddism, and so on. He classed as political ideologies Communism and Islamism. Even a cursory reading of the Koran will convince you Russell was right. That he remains right is indicated by the fact that every Muslim authority in the world agrees that the time for interpreting the Koran (and associated records, which have almost equal value) passed many centuries ago. In other words, Sharia (Muslim religious *and* secular law) is set in stone forever. Any Muslim who tells you there is a moderate Islam is either politically correct (i.e. stupid or easily deluded or both) or a very bad Muslim who will be punished by his co-religionists as soon as they think they can get away with it. There are no Muslim fanatics. Bin Laden does precisely what his *mainstream* religion tells him to do. There is no attempt from the "moderate" Muslims to argue with the precepts of his jihad, because to do so would be to betray their religion. Muslim preachers everywhere, in the cities of the West no less than in Teheran, preach jihad against the West. Their congregations of "moderate" Muslims do nothing about it. The key idea of Mohammedanism is that there is the faithful and the dead. A Muslim is tasked as a duty by his faith to give you, and everyone else, three choices. They are conversion to Islam, death or subjugation. There are no alternatives. According to an Iraqi mullah described by your own State Department as "a moderate", in a list of dirty things you, all of us unbelievers, rank eight, below pig urine but two above the sweat of your coonhounds. Subjugation means that the non-Muslim are tolerated if they pay higher taxes than Muslims and bear multiple other humiliations; that is why the dhimmi as these underclasses are called, are so small in Muslim lands. Islam is a "faith" that has historically spread only by conquest and force. (Contrast the spread of all other faiths that preach love rather than hatred: they spread by conviction.) Therefore Islam is a political system. I can multiply the examples, and the parallels with communist totalitarianism. But to an intelligent audience, a single telling example will suffice: Christians are admonished to treat the stranger as they would be treated themselves. Communists are admonished to prefer the nash, who are totalitarian U-folk, to the non-nash. Islam goes further. The Koran instructs the faithful to have no friends or helpers from the unbelievers except deceitfully to further the cause of Islam. A lot of our conceptual and legal problems with the terrorists will disappear if we start countering their strategies rather than their tactics, in some cases merely their tools. But the confirmation hearing of Dr Rice, a golden opportunity to clarify muddy Administration thinking, never even touched on this subject, strengthening the suspicion among thinking people that all Democrats are stupid and that Republicans with brains go into business rather than into public service. (It is pretty obvious that the smarts in the present Administration belong to those with substantial careers elsewhere before they were called to serve rather than to the career pols. But Congress each term gets more and more stuffed with careerists.) The Muslim strategy is written out in full in the Koran, just like Hitler's strategy was written out in full in Mein Kampf. I am not so sure the peaceful muslims I know would agree. You're assuming that they have read the Koran, Patrick. They haven't. The Koran isn't in a language that your average Muslim can understand. It is in an archaic form of Arabic. It is read and interpreted to them by the mullah. They don't actually know what it says. It is like Christians before the Bible was available in the vernacular, in English. I think many muslims in Iraq wouldn't mind a McDonalds in every village; its as if they don't much care about the religion; they'd just like to get on with life and without the extremists of quite a large variety spoiling their day by conducting wars around their homes, interupting electricity supplies and damaging sewerage pumps and occasionally killing children and their young brothers in law. We're not overly impressed with the woolly processes of your mind, Patrick. Do you have any facts to support your contention? But there's oil in Iraq, and that is the ONLY reason the US sent an army overseas to secure a whole country for the security of the US in future. If there was no oil, ther'd have been no invasion, no fight, and far les reason for the terrorists to focus on getting even with the US. I just went to considerable trouble to explain to you that Muslims attack non-Muslim power centres *because they are non-Muslim*. Have you read what I said at all? How the **** does Iraq explain the embassy bombing in East Africa, and other earlier Muslim terrorist crimes? But of course Andre, 10% of muslims **are** fanatic enough to fight for what they believe in, so we are stuck with them. 10% of Muslims would be bad enough, possibly overwhelming. But what I'm trying to explain to you is that the entire population in Muslim countries can still be swept up to jihad, as Christians could to a crusade a millennium ago. Osama bin Laden is not a fanatic, he is within his "religion" not an extremist, he has substantial support even among American Muslims--because he is doing what his holy books tell him to do. If Osama isn't fanatic, who is? Bin Laden is not a fanatic in exactly the same way that a Quaker is not a fanatic merely because he states that he believes in the tenets of his religion. The difference is that the Quaker's religion is peaceful and loving, and bin Laden's religion is not a religion at all but an ideology of violence and conquest. Leaders of the Muslim community in America before 9/11 used to say openly that they would like to replace the Constitution by Sharia Law. That's like Stalin saying that of course the Poles could vote, as long as they voted for him, and that single vote was the last vote ever. Sharia would make every American who didn't convert a humiliated member of an underclass whose word would be worth only a quarter of a Muslim's word in court, who can be struck with impunity by a Muslim, who will pay higher taxes than Muslims -- and in your case, Willie, since you have a beard, will be ritually pulled forward by the beard by the tax collector and slapped on both cheeks to emphasize that you should be grateful that higher taxes permit you to remain alive. A good start on countering terrorist strategy rather than mere tactics can be made by declaring Islam a political system and subjecting it to all the normal laws and tests of a political party. Muslims who wish to live in a country should be required to declare that they will obey the laws of the country above all others. (Instead Mr Blair, the British Prime Minister, for political advantage, tried to give Muslims special rights; in America there are a number of documented cases of the FBI and other authorities declaring murders clearly inspired by Muslim jihad theology to be something else ("road rage" in one case in which a Muslim killed a bunch of Jewish students) for fear of public reaction to Muslims in the community. In the State of Victoria in Australia Muslims are protected species to the extent that correctly quoting verses from the Koran can get anyone else fined or jailed; in other words it has become an offence in law to discuss the fabric of the philosophy. As both an Irishman and an Australian, I am ashamed to say that the judge who perpetrated this stupidity is called Michael Higgins.) I am not so sure that someone can be fined, arrested, detained, jailed or prosecuted if you quote the Koran in a public place or privately to another person. It happened in your back yard. Do your homework before you doubt me. Start he http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary...es/000952.html http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/com...E25717,00.html http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=3050 But in the last few days, some "peace activist" was detained by the latest use of the special anti terrorist legislation. His friends can't explain why he was detained. Politicians are very nervous here and they expect a bombing by some wacko muslim extremists who see themselves being attacked by the new laws and by society's rejection of and vilification of Islam. We are drifting slowly towards a police state. So I would not be surprised to see myself blown to peices one evening while attending a movie in a theatre some place. There are simply hundreds of easy targets in the West. A bomber can conceal enough explosives on his person; a fat man doesn't look at all strange in our world, and then he can walk into a theatre with 500 present and bingo, he gets maybe 100 christians. The more we conduct wars in arab countries, and express hatred toward Islam, and the more we strengthen laws against extremism the more likely we will be bombed. I don't advocate doing nothing though, and this is definately the hard part. Zzzzzz! This is actually serious stuff. Could you state your point in one sentence without internal contradiction? If you cannot, you don't have a point. In foreign parts the war on terrorism can best be fought right there in NY by cleaning up the hypocrisy at the United Nations. For a start, the Western democracies can announce that they will not give any financial or technical aid or diplomatic services to Muslim nations until the non-Muslims in their countries (the dhimmi described above) enjoy the same rights, privileges and protections as Muslim citizens. (The Muslims have met twice in the last quarter-century to draw up their own Declaration of Human Rights. It essentially gives Muslims the right to discriminate against everyone else. It does not forbid Muslims to kill anyone else.) A clean up is definately a hard part of the action to better the world. It's a simple test with truly tremendous consequences because it goes to the root of Muslim belief. Sharia law, a theocratic dictatorship, is fundamentally incompatible with democracy. It declared war on all other values in 622 and hasn't changed course since. It is an enemy of democracy and decency and humanity in exactly the same way communism was -- and should be eradicated the same way, with guns and butter, the carrot and the stick, and simple straightforward righteousness. In Canada they are proposing to allow moslems to apply sharia law with regard to marriage and other laws among their own kind by volantary consent. Probably it would facilitate a man dumping a wife and getting a new one from his home country. I don't know if it will allow hands to be cut off theives......... Also, we Westerners are a lot smarter than Muslims, because centuries of repression must eventually have an effect, because the Christian heritage delivers a mode of free thought which the repressive Muslim heritage does not. The key here is that Allah is so all-powerful that mere goodness will constrain his power, and thus he is unpredictable; whereas the Christian God is good, and therefore consistent and predictable. This difference in outlook has huge implications for the resulting societies and their attitudes to art, science and commerce; over a few centuries the difference compounds into the difference between civilization and the barbarities of Saudi Arabia and Iran. In the final analysis, what Osama bin Laden fights for is to bring back the Khalifa, the caliphate, the single Muslim authority abolished by Kemal Ataturk in the 1920s as a necessary precondition to bringing democracy and decent values to Turkey. The key value of the caliphate is that it unites all Muslims into a force that can subjugate and conquer the world for Allah. Your curse will not deter bin Laden from a duty in which, according to the huge majority of his religious authorities, every fellow religionist must support him, and in which we know from polls he has the majority of Muslims worldwide behind him. But is there real evidence the majority of muslims support Bin Laden? Huh? First you go on about how they hate us for our supposed crimes, now you doubt they support their champion bin Laden? My statement of support for bin Laden is not based on what I think but on a BBC report. Sure many would, like the westerners of the 1960's did by pinning up a poster of Che Guavre in their loungerooms. These people got the publicity, but were in fact a very small minority. **** me with a hot stone. Do you really fail to understand the difference in scale between a few South American hotheads and a worldwide movement with billions available and nations to hide in? Most of those long haired socialists discovered capitalism, and got a hair cut, got married, and paid a mortgage. Bin Laden and his guys been there, done that, made their millions, now for a hobby they want to kill you. My money is on them, not on you, Patrick. Their minds are not woolly, and they don't care much for political correctness. Some have joined extremist christian right churches, which is a real worry. Bring another hot stone. Muslims daily kill hundreds, possibly thousands of people, but you worry about Christians who haven't killed anyone, who haven't threatened to kill anyone, whose religion forbids them to kill anyone. This is political correctness run absolutely riot. There is no reason for Muslim hatred of America, of the West, of Democracy, of anyone who isn't like them. The only reason is that the others don't believe in Allah, and should therefore be killed or enslaved. To them it is a rational reason. Any old politically correct reason will do for a cover, with the benefit that PC whores everywhere will lie back and open their legs to be raped. Hasn't Osama cited the problems of Palestine being enough reason to conduct a war on the US? Your ignorance is showing again. Bin Laden attacked America as a protest against the Saudi regime becoming soft Muslims. The symbol of their flabbiness is that they provided bases for the Americans in first Gulf War. Bin Laden did not think that the heathens should be permitted in the same country as the holy city of Mecca. Since you won't get it by yourself, there is an irony here, in that the Saudi regime, who belong to a sect that other sects within Islam consider narrowminded, runs perhaps the most oppressive Sharia regime anywhere on earth. But bin Laden considers them soft.. Didn't Israel steal Palestine with US support? All Muslim lands were obtained and are held by conquest. The Jews in fact bought the land from the Palestinians, piece by piece, in normal real estate transactions. The Jews were few; they needed those Palestinians to stay. After a war Jordan and Eqypt and Syria started with the express purpose of driving the Jews into the sea, and which they lost, the remaining Palestinians were encouraged by the losers to flee. Jordan, Syria and Egypt did not offer them a home. The rich Arab nations, all of them with vast open spaces, have not settled the miserably few Palestinians in more than half a century, preferring instead to hold them as human club over the head of Israel, and as moral blackmail on the rest of the world. The Palestinians have been so outraged by this treatment by their fellow Muslims that they have mounted coup d'etat in more than one of those Arab countries, most notably the nearly successful takeover of Jordan in the Black September uprising. Its not religion, its not politics, its land&country stealing. Really, Patrick, if you want to pontificate on such matters, you should take the trouble to learn a little simple history. Regurgitating politically correct untruths merely does more damage. "I like knowing my enemies, so I read Mein Kampf, Das Kapital and the Koran," I said in a speech to the Union, 1965, "Liberty is indivisible", delivered to constant heckling by the same people who, having wasted forty years on the chimera of multiculturalism, are now screeching that the government should stop all immigration... Now I find myself politically to the left of the jeerers and sneerers who didn't do their homework by reading the key texts. God certainly works in strange ways. Why, m'lord, your curse might even bring bin Laden to the path of mercy and righteousness. Of course, he will first have to forswear Islam, because it is a religion without mercy and withouy righteousness even to its own, never mind to the rest of us. Verses from the Koran to prove all my points on request. Someone is bound to be thick enough and politically correct enough to try and argue even with a guy who *has* done his homework. Andre Jute There are many areas of the world where religions of different kinds have co-existed for many years. Sure. So what? My point is that none of those countries are Muslim countries. My point is that in Muslim countries minorities do not have any rights. My point is that it a deliberate part of the Muslim "religion" to oppress minorities. That by itself makes Muslims unfit to be commercial partners or otherwise allies of morally fit nations. (I live in Ireland, a notoriously neutral nation, though in recent years it has a good history in providing more effective peacekeeping troops than for instance the Americans and the Canadians. It ill behoves Irish politicians to crow, but the British are supposed to have an officially moral foreign policy... You might address some of your outraged sputtering at Mr Blair for hypocrisy, Patrick, and I won't say a word because you will be right. But I don't see what else he could have done except follow George Bush into that necessary war.) If the secrets of such happy co-existance a lost, we will all be poorer for it, and our hate would not improve matters. This is the sort of waffle you get for years of letting poltical correctness in the media pulp the good brains your parents left you with. I doubt Lord Valve is so unsophisticated that he would post a hate missive on a public forum. The signal that he intends humour is in the stylistic form. Other people have to pay to send their children to university to get their brains softened by political correctness. Did you go to night school, Patrick, to have your brains softened? Or did you just buy a pair of heavily rose-tinted glasses? But religions and or political beliefs have propelled many wars; all such notions are potential dangers. Oh, crap. How do you propose that Christians or Budhists will ever in the next generation start a war for religion? As for political beliefs, that is exactly why I call Islam a clear and present danger (a specific term of importance in permitting the President of the United States to act without Congressional approval), because Islam is not a religion but a system of social engineering very much akin to the late unlamented soviet communist one. Consumerism might just triumph over all that has preceded, and bibles and korans may gather layers of dust. Wishful thinking. I too wish you were right. But, again, you haven't done your homework. A Muslim who ceases to be a Muslim is in Sharia an apostate, and that means an automatic death sentence. Did you know that the Palestinians have killed far more of their own than the Israelis ever killed? Why? To keep them in line, to stop them emigrating to a better life elsewhere, to enforce conformity, in other words to keep them in misery as a nation of hostages to Arab wet dreams of driving out the Jews. Consumerism will work with the Chinese, if slowly. With the Muslims, the poisoned head will need to be cut off. That will be a very slow process. You simply have no idea what a hold your 10% minority (and it may be much larger) has on many Muslim societies. Ask yourself whether the YMCA could organize the murder of an Australian Prime Minister. The Muslim Brotherhood killed Anwar Sadat for making peace with Israel in a deal that got the Palestinians land to settle on. The Muslims killed a Dutch filmmaker for a film critical of Muslims. (The film maker, van Gogh, was a sick ****; I saw his film on Catholics and was embarrassed, so I don't imagine his film on Muslims was much better. But kitsch taste is no reason to kill him.) Consumerism by everyone on the planet at the same levels of nth america will surely bring eventual ruination to our environment and to our species though. More undigested politically correct crap. Do you not understand that there is now more known, proven resources than at any time in history? You can read electronic diagrams. The resource statistics are no more complicated. Go read them! Make up your own mind; don't let an idiot of a journalist, who couldn't be bothered to study the raw figures, feed you political pap. There is now more known oil in the ground than ever before. All that has slowed down is the *rate* of *increase* of new discoveries. There is no energy crisis. There won't be an energy crisis for longer into the future than the beginning of the industrial revolution is into the past. Of course, everyone with his mind in gear, knows that in a hundred years we won't use oil at all, we will long since have discovered hwo to run everything on the most abundant resource on the planet, water, which contains a powerful fuel called hydrogen. (The politically correct, tempted to call me an enemy of the environment, are hereby warned that my lifestyle is whole lot less of a danger to the environment than yours is, so keep your trap shut unless you want me to embarrass you in public.) We look set to replace spiritual happiness with keepin up with the neighbours. Whatever. I don't care to prescribe the form of anyone else's happiness. I merely don't want them interfering in mine. That is the point about Islamism, that it insists on its right to enforce its values on everyone else. There is an unlimited supply of only one thing.................. its demand. Every ******* wants some damn thing. Except sour Puritans like you, eh Patrick? But you too want something: you want to be able to tell us what is best for us. **** you. So nothing works longterm is really is the answer. That's what makes man in general, and westerners in particular, such a durable species, that we are omnivorous (yah, yah, I know, that enrages the Green Puritans and other environmental fascists) and infinitely adaptive. It's an advantage, not a cause for breastbeating. Many of the sons and daughters of muslim immigrants to Australia don't much care about their religion, becomeing moderates allows them to integrate far more easily; they get more out of being easy on the christians surrounding them. Methinks conviction wins them to moderacy, even virtual abandonment of their islamic faith. Yes, I too have seen the assimilative power of Australia. But Australia is fewer than 20 million people. She can't assimilate more than a tiny fraction of Muslims, even if the will were there, which it is not, which it will not be any time into the future. Most people here don't practice any religion, and have a very inconsistent set of values, and they sin everyday. But not many pools of blood here due to troubles like they have elsewhere. Better and better. The road toll is by far a greater real problem to us than terrorism is ever likely to be. Apparently in Iran, about 50,000 die on their roads, about the same number as in the US which has 6 times the population. I've been explaining to you that human life has a very low value in a Muslim society, though some forms, women for instance, have less value again, and some life forms, like unbelievers, have no value at all. Teaching immigrant Iranians to drive properly should be the priority rather than say we hate them for coming because they believe in Allah, and expecting them to renounce their religion. Try reading what I said, Patrick, rather than what your prejudice whispers in your head that I said. I don't hate them; I don't waste motion on hatred. I have no objection if Muslims want to believe in Allah or Edward the Teddy Bear or in Sex with Barbarella. I said that they hate us because their religion prescribes hatred of all unbelievers. I said that their religion is a system of political conquest. As long as they stay in their country, I do not ask them to renounce their religion. However, when they wish to stay in another country, I said, it is fair to demand an undertaking that they will honour the laws of the host country above any other laws. If they wish to see that undertaking as a renunciation of their religion, they can refuse the undertaking and return where they came from. Clear now? See, I'm as politically correct as anyone. I haven't even asked what the fellow's religion is, merely that he observes the laws of my country while he is in it as I will observe the laws of his country when I am there. I will be happy to die when i do, no more worries. Perhaps you'd get more that is useful done before you croak if you left history and morality to people willing and able to put in the time to understand the context. Patrick Turner. Andre Jute |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Seen. Ignored with the contempt it deserves.
