Page 3 of 3 pages < 1 2 3
Noam Chomsky a “beacon of moral and intellectual integrity”? Surely you jest. This would be funny if it weren’t so sad at the same time. The fact that the Left is enamored of this fashionable intellectual and moral fraud is truly frightening. Anyone who cares to do some basic research knows that Chomsky is not even taken seriously by his supposed colleagues in the academy any longer with regard to his alleged specialty, Linguistics, much less with regard to his political screeds.
Posted by EmitFlesti on Oct 25, 2005 at 1:55 PM
Or to put it another way:
who cares what man sits in the White House if that man must carry out the orders of the military-industrial-corporation-complex: invade Iraq to maximise our profits!
Thanks for opening my eyes: George W is a socialist - a flag-waver who knows how to use the props recognisable to the people!
How stupid of me to accuse the silly scorp of being a state department shill. It’s you, JasonPappas!
Posted by Anarcho-Sozi on Oct 25, 2005 at 1:55 PM
Name-calling, name-calling, EmitFlesti.
I happen to be a linguist and a member of “the academy”. Chomsky has defined the discipline for over fifty years. It is true, however, that many of his former students have not kept pace with his constant furthering of the discipline. They have chosen to protect their territory. Understandable - typical for former revolutionaries…
The academy is the Establishment - as it always has been. I would be very worried if they accepted him. It would be a sign of moral rot on his part…
Chomsky a moral fraud?! That is slander of the grandest order. Prove it with facts! You can’t defeat ideas with name-calling forever.
I offer the following challenge: let us all read his “Hegemony or Survival”. Then you and the scorp and jasonp can all point out what you don’t agree with - and we can debate it.
Posted by Anarcho-Sozi on Oct 25, 2005 at 2:10 PM
Not the old
Posted by JasonPappas on Oct 25, 2005 at 2:14 PM
EmitFlesti:
Coming as it does from someone, who to all appearances, dwells in the lugubrious nadir of intellectual dishonesty and vapidity, your criticism of Chomsky is high praise indeed.
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 25, 2005 at 2:23 PM
EmitFlesti:
Treating big business as an element of fascism is silly? What planet are you living on? Picture-book fascists of modern times such as Somoza or Pinochet had nothing to do with big business?
I’m not going to enter into a debate with you on the compatability of anarchism and socialism. A tightly-knit and well-organised society is the only way to realise true freedom without hierarchy. I am as sceptical of “state socialism” as you are - albeit for different reasons.
You are not an anarchist but a libertarian of the Ayn Rand sort, it seems. We don’t need to reinvent the wheel and discuss this here. I have neither the time nor the inclination to do so.
What are you doing on a website like this? Back in the German Democratic Republic, we had a state spy in every lecture, every seminar at university. That was always the big question: who of the people sitting there was the one who was spying on us? I can well imagine that Bush’s America has such a person in every listserv, every chat group on all the internet. Are you the government shill, the plant, EF?
Posted by Anarcho-Sozi on Oct 25, 2005 at 2:27 PM
Coming as it does from someone, who to all appearances, dwells in the lugubrious nadir of intellectual dishonesty and vapidity, your criticism of Chomsky is high praise indeed.
Vacuous name-calling without substance… Oh how this reminds me of the “good old days” of East Germany…
I hereby stop responding to you people. I’m sure that is your purpose - to silence the few who question your regime. It’s not enough for you to have total control of the MSM - you have to drive us sane people on the fringe crazy. Keep up the good fight, Rabbit, luminous beauty, major major - and all the rest of you decent souls…
Posted by Anarcho-Sozi on Oct 25, 2005 at 2:36 PM
Your right Sozi, everyone here who disagree with you is a secret agent of the Bush administration sent to spy on you, since you’re obviously a very important individual.
For what it’s worth, Ayn Rand was not a libertarian, so I can’t be a “libertarian of the Ayn Rand sort”. She repeatedly disclaimed such a label for herself and professed to despise the Libertarian Party of her day. I have my own disgreements with Rand, stemming largely from her knee-jerk anti-theism and also the fact that she claimed an originalty for her though that, being highly derivative, it did not posses - being highly derivative - and also from the fact that she proclaimed absolute freedom and rationality while at the same time encouraging a cult of personality around herself.
Anarchism is not compatible with Socialism. All socialism is “state socialism”.
Luminous, engaging in ad hominem attacks, with no indication that you have read or understood a thing, is hardly a serious argument.
Posted by EmitFlesti on Oct 25, 2005 at 2:44 PM
Substance.
<i>It
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 25, 2005 at 2:46 PM
One ad hominem, deserves another. Come into my parlor and start kicking the dog, don’t expect politesse.
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 25, 2005 at 2:58 PM
<i>Anarchism is not compatible with Socialism. All socialism is
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 25, 2005 at 3:10 PM
Actually, your claim does need elucidating. How would you propose to implement Socialism without a State? Socialism requires a strong state to engage in socio-economic levelling, to confiscate private property, and to redistribute wealth from those who create and earn it to those who do not.
In an Anarchy, there would be no state to impose Socialism, and the natural disparities in talents and desires among individuals would result in disparities of wealth and property, the very thing Socialism professes to abhor.
You simply cannot have Anarchy and Socialism at the same time in the same place. They are mutually exclusive categories.
Posted by EmitFlesti on Oct 25, 2005 at 3:21 PM
EF:
Your problem is your narrow and erroneous understanding of what Anarchism is. I don’t mean the facile facsimile of AnarchoCapitalism of the so-called Libertarian Right.
The key is in your statement to wit:
In an Anarchy, there would be no state to impose Socialism.
A correct view would be:
In Anarchism, there is no state to impose Socialism.
There is no such animal as an Anarchy. It is a one word oxymoron. Anarchists are not concerned with utopian speculation. You might have known this if you had actually read Chomsky rather than the specious and vicious lies promulgated by his detractors which you parrot in the most rote and robotic fashion. I saw a red and black sticker posted on a street sign this afternoon that expressed this idea with graphic clarity. It read, “EXPECT RESISTANCE: the future is not yet written.
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 25, 2005 at 3:57 PM
The depth of your understanding of socialism is likewise brain numbingly shallow.
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 25, 2005 at 4:10 PM
It looks like I stumbled onto another replay of the decades old debate between Libertarian-Anarchism and Anarcho-Communism. It
Posted by JasonPappas on Oct 25, 2005 at 6:04 PM
“The depth of your understanding of socialism is likewise brain numbingly shallow.” - Ah yes…reminds me of the earnest and self-righteous American girl in Prague a few summers ago who assured me that Socialism was a great idea that just hadn’t been correctly understood and implemented yet. Somehow it hadn’t occured to her that there were millions nearby who had relatively recently been liberated from Communist tryanny and who could tell her a thing or two about the implementation of Socialism.
Also, a word to the wise: I wouldn’t be too eager to broadcast that you find bumper-stickers a compelling form of political argument. Let me guess: you also drive a late-model Volvo, eat only Ice Cream brands that come wrapped in a political philosophy, and have a plethora of bumper-stickers on your car - with “Impeach Bush” and “Imagine Whirled Peas” featured prominently?
As for this: “The key is in your statement to wit:
In an Anarchy, there would be no state to impose Socialism. A correct view would be: In Anarchism, there is no state to impose Socialism,” you have essentially posited a distinction without a difference. My formulation was correct, in that the present non-existence of a state of Anarchy requires the conditional usage - “would be” - when describing the hypothetical nature of a hypothetical state. Whether one prefers the term Anarchy or Anarchism (much like one may variously use Monarchy/Monarchism, or Egalitarian/Egalitarianism, etc.), the key point in either is that there would be no state in such a system to impose Socialism. The very nature of Socialism requries the exisence of a state in order to impose the sort of egalitarian levelling that Socialism requires; ergo, Anarchy and Socialism are mutually exclusive. How you come to the conclusion that Anarchy is a “one-word oxymoron” is baffling. The word is simply a composite of the Greek “an” meaning “absence of”, and “arche” meaning “authority or government”. Hence Anarchy means “absence of authority or absence of government” (similarly Monarchy means “authority or government by one”, and Democracy means “rule or power excercized by the many”, and Aristocracy means “rule or power excercized by the those who possessing the qualtities of virture and excellence). But, since you never propose arguments or explanations, preferring ad hominem name-calling, I guess I shouldn’t expect any clear explanation for any of your conclusions.
A quick lesson in oxymorons: “Authoritarian Anarchy” or “Socialist Anarchy”. These are actual oxymorons employing the word Anarchy. The word Anarchy, by itself, is not an oxymoron.
Posted by EmitFlesti on Oct 25, 2005 at 8:15 PM
You are quite right. Anarchy means roughly ‘without a government. (I would prefer for the sake of rigor to use the term state, but I submit to your usage as it is only a hypothetical for the sake of argument) Then an Anarchy would be ‘a government without a government. Hence it is an oxymoron. Don’t try to weasel about the use of the article ‘an’ being trivial. It’s not, it is probative. If you were at all intellectually honest you would also recognize the substantive change in meaning between the present tense and future conditional and it’s centrality to my argument, which your subsequent remarks show you have completely failed to apprehend. You certainly would not be so dismissive as to say it is a difference without distinction. However your basic non-understanding of anarchist principles is an insignificant absence in the dark narcissistic ghetto of your consciousness, compared to your unquenchable neurotic obsession to attempt (vainly) to assert the supposed superiority of your parlor philosophy. The probative evidence of which is that you are here, spewing crap.
I drive an old Mazda hatchback. I’ve owned a couple of Volvos, neither was a late model. We hope to convert an old VW Golf and Toyota pick-up to bio-diesel soon. The only sticker on my car is a Greatful Dead thunderbolt-in- skull. I eat cheap ice cream from the local discount worker owned supermarket. I don’t judge statements by the putative authority of their source, but by the cogency of the ideas they present.
I have no idea what kind of person you are, but from what you’ve posted here
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 25, 2005 at 9:28 PM
“EXPECT RESISTANCE : the future is not yet written.”
I like that very much. Thanks.
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 25, 2005 at 9:54 PM
Anarchy doesn’t mean “roughly” without government. It means precisely “without government or without authority”. The terms State and Government are not necessarily interchangible.
“An Anarchy” would thuse be a society or a state without a government or authority to lead it. Just as a Monarchy is a state or society with a government led by a single authority, and a Democracy is (in principle at least) a society or state with a government led by the authority of the many. To say that “an anarchy” would mean a “government without a government”, and thus be a contradiction in terms, demonstrates your failure to grasp fundamental principles of language usage. By your definition the word “an” in the above phrase would itself be defined as meaning “government”.
Might I, in parting from this Chomsky-brainwashed Leftist cesspool, also suggest you change your name to Unilluminated Ugliness?
Posted by EmitFlesti on Oct 25, 2005 at 10:22 PM
I like cogency too. But tangents are fun.
I like ice cream. But only the expensive Haagen-Dazs. So I eat it once in a blue moon.
I used to drive an old Mazda hatchback. Until it exploded. It was a good horse to it’s last day.
I used to drive a VW Rabbit. Had two in succession, one gas, one diesel. Good cars.
Now a Chev S10 pickup. No bumper stickers. Good truck. Gets me camping and fishing. When it goes to the junkyard in the sky I may consider walking .... or a motorcycle .... or an old 4 cylinder Jeep.
Depends on the imperialistic oil wars I guess.
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 25, 2005 at 10:25 PM
LB -
“An anarchy” is not an oxymoron. “Archy anarchy” would be an oxymoron, but it is not seen often in everyday English. I hope your luminous beauty is greater than your English comprehension. Otherwise you are guilty of false self-aggrandizement, an oxymoron, twice, instead of once.
Posted by scorp on Oct 25, 2005 at 11:32 PM
EF….You are an uncommonly rash person, to be so rash and rush in so fast, to deny what another says is so, without even checking, is foolish. rabbit finds you to be quite boring, you are not too bright and hardly worth the keystrokes. All you do is say “No it isn’t” and call people names, well you are earning a few names for yourself. As for feeling insane, Rabbit has wondered about his sanity from time to time, like all sane creatures. He feels pretty sane as it happens.
It would be pointless for Rabbit to ask the same of EF, since it is a well known fact that the truly insane never suspect they are, so how would you know.
You are certainly full of empty though when it comes to knowledge.
Rabbit just selects Random sources for facts, if you have a genuine grievance with a fact, and feel it is not adequately referenced in one source you have only to say and Rabbit will select more from the thousands that seem to be available on all these issues you question. Do you think you have most of the knowledge in the world in your puny head? Boy discussion for you is at about the level of the sort had with a Traffic cop, on a slow day.
The Polish thing, the beginning. Stop being such a damned coward and read the details. If you can’t read what is given in answer to your challenge then who the hell do you think you are to come around here challenging others who do know what they are talking about?.
A sample for you EF.
The accounts of the barbarism that accompanied the expulsions of Sudeten Germans is well documented, and are contained and supported by 40,000 documents held at Koblenz Archives. These include names, dates and figures. As Dr. A.J App points out, these expulsions (and 241,000 murders) unlike the six million ‘gassed’ Jews allegations, are all backed by judicially acceptable documentation.
THE EVIDENCE OF:Dr. Jur. Bruno S. Stadler, Christlich Sociale UNION, November, 1948
“One Professor Zelenk of the University of Prague delivered twenty women to a Czech mob saying; ‘Here I bring the German sows.’ The mob beat them with laths and rubber hoses and screamed, ‘Kneel down, you German harlots.’ They fell to their knees, and had their hair shorn off with bayonets.
“Some of the women who had not done nor were accused of any wrongdoing, their crime was being German, were clubbed to death. One of the women, Helene Burger, a mother, became unconscious when a kick broke two of her ribs. When she came too, her foot bled; someone had cut a four centimeter piece of flesh from her calf.”
“Of the twenty women Helene Burger was tortured with, two committed suicide, two went insane. She survived and was moved to Camp Habigot where in four barracks 1,200 women were imprisoned.
“A Czech Red Cross nurse sorted out the pretty and young women, to whom at night the Russian militia were admitted. Some were raped as often as forty-eight times at night. Their cries of despair could be heard in the other barracks. In the morning these women lay about apathetic on the dirty floors with ‘bitten off noses, and scratched up faces.’”
“Hot pitch was brushed on the bare backs of inmates before they were beat up. In Iglau, 1,200 Germans committed suicide; the rest, the old and the sick included, were whipped on to Tangen. 350 of them died on the way….”
