|
Post by nymos on Jan 23, 2006 11:40:32 GMT -5
I've got to say this Dukey fella is one vile and nefarious character. The guy either simply has no dignity, or just deeply, pathologically deluded. He goes around spreading lies and misinformation, and when shown where he is wrong he either shifts ground or, when all hope is lost for him, he turns around and shamelessly and falsely accuses his opponent, oftentimes exactly of the things he himself is guilty of. It's truly some kind of a mental disorder - really interesting to observe. Of course, when asked to back up his accusations, he does not and cannot, because they are false.
|
|
|
Post by dukeofpain on Jan 23, 2006 18:28:28 GMT -5
I've got to say this Dukey fella is one vile and nefarious character. The guy either simply has no dignity, or just deeply, pathologically deluded. He goes around spreading lies and misinformation, and when shown where he is wrong he either shifts ground or, when all hope is lost for him, he turns around and shamelessly and falsely accuses his opponent, oftentimes exactly of the things he himself is guilty of. It's truly some kind of a mental disorder - really interesting to observe. Of course, when asked to back up his accusations, he does not and cannot, because they are false. If a zionist didn't have this opinion about me, I'd be worried. So have you shot any Arabs today? Might loosen you up.
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Jan 23, 2006 19:41:44 GMT -5
I've got to say this Dukey fella is one vile and nefarious character. The guy either simply has no dignity, or just deeply, pathologically deluded. He goes around spreading lies and misinformation, and when shown where he is wrong he either shifts ground or, when all hope is lost for him, he turns around and shamelessly and falsely accuses his opponent, oftentimes exactly of the things he himself is guilty of. It's truly some kind of a mental disorder - really interesting to observe. Of course, when asked to back up his accusations, he does not and cannot, because they are false. If a zionist didn't have this opinion about me, I'd be worried. So have you shot any Arabs today? Might loosen you up. Duke is unaware that Arabs have more rights in Israel than in any Arab nation. No... wait...., actually, he is aware because it was pointed out to him in another thread and he didn't bother to provide evidence to the contrary.
|
|
|
Post by nymos on Jan 23, 2006 22:31:03 GMT -5
I've got to say this Dukey fella is one vile and nefarious character. The guy either simply has no dignity, or just deeply, pathologically deluded. He goes around spreading lies and misinformation, and when shown where he is wrong he either shifts ground or, when all hope is lost for him, he turns around and shamelessly and falsely accuses his opponent, oftentimes exactly of the things he himself is guilty of. It's truly some kind of a mental disorder - really interesting to observe. Of course, when asked to back up his accusations, he does not and cannot, because they are false. If a zionist didn't have this opinion about me, I'd be worried. If any reasonable human being didn't have this opinion about you, I'd be worried. If by zionist you mean one who supports Israel's right to exist, then I'm a zionist. However, I don't think that's how you define it. What does this moron mean by this? Am I supposed to be antagonistic to Arabs now? I'm sorry, but you have the monopoly on bigotry on this board. Don't presume I have the same hateful mindset as you do. This is a prime example of falsely accusing others of the very things he himself is guilty of. I'm sure it's cozy in that upside-down, bizarro-world cocoon of yours. You can stay there where if it makes you feel safe. Leave reality to the rest of us.
|
|
|
Post by dukeofpain on Jan 23, 2006 22:47:18 GMT -5
If a zionist didn't have this opinion about me, I'd be worried. So have you shot any Arabs today? Might loosen you up. Duke is unaware that Arabs have more rights in Israel than in any Arab nation. No... wait...., actually, he is aware because it was pointed out to him in another thread and he didn't bother to provide evidence to the contrary. Did you get that one from your Chomsky book that you were imploring me too "enlighten" myself with, so as to understand Israeli policy making? [!] The things you say and the obstinacy with which you say them with, is something to marvel over. Though, not they're terribly unique, or worthy of blame, just a Victim of the neo-zio liberalist judeo-Christian new world order. A culture of filth and insanity that you oh so pride yourself with defending, with lies and slander. But anyways, you oughta get to it, or else you'll miss the Arab pro-Israel rally.
