History doomed to repeat itself...

by Reborn2002 67 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Focus

  NeonMadman wrote:
  

  Your criticism was nit-picking, not in the number of people about whom I misstated a fact, but in the negligible amount of impact that the misstated fact had on my overall argument. You held up my one misstated fact (significant though it may have been in terms of the number of people it misrepresented) and attempted to make it appear as though, by disproving that one fact, you had utterly devastated everything I had argued. In fact, that was not the case at all

  You still fail to understand... Let us check what you refer to as nit-picking, OK? It is revealing.

  You more than imply, by repetition of varying innuendo and read in context of what you are supporting, that:

  1. The evidence shows that very many, perhaps most, Arabs hate the U.S., are basically enemies or potential enemies of the U.S., even terrorist-supporters.

  (which is highly offensive IMO, and which sentiment - when uttered by enough people - may influence or determine policy, thus making it a self-fulfilling prophecy; but leave that aside, I do not need to deconstruct it - let us assume here that you are right!) and then, through your egregious perception of the world's second last religion and who are its adherents, throw in for good measure:

  2. The vast majority of Muslims are Arabs.

  So what you reiterate is but a most minor and irrelevant error reclassifies almost a BILLION PEOPLE (the number of non-Arab Muslims) as being, on the balance of probability, haters of the U.S. and even sympathetic to terrorists.

  It is most telling that you view my criticism of such views/reasoning as comprising mere "nit-picking".

  You really don't care very much for the feelings of "them", now, do you? You can't or won't see how such highly abusive "classification" causes deep offense and hurt, right? How the generally law-abiding, generally honest, "I hate absolutely no one" Muslim, who has barely given the U.S. a thought in his life, might get really riled when he is classified by some ignoramus as being of such a hateful Noachian "kind"? Doh!

  And when enough are slandered in this way, guess what - some get riled enough to actually find plenty of reasons TO hate the U.S., to support terrorism, maybe even (for one in a thousand) - sign up as a suicide-killer recruit.

  Of course, you say "he always was!". DOH!!

  And you wonder why so many (including THINKING Americans) hate such "Americanisms"? LOL!

  These sorts of views give the whole country a bad name, cause the U.S. to be the butt of ill-humor among its natural/historic allies and get it more hated around the world.

  And attract the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune - and the bombs of terrorists.

  They are going to nuke Baghdad??? Where did you read this?
  Errr...now you've confused me. I mentioned a mushroom cloud over your town. Do you live in Baghdad? If so, it explains a lot.

  Firstly, I never implied I lived or live in Baghdad. I did not write "So, they are going to nuke Baghdad???" or similar. And "Where did you read this?" does not imply that you read it. "Do you enjoy beating your wife?". Sorry for the little trap, the point being to get you to express your real views. Which you did, exactly as I expected.
  Your clear statement that you can, will and do PREDICT MY VIEWS AND OPINIONS, EVEN JUDGE ME, ON THE BASIS OF WHERE I LIVE ("you live in Baghdad .. If so, it explains a lot.") has already determined what your feelings border on, and allows the reader to consider your own "objectivity", "maturity" etc. on this issue when reviewing your arguments.

  I warned you not to post when angry. When people are angry, people's real feelings, biases etc. come to the fore.

  That you resort to the likes of "potential terrorists won't read what I write in jw.com, so how could the expression of these views prove your point that ignorance here helps recruit terrorists?" shows me that you know you are lost. Your scribbles are symptomatic of, and while being more refined still broadly reflect, the very widespread "anti-turban-head" thinking prevalent in U.S. society. Allowed to influence policy, this results in the perceived opponent (within or without the U.S.) to be brutalized, treated as something other than an individual, made to feel inferior and contemptible, and so on. Which makes recruiting suicide-bombers much easier.