Boy are you on the wrong track just denying things off the top of your wee head.
As for Anarcho-socialism, it is a valid political label and can be aplied to Rabbit too, you damned fool.
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 26, 2005 at 3:36 AM
Tricky little site still, gotta watch those line breaks.
<a
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 26, 2005 at 3:37 AM
<a
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 26, 2005 at 3:39 AM
Anarcho-Sozi your observation about the shill, the agent, it is ineteresting. Rabbit has definately got that impression too. Not necessarily this one, yet, but he has noticed there is always one, this site is not the only one to be infested, all important issues threads attract them of course. It is interesting to lead one from one thread to another where such a person would never normally have found itself on that thread, but with “their” assigned issues, ever vigilant.
You can see a textbook case from the Radioactive Wounds of War thread, where one of the outed shills, actually does follow Rabbit from DU to 911 on the God Squad, just to stick with the assignment. She’s still at it and getting desperate too. Snaky.
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 26, 2005 at 3:46 AM
This is a good site for those who would like to research the Jewish Zionist influence in History
Ah HA a bad little extra = did it.
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 26, 2005 at 4:04 AM
For the edification of any who need it and can use it.
Anarcho-socialism,
Anarcho-socialism: A term which broadly refers to anarchism (social) and anarchism (mutualist). Most anarcho-socialists deem the term redundant, however, and prefer to be called “anarchists,” not “anarcho-socialists.” This is because they believe that the only true anarchy is socialist, and the only true socialism is anarchic. However, it remains a useful term, because it distinguishes them from others who, right or wrong, also consider themselves anarchists and socialists: for example, anarcho-capitalists and social democrats. (See anarchy; anarcho-syndicalism; libertarianism (left); and socialism. Compare to anarcho-capitalism; libertarianism (right) and social democracy.)
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 26, 2005 at 4:23 AM
Aint the internet a wonderful thing? Allows fools to be put in their place so quickly and easily…...Allows for such ordered debate, even if the fools carp on, they cannot take back anything they say, none of us can. Who will live to regret their words most?
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 26, 2005 at 4:26 AM
scorp:
False self-aggrandizement would be a redundancy, I believe. Most particularly in your case.
I’ll be clearer; (I was writing last night straining to keep my eyes open to watch the WS. You now have my full attention.
An Anarchy would be a Stateless State. Paradox = oxymoron. If i only had a brain.
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 26, 2005 at 6:03 AM
The most general difference between anarchists and socialists is that socialists are more concerned with ends, while anarchists are focused on the means. In a practical sense. Theoretically they are more similar.
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 26, 2005 at 6:18 AM
The form of governance anarchists live by is called syndicalism. Consensual agreements based on Mutual Aid.
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 26, 2005 at 6:33 AM
article
(grammar) a word, a type of determiner, that specifies or limits the following noun. (a, an, or the in English).
the articles a and an specify the kind of object to which the noun refers. In this case the root of the determinate noun, or invariant object, -archy or rule. The prefix an- is an additional determiner of the root. What kind of rule? a rule without rule. An explicit contradiction.
A non-paradoxical example is the indeterminate and variable noun: an imbalance. What kind of balance? A non-balanced balance. Not a contradiction in terms. A scale or balance can easily be out of balance.
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 26, 2005 at 7:57 AM
This is but a restatement of the classic oxymoron: The only rule in a knife fight is, there are no rules. It applies directly to debating trolls on the internet.
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 26, 2005 at 8:21 AM
I see the comment up the thread about Prescott Bush having been involved with Nazi industry before WW2…. I wonder how many people fond of using that to imply that the sins of the father and grandfather fall on the son and grandson remember that there was another famous American political patriarch with close ties to Nazi Germany: Joseph Kennedy, father of President John F. Kennedy and would be Presidents Robert and Ted Kennedy.
Posted by Reynardine on Oct 26, 2005 at 4:33 PM
“Scorpy can you give us a single one of the 14 which doesn
Posted by chopper on Oct 26, 2005 at 5:13 PM
Reynardine:
Don’t forget William Randolph Hearst, Charles Lindbergh, John Rockefeller, Andrew Mellon, DuPont, General Motors, Standard Oil (now Exxon), Ford, Chrysler, ITT, Allen Dulles, National City Bank, and General Electric.
And don’t forget who from the US was fighting Fascism in Spain.
Which side are you on, brothers? Which side are you on? Wasn’t that a time, brothers? Wasn’t that a time?
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 26, 2005 at 8:35 PM
I suppose it’s already crossed your minds with sickly twinge, but it is also fair to remember who was selling Saddam Hussein the raw materials and technology for his WMD’s in the 80’s and who was calling him a bloodthirsty tyrant.
Boy, us blind leftie ideologs can see parallels in just about anything, can’t we? It must be just our fevered, hysterical imaginations, I suppose. It couldn’t be because we know how to think reflectively with evidence, logic and reason, could it? Noooooooooooo…...We must be hallooooooocinating. You guys are entertaining, but nobody here is buying what you’re selling. Better try a new tack.
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 26, 2005 at 8:53 PM
Houston just went down in 4 with two amazing defensive sparklers from Juan Uribe of the World Champion Chicago White Sox. Shoeless Joe Jackson for the Hall!!!
It’s gonna be a dismal day in the big T tomarra with indictments comin’ down aroun’ the ol’ fav’rite son an’ all. Shee-it.
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 26, 2005 at 9:11 PM
Chopper that wasn’t an answer to any of the 14, so go blow yourself. You have as yet oferred nothing in refutation of any of them, for the record.
Reynardine
Your presumption about what others on this site would know about is uncalled for and as it happens would be quite wrong.
We all know what a*seholes the Kennedy’s are, and as for the sins of the father, if only…............
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 26, 2005 at 9:57 PM
The indigtments, which The Conservative Voice, was whistling in the dark about on wednesday…..See them cringing in fear.
Today is Friday (here) today is the day eh?
Too bad it is only a battle, the war has hardly begun, but some ignominious falls will be good for morale, anyway. Ours anyway.
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 26, 2005 at 10:05 PM
When the Mountain Man returns from slumber after seeing the gladiatorial sport of men fighting over a ball, he might want to see this, it is Cold Water but should be remembered in light of the wider view.
Hot Air
trust Alex and crew to be the spoilsports, so conservative, always Prison Planet is conservative. Like the grown ups amongst us, kids on a beach looking for tresure, truth seekers.
Got it, Fundys, Jones is a conservative by Rabbit’s estimate, an intelligent and honest conservative. Moon Bat bait
We haven’t seen any moonbats lately, pretty Moonbats.
Blue and flappy in the black sky.
Moonbats happy with their lie pie.
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 27, 2005 at 12:29 AM
Wasn’t someone attacking
Noam Chomsky here a while back?
“Best known for his contributions to the study of linguistics through his theory of generative grammar, this Professor Emeritus of Linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has been the most intelligent, vehement critic of the US government during the current and the preceding centuries. Consistently writing (and speaking publicly) in a calm, thoughtful manner, for years Professor Chomsky charged America’s ruling establishment and its obedient press corps with some of the most heinous crimes against humanity one could imagine. His political activism has spanned decades while his impressive list of books assailing the US government has continued to grow. His perception, insight, and presentation of evidence to support his dissidence are without equal. And activism is his “hobby”. I feel assured that there are many amongst America’s ruling elite who count their blessings that Dr. Chomsky has focused so much of his attention on his linguistics studies.
A Dead Civilian a Day Keeps the Terrorists at Bay?
“The new doctrine was not one of preemptive war, which arguably falls within some stretched interpretation of the UN Charter, but rather a doctrine that doesn’t begin to have any grounds in international law, namely, preventive war. That is, the United States will rule the world by force, and if there is any challenge to its domination—-whether it is perceived in the distance, invented, imagined, or whatever—then the United States will have the right to destroy that challenge before it becomes a threat. That’s preventive war, not preemptive war.”
Chomsky goes on to dissect the manner in which the Bush regime has implemented its doctrine of preventive war and “normalized it”. By virtue of its sheer might and through the masterful propaganda which convinced its citizenry that invading Iraq was necessary to defend the “homeland, the United States has established such a war of aggression as “acceptable behavior” for a legitimate government. Essentially, Chomsky concludes that the Bush administration, its collaborating wealthy elite and its supportive corporate leviathans imposed their will to expand the American Empire through instilling the fear in other nations that they could be in the cross-hairs of an incredibly powerful military, and by shamelessly telling unprecedented lies to the American people.
As a result, Chomsky asserts, “George Bush has succeeded within a year in converting the United States to a country that is greatly feared, disliked, and even hated.”
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 27, 2005 at 3:16 AM
Sorry Rabbit, but I disagree about
beisbol being a gladiatorial sport.
It’s a real sign of progress that the wing-nuts are attacking Chomsky after years and years of totally ignoring him. As famous as he is (for a scholar) internationally, he’s long been a virtual non-entity in his own country. It’s undoubtedly news to most US citizens that there even exists a field of scientific enquiry called Cognitive Science much less the central role Chomsky has played in it’s development.
I liked this line in the Rense article: “Again the kindest thing you can say about Reagan is that he probably didn’t know what he was saying.”. That goes in spades for our resident trolls.
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 27, 2005 at 9:19 AM
Reynardine:
My mention of Prescott Bush had nothing to do with the “sins of the father and grandfather”. It was offered merely as an example of the (well-known outside of dumbed-down America) fact that capital knows no morals (or national boundaries) but only profit.
Why do you throw the Kennedys at me? Of course they are no different, just as Republicans and Democrats are no different from each other. That’s the point!
By the way, P. Bush was not doing business with the Nazis merely *before* WW2 but also during (even after America’s entry - how stupid of me to mention this, though. Most Americans probably think the war started on 7 Dec. 1941 - at least those few Americans who even know there was a WW2…). As I recall, he was tried and even convicted for “aiding and abetting the enemy”.
A more topical example of Bush family financial dealings would have been their connection to the house of Saud and the bin Laden family…
Posted by Anarcho-Sozi on Oct 27, 2005 at 10:07 AM
“How could this horror have seized a nation and corrupted so much of Europe?” you ask.
For the same reason that you make no mention of Islamic terror, aggression, and fanaticism: you are wilfully blind to this new danger that is equivalent to Nazism, because it doesn’t fit your preconceptions.
It is much more comfortable to ponder the European decadence of 70 years ago than to look at today’s Eurabia, isn’t it?
Posted by rdar on Oct 27, 2005 at 2:27 PM
OK, rdar,
Let’s look at Islamic terrorism. Are there any Islamic terrorists poised to take over the US Government from within? Are they in any position to even attain power in a single Islamic country? Do you believe the war in Iraq has done anything but increase the danger of terrorism by driving the Iraqi people to fear and anger and vengefulness by our bloody occupation? How do you think W will function after his brainectomy?
Please tell me, what are the intellectual antecedents to your peculiar world-view? And tell me more about Eurabia, it sounds fascinating, even phantasmagoric. If it includes Europe’s imminent collapse under the weight of its Socialist Nanny-State and plummeting white population, don’t bother, I’ve heard it.
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 27, 2005 at 4:32 PM
What’s the matter rdar, cat got your tongue.
HERE is a little info on ‘IslamoFascist terrorism you might want to wrap your o-so-un-preconcieved mind around. Read it, footnotes & all, and let’s chat.
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 28, 2005 at 9:25 AM
Hmm, rather a reactionary song, David in Canada.
And there aren’t any Russians coming to get us - we bankrupted them years ago,and let their mob take over what was left.
Posted by Liz on Oct 28, 2005 at 1:48 PM
Jay Cline - your points on page one are particularly nonsensical, considering who the “oil-rich Muslim country” is friends with… your very own POTUS!
Posted by Liz on Oct 28, 2005 at 1:50 PM
Hi, Anarcho-Sozi! Meet the other worthwhile perosn on his board - me - your very own original Liz - contributor!!
EmitFlesti is just trying to smash anarchists and socialists and all the Left apart, because he well knows we have several schools of thought. He’d rather lump the anarchists in with the libertarians. and stupid Randists.
I tell you what *I* think. The left should have patched up its differences years ago. Let’s do so NOW and then go and smash the Right!! The REAL task of today!
Liz - the other socialist on this board with a twist of anarchism!
Posted by Liz on Oct 28, 2005 at 2:14 PM
oops, sorry Rabbit, didn’t read that - didn’t know you too were one of the band!
Posted by Liz on Oct 28, 2005 at 2:23 PM
Brill link to home.att.net. Thanks, Rabbit!!
Posted by Liz on Oct 28, 2005 at 2:24 PM
JFK was rather sweet, though, wasn’t he, Ghost Rabbit? He and Robert were at least dishy.
As for comparisons - well it all DOES go by degree!
A thing which keeps going round and round my head like mad (before you ask, I’m not a Trotskyist: I can’t really be, because I believe in the supernatural!) is a little excerpt from an article published quite a while ago on the World Socialist Web site, comparing J F K’s speeches, which were said to be eloquent and idealistic compared to today’s “political pig grunts” (how I loved that phrase!) from George W. Bush.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/nov2003/jfk-n22.shtml
“Political pig grunts”! how I revel in that phrase… it appears about half-way down.
...anyway, John did die… that’s enough to cover up a multitude of sins I would say!
Oooh, anyway, another small theory: should be interesting to rabbit and luminous beauty. I believe that the two dead Kennedys rebelled against their right-wing father (and his set.) Sons sometimes do: take it from me, it’s a Freudian thing, as in “Totem and Taboo”....
They slay the father: they don’t always however make of him a totem… sometimes they really rebel, I think, which means not to propagate his views….
I think it was some of those Old White Men who struck back, no?
Posted by Liz on Oct 28, 2005 at 2:49 PM
Greetings Liz
and welcome to this hmm… how should it be characterised? group! (I, too, am new here…)
Many thanks for your link to wsws. Sometimes it is indeed worthwhile to reflect on some of the (minor) differences within the ruling elite. Yes, there is most definitely a qualitative difference between much of what Kennedy said in his speeches and the political pig grunts of W.
Nice to have another non-dumbed-down Ami here (your language gives you away. My guess: UK, IRE, NZ, OZ, SA…) (no offence intended as regards Luminous Beauty, Major Major, and a select group of others!)
Posted by Anarcho-Sozi on Oct 28, 2005 at 4:21 PM
Hi Liz
Yes a reactionary song. From a long ways back. But the Russian still have nukes my dear. They may not have to use them though.
