Comments by windweaver
1. Obama Wants to Expand Role of Religious Groups
Comment #203534 by windweaver on July 3, 2008 at 5:21 am
Obama is turning out to be a major disappointment for many of those with a progressive political perspective. Here's what John Pilger had to say about the man in a recent op-ed:
In The Great Tradition, Obama Is A Hawk by John Pilger
In 1941, the editor Edward Dowling wrote: "The two greatest obstacles to democracy in the United States are, first, the widespread delusion among the poor that we have a democracy, and second, the chronic terror among the rich, lest we get it." What has changed? The terror of the rich is greater than ever, and the poor have passed on their delusion to those who believe that when George W Bush finally steps down next January, his numerous threats to the rest of humanity will diminish.
The foregone nomination of Barack Obama, which, according to one breathless commentator, "marks a truly exciting and historic moment in US history", is a product of the new delusion. Actually, it just seems new. Truly exciting and historic moments have been fabricated around US presidential campaigns for as long as I can recall, generating what can only be described as bullshit on a grand scale. Race, gender, appearance, body language, rictal spouses and offspring, even bursts of tragic grandeur, are all subsumed by marketing and "image-making", now magnified by "virtual" technology. Thanks to an undemocratic electoral college system (or, in Bush's case, tampered voting machines) only those who both control and obey the system can win. This has been the case since the truly historic and exciting victory of Harry Truman, the liberal Democrat said to be a humble man of the people, who went on to show how tough he was by obliterating two cities with the atomic bomb.
Understanding Obama as a likely president of the United States is not possible without understanding the demands of an essentially unchanged system of power: in effect a great media game. For example, since I compared Obama with Robert Kennedy in these pages, he has made two important statements, the implications of which have not been allowed to intrude on the celebrations. The first was at the conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac), the Zionist lobby, which, as Ian Williams has pointed out, "will get you accused of anti-Semitism if you quote its own website about its power". Obama had already offered his genuflection, but on 4 June went further. He promised to support an "undivided Jerusalem" as Israel's capital. Not a single government on earth supports the Israeli annexation of all of Jerusalem, including the Bush regime, which recognises the UN resolution designating Jerusalem an international city.
His second statement, largely ignored, was made in Miami on 23 May. Speaking to the expatriate Cuban community - which over the years has faithfully produced terrorists, assassins and drug runners for US administrations - Obama promised to continue a 47-year crippling embargo on Cuba that has been declared illegal by the UN year after year.
Again, Obama went further than Bush. He said the United States had "lost Latin America". He described the democratically elected governments in Venezuela, Bolivia and Nicaragua as a "vacuum" to be filled. He raised the nonsense of Iranian influence in Latin America, and he endorsed Colombia's "right to strike terrorists who seek safe-havens across its borders". Translated, this means the "right" of a regime, whose president and leading politicians are linked to death squads, to invade its neighbours on behalf of Washington. He also endorsed the so-called Merida Initiative, which Amnesty International and others have condemned as the US bringing the "Colombian solution" to Mexico. He did not stop there. "We must press further south as well," he said. Not even Bush has said that.
It is time the wishful-thinkers grew up politically and debated the world of great power as it is, not as they hope it will be. Like all serious presidential candidates, past and present, Obama is a hawk and an expansionist. He comes from an unbroken Democratic tradition, as the war-making of presidents Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter and Clinton demonstrates. Obama's difference may be that he feels an even greater need to show how tough he is. However much the colour of his skin draws out both racists and supporters, it is otherwise irrelevant to the great power game. The "truly exciting and historic moment in US history" will only occur when the game itself is challenged.
2. Hints of structure beyond the visible universe
Comment #191901 by windweaver on June 12, 2008 at 4:41 am
great teapot,
I highly recommend the 2005 NOVA documentary Einstein's Big Idea. You can buy the DVD online.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/einstein/about.html
3. John McCain: America a Christian nation, needs Christian president
Comment #190431 by windweaver on June 9, 2008 at 5:01 am
NAFTA has resulted in trillions of dollars of trade between Canada and the United States, in addition to creating a significant number of jobs and contributed to economic prosperity in both countries. This is just one FTA that Obama wants to get rid of.
Anyone who thinks that NAFTA has been good for the ordinary working people of the US and Canada is either seriously deluded or is a raging right-wing Republican:
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199303--.htm
4. Teenager faces prosecution for calling Scientology 'cult'
Comment #182737 by windweaver on May 20, 2008 at 11:15 pm
If you haven't seen this South Park clip on Scientology, it's well worth checking out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRe0e-Vr0-U
The behaviour of the British police in the article above doesn't surprise me. Huge numbers of them are freemasons and closet fascists. I have a German friend who lived in England for many years and she couldn't believe how poorly educated (read: THICK) many of them are compared to German police officers.
5. My Response to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach
Comment #178290 by windweaver on May 11, 2008 at 5:11 am
I'm sad to report that there are a few people here who are first and foremost anti-Israeli and will leap on every opportunity to go on an "Israel is evil" tirade
SilentMike, assuming your comment is directed at me and "hostile" others, I hate to disappoint you but, unlike many people who criticise Israel, I've been to your country and had many pleasant experiences while there. I conversed with many Israelis,particularly in the peace movement, and found them to be very knowledgeable about world politics and keen to hear what a Western "gentile" thought about their country. I have absolutely nothing against the Israeli people. I do not indulge in "Israel is evil" tirades and never have done. My criticisms are directed specifically at the policies of the state of Israel. If Israel stopped oppressing the Palestinians tomorrow, you'd never hear me comment on the country again. I made a comment about Israel on this thread because Boteach accused British Academia of being the epicentre of anti-jewish and anti-Israeli attitudes.
though there is racism here (which I find to be reprehensible) it is no where near the level that is alluded to by the quotes.
The quotes highlght racist attitudes among leading Israeli statesmen/women, not the general population. Having said that, surveys reveal a strong upsurge in racist attitudes among Israeli citizens in the last 5 years. This is particularly the case among Russian immigrants(aproximately 20% of the population), who overwhelmingly support Avigdor Lieberman of Yisrael Beitenu. Lieberman and his party openly call for the mass expulsion of the arabs from both Israel and the occupied territories.
I would not in my wildest nightmares ever vote for Netanyahu, but I can assure you that if elected, he has no intention of executing a mass expulsion plan of Palestinian civilians.
I agree with you that Netanyahu would never execute this policy but that is because of pragmatic concerns such as the effect on Israel of international outrage and possible sanctions. The point is that he has clearly expressed what he would like to do if he could get away with it. He still deserves the strongest possible condemnation for expressing his arab-expulsion fantasies to impressionable students in a university environment.
The quotes are a disgrace. They are cherry picked to try and present a reality that is very different than the public persona (in Israel itself)
That is a value judgment on your part. Most people, including many Israelis, would be horrified to read these quotations because they contradict the democratic and liberal values which the State of Israel claims to represent. They stand as a testiment to institutionalised racist attitudes which are at the very heart of Israeli government policy and actions over the past 60 years of Israel's existence.
6. Anti-Evolution Film Misappropriates the Holocaust
Comment #178263 by windweaver on May 11, 2008 at 3:52 am
He managed to bitch and moan (whine) about the US in Somalia. Trying to feed starving Africans even receives condemnation from this man.
Al, I'd be interested to hear your opinion on this article:
http://zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/12448
7. My Response to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach
Comment #177992 by windweaver on May 10, 2008 at 7:17 am
MaxD wrote
Windweaver,
Do you think it is appropriate to use a mass of quotes that seem to have been uttered more than twenty years ago? Only about 22% of the quotes you have are likely to have been made in the last twenty years. I see Ehud Barack makes several appearences, as does Sharon, and Olmert. Were these made in the same setting? The same day?
Why are you not concerned with the equally heinous things uttered on the Palestinian side. Is it right to deny someone a Ph. D. position simply because they were in Israeli Defense Force? Seems like a bit of a leap from this post alone.
I'm not saying you are wrong necessarily, I am noting that you are making a lot of assumptions, and that a list of mined quotes isn't an argument.
MaxD, I was responding to comments made by Boteach regarding British Academia's boycott of Israeli academics and his accusation that it has become the epi-centre of anti-Israeli/anti-semitic attitudes. Palestinians have nothing to do with this issue. Yes, of course I could find equally heinous things uttered by Palestinians. But this does not absolve the State of Israel of its racist and apartheid behaviour. I am not equally concerned about Palestinian attitudes to Israel because they are not an occupying power with responsibility for the welfare of millions of jews.
Whether the quotes I posted are 60 years old or 6 days old is irrelevant. There is a general pattern of racist behaviour by leading Israelis which continues up to the present day. Take Binyamin Netanyahu, for example. Polls suggest that he is highly likely to become the next Israeli Prime Minister. Here's a quote from my list:
"Israel should have exploited the repression of the demonstrations in China, when world attention focused on that country, to carry out mass expulsions among the Arabs of the territories."
Benyamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel then Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister, speaking to students at Bar Ilan University, from the Israeli journal Hotam, 1989-11-24.
So the future Prime Minister of Israel supports the mass expulsion of Palestinians (and wants his country to go about this process in a despicable and underhanded way, ie while the attention of the world is diverted) from the occupied territories, a region that Israel occupies illegally in contravention of UN resolutions. This is sickeningly racist behaviour and should be condemned by all decent people.
Regarding Professor Andrew Wilkie's rejection of a prospective PHD candidate because of service in the IDF, here's what he actually wrote:
"Thank you for contacting me, but I don't think this would work. I have a huge problem with the way that the Israelis take the moral high ground from their appalling treatment in the Holocaust, and then inflict gross human rights abuses on the Palestinians because they (the Palestinians) wish to live in their own country. I am sure that you are perfectly nice at a personal level, but no way would I take on somebody who had served in the Israeli army. As you may be aware, I am not the only UK scientist with these views but I'm sure you will find another suitable lab if you look around."
There is sustantial evidence that the IDF is guilty of war crimes stretching over many years (there are well researched reports by Amnesty International and the UN dealing with this) so I wouldn't personally condemn the professor for his actions(I certainly don't think he was being anti-semitic if that's what you're getting at). I note that he was disciplined by Oxford University for refusing to accept the Israeli.
Whether you think I'm quote mining or not is irrelevant. The fact is that the above comments were said by leading Israelis and all can be independently verified. I never intended the list to be an argument. Rather it was presented as evidence for my contention that Israel is a racist and apartheid state.
