Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Will Israel still be hated if this bears fruit?

Will Israel still be hated if this bears fruit? (Page 2)
Thread Tools
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 09:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
On a totally random note, do you think Big Mac needs to get laid? He's single, right? And devoutly religious, which I take to mean "isn't getting any"? Because everytime I see this thread title on the main page I ask myself, "who uses the phrase 'bears fruit' unless they're not getting laid"?

It's a valid question.
ACTUAL post of the year goes to...
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 09:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post

Illegal? Depends on what standard you want to recognize, I suppose. I'm skeptical of international law that contravenes sovereign state authority. Every sovereign country on earth has the right to self-defense, and the nuclear deterrent Israel possess is a huge part of its self-defense regime. And with Israel's nukes you never have to worry about proliferation to unfriendly countries or terrorists. It would be an illegal abrogation of the defense of Israel's citizenry for Israel not to have nuclear deterrence. But you can villify Israel's ability to defend itself as much as you wish. I don't find it to be a credible argument at all, and I sleep better at night as an American Jew knowing Israel is so armed.
Then you must have been totally against the second Iraq war.

Israel's hands aren't entirely, clean, no. But your attempt at moral equivalence is a stretch way too far and gross in my book, but you're still far better than the likes of Athens at least.
Thank You, all your doing is proving why Religion is the biggest evil on this planet.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 09:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
You don't need appeasement policies. What you do need is to stop building settlements and to stop kicking Palestinians out of homes and to stop bulldozing homes. What you do need is more investigative fact/proof based arrest policies and proper and fair trials of accused terrorists not just rounding up people at random. A more police approach vs military approach.
So... of course they've said no such thing.

Next up, please source the following:
Originally Posted by Athens
Just stop the settlements, stop bulldozing homes and stop shooting randomly over peoples heads, or randomly picking up people with out cause and trial people in a fair justice system not summery conviction by generals and commanders.
ebuddy
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 09:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
That's a quite a ridiculously large disparity you're attempting to ignore through moral equivalence, and it's not endearing. How many car bombs does the Mossad execute per year versus the number of rockets Hamas launches per year? I think the numbers are overwhelmingly against your simple moral equivalence. Would you rather the Mossad not act, allow a terrorist to perpetrate a mega-attack against Israel and thereby ensure many more Arab deaths in the general war Israel would be forced into as a reprisal?
I have no idea what the numbers are. I'm just trying to say that Israel isn't quite the shining perfect little nation either. They use some pretty hardcore tactics to achieve security. Which is fine. That's the reality of having a modern nation, let alone one in the eastern Mediterranean. The problem I take issue with is the idea that Israel refuses to sink to the level of whomever the argument is about. Israel is plenty happy to play dirty too, if simply out of necessity. If they didn't, I suspect they wouldn't have made it past the Six-Day War.

Illegal? Depends on what standard you want to recognize, I suppose. I'm skeptical of international law that contravenes sovereign state authority. Every sovereign country on earth has the right to self-defense, and the nuclear deterrent Israel possess is a huge part of its self-defense regime. And with Israel's nukes you never have to worry about proliferation to unfriendly countries or terrorists. It would be an illegal abrogation of the defense of Israel's citizenry for Israel not to have nuclear deterrence. But you can villify Israel's ability to defend itself as much as you wish. I don't find it to be a credible argument at all, and I sleep better at night as an American Jew knowing Israel is so armed.
I'm not vilifying Israel for defending themselves. Yet, Israel was a nation created by international alliances and is upheld by international alliances. But those same alliances let Israel break their own rules! Luckily Israel is generally responsible with nuclear weapons, but also the potential for them to get in the wrong hands seems very high as well, especially in such a geographically confined region.


Israel's hands aren't entirely, clean, no. But your attempt at moral equivalence is a stretch way too far and gross in my book, but you're still far better than the likes of Athens at least.
Again, I am not trying to speak to moral notions. I'm just saying that BOTH sides are plenty willing to accomodate violent means to access an end.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 09:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
I am serious about the region being disarmed and over seen by a international governance with all sides being treated the same.
That worked so well in 2003. In theory, that sounds all good and well, but let's face it. "International" governance tends to, thus far, mean the US and UK, who have vested interests in the region.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 09:54 PM
 
You know what the saddest part is of all this. The people are the same people. They come from the same ancestors both the Jewish Settlers and the Palestinians and the only thing that separates them is faith. And they both use faith to justify murder. It would be no different then a large family keeping half there relatives locked in a basement for believing in something different, starving them, holding them captive, beating on them. Its amazing what evils people can commit to each other over fictional stories.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 09:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
So... of course they've said no such thing.