America is mostly bankrupt too. Morally and otherwise
America seems to ready to self destruct.
I hope they don’t.
I happen to live next door.
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 28, 2005 at 5:14 PM
UK, mein lieber Ossi! (I mean Anarcho-Sozi)
Aus welcher Stadt stammen Sie? Darf ich bitte fragen?
Posted by Liz on Oct 28, 2005 at 6:43 PM
Rabbit- The 14 points
1. Rampant & Continuing Nationalism- I actually see relatively few flags, and none of the people I know actually wear flags or display them on their vehicles, including the political conservatives I know.
2. Identification of enemies/scapegoats. Bush has gone out of his way to state we have no quarrel with Islam itself. He has identified terrorists as enemies, perhaps understandable in that they actually have attacked us. There is a Muslim Mosque that openly operates in the city I live in, & I live in a city in a fairly conservative area.
3. Supremacy of the military. The US has no draft, no military dictatorship, and the bulk of our budget does not go to the military. If this is military supremacy they are doing a pretty poor job of it.
4. Rampant sexism. In practice we have abortion on demand. Gays are not prosecuted for homosexual activity. Again, all these sexists aren’t much on the ball, are they?
5. Controlled mass media. With major media outlets such as the New York Times and Washington Post which regularly criticize Bush & his administration (often in very harsh terms), if it is controlled then the controllers are asleep at the switch.
6. Corporate power. As a branch manager in a small company, I regularly get newsletters that illustrate practices that would get us into legal trouble for unfair employment procedures. Again, if there is a lot of corporate power those exercising it aren’t doing their jobs very well.
7. Labor power. There is no government effort to destroy unions. They have made themselves increasingly irrelevant to large sections of the workforce.
8. Disdain for intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals are in no way muzzled. In fact they are often quoted at length or aired by major media outlets. Do you mean that not everyone bows to their obvious (in their minds) intellectual superiority? That some of us don’t actually take such absurd figures as Ward Churchill seriously? In that case you are correct. William Buckley (himself an intellectual, although a conservative one) once famously said he’d rather be governed by the first 3,000 names in the Boston phone directory than by the faculty of Yale. There was a lot of wisdom in that statement.
9. Obsession with crime and punishment. I haven’t noticed a lot of this obsession in the media lately. Guliani was effective in reducing the crime rate in New York with innovative policing techniques. Was this a bad thing?
10. Fradulent elections. Charged by leftwing partisans in the 2000 election. Not generally given much credence by impartial observers.
Well Rabbit, that is it for starters. I believe you don’t actually live in the US, so you probably don’t know what you are writing about. And by the way, go blow yourself.
Posted by chopper on Oct 28, 2005 at 7:16 PM
Hooray for Liz…......................Hello LIZ….......Excited Rabbit is to see you. Will you stay awhile?
Coming right up Chopper, and as for not living in the USA, you can believe it. As it happens Rabbit has a lot of American friends, spends a lot of time on the internet, and reads a great deal. Rabbit also has the inestimable advantage, as has been noted by others, of being suffiently removed from things in America that it affords a more objective viewpoint. If Rabbit gets anything majorly wrong about the USA, then he has many good friends who would have told him about it by now, so if it comes down to Rabbit and you disagreeing about something, the “foreigner” argument won’t fly, let us get that much straight. And to anticipate the other side of thise forged coin, the USA became other country’s business when they made other countries their business.
You have been brave to attempt the list and rabbit shall ‘reward’ your efforts.
............................
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 28, 2005 at 9:38 PM
1. Rampant & Continuing Nationalism- I actually see relatively few flags, and none of the people I know actually wear flags or display them on their vehicles, including the political conservatives I know.
What is relatively few? You are living inside your bubble and have no reference with which to make comparisons on this or indeed several of the claims such as this which are based on an objective analysis. Rabbit see’s one Aussie flag on average per day, which is because on his way to work he ‘usually’ drives past a particular house who has a flag pole. That is as many as most Aussies would see. In Denmark, where Rabbit lived for five years, there are flags everywhere and the Danes have a healthy amount of National pride, but it is nothing compared to American Nationalism which is itself a phenomenon being observed and commented upon by the world at large, at every imaginable level of intercourse. Not a chumps chance, 1. is a certainty.
2. Identification of enemies/scapegoats. Bush has gone out of his way to state we have no quarrel with Islam itself. He has identified terrorists as enemies, perhaps understandable in that they actually have attacked us. There is a Muslim Mosque that openly operates in the city I live in, & I live in a city in a fairly conservative area.
“No quarrel”? You are at war and threatening more war against Muslim nations, you support the most vicious little terrorist state in the Middle East with all it’s threats and nastiness and you threaten their elected leaders, threaten and actually launch military attacks oon any Muslim Nation at the drop of a hat, and accuse them of everything that goes bang in the night, You are invading and have been destabilising the Middle east for decades and it is reaching a crescendo at this moment and you say Bush says you have no quarrel with Islam. Yes mate sure. Well Islam has now got a quarrel with you, and calling them terrorists is not going to cut it anymore, they are defending what is theirs on their home soil. You are attacking them inside thjeir bordeers and heh WAKE UP Chopper, Iraq had nothing to do with any terrorism, or attacks on the USA. There is NO proof that Muslim Fundamentalists alone caused 911. There is a HUGE and growing body of evidence which much more clearly PROVES US government complicity in 911. Not even half of Americans believe the official theory, and those of us who are informed KNOW it is all lies. So you are indeed finding scapegoats. Yoiu have killed upwards of a couple of hundred thousand Muslims so far, who had nothing to do with 911, and yet you dare to raise 911 as a justification? You are a louse, boy are you a louse. So there is a Muslim Mosque near you, BIG DEAL does that somehow prove that you or Americans are espceially tolerant does it? Well there is one down the road from me too, and most Australians are about as intolerant and ignorant about others as Americans, so no, not that or the Budhist temple on the other end of that road makes for Aussies being more tolerant in general, why shopuld it mean more in America? For you information there are and have always been Christian Churches and Jewish Synagogues in most Islamic countries to.,. Muslims don’t even hate Jews, or Christians but you would not know that. The only people who have a religious dimension to their beliefs about the causes of conflict are those from the Judeo Christian side. The Muslims just want Israel to stop abusing the Pallestinians. Some more extreme Muslims would like Israel out of the Middle East and if you knew enough history we could discuss that. But you do not, so we won’t. The extremists no sooner make decisions in the Middle East than they do in the USA. Except where those extremists are propped up by the USA.
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 28, 2005 at 10:00 PM
How many potentially Muslim Bombs have been blown up in the USA….........Chopper?
How many bombs and much of them Dirty Bombs at that, has the USA dropped on Muslim Nations? You can even pretend all the terrorist attacks in America were Muslims if you want, even though probably none of them were.
2. would have to be said to be carried. You set up Libya to take the fall for Lockerbie, more scapegoats. Now that one has come undone too. Nope 2. is still looking good Chop.
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 28, 2005 at 10:07 PM
3. Supremacy of the military. The US has no draft, no military dictatorship, and the bulk of our budget does not go to the military. If this is military supremacy they are doing a pretty poor job of it.
Let us keep it simple, The US Military Budget for 2005 $420.7 billion.
” The US military budget is almost as much as the rest of the world’s.
The US military budget is more than 8 times larger than the Chinese budget, the second largest spender.
The US military budget is more than 29 times as large as the combined spending of the seven
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 28, 2005 at 10:32 PM
<i>6. Corporate power. As a branch manager in a small company, I regularly get newsletters that illustrate practices that would get us into legal trouble for unfair employment procedures. Again, if there is a lot of corporate power those exercising it aren
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 28, 2005 at 11:08 PM
Lovely Liz,
Rabbit has read far enough down to see you had seen him here amongst the grass, and he is happy too you noticed he is an Anarcho-Socialist, he has called himself this about as long as he has realised he is an Agnostic Rabbit. Some things are so easy to understand once you read them, because they are.
Rabbit could easily accomodate your theory about the Kennedys. Some things about Kennedy have given me pause to wonder along similar lines. If as we many do accept that there was establishment involved(CIA>>>MAFIA), then it seems likely that they were considered a threat to somebody. It wasn’t any lone nut either, though Rabbit doesn’t tend to have much doubts about Lennon’s murderer having being a fried egg. he was classic, looney tune. The others were classic assasinations.
Does Liz know about reptiles? Since Liz spiritual she may know what Rabbit means. If so just nod, we don’t want to attract “Moonbats”. Wasn’t it Liz and rabbit who enjoyed Moonbats together once? Rabbit only mentioned this a couple of days ago to Kuya.
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 28, 2005 at 11:24 PM
Rabbit does some more Chopping…...........
<i>8. Disdain for intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals are in no way muzzled. In fact they are often quoted at length or aired by major media outlets. Do you mean that not everyone bows to their obvious (in their minds) intellectual superiority? That some of us don
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 28, 2005 at 11:47 PM
Would people like to see Rabbit change into Ultra Rabbit? He is sick of being a Ghost, it was only ever meant to be temporary, and he wishes to return, as a live Rabbit? Having taken the necessary steps with the recent Shill attack, to do this, Rabbit could do this. It distresses Rabbit to be called a Ghost, really.
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 29, 2005 at 12:04 AM
Chop Chop Chop
Rabbit with his little axe, reaches number 10
10. Fradulent elections. Charged by leftwing partisans in the 2000 election. Not generally given much credence by impartial observers
This deserves to be refuted in totality. Don’t go selling your ass and then denying you sold it. The Impartial Observers who were hindered in Observing the US elections as it happens, DID not give either election the thumbs up and nor have many other impartial observers and Americans too.
The [url=“http://tinyurl.com/dzyzv”]2004
election[/url] was widely criticised and as you will see from pushing the >Blue Button< it is now emerging that it is even officially well on the way to being called SHONKY. See the GAO report and Blow Chopper Blow.
Don’t you hate it when the news catches up and overtakes your illusions?
10 down and four to go, maybe you just want to accept the last four out of hand? Most do.
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 29, 2005 at 12:15 AM
Hallo Liz
Ja, ich bin ein alter Ossi, wie er leibt und lebt - urspr
Posted by Anarcho-Sozi on Oct 29, 2005 at 8:52 AM
Yes, Rabbit, definitely!
Take off the kid gloves and show us your true self. We don’t want any ghosts here. Be the Vollblutkarnickelbock you really are!
Posted by Anarcho-Sozi on Oct 29, 2005 at 8:57 AM
One bourbon, one scotch, and one beer.
Last call for comments on :
Radioactive Wounds of War.
This thread is being shut down soon. Comment while you still can.
The link is to the second last page (for now) to allow for some context to recent developments.
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 29, 2005 at 1:01 PM
That thread ...
Radioactive Wounds of War
... not this thread where you are now.
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 29, 2005 at 2:05 PM
“It
Posted by chopper on Oct 29, 2005 at 8:34 PM
“What is relatively few? You are living inside your bubble and have no reference with which to make comparisons on this or indeed several of the claims such as this which are based on an objective analysis. Rabbit see
Posted by chopper on Oct 29, 2005 at 8:39 PM
“There is a HUGE and growing body of evidence which much more clearly PROVES US government complicity in 911. Not even half of Americans believe the official theory, and those of us who are informed KNOW it is all lies”
Let’s see Rabbit, I’ll bet you also know that OJ didn’t kill Nicole (must have been those Columbian drug dealers OJ promised to find), the moon landings were a hoax, Lee Harvey Oswald was a CIA agent, the man kept in Spandau as Rudolph Hess was really an imposter, the US government has alien bodies at area 51, Alger Hiss was innocent, and Napoleon took his orders from the Illuminati. I was going to do a more detailed answer to your post, some of which is somewhat plausible, but this is straight out of the fever-swamps of far left paranoia. Do you really believe this crap or is it just fashionable Euro-bashing of the US?
Posted by chopper on Oct 29, 2005 at 8:56 PM
“you say Bush says you have no quarrel with Islam.”
Now your confusing Bush with me. Get a grip.
Posted by chopper on Oct 29, 2005 at 9:25 PM
Let us keep it simple, The US Military Budget for 2005 $420.7 billion.
Posted by chopper on Oct 29, 2005 at 9:30 PM
“This only says that you are a male, and in denial. What is that old favorite which sells every product under the sun? Begins with an
Posted by chopper on Oct 29, 2005 at 9:34 PM
“Ever heard of the Downing Street Memo
Posted by chopper on Oct 29, 2005 at 9:39 PM
“Rabbit ignores all this as being twaddle, A few names dropped which mean nothing to Rabbit but the format suggests he is trying to sound intellectual. Rabbit would prefer to refer the matter of American Intellectualism and the arts, to his
Posted by chopper on Oct 29, 2005 at 10:12 PM
“10 down and four to go, maybe you just want to accept the last four out of hand? Most do.”
No, I just haven’t gotten to them yet. This whole list is carefully designed to put a leftwing spin on a view of facism. It leaves out some essential features of facism, such as extensive control of the economy, and includes some others that are marginal or just off-base. Facism historically was pretty secular. Mussolini was a socialist, and never really abandoned socialism.
None of this changes the fact that you’re delusional, however.
Posted by chopper on Oct 29, 2005 at 10:21 PM
The two people who were most successful in bringing the cold war to a close were Osama Bin Laden, and Michel Gorbachev. Despite Reagan.
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 29, 2005 at 10:21 PM
“The two people who were most successful in bringing the cold war to a close were Osama Bin Laden, and Michel Gorbachev. Despite Reagan.”
Further evidence that Rabbit is delusional.
Posted by chopper on Oct 29, 2005 at 10:22 PM
Jeez Chopper you are not much of a fish, more of a dud than anything.
<blockquote>
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 29, 2005 at 11:09 PM
<blockquote> When you can point to actual examples of homosexuals being persecuted by the government then I
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 29, 2005 at 11:36 PM
How exactly could Ronald Mc Donald, oops sorry, Rabbit meant Ronald Reagan, be given credit for ending the cold war?
Exactly how? As Rabbit recalls Reagan was busy setting up an inpossible dream at the time “star wars” and various other atrocities were being carried out in anticipation of many more decades of war. The USSR, led by Gorbachev, shocked the world with it’s own internal collapse, and History shows it was bled to death by it’s military, especially the sharp drain on morale and economy represented by the WAR in Afghanistan. That is not delusional Chopper, it is history and an entire internet and literary history stand as testimony. So have a go at another this one is gone for you brother, gone for good.