|
|
|
Post by dukeofpain on Jan 23, 2006 22:58:45 GMT -5
If a zionist didn't have this opinion about me, I'd be worried. If any reasonable human being didn't have this opinion about you, I'd be worried. If by zionist you mean one who supports Israel's right to exist, then I'm a zionist. However, I don't think that's how you define it. What does this moron mean by this? Am I supposed to be antagonistic to Arabs now? I'm sorry, but you have the monopoly on bigotry on this board. Don't presume I have the same hateful mindset as you do. This is a prime example of falsely accusing others of the very things he himself is guilty of. I'm sure it's cozy in that upside-down, bizarro-world cocoon of yours. You can stay there where if it makes you feel safe. Leave reality to the rest of us. "upside-down, bizarro-world cocoon" I could see it coming from the prespective of a zionist or a resentful american noahide like "anodyne". However, the majority of the worlds population is hostile to the same things I disdain. Therefore, it is you that is in the bizarro bubble.
|
|
|
Post by nymos on Jan 23, 2006 23:15:59 GMT -5
If any reasonable human being didn't have this opinion about you, I'd be worried. If by zionist you mean one who supports Israel's right to exist, then I'm a zionist. However, I don't think that's how you define it. What does this moron mean by this? Am I supposed to be antagonistic to Arabs now? I'm sorry, but you have the monopoly on bigotry on this board. Don't presume I have the same hateful mindset as you do. This is a prime example of falsely accusing others of the very things he himself is guilty of. I'm sure it's cozy in that upside-down, bizarro-world cocoon of yours. You can stay there where if it makes you feel safe. Leave reality to the rest of us. "upside-down, bizarro-world cocoon" I could see it coming from the prespective of a zionist or a resentful american noahide like "anodyne". However, the majority of the worlds population is hostile to the same things I disdain. Therefore, it is you that is in the bizarro bubble. Is that the same kind of "majority" the nazi party had in Reichstag? lmao! Keep living inside your cocoon, Nazi prick.
|
|
|
Post by dukeofpain on Jan 24, 2006 0:00:41 GMT -5
"upside-down, bizarro-world cocoon" I could see it coming from the prespective of a zionist or a resentful american noahide like "anodyne". However, the majority of the worlds population is hostile to the same things I disdain. Therefore, it is you that is in the bizarro bubble. Is that the same kind of "majority" the nazi party had in Reichstag? lmao! Keep living inside your cocoon, Nazi prick. I never said they had the majority, they had the near majority. I said they were far and away the largest party in parliament, and that Hitler as Chancellor elect was completely by the book in the Democratic republic of Germany. In fact he was discriminated against by the current govt, and was only appointed becuase they had no real choice. Since obviously the people weren't going to support the likes of Von Papen in office. This of course is called a "coup", by your fearless all-knowing leader. But yes. The majority of the world despises the Nefarious and vile American-zionist axis.
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Jan 24, 2006 0:33:36 GMT -5
LOL, Chomsky isn't supportive of Israel. Man, you are just not in tune to anything at all. He's very hard on Israels' past policies on Israel.
errr.... you're unique? The centuries old conflict between liberalism/rationality/objectivity (I would love to hear your definition of liberalism... i'm sure it'll be interesting and wrong) and statism/irrationality/subjectivity is, like I said, centuries old. You've chosen your side and I've chosen mine. Our arguments are just intellectually water down version of that struggle. But nothing either of us says is new.
The underlining principles to your philosophy doesn't lead to liberty. You show no respect for indivdiual rights, you respect force over reason, consider actions and morality relative, etc. Humanity is safer in my camp than yours. The only thing your camp brings is misery and destruction. You complain about leftists and yet you are one.