Next up, please source the following:
Google give it try, im not catering to your laziness.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 09:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
You know what the saddest part is of all this. The people are the same people. They come from the same ancestors both the Jewish Settlers and the Palestinians and the only thing that separates them is faith. And they both use faith to justify murder. It would be no different then a large family keeping half there relatives locked in a basement for believing in something different, starving them, holding them captive, beating on them. Its amazing what evils people can commit to each other over fictional stories.
I disagree. Faith isn't the issue here. It's more basic than that. It's access to resources, especially water, education, and the wall. Muslims and Jews are perfectly happy to live side-by-side (and often do in both Israel and Palestine).
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 09:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
s! Luckily Israel is generally responsible with nuclear weapons, but also the potential for them to get in the wrong hands seems very high as well, especially in such a geographically confined region.
.
Israel has every right to own Nuclear weapons. IT is a non signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
Thank You, all your doing is proving why Religion is the biggest evil on this planet.
What religion was Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler, and Mao?
¡Viva Cristo Rey!
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
I disagree. Faith isn't the issue here. It's more basic than that. It's access to resources, especially water, education, and the wall. Muslims and Jews are perfectly happy to live side-by-side (and often do in both Israel and Palestine).
I disagree and this is why. The heart of the matter is the holly lands. They all want totally control over it. The reason Muslims and Jewish and Christians can live in peace in most places around the world is because there is no fight over ownership of the holly land. My core group of friends have some Muslims and Jewish people in it and we all play soccer and hang out and live in absolute peace. I think location and religion is the heart of the matter and why the fighting is specific to that location, not resources. There is a special meaning to that location for them.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
What religion was Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler, and Mao?
Lets compare, normal intelligent human with no known brain or physiological problems advocating murder and terror in the name of Religion (Big Mac) in comparison to psychopaths that had something seriously wrong with them who used ideology to impose mass murder the same way religion uses ideology to make it acceptable.

Ok

Pol Pot - Atheism, religion stood in the way
Stalin - Atheism, religion stood in the way
Hitler - Roman Catholic originally
Mao - Buddhist originally

Religion conflicts with dictatorship, its a power struggle between the intelligent vs the stupid. Stupid faith is more evil because it makes every one stupid.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Big Mac  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
I disagree. Faith isn't the issue here. It's more basic than that. It's access to resources, especially water, education, and the wall. Muslims and Jews are perfectly happy to live side-by-side (and often do in both Israel and Palestine).
I agree with your general point that Jews and Muslims do live side-by-side in general peace in many places in Israel. But for the sake of argument, where do you think Jews live happy side-by-side with Muslims in "Palestine"? If by Palestine you mean Gaza, that's demonstrably false. Israel ethnically cleansed its Jews from Gaza in 2006 in the vain hope that it would bring an end to terrorism from Gaza. If you're talking about the so-called "West Bank" (Judea and Samaria) that's not Palestine. That's disputed territory that Israel will be under a lot of pressure to annex if the "Palestinians" violate the treaties they've signed thus far by unilaterally declaring a new terrorist country.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
That worked so well in 2003. In theory, that sounds all good and well, but let's face it. "International" governance tends to, thus far, mean the US and UK, who have vested interests in the region.
The US and UK would only be needed to protect the area from hostility from other nations, Iran, Egypt and such. Actual peace keeper numbers on the ground could be achieved easily by many smaller nations. Dutch, Canadians, South Africans.....

The problem for peace keepers would be the hostilities by both the former israelites and the former Palestinians. Both would have a common interest in not liking a foreign power over seeing them.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
I agree with your general point that Jews and Muslims do live side-by-side in general peace in many places in Israel. But for the sake of argument, where do you think Jews live happy side-by-side with Muslims in "Palestine"? If by Palestine you mean Gaza, that's demonstrably false. Israel ethnically cleansed its Jews from Gaza in 2006 in the vain hope that it would bring an end to terrorism from Gaza. If you're talking about the so-called "West Bank" (Judea and Samaria) that's not Palestine. That's disputed territory that Israel will be under a lot of pressure to annex if the "Palestinians" violate the treaties they've signed thus far by unilaterally declaring a new terrorist country.
Have you seen the documentary Arna's Children? It's about this women who builds an orphanage in Gaza and then her son builds a children's theatre. They are both Israeli.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
The US and UK would only be needed to protect the area from hostility from other nations, Iran, Egypt and such. Actual peace keeper numbers on the ground could be achieved easily by many smaller nations. Dutch, Canadians, South Africans.....

