What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
37 Comments
- texasshodan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+23Maybe the cabbies should find some other line of work. I'd hate to find out one day that they suddenly need to drive on the left hand side of the road because they can not go in the same direction as infidels.
- PrincepsSenatus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+22Sharia? Sharia? We don't need no stinkin' sharia.
Keep sharia in 7th century past where it belongs. I aint no dhimmi! - Wingman2003, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18Are you serious? Try telling a black passenger that the white driver who refuses to take him into an inner city neighborhood known for its dangers to white people that he isn't required to do so. This driver would at least be justified in his concern for his own health. The muslim driver is putting his religion ahead of his job responsibilities and not serving the public he is licensed to serve. I'm sure the white driver who refuses service to a black person would have his cab license revoked before he finished his shift. The muslim should be treated the same.
Liberals scream about separation of church and state if it involves Christianity but have no problem mixing islam with everything. - Bridgetown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17Maddening. Creepy. Psychotic Muslims strike again.
- jimyai, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11@YixilIesiphon
I can’t believe anyone is that is incredibly stupid.
When cabbies don’t like blacks they don’t have to pick them up.
When a cabbie sees a turban they can simply tell that person no I don’t like your religion.
Didn’t we go through this bullsh*t 30 and 40 years ago. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Okay YixilTesiphon, thats fine, so why are they creating a stir about it? and why is anyone contemplating a policy in regards to this?
I say lt them eat pork!! they can always move to Londonistan and drive a hack there if they dont like it here. - Bridgetown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Hmmm....I went to your links...I linked from those links..I read what he has written.
I do not see the lies.
And I do not see the Lie within this story. ... . . . - MissMargo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7When I lived in San Francisco I didn't own a car. I usually took the bus or the Max and sometimes a taxi. This meant I used one of these forms of transportation after I went grocery shopping. I usually purchased wine when grocery shopping. I can't see the problem carrying this home on a bus or in a taxi.
- Bridgetown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Furthermore, Kbkbkbk....
While I await you trying to find a lie in Pipes' postings.....
Here, Same subject....different sources. Are you going to now, tell me they ALL LIE????????????
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-10-10-cabbies-culture_x.htm
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/01/25/oppenheim.cabbies/index.html
I'd keep on going, but I think I've made my point.
I won't wait for you to enlighten us on the "lie", because you can't. There isn't one. And 2+2 still equals 4, babe. - Bridgetown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Wait a second. If I go out and have a drink, and don't want to get in my car and drive....I'd like to take a cab home, thanks.
- MissMargo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Yes I agree, no drinking in the cab/bus etc. Oh and it was the Muni not the Max. I'm in Portland now and it's called the Max here :)
- NotaSlickFan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"kababble" doing "It's" best to babble incoherently again. You are so fun to laugh at. I should know as I have laughed at you "at least 300 times”! Te-hee! That is exactly what the answer is to your question: "Why do you think I'm here?” To be laughed at of course!
- signals, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Yes Mondo-Retardo continues...
Seriously, how come some Muslims refuse to go near alcohol while others sell cheap alcohol and cigarettes at those high-crime convenient stores??? Or is this a 'local' problem?
Basically none of them can practice what they preach, either! Or maybe more than strict Sharia Laws, these are ways to put dhimmis in their place. - Bridgetown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5bridge, in yet another typical right-wing attempt to use the concepts they learned from me, said:
"This is what you call Projection."
No, this is NOT projection. If you're going to try and use terms like this perhaps you should try and study them and their meanings first. Oh, and while you're at it you can look up democracy, freedom of speech, and all of those other terms you are unfamiliar with.
***************************************************
I'm well aware of the word, and it works perfectly.
***************************************************
"You brought up one sentence that he said or didn't say about Chomsky."
It's irrelevant, as I've said from the beginning, even if I said Chomsky's name in ever other sentence. In fact, I've rarely brought him up. I rarely say anything about his ideas. I've never said that I even like the guy, though I do. Nothing. But, since you've said his name, AGAIN, here, then you TOO should just stop using the word given you know nothing of the subject. After you study a little and have some clue as to what you're referring to THEN perhaps you can start making a debate.
*********************************************************************
what the heck are you saying? You brought the guy up. Can you read? DO you know what you typed? It's write here on this page. Your comments. Sheesh
******************************************************************************
"Perhaps he made one comment in ignorance."
Irrelevant. Your and your cohorts talking about Chomsky without knowing the subject is the only thing ignorant here. Better be careful.