What culture do you speak about, exactly? you don't even know. You just throw some words together and added "new world order" to it and BAM! it's suppose to me something. How about explaining what you mean, or do you fear that you'll be embarrassed? I think I know what road you want to go down in your argument but I want you to be clear. We'll have an interesting debate.
lol, that the majority of Arabs dislike Israel doesn't negate that Arabs have more rights in Israel than in any Arab nation. See how you evade questions? You do it often. Many black Americans think they get screwed by whites in America... is it true? obviously not but many feel they do. Yet, you'll see statements and actions by groups representing blacks that that is the case. And just like in America there is ethnic tension in Israel, but that doesn't seem to change the fact that blacks get treated fairly, in general, in America and the same goes with Arabs in Israel.
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Jan 24, 2006 0:46:46 GMT -5
errr.... this not what you've been saying way back in "stalin's willing Executioner's" thread. You said Hitler was democratically elected by the German people. That the majority wanted him. That was incorrect. Hence your new argument.
I'm no one's leader and no one's follower. Hitler became Chancellor by underhanded methods. The difference betwen an armed coup and a coup through manipulation is that one is out in the open and the other is not.
The issue is more complicated than what you make it. Power struggles are at play on the international scene as there always has been throughout history. If you wish to discuss it we can.. or perhaps its best to create a new thread.
|
|
|
Post by nymos on Jan 24, 2006 1:02:27 GMT -5
Is that the same kind of "majority" the nazi party had in Reichstag? lmao! Keep living inside your cocoon, Nazi prick. I never said they had the majority, they had the near majority. I said they were far and away the largest party in parliament, and that Hitler as Chancellor elect was completely by the book in the Democratic republic of Germany. In fact he was discriminated against by the current govt, and was only appointed becuase they had no real choice. Since obviously the people weren't going to support the likes of Von Papen in office. This of course is called a "coup", by your fearless all-knowing leader. But yes. The majority of the world despises the Nefarious and vile American-zionist axis. lmao! The majority of the world doesn't have the bogus notion of "American-zionist axis", let alone despise it. But it's funny how you took the "bizarro-world cocoon" metaphor and misinterpreted it as something having to do with who disdains whom. I don't know where you pulled that from, but it's telling. Apparently, all you know is contempt and disdain. Vile and nefarious were dead on. Keep quoting and italicizing it; I know it was a zinger.
|
|
|
Post by dukeofpain on Jan 24, 2006 1:34:17 GMT -5
What an Ironic statement.
The fact that an American professor has absolutely no influence in Israeli policy making, was what I was alluding to, since you told me to check out a book by him: the scholarly "scholar", so as to support your claim that there is much dissent within the Israeli policy- making ranks.
Of course it's stupid, he's an anti-Zionist American, not even an Israeli citizen much less bureaucrat. But hey, I never said it.
|
|
|
Post by dukeofpain on Jan 24, 2006 1:52:59 GMT -5
Weimar = Democratic republic
German people = Voted in favor of the Coalition Hitler presided over
Chancellor Hitler = Democraticaly elected
Anybody, if interested, could look into it and find out for themselves that it was fully legal. There's little use arguing with you or anybody that has such utter contempt for the trruth. Your own words are enough.