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 29, 2005 at 11:45 PM
While we are at it can anybody predict what history might be saying about the demise of the USA in a decade from now?
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 29, 2005 at 11:54 PM
“As for the militaristic society, you are obviously so shocked by those figures yourself that you almost threw in the towell on that one, now admit it. Or don
Posted by chopper on Oct 30, 2005 at 12:01 AM
“How exactly could Ronald Mc Donald, oops sorry, Rabbit meant Ronald Reagan, be given credit for ending the cold war?
Exactly how? As Rabbit recalls Reagan was busy setting up an inpossible dream at the time
Posted by chopper on Oct 30, 2005 at 12:11 AM
“Well Rabbit cannot oblige you here. He has never seen any need to raise the issue of homosexuality on this thread. Not the first time you raised it nor this one. So if this is the weird and wonderful test of integrity you have set the Rabbit, perhaps he must accept he will lack integrity with such an one as Chopper”
In the “rampant sexism” point “homophobia” and “anti-gay legislation” were specifically mentioned, as was opposition to abortion. Looks like I wasn’t the one that raised it Rabbit. You lose on this one.
Posted by chopper on Oct 30, 2005 at 12:20 AM
<blockquote>The war in Afghanistan drained the morale and economy of the Soviet Union because of Reagan
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 30, 2005 at 12:48 AM
<blockquote>Also, Soviet scientists told Gorbachev that they didn
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 30, 2005 at 12:53 AM
Yes Rabbit had already agreed your government are a bunch of bum brothers, it is a part of Skull and Bones lore. Not in the “normal” sense of our homosexual brothers and sisters, but rather as a deliberate act of perversion. It is an important issue to those who hold fast to the Bush. Of course it is. But does it occur to Chopper that one can be a Homosexual and a pervert as well?
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 30, 2005 at 1:00 AM
So the Pope and Reagan did it now?
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 30, 2005 at 1:05 AM
Before Rabbit has even found the comparison of US Military Budget to other, less important things like education, health and emergency services ,
there is THIS which sort of makes anything further on the issue redundant.
Push the link and look at the graph half way down the page, and tell Rabbit how you can argue the USA is not dominated by the Military.
Like Rabbit said, the rest of the world feels the lash…................. but you dorks are paying for it.
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 30, 2005 at 1:23 AM
Another thing Rabbit was hoping others would mention is about number 9. Jose Padilla .....................a start to legal abuses.
Posted by GhostRabbit on Oct 30, 2005 at 1:56 AM
“So the Pope and Reagan did it now?”
Yeah, that’s what I said the first time
Posted by chopper on Oct 30, 2005 at 8:15 AM
“Yes Rabbit had already agreed your government are a bunch of bum brothers, it is a part of Skull and Bones lore. Not in the
Posted by chopper on Oct 30, 2005 at 8:19 AM
Rabbit; It is a deliberate act of coercive sexual domination, much like rape. Consensual perversion is relatively just silly play acting. Not too surprising that chopper doesn’t get the point. He is such a punk.
Posted by luminous beauty on Oct 30, 2005 at 10:49 AM
This site is a microcosm of the USA. There are, in the USA and on this site, a group of dedicated, white-hot leftists, with many tactics and no strategy. The tactics include dishonesty, hatred, vituperation, and illogic fueled by conspiracy theories, wishful thinking, and an air of unreality. We have been here before. The year was 1972.
In 1972, the McGovern campaign cut itself loose from traditional Democratic sources of strength such as unions and farmers (the delegates from Iowa to the Democratic Convention that year did not include a single farmer!). The Democratic Party was instead led by Liberals, radicals, academic and media elites, and money men. The result was the worst electoral defeat in modern times; McGovern lost the Electoral College vote 520-17, winning only Massachusetts and Washington DC. The Democratic Party has had only two Presidential winners (?) since then, Carter and Clinton, both of whom advertised themselves as Southern Moderates, regardless of whatever was going on in their heads/hearts/gonads/whatever.
The similarities between 1972 and upcoming elections is astonishing. The union movement is now greatly diminished and fractured, so that unions will not in the near future exert a great influence, regardless of how the Democratic Party solicits or ignores their participation. Other than that, Radicals? Michael Moron and Cindy Sheehan. Academic elites? Ward Churchill and Michael Bellesiles. Media elites? NYT and ABC, both rocked by scandal, and sharing in the common decline across the board within Old Media. Money men? George Soros, Linda Pritzker (actually a money woman), Stephen L. Bing, Peter B. Lewis, and their ilk, who gave tens of millions of dollars in a losing effort to influence the 2004 elections, and who are now organizing to waste more money in 2006 and 2008. Losers all.
If the Republicans have disagreements on the best way to achieve their objectives (Harriet Miers), they have no disagreement on what they want to accomplish; they certainly do not want to turn over the government to a bunch of radical losers, and they will fight to avoid this. But 1972 clearly illustrated that many Democrats do not care for the radical agenda, either.
What, you say the Democrats have a strategy? Where is it? Social Security? No. Improve homeland security? No. Eliminate government taking of private property? No. Rebuild the economy after the Bubba Bubble? No. Increase domestic energy production to alleviate energy strains? Hell, no. Create democracy around the world? Oh, no, not that. With no strategy, the Democrats are building an identical reprise of their 1972 disaster.
Being basically clueless, Hillary, LB, Harry Reid, Eidolon Lagomorph, Nancy Pelosi, and other Liberals near and far do not know what is in store for them. And they won
Posted by scorp on Oct 30, 2005 at 1:32 PM
“Rabbit; It is a deliberate act of coercive sexual domination, much like rape. Consensual perversion is relatively just silly play acting. Not too surprising that chopper doesn
Posted by chopper on Oct 30, 2005 at 3:09 PM
“To the extent that I can decipher it he was saying that Bush and his administration are a bunch of preverted homosexuals (sort of a redundancy there).”
Chopper,
You have decided to expose both your ignorance and bigotry on this thread.
“Actually Rabbit is sure that Homosexuality, especially the ugly dominant kind is quite common practice among the government heirarchy, and the history will show that issues such as Jeff Gannon etc will lead to a better understanding of what this is all about.”
Rabbit? I am not sure what you mean by the “ugly dominant kind.” But am very interested in knowing.
As for homosexuals being persecuted by the government. I don’t know if you all consider discrimination to be persecution but I do. Having relationships denied legal status is discrimination. Endorsing the existence of “treatment centers” run by hacks on the excuse that they are faith based is persecution. Laws under consideration to ban gays from adopting are discriminatory and I believe that is persecution. But it is always easy for those who are not feeling the effect of these types of persecutions to write them off as something else. How well the ignorant, powerhungry repugs have scapegoated gays during election years is only comparable to the scapegoating of blacks, jews, native americans, etc…
Posted by Neruda on Oct 30, 2005 at 3:57 PM
What is the redundancy Chopper?
You are a bigot as it it has been noted before. Homosexuals do not have to be perverts. Bush and the Skull and bones NWO types etc are very much into PERVERSION. That doesn’t so much make them homosexuals as in their case perverts.
Insults are the sort of mindless name calling and false accusations, of others which is the stock in trade of self confessed Conservative extremists like yourself. It is you and Scorpy who are conforming
to a recognised mental disorder. HIV Rabbit thinks he read it called. Rabbit posted a link somewhere.
<i>Time and time again, when I come across close-minded Bush supporters, I witness the effects of an unexplainable phenomenon: a highly dangerous variation of HIV
Posted by Rabbit on Oct 30, 2005 at 7:20 PM
You leftists are all about peace & love until someone disagrees with you. Then the gloves come off.
says the Chopper.
Like all self claimed Rightist Morons you argue with your preconceptions. We leftists, as “You” choose to label US are as inclined to defend oursleves and destroy pests if the need arises as any. As a rule we do it in a lot more intelligent and efficient fashion due to having open minds hence adaptability and imagination.
You should be glad we prefer to settle disputes with words instead of your first and prefferred method. Obviously you think you are better at Wars than we are, but being the first choice for you doesn’t make it the one you are most likely to win either. We can beat you morons to porridge with words or whatever. OOH OOH OOH!
Rabbit jumps around and roars ferociously.
Posted by Rabbit on Oct 30, 2005 at 7:27 PM
>> Rabbit jumps around and roars ferociously. <<
One trick pony, so to speak.
Posted by scorp on Oct 31, 2005 at 12:47 PM
OH Rabbit is sooo devastated…................Scorpy has cut the Rabbit to the marrow…............................aaaarrghh…..........Poor Rabbit he is so hurt, Scorpy is so clever and so mean…........^^...........
Scorpy don’t ever get to saying nice things about me will you….........That is honestly what would worry me.
Find any sources for anything yet Scorpy?
Posted by Rabbit on Oct 31, 2005 at 9:31 PM
You ever ride a PONY Scorpy?
Ever ride a Rabbit?
Your metaphors are as always wacky.
For a one trick Rabbit, I have altered the look of this site for all time, adding HTML as a response to another idiot, and that was “learnt” in the time shown by the postings, about ten minutes. So that is two tyrick anyway.
Scorpy who hasn’t even picked up on the HTML, is still clapping with one hand. Scorpy has it ever occurred to you to get the barrel of that thing straightened? It seems curled over so that everyu shot comes straight at your own feet.
Posted by Rabbit on Oct 31, 2005 at 9:35 PM
Wack…............Wack…...........^^........................
Thankyou stick…................... Rabbit looks appreciatively at his own stick and is glad he selected well.
Wack…...............................................wack
Posted by Rabbit on Oct 31, 2005 at 9:37 PM
Scorp,
You were funny with your one liner but Rabbit has a whole routine down.
You got anything else, Scorp?
This is better than the Comedy Channel.
Thanks guys.
Posted by David in Canada on Oct 31, 2005 at 10:34 PM
Rabbit has a list of routines…....................One to ...................well infinity I guess.
Posted by Rabbit on Nov 1, 2005 at 12:26 AM
Eidolon Lagomorph -
Rabbits are not for riding. Rabbits are for shooting.
A pack of beagles will flush a rabbit, and the rabbit will run in a big circle, returning to his original point. When you hear the hounds turn and start to get close, you know the rabbit is closer, and then you pop the sucker. Good sport, good eating.
Like you, always going in circles, never making progress, stupidly exposing yourself.
Posted by scorp on Nov 1, 2005 at 9:19 AM
scorpy is carving hisself a little hole in an old log, into which he will later crawl and hide. Like the ugly, toxic little arachnid he is.
scorpy, I just have to adze; isn’t your edge getting a little dull? You are about as funny as an abscessed wound.
Posted by luminous beauty on Nov 1, 2005 at 10:22 AM
Rabbit was once a farmer and hunter. Bet he’s shot more Bunnies than Scorpy. All head shots too, and I never shot one standing…..................^^........................
Rabbit nature has since taught me the value and inate respect for life which even ten years of Budhism never quite achieved.
Since explo*ives, their manufacture and use is actually a Rabbit hobby and once his job, he has popped a few Rabbit warrens with Powergel too. Powergel, or even better, PETN is good for clearing a swimming hole of Crocs too. Rabbit is a Kimberley soul and knows a bit about Crocs and doesn’t really like them much.
So Scorpy you go out and shoot bunnies, Rabbit will stick to giving Crocs a headache. By the way Crocodile steaks are not bad either.
You are a bit sad sometimes Scorpy, but, hell you stand head and shoulders above Jay Decline, next to him you are a sage.
Rabbit goes in circles for play, but the rest of the time he moves forward like a bulldozer. Admit it Scorpy.
.........................................................^^..................................
Posted by Rabbit on Nov 1, 2005 at 5:12 PM
“You should be glad we prefer to settle disputes with words instead of your first and prefferred method. Obviously you think you are better at Wars than we are, but being the first choice for you doesn
Posted by chopper on Nov 2, 2005 at 12:49 AM
“The sad reality is that there is no way to convince these brain-washed believers that there may be something more to the story of 9/11 than what they have been told. That
Posted by chopper on Nov 2, 2005 at 1:13 AM
Yes chopper, it’s all about you, isn’t it?
Posted by luminous beauty on Nov 2, 2005 at 8:43 AM
Rabbit has no opinions about the following, sorry since they are things of import to Chopper it would seem.
The only thing it shows is that you seem to like conspiracy theories. So tell me, who really did kill Nicole Simpson? And who really was the man known as Rudolph Hess who was kept in Spandau prison after WWII? And how many crashed alien spaceships does the US government have at area 51?
It seems that Chopper is one of those crazy people who believe in “Conspiracy Theorists” who collect such silly ideas. Rabbit only ever heard about such issues from people like Chopper who semed to imagine their opponents more than they see them.
Chopper Rabbit has at no stage indulged in a rational discussion with you. Chopper is flattering himself if he thought the Rabbit was discussing anything with him. Rabbit was just playing a bit of Wack a Moron with the Chopper.
Does Chopper not believe America is the natural world leader and moral center then?
Posted by Rabbit on Nov 2, 2005 at 8:09 PM
Anarcho-Sozi
Just catching up with Gwynne Dyer’s articles. Rabbit checks in on him from time to time, finding his careful and measured words perspectivising. One here about the German Election which I’d like your comment on.
Shroeder’s Long Game
Don’t worry if Rabbit finds you on another thread first and you see this later.
Posted by Rabbit on Nov 3, 2005 at 5:43 PM
GO here
That is a great site, lots of quotes from experts and exactly the sort of Pyrotechnics Rabbit was talking about.
Say one idiotic thing Natty and Rabbit will mention the name of the company….....you know who…....and post lots of quotes from the site. For now you can just hope that others don’t notice this link and push it. Keep on with those tissues and towels, you’ll cover that elephant some way.
Posted by Rabbit on Nov 4, 2005 at 8:05 PM
On second thoughts, scrap that, Natty will only feel that is a challenge and will no doubt comply. So here we go
This article provides important information for WTC demolition researchers, in particular because of the information about Controlled Demolition Inc., which (a) was apparently keen to have the debris removed and disposed of as soon as possible and (b) was able to come up with a detailed plan for doing so within eleven days of the collapse of the Twin Towers, suggesting that Controlled Demolition Inc. had detailed knowledge of the Twin Towers and the entire WTC complex prior to September 11th. The role of the U.S. Army in efforts to speed up the removal of the debris is also worth noting.