The problem for peace keepers would be the hostilities by both the former israelites and the former Palestinians. Both would have a common interest in not liking a foreign power over seeing them.
That's EXACTLY what happened post-World War I after the breakup of the Ottoman Empire. Taking another country's sovereignty or asserting your own sovereignty in a region you don't really have a right to be in is a very, very dangerous road. As the war in Iraq and Afghanistan shows.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
I agree with your general point that Jews and Muslims do live side-by-side in general peace in many places in Israel. But for the sake of argument, where do you think Jews live happy side-by-side with Muslims in "Palestine"? If by Palestine you mean Gaza, that's demonstrably false. Israel ethnically cleansed its Jews from Gaza in 2006 in the vain hope that it would bring an end to terrorism from Gaza. If you're talking about the so-called "West Bank" (Judea and Samaria) that's not Palestine. That's disputed territory that Israel will be under a lot of pressure to annex if the "Palestinians" violate the treaties they've signed thus far by unilaterally declaring a new terrorist country.
Holly Hell *face palm* Its not disputed territory, its not ISRAEL's. And what kind of peace can you expect from Gaza. Just because settlers left changes nothing its still a big open prison no different then the Warsaw Ghetto's. Its still a blockade which is why Israeli troops murdered Turkish aid givers in international waters trying to get to Gaza.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
That's EXACTLY what happened post-World War I after the breakup of the Ottoman Empire. Taking another country's sovereignty or asserting your own sovereignty in a region you don't really have a right to be in is a very, very dangerous road. As the war in Iraq and Afghanistan shows.
And it was pretty peaceful there until after World War 2 when a state (i wont name) was created.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
Holly Hell *face palm* Its not disputed territory, its not ISRAEL's. And what kind of peace can you expect from Gaza. Just because settlers left changes nothing its still a big open prison no different then the Warsaw Ghetto's. Its still a blockade which is why Israeli troops murdered Turkish aid givers in international waters trying to get to Gaza.
It was voted on by the League of Nations, and confirmed by a vote by the United Nations. The west bank was take by Jordan in the 48 war of independence, and returned during the 6 Day war.


What Israel was first granted by the mandate


There already is a "Palestinian" homeland. It's called Jordan.
¡Viva Cristo Rey!
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
And it was pretty peaceful there until after World War 2 when a state (i wont name) was created.
The creation of Israel at a state is only a small part of the picture. When you come in and draw lines regardless of ethnicity or vested interests, you're going to stir up strife. Everyone lost something under the mandate system.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:29 PM
 
Yes a nice map of the Emirate of Transjordan's 2 sections and Palestine Mandate lands. What are you trying to say?
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:31 PM
 
That your idea of foreign intervention never, ever works.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:31 PM
 
And this was the UN Partition Map.

PS

Yes a nice map of the Emirate of Transjordan's 2 sections and Palestine Mandate lands. What are you trying to say?
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
That your idea of foreign intervention never, ever works.
I was replying to Chongo
( Last edited by Athens; May 10, 2011 at 10:37 PM. )
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:34 PM
 
What do you mean? It didn't work in the Congo either. They live in such nice conditions now.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:36 PM
 
Israel's enemies weren't happy with that one either. They attacked the next day.
And it was pretty peaceful there until after World War 2 when a state (i wont name) was created.
Are saying if the UN did not created Israel, the middle east would be peaceful?
¡Viva Cristo Rey!
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Israel's enemies weren't happy with that one either. They attacked the next day.
After the withdrawal of British forces. But the map I posted was the land given to Israel, everything else is now occupied land they took outside of what was given to them.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
Uh, yes, since pharmaceuticals are the largest lobbies in the US (apart from Israel itself).
First of all, I don't think pharmaceuticals are the largest lobby in the US and does Israel even fall in the top 10?

Pharmaceuticals do not pass laws and they did not grant the right of influence lobbies enjoy, our government did. There are numerous lobbies, many of which you might support doling out huge sums of money on anything from health to energy and they don't always prevail.

I think it's mistaken to assume pharmaceuticals cause legislation as if lobby-appeasement is the only interest of the Federal government. After all, a governing philosophy that advocates a smaller, less intrusive government would challenge a regulatory environment regardless of MO. You don't strike me as a champion of this philosophy.