Stewart Pinkerton wrote: On 11 Sep 2005 15:35:52 -0700, "Andre Jute" wrote: Verses from the Koran to prove all my points on request. Someone is bound to be thick enough and politically correct enough to try and argue even with a guy who *has* done his homework. No need to debate with a putrid sack of fascist **** like you, one need only observe the historical facts regarding the treatment of unbelievers by so-called Christian countries over the last two thousand years. The American Civil war, if you'll recall, was largely fought over slavery, a matter of no importance to right-thinking Christians, as these were only heathens. Also consider the bringing of the True Faith to South America, and the untold devastation that caused to the locals. Then we have the attempted genocide of Australian aboriginals by fine upstanding Christians. As ever, your putrid outpourings are a mere sham. Consider also the Golden Age of Jewish culture, which took place under centuries of Islamic rule in Spain - then go crawl back under your rock. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
Seen. Ignored with contempt.
Stewart Pinkerton wrote: On 11 Sep 2005 22:17:15 -0700, "Andre Jute" wrote: Chris Hornbeck wrote: Can't somebody start some little war or something? Is that too much to ask? 'Course, it's gotta be White People involved, or it won't matter. Natch. Chris Hornbeck Don't joke about such things! snip reams of fanciful self-aggrandisement by the lunatic Jute Jeez, that guy's delusions are getting worse by the minute! Lest we forget, he's really a South African, from a fine God-fearing Christian country which has always treated its non-Christian population with love and care........................ The hypocrisy of clowns like Jute would be absolutely hilarious, if it didn't make you gag. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
Andre Jute wrote: A most entertaining pastiche of an Arabic style, my lord Valve (your post in full below). However, would you expect even such a curse to cause any improvement in an ill-bred dog? Of course you will not be so foolish. The problem with Osama bin Laden is that he has had terrorism bred into him by 14 centuries of a vicious religion called Islam. He cannot help what he is. He cannot be improved by example or admonition. He can only be put down. It is a misnomer to describe Islam as a religion, as I do above merely for the sake of conformity to contemporary usage. Bertrand Russell, no friend of libertarians, and a man with a close firsthand experience of the Russian totalitarian system as an honored guest of Stalin himself, classed as religions Christianity, Buddism, and so on. He classed as political ideologies Communism and Islamism. Even a cursory reading of the Koran will convince you Russell was right. That he remains right is indicated by the fact that every Muslim authority in the world agrees that the time for interpreting the Koran (and associated records, which have almost equal value) passed many centuries ago. In other words, Sharia (Muslim religious *and* secular law) is set in stone forever. Any Muslim who tells you there is a moderate Islam is either politically correct (i.e. stupid or easily deluded or both) or a very bad Muslim who will be punished by his co-religionists as soon as they think they can get away with it. There are no Muslim fanatics. Bin Laden does precisely what his *mainstream* religion tells him to do. There is no attempt from the "moderate" Muslims to argue with the precepts of his jihad, because to do so would be to betray their religion. Muslim preachers everywhere, in the cities of the West no less than in Teheran, preach jihad against the West. Their congregations of "moderate" Muslims do nothing about it. The key idea of Mohammedanism is that there is the faithful and the dead. A Muslim is tasked as a duty by his faith to give you, and everyone else, three choices. They are conversion to Islam, death or subjugation. There are no alternatives. According to an Iraqi mullah described by your own State Department as "a moderate", in a list of dirty things you, all of us unbelievers, rank eight, below pig urine but two above the sweat of your coonhounds. Subjugation means that the non-Muslim are tolerated if they pay higher taxes than Muslims and bear multiple other humiliations; that is why the dhimmi as these underclasses are called, are so small in Muslim lands. Islam is a "faith" that has historically spread only by conquest and force. (Contrast the spread of all other faiths that preach love rather than hatred: they spread by conviction.) Therefore Islam is a political system. I can multiply the examples, and the parallels with communist totalitarianism. But to an intelligent audience, a single telling example will suffice: Christians are admonished to treat the stranger as they would be treated themselves. Communists are admonished to prefer the nash, who are totalitarian U-folk, to the non-nash. Islam goes further. The Koran instructs the faithful to have no friends or helpers from the unbelievers except deceitfully to further the cause of Islam. A lot of our conceptual and legal problems with the terrorists will disappear if we start countering their strategies rather than their tactics, in some cases merely their tools. But the confirmation hearing of Dr Rice, a golden opportunity to clarify muddy Administration thinking, never even touched on this subject, strengthening the suspicion among thinking people that all Democrats are stupid and that Republicans with brains go into business rather than into public service. (It is pretty obvious that the smarts in the present Administration belong to those with substantial careers elsewhere before they were called to serve rather than to the career pols. But Congress each term gets more and more stuffed with careerists.) The Muslim strategy is written out in full in the Koran, just like Hitler's strategy was written out in full in Mein Kampf. Osama bin Laden is not a fanatic, he is within his "religion" not an extremist, he has substantial support even among American Muslims--because he is doing what his holy books tell him to do. Leaders of the Muslim community in America before 9/11 used to say openly that they would like to replace the Constitution by Sharia Law. That's like Stalin saying that of course the Poles could vote, as long as they voted for him, and that single vote was the last vote ever. Sharia would make every American who didn't convert a humiliated member of an underclass whose word would be worth only a quarter of a Muslim's word in court, who can be struck with impunity by a Muslim, who will pay higher taxes than Muslims -- and in your case, Willie, since you have a beard, will be ritually pulled forward by the beard by the tax collector and slapped on both cheeks to emphasize that you should be grateful that higher taxes permit you to remain alive. A good start on countering terrorist strategy rather than mere tactics can be made by declaring Islam a political system and subjecting it to all the normal laws and tests of a political party. Muslims who wish to live in a country should be required to declare that they will obey the laws of the country above all others. (Instead Mr Blair, the British Prime Minister, for political advantage, tried to give Muslims special rights; in America there are a number of documented cases of the FBI and other authorities declaring murders clearly inspired by Muslim jihad theology to be something else ("road rage" in one case in which a Muslim killed a bunch of Jewish students) for fear of public reaction to Muslims in the community. In the State of Victoria in Australia Muslims are protected species to the extent that correctly quoting verses from the Koran can get anyone else fined or jailed; in other words it has become an offence in law to discuss the fabric of the philosophy. As both an Irishman and an Australian, I am ashamed to say that the judge who perpetrated this stupidity is called Michael Higgins.) In foreign parts the war on terrorism can best be fought right there in NY by cleaning up the hypocrisy at the United Nations. For a start, the Western democracies can announce that they will not give any financial or technical aid or diplomatic services to Muslim nations until the non-Muslims in their countries (the dhimmi described above) enjoy the same rights, privileges and protections as Muslim citizens. (The Muslims have met twice in the last quarter-century to draw up their own Declaration of Human Rights. It essentially gives Muslims the right to discriminate against everyone else. It does not forbid Muslims to kill anyone else.) It's a simple test with truly tremendous consequences because it goes to the root of Muslim belief. Sharia law, a theocratic dictatorship, is fundamentally incompatible with democracy. It declared war on all other values in 622 and hasn't changed course since. It is an enemy of democracy and decency and humanity in exactly the same way communism was -- and should be eradicated the same way, with guns and butter, the carrot and the stick, and simple straightforward righteousness. Also, we Westerners are a lot smarter than Muslims, because centuries of repression must eventually have an effect, because the Christian heritage delivers a mode of free thought which the repressive Muslim heritage does not. The key here is that Allah is so all-powerful that mere goodness will constrain his power, and thus he is unpredictable; whereas the Christian God is good, and therefore consistent and predictable. This difference in outlook has huge implications for the resulting societies and their attitudes to art, science and commerce; over a few centuries the difference compounds into the difference between civilization and the barbarities of Saudi Arabia and Iran. In the final analysis, what Osama bin Laden fights for is to bring back the Khalifa, the caliphate, the single Muslim authority abolished by Kemal Ataturk in the 1920s as a necessary precondition to bringing democracy and decent values to Turkey. The key value of the caliphate is that it unites all Muslims into a force that can subjugate and conquer the world for Allah. Your curse will not deter bin Laden from a duty in which, according to the huge majority of his religious authorities, every fellow religionist must support him, and in which we know from polls he has the majority of Muslims worldwide behind him. There is no reason for Muslim hatred of America, of the West, of Democracy, of anyone who isn't like them. The only reason is that the others don't believe in Allah, and should therefore be killed or enslaved. To them it is a rational reason. Any old politically correct reason will do for a cover, with the benefit that PC whores everywhere will lie back and open their legs to be raped. "I like knowing my enemies, so I read Mein Kampf, Das Kapital and the Koran," I said in a speech to the Union, 1965, "Liberty is indivisible", delivered to constant heckling by the same people who, having wasted forty years on the chimera of multiculturalism, are now screeching that the government should stop all immigration... Now I find myself politically to the left of the jeerers and sneerers who didn't do their homework by reading the key texts. God certainly works in strange ways. Why, m'lord, your curse might even bring bin Laden to the path of mercy and righteousness. Of course, he will first have to forswear Islam, because it is a religion without mercy and withouy righteousness even to its own, never mind to the rest of us. Verses from the Koran to prove all my points on request. Someone is bound to be thick enough and politically correct enough to try and argue even with a guy who *has* done his homework. Andre Jute You Sir, have done your homework. When will the sheep come to know the difference between the followers of the 1200 prophets of peace, and those followers of their Warrior Prophet. It would do us well to elevate General Patton to the status of prophet. http://www.generalpatton.com/biography.html Regards, Rich Koerner, Time Electronics. http://www.timeelect.com Specialists in Live Sound FOH Engineering, Music & Studio Production, Vintage Instruments, and Tube Amplifiers |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
Andre Jute wrote: Patrick Turner wrote: Andre Jute wrote: snip for brevity... The Muslim strategy is written out in full in the Koran, just like Hitler's strategy was written out in full in Mein Kampf. I am not so sure the peaceful muslims I know would agree. You're assuming that they have read the Koran, Patrick. I didn't assume anything. They come from arab place, and say they are muslim. I just guess thay are. They'd be wrong if they assumed I'd read the bible. But I would be better informed if I read the Koran, and if they read the Bible, especially the New Testament. In fact if we all just stopped hating and read all the books we should read we might forget to bomb ppl. I don't have time to be an allround scholar. They haven't. The Koran isn't in a language that your average Muslim can understand. It is in an archaic form of Arabic. It is read and interpreted to them by the mullah. They don't actually know what it says. It is like Christians before the Bible was available in the vernacular, in English. I'll take your word for that. There is now heat in oz to make sure the omams and muslim teachers in Oz have been properly trained in Koran studies, and thay are not just self appointed know-alls and trouble makers. And since the Koran is so difficult to know then the muslims who go to the mosque could be led seriously astray. Its happened in Christendom. I would not like a return to the times of the Spanish Inquisition, I would not like to see witches burned at the stake. I think many muslims in Iraq wouldn't mind a McDonalds in every village; its as if they don't much care about the religion; they'd just like to get on with life and without the extremists of quite a large variety spoiling their day by conducting wars around their homes, interupting electricity supplies and damaging sewerage pumps and occasionally killing children and their young brothers in law. We're not overly impressed with the woolly processes of your mind, Patrick. Do you have any facts to support your contention? Look, I am just a bloke. I am largely free of pretensions. But I do know that all of Iraq is not rising up in anger to push the yanks out of their country. Many would like to emigrate from Iraq to the wonderful country of america. But they can't. So when America comes to Bagdad, then it must seem good to them, hell, anything would be better than Saddam's rule. Iraq was mostly a non religious oriented society. Its basically secular. But now small % of the population and who seem to be the islamic faithful are rising up to bleed for their country, and to make their country bleed, and make the americans bleed because they don't like being invaded any more than america would. Now we have a religious zealot leader in Iran, and the heat is just starting; no doubt Isreal and the US are plotting to bomb the crap out of Iran's nuclear reactors some day soon. Maybe that would be a good thing, since too many bullies gathered together all with nukes would spell disaster; it'd be terrible if the oil fields were nuked, and nobody could extract the oil. There is no islam and no oil in Nth Korea. Plenty of real BIG arsoles keeping a nation suppressed. They got the Bomb, but America does nothing.... No oil. Oil makes all the difference. But there's oil in Iraq, and that is the ONLY reason the US sent an army overseas to secure a whole country for the security of the US in future. If there was no oil, ther'd have been no invasion, no fight, and far les reason for the terrorists to focus on getting even with the US. I just went to considerable trouble to explain to you that Muslims attack non-Muslim power centres *because they are non-Muslim*. Have you read what I said at all? How the **** does Iraq explain the embassy bombing in East Africa, and other earlier Muslim terrorist crimes? The way I see it is that sure they bomb us to try to convert us, but they also seem to have a lot of revenge to take before they think they are even. Its an eye for an eye. We used to be like that until Christ came along with his idea of forgiveness and love, and so I didn't feel cranky when my cousin married a Japanese girl, despite what the Japs had started in WW2. Afaik, the trade centre bombings were a way to get the message to the jews. All that trade, all that money, all those jews. Didn't someone tell binLaden that most people are unconvertible? had 1/2 the ppl in the trade centres been muslim, I wonder if bL would have bombed. But if there were a vast number of muslims then that would be because of the muslim equity in the world's wealth. But we know there is a shirtload of arab oil money invested in american owned company stocks. bL threatens his own family by his behaviour. I just think there are more reasons for the islamic jihads than disagreements over purely religious matters. What the youth of the middle east need is opportunity for work, inclusion in the modern world of plenty. They see big fat yanks driving around in huge cars and enjoying a lifestyle that is way above what they can have, and given the opportunity they would ditch all this muslim BS and get secular. Things are slightly different in Turkey I suspect. But while ppl suffer, and see themselves being exploited and manipulated by Washington, then an exit from life with a bomb seems a reasonable way to go. Maybe even where muslims do have a reasonable standard of living then a few still get the ****s with Washington, so they strap on the explosives and do an exit on a London train. The technology allows it. And whatever is possible can happen, no matter how grotesque. It makes a lot of sense to those not concerned about dying and still expressing a viewpoint with an exit with a bomb. Its a new phenomena. You only have to have a small number of such ppl to keep a nation afraid. But I am far more afraid of dying on the roads; 10,000 times more afraid. So I largely ignore the BS from the politicians. I don't know all the facts and answers, I only know what I read in newspapers which I just won't believe all the time. I don't care too much if i am seen as ill-informed about an off topic on a tube group during times when few people bring tube related issues before us. But of course Andre, 10% of muslims **are** fanatic enough to fight for what they believe in, so we are stuck with them. 10% of Muslims would be bad enough, possibly overwhelming. But what I'm trying to explain to you is that the entire population in Muslim countries can still be swept up to jihad, as Christians could to a crusade a millennium ago. At the moment many muslims must wonder that America is on a crusade in the middle east right now. And yes, all of Indonesia could turn fundo, and become quite ugly. Australia could become like Nazi Germany, and instead of chasing the jews, we'd chase the muslims. many feel very isolated. There is a much hatred and fear of Islam here because of the Bali Bombing. The muslim devotees hate the tourist trade and all of the pagan shenanigans westeners get up to while on leave, such as the topless girls at the beaches, and the drinking in ther bars, and fornication in the hotels. When i was in Bali in 1981 for a month, I