Posted by Rabbit on Nov 4, 2005 at 8:09 PM
Rabbit,
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you on the Dyer article - I was off in Poland for a week. He was pretty right on with most points. Most of us Germans are not willing to scrap our social system (one could call it “Capitalism Lite”) on the bonfire of globalisation.
The article is a month old now, so it’s hard to get motivated to go into detail. As a general statement, something many non-Germans don’t understand is that even our Christian Democrats are not to be compared to Anglo-Saxon-style conservatives. Angela Merkel does not believe in free-market capitalism - that’s just the Free Democrats who do that (the party of dentists and small business owners, also known as the liberal party - “liberal” having the traditional meaning here, and not the unusual meaning the Americans give to it). She is not against trade unions and does not question the system of works committees which guarantees a 50 per cent worker say in management policies and decisions in all firms with more than ca. 20 employees, etc.
Posted by Anarcho-Sozi on Nov 9, 2005 at 1:05 PM
Thanks Anarcho-Sozi
Yeh it’s old in a week in this breakneck speed world isn’t it?
Oz is getting the final touches on a fascist system of Workplace reform. It is sundown on the unions basically.
Go to Democrats:It the War thread, for a funny Rabbit story. A true one he posted a moment ago. Not to mention the JC doing performing like a champion.. Have a few Polish friends over the years, never got there and I’m just reading a bit about the history between Poland and Germany leading up to and during the WAR and aftermath. Pretty depressing stuff over all.
Posted by Rabbit on Nov 10, 2005 at 2:11 AM
Rabbit re-posting this, from another thread. It is relevant to the comparison of Bush atrocities, to Hitler atrocities.
How will it read in the history books?
This Article is a must read
<blockquote>It
Posted by Rabbit on Nov 11, 2005 at 11:11 PM
I like Gwynne Dyer’s articles, Rabbit. I’ve bookmarked his page.
Liked his one on the development of the “major” religions.
Don’t agree with him that Pope Ratzinger is harmless, though!!
Posted by Liz on Nov 16, 2005 at 8:06 AM
Conservatives are just fascists without the balls. They share the same basic belief in the ‘natural order’ and in the necessity of an authoritarian hierarchy to enforce obedience to the presumed status quo.
Once again, conservatives are just diluted fascists.
Posted by Max Godwin on Jan 18, 2006 at 4:16 AM
what utter tripe.
religion and politics don’t mix??
their tune, tyrannical dogmatic slavery of the mind.
keep dancing fools.
Posted by kikz on Feb 3, 2006 at 8:20 AM
Religion and politics are mixing great in the US. Soon we’ll be a theocracy. Religion and politics mix only if you don’t care about democracy. Religion is about absolutes. Politics is about compromise, diversity, and inclusion. Religion and Modern Democracy were born in different times. They can’t mix!! History shows this and Fritz Stern’s article is brilliant.
Posted by cabdriverinchicago on Mar 29, 2007 at 11:51 AM
8 years of little ol’ Georgie Bush , and look what that got us…two futile wars , a dead economy…and years too go before we can possible see any light….Politics and religion mix like dog crap on your carpet…even after you clean up the mess..the stench lingers…
Posted by blackhorse on Jul 9, 2009 at 1:44 PM
PPG, just overnight moncler ski salecollapsed, clothing industry can let youmoncler in one year, Two make millions, but if you don’t take too large, sovereignty, ambition,moncler jackets also can let y Moncler Kids ou in an instant Production is negative. Thismoncler coats is an interesting industry contacts, resources,moncler ski and reputation aremoncler boots important, but the mentality is more important. The first said, CheYuan LiuDuan ace. Discount Moncler LiuDuan moncler vestace as high in the rational utilization of rules, rational utilization buy moncler coatsof natural resources, with little money also create a moncler ski pantsSmall brand, although know this brand of too little, but buy moncler vestas long Moncler Boots as he earned money.
Posted by pandorafml on Dec 15, 2010 at 2:40 AM
Page 3 of 3 pages < 1 2 3
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
Reader Comments
Noam Chomsky a “beacon of moral and intellectual integrity”? Surely you jest. This would be funny if it weren’t so sad at the same time. The fact that the Left is enamored of this fashionable intellectual and moral fraud is truly frightening. Anyone who cares to do some basic research knows that Chomsky is not even taken seriously by his supposed colleagues in the academy any longer with regard to his alleged specialty, Linguistics, much less with regard to his political screeds.
Or to put it another way:
who cares what man sits in the White House if that man must carry out the orders of the military-industrial-corporation-complex: invade Iraq to maximise our profits!
Thanks for opening my eyes: George W is a socialist - a flag-waver who knows how to use the props recognisable to the people!
How stupid of me to accuse the silly scorp of being a state department shill. It’s you, JasonPappas!
Name-calling, name-calling, EmitFlesti.
I happen to be a linguist and a member of “the academy”. Chomsky has defined the discipline for over fifty years. It is true, however, that many of his former students have not kept pace with his constant furthering of the discipline. They have chosen to protect their territory. Understandable - typical for former revolutionaries…
The academy is the Establishment - as it always has been. I would be very worried if they accepted him. It would be a sign of moral rot on his part…
Chomsky a moral fraud?! That is slander of the grandest order. Prove it with facts! You can’t defeat ideas with name-calling forever.
I offer the following challenge: let us all read his “Hegemony or Survival”. Then you and the scorp and jasonp can all point out what you don’t agree with - and we can debate it.
Not the old
EmitFlesti:
Coming as it does from someone, who to all appearances, dwells in the lugubrious nadir of intellectual dishonesty and vapidity, your criticism of Chomsky is high praise indeed.
EmitFlesti:
Treating big business as an element of fascism is silly? What planet are you living on? Picture-book fascists of modern times such as Somoza or Pinochet had nothing to do with big business?
I’m not going to enter into a debate with you on the compatability of anarchism and socialism. A tightly-knit and well-organised society is the only way to realise true freedom without hierarchy. I am as sceptical of “state socialism” as you are - albeit for different reasons.
You are not an anarchist but a libertarian of the Ayn Rand sort, it seems. We don’t need to reinvent the wheel and discuss this here. I have neither the time nor the inclination to do so.
What are you doing on a website like this? Back in the German Democratic Republic, we had a state spy in every lecture, every seminar at university. That was always the big question: who of the people sitting there was the one who was spying on us? I can well imagine that Bush’s America has such a person in every listserv, every chat group on all the internet. Are you the government shill, the plant, EF?
Coming as it does from someone, who to all appearances, dwells in the lugubrious nadir of intellectual dishonesty and vapidity, your criticism of Chomsky is high praise indeed.
Vacuous name-calling without substance… Oh how this reminds me of the “good old days” of East Germany…
I hereby stop responding to you people. I’m sure that is your purpose - to silence the few who question your regime. It’s not enough for you to have total control of the MSM - you have to drive us sane people on the fringe crazy. Keep up the good fight, Rabbit, luminous beauty, major major - and all the rest of you decent souls…
Your right Sozi, everyone here who disagree with you is a secret agent of the Bush administration sent to spy on you, since you’re obviously a very important individual.
For what it’s worth, Ayn Rand was not a libertarian, so I can’t be a “libertarian of the Ayn Rand sort”. She repeatedly disclaimed such a label for herself and professed to despise the Libertarian Party of her day. I have my own disgreements with Rand, stemming largely from her knee-jerk anti-theism and also the fact that she claimed an originalty for her though that, being highly derivative, it did not posses - being highly derivative - and also from the fact that she proclaimed absolute freedom and rationality while at the same time encouraging a cult of personality around herself.
Anarchism is not compatible with Socialism. All socialism is “state socialism”.
Luminous, engaging in ad hominem attacks, with no indication that you have read or understood a thing, is hardly a serious argument.
Substance.
<i>It
One ad hominem, deserves another. Come into my parlor and start kicking the dog, don’t expect politesse.
<i>Anarchism is not compatible with Socialism. All socialism is
Actually, your claim does need elucidating. How would you propose to implement Socialism without a State? Socialism requires a strong state to engage in socio-economic levelling, to confiscate private property, and to redistribute wealth from those who create and earn it to those who do not.
In an Anarchy, there would be no state to impose Socialism, and the natural disparities in talents and desires among individuals would result in disparities of wealth and property, the very thing Socialism professes to abhor.
You simply cannot have Anarchy and Socialism at the same time in the same place. They are mutually exclusive categories.
EF:
Your problem is your narrow and erroneous understanding of what Anarchism is. I don’t mean the facile facsimile of AnarchoCapitalism of the so-called Libertarian Right.
The key is in your statement to wit:
In an Anarchy, there would be no state to impose Socialism.
A correct view would be:
In Anarchism, there is no state to impose Socialism.
There is no such animal as an Anarchy. It is a one word oxymoron. Anarchists are not concerned with utopian speculation. You might have known this if you had actually read Chomsky rather than the specious and vicious lies promulgated by his detractors which you parrot in the most rote and robotic fashion. I saw a red and black sticker posted on a street sign this afternoon that expressed this idea with graphic clarity. It read, “EXPECT RESISTANCE: the future is not yet written.
The depth of your understanding of socialism is likewise brain numbingly shallow.
It looks like I stumbled onto another replay of the decades old debate between Libertarian-Anarchism and Anarcho-Communism. It
“The depth of your understanding of socialism is likewise brain numbingly shallow.” - Ah yes…reminds me of the earnest and self-righteous American girl in Prague a few summers ago who assured me that Socialism was a great idea that just hadn’t been correctly understood and implemented yet. Somehow it hadn’t occured to her that there were millions nearby who had relatively recently been liberated from Communist tryanny and who could tell her a thing or two about the implementation of Socialism.
Also, a word to the wise: I wouldn’t be too eager to broadcast that you find bumper-stickers a compelling form of political argument. Let me guess: you also drive a late-model Volvo, eat only Ice Cream brands that come wrapped in a political philosophy, and have a plethora of bumper-stickers on your car - with “Impeach Bush” and “Imagine Whirled Peas” featured prominently?
As for this: “The key is in your statement to wit:
In an Anarchy, there would be no state to impose Socialism. A correct view would be: In Anarchism, there is no state to impose Socialism,” you have essentially posited a distinction without a difference. My formulation was correct, in that the present non-existence of a state of Anarchy requires the conditional usage - “would be” - when describing the hypothetical nature of a hypothetical state. Whether one prefers the term Anarchy or Anarchism (much like one may variously use Monarchy/Monarchism, or Egalitarian/Egalitarianism, etc.), the key point in either is that there would be no state in such a system to impose Socialism. The very nature of Socialism requries the exisence of a state in order to impose the sort of egalitarian levelling that Socialism requires; ergo, Anarchy and Socialism are mutually exclusive. How you come to the conclusion that Anarchy is a “one-word oxymoron” is baffling. The word is simply a composite of the Greek “an” meaning “absence of”, and “arche” meaning “authority or government”. Hence Anarchy means “absence of authority or absence of government” (similarly Monarchy means “authority or government by one”, and Democracy means “rule or power excercized by the many”, and Aristocracy means “rule or power excercized by the those who possessing the qualtities of virture and excellence). But, since you never propose arguments or explanations, preferring ad hominem name-calling, I guess I shouldn’t expect any clear explanation for any of your conclusions.
A quick lesson in oxymorons: “Authoritarian Anarchy” or “Socialist Anarchy”. These are actual oxymorons employing the word Anarchy. The word Anarchy, by itself, is not an oxymoron.
You are quite right. Anarchy means roughly ‘without a government. (I would prefer for the sake of rigor to use the term state, but I submit to your usage as it is only a hypothetical for the sake of argument) Then an Anarchy would be ‘a government without a government. Hence it is an oxymoron. Don’t try to weasel about the use of the article ‘an’ being trivial. It’s not, it is probative. If you were at all intellectually honest you would also recognize the substantive change in meaning between the present tense and future conditional and it’s centrality to my argument, which your subsequent remarks show you have completely failed to apprehend. You certainly would not be so dismissive as to say it is a difference without distinction. However your basic non-understanding of anarchist principles is an insignificant absence in the dark narcissistic ghetto of your consciousness, compared to your unquenchable neurotic obsession to attempt (vainly) to assert the supposed superiority of your parlor philosophy. The probative evidence of which is that you are here, spewing crap.
I drive an old Mazda hatchback. I’ve owned a couple of Volvos, neither was a late model. We hope to convert an old VW Golf and Toyota pick-up to bio-diesel soon. The only sticker on my car is a Greatful Dead thunderbolt-in- skull. I eat cheap ice cream from the local discount worker owned supermarket. I don’t judge statements by the putative authority of their source, but by the cogency of the ideas they present.
I have no idea what kind of person you are, but from what you’ve posted here
“EXPECT RESISTANCE : the future is not yet written.”
I like that very much. Thanks.
Anarchy doesn’t mean “roughly” without government. It means precisely “without government or without authority”. The terms State and Government are not necessarily interchangible.
“An Anarchy” would thuse be a society or a state without a government or authority to lead it. Just as a Monarchy is a state or society with a government led by a single authority, and a Democracy is (in principle at least) a society or state with a government led by the authority of the many. To say that “an anarchy” would mean a “government without a government”, and thus be a contradiction in terms, demonstrates your failure to grasp fundamental principles of language usage. By your definition the word “an” in the above phrase would itself be defined as meaning “government”.
Might I, in parting from this Chomsky-brainwashed Leftist cesspool, also suggest you change your name to Unilluminated Ugliness?
I like cogency too. But tangents are fun.
I like ice cream. But only the expensive Haagen-Dazs. So I eat it once in a blue moon.
I used to drive an old Mazda hatchback. Until it exploded. It was a good horse to it’s last day.
I used to drive a VW Rabbit. Had two in succession, one gas, one diesel. Good cars.
Now a Chev S10 pickup. No bumper stickers. Good truck. Gets me camping and fishing. When it goes to the junkyard in the sky I may consider walking .... or a motorcycle .... or an old 4 cylinder Jeep.
Depends on the imperialistic oil wars I guess.
LB -
“An anarchy” is not an oxymoron. “Archy anarchy” would be an oxymoron, but it is not seen often in everyday English. I hope your luminous beauty is greater than your English comprehension. Otherwise you are guilty of false self-aggrandizement, an oxymoron, twice, instead of once.
EF….You are an uncommonly rash person, to be so rash and rush in so fast, to deny what another says is so, without even checking, is foolish. rabbit finds you to be quite boring, you are not too bright and hardly worth the keystrokes. All you do is say “No it isn’t” and call people names, well you are earning a few names for yourself. As for feeling insane, Rabbit has wondered about his sanity from time to time, like all sane creatures. He feels pretty sane as it happens.