8. My Response to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach
Comment #177491 by windweaver on May 9, 2008 at 7:18 am
Shmuley Boteach wrote:
Surely, you are aware that British academia has become a world epicenter of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic sentiment. You are familiar, I am sure, with the shameful story of your colleague, Oxford Pathology Professor Andrew Wilkie, refusing to accept an Israeli doctoral applicant because he served in the Israeli army, or the shocking and disgraceful decision by the British Academics Union to bar fellow Israeli academics from academic conferences in the UK.
British Academia are fully justified in seeking to boycott Israeli academics. Israel is a demonstrably racist and apartheid state, as the following comments by leading Israeli statesmen/women attest:
"Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves … politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves… The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country. … Behind the terrorism [by the Arabs] is a movement, which though primitive is not devoid of idealism and self sacrifice."
~ David Ben Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel 1948-1963
"The Palestinians are like crocodiles, the more you give them meat, they want more."
Ehud Barak, Prime Minister Of Israel 1999-2001, 2000-08-28, Reported in the Jerusalem Post 2000-08-30.
"The Partition of Palestine is illegal. It will never be recognized… Jerusalem was and will for ever be our capital. Eretz Israel will be restored to the people of Israel. All of it. And for Ever."
~ Menachem Begin, Prime Minister of Israel 1977-1983, the day after the U.N. vote to partition Palestine.
"This country exists as the fulfillment of a promise made by God Himself. It would be ridiculous to ask it to account for its legitimacy."
~ Golda Meir, Prime Minister of Israel 1969-1974, Le Monde, 1971-10-15
"If I was an Arab leader I would never make [peace] with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country."
~ David Ben Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel 1948-1963, quoted in The Jewish Paradox, by Nahum Goldmann, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1978, p. 99.
"I would have joined a terrorist organization."
~ Ehud Barak, Prime Minister Of Israel 1999-2001, in response to Gideon Levy, a columnist for the Ha'aretz newspaper, when Barak was asked what he would have done if he had been born a Palestinian.
"We should prepare to go over to the offensive. Our aim is to smash Lebanon, Trans-Jordan, and Syria. The weak point is Lebanon, for the Moslem regime is artificial and easy for us to undermine. We shall establish a Christian state there, and then we will smash the Arab Legion, eliminate Trans-Jordan; Syria will fall to us. We then bomb and move on and take Port Said, Alexandria and Sinai."
~ David Ben Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel 1948-1963, 1948-05, to the General Staff. From Ben-Gurion, A Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978.
"If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?"
~ David Ben Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel 1948-1963, 1948-06
"In strategic terms, the settlements (in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza) are of no importance."
~ Binyamin Begin, son of the late Menahem Begin and a prominent voice in the Likud party writing in 1991. (Quoted in Findley, Deliberate Deceptions; p 159) Paul Findley notes that Begin added that their importance was that "they constitute an obstacle, an insurmountable obstacle to the establishment of an independent Arab State west of the river Jordan."
"The establishment of such a school is a foul, disgraceful deed. You can't mix pure and foul. They are a disease, a disaster, a devil. The Arabs are asses, and the question must be asked, why did God did not create them walking on their fours? The answer is that they need to build and wash. They have no place in our school."
~ Rabbi David Bazri speaking about a proposed integrated school in Israel.
"[The Palestinians] are beasts walking on two legs."
~ Menachem Begin, Prime Minister of Israel 1977-1983, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, Begin and the Beasts New Statesman, 1982-06-25
"One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail."
~ Rabbi Ya'acov Perin in his eulogy at the funeral of mass murderer Dr. Baruch Goldstein (Cited in the New York Times, 1994-02-28)
"Israeli lives are worth more than Palestinian ones."
~ Ehud Olmert, acting Prime Minister of Israel 2006- 2006-06-23
"There is no such thing as a Palestinian people… It is not as if we came and threw them out and took their country. They didn't exist."
~ Golda Meir, Prime Minister of Israel 1969-1974, Statement to The Sunday Times, 1969-06-15
"How can we return the occupied territories? There is nobody to return them to."
~ Golda Meir Prime Minister of Israel 1969-1974, (quoted in Chapter 13 of The Zionist Connection II: What Price Peace by Alfred Lilienthal )
"We must expel Arabs and take their places."
~ David Ben Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel 1948-1963, 1937, Ben Gurion and the Palestine Arabs, Oxford University Press, 1985.
"Israel should have exploited the repression of the demonstrations in China, when world attention focused on that country, to carry out mass expulsions among the Arabs of the territories."
Benyamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel then Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister, speaking to students at Bar Ilan University, from the Israeli journal Hotam, 1989-11-24.
"It must be clear that there is no room for both peoples in this country. If the Arabs leave the country, it will be broad and wide-open for us. If the Arabs stay, the country will remain narrow and miserable. The only solution is Israel without Arabs. There is no room for compromise on this point. The Zionist enterprise so far… has been fine and good in its own time, and could do with 'land buying' �quot; but this will not bring about the State of Israel; that must come all at once, in the manner of a Salvation [this is the secret of the Messianic idea]; and there is no way besides transferring the Arabs from here to the neighboring countries, to transfer them all; except maybe for Bethlehem, Nazareth and Old Jerusalem, we must not leave a single village, not a single tribe. And only with such a transfer will the country be able to absorb millions of our brothers, and the Jewish question shall be solved, once and for all."
~ Joseph Weitz, Directory of the Jewish National Land Fund, 1940-12-19, The Question of Palestine by Edward Said.
"… we have no solution, that you shall continue to live like dogs, and whoever wants to can leave �quot; and we will see where this process leads? In five years we may have 200,000 less people �quot; and that is a matter of enormous importance."
~ Moshe Dayan Defense Minister of Israel 1967-1974, encouraging the transfer of Gaza strip refugees to Jordan (from Noam Chomsky's Deterring Democracy, 1992, p.434, quoted in Nur Masalha's A Land Without A People, 1997 p.92).
"It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonization or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands."
~ Yoram Bar Porath, Yediot Aahronot, 1972-08-14, responding to public controversy regarding the Israeli evictions of Palestinians in Rafah, Gaza, in 1972. (Cited in Nur Masalha's A land Without A People 1997, p98).
"We walked outside, Ben Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population?' Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said 'Drive them out!'"
~ Yitzhak Rabin, Prime Minister of Irael 1974-1977 and 1992-1995, leaked Rabin memoirs, published in the New York Times, 1979-10-23
"There are some who believe that the non-Jewish population, even in a high percentage, within our borders will be more effectively under our surveillance; and there are some who believe the contrary, i.e., that it is easier to carry out surveillance over the activities of a neighbor than over those of a tenant. [I] tend to support the latter view and have an additional argument:…the need to sustain the character of the state which will henceforth be Jewish…with a non-Jewish minority limited to 15 percent. I had already reached this fundamental position as early as 1940 [and] it is entered in my diary."
~ Joseph Weitz, head of the Jewish Agency's Colonization Department. From Israel: an Apartheid State by Uri Davis, p.5.
"We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our own country…. expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly."
~ Theodore Herzl The founder of Zionism, (from Rafael Patai, Ed. The Complete Diaries of Theodore Herzl, Vol I)
"In our country there is room only for the Jews. We shall say to the Arabs: Get out! If they don't agree, if they resist, we shall drive them out by force."
~ Professor Ben-Zion Dinur, Israel's First Minister of Education, 1954, from History of the Haganah
"The Arabs will have to go, but one needs an opportune moment for making it happen, such as a war."
~ David Ben Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel 1948-1963, writing to his son, 1937
"If we thought that instead of 200 Palestinian fatalities, 2,000 dead would put an end to the fighting at a stroke, we would use much more force…"
Ehud Barak, Prime Minister Of Israel 1999-2001, quoted in Associated Press, 2000-11-16.
"(The Palestinians) would be crushed like grasshoppers… heads smashed against the boulders and walls."
~ Yitzhak Shamir Prime Minister of Israel 1983-1982, in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times 1988-04-01
"We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population."
~ David Ben Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel 1948-1963, 1948-05, to the General Staff. From Ben-Gurion, A Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978.
"All those now living in South Lebanon are terrorists who are related in some way to Hizb'allah."
~ Haim Ramon, Israeli Justice Minister, explaining why it was OK for Israel to target children in Lebanon. Hans Frank was the Justice Minister in Hitler's cabinet.
"[Three quarters of a million young people who have served in the IDF] know that the task of the army is not only to defend the state in the battlefield against a foreign army, but to demolish the rights of innocent people just because they are Araboushim living in territories that God promised to us."
Yaram Peri, in Davar, 1982-12-10. academic specialist on Israeli affairs. Araboushim is Israeli slang that is roughly equivalent to niggers or kikes.
"I vow that if I was just an Israeli civilian and I met a Palestinian I would burn him and I would make him suffer before killing him."
~ Ariel Sharon, Prime Minister of Israel 2001-2006, magazine Ouze Merham in 1956.
"Even today I am willing to volunteer to do the dirty work for Israel, to kill as many Arabs as necessary, to deport them, to expel and burn them, to have everyone hate us, to pull the rug from underneath the feet of the Diaspora Jews, so that they will be forced to run to us crying. Even if it means blowing up one or two synagogues here and there, I don't care."
~ Ariel Sharon, Prime Minister of Israel 2001-2006, daily Davar, 1982-12-17.
"We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter of Eretz Israel…. Force is all they do or ever will understand. We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours … When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do will be to scurry around like drugged roaches in a bottle."
~ Rafael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defence Forces - Gad Becker, Yediot Ahronot, New York Times 1983-04-14
"The very point of Labor's Zionist program is to have as much land as possible and as few Arabs as possible!"
~ Yitzhak Navon ("moderate" ex-Israeli president and a leading labor party politician.) Cited on p.179 of Nur Masalha's A Land without a People who cites Bernard Avishai's The Tragedy of Zionism 1985 p.340.
"I don't sign orders to destroy the houses of Jews, only of Arabs,"
~ Haim Miller, deputy mayor of Jerusalem and acting mayor in Olmert's absence, quoted in Yediot Aharonot, 1998-02-07.
"We must do everything to ensure they [the Palestinian refugees] never do return "
~ David Ben Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel 1948-1963, in his diary, 1948-07-18, quoted in Michael Bar Zohar's Ben-Gurion: the Armed Prophet, Prentice-Hall, 1967, p. 157.
"Israel should keep the Araboushim [derogatory slang for Arabs] on a short leash, so that they recognise a whip is over their head. As long as not too many people are being visibly killed, then Western humanists will accept it all peacefully, and even ask 'What is so terrible?'."