saw the young male indonesian office workers gathered by the seaside in their lunch breaks to perve at the shielas tits. They'd never catch a sight of tits anywhere else. Sex isn't well handled by muslims; they deal with lust by covering women, denying most of their rights we take for granted, and then insist in strict codes of socialization; who can be allowed to to whatever with who. I'd imagine that because so many young muslim men never get their rocks off like in america, it adds to the pent up frustration of just being. They are unhappy, not sure why, so some would drift to some way out that was offered. The young man of San Francisco would go to a bar and chat someone up, have a drink, and be cool, laugh, have fun, get ****ed, be happy, and have not the slightest care in the world for the drakness that religion can bring. Osama bin Laden is not a fanatic, he is within his "religion" not an extremist, he has substantial support even among American Muslims--because he is doing what his holy books tell him to do. If Osama isn't fanatic, who is? Bin Laden is not a fanatic in exactly the same way that a Quaker is not a fanatic merely because he states that he believes in the tenets of his religion. The difference is that the Quaker's religion is peaceful and loving, and bin Laden's religion is not a religion at all but an ideology of violence and conquest. Ah, Gerry Fallwell is also not a fanatic, but he's OK, he don't try to encourage explosions. snip a bit, I am not so sure that someone can be fined, arrested, detained, jailed or prosecuted if you quote the Koran in a public place or privately to another person. It happened in your back yard. Do your homework before you doubt me. Start he http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary...es/000952.html http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/com...E25717,00.html http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=3050 I have not had time to read all about that stuff. There is MUCH current concern about what is being taught from the mosques in Oz. They have been given the message by our leader that incitement against australian values will not be tolerated. There was a 2 hr summit meeting a few weeks back with many moderate islamic community leaders present by invitation only. The radicals were excluded, along with members of the largest ethnic islamic group in Oz, the Turks. Not many muslims are happy about the "summit". But our leaders like to be seen to be doing something. snip my sleep provoking verbage. I don't advocate doing nothing though, and this is definately the hard part. Zzzzzz! This is actually serious stuff. Could you state your point in one sentence without internal contradiction? If you cannot, you don't have a point. This is a casual chat between two blokes, and probably with a tiny tiny audience. Its not a university lecture theatre discussion by experts. But is there real evidence the majority of muslims support Bin Laden? Huh? First you go on about how they hate us for our supposed crimes, now you doubt they support their champion bin Laden? My statement of support for bin Laden is not based on what I think but on a BBC report. We all get our views from a different source. I believe that there is not any ironclad unity of purpose amongst muslims. binLaden would have enemies who would be muslims, surely. One thing that fascinates us about politics and world affairs are the contraditions and inconsistencies and exceptions in/of/by those who make history. Sure many would, like the westerners of the 1960's did by pinning up a poster of Che Guavre in their loungerooms. These people got the publicity, but were in fact a very small minority. **** me with a hot stone. Do you really fail to understand the difference in scale between a few South American hotheads and a worldwide movement with billions available and nations to hide in? Sure, binLaden is doing more than Che. For starters, binLaden came from a good Saudi family with big ties to great big US companies. Most of those long haired socialists discovered capitalism, and got a hair cut, got married, and paid a mortgage. Bin Laden and his guys been there, done that, made their millions, now for a hobby they want to kill you. My money is on them, not on you, Patrick. Their minds are not woolly, and they don't care much for political correctness. But exactly how many converts is binLaden getting? Not many christians are swinging to his aid. You think binLaden will prevail in the fullness of time? I'm not a betting man. Well I hate to upset all who hate binLaden, but it does seem the muslims in Iraq are winning, simply because they are costing America 2 billion a week, while spending peanuts themselves. Does binLaden have much to do with what is going on in Iraq? I doubt it; it looks to me more like sunnis refusing to give up in the face of being marginalised by the majority of Shiites assisted by the kurds. Its not really binLaden who has old Uncle Sam bogged down. Anyway, who knows which way it will all end up. Who would have said in 1967 that the yanks would be kicked out of Vietnam and that Uncle Ho would make the country communist? Some have joined extremist christian right churches, which is a real worry. Bring another hot stone. Muslims daily kill hundreds, possibly thousands of people, but you worry about Christians who haven't killed anyone, who haven't threatened to kill anyone, whose religion forbids them to kill anyone. This is political correctness run absolutely riot. How many Iraqi civilians have died in Iraq during the invasion and occupation? There is no reason for Muslim hatred of America, of the West, of Democracy, of anyone who isn't like them. The only reason is that the others don't believe in Allah, and should therefore be killed or enslaved. To them it is a rational reason. Any old politically correct reason will do for a cover, with the benefit that PC whores everywhere will lie back and open their legs to be raped. Hasn't Osama cited the problems of Palestine being enough reason to conduct a war on the US? Your ignorance is showing again. Bin Laden attacked America as a protest against the Saudi regime becoming soft Muslims. The symbol of their flabbiness is that they provided bases for the Americans in first Gulf War. Bin Laden did not think that the heathens should be permitted in the same country as the holy city of Mecca. Yeah, bin Laden has become the black sheep of the family. We are lucky all the arabs don't think like binLaden. Since you won't get it by yourself, there is an irony here, in that the Saudi regime, who belong to a sect that other sects within Islam consider narrowminded, runs perhaps the most oppressive Sharia regime anywhere on earth. But bin Laden considers them soft.. I would never say I understood the complexities of the middle east. I do know the price of gas has risen from $1 per litre to $1.50 in about 18 mths, and someone is draining my finances more than I would like them to. Didn't Israel steal Palestine with US support? All Muslim lands were obtained and are held by conquest. The Jews in fact bought the land from the Palestinians, piece by piece, in normal real estate transactions. Normal transactions? with jews dictating a price? Maybe it was like the british who bought australia with a few strings of beads and a couple of steel axes and case of rum. The Jews were few; they needed those Palestinians to stay. After a war Jordan and Eqypt and Syria started with the express purpose of driving the Jews into the sea, and which they lost, the remaining Palestinians were encouraged by the losers to flee. Jordan, Syria and Egypt did not offer them a home. The rich Arab nations, all of them with vast open spaces, have not settled the miserably few Palestinians in more than half a century, preferring instead to hold them as human club over the head of Israel, and as moral blackmail on the rest of the world. The Palestinians have been so outraged by this treatment by their fellow Muslims that they have mounted coup d'etat in more than one of those Arab countries, most notably the nearly successful takeover of Jordan in the Black September uprising. Not much arab unity, eh. You make Israel look pretty nice. I'll have to live there to understand it better, But Israel is not blameless in its struggles with palestinains. Its not religion, its not politics, its land&country stealing. Really, Patrick, if you want to pontificate on such matters, you should take the trouble to learn a little simple history. Regurgitating politically correct untruths merely does more damage. Its an off topic discussion on a tube group. It matters not if I am not correct in my opinions, I have not spent time studying all this crap, so who did what deals and who made what **** happen is mainly beyond me. I don't have the ammo to argue with you; I don't need to win this time in any issue raised. But I see walls being erected across Israel, I think walls don't really work forever, since I did see the Berlin Wall come down. There are many areas of the world where religions of different kinds have co-existed for many years. Sure. So what? My point is that none of those countries are Muslim countries. My point is that in Muslim countries minorities do not have any rights. My point is that it a deliberate part of the Muslim "religion" to oppress minorities. That by itself makes Muslims unfit to be commercial partners or otherwise allies of morally fit nations. Yet America who treats its minorities so well ( haha ) trades with arab nations for the oil, and then accept the pofits of the arab oil sales as investements in American businesses.... Moral fitness. A strange bedfellow for international trade. (I live in Ireland, a notoriously neutral nation, though in recent years it has a good history in providing more effective peacekeeping troops than for instance the Americans and the Canadians. It ill behoves Irish politicians to crow, but the British are supposed to have an officially moral foreign policy... You might address some of your outraged sputtering at Mr Blair for hypocrisy, Patrick, and I won't say a word because you will be right. But I don't see what else he could have done except follow George Bush into that necessary war.) I struggle to find good reasons why out John Bloward joined the yanks in Iraq. Before that war started it seemed binLaden had nothing to do with Iraq. But didn't George Bush connect Al-queada with Iraq because there is a q in each name? Maybe little johnny likes looking big, hangin out with world leaders, and maybe he hopes for a result with special oil deals for oz in future. And pigs will fly before those deals materialise. I don't think we got anything specially rewarding from helping out in Vietnam, 500 dead soldiers, and **** all to show for it. If the secrets of such happy co-existance a lost, we will all be poorer for it, and our hate would not improve matters. This is the sort of waffle you get for years of letting poltical correctness in the media pulp the good brains your parents left you with. I doubt Lord Valve is so unsophisticated that he would post a hate missive on a public forum. The signal that he intends humour is in the stylistic form. He has rhe right to post whatever he wants, and it helps those filling backpacks with explosives to feel they are right to turn up someplace to let themselves make that special exit with a bang. Maybe such a bomber will park right outside his store. What a shame so many nice tubes will become sand. Nobody has to think I am weak and soft brained when I say hate begets hate. Other people have to pay to send their children to university to get their brains softened by political correctness. Did you go to night school, Patrick, to have your brains softened? Or did you just buy a pair of heavily rose-tinted glasses? I went 5 years to night school and worked 6 days a week for years to qualify as a builder. I used to think the longhair layabouts at the universities were crap merchants. Some even gave money from raffles to the viet cong. They helped fund the deaths of their nations brothers. I knew scum when I saw it. The communist party never got off the ground much in oz. ppl here don't like becoming losers. All I have came from hard work. But I didn't agree with conscription of young men into the army for the purpose of taking a side in a civil war in asia. I was against the war. I worked with many who were all for it, and tolerated them and their views. Being of an opposite opinion isn't a position of wearing of rose tinted glasses. Well after the Viet Cong prevailed in Vietnam some diehards said we shoulda nuked Hanoi. Not even more bomb tonnage than all WW2 worked on these pyjama boys. I think I was right to make the judgement that the Vietnam war was wrong to be a part of, and i was in the draft ballot at the time. I wrote **conscientious objector** right across the front page and left the other 4 pages blank in the application the goverment sent out to all young blokes elegible to be drafted. Had my number been drawn, I'd have been jailed if I'd been found. I had the firm support of my parents and of at least 1/2 the other parents they knew, many of whom were well aware of Korea and WW2. BinLaden's actions and ideas are side issue to Iraq. The Iraq war is for the oil, and the invasion would have proceeded regardless of whether binLaden exists. It suits the yanks that he does exist, for they can say they are having trouble in Iraq with these muslim extremists who like to bomb trade centres.... All our perceptions of what is going on on the world stage is manipulated and spin doctored. But religions and or political beliefs have propelled many wars; all such notions are potential dangers. Oh, crap. How do you propose that Christians or Budhists will ever in the next generation start a war for religion? Ideas are dangerous Andre. They propel people. Who knows what idea will arise to galavanise ppl into fighting a war. Its unlikely to expect a buddhist nation will attack Oz. I doubt we will ever be at war with Thailand. As for political beliefs, that is exactly why I call Islam a clear and present danger (a specific term of importance in permitting the President of the United States to act without Congressional approval), because Islam is not a religion but a system of social engineering very much akin to the late unlamented soviet communist one. Consumerism might just triumph over all that has preceded, and bibles and korans may gather layers of dust. Wishful thinking. I too wish you were right. But, again, you haven't done your homework. A Muslim who ceases to be a Muslim is in Sharia an apostate, and that means an automatic death sentence. Did you know that the Palestinians have killed far more of their own than the Israelis ever killed? Why? To keep them in line, to stop them emigrating to a better life elsewhere, to enforce conformity, in other words to keep them in misery as a nation of hostages to Arab wet dreams of driving out the Jews. Consumerism will work with the Chinese, if slowly. With the Muslims, the poisoned head will need to be cut off. I fear many heads will spring up to replace the head cut off. But here in Oz most muslims just want to get on with a peaceful life. That will be a very slow process. You simply have no idea what a hold your 10% minority (and it may be much larger) has on many Muslim societies. Ask yourself whether the YMCA could organize the murder of an Australian Prime Minister. The Muslim Brotherhood killed Anwar Sadat for making peace with Israel in a deal that got the Palestinians land to settle on. The Muslims killed a Dutch filmmaker for a film critical of Muslims. (The film maker, van Gogh, was a sick ****; I saw his film on Catholics and was embarrassed, so I don't imagine his film on Muslims was much better. But kitsch taste is no reason to kill him.) Maybe arabs have always been a bit shirty livered, even before mohommad came along. They have been trying to get civilisation right in that part of the world for 10,000 years, and still the struggle goes on. Consumerism by everyone on the planet at the same levels of nth america will surely bring eventual ruination to our environment and to our species though. More undigested politically correct crap. Do you not understand that there is now more known, proven resources than at any time in history? I don't quite se things so rosy as you are suggesting. I think by the time we wean ourselves off the teat of oil the world will be a crowded dirty place, somewhat rather warmer, with not much ice at the poles. I could be wrong, but if we simply burn all those resources you say are so abundant, then the carbon will do things to the atmosphere. I just cannot see that current rates of consumption in america are sustainable by a popullation of say 15 billion in 50 years for the next 10,000 years of the civilisation experiment. That's all i said. Maybe we learn to conduct ourselves with less pressure on reserves. I am hopeless in forecasting the future. How do you have a high standard of living for all without reducing consumption at least 10fold? Its taken millions of years for the oil to be accumulated underground, and here we go burning it all over a few centuries. I ain't worried though, I might only live 20 years more. But someone 3 years old has reason to worry. You can read electronic diagrams. The resource statistics are no more complicated. Go read them! Make up your own mind; don't let an idiot of a journalist, who couldn't be bothered to study the raw figures, feed you political pap. There is now more known oil in the ground than ever before. That depends on who you read. Bugger all oil has been found in Oz. All that has slowed down is the *rate* of *increase* of new discoveries. There is no energy crisis. There won't be an energy crisis for longer into the future than the beginning of the industrial revolution is into the past. Of course, everyone with his mind in gear, knows that in a hundred years we won't use oil at all, we will long since have discovered hwo to run everything on the most abundant resource on the planet, water, which contains a powerful fuel called hydrogen. But hydrogen has to be separated from oxygen to make H2 power work. That takes energy, so I guess the 40% of world stocks of uranium will be used. Maybe the french experiment with a fusion reactor will work fine... But armed with cheap as dirt fuel, the natural enviroment will be raped at a faster than ever before rate. (The politically correct, tempted to call me an enemy of the environment, are hereby warned that my lifestyle is whole lot less of a danger to the environment than yours is, so keep your trap shut unless you want me to embarrass you in public.) I didn't have children who would have burdened the planet even more. Beat that. My effect on the planet is thus entirely miniscule. We look set to replace spiritual happiness with keepin up with the neighbours. Whatever. I don't care to prescribe the form of anyone else's happiness. I merely don't want them interfering in mine. That is the point about Islamism, that it insists on its right to enforce its values on everyone else. They won't succeed around here. There is an unlimited supply of only one thing.................. its demand. Every ******* wants some damn thing. Except sour Puritans like you, eh Patrick? But you too want something: you want to be able to tell us what