It would be pointless for Rabbit to ask the same of EF, since it is a well known fact that the truly insane never suspect they are, so how would you know.
You are certainly full of empty though when it comes to knowledge.
Rabbit just selects Random sources for facts, if you have a genuine grievance with a fact, and feel it is not adequately referenced in one source you have only to say and Rabbit will select more from the thousands that seem to be available on all these issues you question. Do you think you have most of the knowledge in the world in your puny head? Boy discussion for you is at about the level of the sort had with a Traffic cop, on a slow day.
The Polish thing, the beginning. Stop being such a damned coward and read the details. If you can’t read what is given in answer to your challenge then who the hell do you think you are to come around here challenging others who do know what they are talking about?.
A sample for you EF.
The accounts of the barbarism that accompanied the expulsions of Sudeten Germans is well documented, and are contained and supported by 40,000 documents held at Koblenz Archives. These include names, dates and figures. As Dr. A.J App points out, these expulsions (and 241,000 murders) unlike the six million ‘gassed’ Jews allegations, are all backed by judicially acceptable documentation.
THE EVIDENCE OF:Dr. Jur. Bruno S. Stadler, Christlich Sociale UNION, November, 1948
“One Professor Zelenk of the University of Prague delivered twenty women to a Czech mob saying; ‘Here I bring the German sows.’ The mob beat them with laths and rubber hoses and screamed, ‘Kneel down, you German harlots.’ They fell to their knees, and had their hair shorn off with bayonets.
“Some of the women who had not done nor were accused of any wrongdoing, their crime was being German, were clubbed to death. One of the women, Helene Burger, a mother, became unconscious when a kick broke two of her ribs. When she came too, her foot bled; someone had cut a four centimeter piece of flesh from her calf.”
“Of the twenty women Helene Burger was tortured with, two committed suicide, two went insane. She survived and was moved to Camp Habigot where in four barracks 1,200 women were imprisoned.
“A Czech Red Cross nurse sorted out the pretty and young women, to whom at night the Russian militia were admitted. Some were raped as often as forty-eight times at night. Their cries of despair could be heard in the other barracks. In the morning these women lay about apathetic on the dirty floors with ‘bitten off noses, and scratched up faces.’”
“Hot pitch was brushed on the bare backs of inmates before they were beat up. In Iglau, 1,200 Germans committed suicide; the rest, the old and the sick included, were whipped on to Tangen. 350 of them died on the way….”
Boy are you on the wrong track just denying things off the top of your wee head.
As for Anarcho-socialism, it is a valid political label and can be aplied to Rabbit too, you damned fool.
Tricky little site still, gotta watch those line breaks.
<a
<a
Anarcho-Sozi your observation about the shill, the agent, it is ineteresting. Rabbit has definately got that impression too. Not necessarily this one, yet, but he has noticed there is always one, this site is not the only one to be infested, all important issues threads attract them of course. It is interesting to lead one from one thread to another where such a person would never normally have found itself on that thread, but with “their” assigned issues, ever vigilant.
You can see a textbook case from the Radioactive Wounds of War thread, where one of the outed shills, actually does follow Rabbit from DU to 911 on the God Squad, just to stick with the assignment. She’s still at it and getting desperate too. Snaky.
This is a good site for those who would like to research the Jewish Zionist influence in History
Ah HA a bad little extra = did it.
For the edification of any who need it and can use it.
Anarcho-socialism,
Anarcho-socialism: A term which broadly refers to anarchism (social) and anarchism (mutualist). Most anarcho-socialists deem the term redundant, however, and prefer to be called “anarchists,” not “anarcho-socialists.” This is because they believe that the only true anarchy is socialist, and the only true socialism is anarchic. However, it remains a useful term, because it distinguishes them from others who, right or wrong, also consider themselves anarchists and socialists: for example, anarcho-capitalists and social democrats. (See anarchy; anarcho-syndicalism; libertarianism (left); and socialism. Compare to anarcho-capitalism; libertarianism (right) and social democracy.)
Aint the internet a wonderful thing? Allows fools to be put in their place so quickly and easily…...Allows for such ordered debate, even if the fools carp on, they cannot take back anything they say, none of us can. Who will live to regret their words most?
scorp:
False self-aggrandizement would be a redundancy, I believe. Most particularly in your case.
I’ll be clearer; (I was writing last night straining to keep my eyes open to watch the WS. You now have my full attention.
An Anarchy would be a Stateless State. Paradox = oxymoron. If i only had a brain.
The most general difference between anarchists and socialists is that socialists are more concerned with ends, while anarchists are focused on the means. In a practical sense. Theoretically they are more similar.
The form of governance anarchists live by is called syndicalism. Consensual agreements based on Mutual Aid.
article
(grammar) a word, a type of determiner, that specifies or limits the following noun. (a, an, or the in English).
the articles a and an specify the kind of object to which the noun refers. In this case the root of the determinate noun, or invariant object, -archy or rule. The prefix an- is an additional determiner of the root. What kind of rule? a rule without rule. An explicit contradiction.
A non-paradoxical example is the indeterminate and variable noun: an imbalance. What kind of balance? A non-balanced balance. Not a contradiction in terms. A scale or balance can easily be out of balance.
This is but a restatement of the classic oxymoron: The only rule in a knife fight is, there are no rules. It applies directly to debating trolls on the internet.
I see the comment up the thread about Prescott Bush having been involved with Nazi industry before WW2…. I wonder how many people fond of using that to imply that the sins of the father and grandfather fall on the son and grandson remember that there was another famous American political patriarch with close ties to Nazi Germany: Joseph Kennedy, father of President John F. Kennedy and would be Presidents Robert and Ted Kennedy.
“Scorpy can you give us a single one of the 14 which doesn
Reynardine:
Don’t forget William Randolph Hearst, Charles Lindbergh, John Rockefeller, Andrew Mellon, DuPont, General Motors, Standard Oil (now Exxon), Ford, Chrysler, ITT, Allen Dulles, National City Bank, and General Electric.
And don’t forget who from the US was fighting Fascism in Spain.
Which side are you on, brothers? Which side are you on? Wasn’t that a time, brothers? Wasn’t that a time?
I suppose it’s already crossed your minds with sickly twinge, but it is also fair to remember who was selling Saddam Hussein the raw materials and technology for his WMD’s in the 80’s and who was calling him a bloodthirsty tyrant.
Boy, us blind leftie ideologs can see parallels in just about anything, can’t we? It must be just our fevered, hysterical imaginations, I suppose. It couldn’t be because we know how to think reflectively with evidence, logic and reason, could it? Noooooooooooo…...We must be hallooooooocinating. You guys are entertaining, but nobody here is buying what you’re selling. Better try a new tack.
Houston just went down in 4 with two amazing defensive sparklers from Juan Uribe of the World Champion Chicago White Sox. Shoeless Joe Jackson for the Hall!!!
It’s gonna be a dismal day in the big T tomarra with indictments comin’ down aroun’ the ol’ fav’rite son an’ all. Shee-it.
Chopper that wasn’t an answer to any of the 14, so go blow yourself. You have as yet oferred nothing in refutation of any of them, for the record.
Reynardine
Your presumption about what others on this site would know about is uncalled for and as it happens would be quite wrong.
We all know what a*seholes the Kennedy’s are, and as for the sins of the father, if only…............
The indigtments, which The Conservative Voice, was whistling in the dark about on wednesday…..See them cringing in fear.
Today is Friday (here) today is the day eh?
Too bad it is only a battle, the war has hardly begun, but some ignominious falls will be good for morale, anyway. Ours anyway.
When the Mountain Man returns from slumber after seeing the gladiatorial sport of men fighting over a ball, he might want to see this, it is Cold Water but should be remembered in light of the wider view.
Hot Air
trust Alex and crew to be the spoilsports, so conservative, always Prison Planet is conservative. Like the grown ups amongst us, kids on a beach looking for tresure, truth seekers.
Got it, Fundys, Jones is a conservative by Rabbit’s estimate, an intelligent and honest conservative. Moon Bat bait
We haven’t seen any moonbats lately, pretty Moonbats.
Blue and flappy in the black sky.
Moonbats happy with their lie pie.
Wasn’t someone attacking
Noam Chomsky here a while back?
“Best known for his contributions to the study of linguistics through his theory of generative grammar, this Professor Emeritus of Linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has been the most intelligent, vehement critic of the US government during the current and the preceding centuries. Consistently writing (and speaking publicly) in a calm, thoughtful manner, for years Professor Chomsky charged America’s ruling establishment and its obedient press corps with some of the most heinous crimes against humanity one could imagine. His political activism has spanned decades while his impressive list of books assailing the US government has continued to grow. His perception, insight, and presentation of evidence to support his dissidence are without equal. And activism is his “hobby”. I feel assured that there are many amongst America’s ruling elite who count their blessings that Dr. Chomsky has focused so much of his attention on his linguistics studies.
A Dead Civilian a Day Keeps the Terrorists at Bay?
“The new doctrine was not one of preemptive war, which arguably falls within some stretched interpretation of the UN Charter, but rather a doctrine that doesn’t begin to have any grounds in international law, namely, preventive war. That is, the United States will rule the world by force, and if there is any challenge to its domination—-whether it is perceived in the distance, invented, imagined, or whatever—then the United States will have the right to destroy that challenge before it becomes a threat. That’s preventive war, not preemptive war.”
Chomsky goes on to dissect the manner in which the Bush regime has implemented its doctrine of preventive war and “normalized it”. By virtue of its sheer might and through the masterful propaganda which convinced its citizenry that invading Iraq was necessary to defend the “homeland, the United States has established such a war of aggression as “acceptable behavior” for a legitimate government. Essentially, Chomsky concludes that the Bush administration, its collaborating wealthy elite and its supportive corporate leviathans imposed their will to expand the American Empire through instilling the fear in other nations that they could be in the cross-hairs of an incredibly powerful military, and by shamelessly telling unprecedented lies to the American people.
As a result, Chomsky asserts, “George Bush has succeeded within a year in converting the United States to a country that is greatly feared, disliked, and even hated.”
Sorry Rabbit, but I disagree about
beisbol being a gladiatorial sport.
It’s a real sign of progress that the wing-nuts are attacking Chomsky after years and years of totally ignoring him. As famous as he is (for a scholar) internationally, he’s long been a virtual non-entity in his own country. It’s undoubtedly news to most US citizens that there even exists a field of scientific enquiry called Cognitive Science much less the central role Chomsky has played in it’s development.
I liked this line in the Rense article: “Again the kindest thing you can say about Reagan is that he probably didn’t know what he was saying.”. That goes in spades for our resident trolls.
Reynardine:
My mention of Prescott Bush had nothing to do with the “sins of the father and grandfather”. It was offered merely as an example of the (well-known outside of dumbed-down America) fact that capital knows no morals (or national boundaries) but only profit.
Why do you throw the Kennedys at me? Of course they are no different, just as Republicans and Democrats are no different from each other. That’s the point!
By the way, P. Bush was not doing business with the Nazis merely *before* WW2 but also during (even after America’s entry - how stupid of me to mention this, though. Most Americans probably think the war started on 7 Dec. 1941 - at least those few Americans who even know there was a WW2…). As I recall, he was tried and even convicted for “aiding and abetting the enemy”.
A more topical example of Bush family financial dealings would have been their connection to the house of Saud and the bin Laden family…
“How could this horror have seized a nation and corrupted so much of Europe?” you ask.
For the same reason that you make no mention of Islamic terror, aggression, and fanaticism: you are wilfully blind to this new danger that is equivalent to Nazism, because it doesn’t fit your preconceptions.
It is much more comfortable to ponder the European decadence of 70 years ago than to look at today’s Eurabia, isn’t it?
OK, rdar,
Let’s look at Islamic terrorism. Are there any Islamic terrorists poised to take over the US Government from within? Are they in any position to even attain power in a single Islamic country? Do you believe the war in Iraq has done anything but increase the danger of terrorism by driving the Iraqi people to fear and anger and vengefulness by our bloody occupation? How do you think W will function after his brainectomy?
Please tell me, what are the intellectual antecedents to your peculiar world-view? And tell me more about Eurabia, it sounds fascinating, even phantasmagoric. If it includes Europe’s imminent collapse under the weight of its Socialist Nanny-State and plummeting white population, don’t bother, I’ve heard it.
What’s the matter rdar, cat got your tongue.
HERE is a little info on ‘IslamoFascist terrorism you might want to wrap your o-so-un-preconcieved mind around. Read it, footnotes & all, and let’s chat.
Hmm, rather a reactionary song, David in Canada.
And there aren’t any Russians coming to get us - we bankrupted them years ago,and let their mob take over what was left.
Jay Cline - your points on page one are particularly nonsensical, considering who the “oil-rich Muslim country” is friends with… your very own POTUS!
Hi, Anarcho-Sozi! Meet the other worthwhile perosn on his board - me - your very own original Liz - contributor!!
EmitFlesti is just trying to smash anarchists and socialists and all the Left apart, because he well knows we have several schools of thought. He’d rather lump the anarchists in with the libertarians. and stupid Randists.
I tell you what *I* think. The left should have patched up its differences years ago. Let’s do so NOW and then go and smash the Right!! The REAL task of today!
Liz - the other socialist on this board with a twist of anarchism!
oops, sorry Rabbit, didn’t read that - didn’t know you too were one of the band!
Brill link to home.att.net. Thanks, Rabbit!!
JFK was rather sweet, though, wasn’t he, Ghost Rabbit? He and Robert were at least dishy.
As for comparisons - well it all DOES go by degree!
A thing which keeps going round and round my head like mad (before you ask, I’m not a Trotskyist: I can’t really be, because I believe in the supernatural!) is a little excerpt from an article published quite a while ago on the World Socialist Web site, comparing J F K’s speeches, which were said to be eloquent and idealistic compared to today’s “political pig grunts” (how I loved that phrase!) from George W. Bush.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/nov2003/jfk-n22.shtml
“Political pig grunts”! how I revel in that phrase… it appears about half-way down.
...anyway, John did die… that’s enough to cover up a multitude of sins I would say!
Oooh, anyway, another small theory: should be interesting to rabbit and luminous beauty. I believe that the two dead Kennedys rebelled against their right-wing father (and his set.) Sons sometimes do: take it from me, it’s a Freudian thing, as in “Totem and Taboo”....