  I plead guilty to scapegoating you. Sorry. But you appeared, of all those in this thread whose world-view contrasted with mine, the one most able to take a bit of heat. So - Merry Christmas..... ignoramus. Seriously, you need to read a bitLOT more. You need to first understand how the world is, before trying to tell others how to get the world to the state you (and maybe I: I am sure you want the basic causes of terrorism i.e. ignorance, injustice and intolerance done away with, making our little planet better, safer and fairer for all) want it to be. Common sense. I have no intention of verbally brutalizing you; your own arguments and views, when exposed for what they are or lead to, do that. Pray reflect on this.

  As you are clearly intelligent, though somewhat less knowledgeable than many, why not apply your mind to solving this problem. Real, lasting propaganda damage is being done to the U.S. within the Arab world by the extremely widespread dissemination of outrageous "hate" material there by those who have an anti-Semitic/Holocaust-Denying/pro-Nazi/pro-Hitler agenda. There are many academic and other studies showing that this is a major factor influencing Arab intellectual opinion. Arab libraries often dare not stock Lipstadt or Hilberg (because of protests from a vocal minority), but they will have the disgraceful distortions of Irving, David Duke, Leuchtner, Raven, Zundel etc. By denying that the Holocaust happened, and repeating all sorts of absurd mega-lies and myths (e.g. The Protocols of Zion) about "the Jews", their enormous conspiracies to run the U.S. etc., the authors of such material in their quest to rehabilitate National Socialism (i.e. Nazism) as an acceptable form of government both:
  a\ remove the reason for the world sympathy that resulted in the U.N. majority vote to create/recognize the state of Israel by deeming it all a hoax by the Jews to gain money, power, influence and their own state (even that the Jews perpretrated the Holocaust themselves, or directly deserved it, etc. - many variations); and
  b\ foment rabid race hate against Jews, and
  c\ portray the U.S. as run by "Jewish" "monsters" who wish to destroy Arabs, and therefore fighting the U.S. is fighting the Jewish conspiracy.

  And where are the authors and originators of such distasteful, often openly fraudulent, material to be found? In the Arab world? Nope. The vast majority live in the U.S. and Canada. It is true that a few are in Europe (from where one or two have fled to totalitarian Arab regimes, to stay out of European gaols because of laws against hate speech/writings). But the vast majority are in the U.S. and Canada, abusing their First Amendment rights and doing their bit, wittingly or otherwide, to encourage the U.S. to be bombed.
  Same folks basically said the Jews were directly responsible for 9/11.

  And what is the ethnicity of the vast majority of such authors and originators of this propaganda? WHITE. And obviously so. Check for yourself.

  Want to encourage or justify witch-hunts, target them better, Neon, methinks...

  Knowledge!

  Anti-ignorance!

  --
  Focus
  (Knowledge is Power Class)

  Edited by - Focus on 22 December 2002 23:51:26
• 

  Focus

  Quoth LDH:
  

  I'm leaning toward's Focus' .. point of view.

  Quoth SixofNine:
  

  And yes, what a great terrorist recruitment tactic. Piss off people who are familiar with living and working in and amongst Americans. Good thinking, Georgie.

  Quoth pettygrudger:
  

  I couldn't agree more with you Focus that it is our "foreign" and domestic policies that gets us into so much hot water. ... I am talking about enlightening Americans. ... With all the wealth of knowledge available to us, with all the examples in recent history, with all the knowledge of recent history - we still seemed to have not learned a thing.

  Quoth Robdar:
  

  You had better start praying that you are not a member of the next identified group.

  Quoth outoftheorg:
  

  I enjoyed your reply Focus. It was well thought and delivered. I agree with much of it. ... of the whats wrong with us class

  Quoth back2dafront:
  

  Would have to agree with Focus actually.

  Thanks, folks. But You Know I prefer some dissension. We ain't no steeenking Borg!

  I'm 'bout done with good Bro' Neon, as he has me laughing so much I'll get a stitch. And that would not do in time. Save us all, would it, now, Six o' Nine? Please do not be harsh with him, Neon means well though is rather confused on this matter.

  Merry Pagan Celebration, one and all. May good cheer be with you.