*****************************************
What the heck are you talking about? I'm not talking about CHOMSKY in this sentence. I'm talking about Pipes. I'm responding to Your earlier comments. You can't even follow a conversation?
*****************************************
"And then you claim that people become zombies and "follow" him."
I know of no one who "follows" him. No one fro the left anyway. I've studied him and know his work, just as I have Plato Aristotle, Hume, Kant, etc...and all the other famous philosophers in the history books, where, mind you, Chomsky already is and will be more in the future. What's wrong with learning about one of the great thinkers of our time? What's odd is that people would resist knowing about him. I don't recall this much antipathy towards Einstein, even though he probably had many of the same ideas. Nope, 100% irrelevant. If you're going to talk about the subject, try studying it a little first. Hey, I'm not doing this because I get something out of it. On the contrary, I get much more of the data I'm looking for by you maintaining your seemingly proud positions of ignorance on the topic while trying to talk about it all the time. This benefits YOU, not me.
**************************************************************************
Again, I wasn't talking about Chomsky. You are unable to follow the conversation between us, I see. Again, I'm referring to Pipes and what you wrote above.
***********************************************************************
"Utter stupidity."
Now THIS is projection, as I've just demonstrated, again, for the 300th time.
***************************************************************
Projection? I'm talking about the idea that YOu brought forth about people following Pipes and it becoming "propoganda"...Again, you can't follow.
****************************************************************
"Besides, this has nothing to do with Chomsky. (again)"
Then quit talking about him.
***********************************************************
you're losing it. Try to follow a conversation. YOU brought the guy up.
***********************************************************
"Pertaining to This Post, Where is the LIE????????????????????????????"
You really don't see it, do you? Perhaps if you knew a little background, as I've tried briefly to teach you, about the man Malkin is trying to spoon-feed you as a source, then it wouldn't be so difficult to tell. And if someone claims that 2+2=54, and you TOO believe that it's 54, then you probably wouldn't see the problem. Couldn't get much easier than this.
********************************************
Where's the LIE? If it's so clear as day. DO TELL. Still waiting.....and still Nothing but you not being able to follow.
********************************************** - agitate, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Good discussion, I'd be interested in your take on refusing blind people with dogs, same?
- THX1212, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8"They shouldn't be required to transport anybody they don't like. It's their financial loss. Free market wins again."
Fool. Most airports are government owned. Most airport transportation companies work on lease from that government owned airport and are hardly in free competition with competitors. Your argument is equivalent to telling taxpayers to butt out of how their money is being spent. - Bridgetown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4This is what you call Projection.
You brought up one sentence that he said or didn't say about Chomsky. Perhaps he made one comment in ignorance.
And then you claim that people become zombies and "follow" him. Utter stupidity.
Besides, this has nothing to do with Chomsky. (again)
Pertaining to This Post, Where is the LIE???????????????????????????? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Blocking again. Not worth my time.
- manchu2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Bridge, everything comes back to Chomsky (of course, KB's just "pulling your chain" with that...he's not really completely obsessed with the good professor.....)
Didn't read KB's posts; not worth the time - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well if you ask Biden it's because those working at convenience stores are all INDIAN (as in from India).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIT3jUrNTX0
Most of them are NOT muslim.
I used to live in a part of Ohio that is heavily populated by Indian immigrants. One was the best friend of my oldest and I babysitted for a while. After 9/11 she started getting picked on by some kids who stupidly assumed because of her dark skin she was muslim. - Bridgetown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3You're out of your freaking mind. This is about Cab Drivers.
It's not propaganda.
It's actually happening.
Enlightenment yourself to the facts On The Ground. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4You make a good point. I can assume the alcohol was down in the bad and not prominent. If the taxi driver is going out of his way to insist he knows what's in your bags, before he lets you ride, score one. You're right. That should not be happening.
On the other hand, if I'm hailing a taxi, prominently carrying my "fifth," I can think of a lot of public transportation that would refuse to allow me to board.
The former scenario, you're right. The taxi driver should mind his own business. On the latter. I think common sense would prevail regardless of religion.
I - manchu2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Unfortunately, the passenger doesn't know which is which, and airport taxis aren't the "free market". Not just any taxi can pick up fares at the airport.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Ah! You bring up something I hadn't thought about earlier. No, I would not be for that. No religion should be allowed to discriminate, especially against the handicapped.