They slay the father: they don’t always however make of him a totem… sometimes they really rebel, I think, which means not to propagate his views….
I think it was some of those Old White Men who struck back, no?
Greetings Liz
and welcome to this hmm… how should it be characterised? group! (I, too, am new here…)
Many thanks for your link to wsws. Sometimes it is indeed worthwhile to reflect on some of the (minor) differences within the ruling elite. Yes, there is most definitely a qualitative difference between much of what Kennedy said in his speeches and the political pig grunts of W.
Nice to have another non-dumbed-down Ami here (your language gives you away. My guess: UK, IRE, NZ, OZ, SA…) (no offence intended as regards Luminous Beauty, Major Major, and a select group of others!)
Hi Liz
Yes a reactionary song. From a long ways back. But the Russian still have nukes my dear. They may not have to use them though.
America is mostly bankrupt too. Morally and otherwise
America seems to ready to self destruct.
I hope they don’t.
I happen to live next door.
UK, mein lieber Ossi! (I mean Anarcho-Sozi)
Aus welcher Stadt stammen Sie? Darf ich bitte fragen?
Rabbit- The 14 points
1. Rampant & Continuing Nationalism- I actually see relatively few flags, and none of the people I know actually wear flags or display them on their vehicles, including the political conservatives I know.
2. Identification of enemies/scapegoats. Bush has gone out of his way to state we have no quarrel with Islam itself. He has identified terrorists as enemies, perhaps understandable in that they actually have attacked us. There is a Muslim Mosque that openly operates in the city I live in, & I live in a city in a fairly conservative area.
3. Supremacy of the military. The US has no draft, no military dictatorship, and the bulk of our budget does not go to the military. If this is military supremacy they are doing a pretty poor job of it.
4. Rampant sexism. In practice we have abortion on demand. Gays are not prosecuted for homosexual activity. Again, all these sexists aren’t much on the ball, are they?
5. Controlled mass media. With major media outlets such as the New York Times and Washington Post which regularly criticize Bush & his administration (often in very harsh terms), if it is controlled then the controllers are asleep at the switch.
6. Corporate power. As a branch manager in a small company, I regularly get newsletters that illustrate practices that would get us into legal trouble for unfair employment procedures. Again, if there is a lot of corporate power those exercising it aren’t doing their jobs very well.
7. Labor power. There is no government effort to destroy unions. They have made themselves increasingly irrelevant to large sections of the workforce.
8. Disdain for intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals are in no way muzzled. In fact they are often quoted at length or aired by major media outlets. Do you mean that not everyone bows to their obvious (in their minds) intellectual superiority? That some of us don’t actually take such absurd figures as Ward Churchill seriously? In that case you are correct. William Buckley (himself an intellectual, although a conservative one) once famously said he’d rather be governed by the first 3,000 names in the Boston phone directory than by the faculty of Yale. There was a lot of wisdom in that statement.
9. Obsession with crime and punishment. I haven’t noticed a lot of this obsession in the media lately. Guliani was effective in reducing the crime rate in New York with innovative policing techniques. Was this a bad thing?
10. Fradulent elections. Charged by leftwing partisans in the 2000 election. Not generally given much credence by impartial observers.
Well Rabbit, that is it for starters. I believe you don’t actually live in the US, so you probably don’t know what you are writing about. And by the way, go blow yourself.
Hooray for Liz…......................Hello LIZ….......Excited Rabbit is to see you. Will you stay awhile?
Coming right up Chopper, and as for not living in the USA, you can believe it. As it happens Rabbit has a lot of American friends, spends a lot of time on the internet, and reads a great deal. Rabbit also has the inestimable advantage, as has been noted by others, of being suffiently removed from things in America that it affords a more objective viewpoint. If Rabbit gets anything majorly wrong about the USA, then he has many good friends who would have told him about it by now, so if it comes down to Rabbit and you disagreeing about something, the “foreigner” argument won’t fly, let us get that much straight. And to anticipate the other side of thise forged coin, the USA became other country’s business when they made other countries their business.
You have been brave to attempt the list and rabbit shall ‘reward’ your efforts.
............................
1. Rampant & Continuing Nationalism- I actually see relatively few flags, and none of the people I know actually wear flags or display them on their vehicles, including the political conservatives I know.
What is relatively few? You are living inside your bubble and have no reference with which to make comparisons on this or indeed several of the claims such as this which are based on an objective analysis. Rabbit see’s one Aussie flag on average per day, which is because on his way to work he ‘usually’ drives past a particular house who has a flag pole. That is as many as most Aussies would see. In Denmark, where Rabbit lived for five years, there are flags everywhere and the Danes have a healthy amount of National pride, but it is nothing compared to American Nationalism which is itself a phenomenon being observed and commented upon by the world at large, at every imaginable level of intercourse. Not a chumps chance, 1. is a certainty.
2. Identification of enemies/scapegoats. Bush has gone out of his way to state we have no quarrel with Islam itself. He has identified terrorists as enemies, perhaps understandable in that they actually have attacked us. There is a Muslim Mosque that openly operates in the city I live in, & I live in a city in a fairly conservative area.
“No quarrel”? You are at war and threatening more war against Muslim nations, you support the most vicious little terrorist state in the Middle East with all it’s threats and nastiness and you threaten their elected leaders, threaten and actually launch military attacks oon any Muslim Nation at the drop of a hat, and accuse them of everything that goes bang in the night, You are invading and have been destabilising the Middle east for decades and it is reaching a crescendo at this moment and you say Bush says you have no quarrel with Islam. Yes mate sure. Well Islam has now got a quarrel with you, and calling them terrorists is not going to cut it anymore, they are defending what is theirs on their home soil. You are attacking them inside thjeir bordeers and heh WAKE UP Chopper, Iraq had nothing to do with any terrorism, or attacks on the USA. There is NO proof that Muslim Fundamentalists alone caused 911. There is a HUGE and growing body of evidence which much more clearly PROVES US government complicity in 911. Not even half of Americans believe the official theory, and those of us who are informed KNOW it is all lies. So you are indeed finding scapegoats. Yoiu have killed upwards of a couple of hundred thousand Muslims so far, who had nothing to do with 911, and yet you dare to raise 911 as a justification? You are a louse, boy are you a louse. So there is a Muslim Mosque near you, BIG DEAL does that somehow prove that you or Americans are espceially tolerant does it? Well there is one down the road from me too, and most Australians are about as intolerant and ignorant about others as Americans, so no, not that or the Budhist temple on the other end of that road makes for Aussies being more tolerant in general, why shopuld it mean more in America? For you information there are and have always been Christian Churches and Jewish Synagogues in most Islamic countries to.,. Muslims don’t even hate Jews, or Christians but you would not know that. The only people who have a religious dimension to their beliefs about the causes of conflict are those from the Judeo Christian side. The Muslims just want Israel to stop abusing the Pallestinians. Some more extreme Muslims would like Israel out of the Middle East and if you knew enough history we could discuss that. But you do not, so we won’t. The extremists no sooner make decisions in the Middle East than they do in the USA. Except where those extremists are propped up by the USA.
How many potentially Muslim Bombs have been blown up in the USA….........Chopper?
How many bombs and much of them Dirty Bombs at that, has the USA dropped on Muslim Nations? You can even pretend all the terrorist attacks in America were Muslims if you want, even though probably none of them were.
2. would have to be said to be carried. You set up Libya to take the fall for Lockerbie, more scapegoats. Now that one has come undone too. Nope 2. is still looking good Chop.
3. Supremacy of the military. The US has no draft, no military dictatorship, and the bulk of our budget does not go to the military. If this is military supremacy they are doing a pretty poor job of it.
Let us keep it simple, The US Military Budget for 2005 $420.7 billion.
” The US military budget is almost as much as the rest of the world’s.
The US military budget is more than 8 times larger than the Chinese budget, the second largest spender.
The US military budget is more than 29 times as large as the combined spending of the seven
<i>6. Corporate power. As a branch manager in a small company, I regularly get newsletters that illustrate practices that would get us into legal trouble for unfair employment procedures. Again, if there is a lot of corporate power those exercising it aren
Lovely Liz,
Rabbit has read far enough down to see you had seen him here amongst the grass, and he is happy too you noticed he is an Anarcho-Socialist, he has called himself this about as long as he has realised he is an Agnostic Rabbit. Some things are so easy to understand once you read them, because they are.
Rabbit could easily accomodate your theory about the Kennedys. Some things about Kennedy have given me pause to wonder along similar lines. If as we many do accept that there was establishment involved(CIA>>>MAFIA), then it seems likely that they were considered a threat to somebody. It wasn’t any lone nut either, though Rabbit doesn’t tend to have much doubts about Lennon’s murderer having being a fried egg. he was classic, looney tune. The others were classic assasinations.
Does Liz know about reptiles? Since Liz spiritual she may know what Rabbit means. If so just nod, we don’t want to attract “Moonbats”. Wasn’t it Liz and rabbit who enjoyed Moonbats together once? Rabbit only mentioned this a couple of days ago to Kuya.
Rabbit does some more Chopping…...........
<i>8. Disdain for intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals are in no way muzzled. In fact they are often quoted at length or aired by major media outlets. Do you mean that not everyone bows to their obvious (in their minds) intellectual superiority? That some of us don
Would people like to see Rabbit change into Ultra Rabbit? He is sick of being a Ghost, it was only ever meant to be temporary, and he wishes to return, as a live Rabbit? Having taken the necessary steps with the recent Shill attack, to do this, Rabbit could do this. It distresses Rabbit to be called a Ghost, really.
Chop Chop Chop
Rabbit with his little axe, reaches number 10
10. Fradulent elections. Charged by leftwing partisans in the 2000 election. Not generally given much credence by impartial observers
This deserves to be refuted in totality. Don’t go selling your ass and then denying you sold it. The Impartial Observers who were hindered in Observing the US elections as it happens, DID not give either election the thumbs up and nor have many other impartial observers and Americans too.
The [url=“http://tinyurl.com/dzyzv”]2004
election[/url] was widely criticised and as you will see from pushing the >Blue Button< it is now emerging that it is even officially well on the way to being called SHONKY. See the GAO report and Blow Chopper Blow.
Don’t you hate it when the news catches up and overtakes your illusions?
10 down and four to go, maybe you just want to accept the last four out of hand? Most do.
Hallo Liz
Ja, ich bin ein alter Ossi, wie er leibt und lebt - urspr
Yes, Rabbit, definitely!
Take off the kid gloves and show us your true self. We don’t want any ghosts here. Be the Vollblutkarnickelbock you really are!
One bourbon, one scotch, and one beer.
Last call for comments on :
Radioactive Wounds of War.
This thread is being shut down soon. Comment while you still can.
The link is to the second last page (for now) to allow for some context to recent developments.
That thread ...
Radioactive Wounds of War
... not this thread where you are now.
“It
“What is relatively few? You are living inside your bubble and have no reference with which to make comparisons on this or indeed several of the claims such as this which are based on an objective analysis. Rabbit see
“There is a HUGE and growing body of evidence which much more clearly PROVES US government complicity in 911. Not even half of Americans believe the official theory, and those of us who are informed KNOW it is all lies”
Let’s see Rabbit, I’ll bet you also know that OJ didn’t kill Nicole (must have been those Columbian drug dealers OJ promised to find), the moon landings were a hoax, Lee Harvey Oswald was a CIA agent, the man kept in Spandau as Rudolph Hess was really an imposter, the US government has alien bodies at area 51, Alger Hiss was innocent, and Napoleon took his orders from the Illuminati. I was going to do a more detailed answer to your post, some of which is somewhat plausible, but this is straight out of the fever-swamps of far left paranoia. Do you really believe this crap or is it just fashionable Euro-bashing of the US?
“you say Bush says you have no quarrel with Islam.”
Now your confusing Bush with me. Get a grip.
Let us keep it simple, The US Military Budget for 2005 $420.7 billion.
“This only says that you are a male, and in denial. What is that old favorite which sells every product under the sun? Begins with an
“Ever heard of the Downing Street Memo
“Rabbit ignores all this as being twaddle, A few names dropped which mean nothing to Rabbit but the format suggests he is trying to sound intellectual. Rabbit would prefer to refer the matter of American Intellectualism and the arts, to his
“10 down and four to go, maybe you just want to accept the last four out of hand? Most do.”
No, I just haven’t gotten to them yet. This whole list is carefully designed to put a leftwing spin on a view of facism. It leaves out some essential features of facism, such as extensive control of the economy, and includes some others that are marginal or just off-base. Facism historically was pretty secular. Mussolini was a socialist, and never really abandoned socialism.
None of this changes the fact that you’re delusional, however.
The two people who were most successful in bringing the cold war to a close were Osama Bin Laden, and Michel Gorbachev. Despite Reagan.
“The two people who were most successful in bringing the cold war to a close were Osama Bin Laden, and Michel Gorbachev. Despite Reagan.”
Further evidence that Rabbit is delusional.
Jeez Chopper you are not much of a fish, more of a dud than anything.
<blockquote>
<blockquote> When you can point to actual examples of homosexuals being persecuted by the government then I
How exactly could Ronald Mc Donald, oops sorry, Rabbit meant Ronald Reagan, be given credit for ending the cold war?
Exactly how? As Rabbit recalls Reagan was busy setting up an inpossible dream at the time “star wars” and various other atrocities were being carried out in anticipation of many more decades of war. The USSR, led by Gorbachev, shocked the world with it’s own internal collapse, and History shows it was bled to death by it’s military, especially the sharp drain on morale and economy represented by the WAR in Afghanistan. That is not delusional Chopper, it is history and an entire internet and literary history stand as testimony. So have a go at another this one is gone for you brother, gone for good.
While we are at it can anybody predict what history might be saying about the demise of the USA in a decade from now?
“As for the militaristic society, you are obviously so shocked by those figures yourself that you almost threw in the towell on that one, now admit it. Or don
“How exactly could Ronald Mc Donald, oops sorry, Rabbit meant Ronald Reagan, be given credit for ending the cold war?
Exactly how? As Rabbit recalls Reagan was busy setting up an inpossible dream at the time
“Well Rabbit cannot oblige you here. He has never seen any need to raise the issue of homosexuality on this thread. Not the first time you raised it nor this one. So if this is the weird and wonderful test of integrity you have set the Rabbit, perhaps he must accept he will lack integrity with such an one as Chopper”
In the “rampant sexism” point “homophobia” and “anti-gay legislation” were specifically mentioned, as was opposition to abortion. Looks like I wasn’t the one that raised it Rabbit. You lose on this one.