is best for us. **** you. I am no Puritan; wouldn't that make me rather like the devout muslims? I have enough bother getting my own life organised, and no time for getting yours organised. And urging me to be copulated by some unknown party won't improve australian - irish relations. So nothing works longterm is really is the answer. That's what makes man in general, and westerners in particular, such a durable species, that we are omnivorous (yah, yah, I know, that enrages the Green Puritans and other environmental fascists) and infinitely adaptive. It's an advantage, not a cause for breastbeating. If we know there is no ultimate answer, we still search for answers because the ulimate is a long way off; we have to get there yet, our offspring will anyway if we don't. maybe something comes up which eases our anxieties about our species future security. Many of the sons and daughters of muslim immigrants to Australia don't much care about their religion, becomeing moderates allows them to integrate far more easily; they get more out of being easy on the christians surrounding them. Methinks conviction wins them to moderacy, even virtual abandonment of their islamic faith. Yes, I too have seen the assimilative power of Australia. But Australia is fewer than 20 million people. She can't assimilate more than a tiny fraction of Muslims, even if the will were there, which it is not, which it will not be any time into the future. Most people here don't practice any religion, and have a very inconsistent set of values, and they sin everyday. But not many pools of blood here due to troubles like they have elsewhere. Better and better. The road toll is by far a greater real problem to us than terrorism is ever likely to be. Apparently in Iran, about 50,000 die on their roads, about the same number as in the US which has 6 times the population. I've been explaining to you that human life has a very low value in a Muslim society, though some forms, women for instance, have less value again, and some life forms, like unbelievers, have no value at all. Its been like that for aeons. It must be all that heat, sand and desert that somehow does things to minds.... Give me a well watered country any day. Teaching immigrant Iranians to drive properly should be the priority rather than say we hate them for coming because they believe in Allah, and expecting them to renounce their religion. Try reading what I said, Patrick, rather than what your prejudice whispers in your head that I said. I don't hate them; I don't waste motion on hatred. I have no objection if Muslims want to believe in Allah or Edward the Teddy Bear or in Sex with Barbarella. I said that they hate us because their religion prescribes hatred of all unbelievers. I said that their religion is a system of political conquest. Yeah, but Iraq didn't invade the US, now did it? Just how much progress with conversion by force has occured in the last 100 years? What of Turkey? But yes, I agree there are many muslims who if given power they would takes us all backwards to the limited world of the fundementalist islamic existance. Given the power I would shoot binLaden on the spot with no worry to my mind. But why get myself into a lather of hate?. I know not all muslims are like binLaden though. As long as they stay in their country, I do not ask them to renounce their religion. However, when they wish to stay in another country, I said, it is fair to demand an undertaking that they will honour the laws of the host country above any other laws. If they wish to see that undertaking as a renunciation of their religion, they can refuse the undertaking and return where they came from. Clear now? All nice and simple, but humans are inconsistent, and contradictory. They fudge their way, saying yes I will honour Australian law and culture ( whatever that is ) but meanwhile they practice their faith in their home and live here and make Oz nice wages. Governments can't enforce what your mind sees as a simple commonsense solution. All mine can do is stop letting too many muslims come here. See, I'm as politically correct as anyone. I haven't even asked what the fellow's religion is, merely that he observes the laws of my country while he is in it as I will observe the laws of his country when I am there. I will be happy to die when i do, no more worries. Perhaps you'd get more that is useful done before you croak if you left history and morality to people willing and able to put in the time to understand the context. Probably you are right, my backgound is that of a tradesman. I am not an intellectual. I spent time in universities though. I laboured to build lecture theatres and multistory blocks where the young brats could learn about the world. But I have the right to discuss right, wrong, the seven vices, seven virtues, the 10 commandments, and more if I feel up to it. Most ppl in the world know a lot less than i do because I have the luxury of the access to knowledge they don't. If the poor are given more access to education perhaps they will learn to neglect their religions, and be more tolerant. To survive as a species long term, we would need greater reserves of tolerance than we have now. I must away to complete a job on a tubed Monacor receiver Its a not very well designed bit of junk. Patrick Turner. Patrick Turner. Andre Jute |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
flipper wrote: On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 02:03:40 GMT, Patrick Turner wrote: But there's oil in Iraq, and that is the ONLY reason the US sent an army overseas to secure a whole country for the security of the US in future. If there was no oil, ther'd have been no invasion, no fight, and far les reason for the terrorists to focus on getting even with the US. Crap The middle east and its peoples are difficult to understand, but saying "crap" does not support any opinion you may have. Patrick Turner. |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 03:31:24 -0500, flipper wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 02:03:40 GMT, Patrick Turner wrote: But there's oil in Iraq, and that is the ONLY reason the US sent an army overseas to secure a whole country for the security of the US in future. If there was no oil, ther'd have been no invasion, no fight, and far less reason for the terrorists to focus on getting even with the US. Crap No, oil................. North Korea has no oil, and is a considerably more 'clear and present danger' to America than Iraq (or Iran) could ever be. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
an ill-bred dog? Of course you will not be so foolish. The problem with
Osama bin Laden is that he has had terrorism bred into him by 14 centuries of a vicious religion called Islam. This is total Bull**** & it show your complete ignorance about Islam. You are about as smart at Pat Robinson. Mr Soul |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mr Soul" wrote in message oups.com... an ill-bred dog? Of course you will not be so foolish. The problem with Osama bin Laden is that he has had terrorism bred into him by 14 centuries of a vicious religion called Islam. This is total Bull**** & it show your complete ignorance about Islam. You are about as smart at Pat Robinson. Mr Soul sorry, but your response shows YOUR complete ignorance about Islam. do a little serious study on the situation. look at their history, starting back before the crusades, then tell me there is no "14 centuries of a vicious religion called Islam". the only bull**** here is your refference to Pat Robertson. take care, paul az |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lord Valve wrote:
I curse you. Why don't we send him tapes of people eating pork products? Adam |
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 11 Sep 2005 22:17:15 -0700, "Andre Jute" wrote:
Big fun snipped for bandwidth The fall of Salvador Allende cost as little as eight million American, no white men dead, no link no scandal An interesting example, because CIA funded at the behest of AT&T, to maintain low copper prices. Americans didn't even know the names involved and still don't. Our tax dollars in action. Not, however, what I was trying to get at. The war I'm suggesting needs to be sellable (to the gullible, at least) as a war on _________ . Fill in the name and win a prize. Thanks, as always, Chris Hornbeck |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
Aw, come on, Mon. It's all in fun.
Thanks, as always, Chris Hornbeck |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mr Sole flubbed: This is total Bull**** & it show your complete ignorance about Islam. You are about as smart at Pat Robinson. That is absolutely priceless. Sigfile for damn sure. Lord Valve ROFLMBFAO! |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 19:51:41 -0500, flipper wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 17:48:02 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton wrote: On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 03:31:24 -0500, flipper wrote: On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 02:03:40 GMT, Patrick Turner wrote: But there's oil in Iraq, and that is the ONLY reason the US sent an army overseas to secure a whole country for the security of the US in future. If there was no oil, ther'd have been no invasion, no fight, and far less reason for the terrorists to focus on getting even with the US. Crap No, oil................. No, oil is an energy source. Crap is a description of the message posted above it. North Korea has no oil, and is a considerably more 'clear and present danger' to America than Iraq (or Iran) could ever be. And you base that opinion on what geo-political and military strategic expertise? China is potentially a "more 'clear and present danger' to America" than any of them so, in your simpleton strategic planning, America should attack China? Indeed, but as in all its foreign poilicy, America lacks the guts. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
Stewart Pinkerton wrote: On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 03:31:24 -0500, flipper wrote: On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 02:03:40 GMT, Patrick Turner wrote: But there's oil in Iraq, and that is the ONLY reason the US sent an army overseas to secure a whole country for the security of the US in future. If there was no oil, ther'd have been no invasion, no fight, and far less reason for the terrorists to focus on getting even with the US. Crap No, oil................. North Korea has no oil, and is a considerably more 'clear and present danger' to America than Iraq (or Iran) could ever be. Not really. Nth Korea can't send its nukes by rocket to New York or Washington yet, but when it is able to do that I would think the yanks will do a trick on them to reduce their capability. China couldn't be too overjoyed with Korea. Sure there is no oil in Korea, and not much of any tradeable value, so there is no need to neutralise the regime there because there is no threat to the US security of oil supplies. But the US doesn't care a hoot about the suffering of the people in Korea or that their govt has made some real WMD. The suffering of Iraqis and the supposed WMD were the reasons given to invade Iraq. The US is the one with WMD. The people of Iraq will be just as poor as usual if the fighting ever stops. AFAIK the US has no plans to allow Iraqis to get rich from the oil. Nothing else matters except the oil. Its for oil reasons the US is trying to set up a democratic state to run Iraq so the oil can flow out without 140,000 troops needed to protect the flow. The tribal nature of the many groups of ppl in Iraq will make democracy a nightmare. They'll be squatting in the desert sand and arguing forever, and nothing will get done. Patrick Turner. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
flipper wrote: On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 10:56:51 GMT, Patrick Turner wrote: snip Look, I am just a bloke. I am largely free of pretensions. But I do know that all of Iraq is not rising up in anger to push the yanks out of their country. Many would like to emigrate from Iraq to the wonderful country of america. But they can't. So when America comes to Bagdad, then it must seem good to them, hell, anything would be better than Saddam's rule. Iraq was mostly a non religious oriented society. Its basically secular. Your confusing the political term 'secular' with a notion that the people, and their 'society', are "non religious" and that isn't so. Not everybody is religious or even islamic in Iraq. Some a very religious. Some are raving nutcase religious extremists. But now small % of the population and who seem to be the islamic faithful are rising up to bleed for their country, and to make their country bleed, Of the small number that are Iraqis, that would be what you please to call the 'secular' element. Namely those Sunnis, who aren't secular but would like their preferred status under the dictator Saddam returned. Tyrants and their cronies seldom enjoy losing power. Sure the Sunnis lost in Iraq and didn't enjoy it. They think they will be crushed to dust by the Shiites, so they fight since a vote would be useless. But the Sunni are mainly islamic, and when they had power it was more effective to forget the Koran and just rule with the secular iron rod. I am oversimplifying by a factor of 30dB I am sure. Those you please to call "the Islamic faithful" are primarily imports like Zarkowi and his Islamic fascist terrorists who enjoy wreaking carnage wherever they get a chance, be it Iraq, Spain, Saudi Arabia, Moroco, Somalia, New York or where ever. I am not so sure the insurgergents or terrorists or the fighters are mainly from outside Iraq. Its easy to say a dead insurgent came from Syria or wherever. The US has a terrible history of lying its arse off about the dirty work it performs around the globe to get a commercial advantage, ( sth america ) or to try to stop a trend ( Vietnam ). and make the americans bleed because they don't like being invaded any more than america would. America doesn't need liberation from the likes of Saddam and it's absurd to equate the two. There IS a mob in the middle east which DOES think america should be invaded, and all converted to Islam at the point of a sword. Should such an invasion proceed, the yanks wouldn't like it. Just imagine if another huge country called Humungia and which was 50 times the size of the US with 5,000 times the wealth and power of the US, and they didn't like the Bush crew, and wanted a secure supply of McDonald Hamburgers because the US had a huge reserve of these burgers not available anywhere else, then the boss Humungia could make a decision to send 15 million men to take america in 3 weeks. You would not like it if you were from Texas, and a large part of the US welcomed the Humungia troops. Get my point? Put bluntly it's simple minded to equate all 'fighting' and ignore what the 'fighting' is about and while the Islamic fascists may falsely toss out the 'national' moniker they're fighting for Islamic fascism. But directly to the point, no. If America somehow befell a fate similar to Iraq and were ruled by the likes of a Saddam then most Americans would be eternally grateful to whoever liberated them. At least those with any sense would. Now we have a religious zealot leader in Iran, Now? Iran has had a "religious zealot leader" ever since Carter decided it was a grand idea. and the heat is just starting; No, it only seems like "the heat is just starting" when people only pay attention when it's hot. But it 'started' decades ago. 10,000 years ago actually, when civilisation was invented in Iraq. It all went sour in so many places. Iraq has a terrible problem with environmental degradation. A party that goes on for 10,000 years does leave quite a mess. no doubt Isreal and the US are plotting to bomb the crap out of Iran's nuclear reactors some day soon. Perhaps. If it isn't already too late. Maybe that would be a good thing, since too many bullies gathered together It actually isn't so much a matter of "too many bullies." It's a matter of fanatics/lunatics with them. My worry is that the US will drift to a police state.... slowly at first, almost like you wouldn't notice it, then bingo, there goes your freedom. People aren't particularly exercised with even France having nuclear weapons (a little joke) but lunatics that will, and do, massacre whole swaths of their own populace is another matter. "M.A,D." doesn't work when the other side is 'mad'. Sure is a looming problem A nuclear war would set us all back a long way. all with nukes would spell disaster; it'd be terrible if the oil fields were nuked, and nobody could extract the oil. Darn right and if anything needs gobs of oil it's tube amps. Why? The energy problem is mainly about burning coal for electricity and oil in transport and industrial processes . 25% of my energy consumption is about keeping clean and using hot water. Many ppl use a 24 kilowatt-hours per day; they live their whole life with an input of 1,000 watts per hour. Tube amps are a tiny part of that. The atmosphere is currently heating up at a rate estimated to be 30 times the rate of increase between the last ice age and the warm time which followed and which we are in now. There is no islam and no oil in Nth Korea. Plenty of real BIG arsoles keeping a nation suppressed. They got the Bomb, but America does nothing.... Hardly. What you mean is we haven't invaded them. But a trade embargo, 'free' nuclear reactors, 'free' oil, and decades of 'negotiation', to name a few, isn't "nothing." No oil. Oil makes all the difference. No. What makes the (biggest) difference is a nuclear power called China sitting next to them who would not take kindly to their favorite puppet regime being attacked and you may recall they contributed a few millions on the hoof to the last tiff over there. Speaking of which, care to explain where the Korean 'oil' was back in 1950? You are trying to say the US doesn't like competition. It likes to be the Biggest, the Best. That's all well and good for those who feel inclined, but as time goes on other countries will rise to much greater power. This cycle of events have been occuring for aeons. Anticipate it, prepare for it, get used to it. Saddam became vulnerable because of his own actions. Starting two wars (both against 'fellows of the brotherhood'), violating the cease fire terms, and a decade of refusing to comply with scores of mandatory U.N. resolutions, to name just a few. That plus *his* 'nuclear protector' collapsing and, half way at least, joining the other side. Saddam was much aided by the US in the past, especially during the Iran-Iraq war, because the US didn't want Iran to win, and there is nothing like wearing down the arabs by helping each side fight each other. Then Saddam he got too big for his boots over Kuwait, and had to be hauled back, and he didn't like it, and finally sonny Bush goes over to finish what Daddy bush and all his mates were not allowed to finish in 1991. The US had helped Saddam, even though it knew Saddam's regime functioned on pools of blood and screaming victims, and then it found it mustn't help, The Kuwaitis were very upset, along with other large oily nations. Oil came FIRST. Then the US said let's get Saddam's oil, and it invented a pile of lies about WMD, and how terrible Saddam was even after about 1/2 a million Iraqi kids died as a result of US trade sanctions. And now Iraq has been sprayed with depleted uranium dust the birth defect rate has risen alarmingly with reports of women running out of hospitals screaming in anguish after giving birth to monsters. That uranium will find its way into the lungs of young allied servicemen and cause problems just like agent Orange did. The yanks just can't fight cleanly, they always leave a mess wherever they go. I can understand how the old war horse minds work in the corridors of US power. The cold war ended and the US thinks it can do what it likes. Some of what it likes might seem rather nice and pleasant for many, but certainly not for everyone. How many hospitals and schools could have been built for the money they have spent in Iraq and Afghanistan? And how come the drug production in 'Ghan has increased to record levels after the Taliban were reduced? It does not matter what you say, I know I am being fooled by spin and BS from the military and big business whenever they say anything that's public and official. Patrick Turner. |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