  --
  Focus
  (You better watch out, you better not cry, you better not pout, I'm telling you why: Satan Claws is coming to town! Class)
• 

  NeonMadman

  Sigh. This is why I rarely get involved with political threads on this forum. They tend to be a pain in the butt, and nobody ever convinces anybody of anything.

  But, a few responses still come to mind...

  You more than imply, by repetition of varying innuendo and read in context of what you are supporting, that:
  1. The evidence shows that very many, perhaps most, Arabs hate the U.S., are basically enemies or potential enemies of the U.S., even terrorist-supporters.

  Again, you seek to make your point by mischaracterizing what I said. I nowhere wrote that "very many, perhaps most" Arabs hate the U.S. I would imagine that it's only a small minority that actually hate us. What I do believe, however, is that enough of them hate the US to cause us a lot of problems. We aren't facing off against the whole Arab world here, basically only against a cult or two. Our fundamental point of disagreement is still your contention that these groups need a massive supply of recruits in order to carry out their operations. But the whole nature of terrorism is to do a lot of damage with a small amount of resources, including personnel. They have access already to all the people they need, without recruiting any significant numbers. Whether the Arab world as a whole loves us or hates us isn't the point - the groups we are talking about hate us, and that isn't going to change because we start using politically correct speech.

  So what you reiterate is but a most minor and irrelevant error reclassifies almost a BILLION PEOPLE (the number of non-Arab Muslims) as being, on the balance of probability, haters of the U.S. and even sympathetic to terrorists.

  Well, no - again, you build your case upon words you clumsily inserted into my mouth. I never said that the majority of Arabs or Muslims hated the US. It is known, however, that the governments of certain Arab countries and powerful interests within those same countries are sympathetic to the terrorists, offering them aid and comfort. I merely suggested at the outset that it is entirely appropriate that we closely watch immigrants from those countries, and act against those who violate the law. You respond, in effect, that we shouldn't do that because we might make them mad. Can you imagine what might have occurred if something similar to the 9/11 attacks had been carried out against China, or even Russia? In either case, I would have expected to see their borders closed to all immigrants from the countries involved, and the ones who were there expelled, or worse - and you can be sure the governments whose countries had been attacked wouldn't be apologizing for their politically incorrect actions. And, frankly, such immigration-related actions would make a lot of practical sense, given the abundant evidence that the terrorists were operating from bases right here within the USA, using our own resources against us. But, in this country, we have to watch every word so that we don't anger the very people who attacked us! Sorry, friend, but if anybody has a right to be angry, it's us. We were the ones attacked, we were primarily the ones whose countrymen have been killed. It should be these terrorist groups and the governments and interests who sponsor them who should be very afraid indeed to make us any more angry than we already are - not the other way around.

  Your clear statement that you can, will and do PREDICT MY VIEWS AND OPINIONS, EVEN JUDGE ME, ON THE BASIS OF WHERE I LIVE ("you live in Baghdad .. If so, it explains a lot.") has already determined what your feelings border on, and allows the reader to consider your own "objectivity", "maturity" etc. on this issue when reviewing your arguments.

  Baghdad is the capital of an enemy country, one of the countries I mentioned above that supports and sponsors terrorism against our country. I read in your comments a certain sympathy with the terrorists, a sense that perhaps you feel that they are justified in their attacks by actions the USA has taken on the world scene. That being the case, I took the opportunity you presented in your "trap" to offer a barb with the intent of making that point. No, not that I can read the heart of every citizen of Baghdad, but that it would not surprise me if a lot of people who live there - especially those involved with the enemy government and other terror-sponsoring interests - think quite a bit like you do.

  As far as objectivity, I never claimed it. Everything I post here is my own opinion. I will say this, though: I'm every bit as objective in my views as you are. And maturity? Well, I don't claim a lot of that, either, but I'll leave it to those who know me to decide.

  I warned you not to post when angry.

  And I rarely do. Reasoned arguments - even ones I consider as misguided as yours - seldom if ever make me angry. Personal attacks occasionally do, but I do see the lightheartedness in the ones in which you have engaged herein and understand that you are a well-meaning moron who means no offense by them.