|
|
|
Post by anodyne on Jan 24, 2006 17:31:50 GMT -5
What an Ironic statement. The fact that an American professor has absolutely no influence in Israeli policy making, was what I was alluding to, since you told me to check out a book by him: the scholarly "scholar", so as to support your claim that there is much dissent within the Israeli policy- making ranks. Of course it's stupid, he's an anti-Zionist American, not even an Israeli citizen much less bureaucrat. But hey, I never said it. Dude, you're an idiot. I have to say it. Israeli politics is not as simple as your simple mind likes to perceive it, which I get into at the end of the next paragraph. The question back then was whether people of Jewish, and in particular Israeli, origin speak out against Israeli policies and the fact is that many do so. Those who do so in Israel do so without repercussions, which can't be said about many nations. Chomsky doesn't live in Israel but he's a Jew and very influential in universities. Although I think he's a joke the fact is he carries a lot of weight with many people. So, contrary to what you try to push, Jews, in Israel and outside of Israel, aren't a people with one political identity and many speak freely of the Israeli policies towards Arabs that they feel is incorrect. Nor do you seem aware of current Israeli policies. It's odd.. if they give up land it's because they're ethnocentric and don't want Arabs inside of Israel but if they don't give up land then they're showing an injustice to Arabs. It's a catch 22. Either way, whether an Israeli in a government position is a "war hawk" or a "concessionist" they are lumped together by your folks. You're probably unaware that people of Arab ethnicity can be found in the Isreali Parliament and that was pointed out to you before but you tend to be forgetful. Yes, Arabs involved in Isreali politics... take a deep breathe.. i know it's shocking. err... Titles are easily used and not always true. Anyone would be hard pressed to call Hitler's Germany a Democratc Republic and I'll explain why. Definition of Democratic: relating to, appealing to, or available to the broad masses of the people. Definition of Republic: a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law. Allowing president Hindernburg to pick and choose who should lead the Reichstag is an action that has no validty from the people since their representatives have no say. This is not uncommon. The elite don't particuarly trust democracy and therefore nullify it by placing whoever they wish in power. It's their safeguard. So although it's people are allowed to vote people into the Reichstag they have no choice to accept whomever the president decides. Is it a sign of a democratic instutition? no, since one man (and his following) can checkmate members that are actually elected by the citizens. What's in a name? examples of supposedly democratic republics of the past and today. Communist East Germany called itself the German Democratic Republic and it obviously wasn't one. North Korea and the Congo also call themselves a democratic republic. Terms like democracy can be very confusing for people such as yourself. It's a common belief in the US that its government is a democracy. It isn't. It's a federal Republic. Didn't you get confused about that once and I had to set you straight? yeah, it was in the same thread where you learned that the best way you can argue when your back is against the wall is by mentoning me posting Chomsky. Rather comical considering its your attempt to not provide evidence that Arab nations gives its citizens more rights than Israel does to its Arab citizens because you simply can't or you would have done so long ago. You're evading again, Duke. Actually, I should stop stating that you evade considering evasion means you "cleverly avoided" a fact and clearly you're not clever. So I need to call your BS something else... ah, there we go... BS is just fine. He didn't have a majority. One of the key points of democracy is majority rule. If he had enough seats with the coalition then we wouldn't be having this conversation. definition of democracy: government by the people; especially : rule of the majority You just can't get around that. It's important to know what terms mean. Once again, comical considering you go on about how Zionists rule behind the scenes in the US government against the people's will but yet when it comes to Hitler it's too far fetched to believe that he played the manipulation game. The acts of Hitler (his threats), Von Papen, and Hindenburg's son are well known. Well, to all but you. I mean... aren't you the guy who said Von Papen was Hindenburg's son? I'm not too sure. My memory is fuzzy of late since I've had a huge work load. Answer my questions or don't post. In this thread I've asked a few questions that you refuse to answer. Leave your bitching and Chomsky at the door. Although, I did get a good laugh when you brought up Chomsky for the reason I gave above and because it's odd that you would think I would use Chomsky to prove that Arabs have more rights in Israel when it's safe to say he'd disagree. I don't know why I'd have to refer back to someone who I takes a different position than me.... maybe you can explain it after you answer my questions.