I don't want to be a hypocrite on this issue. I'm against forcing pharmacists to carry the abortion pill, thus I have no problem with muslims refusing to carry alcohol. I'm a big believer in religious freedom. We are not talking about refusing service to a human being in the case of alcohol. (although, I'm sure some liberal would argue refusing to carry the abortion pill is "discriminatory," despite the fact it saves a human life. Sheesh)
However, you bring up something I had not thought of before and that is the sharia belief about dogs. To discriminate against a human being, especially, a helpless individual like the handicapped, based on some part of one's religion is a different matter.
No one should be allowed to refuse service to the handicapped or anyone based on race, religion, etc. etc. etc. In that case, I think the answer is, if you are a muslim and you have a problem with carrying the assistance dogs, then get another job. You are obviously in the wrong line of work. - Bridgetown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Furthermore....you say, "you can tell me the names of all the muslim writers, blogs, hompgs,agncs,grps,etc u have studied which led u to perceptions..."
I lived in Saudi Arabia, for starters...no books, just first hand living with people there as they live.
Also, the category would not be empty, I have thousands of references, but only One should matter here, The Quran.
And before you say that I don't have thousands of references, just ask and I'll list them for your stubborn head. - Bridgetown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2kkkkb...
you honestly sit there and type that you "rarely talk about him at all"
You're kidding, right?
sheesh. Should I cut and paste for you? Are you all there? Are you serious?? - Bridgetown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Kkkkkkb
You need to sit down and assess yourself, son.
This digg post is not about Pipes. This digg post is about what is happening in Minn. w/ Taxi drivers.
There is no lie. It is happening.
Your posts, therefore, are Irrelevent, empty, tedious, and frankly, embarrasing. - Bridgetown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1kbkbkb.
I believe now that you are a senile old man.
You don't even know what you type.
I don't need to, nor will I cut and paste. All you have to do is scroll through all of your OWN postings. I'm not going to copy and paste what YOU typed to prove to YOU that you typed it. Your failing memory is not my problem...and most of your postings (less the ones deleted by digg) are here.
You always ask and I never give you links or references? Another lie. Once again, all you have to do is scroll through past postings. THey are all here. Digg has not erased any of them. Proof is in the postings.
This is an ongoing problem in Minn. With cab drivers.
You don't want to believe the truth? Fine, stick your head back in the sand. I could care less what you believe.
I don't think you are lucid enough to continue bothering with you. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5May I insert something into this.
Christian pharmacists are being harassed for refusing to carry the abortion pill. Further, some Christian doctors are being harassed for refusing to perform abortions for religious reasons.
I am against forcing people to do something against their religious conscience. In a free country, every one should be against that.
We are talking about people on religious grounds refusing to carry people with alcohol, no more, no less.
Let's get down to brass tacks. There isn't a taxi or bus around where I live, that I know of, that would carry people and alcohol, and religion has nothing to do with it. It's just good common sense.
I totally understand why Sharia should not be forced on those wanting to ride a taxi. If my taxi driver said I had to don a burkah to ride in his taxi, my answer would not be printable, HOWEVER, we are not talking about banning race, or religion, we are talking about banning alcohol.
There are plenty of businesses that do that regardless of religion. I don't see why, then it should be a problem BECAUSE of religion.
I'm sorry, on this one, whether I get dugg down or no, I cannot agree with Michelle. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0bridge said:
"kkkkb... you honestly sit there and type that you "rarely talk about him at all"
You're kidding, right?"
Yes, this is exactly what I'm saying. I don't recall once saying Chomsky thinks X about Y, or that I agreed with it, or disagreed with it. Probably less than two times since I've been coming here, and I don't really even recall those. But if you have the overwhelming evidence to demonstrate that I do I'd be happy to look at it. Nothing so far.
"sheesh. Should I cut and paste for you? Are you all there? Are you serious??"
Yes, that's EXACTLY what you should do. I'm waiting.
==========================================================================
bridge continues:
"Kkkkkkb You need to sit down and assess yourself, son."
No, I do NOT. I'm quite well aware of what I've written, and I have rarely talked about anything having to do with Chomsky's positions on anything, nor have I ever said they were bad, good, right, wrong, or anything. I've said what they weren't several hundred times after you fools made factually incorrect statements, but that's about it. So, given that I do this all the time it should be quite easy for you to produce something. (THIS will NEVER happen)
"This digg post is not about Pipes."