How many Muslim's do you know because I work with numerous ones & they
are some of the nicest people I know. I've heard the arguments you present about Islam & I've heard them debunked. Pat Robinson's says the same thing you are saying about Islam & it is WRONG. Mr Soul |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
flipper wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 10:22:22 GMT, Patrick Turner wrote: flipper wrote: On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 10:56:51 GMT, Patrick Turner wrote: snip Look, I am just a bloke. I am largely free of pretensions. But I do know that all of Iraq is not rising up in anger to push the yanks out of their country. Many would like to emigrate from Iraq to the wonderful country of america. But they can't. So when America comes to Bagdad, then it must seem good to them, hell, anything would be better than Saddam's rule. Iraq was mostly a non religious oriented society. Its basically secular. Your confusing the political term 'secular' with a notion that the people, and their 'society', are "non religious" and that isn't so. Not everybody is religious or even islamic in Iraq. Some a very religious. Some are raving nutcase religious extremists. That's a common trick but I didn't say "everybody" was religious. You were making a "mostly non religious' argument based on a misunderstanding of the political term 'secular'. "Most" in Iraq are, indeed, religious. But now small % of the population and who seem to be the islamic faithful are rising up to bleed for their country, and to make their country bleed, Of the small number that are Iraqis, that would be what you please to call the 'secular' element. Namely those Sunnis, who aren't secular but would like their preferred status under the dictator Saddam returned. Tyrants and their cronies seldom enjoy losing power. Sure the Sunnis lost in Iraq and didn't enjoy it. They think they will be crushed to dust by the Shiites, And the Shiites have been stunningly reserved and not sought blood retribution. They even appear to have tried to include Sunnis in the govt even though Sunnis boycoted the elections. Sore losers, sunnis. Then there was a deadlock on the constitution; more arguing forever in the dust. But when 1,000 Shiites died in a stampede from a religious gathering last fortnight sunnis helped ppl out of the water. There is good and bad in Iraq. so they And your poll on just how many of 'they' there are came from where? Well the latest newspaper reports I have from nth Iraq where the yanks are belting into the "insurgents", the report said that most killed and taken prisoner were Iraqis, and Sunnis. fight since a vote would be useless. Not as useless as not voting. Again, the rest of Iraq has been amazingly tolerant, and gave them seats even with the low vote turn out. But the Sunni are mainly islamic, Of course they are. And they were the head of what you claim to be a 'secular' "mostly non religious' state. and when they had power it was more effective to forget the Koran and just rule with the secular iron rod. Power can make one forget a lot of things but Saddam forgot it long before then. I am oversimplifying by a factor of 30dB I am sure. It's probably the negative feedback  Those you please to call "the Islamic faithful" are primarily imports like Zarkowi and his Islamic fascist terrorists who enjoy wreaking carnage wherever they get a chance, be it Iraq, Spain, Saudi Arabia, Moroco, Somalia, New York or where ever. I am not so sure the insurgergents or terrorists or the fighters are mainly from outside Iraq. Its easy to say a dead insurgent came from Syria or wherever. And there you go again. I didn't say "mainly" to either. However, it's impossible to miss Zarkowi since he loves video tape, as well as beheading people, and it's also impossible to miss his calls for Jihad, chats with Bin Laden, and appeals for others to come join the fight. And that's before you even get to the motives of Syria and Iran. These ppl are not very nice. If I had a daughter, I'd never permit her to marry one of these critters. If I had a son, I'd probably never speak to him again if he joined their cause. Education sometimes has to come from the barrel of a gun. As a peaceful man i regret that i WOULD GLADLY shoot binLaden. I'd be even happier though if I could ensure he got a fair trial, and that his demise was not a product of my hate and anger, but a consensus of wise, fair, but firm minded men. The US has a terrible history of lying its arse off Rather it has a lot of enemies who love claiming that the U.S. lies it's arse off. No use arguing that the US tells lies. It does. All nations tell lies. And the first casualty in a war is the truth. Many ppl don't give a **** about it, just as long as they are on the winning side and 10,000 miles away from the action they will vote for just about any idiot. about the dirty work it performs around the globe to get a commercial advantage, ( sth america ) or to try to stop a trend ( Vietnam ). What 'trend'? The inevitable march of global communism? Yeah, the Domino theory we were told at high school. The Hoards of Yellow Peril are a comin south towards Oz, so we mus stopem in Vietnam. The Vietnamese simply wanted freedom from French rule, and were willing to kick ass to get it. It involved some despicable acts of terrorism. They bruised Uncle Sam's butt till it bled rivers of blood. China had unsuccessfully tried to invade Vietnam several times over the last 2,000 years but out STOOPID leaders got sucked into a BS idea that somehow china was about to swallow up all sth east asia. It never happened. Lord Valve once said the yanks won in Vietnam because although the US lost 50,000, they killed 3 million gooks. Its one way of describing a qualified win, but to me a win is where the enemy surrenders unconditionally, like in germany and japan. Vietnam went red, sure, but the chinese could not take the country. Out of spite the losers, the US, applied sanctions and other BS. Thousands of agent orange victims are now suing the US Govt. thousands have been maimed by US mines and bombs. The Vuetnam war is a great shame to be involved in, and it should never have happened. Even Robert McNamara said it was all wrong. Old Westmoreland kept saying the US should have won until he died. Good riddence to ****sters like Westmoreland, a "master or war" that Dylan sang about. Good thing we left so the North could get to the business of murdering a few million South Vietnamese, eh? Had the US never got involved with what was a civil war, the Nth would have won easily, and the killings would have been far less. Instead the US supported crummy Sth Vietnamese govts. US involvement only made the painful process 20dB worse. and make the americans bleed because they don't like being invaded any more than america would. America doesn't need liberation from the likes of Saddam and it's absurd to equate the two. There IS a mob in the middle east which DOES think america should be invaded, and all converted to Islam at the point of a sword. I am aware of that. It also happens to be why we aren't sitting on our ass. Should such an invasion proceed, the yanks wouldn't like it. Of course not, We've gotten used to that little thing called freedom. Just imagine if another huge country called Humungia and which was 50 times the size of the US with 5,000 times the wealth and power of the US, and they didn't like the Bush crew, and wanted a secure supply of McDonald Hamburgers because the US had a huge reserve of these burgers not available anywhere else, then the boss Humungia could make a decision to send 15 million men to take america in 3 weeks. You would not like it if you were from Texas, and a large part of the US welcomed the Humungia troops. Get my point? Oh I got your point the first time but you didn't get mine because you repeated the exact same mistake, throwing a big blur over everything and then calling it 'the same thing'. Contrary to your favorite conspiracy theory, the U.S. is not in Iraq 'for the oil'. We're too lazy for THAT. It's a hell of a lot easier to just BUY the stuff. If there was no oil in Iraq, the US wouldn't be there. Iraq would be a very poor arab country. Plenty of poor contries in that part of the world, and nearly all are not nice democracies at all. So why didn't the US just settle for buying the damn oil? Americans are beginning to wonder why this war is being fought. Bushes approval ratings have fallen. Its not just the 2,000 dead men but the cost, the poor success rate, the promises, the failures, military BS as usual. After awhile it all looks like a circus act, and bleeding expensive, literally....... Put bluntly it's simple minded to equate all 'fighting' and ignore what the 'fighting' is about and while the Islamic fascists may falsely toss out the 'national' moniker they're fighting for Islamic fascism. But directly to the point, no. If America somehow befell a fate similar to Iraq and were ruled by the likes of a Saddam then most Americans would be eternally grateful to whoever liberated them. At least those with any sense would. Now we have a religious zealot leader in Iran, Now? Iran has had a "religious zealot leader" ever since Carter decided it was a grand idea. and the heat is just starting; No, it only seems like "the heat is just starting" when people only pay attention when it's hot. But it 'started' decades ago. 10,000 years ago actually, when civilisation was invented in Iraq. Well, the Chinese have a different opinion on that but to lay the current situation on Babylon is a bit of a stretch. Iraq shows that civilisation is difficult to perfect. After 10,000 years of pretty serious occupation by humans the US may be just as stuffed as Iraq. At the rate of environmental damage here in Oz I would say that in 10,000 years our patch of the world will be pretty dreadful..... It all went sour in so many places. Iraq has a terrible problem with environmental degradation. A party that goes on for 10,000 years does leave quite a mess. What in the world that rambling has to do with the price of eggs I don't know. I like to relate the present actions to the long term results. no doubt Isreal and the US are plotting to bomb the crap out of Iran's nuclear reactors some day soon. Perhaps. If it isn't already too late. Maybe that would be a good thing, since too many bullies gathered together It actually isn't so much a matter of "too many bullies." It's a matter of fanatics/lunatics with them. My worry is that the US will drift to a police state.... slowly at first, almost like you wouldn't notice it, then bingo, there goes your freedom. Anything's possible, I suppose. Who knows, maybe you folks will beat us to it. It seems to me there is a mad scramble to control the world's resources. Chinese and Indians want the US lifestyle. When? yesterday please, if possible. So the demand for resources is a real worry. In 12mths, the price of transformer laminations that I get here in Oz has risen from $8 per Kg to $12. The chinese want all the grain oriented silicon sheet steel they can buy. They don't make enough themsleves. They add value to the raw sheet with the millions of ppl working for $2 per day, then sell their product to us at way below what anyone here could make transformes for. The result is that closures of tranny winding companies is happening, and the costs of raw materials is skyrocketing. Fuel has gone up 50% in 18mths. I'm more concerned with the 'immediate' threats. If those aren't dealt with then your 'concerns' won't matter one whit. Well we have to deal with the chinese....... People aren't particularly exercised with even France having nuclear weapons (a little joke) but lunatics that will, and do, massacre whole swaths of their own populace is another matter. "M.A,D." doesn't work when the other side is 'mad'. Sure is a looming problem A nuclear war would set us all back a long way. A sobering thought and I do not have a ready made solution. all with nukes would spell disaster; it'd be terrible if the oil fields were nuked, and nobody could extract the oil. Darn right and if anything needs gobs of oil it's tube amps. Why? It was a little joke because tubes are horribly inefficient. We have to allow you your little haha. The energy problem is mainly about burning coal for electricity and oil in transport and industrial processes . The "energy problem" is that it takes energy to do things, be it oxen, slave labor, or something else. Fossil fuels just happen to be the best buy at the moment since the environmentalists have blocked just about everything else (and are working on those too). Using muscle means it takes many to do anything. The Ryramids of Egypt took real time to build. Today we do far more with far less, but it means we have to load the air with carbon. 25% of my energy consumption is about keeping clean and using hot water. Many ppl use a 24 kilowatt-hours per day; they live their whole life with an input of 1,000 watts per hour. Tube amps are a tiny part of that. As I said, it was a joke. The atmosphere is currently heating up at a rate estimated to be 30 times the rate of increase between the last ice age and the warm time which followed and which we are in now. Wait a week. The 'estimate' will change. Global warming is an interesting conjecture. Some day it might even reach the status of a scientific theory. There are 6 billion of us here on the planet. There are so many tonnes of air per person. So much carbon going in, so much going out. Up until about 1920, the amount going in from us wasn't much. But suddenly everyone starts putting far more C into their allotment of air tonnage because they insist on a lifestyle requiring about 2 kilowatts of power for each hour of the day. My electricty bill tells me I use about 1,000 watts average all the time, but then there is the world outside myself, my car, and the total wattage of energy attributable to my existance is maybe 2,000 watts. That's a large flow of carbon that would not exist if I was a hunter-gatherer, althought the natives here regularly burned down huge tracts of bushland to hunt game, bush fires started naturally, but none of this was equivalent to the far larger numbers now running on 2,000 watts per hour. Work it out for yourself, and its all bad news. Anyway, the message will be clear in another 10 years when we see far worse hurricanes in the Gulf, and an extended season for them, and a northward march of them. Surface sea temperatures are now killing vast areas of the coral reefs. Fish from warmer waters are now appearing in Tasmania. Changes are underway. There is no islam and no oil in Nth Korea. Plenty of real BIG arsoles keeping a nation suppressed. They got the Bomb, but America does nothing.... Hardly. What you mean is we haven't invaded them. But a trade embargo, 'free' nuclear reactors, 'free' oil, and decades of 'negotiation', to name a few, isn't "nothing." No oil. Oil makes all the difference. No. What makes the (biggest) difference is a nuclear power called China sitting next to them who would not take kindly to their favorite puppet regime being attacked and you may recall they contributed a few millions on the hoof to the last tiff over there. Speaking of which, care to explain where the Korean 'oil' was back in 1950? You are trying to say the US doesn't like competition. Bad guess. No, what I am saying is there was no oil in North Korea. It likes to be the Biggest, the Best. Of course we do. No nation has been able to stay high forever. Not even Rome. That's all well and good for those who feel inclined, but as time goes on other countries will rise to much greater power. If history is any gauge that's likely. This cycle of events have been occuring for aeons. Anticipate it, prepare for it, get used to it. That's all well and good but it doesn't have a damn thing to do with the topic in this section: your claim that oil is 'everything' and the example of North Korea I provided which disproves it. Well, oil ain't nothing, now is it.... Saddam became vulnerable because of his own actions. Starting two wars (both against 'fellows of the brotherhood'), violating the cease fire terms, and a decade of refusing to comply with scores of mandatory U.N. resolutions, to name just a few. That plus *his* 'nuclear protector' collapsing and, half way at least, joining the other side. Saddam was much aided by the US in the past, That's more hogwash conjured up by political hacks. In denial again? especially during the Iran-Iraq war, because the US didn't want Iran to win, The famous line is from Henry Kissinger who commented he wished both sides could lose. and there is nothing like wearing down the arabs by helping each side fight each other. Saddam started the damn war, not the U.S. The US sure didn't seem to mind. Then Saddam he got too big for his boots over Kuwait, and had to be hauled back, and he didn't like it, He was "too big for his boots" when he started the Iran/Iraq war and didn't shrink any, just changed targets. Whoa, the US didn't do anything to stop Saddam when he began the blue with Iran. and finally sonny Bush goes over to finish what Daddy bush and all his mates were not allowed to finish in 1991. You've got that one closer than most do. Yes, Daddy Bush was not 'allowed' to do anything more than he did, The US had helped Saddam, even though it knew Saddam's regime functioned on pools of blood and screaming victims, and then it found it mustn't help, That is false and part of an entire mythology that's been created by political hacks. The U.S. never armed Saddam. The U.S. did not give/sell Saddam his WMD. None of that B.S. is true. Well of course not, despite all the evidence, you may say all of what i said was true. I am not out to win an argument, just explain the general mindset of an ordinary man like myself whose only tiny morsel of power is his vote once every 3 years. The Kuwaitis were very upset, along with other large oily nations. Oil came FIRST. Then the US said let's get Saddam's oil, and it invented a pile of lies about WMD, and how terrible Saddam was even after about 1/2 a million Iraqi kids died as a result of US trade sanctions. You've been reading someone's propaganda. None of that is true