~ Boaz Evron, Yediot Ahronot, 1982-12-02, Israeli writer and commentator.
"We can have peace, but if we continue to hold out, we can obtain more."
General Haim Bar-Lev, quoted on page 166 of Hegemony Or Survival, where more meant the Sinai.
"It's not a matter of maintaining the status quo. We have to create a dynamic state, oriented towards expansion."
~ David Ben Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel 1948-1963
"Take the American declaration of Independence. It contains no mention of territorial limits. We are not obliged to fix the limits of the State."
~ Moshe Dayan Defense Minister of Israel 1867-1974, (Jerusalem Post, 1967-08-10)
"Everybody has to move, run and grab as many hilltops as they can to enlarge the settlements because everything we take now will stay ours… Everything we don't grab will go to them."
~ Ariel Sharon, Prime Minister of Israel 2001-2006, Israeli Foreign Minister at the time, addressing a meeting of militants from the extreme right-wing Tsomet Party, Agence France Presse, 1998-11-15
"Without [the settlements] the IDF [Israeli Defense Force] would be a foreign army ruling a foreign population."
~ Moshe Dayan, Defense Minister of Israel 1867-1974, (quoted in Aronson, Geoffrey, Settlements and the Israeli- Palestinian Negotiations; Institute for Palestinian Studies)
"The past leaders of our movement left us a clear message to keep Eretz Israel from the Sea to the River Jordan for future generations, for the mass aliya [immigration], and for the Jewish people, all of whom will be gathered into this country."
~ Yitzhak Shamir Prime Minister of Israel 1983-1982, (Former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir declares at a Tel Aviv memorial service for former Likud leaders Jerusalem Domestic Radio Service, November 1990)
"The settlement of the Land of Israel is the essence of Zionism. Without settlement, we will not fulfill Zionism. It's that simple."
~ Yitzhak Shamir Prime Minister of Israel 1983-1982, (Maariv, 1997-02-21)
"Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population."
~ Moshe Dayan, Defense Minister of Israel 1867-1974, address to the Technion, Haifa, reported in Haaretz, April 4, 1969.
"Israel may have the right to put others on trial, but certainly no one has the right to put the Jewish people and the State of Israel on trial."
~ Ariel Sharon, Prime Minister of Israel 2001-2006, to a U.S. commission investigating violence in Israel. 2001-03-25 quoted in BBC News Online
"A lie should be tried in a place where it will attract the attention of the world."
~ Ariel Sharon, Prime Minister of Israel 2001-2006, 1984-11-20
"One of the chief tasks of any dialogue with the Gentile world is to prove that the distinction between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism is not a distinction at all."
~ Abba Eban, Foreign Minister of Israel, 1966-1974.
9. Anti-Evolution Film Misappropriates the Holocaust
Comment #177468 by windweaver on May 9, 2008 at 6:29 am
al-rawandi, here's what you said about Fanusi Khiyal in an earlier post:
As for Fanusi, here is what I have to say. I don't always like what he has to say, but when he is right, he is right. Facts are facts irrespective of who delivers them.
The point here is that you're being very accommodating of a man who, by any objective criterion, is an extremist(I've already provided some of FK's bigoted comments about muslims-there are dozens more that he's made (many on extreme right-wing blogs) that you can check, should you wish to do so, through google). You direct no ad-hominems towards him, refer to him affectionately as "my friend" etc, etc. Why then are you so incendiary when it comes to Noam Chomsky, a man who (I'm sure you'll agree)is a pacifist, champion of the underdog, and lover of freedom? Why don't you adopt the same attitude towards Chomsky that you do towards FK?
You referred to my "fellow dogmatist" riverrun. What evidence do you have to charge me with being a dogmatist? I challenge you to find any examples on this thread (or any other, for that matter) where I have been dogmatic.
10. Anti-Evolution Film Misappropriates the Holocaust
Comment #177451 by windweaver on May 9, 2008 at 5:48 am
Keith wrote:
That claim sounded awfully all-inclusive, as though the majority of members of this site were slowly lining up against Al, and I suspect that isn't really the case. Perhaps in future you ought to limit such comments to saying that Al has lost all credibility with you, rather than suggesting that this is a widespread phenomenon.
And let's be honest Windweaver, trying to make out that it is some kind of crime to call Chomsky a nit-wit in the context of a heated argument is in reality just a bit of mischief-making on your part. Al has said all along that Chomsky has done some brilliant stuff in the past so he clearly doesn't think that Chomsky is a nit-wit - just a liar. Such literal-mindedness on your part really does you no credit, at all.
Keith, you are guilty of EXACTLY what you charge me with-being too literal-minded. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence would know that when I accuse Al-Rawandi of losing credibility on this thread I am merely offering my own opinion. Who,in the real world, goes around saying "you've lost credibility with me" when they're commenting in general on a political slanging match. And I'll continue to pull up anyone who calls Chomsky a "nit-wit", "idiot" etc. Just because Al admits that Chomsky can be brilliant at times doesn't excuse his appalling ad-hominem attacks on the man.
And I've another bone to pick with you Keith. You've done the same thing you did back in 2007 on the Chomsky thread-entered this debate with the sole aim of vilifying and discrediting a man whose work you admit you haven't even read. Here's what you said at the time:
And of course you're right, I have read almost nothing by Chomsky. Why would I? How many times do you have to tread in dogshit before you know you don't like it?
I leave it to readers of this thread to draw their own conclusions about you and your contributions to this debate.
11. Anti-Evolution Film Misappropriates the Holocaust
Comment #176733 by windweaver on May 7, 2008 at 11:08 pm
al-rawandi wrote:
Even a nit-wit like Chomsky could have ascertained this.
This is a wonderful example of just how extreme Al has become on this thread. Even some of his most vehement detractors (eg Hitchens) concede that Chomsky is a brilliant intellectual with a first class mind. In 2005, he was voted the world's leading intellectual:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=051018152652.77esbn1j&show_article=1
Chomsky is also the most cited author on the planet:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/richpub/syltguides/fullview/REITI0SRX7OK6
Al, okay you don't like the guy and think he's a liar.I can accept that. But why do you have to stoop to calling Chomsky a nit-wit. You're losing all credibility the longer this debate continues.
Comment #176718 by windweaver on May 7, 2008 at 10:37 pm
You're welcome prettygoodformonkeys. I think you'll enjoy reading this too:
exorcism
An exorcism is a religious rite for driving Satan or evil spirits out of a possessed person, place, or thing. In ancient times, many cultures had such rites. Today, the Roman Catholic Church still believes in diabolic possession and its priests still practice what is called "real exorcism," a 27-page ritual to drive out evil spirits. The ritual involves the use of holy water, incantations, various prayers, incense, relics, and Christian symbols such as the cross. The Catholic Church has at least ten official exorcists in America today (Cuneo). The Archbishop of Calcutta, Henry Sebastian D'Souza, says he ordered a priest to perform an exorcism on Mother Teresa shortly before she died in 1997 because he thought she was being attacked by the devil.
Most Protestant sects also believe in satanic possession and exorcism. Michael Cuneo, a sociologist at Fordham University, claims "By conservative estimates, there are at least five or six hundred evangelical exorcism ministries in operation today, and quite possibly two or three times this many." Reverend Brian Connor of South Carolina says "dealing with animate evil is the single most overlooked component of the biblical mandate."* Connor was featured on NBC's "Dateline" program on exorcism (November 13, 2001). He and several friends spent an entire day trying to talk the demons out of the body of a 50-something man with a history of depression and aimlessness. The exorcists held Bibles, which they read from occasionally, and crosses. They huddled around their subject for hours, chanting prayers and ordering the demons to leave. The subject occasionally howled like an animal and grimaced at his benefactors. It was all great drama and eventually cathartic enough for the subject to vomit a little. Connor declared that he was spitting out Satan and that all the demons had left. A follow-up done two months later, however, found that the group had to repeat the exercise six more times. Now they were sure the demons were gone and the subject was sure he was fine and a new man.
Michael Cuneo watched a film of the exorcism and concluded that the group was suggesting to their subject how he should respond and that he saw no evidence of either demonic possession or of demons being exorcized. A psychiatrist was shown the same film and he announced that he couldn't evaluate what he observed as a psychiatrist but as a "believer" he thought that there might be something real going on involving demonic possession. When asked what he based his belief on, he replied tersely: faith. This man was a member of the American Psychiatric Association's Committee on Religion and Psychiatry.
As a layman, I (Robert Todd Caroll, author of The Skeptics Dictionary) found the behavior of the exorcists at least as interesting as that of the subject. Believing in demons is one thing; believing you have the ability to call up a supernatural being with infinite power and perfection who will cause demons to move on at your behest seems certifiable. The whole coven of exorcists and exorcized are deluded. The former clearly felt great pride at their achievement and shared in a glorious victory over Satan. The latter was coddled and cuddled, hugged and loved, and eventually praised and rewarded with the good feelings of caring people when he released Satan and said "Jesus is Lord." There doesn't seem to be anything deeply complicated about what happened. The group convinced the subject he was possessed. They cued him as to how to behave and they rewarded him and themselves when he let the demon go. Communal reinforcement and self-deception will go a long way toward explaining how the group came to believe they could exorcize demons. The exorcists clearly enjoy their work and get great satisfaction out of "helping" people in this powerful way. I am sure that many evangelicals who saw the program are wondering where they can sign up to be exorcist's helpers.
traditional exorcisms
Exorcisms can be done on inanimate objects or places as well as on people. These need not be "real exorcisms" but can be "simple exorcisms" (usually thought of as baptizing the infant or "blessing" the house or place). Satan is everywhere, it seems, but the specialist in real exorcism is needed only when The Evil One starts acting up.
Most, if not all, cases of alleged demonic possession of humans probably involve either people with brain disorders ranging from epilepsy to schizophrenia and Tourette's syndrome, or people whose brains are more or less healthy but who are unfortunate enough to be sucked into playing a social role with very unpleasant consequences. In any case, the behaviors of the possessed resemble very closely the behaviors of those with electrochemical, neurochemical, or other physical or emotional disorders.
A secularized version of exorcism is practiced by some therapists who specialize in unveiling and ridding their patients of "entities" which, the therapists believe, are the cause of the patient's troubles. Entity release therapists engage in this work even though there is about as much evidence for the "entities" as there is for the devils exorcised by Catholic priests and Protestant evangelicals. Many people, however, are very resistant to the idea that demonic possession is a myth, especially since they have seen or read fictional works such as The Exorcist or the Amityville Horror. They can't imagine how anyone could make such stuff up; yet, it would seem to take much more imagination to give credence to such tales.