Malkin referred to Pipes and it IS about him and what kind of idiot you're using as a source. But like I said, even pathological liars don't lie ALL the time.
"This digg post is about what is happening in Minn. w/ Taxi drivers."
Yes? And? This has nothing to do with my pointing out that the source is a racist idiot, and how this influences folks like you.
"There is no lie. It is happening."
Yes, and he's a liar. So?
"our posts, therefore, are Irrelevant, empty, tedious, and frankly, embarrassing."
Your reading anything written by Pipes or Malkin and believing what they say is what's embarrassing. Oh, and I'll be waiting for that Chomsky stuff which doesn't exist. Don't forget.
==========================================================================
bridge further drools and says:
"Furthermore....you say, "you can tell me the names of all the Muslim writers, blogs, homepages,agncs,grps,etc u have studied which led u to perceptions...""
Yes, I say. So, where are they?
"I lived in Saudi Arabia, for starters"
So what? What does this have to do with anything? Then you should be quite familiar that almost all of the 9/11 terrorists were from there. You know, probably the most fundamentalist country in the world, which has a horrible human rights record, etc....Anyway, where are your sources?
"...no books, just first hand living with people there as they live."
Ahhh....There we have it. Nothing. Just a conversation with a few people generalized to the entire nation. Sorry, but while your experience may have had some touristic value you're going to have to demonstrate that you learned something. So far, nothing.
"Also, the category would not be empty, I have thousands of references"
And that's why you use them so often. NOT!
"but only One should matter here, The Quran."
Oh, Christ, don't tell me you're going to start spouting out all of the phrases which supposedly demonstrate that it's a religion of death or something. Sorry, FAR more folks have been killed via Christianity. Better not go down that path.
"And before you say that I don't have thousands of references, just ask and I'll list them for your stubborn head."
What do you mean, "just ask"? I ALWAYS ask, and you NEVER send anything. Oh, and if you plan on leading me to some right-wing racist sites, like Pipes or something, save you fingers. However, if you have some scholarly materials I'll look at them. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0manchu drooled, having nothing better to offer:
"Bridge, everything comes back to Chomsky (of course, KB's just "pulling your chain" with that...he's not really completely obsessed with the good professor.....)"
Evidence? I rarely talk about him at all. I don't recall mentioning ANY of his positions or quoting him more than once or twice since I've been coming to this blog. But of you think you can find any evidence, please present it. About 85% of the comments rel;ated to the man at all have simply come from the village idiots here who think they know his positions, when they don't, and then lies about them, which, I then procede to correct. Then there is about14% which is responding to liars who say that I talk about him all the time when I rarely do. Then there is maybe 1% at most, and I don't recall even this much, so I'm being rather conservative here, where I actually mentioned his positions in any manner other than correcting incorrect assertions made against him. And even then, I never remember saying that therefore he was correct. I simply said that the position assigned to him were incorrect, just as the positions I've assigned to Pipes ARE correct. So, I'm afraid your assertion itself, manchu, is as full of crap and falsity as those who seem to attrack your type, Pipes, Malkin, and the like, all full of crap.
"Didn't read KB's posts; not worth the time"
This is probably true. If I went to a physics blog and saw a bunch of formulations which I didn't understand and knew that I had nothing to contribute, and that I was unable to respond with anything more than a grunt, I'd probably conclude that it was "not worth the time" also. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0".....Oh, and while you're at it you can look up democracy, freedom of speech, and all of those other terms you are unfamiliar with."kb
"I'm well aware of the word, and it works perfectly."brid
No, you aren't. Or if you are you keep doing it repeatedly.
*****************************************************************************************************
"You brought up one sentence that he said or didn't say about Chomsky."
"It's irrelevant, as I've said from the beginning, even if I said Chomsky's name in ever other sentence. In fact, I've rarely brought him up...."kb
"what the heck are you saying?"
I'm saying that it's irrelevant. See? It's written right up there.
"You brought the guy up. Can you read? DO you know what you typed? It's write here on this page. Your comments. Sheesh"
Really? Where's the evidence? I've been talking about Pipes and his LONG history of lying. Chomsky's name was only mentioned in how it related to Pipes' habit of lying, therefore the sentence isn't about Chomsky, it's about Pipes. The mention of Chomsky in the above is STILL irrelevant.
******************************************************************************
Perhaps he made one comment in ignorance.
"Irrelevant. Your and your cohorts talking about Chomsky without knowing the subject is the only thing ignorant here. Better be careful."