either. Yeah, of course what i am saying is propaganda, I am used to the accusation. I've heard it all before a thousand times. And now Iraq has been sprayed with depleted uranium dust the birth defect rate has risen alarmingly with reports of women running out of hospitals screaming in anguish after giving birth to monsters. Oh give me a BREAK! I'd like to, really, but uranium was first extensively used in anti tank shells in Gulf war 1. But now its being included in much other calibre of weapons. There is nothing quite so effective as shooting a guy with a bullet that creates a fizzy cloud of energy at 5,000 degrees, and leaves dust to kill the people for ages afterwards. Its just terrorist control, like pest extermination. There may be some info about it on the web. I suggest you take a peek.... That uranium will find its way into the lungs of young allied servicemen and cause problems just like agent Orange did. The yanks just can't fight cleanly, they always leave a mess wherever they go. Lord, you are such a duped sucker. Well, they do leave a mess. So did Rome, wherever they went, then they brought Roman methods, many were converted became Roman, and gradually the world was civilised. the technology to do it all didn't include ghastly weapons like depleted uranium or agent orange. The Romans would have used whatever they could lay their hands on. The yanks are. I can understand how the old war horse minds work in the corridors of US power. It's obvious you haven't got a CLUE how anything works over here. I just see the evidence of the actions in the media, books, reports.... The cold war ended and the US thinks it can do what it likes. Some of what it likes might seem rather nice and pleasant for many, but certainly not for everyone. Yes. mass murderers aren't happy and. frankly, 'pleased' mass murderers isn't at the top of my priority list. How many hospitals and schools could have been built for the money they have spent in Iraq and Afghanistan? Ask me how many World Trade Centers could be built and be sure to place a proper dollar value on the 3,000 inside. Quite a few. Part of the waste of war. And how come the drug production in 'Ghan has increased to record levels after the Taliban were reduced? Murdering people is a great control device and I suppose the question is meant to say you agree with the method. But defeating the Taliban wasn't the end of the problem. The Taliban were not exactly gentlemen, and many deserved to die by the sword since they decided to live by the sword. But they say that outside the small areas of the cities the Taliban still control much. The country is so ****ed over by wars that growing heroin is a great little earner. They pay a lot for it on NY streets, and in Sydney. It does not matter what you say, I know I am being fooled by spin and BS from the military and big business whenever they say anything that's public and official. I think you summed it up real well. No matter what anyone says or what the facts are you'll cling to your conspiracy theories. Its the same old right wing hardline you have. If yer not with us, you must be against us, you must be a conspiritor, a communist, or some other crapper. Its the same old threat, you must agree with us or else, the rest of the world is wrong, we are right, and have God on our side. I heard all this BS before many times. And YOU talk about blind 'religion'. I see the splinter in my eye, but you appear to have a log in yours. Just remember the road toll and gun and drug related deaths in the US are a far greater problem than international terrorism. Maybe you think the US has no problems. Patrick Turner. |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
flipper wrote: On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 09:14:46 GMT, Patrick Turner wrote: snip The people of Iraq will be just as poor as usual if the fighting ever stops. AFAIK the US has no plans to allow Iraqis to get rich from the oil. You said it, you don't know. The Iraqis own the oil and the proceeds go to the Iraqis. The world's ppl own the oil; the Iraqis just happen to live on top of it. The US wants to distribute the oil and make a profit. Everyone benefits because the yanks are a can-do will-do lot of ppl, and will use whatever millitary enforced arrangements to allow private industry to proceed. There are many poor ppl in Saudi arabia. How the oil gets divvied up amongst them has been one of the problems with agreeing to the new Constitution because the Sunni area doesn't have any. Exactly. Hopefully it all works out ok, just not by tomorow night. Maybe by 2015. Nothing else matters except the oil. Its for oil reasons the US is trying to set up a democratic state to run Iraq so the oil can flow out without 140,000 troops needed to protect the flow. We're trying to set up a democracy because, for one, it's the best form of government for human beings and, second, democracies don't generally go around supporting terrorists; which is a bit of self interest there. Might as well have democracy, its a change from puppet regimes used in sth american campaigns, where dictators supported by the US killed hundreds of thousands. In Cuba, the commies won, and the US is still so spiteful, such a rotten loser..... But democracy in Iraq may not end how it starts; it'd be so easy for the whole show to slip into a vicious dictatorship sooner or later. Just like other arab nations in the area. The tribal nature of the many groups of ppl in Iraq will make democracy a nightmare. They'll be squatting in the desert sand and arguing forever, and nothing will get done. Those 'inferior' races just can't handle it, eh? Different, but not inferior. Rather troubled at the present time. Ther has always been a "bull" in Bagdad they say, some big ******* who rules harshly, and its been going on for 10,000 years. I just doubt real democracy can happen. I should read more about the area. So should you. They say a favourite book read by soldiers in Iraq is 'Seven Pillars of Wisdom' by T.E.Laurence, known as Laurence of Arabia; his story was told in the 1960s movie, with Peter O'Toole playing the role rather well i thought. Turkey's change under Attaturk is an interesting history where a nation cast off its islamic ottaman empire as it tried to modernise. Oz lost thousands of the nations best young men at Gallipoli in a disastrous campaign to invade Turkey. But we respect Turkey today. One of my customers was the Turkish ambassador to Australia who liked old tube radios. I repaired a few for him, and he even sent me one to fix from Turkey when he was transferred back home after his time in Oz. They get truly terrible earthquakes in Turkey, I hope this man is OK, I haven't heard from him for some time. Patrick Turner. |
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
What motivates you to write something like this? It indicates a lack
of respect for the second largest bloc of people in the world. You should read the book "What Is Right With Islam Is What Is Right With America". Mr Soul |
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mr Sole continued to step on his crank:
What motivates you to write something like this? It's *amazing* how clueless leftoids can be. It indicates a lack of respect for the second largest bloc of people in the world. Some law says I gotta respect 'em? Sue me, asshole. You should read the book "What Is Right With Islam Is What Is Right With America". You should read the funny papers. Starting from where you are now, that should raise your IQ by at least sixty points. Maybe you'll see a comic with Pat Robinson in it, eh? Maybe not. Lord Valve smirk |
|
#36
|
|||
|
|||
|
Patrick:
You're wasting everyone's time with this uninformed gossip that must have wafted up from a politically correct sewer. It would take the rest of my life to educate you just on the Middle East, on which your every opinion exposes 89 different facts you have all wrong, and on which we know from painful experience that you will answer correction with 189 further irrelevant ignorant opinions, so I'll just show a single example of how many misunderstandings and how much totally destructive ignorance you can cram into one sentence: Didn't Israel steal Palestine with US support? All Muslim lands were obtained and are held by conquest. The Jews in fact bought the land from the Palestinians, piece by piece, in normal real estate transactions. Normal transactions? with jews dictating a price? Maybe it was like the british who bought australia with a few strings of beads and a couple of steel axes and case of rum. In this short exchange we discover that you didn't know *that I was referring to the period between the world wars when the Jews bought most of the land that is now the State of Israel from the Palestinians *that at that time the political authority was the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, not only a Muslim but a grand anti-Semite (watched over very slackly by the British under a mandate from the United Nations) *that the Jews were therefore dhimmi in an Arab land, as I explained elsewhere, an inferior class under constant threat *that therefore "jews dictating the price" of land, as you sneer, is an absurdity *that the Palestinians are among the more sophisticated and better educated Arabs and were even then, so that it is a racist slur to compare them with unsophisticated indigines *that the State of Israel didn't come into existence until after WW II *that between the end of WW II and well into 1948 the British fought a guerilla war against the Jews to keep them out of Palestine (including mining Jewish ships out of Bari--that's in Italy, just for you, eh?--to drown the wretched women and children who survived the Nazi concentration camps) *that therefore the Jews were not in control of anything until they got their own state in 1948 *that the Palestinians deserted the land they still owned on the promise of the Arabs nations to drive the Israeli into the sea in war they launched immediately on the fledgeling state *that those selfsame Arab nations, with huge open spaces and no shortage of international (mainly American) money for the resettlement of the Palestinians, instead kept them stateless as a human club and hostage to world opinion *that the Palestinians themselves were so fed up with this treatment that they perpetrated coup d'etat in several places, most notoriously the Black September in Jordan *that the Israeli, who were few, were desperate to keep those Palestinians in their economy *that the Israeli live in perfect peace with other Arabs and other religions within Israel, for instance the Druze, who are Christian Arabs *that the land variously called Israel and Palestine has always passed by conquest *that there are no descendants of the people the semites who later became the Jews took the land from a millennium or two before Christ *that the Palestinians took Palestine by conquest, from Christian Byzantine, almost within living memory *that therefore the claim to the land of the Israeli is the oldest extant *that therefore the Palestinians have no greater claim to it than the Israelis *that in any event the Arabs admit that the land passes by conquest, and therefore tried to take it from the Israeli by force in 1948, 1963, 1967, and a few other less celebrated wars too *that Israel holds that land by right both of purchese and of successful defence against wouldbe conquerers *that Israel has repeatedly offered the Palestinians a home in return for peace (they won't get it, whatever they give the Palestinians, for reasons I explained more than adequately in my first post in this thread, about why the Muslims want to dominate everyone else) *that Israel was at first a client of the Soviets, not the US, which was against the founding of the State of Israel, permitted it only reluctantly, and made clear that the US would offer Israel no protection (US "help" to Israel in the war of 1948 consisted of a Jewish USAAF colonel resigning his commission and going to Israel to found the Israeli Air Force; the Americans promptly took his citizenship away) *so, tell us, Patrick, how the **** could "Israel steal Palestine with US support"? And then, on top of all this unforgivable ignorance, in addition to day after day of more ignorance spewed out in every direction, you make a kneejerk sneer about "jews dictating the price". How? You didn't even think to ask after the circumstances, you just jerked out your routine ignorant sneer, and bunged it off without even bothering to correct your typo of "jews" for "Jews". Do you read the crap you write before you slush it all over us like so much slurry? You'd better stick to tubes, Patrick, and leave world politics and morality to people who know how to put their minds in gear and check their facts. Andre Jute Patrick Turner wrote: Andre Jute wrote: Patrick Turner wrote: Andre Jute wrote: snip for brevity... The Muslim strategy is written out in full in the Koran, just like Hitler's strategy was written out in full in Mein Kampf. I am not so sure the peaceful muslims I know would agree. You're assuming that they have read the Koran, Patrick. I didn't assume anything. They come from arab place, and say they are muslim. I just guess thay are. They'd be wrong if they assumed I'd read the bible. But I would be better informed if I read the Koran, and if they read the Bible, especially the New Testament. In fact if we all just stopped hating and read all the books we should read we might forget to bomb ppl. I don't have time to be an allround scholar. They haven't. The Koran isn't in a language that your average Muslim can understand. It is in an archaic form of Arabic. It is read and interpreted to them by the mullah. They don't actually know what it says. It is like Christians before the Bible was available in the vernacular, in English. I'll take your word for that. There is now heat in oz to make sure the omams and muslim teachers in Oz have been properly trained in Koran studies, and thay are not just self appointed know-alls and trouble makers. And since the Koran is so difficult to know then the muslims who go to the mosque could be led seriously astray. Its happened in Christendom. I would not like a return to the times of the Spanish Inquisition, I would not like to see witches burned at the stake. I think many muslims in Iraq wouldn't mind a McDonalds in every village; its as if they don't much care about the religion; they'd just like to get on with life and without the extremists of quite a large variety spoiling their day by conducting wars around their homes, interupting electricity supplies and damaging sewerage pumps and occasionally killing children and their young brothers in law. We're not overly impressed with the woolly processes of your mind, Patrick. Do you have any facts to support your contention? Look, I am just a bloke. I am largely free of pretensions. But I do know that all of Iraq is not rising up in anger to push the yanks out of their country. Many would like to emigrate from Iraq to the wonderful country of america. But they can't. So when America comes to Bagdad, then it must seem good to them, hell, anything would be better than Saddam's rule. Iraq was mostly a non religious oriented society. Its basically secular. But now small % of the population and who seem to be the islamic faithful are rising up to bleed for their country, and to make their country bleed, and make the americans bleed because they don't like being invaded any more than america would. Now we have a religious zealot leader in Iran, and the heat is just starting; no doubt Isreal and the US are plotting to bomb the crap out of Iran's nuclear reactors some day soon. Maybe that would be a good thing, since too many bullies gathered together all with nukes would spell disaster; it'd be terrible if the oil fields were nuked, and nobody could extract the oil. There is no islam and no oil in Nth Korea. Plenty of real BIG arsoles keeping a nation suppressed. They got the Bomb, but America does nothing.... No oil. Oil makes all the difference. But there's oil in Iraq, and that is the ONLY reason the US sent an army overseas to secure a whole country for the security of the US in future. If there was no oil, ther'd have been no invasion, no fight, and far les reason for the terrorists to focus on getting even with the US. I just went to considerable trouble to explain to you that Muslims attack non-Muslim power centres *because they are non-Muslim*. Have you read what I said at all? How the **** does Iraq explain the embassy bombing in East Africa, and other earlier Muslim terrorist crimes? The way I see it is that sure they bomb us to try to convert us, but they also seem to have a lot of revenge to take before they think they are even. Its an eye for an eye. We used to be like that until Christ came along with his idea of forgiveness and love, and so I didn't feel cranky when my cousin married a Japanese girl, despite what the Japs had started in WW2. Afaik, the trade centre bombings were a way to get the message to the jews. All that trade, all that money, all those jews. Didn't someone tell binLaden that most people are unconvertible? had 1/2 the ppl in the trade centres been muslim, I wonder if bL would have bombed. But if there were a vast number of muslims then that would be because of the muslim equity in the world's wealth. But we know there is a shirtload of arab oil money invested in american owned company stocks. bL threatens his own family by his behaviour. I just think there are more reasons for the islamic jihads than disagreements over purely religious matters. What the youth of the middle east need is opportunity for work, inclusion in the modern world of plenty. They see big fat yanks driving around in huge cars and enjoying a lifestyle that is way above what they can have, and given the opportunity they would ditch all this muslim BS and get secular. Things are slightly different in Turkey I suspect. But while ppl suffer, and see themselves being exploited and manipulated by Washington, then an exit from life with a bomb seems a reasonable way to go. Maybe even where muslims do have a reasonable standard of living then a few still get the ****s with Washington, so they strap on the explosives and do an exit on a London train. The technology allows it. And whatever is possible can happen, no matter how grotesque. It makes a lot of sense to those not concerned about dying and still expressing a viewpoint with an exit with a bomb. Its a new phenomena. You only have to have a small number of such ppl to keep a nation afraid. But I am far more afraid of dying on the roads; 10,000 times more afraid. So I largely ignore the BS from the politicians. I don't know all the facts and answers, I only know what I read in newspapers which I just won't believe all the time. I don't care too much if i am seen as ill-informed about an off topic on a tube group during times when few people bring tube related issues before us. But of course Andre, 10% of muslims **are** fanatic enough to fight for what they believe in, so we are stuck with them. 10% of Muslims would be bad enough, possibly overwhelming. But what I'm trying to explain to you is that the entire population in Muslim countries can still be swept up to jihad, as Christians could to a crusade a millennium ago. At the moment many muslims must wonder that America is on a crusade