HHW
10/2/2010 12:27:00 PM
"Count 1" <omnipitus2...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> >Israel can do for that part of the world what Jews in general did for
> >ours... helped make it enormously better.
That's why the Nazi exceptionalists took Eastern Europe you know, to
make it better. And that's why five years later the Soviets with the
keys to history jingling in their pockets took Eastern Europe, to make
it better. And that's why Israel took the West Bank and East Jerusalem
and the Golan, to make them better in the very same utopian sense. Our
talented Jewish minority has certainly made a great contribution to
the the U.S., but to the extent that they did and still do, they
didn't do it by theft.
You clearly haven't been to that
> >part of world, I have.
Where, how long and why? What did you do, score a junket to Israel?
Arabia, portions of Asia, North and East Africa
> >fractured their cultures by observing the call to Islam. Islam has - since
> >the death of Muhammed - created division. Islam is a younger religion and it
> >is far less ambiguous than Christianity.
You didn't absorb any of that alleged knowledge by a visit to the
Middle East, Count.
Ratner gushes:
> Wow, that's very good. I never thought about ambiguity being a
> positive factor, but in the context of something inherently malignant
> like religion, ambiguity is a desirable mitigating factor. Shit, I
> think that's really profound, thanks for that.
And the Anglo Saxon in Canada continues:
> It holds a stronger grasp on the
> >average adherent -
Stronger than the grasp of fundamentalist Judaism on ultra orthodox
Israelis?? Surely you jest.
even though that is changing very rapidly (especially in
> >the last 40 years). This doesn't mean you have to fear it,
I don't. Inculcating fear of it is Ratner's specialty as an agent of
the Lobby.
but you should
> >recognize the potential for radicalization of adherents within it, and you
> >should recognize how Israel's enemies are motivated by it.
I don't see the potential for radicalization as a bit greater than
that we see in Rabbi Shapira on the West Bank. You recall. He has
written The King's Torah, a murderous, racist screed which has been in
the news lately.
Israel's enemies are motivated by the behavior of israel and her
sponsor, the United States. They are motivated by what we do, not who
we are. The religion colors the response but you're dead wrong in the
pretense that it creates it. That's a slander of Islam. The resistance
is reactive. What you say is the same faux-intellectual nonsense
Ratner was peddling on SRI. Neither of you knows anything more about
the situation than a typical reader of the Sunday Times.
You have admitted
> >ignorance of these topics, and instead continuously blame Israel for all the
> >problems in the ME and for all Arab resentment against America, as if the
> >nations exist in a vaccum.
As to your allegation of "ignorance," what I've told you is only that
one doesn't need to do a close study Hamas' political propaganda to
understand the origins of the conflict and which policies must change
first. Their political propaganda is obviously reactive. Such policies
and propaganda didn't exist until the Ashkenazi, armed with their new
ideology, started arriving in Palestine with the intent to take it
from its native people. That Israel is the bottom line aggressor is
proved definitively by the history of Zionist expansion--if only by
just looking at successive maps which are readily available and have
previously been posted here. That israel is the aggressor is also
proved definitively by comparing Israeli behavior with the law.
Nothing exists in a vacuum. You are correct on that even though you
don't understand its application here. What you have to admit is that
Zionism is racism BECAUSE Hitler's crimes do not and of necessity can
not justify Ben-Gurion's or those of his successors. It was wrong for
European power elites and colonialists to punish Palestinians for
Hitler's crimes. It was wrong for them to purport to give something
which was not theirs to others who had no legitimate claim to it.
Accordingly all that's left in the analysis is racism. In sum, Count,
there would be no significant Muslim "resentment against America" if
we weren't smashing up countries over there as the enforcer and
enabler of Israeli colonial expansion. They wouldn't resent us if we
had not created the regional Israeli superpower and then done nothing
to curb her appetites. And for Chrissake we didn't even volunteer for
the position. We're dragooned into it whether we like it or not. Tell
your Zionist friends to get Israel out of the West Bank so that we can
be done with this.
> >To suggest this is a 'racist' comment is to display ignorance of just how
> >far and fast Islam spread in the world. Don't you find it interesting that
> >Indonesian and Malaysian Muslims don't care about Israel and the
> >Palestinians?
I don't believe this undocumented assertion. Over to you.
They basically don't give a shit. Not their corner of their
> >world. Sure, you'll find groups of people agitated from seeing their
> >'brothers' suffering in Gaza on Al-Jazeera, but they are the exception to
> >the rule.
You've just contradicted yourself.
>
> >***
> >I still have his marked-up copies of
> >both and of Lavengro too. And yes, I did consult Wiki. Is there a
> >problem with that? In a courtroom one may refresh a witness' memory
> >with anything. Why not here with Wiki? Were you given similar
> >opportunities at that stage in your life, you might have come away
> >with better opinions of Gypsies and Arabs.
> >***
>
> >I have never seen Drahcir speak of Arabs or Gypsies. He has spoken of Islam
> >and Muslims though.
Are not Arabs Muslims? Are not Iranians Muslims.
>
> >***
> >BTW, you are not telling the truth when you deny having read the
> >article. Your compulsions won't permit that.
> >***
>
> >The article you're speaking of doesn't exist.
Explain that to Ratner. He say's that as a matter of policy he didn't
read it.
>
> >***
> >So, the advice is now that you read all three of them. Meet Audah abu
> >Tahyi and Prince Feisal. Meet Borrow (...) Meet the great Lawrence himself
> >***
>
> >None of those people ever existed.
>
> >***
> >Come to understand why he had such great respect for the Arab people and
> >what a crushing personal defeat it was when he and they were betrayed by his
> >own government at the end of WW I.
> >***
>
> >There was never any historical event called 'World War 1'. And wikipedia
> >doesn't have an article about it.
>
> >Good job sniffing out another of Hunter's attempts to appear intelligent,
> >Drahcir. Fun stuff.
It's up to the readership as to whether you're having fun here. I
doubt they're amused by your frivolity. For me it's close to four
thousand this week. How about you, Count?