Many people fear possession by demons, but the exorcists themselves can cause great damage.
Exorcism has caused a number of real-world tragedies over the years, including several deaths.
Pentecostal ministers in San Francisco pummeled a woman to death in 1995, as they tried to drive out her demons.
In 1997, a Korean Christian woman was stomped to death in Glendale, Calif., and in the Bronx section of New York City, a 5-year-old girl died after being forced to swallow a mixture containing ammonia and vinegar and having her mouth taped shut.
In 1998, a 17-year-old girl in Sayville, N.Y., was suffocated by her mother with a plastic bag, in an effort to destroy a demon inside her.
In 2001, a 37-year old woman, Joanna Lee, was strangled to death in an exorcism by a Korean church minister working in New Zealand. The minister, Luke Lee, was found guilty of manslaughter.
An MSNBC program on exorcists, featuring evangelicals Tom Brown and Bob Larson, warned viewers not to try this at home because they might end up being arrested for botched exorcisms such as those mentioned above. The evangelicals' game is to bring groups of troubled people together and look for demons that are causing the trouble so they can exorcize them. Brown and Larson have never killed anyone, as far as we know, but whether they help or harm people was not possible to discern from the program, since the "reporters" did no background checks or follow-ups on the people exorcised.
The exorcists' only prop is a Bible, which is held in one hand while they talk down the devil in very dramatic episodes worthy of Jerry Springer or Jenny Jones. The "possessed" could have been mentally ill, actors, mentally ill actors, drug addicts, mentally ill drug addicts, or they may have been possessed, as the exorcists claimed. All the participants shown being exorcized seem to have seen the movie "The Exorcist" or one of the sequels. They all fell into the role of husky-voiced Satan speaking from the depths, who was featured in the film. The similarities in speech and behavior among the "possessed" has led some psychologists such as Nicholas Spanos to conclude that both "exorcist" and "possessed" are engaged in learned role-playing.
What was disappointing about the MSNBC program was that no effort was made to get anyone's opinion as to what was going on except for the opinions of the televangelists and their subjects. Wouldn't a serious journalist get a third opinion? Why should we take the word of interested parties like Brown and Larson that their subjects really were possessed and that they really released Satan from all these bodies? These evangelical exorcists might be self-deceived and be guilty of confirmation bias. Even if their intentions are good, they are most probably deluded and certainly causing harm to those they exorcize who should be under psychiatric care.
13. Anti-Evolution Film Misappropriates the Holocaust
Comment #176285 by windweaver on May 7, 2008 at 5:44 am
al-rawandi,with your tirade against Chomsky you are missing the point.The point being that his country does things that his fellow countrymen are ignorant of and which he wants to bring to their attention.These 'things' result in the deaths of innocent people the world over.
Jiten, you make an excellent point. Most American citizens would be outraged if they really knew what their government and the military industrial complex were up to. Take the US Space Command's Vision for 2020, for example. This calls for nothing less than the United States' domination of the Earth from space. The first page of the document calls for "dominating the space dimension of military operations to protect US interests and investment." The document also calls for "full spectrum dominance" of the world. Basically, the Pentagon wants the ability to be able to vapourise its enemies anywhere in the world using high tech weapons based in outer space. The US government is currently spending billions of dollars to make this vision a reality. This goes completely against the UN Outer Space Treaty banning the militarisation of space.
Master of Space
by Karl Grossman
The Progressive magazine, January 2000
On November 1, the General Assembly of the United Nations voted to reaffirm the Outer Space Treaty-the fundamental international law that establishes that space should be reserved for peaceful uses.
Almost 140 nations voted for the resolution entitled "Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space." It recognizes "the common interest of all mankind in the exploration and use of outer space for peaceful purposes," reaffirms the will of all states that the exploration and use of outer space "shall be for peaceful purposes and shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interest of all countries," and declares "that prevention of an arms race in outer space would avert a grave danger for international peace and security."
Only two nations declined to support this bill-the United States and Israel. Both abstained.
For the United States, the issue goes way beyond missile defense. The U.S. military explicitly says it wants to "control" space to protect its economic interests and establish superiority over the world.
Several documents reveal the plans. Take Vision for 2020, a 1996 report of the U.S. Space Command, which "coordinates the use of Army, Navy, and Air Force space forces" and was set up in 1985 to "help institutionalize the use of space."
The multicolored cover of Vision for 2020 shows a weapon shooting a laser beam from space and zapping a target below. The report opens with the following: "U.S. Space Command-dominating the space dimension of military operations to protect U.S. interests and investment. Integrating Space Forces into warfighting capabilities across the full spectrum of conflict." A century ago, Nations built navies to protect and enhance their commercial interests" by ruling the seas, the report notes. Now it is time to rule space.
"The medium of space is the fourth medium of warfare-along with land, sea, and air," it proclaims on page three. "The emerging synergy of space superiority with land, sea, and air superiority will lead to Full Spectrum Dominance."
The Air Force publishes similar pamphlets. "Space is the ultimate'high ground," declares Guardians of the High Frontier, a 1997 report by the Air Force Space Command. Proudly displayed in that report is a Space Command uniform patch and motto: MASTER OF SPACE.
Nuclear power is crucial to this scenario. "In the next two decades, new technologies will allow the fielding of space-based weapons of devastating effectiveness to be used to deliver energy and mass as force projection in tactical and strategic conflict," says New World Vistas: Air and Space Power for the 21st Century, a 1996 U.S. Air Force board report. "These advances will enable lasers with reasonable mass and cost to effect very many kills.... Setting the emotional issues of nuclear power aside, this technology offers a viable alternative for large amounts of power in space."
Corporate interests are directly involved in helping set the U.S. space doctrine-a fact the military flaunts. In its 1998 "Long Range Plan," the U.S. Space Command acknowledges seventy-five participating corporations-including Aerojet, Hughes Space, Lockheed Martin, and TRW.
The PR. spin is that the U.S. military push into space is about "missile defense" or defense of U.S. space satellites. But the volumes of material coming out of the military are concerned mainly with offense-with using space to establish military domination over the world below.
"It's politically sensitive, but it's going to happen. Some people don't want to hear this, and it sure isn't in vogue, but-absolutely-we're going to fight in space," General Joseph W. Ashy, the former commander-in-chief of the U.S. Space Command told Aviation Week and Space Technology in 1996. "We're going to fight from space, and we're going to fight into space. That's why the U.S. has development programs in directed energy and hit-to-kill mechanisms. We will engage terrestrial targets someday-ships, airplanes, land targets-from space."
Space is "increasingly at the center of our national and economic security," agreed General Richard B. Myers, current commander-in-chief of the U.S. Space Command, in a speech entitled "Implementing Our Vision for Space Control," which he delivered in April 1999 to the U.S. Space Foundation in Colorado Springs, Colorado.
"The threat, ladies and gentlemen, I believe is real," he said. "It's a threat to our economic well-being. This is why we must work together to find common ground between commercial imperatives and the President's tasking to me for space control and protection."
"With regard to space dominance, we have it, we like it, and we're going to keep it," said Keith Hall, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Space, in a 1997 speech to the National Space Club. "Space is in the nation's economic interest."
In Congress, one avid booster of U.S. space dominance is Senator Bob Smith, Republican of New Hampshire. Smith believes that national security depends on "space supremacy" He is interested in breaking up the Air Force and creating a "Space Force."
Even the Council on Foreign Relations-usually characterized as centrist- has come on board. In 1998, it published a booklet entitled Space, Commerce, and National Security, written by Air Force Colonel Frank Klotz, a military fellow at the council. "The most immediate task of the United States in the years ahead is to sustain and extend its leadership in the increasingly intertwined fields of military and commercial space. This requires a robust and continuous presence in space," says the report.
The U.S. government is pouring massive amounts of public money-an estimated $6 billion a year, not counting what is secretly spent-into the military development of space. And the United States has signed a multimillion dollar contract with
TRW and Boeing to build a Space-Based Laser Readiness Demonstrator. The military's poster for this laser shows it firing a ray into space while above it an American flag somehow manages to wave.
The Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space is challenging these plans. Next April, the Global Network will come to Washington, D.C., for a protest, including a demonstration at the U.S. Treasury to stress how much money is being spent by the United States on military activities in space.
"If the U.S. is allowed to move the arms race into space, there will be no return," says Bruce Gagnon, coordinator for the Global Network, based in Gainesville, Florida. "We have this one chance, this one moment in history, to stop the weaponization of space from happening. The peace movement must move quickly, boldly, and publicly."
"Above all, we must guard against the misuse of outer space," said Kofi Annan as he opened the 1999 U.N. conference on space militarization in Vienna. "We must not allow this century, so plagued with war and suffering, to pass on its legacy, when the technology at our disposal will be even more awesome. We cannot view the expanse of space as another battleground for our Earthly conflicts."
But, as the new century dawns, that is exactly what the U.S. military is doing.
Karl Grossman, professor of journalism at the State University of New York/College at Old Westbury, wrote "The Wrong Stuff: The Space Program's Nuclear Threat to Our Planet" (Common Courage, 1997) and produced the video documentary "Nukes in Space: The Nuclearization and Weaponization of the Heavens" (EnviroVideo, 1-800-ECO-TV46).
Comment #176282 by windweaver on May 7, 2008 at 5:06 am
Dinah, I think you'll enjoy reading this:
The Implausibility of Satan
Paul Doland
I often hear Christians talk about Satan, "The Great Deceiver." When I tell them that I don't believe in such a being, they ask me how can I know? This article explains why I find the existence of such a being to be extremely implausible.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who is Satan? Satan is supposedly a powerful, supernatural being created by God. God intended Satan to be good. Yet Satan turned evil.
Many Questions--No Good Answers
How is it possible that God--from whom only good things come--created a supernatural being that turned evil? Right off the proverbial bat, this seems to make the idea of Satan hard to believe. Note that Matthew 7:18 says, "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit." How could the "bad fruit" of Satan have come from the "good tree" of God?"
Say that God did create this supernatural being that turned evil. How is it possible that an omniscient God would not know that Satan would turn evil? Actually, some have argued that God did know it would happen, so let's look at the question from both angles. If God did know Satan would turn evil, why would God have created Satan? If I made proverbial widgets, and I could tell that one of my widgets wasn't going to meet my needs, wouldn't I be a fool to make it anyway? If God knew his creation would turn evil, and created Satan anyway, doesn't that mean God wanted Satan to turn evil or that He was at least ambivalent about it?