in the middle east right now. And yes, all of Indonesia could turn fundo, and become quite ugly. Australia could become like Nazi Germany, and instead of chasing the jews, we'd chase the muslims. many feel very isolated. There is a much hatred and fear of Islam here because of the Bali Bombing. The muslim devotees hate the tourist trade and all of the pagan shenanigans westeners get up to while on leave, such as the topless girls at the beaches, and the drinking in ther bars, and fornication in the hotels. When i was in Bali in 1981 for a month, I saw the young male indonesian office workers gathered by the seaside in their lunch breaks to perve at the shielas tits. They'd never catch a sight of tits anywhere else. Sex isn't well handled by muslims; they deal with lust by covering women, denying most of their rights we take for granted, and then insist in strict codes of socialization; who can be allowed to to whatever with who. I'd imagine that because so many young muslim men never get their rocks off like in america, it adds to the pent up frustration of just being. They are unhappy, not sure why, so some would drift to some way out that was offered. The young man of San Francisco would go to a bar and chat someone up, have a drink, and be cool, laugh, have fun, get ****ed, be happy, and have not the slightest care in the world for the drakness that religion can bring. Osama bin Laden is not a fanatic, he is within his "religion" not an extremist, he has substantial support even among American Muslims--because he is doing what his holy books tell him to do. If Osama isn't fanatic, who is? Bin Laden is not a fanatic in exactly the same way that a Quaker is not a fanatic merely because he states that he believes in the tenets of his religion. The difference is that the Quaker's religion is peaceful and loving, and bin Laden's religion is not a religion at all but an ideology of violence and conquest. Ah, Gerry Fallwell is also not a fanatic, but he's OK, he don't try to encourage explosions. snip a bit, I am not so sure that someone can be fined, arrested, detained, jailed or prosecuted if you quote the Koran in a public place or privately to another person. It happened in your back yard. Do your homework before you doubt me. Start he http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary...es/000952.html http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/com...E25717,00.html http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=3050 I have not had time to read all about that stuff. There is MUCH current concern about what is being taught from the mosques in Oz. They have been given the message by our leader that incitement against australian values will not be tolerated. There was a 2 hr summit meeting a few weeks back with many moderate islamic community leaders present by invitation only. The radicals were excluded, along with members of the largest ethnic islamic group in Oz, the Turks. Not many muslims are happy about the "summit". But our leaders like to be seen to be doing something. snip my sleep provoking verbage. I don't advocate doing nothing though, and this is definately the hard part. Zzzzzz! This is actually serious stuff. Could you state your point in one sentence without internal contradiction? If you cannot, you don't have a point. This is a casual chat between two blokes, and probably with a tiny tiny audience. Its not a university lecture theatre discussion by experts. But is there real evidence the majority of muslims support Bin Laden? Huh? First you go on about how they hate us for our supposed crimes, now you doubt they support their champion bin Laden? My statement of support for bin Laden is not based on what I think but on a BBC report. We all get our views from a different source. I believe that there is not any ironclad unity of purpose amongst muslims. binLaden would have enemies who would be muslims, surely. One thing that fascinates us about politics and world affairs are the contraditions and inconsistencies and exceptions in/of/by those who make history. Sure many would, like the westerners of the 1960's did by pinning up a poster of Che Guavre in their loungerooms. These people got the publicity, but were in fact a very small minority. **** me with a hot stone. Do you really fail to understand the difference in scale between a few South American hotheads and a worldwide movement with billions available and nations to hide in? Sure, binLaden is doing more than Che. For starters, binLaden came from a good Saudi family with big ties to great big US companies. Most of those long haired socialists discovered capitalism, and got a hair cut, got married, and paid a mortgage. Bin Laden and his guys been there, done that, made their millions, now for a hobby they want to kill you. My money is on them, not on you, Patrick. Their minds are not woolly, and they don't care much for political correctness. But exactly how many converts is binLaden getting? Not many christians are swinging to his aid. You think binLaden will prevail in the fullness of time? I'm not a betting man. Well I hate to upset all who hate binLaden, but it does seem the muslims in Iraq are winning, simply because they are costing America 2 billion a week, while spending peanuts themselves. Does binLaden have much to do with what is going on in Iraq? I doubt it; it looks to me more like sunnis refusing to give up in the face of being marginalised by the majority of Shiites assisted by the kurds. Its not really binLaden who has old Uncle Sam bogged down. Anyway, who knows which way it will all end up. Who would have said in 1967 that the yanks would be kicked out of Vietnam and that Uncle Ho would make the country communist? Some have joined extremist christian right churches, which is a real worry. Bring another hot stone. Muslims daily kill hundreds, possibly thousands of people, but you worry about Christians who haven't killed anyone, who haven't threatened to kill anyone, whose religion forbids them to kill anyone. This is political correctness run absolutely riot. How many Iraqi civilians have died in Iraq during the invasion and occupation? There is no reason for Muslim hatred of America, of the West, of Democracy, of anyone who isn't like them. The only reason is that the others don't believe in Allah, and should therefore be killed or enslaved. To them it is a rational reason. Any old politically correct reason will do for a cover, with the benefit that PC whores everywhere will lie back and open their legs to be raped. Hasn't Osama cited the problems of Palestine being enough reason to conduct a war on the US? Your ignorance is showing again. Bin Laden attacked America as a protest against the Saudi regime becoming soft Muslims. The symbol of their flabbiness is that they provided bases for the Americans in first Gulf War. Bin Laden did not think that the heathens should be permitted in the same country as the holy city of Mecca. Yeah, bin Laden has become the black sheep of the family. We are lucky all the arabs don't think like binLaden. Since you won't get it by yourself, there is an irony here, in that the Saudi regime, who belong to a sect that other sects within Islam consider narrowminded, runs perhaps the most oppressive Sharia regime anywhere on earth. But bin Laden considers them soft.. I would never say I understood the complexities of the middle east. I do know the price of gas has risen from $1 per litre to $1.50 in about 18 mths, and someone is draining my finances more than I would like them to. Didn't Israel steal Palestine with US support? All Muslim lands were obtained and are held by conquest. The Jews in fact bought the land from the Palestinians, piece by piece, in normal real estate transactions. Normal transactions? with jews dictating a price? Maybe it was like the british who bought australia with a few strings of beads and a couple of steel axes and case of rum. The Jews were few; they needed those Palestinians to stay. After a war Jordan and Eqypt and Syria started with the express purpose of driving the Jews into the sea, and which they lost, the remaining Palestinians were encouraged by the losers to flee. Jordan, Syria and Egypt did not offer them a home. The rich Arab nations, all of them with vast open spaces, have not settled the miserably few Palestinians in more than half a century, preferring instead to hold them as human club over the head of Israel, and as moral blackmail on the rest of the world. The Palestinians have been so outraged by this treatment by their fellow Muslims that they have mounted coup d'etat in more than one of those Arab countries, most notably the nearly successful takeover of Jordan in the Black September uprising. Not much arab unity, eh. You make Israel look pretty nice. I'll have to live there to understand it better, But Israel is not blameless in its struggles with palestinains. Its not religion, its not politics, its land&country stealing. Really, Patrick, if you want to pontificate on such matters, you should take the trouble to learn a little simple history. Regurgitating politically correct untruths merely does more damage. Its an off topic discussion on a tube group. It matters not if I am not correct in my opinions, I have not spent time studying all this crap, so who did what deals and who made what **** happen is mainly beyond me. I don't have the ammo to argue with you; I don't need to win this time in any issue raised. But I see walls being erected across Israel, I think walls don't really work forever, since I did see the Berlin Wall come down. There are many areas of the world where religions of different kinds have co-existed for many years. Sure. So what? My point is that none of those countries are Muslim countries. My point is that in Muslim countries minorities do not have any rights. My point is that it a deliberate part of the Muslim "religion" to oppress minorities. That by itself makes Muslims unfit to be commercial partners or otherwise allies of morally fit nations. Yet America who treats its minorities so well ( haha ) trades with arab nations for the oil, and then accept the pofits of the arab oil sales as investements in American businesses.... Moral fitness. A strange bedfellow for international trade. (I live in Ireland, a notoriously neutral nation, though in recent years it has a good history in providing more effective peacekeeping troops than for instance the Americans and the Canadians. It ill behoves Irish politicians to crow, but the British are supposed to have an officially moral foreign policy... You might address some of your outraged sputtering at Mr Blair for hypocrisy, Patrick, and I won't say a word because you will be right. But I don't see what else he could have done except follow George Bush into that necessary war.) I struggle to find good reasons why out John Bloward joined the yanks in Iraq. Before that war started it seemed binLaden had nothing to do with Iraq. But didn't George Bush connect Al-queada with Iraq because there is a q in each name? Maybe little johnny likes looking big, hangin out with world leaders, and maybe he hopes for a result with special oil deals for oz in future. And pigs will fly before those deals materialise. I don't think we got anything specially rewarding from helping out in Vietnam, 500 dead soldiers, and **** all to show for it. If the secrets of such happy co-existance a lost, we will all be poorer for it, and our hate would not improve matters. This is the sort of waffle you get for years of letting poltical correctness in the media pulp the good brains your parents left you with. I doubt Lord Valve is so unsophisticated that he would post a hate missive on a public forum. The signal that he intends humour is in the stylistic form. He has rhe right to post whatever he wants, and it helps those filling backpacks with explosives to feel they are right to turn up someplace to let themselves make that special exit with a bang. Maybe such a bomber will park right outside his store. What a shame so many nice tubes will become sand. Nobody has to think I am weak and soft brained when I say hate begets hate. Other people have to pay to send their children to university to get their brains softened by political correctness. Did you go to night school, Patrick, to have your brains softened? Or did you just buy a pair of heavily rose-tinted glasses? I went 5 years to night school and worked 6 days a week for years to qualify as a builder. I used to think the longhair layabouts at the universities were crap merchants. Some even gave money from raffles to the viet cong. They helped fund the deaths of their nations brothers. I knew scum when I saw it. The communist party never got off the ground much in oz. ppl here don't like becoming losers. All I have came from hard work. But I didn't agree with conscription of young men into the army for the purpose of taking a side in a civil war in asia. I was against the war. I worked with many who were all for it, and tolerated them and their views. Being of an opposite opinion isn't a position of wearing of rose tinted glasses. Well after the Viet Cong prevailed in Vietnam some diehards said we shoulda nuked Hanoi. Not even more bomb tonnage than all WW2 worked on these pyjama boys. I think I was right to make the judgement that the Vietnam war was wrong to be a part of, and i was in the draft ballot at the time. I wrote **conscientious objector** right across the front page and left the other 4 pages blank in the application the goverment sent out to all young blokes elegible to be drafted. Had my number been drawn, I'd have been jailed if I'd been found. I had the firm support of my parents and of at least 1/2 the other parents they knew, many of whom were well aware of Korea and WW2. BinLaden's actions and ideas are side issue to Iraq. The Iraq war is for the oil, and the invasion would have proceeded regardless of whether binLaden exists. It suits the yanks that he does exist, for they can say they are having trouble in Iraq with these muslim extremists who like to bomb trade centres.... All our perceptions of what is going on on the world stage is manipulated and spin doctored. But religions and or political beliefs have propelled many wars; all such notions are potential dangers. Oh, crap. How do you propose that Christians or Budhists will ever in the next generation start a war for religion? Ideas are dangerous Andre. They propel people. Who knows what idea will arise to galavanise ppl into fighting a war. Its unlikely to expect a buddhist nation will attack Oz. I doubt we will ever be at war with Thailand. As for political beliefs, that is exactly why I call Islam a clear and present danger (a specific term of importance in permitting the President of the United States to act without Congressional approval), because Islam is not a religion but a system of social engineering very much akin to the late unlamented soviet communist one. Consumerism might just triumph over all that has preceded, and bibles and korans may gather layers of dust. Wishful thinking. I too wish you were right. But, again, you haven't done your homework. A Muslim who ceases to be a Muslim is in Sharia an apostate, and that means an automatic death sentence. Did you know that the Palestinians have killed far more of their own than the Israelis ever killed? Why? To keep them in line, to stop them emigrating to a better life elsewhere, to enforce conformity, in other words to keep them in misery as a nation of hostages to Arab wet dreams of driving out the Jews. Consumerism will work with the Chinese, if slowly. With the Muslims, the poisoned head will need to be cut off. I fear many heads will spring up to replace the head cut off. But here in Oz most muslims just want to get on with a peaceful life. That will be a very slow process. You simply have no idea what a hold your 10% minority (and it may be much larger) has on many Muslim societies. Ask yourself whether the YMCA could organize the murder of an Australian Prime Minister. The Muslim Brotherhood killed Anwar Sadat for making peace with Israel in a deal that got the Palestinians land to settle on. The Muslims killed a Dutch filmmaker for a film critical of Muslims. (The film maker, van Gogh, was a sick ****; I saw his film on Catholics and was embarrassed, so I don't imagine his film on Muslims was much better. But kitsch taste is no reason to kill him.) Maybe arabs have always been a bit shirty livered, even before mohommad came along. They have been trying to get civilisation right in that part of the world for 10,000 years, and still the struggle goes on. Consumerism by everyone on the planet at the same levels of nth america will surely bring eventual ruination to our environment and to our species though. More undigested politically correct crap. Do you not understand that there is now more known, proven resources than at any time in history? I don't quite se things so rosy as you are suggesting. I think by the time we wean ourselves off the teat of oil the world will be a crowded dirty place, somewhat rather warmer, with not much ice at the poles. I could be wrong, but if we simply burn all those resources you say are so abundant, then the carbon will do things to the atmosphere. I just cannot see that current rates of consumption in america are sustainable by a popullation of say 15 billion in 50 years for the next 10,000 years of the civilisation experiment. That's all i said. Maybe we learn to conduct ourselves with less pressure on reserves. I am hopeless in forecasting the future. How do you have a high standard of living for all without reducing consumption at least 10fold? Its taken millions of years for the oil to be accumulated underground, and here we go burning it all over a few centuries. I ain't worried though, I might only live 20 years more. But someone 3 years old has reason to worry. You can read electronic diagrams. The resource statistics are no more complicated. Go read them! Make up your own mind; don't let an idiot of a journalist, who couldn't be bothered to study the raw figures, feed you political pap. There is now more known oil in the ground than ever before. That depends on who you read. Bugger all oil has been found in Oz. All that has slowed down is the *rate* of *increase* of new discoveries. There is no energy crisis. There won't be an energy crisis for longer into the future than the beginning of the industrial revolution is into the past. Of course, everyone with his mind in gear, knows that in a hundred years we won't use oil at all, we will long since have discovered hwo to run everything on the most abundant resource on the planet, water, which contains a powerful fuel called hydrogen. But hydrogen has to be separated from oxygen to make H2 power work. That takes energy, so I guess the 40% of world stocks of uranium will be used. Maybe the french experiment with a fusion reactor will work fine... But armed with cheap as dirt fuel, the natural enviroment will be raped at a faster than ever before rate. (The politically correct, tempted to call me an enemy of the environment, are hereby warned that my lifestyle is whole lot less of a danger to the environment than yours is, so keep your trap shut unless you want me to embarrass you in public.) I didn't have children who would have burdened the planet even more. Beat that. My effect on the planet is thus entirely miniscule. We