Are this Administrations' polices on energy for example, exclusively the result of GE's influence? I often do not like these relationships, but they become much more dangerous when coupled with a philosophy that does not check government growth; IMO the root cause and biggest lobby.
ebuddy
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
After the withdrawal of British forces. But the map I posted was the land given to Israel, everything else is now occupied land they took outside of what was given to them.
Land they bought over the years, at over inflated prices at that.
¡Viva Cristo Rey!
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Land they bought over the years, at over inflated prices at that.
I would hardly say land taken at gun point is bought unless you mean bought with blood then I have to agree it was over priced.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
First of all, I don't think pharmaceuticals are the largest lobby in the US and does Israel even fall in the top 10?

Pharmaceuticals do not pass laws and they did not grant the right of influence lobbies enjoy, our government did.
oh wow, dude do you seriously believe this. The members over government are bought and owned by companies. You think a person who gets thousands and millions of dollars to get them into power owes no one a favour.....
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
First of all, I don't think pharmaceuticals are the largest lobby in the US and does Israel even fall in the top 10?
The Israeli lobby is the largest, AARP is the second largest, and pharmaceuticals are all in the top 20.

Pharmaceuticals do not pass laws and they did not grant the right of influence lobbies enjoy, our government did. There are numerous lobbies, many of which you might support doling out huge sums of money on anything from health to energy and they don't always prevail.
Well, they do pass laws by lobbying for them. Like Monsanto now owns every modified corn seed in the US and can persue prosecution in federal courts if someone else makes claims to that seed, or doesn't follow Monsanto's rules.

I think it's mistaken to assume pharmaceuticals cause legislation as if lobby-appeasement is the only interest of the Federal government. After all, a governing philosophy that advocates a smaller, less intrusive government would challenge a regulatory environment regardless of MO. You don't strike me as a champion of this philosophy.
Big government or big corporations, which is better?

Are this Administrations' polices on energy for example, exclusively the result of GE's influence? I often do not like these relationships, but they become much more dangerous when coupled with a philosophy that does not check government growth; IMO the root cause and biggest lobby.
Well, it would be bad for Shell and BP (also huge lobbyists) if Obama began to push electric (like he is). I can guarantee you that BP will file lawsuits against the US government.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:52 PM
 
Another question must be asked, if most American Jewish followers feel the same way as Big Mac, and have the same screwed up logic, but most important Israel first before all notion, wouldn't Jewish people in the US government be a security risk on its own? If you can't separate the faith and the state as Big Mac has attempted to make so clear then its a security risk. I doubt the US government would allow Iranians who are devoted to Iran first before all else to work in the US government.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
Google give it try, im not catering to your laziness.
Actually, my request was intended to exploit what would be nothing other than the most contentious, slanted interpretations of a scenario imaginable. Those that cater to the intellectual laziness of others. Thank you for the illustration. Again.
ebuddy
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 10:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Actually, my request was intended to exploit what would be nothing other than the most contentious, slanted interpretations of a scenario imaginable. Those that cater to the intellectual laziness of others. Thank you for the illustration. Again.
Im not going to cite common knowledge because the articles are so plentiful one only has to type a couple words into a search box to be inundated with articles on the subject. . Would you like me to look up proof the sky is blue too.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Big Mac  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2011, 11:24 PM
 
It's so much better now that I don't have to read the crap you write on this subject, Athens.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2011, 12:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
Lets compare, normal intelligent human with no known brain or physiological problems advocating murder and terror in the name of Religion (Big Mac) in comparison to psychopaths that had something seriously wrong with them who used ideology to impose mass murder the same way religion uses ideology to make it acceptable.

Ok

Pol Pot - Atheism, religion stood in the way
Stalin - Atheism, religion stood in the way
Hitler - Roman Catholic originally, became an atheist
Mao - Buddhist originally, became an atheist

Religion conflicts with dictatorship, its a power struggle between the intelligent vs the stupid. Stupid faith is more evil because it makes every one stupid.
Ah, they killed over 120 million combined people because religious people stood in their way. In the case of Pol Pot and Mao, why was one of the first things they did when they came to power was round up the educated and have them killed?
¡Viva Cristo Rey!
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2011, 12:21 AM
 
Big Mac: do you believe in Jesus?
     
Big Mac  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2011, 12:22 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Big Mac: do you believe in Jesus?
???

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2011, 12:23 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Big Mac: do you believe in Jesus?
¡Viva Cristo Rey!
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, Washington
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2011, 12:28 AM
 
Wow. Well done guys!
     