Some have said that Satan's turning evil was known, and taken into account in God's long-term plan. But why would an all-good God need an evil Satan in His long-term plan? One would think that an all-good God would be able to enact whatever plans He has without need of an evil super-being.
What if God didn't know that Satan would turn evil? Wouldn't that mean that God is not omniscient? Some argue that because of free will, God's omniscience does not give God the ability to know what decisions will be made by His creations. So perhaps, by giving Satan free will, God did not know what Satan would do. But shouldn't a perfect God at least have considered the possibility and made some sort of contingency plan?
Let's move on and assume that somehow Satan did turn evil--whether or not God knew it would happen. Why did God not immediately destroy Satan? Or, if God doesn't want to destroy his own creations, why did God at least not immediately contain Satan, perhaps lock him up in hell? Or take away his supernatural powers? I think that Christians say that God will do this at the time of judgment. Why wait? Why let Satan do evil in the meantime? If God can stop Satan now, and doesn't, isn't God guilty of allowing evil? Isn't God acting as an accomplice to evil?
Now let's assume that there is some explanation for this. So we have Satan, a powerful being, who is intent on corrupting man. Why does Satan only do things surreptitiously? For example, why doesn't Satan shoot intense pain through every human on Earth until they confess their allegiance to him? I know that Christians say God acts as a "hidden God" because He wants to see if we will freely choose Him. But it seems unlikely that Satan, a pure evil being, would have any such motivation. So why doesn't Satan just come on down and kill everybody or do whatever evil he feels like?
Maybe God wouldn't allow Satan to act so boldly? Then why does God let Satan operate surreptitiously? God allows Satan to do surreptitious evil? This doesn't seem to make any sense.
One explanation, offered by apologist Dr. Hugh Ross, is that Satan is not allowed to tempt us more than we are capable of withstanding. So I suppose that means that nobody is ever successfully tempted by Satan, right? If they are, then by definition, they have been tempted more than they can withstand, right?
I suppose Dr. Ross is saying that Satan is only allowed to tempt us to the extent that God expects us to be able to withstand. But how could this really work? If Dr. Ross is right and God limits Satan's evil, then is Satan constantly asking God, "Hey God, can I, like, shoot massive pain through Joe's body and see if that turns Joe against you?" And God says, "No, Satan, you may not." And then Satan asks, "Well--can I, like, kill Joe's baby and see if that turns him against you?" And then God says, "Oh, okay, Satan, I guess you can do that." You might think I'm being sacrilegious but the point is that, although some theologies may sound logical when you read them in a book, when you try to take them off the pages of the book and see how they work in actual practice they are exposed as just being pat answers that have no real value.
[Note: If you think my pretend conversation between God and Satan is sacrilegious, a very similar conversation is depicted in the book of Job where Satan convinces God to allow him to kill Job's family and servants. So, if someone close to you dies, it might be because Satan convinced God to let him kill them.]
It seems to me, then, that either option, Satan self-limits his evil for some reason or God limits Satan's evil, isn't very believable. But say I'm wrong, say that one or the other of these explains why Satan's evil is at least somewhat constrained. However, if Satan does anything at all to influence man, how can man be said to have free will given that Satan has supernatural powers and we don't? How can God really expect us mere mortals to be able to withstand any temptation by a supernatural evil being? If Satan can use supernatural powers--even "a little bit" against us mere mortal humans--how can we truly have free will?
At least a few Christians believe, for example, that Satan placed fossils on Earth to mislead man into believing in evolution. If true, this would mean that we cannot believe anything we see, or any of what our senses tell us--they could be just the conduit for satanic delusions. How can we have free will if there is nothing that we can know with certainty? Thus I say again, if Satan can use any of his supernatural powers against us, then free will does not exist.
Does Satan not know that God is omnipotent? How dumb could Satan be to think that he could possibly win out against the omnipotent Creator, the Creator of everything including even himself? Some Christians say that Satan does know he will eventually loose, but that he just wants to take as many people down to hell with him as he can. But how could Satan have ever been dumb enough to even consider revolting against God, knowing full-well that he could not possibly win? And how could have a third of God's angels have been dumb enough to join Satan, as they too should have known from the beginning that they have no real chance to win?
What is the reason for God not revealing Himself to us in obvious ways? When a skeptic asks that question, Christians will often answer that God feels that if we were to have absolute proof of His existence, we wouldn't have the free will to reject Him. Yet Satan, even though he had proof-positive of God's existence, was still able to choose to disobey God. Thus, if Satan could have proof-positive of God and still have free will to disobey God, then so should we.
Finally, if Satan could become evil because of free will, how will God ever solve the problem of evil? Couldn't tomorrow, some other creation of God use its free will to turn evil? Couldn't this continue to happen for all eternity? How can heaven be any better than Earth if it is subject to the same problem of free will allowing beings to choose evil?
Summary
Let me summarize. I don't believe an all-good God could have created a powerful, supernatural being that turned evil. But even if I am wrong, I don't believe an omniscient God could not have known it would happen, or at least make contingency plans. If somehow this evil Satan did come to exist, I don't think that an all-good God would let Satan continue to do evil. But if God did let Satan continue to do evil, I don't think an all-evil super-being would be restrained or act surreptitiously--he would use his supernatural powers openly. But even if this evil being were for some reason at least somewhat restrained, the fact that he, having supernatural powers, could have influence over us mere mortals would mean that we don't truly have free will. So, from start to finish, the concept of an all-evil, super-being Satan is untenable.
Comment #176280 by windweaver on May 7, 2008 at 4:58 am
I posted this article on another thread but it's just as relevant here:
Exorcisms In Big Demand
February 17, 2008 12:00am
THE Catholic Church has revealed how growing interest in satanism and the occult has led to a rise in exorcisms across Queensland.
One priest, who asked not to be named for fear of "reprisals", said he was carrying out at least one exorcism a fortnight.
More requests for exorcisms came from the Gold Coast than anywhere else.
An exorcism involves holy water, sacrament and Bible reading and can go on for many hours, the priest said. Linda Blair made the subject famous in the 1973 film, The Exorcist.
"Being possessed by a demon is terrifying in one's mental and emotional life," he said. "Some of these manifestations are extremely powerful, causing people to be plagued by disturbances. They hear voices and see hideous creatures in their sleep.
"There has been a recruitment of pagan practices, and it's sheer poison.
"The Gold Coast is not good at all. I do far more exorcisms there than Brisbane."
The Catholic Church has vowed to "fight the devil head-on" by training hundreds of priests as exorcists. Bishop Brian Finnigan, acting head of the Catholic Archdiocese of Brisbane, said it was important for the church to carry out exorcisms.
"People need to be freed of that burden," he said.
Father Gabriele Amorth, 82, the Pope's Exorcist-in-Chief, announced the initiative recently amid church concerns about an increase in people dabbling in the occult. Under plans being considered, each bishop would have a group of priests in his diocese who were specially trained in exorcism.
Father Amorth said: "Too many bishops are not taking this seriously and are not delegating their priests in the fight against the devil. You have to hunt high and low for a proper, trained exorcist."
Queensland Catholic priests can carry out exorcisms only if they have been authorised by an archbishop.
The priest source, who is based in Brisbane, is the only one permitted to do exorcisms in the state. He said he had travelled to Rockhampton, Cairns, Townsville and Toowoomba to save people.
"We are not very plentiful and certainly need more of us to cope with the big occult following that is emerging today," he said.
"It's frightening what can happen when you invite entities into your life which are not meant to be part of God's world."
He said one woman he had met had been plagued by demonic manifestations since taking part in a playground witch game as a child.
16. Anti-Evolution Film Misappropriates the Holocaust
Comment #176277 by windweaver on May 7, 2008 at 4:44 am
To counter the grotesque caricature of Chomsky painted by Al-Rawandi, I recommend readers of this thread (especially people like Quetz, who aren't all that familiar with the man) check out the following interview:
http://www.newstatesman.com/200606190028
An excellent site for those wanting to sample Chomsky's political analysis is http://www.chomsky.info/articles.htm
One thing you'll find when reading his work (especially his books) is that Chomsky goes to meticulous lengths to cite sources and back up his arguments with evidence.
17. Anti-Evolution Film Misappropriates the Holocaust
Comment #176198 by windweaver on May 6, 2008 at 9:32 pm
Al-Rawandi is really starting to lose it on this thread. Look at some of the language he's used to describe Chomsky: "vile", "obnoxious", "buffoon", "Danny Boyle zombie". Hey, don't hold back Al, I'm sure you can add "paedophile" and "serial rapist" to the list if you try hard enough.
As for your "friend" Fanusi, here's a short sample of his bile and vitriol (put together by Xenocratic on a 2007 thread):
"Right that is it. I am officially coming out of the closet. When the whole war with Iraq started, I honestly though that if America took down someone who was killing them in the hundreds of thousands, at the cost of billions of dollars and thousands of _american_ lives, the Iraqis would have, oh I don't know, a little gratitude.
Silly me, I actually thought that the reason for Islamic radicalism was the failed states of the Middle East. I now see that it was the other way around.
Let me point out that when _my_ Fatherland was under the control of a bunch of maniacs (and, gee, is the Ba'ath party a cheap knockoff of the Nazi party? Yup!) America flattened every major city and thoroughly beat the enemy into the ground. Now, am I complaining? No; I have always praised America for that. And did the Germans, being freed from the Nazi yoke, decide to start a civil war? No. Did they, in fact, rebuild? Yes. And did any have the infernal indecency to complain when the bastards were hung, one and all? No.
Whatever else one can say, I think that the Iraq war has taught a lesson everyone needs to learn, and that includes many on the right. That Islam is completely incompatible with freedom, and the savages of the Middle East are about as capable of it as a tribe of barbary apes are of piloting a shuttle.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/014640.php#more
Comment Posted By Fanusi Khiyal On 01.01.2007 @ 02:01
"Finally_ someone gets it. Finally someone gets that the only way to deal with Muslim fanatics is to just fight them head on, no holds barred. No gitmo, no "minimizing casualties", just hammer the bastards into the ground.
Yo, Bush, Blair, Olmert? Take few weeks in Ethiopia to see how it's done right.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to get more booze for the Munchkins.
*ding-dong, the witch is dead…*
Comment Posted By Fanusi Khiyal On 27.12.2006 @ 23:16"
"Woot! Go Ethiopia!
Hell, if this is what they can do, imagine what is possible for the West when the Muslims finally push their luck that bit too far, and the gloves come off permanently.