look set to replace spiritual happiness with keepin up with the neighbours. Whatever. I don't care to prescribe the form of anyone else's happiness. I merely don't want them interfering in mine. That is the point about Islamism, that it insists on its right to enforce its values on everyone else. They won't succeed around here. There is an unlimited supply of only one thing.................. its demand. Every ******* wants some damn thing. Except sour Puritans like you, eh Patrick? But you too want something: you want to be able to tell us what is best for us. **** you. I am no Puritan; wouldn't that make me rather like the devout muslims? I have enough bother getting my own life organised, and no time for getting yours organised. And urging me to be copulated by some unknown party won't improve australian - irish relations. So nothing works longterm is really is the answer. That's what makes man in general, and westerners in particular, such a durable species, that we are omnivorous (yah, yah, I know, that enrages the Green Puritans and other environmental fascists) and infinitely adaptive. It's an advantage, not a cause for breastbeating. If we know there is no ultimate answer, we still search for answers because the ulimate is a long way off; we have to get there yet, our offspring will anyway if we don't. maybe something comes up which eases our anxieties about our species future security. Many of the sons and daughters of muslim immigrants to Australia don't much care about their religion, becomeing moderates allows them to integrate far more easily; they get more out of being easy on the christians surrounding them. Methinks conviction wins them to moderacy, even virtual abandonment of their islamic faith. Yes, I too have seen the assimilative power of Australia. But Australia is fewer than 20 million people. She can't assimilate more than a tiny fraction of Muslims, even if the will were there, which it is not, which it will not be any time into the future. Most people here don't practice any religion, and have a very inconsistent set of values, and they sin everyday. But not many pools of blood here due to troubles like they have elsewhere. Better and better. The road toll is by far a greater real problem to us than terrorism is ever likely to be. Apparently in Iran, about 50,000 die on their roads, about the same number as in the US which has 6 times the population. I've been explaining to you that human life has a very low value in a Muslim society, though some forms, women for instance, have less value again, and some life forms, like unbelievers, have no value at all. Its been like that for aeons. It must be all that heat, sand and desert that somehow does things to minds.... Give me a well watered country any day. Teaching immigrant Iranians to drive properly should be the priority rather than say we hate them for coming because they believe in Allah, and expecting them to renounce their religion. Try reading what I said, Patrick, rather than what your prejudice whispers in your head that I said. I don't hate them; I don't waste motion on hatred. I have no objection if Muslims want to believe in Allah or Edward the Teddy Bear or in Sex with Barbarella. I said that they hate us because their religion prescribes hatred of all unbelievers. I said that their religion is a system of political conquest. Yeah, but Iraq didn't invade the US, now did it? Just how much progress with conversion by force has occured in the last 100 years? What of Turkey? But yes, I agree there are many muslims who if given power they would takes us all backwards to the limited world of the fundementalist islamic existance. Given the power I would shoot binLaden on the spot with no worry to my mind. But why get myself into a lather of hate?. I know not all muslims are like binLaden though. As long as they stay in their country, I do not ask them to renounce their religion. However, when they wish to stay in another country, I said, it is fair to demand an undertaking that they will honour the laws of the host country above any other laws. If they wish to see that undertaking as a renunciation of their religion, they can refuse the undertaking and return where they came from. Clear now? All nice and simple, but humans are inconsistent, and contradictory. They fudge their way, saying yes I will honour Australian law and culture ( whatever that is ) but meanwhile they practice their faith in their home and live here and make Oz nice wages. Governments can't enforce what your mind sees as a simple commonsense solution. All mine can do is stop letting too many muslims come here. See, I'm as politically correct as anyone. I haven't even asked what the fellow's religion is, merely that he observes the laws of my country while he is in it as I will observe the laws of his country when I am there. I will be happy to die when i do, no more worries. Perhaps you'd get more that is useful done before you croak if you left history and morality to people willing and able to put in the time to understand the context. Probably you are right, my backgound is that of a tradesman. I am not an intellectual. I spent time in universities though. I laboured to build lecture theatres and multistory blocks where the young brats could learn about the world. But I have the right to discuss right, wrong, the seven vices, seven virtues, the 10 commandments, and more if I feel up to it. Most ppl in the world know a lot less than i do because I have the luxury of the access to knowledge they don't. If the poor are given more access to education perhaps they will learn to neglect their religions, and be more tolerant. To survive as a species long term, we would need greater reserves of tolerance than we have now. I must away to complete a job on a tubed Monacor receiver Its a not very well designed bit of junk. Patrick Turner. Patrick Turner. Andre Jute |
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
|
Fran=E7ois Yves Le Gal wrote: On 14 Sep 2005 02:01:06 -0700, "Andre Jute" wrote: In this short exchange we discover that you didn't know *that I was referring to the period between the world wars when the Jews bought most of the land that is now the State of Israel from the Palestinians Jews owned less than 2% of palestinian land in 1914 and less than 7% in 1947. So, Froggy Frogspawn, you're making my case for me. Patrick claimed that the Jews dictated the price. Even you should be able to see that if the Jews could dictae the price, they would have bought more land. Gee, it isn't rocket science. So I guess that's why you sliced off the rest of my argument, because it proves my point. *that at that time the political authority was the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, not only a Muslim but a grand anti-Semite Arabs are Semites. Thanks for reminding me. That's another thing Patrick demonstrated in another sentence that he didn't know, that until fairly recently, in a Middle Eastern time perspective at least, there were no Jews and Arabs, only Semites of common stock. You missed a golden opportunity, Froggy Frogspawn, to make a little joke: To be anti-Semitic is not only to be anti-Jewish but to be anti-Arab as well, because they come from a common semitic stock. Even such a dull little joke would be exceptional, coming from you. SNIP the rest of your diarrhea. Thanks for your help, Froggy. You did it so tenderly, next time I succumb to Montezuma's Revenge, you can again come wipe my bum. Andre Jute |
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
|
You'd better stick to tubes, Patrick, and leave world politics and morality to people who know how to put their minds in gear and check their facts. Andre Jute Looking to Andre for moral authority is like expecting HIV/AIDS training from Mbeke . . . . . |
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
|
Andre Jute wrote: Patrick: You're wasting everyone's time with this uninformed gossip that must have wafted up from a politically correct sewer. It would take the rest of my life to educate you just on the Middle East, on which your every opinion exposes 89 different facts you have all wrong, and on which we know from painful experience that you will answer correction with 189 further irrelevant ignorant opinions, so I'll just show a single example of how many misunderstandings and how much totally destructive ignorance you can cram into one sentence: Gossip without angst or trying to be right all the time is harmless in the absense of a huge amount of tube related issues. Nobody agrees on thse issues about Osama and the Iraq war and the history of the middle east. Didn't Israel steal Palestine with US support? All Muslim lands were obtained and are held by conquest. The Jews in fact bought the land from the Palestinians, piece by piece, in normal real estate transactions. Normal transactions? with jews dictating a price? Maybe it was like the british who bought australia with a few strings of beads and a couple of steel axes and case of rum. In this short exchange we discover that you didn't know *that I was referring to the period between the world wars when the Jews bought most of the land that is now the State of Israel from the Palestinians *that at that time the political authority was the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, not only a Muslim but a grand anti-Semite (watched over very slackly by the British under a mandate from the United Nations) *that the Jews were therefore dhimmi in an Arab land, as I explained elsewhere, an inferior class under constant threat *that therefore "jews dictating the price" of land, as you sneer, is an absurdity All the jewish business folk I've known drive hard bargains; its why they are so loathed. They are tight, always wanting bargains.... But my dentist when i grew up was jew who'd battled to get to oz and done all his training pover again even after spending time in Aushwitz ( pardon spelling ). He was a top guy. I've witnessed sveral of my parents old jewish freinds over a long time. I don't hate jews, and i sure don't hate muslims, simply because i have NEVER had an unpleasant dealing with one that left me thinking all of them were dangerous. I did once meet an Iranian diplomat in 1982 in a Juliana's night club that used to operate here. He was a raving brainwashed nutcase when I mentioned america. I avoided the prick after that. Then he got arrested because he pulled a knife and stabbed a guy outside the club just because this guy had accidently bumped him, and an argument had broken out. The oz guy was a big burly grazier visiting from a station far away, and he wasn't gonna take no **** from the mad guy whose eyebrows joined over his nose. But the Iranian had a knife....... But in Isreal the jews pushed things along with many acts of terror after WW2 mainly because they felt that since the world was out to get them after losing 11 million between 33 and 45 they better grab someplace they could call home. We all felt they were just doin what a man has to do. Then we saw how they made the desert bloom while no such miracles occurred under palestinians. Methinks the Isrealis had a hand from the jews in the US.... You need $$ for waterpipes, and missiles, to make the neighbours jealous, and nervous.... The palos and jews have been slugging it out about who owns what ever since. *that the Palestinians are among the more sophisticated and better educated Arabs and were even then, so that it is a racist slur to compare them with unsophisticated indigines *that the State of Israel didn't come into existence until after WW II *that between the end of WW II and well into 1948 the British fought a guerilla war against the Jews to keep them out of Palestine (including mining Jewish ships out of Bari--that's in Italy, just for you, eh?--to drown the wretched women and children who survived the Nazi concentration camps) I thought the terroism was directed the other way, from jews to the brits. but yeah, a lotta ****e went on.... *that therefore the Jews were not in control of anything until they got their own state in 1948 *that the Palestinians deserted the land they still owned on the promise of the Arabs nations to drive the Israeli into the sea in war they launched immediately on the fledgeling state *that those selfsame Arab nations, with huge open spaces and no shortage of international (mainly American) money for the resettlement of the Palestinians, instead kept them stateless as a human club and hostage to world opinion *that the Palestinians themselves were so fed up with this treatment that they perpetrated coup d'etat in several places, most notoriously the Black September in Jordan *that the Israeli, who were few, were desperate to keep those Palestinians in their economy *that the Israeli live in perfect peace with other Arabs and other religions within Israel, for instance the Druze, who are Christian Arabs *that the land variously called Israel and Palestine has always passed by conquest *that there are no descendants of the people the semites who later became the Jews took the land from a millennium or two before Christ *that the Palestinians took Palestine by conquest, from Christian Byzantine, almost within living memory *that therefore the claim to the land of the Israeli is the oldest extant *that therefore the Palestinians have no greater claim to it than the Israelis Well, both sides are still disputing who owns what, after thousands of years of "up you" type of gestures. Now there is a huge wall going up. *that in any event the Arabs admit that the land passes by conquest, and therefore tried to take it from the Israeli by force in 1948, 1963, 1967, and a few other less celebrated wars too *that Israel holds that land by right both of purchese and of successful defence against wouldbe conquerers *that Israel has repeatedly offered the Palestinians a home in return for peace (they won't get it, whatever they give the Palestinians, for reasons I explained more than adequately in my first post in this thread, about why the Muslims want to dominate everyone else) *that Israel was at first a client of the Soviets, not the US, which was against the founding of the State of Israel, permitted it only reluctantly, and made clear that the US would offer Israel no protection (US "help" to Israel in the war of 1948 consisted of a Jewish USAAF colonel resigning his commission and going to Israel to found the Israeli Air Force; the Americans promptly took his citizenship away) *so, tell us, Patrick, how the **** could "Israel steal Palestine with US support"? Great question. Look, I don't have all the answers. But Israel has had a lotta support from the US. There are not a great number involved in this thread. So don't rely on me for the answers. But Palestinians reckon they got a real raw deal and are prepared to send suicide bombers to make their point. Its all very bitter and twisted but that's how some folks try to get even, and get to heaven to meet forty virgins. Israel thinks its **** don't stink and is building a wall, and even giving some land back. Joyful scenes in newpapers today of burning synagogues. What waste to knock good abandoned buildings down; you'd think it'd have been more practical to just occupy abandoned jewish houses, and send a thankyou note saying how wonderful it is to use the old synagogue for a cummunity centre.. And then, on top of all this unforgivable ignorance, in addition to day after day of more ignorance spewed out in every direction, you make a kneejerk sneer about "jews dictating the price". How? You didn't even think to ask after the circumstances, you just jerked out your routine ignorant sneer, and bunged it off without even bothering to correct your typo of "jews" for "Jews". Do you read the crap you write before you slush it all over us like so much slurry? Well, the jews don't pay a price unless its a real low price. They survive on buying low, selling high. Its good business, everyone does it if they can. The circumstances in which any deals were made in that area at that time were unusual, in that the people wanting to buy something from the Palestinians were rather anxious to buy, and had rather extensive plans for the land they wanted to buy and own, and thus force out the palestinians, who most likely didn't have much idea of the long term effects of selling land to the jews. And since I wasn't there, I have no clue as to how the sales actually were conducted, and no idea of all the argy bargy / sweet talk going on, and all I know both sides have traded many lives over the issue of land ownership ever since, so the traders have never been happy with the deals they have made it seems, and so Israel is establishing a Final Solution with a Wall. You live over there................................and we'll live over here. And you can't come over to our side of the Wall. I don't know if the habit of employing palestinians at tiny wage rates and rotten conditions will continue once the Wall is completed. Walls have a rotten habit of crumbling...... You'd better stick to tubes, Patrick, and leave world politics and morality to people who know how to put their minds in gear and check their facts. As I said, you are right of course, I should stick with tubes, but not much doing, and a little chit chat about the world with friends does no harm. I am honoured to hear so many various opinions, claims, facts, nonsense, whatever. We are alive, have not been blown to smithereens, so we are lucky, no? And so far there has not been a knock on the door at midnight with gentleman in dark coats wanting to escort me away to a cell because i type things they wouldn't like to read. Frankly, there are far worse worries than binLaden, anyone's chance of being done in by a terrorist is less than the chance of being eaten by a shark if you went swimming each day as thousands do around Oz. I worry far more about the road traffic, going broke, getting prostate cancer, rising petrol prices, or being mugged by some oz goon invading my home to buy drugs which were grown somewhere illegally, or environmental degradation to the point where the planet won't sustain us properly. The more rats there are in the cage, the more **** happens. The war on terror does seem like its sliding into a push on dissent, to support the political aims of the right wing with its multi-national company bretheren intent on getting Iraq's oil before anyone else does. BinLaden would be well advised to STFU and PO, but he won't do either until he thinks the job is done. Over the next millenia, oponents to binLaden and his agents should do as they wish about him, I don't stand in their way. But such opposition to such evil will to some extent create even more radicals willing to do even more dastardly things, each time i sit in a theatre to watch a movie i feel I am a choice target. Total control of all the people all of the time is impossible. Patrick Turner. |
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
|
please change your usename - ****s like you give Valve users a bad name
my Grandad died in WW2 to save us from Nazi scum like you |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| A rival for Osama Bin Laden ? | Audio Opinions | |||
| Osama is gonna be pissed | Audio Opinions | |||
| Osama Bin Ladin Found Hanged | Pro Audio | |||
| Osama Found Hanged | Car Audio | |||
| Osama Commits Suicide! | Audio Opinions | |||
Linear Mode