Still irrelevant.
*****************************************
"What the heck are you talking about? I'm not talking about CHOMSKY in this sentence. I'm talking about Pipes."
Yes, me too. I've only been talking about Pipes.
"I'm responding to Your earlier comments. You can't even follow a conversation?"
Evidence?
*****************************************
"And then you claim that people become zombies and "follow" him."
I know of no one who "follows" him. No one fro the left anyway. I've studied him and know his work, just as I have Plato Aristotle, Hume, Kant, etc...and all the other famous philosophers in the history books, where, mind you, Chomsky already is and will be more in the future...." **************************************************************************
"Again, I wasn't talking about Chomsky. You are unable to follow the conversation between us, I see. Again, I'm referring to Pipes and what you wrote above."
Evidence? Where? Don't know what you're referring to.
***********************************************************************
"Utter stupidity."
Now THIS is projection, as I've just demonstrated, again, for the 300th time.
"Projection? I'm talking about the idea that You brought forth about people following Pipes and it becoming "propaganda"...Again, you can't follow."
Yes, Pipes IS a propagandist of the first order, and a well established lying fanatic. Again, you can't follow. I left one of the thousands of links where you find many examples of his lying, his neo-conartistry, etc.....That's all. Simply put, he lies. That's all. But even pathological liars don't lies ALL the time. You know, like when he says he must go to the bathroom he might be telling the truth. I'm talking about his entire career, where he came from, etc....Are you unaware of those who you use for sources?
"Besides, this has nothing to do with Chomsky. (again)"
Then quit talking about him.
***********************************************************
"you're losing it. Try to follow a conversation. YOU brought the guy up."
Only in relation to how Pipes was a liar. The mention of Chomsky's name IS irrelevant. The relevant part is that Pipes lied, and in this case a lie so gross and apparent that it should make anyone with a half a brain dismiss him out of hand. Had he made the same lie about anyone else on earth it would have changed the point one bit. The mention of Chomsky is irrelevant.
"Pertaining to This Post, Where is the LIE????????????????????????????"bridge
"You really don't see it, do you?...."kb
Where's the LIE? If it's so clear as day. DO TELL. Still waiting.....and still Nothing but you not being able to follow.
His entire thesis regarding Muslims is a lie. What do you mean "Where's the lie?" You want MORE evidence of his lying? Okay:
http://www.alkalima.com/publications/Alkalima-Exposing-Daniel-Pipes.pdf
http://www.counterpunch.org/neumann1207.html
http://www.scholarofthehouse.org/onrebi.html
See: What Others Say at bottom of page:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Daniel_Pipes
You'll also notice that Malkin supports and has written direct apologetics for this lying buffoon. As always, you should perhaps look at his agenda before jumping on board and drinking the cyanide koolaid. Let's have a look at a few statements which pretty much sum up his positions, and most things which flow from the them, including this joke of an article here:
The Truth About Daniel Pipes
1)Daniel Pipes' speech before the convention of the American Jewish Congress on 10/21/2001). "The increased stature, and affluence, and enfranchisement of American Muslims...will present true dangers to American Jews."
2)"The Palestinians are a miserable people...and they deserve to be." Daniel Pipes, Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, July 2001
3)"Western European societies are unprepared for the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and maintaining different standards of hygiene...All immigrants bring exotic customs and attitudes, but Muslim customs are more troublesome than most." (National Review, 11/19/90)
4)"Iranians and Pakistanis, to take two groups of non-Arabs, are at least as widely conspiracy-minded and as anti-Semitic as, say, Tunisians and Kuwaitis." (Commentary, 9/1/99)
5)"...black converts tend to hold vehemently anti-American, anti-Christian, and anti-Semitic attitudes." (Commentary, 6/1/2000)
http://www.mpac.org/article.php?id=72
From Democracy Now (The true colors of the brave Pipes demonstrated here)
"Last week Pipes walked off the set of an Al Jazeera news show when he learned representatives from the Council on American Islamic Relations would also appear on the show." (Coward)
"Almost two weeks ago we talked with Pipes, as well as Hussein Ibish of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee and Ibrahim Hooper of the Council on American Islamic Relations.
Since it was a phone interview Pipes couldn't walk off the set. But he did the next closest thing. He hung up. Not once but twice. But we were able to ask him a few questions.
I began by asking for his response to the charge that he was the nation's leading Islamophobe..."