Comment Posted By Fanusi Khiyal On 27.12.2006 @ 10:22"
"From now on, not a penny of mine, nor a second of work will go to any Muslim anywhere on this planet if I can help it.
Comment Posted By Fanusi Khiyal On 19.12.2006 @ 06:51"
All of these obtained from The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: HQ of the Rottweiler Empire, An affiliate of the VRWC. It was named the "MOST ANNOYING RIGHT-OF-CENTER BLOG OF 2003".
"an appalling number of Moslems are primitive, brutal savages, addicted to violence, drunk on an appalling level of arrogance, and generally not just uncivilised but anti-civilised"
Comment #53916 by Fanusi Khiyal on July 4, 2007 at 6:45 am in response to the article 'Don't Mince Words: The London Car-Bomb Plot Was Designed to Kill Women' by Christopher Hitchens, Slate posted on richarddawkins.net
It never ceases to amaze me how hysterical otherwise sane people become when Chomsky and his analysis are allowed to see the light of day. A great example of this hysteria can be observed on this 2007 thread(it's well worth checking out for those neutrals who are following this discussion):
http://richarddawkins.net./article,1842,Neuroscience-and-Moral-Politics-Chomskys-Intellectual-Progeny,Gary-Olson
18. Is Liberal Catholicism Dead?
Comment #176160 by windweaver on May 6, 2008 at 5:45 pm
Here's what the Catholic Church has been up to in my neck of the woods (Queensland, Australia) lately.
Exorcisms In Big Demand
February 17, 2008 12:00am
THE Catholic Church has revealed how growing interest in satanism and the occult has led to a rise in exorcisms across Queensland.
One priest, who asked not to be named for fear of "reprisals", said he was carrying out at least one exorcism a fortnight.
More requests for exorcisms came from the Gold Coast than anywhere else.
An exorcism involves holy water, sacrament and Bible reading and can go on for many hours, the priest said. Linda Blair made the subject famous in the 1973 film, The Exorcist.
"Being possessed by a demon is terrifying in one's mental and emotional life," he said. "Some of these manifestations are extremely powerful, causing people to be plagued by disturbances. They hear voices and see hideous creatures in their sleep.
"There has been a recruitment of pagan practices, and it's sheer poison.
"The Gold Coast is not good at all. I do far more exorcisms there than Brisbane."
The Catholic Church has vowed to "fight the devil head-on" by training hundreds of priests as exorcists. Bishop Brian Finnigan, acting head of the Catholic Archdiocese of Brisbane, said it was important for the church to carry out exorcisms.
"People need to be freed of that burden," he said.
Father Gabriele Amorth, 82, the Pope's Exorcist-in-Chief, announced the initiative recently amid church concerns about an increase in people dabbling in the occult. Under plans being considered, each bishop would have a group of priests in his diocese who were specially trained in exorcism.
Father Amorth said: "Too many bishops are not taking this seriously and are not delegating their priests in the fight against the devil. You have to hunt high and low for a proper, trained exorcist."
Queensland Catholic priests can carry out exorcisms only if they have been authorised by an archbishop.
The priest source, who is based in Brisbane, is the only one permitted to do exorcisms in the state. He said he had travelled to Rockhampton, Cairns, Townsville and Toowoomba to save people.
"We are not very plentiful and certainly need more of us to cope with the big occult following that is emerging today," he said.
"It's frightening what can happen when you invite entities into your life which are not meant to be part of God's world."
He said one woman he had met had been plagued by demonic manifestations since taking part in a playground witch game as a child.
19. Anti-Evolution Film Misappropriates the Holocaust
Comment #175300 by windweaver on May 5, 2008 at 6:38 am
Al, I'm not handicapped (why all the ad hominems?). If you re-read my post you'll see that I put the words -escaped Nazi- in speech marks. I knew you were joking but it's clear you also intended the reader to glean from your joke that, compared to Anna, you are politically right wing.
20. Anti-Evolution Film Misappropriates the Holocaust
Comment #174580 by windweaver on May 2, 2008 at 7:35 pm
Here's my 2 cents on the debate so far. Al Rawandi has engaged in little more (his posts on Islam excepted) than a vicious ad-hominem assault on Chomsky. One wonders how much of his work Al has actually read. Riverrun has repeatedly provided HARD evidence of what Chomsky has ACTUALLY said but this has had little impact on Al. I get the impression that he's just reflexively anti-Chomsky (although he at least admits that Chomsky's analysis is sometimes useful). It's a shame because I actually enjoy reading Al's posts on other topics. He's clearly a well read and intelligent guy. To reiterrate a point made by riverrun (and expressed by Chomsky again and again), we are,first and foremost, responsible for our OWN actions. It's trivially easy (and doctrinally acceptable) to focus on the actions of official enemies. Chomsky rightly focuses on America's actions because he's an American writer who cares about what his country stands for. And, in spite of his criticisms of the US political elite, he is on record as describing America as a "uniquely free country". He's clearly not the raging anti-American that his critics so mistakenly charge him as being.
PS: I note that Al describes himself politically as an "escaped Nazi" and a free market libertarian so it's not surprising that he's so reactionary when it comes to dealing with dissident intellectuals like Chomsky.
21. Anti-Evolution Film Misappropriates the Holocaust
Comment #172712 by windweaver on April 30, 2008 at 1:11 am
Those praising the ADL for the above press release need to understand the nature of the beast:
"The ADL has virtually abandoned its earlier role as a civil rights organization, becoming 'one of the main pillars' of Israeli propaganda in the U.S. These efforts, buttressed by insinuations of anti-Semitism or direct accusations, are intended to deflect or undermine opposition to Israeli policies, including Israel's refusal, with U.S. support, to move towards a general political settlement."-Noam Chomsky, Jewish intellectual
"The ADL is one of the ugliest, most powerful pressure groups in the U.S. Its primary commitment is to use any technique, however dishonest and disgraceful, in order to defame and silence and destroy anybody who dares to criticize the Holy State ('Israel')."-Noam Chomsky
"The ADL lost most of its credibility in my eyes as a civil rights organization when it began to identify criticisms of Israel with anti-Semitism, still more when it failed to defend me when I was receiving threats to my life from right-wing Jewish groups because of my critique of Israeli policy toward Palestinians (it said that these were not threats that came from my being Jewish, so therefore they were not within their area of concern)".-Michael Lerner,rabbi
22. Fleabytes
Comment #157498 by windweaver on April 9, 2008 at 7:32 am
You have to question the sanity of someone who goes from being a Mormon to an evangelical to an atheist to a David Robertson devotee...AND who then methodically deletes all his posts on a thread. I'm really offended that RM thinks the people who contribute/interact on RDnet are "joyless". How dare he make that charge. And I have to agree with cartomancer about the complete lack of eloquence in that "goodbye" letter. What a sad, mixed up man.
Comment #157476 by windweaver on April 9, 2008 at 6:29 am
I'm amazed that Richard is such a fan of Evelyn Waugh. Yes he was a very good writer, but he was also an outrageous snob, an uber Tory and a fanatical catholic.
24. Rep. Davis: The Worst Person in the World
Comment #157443 by windweaver on April 9, 2008 at 5:27 am
I sent the article below to Davis's email address:
Why Women Need Freedom From Religion
Organized religion always has been and remains the greatest enemy of women's rights. In the Christian-dominated Western world, two bible verses in particular sum up the position of women:
"I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."--Genesis 3:16
By this third chapter of Genesis, woman lost her rights, her standing--even her identity, and motherhood became a God-inflicted curse degrading her status in the world.
In the New Testament, the bible decrees:
"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression."--1 Tim. 2:11-14
One bible verse alone, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" (Exodus 22:18) is responsible for the death of tens of thousands, if not millions, of women. Do women and those who care about them need further evidence of the great harm of Christianity, predicated as it has been on these and similar teachings about women?
Church writer Tertullian said "each of you women is an Eve . . . You are the gate of Hell, you are the temptress of the forbidden tree; you are the first deserter of the divine law."
Martin Luther decreed: "If a woman grows weary and at last dies from childbearing, it matters not. Let her die from bearing, she is there to do it."
Such teachings prompted 19th-century feminist Elizabeth Cady Stanton to write: "The Bible and the Church have been the greatest stumbling blocks in the way of woman's emancipation."
The various Christian churches fought tooth and nail against the advancement of women, opposing everything from women's right to speak in public, to the use of anesthesia in childbirth (since the bible says women must suffer in childbirth) and woman's suffrage. Today the most organized and formidable opponent of women's social, economic and sexual rights remains organized religion. Religionists defeated the Equal Rights Amendment. Religious fanatics and bullies are currently engaged in an outright war of terrorism and harassment against women who have abortions and the medical staff which serves them. Those seeking to challenge inequities and advance the status of women today are fighting a massive coalition of fundamentalist Protestant and Catholic churches and religious groups mobilized to fight women's rights, gay rights, and secular government.
Why do women remain second-class citizens? Why is there a religion-fostered war against women's rights? Because the bible is a handbook for the subjugation of women. The bible establishes woman's inferior status, her "uncleanliness," her transgressions, and God-ordained master/servant relationship to man. Biblical women are possessions: fathers own them, sell them into bondage, even sacrifice them. The bible sanctions rape during wartime and in other contexts. Wives are subject to Mosaic-law sanctioned "bedchecks" as brides, and male jealousy fits and no-notice divorce as wives. The most typical biblical labels of women are "harlot" and "whore." They are described as having evil, even satanic powers of allurement. Contempt for women's bodies and reproductive capacity is a bedrock of the bible. The few role models offered are stereotyped, conventional and inadequate, with bible heroines admired for obedience and battle spirit. Jesus scorns his own mother, refusing to bless her, and issues dire warnings about the fate of pregnant and nursing women.
There are more than 200 bible verses that specifically belittle and demean women. Here are just a few:
(See Woe To The Women: The Bible Tells Me So for a more comprehensive list)
Genesis 2:22 Woman created from Adam's rib
3:16 Woman cursed: maternity a sin, marriage a bondage
19:1-8 Rape virgins instead of male angels
Exodus 20:17 Insulting Tenth Commandment, considering a wife to be property
21:7-11 Unfair rules for female servants, may be sex slaves
22:18 "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"
38:8 Women may not enter tabernacle they must support
Leviticus 12:1-14 Women who have sons are unclean 7 days
12:4-7 Women who have daughters are unclean 14 days
15:19-23 Menstrual periods are unclean
19:20-22 If master has sex with engaged woman, she shall be scourged
Numbers 1:2 Poll of people only includes men
5:13-31 Barbaric adulteress test
31:16-35 "Virgins" listed as war booty
Deuteronomy 21:11-14 Rape manual
22:5 Abomination for women to wear men's garments, vice-versa
22:13-21 Barbaric virgin test
22:23-24 Woman raped in city, she & her rapist both stoned to death
22:28-29 Woman must marry her rapist
24:1 Men can divorce woman for "uncleanness," not vice-versa
25:11-12 If woman touches foe's penis, her hand shall be cut off
Judges 11:30-40 Jephthah's nameless daughter sacrificed
19:22-29 Concubine sacrificed to rapist crowd to save man
I Kings 11:1-4 King Solomon had 700 wives & 300 concubines
Job 14:1-4 "Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one . . ."