<blockquote>The war in Afghanistan drained the morale and economy of the Soviet Union because of Reagan
<blockquote>Also, Soviet scientists told Gorbachev that they didn
Yes Rabbit had already agreed your government are a bunch of bum brothers, it is a part of Skull and Bones lore. Not in the “normal” sense of our homosexual brothers and sisters, but rather as a deliberate act of perversion. It is an important issue to those who hold fast to the Bush. Of course it is. But does it occur to Chopper that one can be a Homosexual and a pervert as well?
So the Pope and Reagan did it now?
Before Rabbit has even found the comparison of US Military Budget to other, less important things like education, health and emergency services ,
there is THIS which sort of makes anything further on the issue redundant.
Push the link and look at the graph half way down the page, and tell Rabbit how you can argue the USA is not dominated by the Military.
Like Rabbit said, the rest of the world feels the lash…................. but you dorks are paying for it.
Another thing Rabbit was hoping others would mention is about number 9. Jose Padilla .....................a start to legal abuses.
“So the Pope and Reagan did it now?”
Yeah, that’s what I said the first time
“Yes Rabbit had already agreed your government are a bunch of bum brothers, it is a part of Skull and Bones lore. Not in the
Rabbit; It is a deliberate act of coercive sexual domination, much like rape. Consensual perversion is relatively just silly play acting. Not too surprising that chopper doesn’t get the point. He is such a punk.
This site is a microcosm of the USA. There are, in the USA and on this site, a group of dedicated, white-hot leftists, with many tactics and no strategy. The tactics include dishonesty, hatred, vituperation, and illogic fueled by conspiracy theories, wishful thinking, and an air of unreality. We have been here before. The year was 1972.
In 1972, the McGovern campaign cut itself loose from traditional Democratic sources of strength such as unions and farmers (the delegates from Iowa to the Democratic Convention that year did not include a single farmer!). The Democratic Party was instead led by Liberals, radicals, academic and media elites, and money men. The result was the worst electoral defeat in modern times; McGovern lost the Electoral College vote 520-17, winning only Massachusetts and Washington DC. The Democratic Party has had only two Presidential winners (?) since then, Carter and Clinton, both of whom advertised themselves as Southern Moderates, regardless of whatever was going on in their heads/hearts/gonads/whatever.
The similarities between 1972 and upcoming elections is astonishing. The union movement is now greatly diminished and fractured, so that unions will not in the near future exert a great influence, regardless of how the Democratic Party solicits or ignores their participation. Other than that, Radicals? Michael Moron and Cindy Sheehan. Academic elites? Ward Churchill and Michael Bellesiles. Media elites? NYT and ABC, both rocked by scandal, and sharing in the common decline across the board within Old Media. Money men? George Soros, Linda Pritzker (actually a money woman), Stephen L. Bing, Peter B. Lewis, and their ilk, who gave tens of millions of dollars in a losing effort to influence the 2004 elections, and who are now organizing to waste more money in 2006 and 2008. Losers all.
If the Republicans have disagreements on the best way to achieve their objectives (Harriet Miers), they have no disagreement on what they want to accomplish; they certainly do not want to turn over the government to a bunch of radical losers, and they will fight to avoid this. But 1972 clearly illustrated that many Democrats do not care for the radical agenda, either.
What, you say the Democrats have a strategy? Where is it? Social Security? No. Improve homeland security? No. Eliminate government taking of private property? No. Rebuild the economy after the Bubba Bubble? No. Increase domestic energy production to alleviate energy strains? Hell, no. Create democracy around the world? Oh, no, not that. With no strategy, the Democrats are building an identical reprise of their 1972 disaster.
Being basically clueless, Hillary, LB, Harry Reid, Eidolon Lagomorph, Nancy Pelosi, and other Liberals near and far do not know what is in store for them. And they won
“Rabbit; It is a deliberate act of coercive sexual domination, much like rape. Consensual perversion is relatively just silly play acting. Not too surprising that chopper doesn
“To the extent that I can decipher it he was saying that Bush and his administration are a bunch of preverted homosexuals (sort of a redundancy there).”
Chopper,
You have decided to expose both your ignorance and bigotry on this thread.
“Actually Rabbit is sure that Homosexuality, especially the ugly dominant kind is quite common practice among the government heirarchy, and the history will show that issues such as Jeff Gannon etc will lead to a better understanding of what this is all about.”
Rabbit? I am not sure what you mean by the “ugly dominant kind.” But am very interested in knowing.
As for homosexuals being persecuted by the government. I don’t know if you all consider discrimination to be persecution but I do. Having relationships denied legal status is discrimination. Endorsing the existence of “treatment centers” run by hacks on the excuse that they are faith based is persecution. Laws under consideration to ban gays from adopting are discriminatory and I believe that is persecution. But it is always easy for those who are not feeling the effect of these types of persecutions to write them off as something else. How well the ignorant, powerhungry repugs have scapegoated gays during election years is only comparable to the scapegoating of blacks, jews, native americans, etc…
What is the redundancy Chopper?
You are a bigot as it it has been noted before. Homosexuals do not have to be perverts. Bush and the Skull and bones NWO types etc are very much into PERVERSION. That doesn’t so much make them homosexuals as in their case perverts.
Insults are the sort of mindless name calling and false accusations, of others which is the stock in trade of self confessed Conservative extremists like yourself. It is you and Scorpy who are conforming
to a recognised mental disorder. HIV Rabbit thinks he read it called. Rabbit posted a link somewhere.
<i>Time and time again, when I come across close-minded Bush supporters, I witness the effects of an unexplainable phenomenon: a highly dangerous variation of HIV
says the Chopper.
Like all self claimed Rightist Morons you argue with your preconceptions. We leftists, as “You” choose to label US are as inclined to defend oursleves and destroy pests if the need arises as any. As a rule we do it in a lot more intelligent and efficient fashion due to having open minds hence adaptability and imagination.
You should be glad we prefer to settle disputes with words instead of your first and prefferred method. Obviously you think you are better at Wars than we are, but being the first choice for you doesn’t make it the one you are most likely to win either. We can beat you morons to porridge with words or whatever. OOH OOH OOH!
Rabbit jumps around and roars ferociously.
>> Rabbit jumps around and roars ferociously. <<
One trick pony, so to speak.
OH Rabbit is sooo devastated…................Scorpy has cut the Rabbit to the marrow…............................aaaarrghh…..........Poor Rabbit he is so hurt, Scorpy is so clever and so mean…........^^...........
Scorpy don’t ever get to saying nice things about me will you….........That is honestly what would worry me.
Find any sources for anything yet Scorpy?
You ever ride a PONY Scorpy?
Ever ride a Rabbit?
Your metaphors are as always wacky.
For a one trick Rabbit, I have altered the look of this site for all time, adding HTML as a response to another idiot, and that was “learnt” in the time shown by the postings, about ten minutes. So that is two tyrick anyway.
Scorpy who hasn’t even picked up on the HTML, is still clapping with one hand. Scorpy has it ever occurred to you to get the barrel of that thing straightened? It seems curled over so that everyu shot comes straight at your own feet.
Wack…............Wack…...........^^........................
Thankyou stick…................... Rabbit looks appreciatively at his own stick and is glad he selected well.
Wack…...............................................wack
Scorp,
You were funny with your one liner but Rabbit has a whole routine down.
You got anything else, Scorp?
This is better than the Comedy Channel.
Thanks guys.
Rabbit has a list of routines…....................One to ...................well infinity I guess.
Eidolon Lagomorph -
Rabbits are not for riding. Rabbits are for shooting.
A pack of beagles will flush a rabbit, and the rabbit will run in a big circle, returning to his original point. When you hear the hounds turn and start to get close, you know the rabbit is closer, and then you pop the sucker. Good sport, good eating.
Like you, always going in circles, never making progress, stupidly exposing yourself.
scorpy is carving hisself a little hole in an old log, into which he will later crawl and hide. Like the ugly, toxic little arachnid he is.
scorpy, I just have to adze; isn’t your edge getting a little dull? You are about as funny as an abscessed wound.
Rabbit was once a farmer and hunter. Bet he’s shot more Bunnies than Scorpy. All head shots too, and I never shot one standing…..................^^........................
Rabbit nature has since taught me the value and inate respect for life which even ten years of Budhism never quite achieved.
Since explo*ives, their manufacture and use is actually a Rabbit hobby and once his job, he has popped a few Rabbit warrens with Powergel too. Powergel, or even better, PETN is good for clearing a swimming hole of Crocs too. Rabbit is a Kimberley soul and knows a bit about Crocs and doesn’t really like them much.
So Scorpy you go out and shoot bunnies, Rabbit will stick to giving Crocs a headache. By the way Crocodile steaks are not bad either.
You are a bit sad sometimes Scorpy, but, hell you stand head and shoulders above Jay Decline, next to him you are a sage.
Rabbit goes in circles for play, but the rest of the time he moves forward like a bulldozer. Admit it Scorpy.
.........................................................^^..................................
“You should be glad we prefer to settle disputes with words instead of your first and prefferred method. Obviously you think you are better at Wars than we are, but being the first choice for you doesn
“The sad reality is that there is no way to convince these brain-washed believers that there may be something more to the story of 9/11 than what they have been told. That
Yes chopper, it’s all about you, isn’t it?
Rabbit has no opinions about the following, sorry since they are things of import to Chopper it would seem.
The only thing it shows is that you seem to like conspiracy theories. So tell me, who really did kill Nicole Simpson? And who really was the man known as Rudolph Hess who was kept in Spandau prison after WWII? And how many crashed alien spaceships does the US government have at area 51?
It seems that Chopper is one of those crazy people who believe in “Conspiracy Theorists” who collect such silly ideas. Rabbit only ever heard about such issues from people like Chopper who semed to imagine their opponents more than they see them.
Chopper Rabbit has at no stage indulged in a rational discussion with you. Chopper is flattering himself if he thought the Rabbit was discussing anything with him. Rabbit was just playing a bit of Wack a Moron with the Chopper.
Does Chopper not believe America is the natural world leader and moral center then?
Anarcho-Sozi
Just catching up with Gwynne Dyer’s articles. Rabbit checks in on him from time to time, finding his careful and measured words perspectivising. One here about the German Election which I’d like your comment on.
Shroeder’s Long Game
Don’t worry if Rabbit finds you on another thread first and you see this later.
GO here
That is a great site, lots of quotes from experts and exactly the sort of Pyrotechnics Rabbit was talking about.
Say one idiotic thing Natty and Rabbit will mention the name of the company….....you know who…....and post lots of quotes from the site. For now you can just hope that others don’t notice this link and push it. Keep on with those tissues and towels, you’ll cover that elephant some way.
On second thoughts, scrap that, Natty will only feel that is a challenge and will no doubt comply. So here we go
This article provides important information for WTC demolition researchers, in particular because of the information about Controlled Demolition Inc., which (a) was apparently keen to have the debris removed and disposed of as soon as possible and (b) was able to come up with a detailed plan for doing so within eleven days of the collapse of the Twin Towers, suggesting that Controlled Demolition Inc. had detailed knowledge of the Twin Towers and the entire WTC complex prior to September 11th. The role of the U.S. Army in efforts to speed up the removal of the debris is also worth noting.
Rabbit,
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you on the Dyer article - I was off in Poland for a week. He was pretty right on with most points. Most of us Germans are not willing to scrap our social system (one could call it “Capitalism Lite”) on the bonfire of globalisation.
The article is a month old now, so it’s hard to get motivated to go into detail. As a general statement, something many non-Germans don’t understand is that even our Christian Democrats are not to be compared to Anglo-Saxon-style conservatives. Angela Merkel does not believe in free-market capitalism - that’s just the Free Democrats who do that (the party of dentists and small business owners, also known as the liberal party - “liberal” having the traditional meaning here, and not the unusual meaning the Americans give to it). She is not against trade unions and does not question the system of works committees which guarantees a 50 per cent worker say in management policies and decisions in all firms with more than ca. 20 employees, etc.
Thanks Anarcho-Sozi
Yeh it’s old in a week in this breakneck speed world isn’t it?
Oz is getting the final touches on a fascist system of Workplace reform. It is sundown on the unions basically.
Go to Democrats:It the War thread, for a funny Rabbit story. A true one he posted a moment ago. Not to mention the JC doing performing like a champion.. Have a few Polish friends over the years, never got there and I’m just reading a bit about the history between Poland and Germany leading up to and during the WAR and aftermath. Pretty depressing stuff over all.
Rabbit re-posting this, from another thread. It is relevant to the comparison of Bush atrocities, to Hitler atrocities.
How will it read in the history books?
This Article is a must read
<blockquote>It
I like Gwynne Dyer’s articles, Rabbit. I’ve bookmarked his page.
Liked his one on the development of the “major” religions.
Don’t agree with him that Pope Ratzinger is harmless, though!!
Conservatives are just fascists without the balls. They share the same basic belief in the ‘natural order’ and in the necessity of an authoritarian hierarchy to enforce obedience to the presumed status quo.
Once again, conservatives are just diluted fascists.
what utter tripe.
religion and politics don’t mix??
their tune, tyrannical dogmatic slavery of the mind.
keep dancing fools.
Religion and politics are mixing great in the US. Soon we’ll be a theocracy. Religion and politics mix only if you don’t care about democracy. Religion is about absolutes. Politics is about compromise, diversity, and inclusion. Religion and Modern Democracy were born in different times. They can’t mix!! History shows this and Fritz Stern’s article is brilliant.
8 years of little ol’ Georgie Bush , and look what that got us…two futile wars , a dead economy…and years too go before we can possible see any light….Politics and religion mix like dog crap on your carpet…even after you clean up the mess..the stench lingers…
PPG, just overnight moncler ski salecollapsed, clothing industry can let youmoncler in one year, Two make millions, but if you don’t take too large, sovereignty, ambition,moncler jackets also can let y Moncler Kids ou in an instant Production is negative. Thismoncler coats is an interesting industry contacts, resources,moncler ski and reputation aremoncler boots important, but the mentality is more important. The first said, CheYuan LiuDuan ace. Discount Moncler LiuDuan moncler vestace as high in the rational utilization of rules, rational utilization buy moncler coatsof natural resources, with little money also create a moncler ski pantsSmall brand, although know this brand of too little, but buy moncler vestas long Moncler Boots as he earned money.
Posting Security