|
|
|
Post by dukeofpain on Jan 24, 2006 17:38:49 GMT -5
What an Ironic statement. The fact that an American professor has absolutely no influence in Israeli policy making, was what I was alluding to, since you told me to check out a book by him: the scholarly "scholar", so as to support your claim that there is much dissent within the Israeli policy- making ranks. Of course it's stupid, he's an anti-Zionist American, not even an Israeli citizen much less bureaucrat. But hey, I never said it. Dude, you're an idiot. I have to say it. Israeli politics is not as simple as your simple mind likes to perceive it, which I get into at the end of the next paragraph. The question back then was whether people of Jewish, and in particular Israeli, origin speak out against Israeli policies and the fact is that many do so. Those who do so in Israel do so without repercussions, which can't be said about many nations. Chomsky doesn't live in Israel but he's a Jew and very influential in universities. Although I think he's a joke the fact is he carries a lot of weight with many people. So, contrary to what you try to push, Jews, in Israel and outside of Israel, aren't a people with one political identity and many speak freely of the Israeli policies towards Arabs that they feel is incorrect. Nor do you seem aware of current Israeli policies. It's odd.. if they give up land it's because they're ethnocentric and don't want Arabs inside of Israel but if they don't give up land then they're showing an injustice to Arabs. It's a catch 22. Either way, whether an Israeli in a government position is a "war hawk" or a "concessionist" they are lumped together by your folks. You're probably unaware that people of Arab ethnicity can be found in the Isreali Parliament and that was pointed out to you before but you tend to be forgetful. Yes, Arabs involved in Isreali politics... take a deep breathe.. i know it's shocking. err... Titles are easily used and not always true. Anyone would be hard pressed to call Hitler's Germany a Democratc Republic and I'll explain why. Definition of Democratic: relating to, appealing to, or available to the broad masses of the people. Definition of Republic: a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law. Allowing president Hindernburg to pick and choose who should lead the Reichstag is an action that has no validty from the people since their representatives have no say. This is not uncommon. The elite don't particuarly trust democracy and therefore nullify it by placing whoever they wish in power. It's their safeguard. So although it's people are allowed to vote people into the Reichstag they have no choice to accept whomever the president decides. Is it a sign of a democratic instutition? no, since one man (and his following) can checkmate members that are actually elected by the citizens. What's in a name? examples of supposedly democratic republics of the past and today. Communist East Germany called itself the German Democratic Republic and it obviously wasn't one. North Korea and the Congo also call themselves a democratic republic. Terms like democracy can be very confusing for people such as yourself. It's a common belief in the US that its government is a democracy. It isn't. It's a federal Republic. Didn't you get confused about that once and I had to set you straight? yeah, it was in the same thread where you learned that the best way you can argue when your back is against the wall is by mentoning me posting Chomsky. Rather comical considering its your attempt to not provide evidence that Arab nations gives its citizens more rights than Israel does to its Arab citizens because you simply can't or you would have done so long ago. You're evading again, Duke. Actually, I should stop stating that you evade considering evasion means you "cleverly avoided" a fact and clearly you're not clever. So I need to call your BS something else... ah, there we go... BS is just fine. He didn't have a majority. One of the key points of democracy is majority rule. If he had enough seats with the coalition then we wouldn't be having this conversation. definition of democracy: government by the people; especially : rule of the majority You just can't get around that. It's important to know what terms mean. Once again, comical considering you go on about how Zionists rule behind the scenes in the US government against the people's will but yet when it comes to Hitler it's too far fetched to believe that he played the manipulation game. The acts of Hitler (his threats), Von Papen, and Hindenburg's son are well known. Well, to all but you. I mean... aren't you the guy who said Von Papen was Hindenburg's son? I'm not too sure. My memory is fuzzy of late since I've had a huge work load. Answer my questions or don't post. In this thread I've asked a few questions that you refuse to answer. Leave your bitching and Chomsky at the door. Although, I did get a good laugh when you brought up Chomsky for the reason I gave above and because it's odd that you would think I would use Chomsky to prove that Arabs have more rights in Israel when it's safe to say he'd disagree. I don't know why I'd have to refer back to someone who I takes a different position than me.... maybe you can explain it after you answer my questions. You're great.
|
|