Proverbs 7:9-27 Evil women seduce men, send them to hell
11:22 One of numerous Proverbial putdowns
Isaiah 3:16-17 God scourges, rapes haughty women
Ezekiel 16:45 One of numerous obscene denunciations
Matthew 24:19 "[woe] to them that are with child"
Luke 2:22 Mary is unclean after birth of Jesus
I Corinthians 11:3-15 Man is head of woman; only man in God's image
14:34-35 Women keep in silence, learn only from husbands
Ephesians 5:22-33 "Wives, submit . . ."
Colossians 3:18 More "wives submit"
I Timothy 2:9 Women adorn selves in shamefacedness
2:11-14 Women learn in silence in all subjection; Eve was sinful, Adam blameless
Why should women--and the men who honor women--respect and support religions which preach women's submission, which make women's subjugation a cornerstone of their theology?
When attempts are made to base laws on the bible, women must beware. The constitutional principle of separation between church and state is the only sure barrier standing between women and the bible.
For more information about the treatment of women in the bible, read the books Woe to the Women: The Bible Tells Me So by Annie Laurie Gaylor and The Born Again Skeptic's Guide to the Bible by Ruth Hurmence Green.
25. Happy Birthday, Richard Dawkins!
Comment #150970 by windweaver on March 27, 2008 at 8:44 pm
Happy birthday RD!
For what it's worth, you're my favourite science writer (and richarddawkins.net is the best site on the web) :-)
26. Writer Arthur C Clarke dies at 90
Comment #147334 by windweaver on March 20, 2008 at 7:13 am
wind power is accounting for an increasing share of new power plant capacity, and appears set to become a very major player in the near future
Teratornis
If you're interested in an alternative perspective on wind power (you seem like a fairly open-minded individual), I recommend that you check out this link:
http://www.windaction.org/documents/6571
It's written by a physics professor, Colin Keay.
27. They prayed to cast Satan from my body
Comment #145656 by windweaver on March 17, 2008 at 11:28 pm
theantitheist, Peter Irving is only speaking about GJs being a successful business. He fully supports Mercy Ministries.
28. They prayed to cast Satan from my body
Comment #145652 by windweaver on March 17, 2008 at 10:57 pm
Gloria Jeans is owned by two Hillsong church elders. Hillsong is a pentecostal megachurch enterprise with increasing political power. They're anti-evolution, speak in tongues etc etc. I wouldn't buy a coffee at GJs under any circumstances regardless of whether they're associated with Mercy Ministries.
The 'Gloria Jeans' coffee franchise, founded and run in Australia by Hillsong members Peter Irvine and Nabi Saleh, has reached even higher into the upper echelons of success in Australia, but have found some of the links with Hillsong to be mixed blessings.
In speaking of the success of Gloria Jeans, Peter Irvine boasts:
"We now have over 750 stores across 30 countries… We have won the Franchise Council of Australia's 2005 Franchisor of the Year, the 2006 national Retailer of the Year and the 2006 Emerging Exporter of the Year award."
In 2006 these stores brewed more than 50 million cups of coffee, and the number of Gloria Jeans stores in Australia is now more than 400. It is without doubt a remarkably successful business.
And yet this silver lining has a dark cloud attached through its links to Mercy Ministries, a charity launched by Hillsong worship leader Darlene Zschech and whose Executive Director is Gloria Jeans' Peter Irvine.
Last month employees of Borders Bookstores, in which Gloria Jeans coffee outlets are located, expressed concern that they were required to promote Mercy Ministries in October's 'Cuppacino for a Cause' day.
Employee concern centred around the perceived anti-abortion and anti-gay stance of Mercy Ministries, a Christian charity who aims to support young women facing difficulties. According to Crikey, the Mercy Ministries website suggests that young women with unplanned pregnancies are not given the option of abortion by the organisation.
More bluntly Tanya Levin, former Hillsong member and author of 'People in Glass Houses: An insider's story of a life in & out of Hillsong,' claims that Mercy Ministries is "completely anti-gay and completely pro-life. That's why it was established."
The debate over abortion and homosexuality is usually played out through the medium of mainstream politics. Through Gloria Jeans and Mercy Ministries, however, we see the cultural politics of Hillsong played out in a wider economic and cultural realm.
29. I don't believe in atheists
Comment #145628 by windweaver on March 17, 2008 at 8:30 pm
I'll look up Finklestein's article but I confess to being as worried about him as I generally am by Chomsky's political ramblings.
Care to enlighten readers of this thread as to why Chomsky's political writings are "ramblings" MaxD?
Anyone who believes that Arafat received a great deal at Camp David and that the US and Israel were on the "right" side has been so heavily propagandised that one wonders whether this issue can even be discussed in a rational manner with said person.
It's instructive to read what Israelis(and not fundamentalist whackos,just the regular population) actually SAY about Palestinians and Arabs.
Here,again, are statements by leading Israelis on the Arab/Israeli conflict:
"The Palestinians are like crocodiles, the more you give them meat, they want more."
Ehud Barak, Prime Minister Of Israel 1999-2001, 2000-08-28, Reported in the Jerusalem Post 2000-08-30.
"The Partition of Palestine is illegal. It will never be recognized… Jerusalem was and will for ever be our capital. Eretz Israel will be restored to the people of Israel. All of it. And for Ever."
~ Menachem Begin, Prime Minister of Israel 1977-1983, the day after the U.N. vote to partition Palestine.
"This country exists as the fulfillment of a promise made by God Himself. It would be ridiculous to ask it to account for its legitimacy."
~ Golda Meir, Prime Minister of Israel 1969-1974, Le Monde, 1971-10-15
"If I was an Arab leader I would never make [peace] with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country."
~ David Ben Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel 1948-1963, quoted in The Jewish Paradox, by Nahum Goldmann, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1978, p. 99.
"I would have joined a terrorist organization."
~ Ehud Barak, Prime Minister Of Israel 1999-2001, in response to Gideon Levy, a columnist for the Ha'aretz newspaper, when Barak was asked what he would have done if he had been born a Palestinian.
"We should prepare to go over to the offensive. Our aim is to smash Lebanon, Trans-Jordan, and Syria. The weak point is Lebanon, for the Moslem regime is artificial and easy for us to undermine. We shall establish a Christian state there, and then we will smash the Arab Legion, eliminate Trans-Jordan; Syria will fall to us. We then bomb and move on and take Port Said, Alexandria and Sinai."
~ David Ben Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel 1948-1963, 1948-05, to the General Staff. From Ben-Gurion, A Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978.
"If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?"
~ David Ben Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel 1948-1963, 1948-06
"In strategic terms, the settlements (in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza) are of no importance."
~ Binyamin Begin, son of the late Menahem Begin and a prominent voice in the Likud party writing in 1991. (Quoted in Findley, Deliberate Deceptions; p 159) Paul Findley notes that Begin added that their importance was that "they constitute an obstacle, an insurmountable obstacle to the establishment of an independent Arab State west of the river Jordan."
"It would be better to drown these prisoners in the Dead Sea if possible, since that's the lowest point in the world."
~ Avigdor Lieberman, 2003-07-07
"The establishment of such a school is a foul, disgraceful deed. You can't mix pure and foul. They are a disease, a disaster, a devil. The Arabs are asses, and the question must be asked, why did God did not create them walking on their fours? The answer is that they need to build and wash. They have no place in our school."
~ Rabbi David Bazri speaking about a proposed integrated school in Israel.
"[The Palestinians] are beasts walking on two legs."
~ Menachem Begin, Prime Minister of Israel 1977-1983, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, Begin and the Beasts New Statesman, 1982-06-25
"Is Zionism racism? I would say yes. It's a policy that to me looks like it has very many parallels with racism. The effect is the same. Whether you call it that or not is in a sense irrelevant."
~ Desmond Tutu, South African Archbishop
"One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail."
~ Rabbi Ya'acov Perin in his eulogy at the funeral of mass murderer Dr. Baruch Goldstein (Cited in the New York Times, 1994-02-28)
"Israeli lives are worth more than Palestinian ones."
~ Ehud Olmert, acting Prime Minister of Israel 2006- 2006-06-23
"There is no such thing as a Palestinian people… It is not as if we came and threw them out and took their country. They didn't exist."
~ Golda Meir, Prime Minister of Israel 1969-1974, Statement to The Sunday Times, 1969-06-15
"How can we return the occupied territories? There is nobody to return them to."
~ Golda Meir Prime Minister of Israel 1969-1974, (quoted in Chapter 13 of The Zionist Connection II: What Price Peace by Alfred Lilienthal )
"We must expel Arabs and take their places."
~ David Ben Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel 1948-1963, 1937, Ben Gurion and the Palestine Arabs, Oxford University Press, 1985.
"Israel should have exploited the repression of the demonstrations in China, when world attention focused on that country, to carry out mass expulsions among the Arabs of the territories."
Benyamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel then Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister, speaking to students at Bar Ilan University, from the Israeli journal Hotam, 1989-11-24.
"It must be clear that there is no room for both peoples in this country. If the Arabs leave the country, it will be broad and wide-open for us. If the Arabs stay, the country will remain narrow and miserable. The only solution is Israel without Arabs. There is no room for compromise on this point. The Zionist enterprise so far… has been fine and good in its own time, and could do with 'land buying' ; but this will not bring about the State of Israel; that must come all at once, in the manner of a Salvation [this is the secret of the Messianic idea]; and there is no way besides transferring the Arabs from here to the neighboring countries, to transfer them all; except maybe for Bethlehem, Nazareth and Old Jerusalem, we must not leave a single village, not a single tribe. And only with such a transfer will the country be able to absorb millions of our brothers, and the Jewish question shall be solved, once and for all."
~ Joseph Weitz, Directory of the Jewish National Land Fund, 1940-12-19, The Question of Palestine by Edward Said.
"… we have no solution, that you shall continue to live like dogs, and whoever wants to can leave and we will see where this process leads? In five years we may have 200,000 less people and that is a matter of enormous importance."