  Your scribbles are symptomatic of, and while being more refined still broadly reflect, the very widespread "anti-turban-head" thinking prevalent in U.S. society.

  I'm not saying that such thinking is right or proper. It is, however, understandable, since we have been attacked repeatedly by operatives who were Arabs. Pearl Harbor stirred up a lot of anti-Japanese sentiment in this country, and why wouldn't it? They attacked us. The situation is somewhat more confusing today, since the governments and interests who are supporting terrorism do not have either the courage or the honor to attack us directly and in their own name, as did the Japanese. Instead they resort to using backdoor means and covert organizations to carry out operations of the same magnitude and destructive intent. Nonetheless, they must be stopped, and that by force - and sooner rather than later, because they aren't going to stop what they're doing.

  But you appeared, of all those in this thread whose world-view contrasted with mine, the one most able to take a bit of heat. So - Merry Christmas..... ignoramus.

  Merry Christmas to you, too...uh, why does a word commonly used by Farkel pop into my mind at this point?

  Real, lasting propaganda damage is being done to the U.S. within the Arab world by the extremely widespread dissemination of outrageous "hate" material there by those who have an anti-Semitic/Holocaust-Denying/pro-Nazi/pro-Hitler agenda.

  I wasn't aware that such material was being used as propaganda in the Arab world, but it makes a lot of sense that it would be. If so, it's a shame, but I think it illustrates another point against your argument. Like every other propagandist (the Watchtower included), they are going to select the material they present. That's why I don't believe that the anti-Arab sentiments you decry are going to make that big a difference. Living in a country as we do where free speech is permitted, someone is going to express such sentiments (heck, if you looked hard enough, you could probably find anti-Liechtenstein material somewhere). Even if the material is only published by some crank group somewhere, these propagandists will select it and present it as mainstream American opinion. Their goal is not to convey the truth, it is to sway people to their opinion. If they have to lie to do that, no problem. The only way we could possibly counter such a process would be to suspend free speech and prohibit such material from being published. The ramifications of such a move, however, are unacceptable to me, and, I would think, to most Americans. Surely that's not what you're suggesting?
• 

  Focus

  NeonMadman wrote:
  

  This is why I rarely get involved with political threads on this forum.

  I agree. By so doing, you are shown in public to be an ignoramus (Mr "the vast majority of Muslims are Arabs"....) and either a very stubborn person or a genuine bigot (readers may not be able to tell which, even though I keep trying to interpret what you eructate in a way most flattering to you).

  Indeed, a good reason for you not to participate... and your immaturity and ignorance makes you hard to debate with. The gap is a chasm. You should read and study more, think a very great deal more, and leave off the writing until the first tasks are accomplished to the satisfaction of your betters.

  Striving to see things from the point of view of the "other side" may aid you in your path to wisdom, Mr "the vast majority of Muslims are Arabs"!

  We aren't facing off against the whole Arab world here

  But after loudmouthed, ignorants bigots have done with slandering whole races, ethnic groups, the collective 'membership' of "mainstream" religions, and inciting acts targeted against them, that may well change...

  the groups we are talking about hate us, and that isn't going to change because we start using politically correct speech.

  I am not talking about P.C. speech. I am talking about getting things at least approximately right, rather than drawing conclusions from idiotically incorrect "facts".

  Can you imagine what might have occurred if something similar to the 9/11 attacks had been carried out against China

  So? I prefer to have the moral high ground over totalitarian regime responsible for murdering their own student protesters like at Tiananmen Square.
  And of course, you are too young to remember Kent State. Summer '70.

  Sorry, friend, but if anybody has a right to be angry, it's us. We were the ones attacked, we were primarily the ones whose countrymen have been killed.

  Any idea how many people have been murdered by terrorists trained by, financed by and directly supported by the States? By your logic, about twenty countries (most of which had never used or supported anti-U.S. violence) have the right to start bombing the U.S. right now.