Big Mac  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2011, 12:28 AM
 
Haha. . . After the types of material I've written here on Christianity, I have to strongly assume besson asked that in jest. Or else he's high.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2011, 12:36 AM
 
I hope my jesting bears fruit!
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2011, 01:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I hope my jesting bears fruit!
I snickered.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2011, 01:32 AM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
I snickered.
More than the Azrael reference?
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2011, 02:28 AM
 
maybe i should convert to Judaism just to piss Biggy Mac off
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2011, 02:35 AM
 
Big Mac: seriously though, why don't you just convert to Christianity rather than trying to draw attention yourself with some fancy religion that is complicated? Do you understand that Jesus died for your sins? The man was nailed to a damn cross!
( Last edited by besson3c; May 11, 2011 at 02:43 AM. )
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2011, 02:58 AM
 
or just give up on Religion, it is dying out after all. Each new generation more and more saying good bye to it
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2011, 06:30 AM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
Its a god thing the Canadian Government didn't respond to FLQ terrorist the same way Israel responds to Palestinian terrorists. Quebec would be a ruined land with broken people no economy, poverty a wall around the territory lots of deaths through out the country and tens of thousands of dead Quebecors. A breeding ground for continued violence. World condemnation against Canada. Could have been like that when the British took over and instead of a distinct society and the allowing of them to keep their culture they could have attempted to cleanse them and force the British way of life on the land. Had events played out differently 250 years ago it could be very different here. Im pretty thankful the government didn't try to bomb the FLQ into submission 35 years ago because many of my relatives could be dead now if they had.
...what?

This makes no sense. After Lapointe/yaddaguy was kidnapped the Canadian government made the only peacetime enaction of the War Measures Act ("just watch me!") and temporarily suspended civil liberties, made extensive military deployments throughout Quebec and Canada, and arrested almost 500 people, about 85% of whom were later released without charges.

Do you not understand how this does not support your argument at all? And the FLQ was mostly involved with "terrorist activities" in their province of Quebec - had they made serious attempts in other provinces, the public response from the rest of Canada would have escalated.

Your attempt to compare Israel/Palestinians to Canada/British/Quebecers makes zero sense and is completely devoid of historical context.

greg
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2011, 06:49 AM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
The Israeli lobby is the largest, AARP is the second largest, and pharmaceuticals are all in the top 20.
Okay I'll try it this way; you're wrong.
Code:
US Chamber of Commerce $755,875,680 American Medical Assn $247,647,500 General Electric $245,660,000 AARP $202,752,064 Pharmaceutical Rsrch & Mfrs of America $199,713,920 American Hospital Assn $198,887,055 AT&T Inc $168,397,725 Blue Cross/Blue Shield $164,875,795 Northrop Grumman $161,865,253 Exxon Mobil $159,702,742 National Assn of Realtors $158,997,380 Verizon Communications $153,729,841 Edison Electric Institute $150,775,999 Business Roundtable $145,404,000 Boeing Co $143,474,310 Lockheed Martin $138,430,053 Southern Co $121,870,694 General Motors $119,959,170 PG&E Corp $118,520,000 Pfizer Inc $111,157,268
Lobbying Spending Database | OpenSecrets
PhRMA is 5th and Israel isn't even in the top 10. Try again.

Well, they do pass laws by lobbying for them. Like Monsanto now owns every modified corn seed in the US and can persue prosecution in federal courts if someone else makes claims to that seed, or doesn't follow Monsanto's rules.
Well I'd say if Monsanto owns a patent on the modification, they're able to pursue prosecution in Federal courts due to laws in existence since before they arrived in Washington with their powerful lobby. Again, Monsanto may be no more responsible for these laws than you are for seatbelt laws in your State. It's called petitioning your government. This is why folks like myself rail on a governing philosophy that "picks" winners. They have to be picked and are often sustained through unsustainable business models that couldn't exist without the support of the purveyor of your laws. I think your focus is misdirected.

Big government or big corporations, which is better?
Easy, big corporations. The Corporate monoliths enjoying the lion's share of your scrutiny are likely the contrivances of government anyway.

Well, it would be bad for Shell and BP (also huge lobbyists) if Obama began to push electric (like he is). I can guarantee you that BP will file lawsuits against the US government.
The good news is your favorite lobby is spending at least $45 million more in lobbying a year than your least favorite. The system works as long as you appreciate the resulting legislation eh?
ebuddy
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2011, 06:51 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Big Mac: seriously though, why don't you just convert to Christianity rather than trying to draw attention yourself with some fancy religion that is complicated? Do you understand that Jesus died for your sins? The man was nailed to a damn cross!
grow up
ebuddy
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:04 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2