~ Moshe Dayan Defense Minister of Israel 1967-1974, encouraging the transfer of Gaza strip refugees to Jordan (from Noam Chomsky's Deterring Democracy, 1992, p.434, quoted in Nur Masalha's A Land Without A People, 1997 p.92).
"It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonization or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands."
~ Yoram Bar Porath, Yediot Aahronot, 1972-08-14, responding to public controversy regarding the Israeli evictions of Palestinians in Rafah, Gaza, in 1972. (Cited in Nur Masalha's A land Without A People 1997, p98).
"We walked outside, Ben Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population?' Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said 'Drive them out!'"
~ Yitzhak Rabin, Prime Minister of Irael 1974-1977 and 1992-1995, leaked Rabin memoirs, published in the New York Times, 1979-10-23
"There are some who believe that the non-Jewish population, even in a high percentage, within our borders will be more effectively under our surveillance; and there are some who believe the contrary, i.e., that it is easier to carry out surveillance over the activities of a neighbor than over those of a tenant. [I] tend to support the latter view and have an additional argument:…the need to sustain the character of the state which will henceforth be Jewish…with a non-Jewish minority limited to 15 percent. I had already reached this fundamental position as early as 1940 [and] it is entered in my diary."
~ Joseph Weitz, head of the Jewish Agency's Colonization Department. From Israel: an Apartheid State by Uri Davis, p.5.
"We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our own country…. expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly."
~ Theodore Herzl The founder of Zionism, (from Rafael Patai, Ed. The Complete Diaries of Theodore Herzl, Vol I)
"In our country there is room only for the Jews. We shall say to the Arabs: Get out! If they don't agree, if they resist, we shall drive them out by force."
~ Professor Ben-Zion Dinur, Israel's First Minister of Education, 1954, from History of the Haganah
On the eve of yet another round of peace talks with US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has invited the leader of the Moledet Party to join his coalition government. The Moledet (Homeland) Party is not just another far-right Zionist grouping. Its founding principle, as stated in its charter, is the call to transfer Arabs out of "Eretz Israel": [the land of Israel in Hebrew is Eretz Yisrael] "The sure cure for the demographic ailment is the transfer of the Arabs to Arab countries as an aim of any negotiations and a way to solve the Israeli-Arab conflict over the land of Israel." By Arabs, the Modelet Party means not only the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza: its members also seek to "cleanse" Israel of its Palestinian Arab citizens. And by "demographic ailment", the Modelet means not only the presence of Arabs in Israel's midst, but also the "troubling high birth rate" of the Arab population.
~ Al-Ahram Weekly On-line 1998-04-30.. 1998-05-06 Issue No.375
Genocide
"The Arabs will have to go, but one needs an opportune moment for making it happen, such as a war."
~ David Ben Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel 1948-1963, writing to his son, 1937
"Anything moving in the zone, even a three year old, needs to be killed."
~ The Israeli Captain R. who murdered 13-year old Imam Al-Hamas, 2004-11-04.
"If we thought that instead of 200 Palestinian fatalities, 2,000 dead would put an end to the fighting at a stroke, we would use much more force…"
Ehud Barak, Prime Minister Of Israel 1999-2001, quoted in Associated Press, 2000-11-16.
"(The Palestinians) would be crushed like grasshoppers… heads smashed against the boulders and walls."
~ Yitzhak Shamir Prime Minister of Israel 1983-1982, in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times 1988-04-01
"We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population."
~ David Ben Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel 1948-1963, 1948-05, to the General Staff. From Ben-Gurion, A Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978.
"If I'm sorry for anything, it is for not tearing the whole camp down… No one (in the Israeli army) expressed any reservations against doing it… I found joy with every house that came down… I have no mercy… I say if a man has done nothing, don't touch him. A man who has done something, hang him, as far as I am concerned. Even a pregnant woman ; shoot her without mercy, if she has a terrorist behind her. This is the way I thought in Jenin…"
~ bulldozer operator at the Palestinian camp at Jenin, reported in Yedioth Ahronoth, 2002-05-31.
"All those now living in South Lebanon are terrorists who are related in some way to Hizb'allah."
~ Haim Ramon, Israeli Justice Minister, explaining why it was OK for Israel to target children in Lebanon.
"One of the major problems with Israeli democracy is that it has no constitutional guarantees of human rights. To my knowledge it's the only functioning democracy without such provision."
~ Asa Kasher, Israeli philosopher
"[Three quarters of a million young people who have served in the IDF] know that the task of the army is not only to defend the state in the battlefield against a foreign army, but to demolish the rights of innocent people just because they are Araboushim living in territories that God promised to us."
Yaram Peri, in Davar, 1982-12-10. academic specialist on Israeli affairs. Araboushim is Israeli slang that is roughly equivalent to niggers or kikes.
"Defending the occupation has done to the American Pro-Israel community, what living as an occupier has done to Israel ; muddied both its moral compass and its rational self-interest compass."
~ Daniel Levy, Ha'aretz, former adviser to Ehud Barak
"I vow that if I was just an Israeli civilian and I met a Palestinian I would burn him and I would make him suffer before killing him."
~ Ariel Sharon, Prime Minister of Israel 2001-2006, magazine Ouze Merham in 1956. (Disputed as to whether this is genuine.)
"Even today I am willing to volunteer to do the dirty work for Israel, to kill as many Arabs as necessary, to deport them, to expel and burn them, to have everyone hate us, to pull the rug from underneath the feet of the Diaspora Jews, so that they will be forced to run to us crying. Even if it means blowing up one or two synagogues here and there, I don't care."
~ Ariel Sharon, Prime Minister of Israel 2001-2006, daily Davar, 1982-12-17.
"We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter of Eretz Israel…. Force is all they do or ever will understand. We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours … When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do will be to scurry around like drugged roaches in a bottle."
~ Rafael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defence Forces - Gad Becker, Yediot Ahronot, New York Times 1983-04-14
"The very point of Labor's Zionist program is to have as much land as possible and as few Arabs as possible!"
~ Yitzhak Navon ("moderate" ex-Israeli president and a leading labor party politician.) Cited on p.179 of Nur Masalha's A Land without a People who cites Bernard Avishai's The Tragedy of Zionism 1985 p.340.
"I don't sign orders to destroy the houses of Jews, only of Arabs,"
~ Haim Miller, deputy mayor of Jerusalem and acting mayor in Olmert's absence, quoted in Yediot Aharonot, 1998-02-07.
"We must do everything to ensure they [the Palestinian refugees] never do return "
~ David Ben Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel 1948-1963, in his diary, 1948-07-18, quoted in Michael Bar Zohar's Ben-Gurion: the Armed Prophet, Prentice-Hall, 1967, p. 157.
"Here lies the saint, Doctor Baruch Kapal Goldstein, blessed be the memory of the righteous and holy man, may the Lord revenge his blood, who devoted his soul for the Jews, Jewish religion and Jewish land. His hands are clean and his heart is clear. He was killed as a martyr of God on the 14th of Adar, Purim, in the year 5754."
~ inscription on the grave, (made as a shrine visited by pilgrims), of the mass murderer Baruch Goldstein. An American Physician and an Israeli settler of Hebron, Goldstein shot to death 29 worshippers kneeling in a mosque in 1994 before the crowd overpowered and killed him. As a doctor, he had been court-martialed for refusing to treat anyone who was not a Jew.
"Israel should keep the Araboushim [derogatory slang for Arabs] on a short leash, so that they recognise a whip is over their head. As long as not too many people are being visibly killed, then Western humanists will accept it all peacefully, and even ask 'What is so terrible?'."
~ Boaz Evron, Yediot Ahronot, 1982-12-02, Israeli writer and commentator.
"Israel is working on a biological weapon that would harm Arabs but not Jews, according to Israeli military and western intelligence sources… In developing their 'ethno-bomb', Israeli scientists are trying to exploit medical advances by identifying genes carried by some Arabs, then create a genetically modified bacterium or virus. The intention is to use the ability of viruses and certain bacteria to alter the DNA inside their host's living cells. The scientists are trying to engineer deadly micro-organisms that attack only those bearing the distinctive genes. The programme is based at the biological institute in Nes Tziyona, the main research facility for Israel's clandestine arsenal of chemical and biological weapons. A scientist there said the task was hugely complicated because both Arabs and Jews are of semitic origin. But he added: 'They have, however, succeeded in pinpointing a particular characteristic in the genetic profile of certain Arab communities, particularly the Iraqi people.' The disease could be spread by spraying the organisms into the air or putting them in water supplies. The research mirrors biological studies conducted by South African scientists during the apartheid era and revealed in testimony before the truth commission. The idea of a Jewish state conducting such research has provoked outrage in some quarters because of parallels with the genetic experiments of Dr Josef Mengele, the Nazi scientist at Auschwitz."
~ Uzi Mahnaimi and Marie Colvin, The Sunday Times [London, 1998-11-15]
30. Bishop accuses gays of 'conspiracy' against the Catholic Church
Comment #144954 by windweaver on March 17, 2008 at 5:05 am
Is There a 'Gay Gene'?
New Genetic Regions Associated With Male Sexual Orientation Found
WebMD Medical NewsJan. 28, 2005 - The genes a man gets from his mother and father may play an important role in determining whether he is gay or not, according to a new study likely to reignite the "gay gene" debate.
Researchers say it's the first time the entire human genetic makeup has been scanned in search of possible genetic determinants of male sexual orientation. The results suggest that several genetic regions may influence homosexuality.
"It builds on previous studies that have consistently found evidence of genetic influence on sexual orientation, but our study is the first to look at exactly where those genes are located," says researcher Brian Mustanski, PhD, a psychologist at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
Those previous studies looked only at the genes located on the X chromosome. Genes on this chromosome are only passed to a son from his mother. But this study examined genetic information on all chromosomes, including genes from the father.
The findings show that identical stretches of DNA on three chromosomes were shared by about 60% of gay brothers in the study compared to the about 50% normally expected by chance.
Gay Gene Debate
A heated debate over the existence of a "gay gene" emerged from a 1993 report published in the journal Science by then-NIH researcher Dean Hamer, PhD. That study linked DNA markers on the X chromosome to male sexual orientation.
Since then, questions arose regarding the validity of those results. Other researchers are attempting to replicate and verify Hamer's findings. Hamer is also senior author of the current study, which appears in the March issue of Human Genetics.
But researchers say this study takes a different approach. Its goal was not to replicate those findings but to search for new genetic markers associated with male sexual orient