  Assuming you don't actually believe in colossal double standards, you really, really should better educate yourself about what your Government has perpetrated abroad "in your name".

  It should be these terrorist groups and the governments and interests who sponsor them who should be very afraid indeed to make us any more angry than we already are - not the other way around.

  You are a fool. Dangerous bluster like breeds hatred and breeds enemies among many who would otherwise have been neutral or friendly.

  I read in your comments a certain sympathy with the terrorists

  Only shows you can't read with discernment, Mr "the vast majority of Muslims are Arabs".

  The world simply isn't the way you think it is.

  you feel that they are justified in their attacks by actions the USA has taken on the world scene.

  Idiot...... I feel no such thing. Your inability to distinguish "explained" and "justified" is noted. I hope you are very young, and your hot-headedness can be ascribed to inexperience, immaturity and childish folly and arrogance, rather than to wickedness, malice or stupidity.

  No, not that I can read the heart of every citizen of Baghdad

  Oh, that's so gracious of you to concede that!
  But you are happy to have them killed anyway, "just in case"? And then wonder why that suitcase nuke goes off rather closer to home?

  it would not surprise me

  From one whose level of knowledge was shown by his bold assertion, despite warning shots, that "the vast majority of Muslims are Arabs", I don't think any of the more discerning readers will give a rat's ass about what may or may not surprise you.

  a lot of people who live there - especially those involved with the enemy government and other terror-sponsoring interests - think quite a bit like you do.

  LOL! Your impotent anger is noted. When your sheer idiocy and ignorance is exposed to all, Mr "the vast majority of Muslims are Arabs", you continue to bluff, bluster and slander. Fools like you, permitted a platform, breed terrorists.

  As far as objectivity, I never claimed it. Everything I post here is my own opinion.

  Attention! Opinions can be objective.

  I'm every bit as objective in my views as you are.

  Fool. Your views are bred from, and in, ignorance, Mr "the vast majority of Muslims are Arabs". It is therefore not possible for you to be objective. Mine, in this area, are the result of a careful and considered study of history.

  maturity? Well, I don't claim a lot of that, either, but I'll leave it to those who know me to decide.

  The readers already have, fool. Haven't you read this thread? LOL!

  you are a [..] moron

  Those who view me as being a moron reveal far more about themselves than they do about me.

  why does a word commonly used by Farkel pop into my mind at this point?

  I would not dream of speculating about what dangerous fantasies pop into your head. Perhaps you should ask Farkel to comment on this thread, and he may be able to answer your question.

  I wasn't aware that (anti-Semitic, Neo-Nazi, Holocaust-denying material written by 'good white folk' in the U.S./Canada) was being used as propaganda in the Arab world, but it makes a lot of sense that it would be. If so, it's a shame

  1. Another massive bit of ignorance on your part. Propaganda plays a major part in almost all conflicts, and it is obvious that this type of propaganda is exactly the sort which serves anti-American hate "needs" in lands that are close to Israel.

  2. "it's a shame" is the best you can do? Why don't you want to round up the authors of such hateful material close to home, rather than picking on defenseless ones from abroad? If I simply had to choose between one or other course of action, I would choose the first.

  It is vocal ignoramuses such as yourself, Mr "the vast majority of Muslims are Arabs", who are God's gifts to terrorist recruiters. They too preach "My Nation, Right or Wrong". And you smear those who expose your nonsense for what it is as being sympathetic to, or sharing the views of, terrorists. Your ad hominem shows you are truly confused.

  In the spirit of your bluster, I could suggest that you should consider being on Osama's payroll - at least that way you get paid for what your 'world view' may ultimately accomplish. But I will not.

  --
  Focus
  (Suffering ungladly Class)

  Edited by - Focus on 26 December 2002 13:12:13
• 

  donkey

  Tim McVeigh was white - detain all whites

  The snipers were black - detain all blacks

  The killers on 9/11 were Islamic - detain all Muslims

  Tim McVeigh was a Christian - detain all Christians

  Damn it's nice to be a green Donkey!!! I have the whole USA to myself now ....yipeeee
• 

  NeonMadman

  I just noticed now for the first time that Focus had responded to my last posting on this thread, and I'm not going to continue the discussion any further. Clearly, he is just going to become more angry and abusive as the discussion continues. I've noticed the same syndrome among Jehovah's Witnesses when their teachings are questioned; in their hearts they know that they are wrong, and the cognitive dissonance manifests itself in the form of anger and name-calling.

  Like the JW's, Focus is a master of propaganda. He hammers on irrelevant points that bolster his position, he ignores substantive arguments that refute his position, he quotes out of context, he deceptively imputes to his opponent ideas and attitudes that have not been expressed, and he then breaks his arm patting himself on the back, congratulating himself publicly for his "victory". All of which doesn't make him right, it only makes him loud.

  One point I would make to Mr. "Get-Your-Facts-Straight," however: I'm no spring chicken. Contrary to your assertion that I'm "too young to remember Kent State," I was old enough at the time it happened to be enrolled at Kent State, had that been my chosen course. I have stated my age (50) and even posted my picture, numerous times on this forum. I'll close with Focus' own words:

  I am talking about getting things at least approximately right, rather than drawing conclusions from idiotically incorrect "facts".

  Edited by - NeonMadman on 27 December 2002 9:55:14
• 

  Focus

  NeonMadman wrote:
  

  I'm not going to continue the discussion any further.

  But, you just did!

  Clearly

  LOL!

  he is just going to become more angry

  I promise you, with my hand duly placed on the ass, that nothing that you have written has angered me, and that I have never responded when angry or in anger. Anger clouds judgment and seldom assists in the search for truth.

  {Snipped Neon's anger, suggesting as it did that I am suffering from cognitive dissonance just like a JW in denial: all this at my exposure of his egregious errors of fact and logic}

  Focus is a master of propaganda

  That may, or may not, be true.
  If true, this gift was not being demonstrated here.

  he ignores substantive arguments that refute his position

  The "substantive argument" being that it is OK, even desirable, to seriously and unjustly "piss off" (Six's words) hordes of people, make friends or neutrals into bitter enemies, but thereby miraculously reduce the risk of inciting more people into terrorist acts of hatred or perceived revenge...

  Such arguments require no rebuttal. They self-rebut.

  he quotes out of context, he deceptively imputes to his opponent ideas and attitudes that have not been expressed

  How could I? Your words are right there, next to mine, for anyone interested to check.

  I'm no spring chicken. Contrary to your assertion that I'm "too young to remember Kent State," I was old enough at the time it happened to be enrolled at Kent State, had that been my chosen course.

  Well, bully for you! Actually, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, being willing to attribute your demonstrated ignorance and excessive and dangerous jingoism to the follies of youth. Alas, responsibility for these sins must be laid instead at the door of the follies of age.

  I concede that you have done a good job of presenting the "argument" for the other side. Alas, there is no possible good argument there. Acting with circumspection is called for.

  The U.S. can stand for so many fine and wonderful things. Its present residents in large number have done much, accomplished great things, shown mercy and compassion, individually demonstrated great charity to neighbors and to foreigners. Inflammatory words and precipitate action, either manifestly unjust or seen to be unjust by those who believe they are targeted, serves to erase the good parts of U.S. heritage and culture and aids, makes the country the butt of ridicule and contempt abroad, and assists enemy terrorist recruiters.

  Neon, why don't you listen to the donkey!

  btw: the one who kicked Old Farmer Green on Thanksgiving - right in his particules - was a donkey - detain all donkeys.

  --
  Focus
  (Undetained feline Class)
• 

  NeonMadman

  I concede that you have done a good job of presenting the "argument" for the other side. Alas, there is no possible good argument there.

  Thank you, at least, for that concession.

  As to the second part, with all due respect, I disagree.

  Tom (of the "Treat me with respect and I'll reciprocate" class)