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/05/03/0026241
There are 12 good examples here:
http://www.cair-net.org/default.asp?Page=searchResults
More here:
http://www.adc.org/index.php?id=1779&no_cache=1&sword_list[]=daniel&sword_list[]=pipes
Anyway, I could go on and on demonstrating the man's history, and it is in THIS light which one should be reading things such as this basically irrelevant issue regarding taxis, Muslims, and alcohol.
=========================================================================
bridgetown said:
"Furthermore, Kbkbkbk....
While I await you trying to find a lie in Pipes' postings....."
"Here, Same subject....different sources. Are you going to now, tell me they ALL LIE????????????"
As mentioned before, even the most depraved and pathetic figures like Pipes lie ALL the time, though some seem to be trying. If he said his butt itched I see no reason not to believe him. Beyond this I don't see much reason to believe him regarding anything. The he has tried to frame the two light on the taxi issue as more evidence that "The Muslims are taking over" in the same paranoid light that his father thought "The commies are taking over". What this does is to instill further incorrect stereotypes and hatred for Muslims, basically from folks like you folks here, and causes you to see ALL things they do through these warped lenses, which, in turn, DOES affect the decisions you make on whom to support, their agendas, etc...A given that his agenda is hardly a secret, well, one should be able to easily see that "the taxi affair" is just another link in the chain. Seemed to me pretty much like a culturally sensitive thing to do by putting lights on the cabs. Personally I'd prefer to get into a cab with a light having a Muslim driver who doesn't wish to pick up a drunk person, that I would a cab with a light saying the racist driver doesn't wish to pick up a black person. I think it's a good idea. Then we can see who stands where.
"I'd keep on going, but I think I've made my point."
Your point being that Pipes thinks that the Muslims are trying to take over the world?
"I won't wait for you to enlighten us on the "lie", because you can't. There isn't one. And 2+2 still equals 4, babe."
His entire position is a lie, babe. I think I've made MY point. And why are you using my 2+2=4 examples being that your math is as good as your debating abilities, not to mention that you don't do math. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0Oh, and a word of advice. When you folks begin to look at an issue where two or more sides are involved, or where one side has a grievence against the other, it REALLY doesn't hurt to try and make some sort of attempt at looking at the side with the grievence instead of relying solely upon folks like Pipes to "tell" you what the other side is all about. A simply example which ALL of you should be able to easily relate: There were black slaves and white slave masters. The blacks had grievences. From time to time they actually had the nerve to ask for things, like, perhaps going to see their children a few counties over who had been sold to the highest bidder that day. These grievences were perceived by the masters as attempts by the blacks to impose THEMSELVES on the master. After all, he paid for them. Now, the master thought that if we allow the blacks to start down this "slippery slope" where would it end. Then there were even instances where the masters were killed. The fear and anti-black fever was reaching a high pitch around white communities where the like-minded lived. Everyone was sure the blacks would get them next. Now, if you ONLY listened to the masters arguments, rationalizations, etc...and never took the time to actually talk to any of the slaves, etc....do you think you'd be developing an accurate perception of what was actually taking place? Would you not perceive every act the slaves were doing through these lenses? Would you not begin to become paranoid, as the right has ALWAYS done, about everything they do, interpreting everything as a potential plot to "get them"? I'm sorry, but I'm afraid you probably would. And, I'm sorry, but this is basically what you do on an almost daily basis here. You ARE the white folks looking through the eyes of the master, and this IS not a way to understand issues. Period! The absolute FIRST step, once again (Why am I always having to point out the ost obvious first steps which you folks never seem to grasp?), if wishing to enlighten yourself about the topic, is to actually go to the exact people who Pipes lies about, most often the victims, just as the master lied about his slaves, and see what they actually say themselves. THIS is the FIRST step, and I'd doubt VERY SERIOUSLY that a one of you unwitting right-wing propagandist bottom-feeders has read a sentence from the folks directly instead of after having it filtered through folks like Pipes or Malkin. This is also another reason why things even as obvious as allowing bin Laden blurbs to not appear in the media are so important. You folks aren't supposed to know what they actually say, you're only supposed to know what others, the propagandists want you to hear. This is the job of places like The U.S. Information Agency. What do you think their job is? Who do you think the targets of propaganda are? People overseas? YOU are the primary targets of the propaganda and this is how it works in almost every state. Propaganda isn't only trying to make Iraqis believe that the U.S. is trying to "free them". It's about trying to make YOU perceive that this is what the U.S. is up to. And for the most part it works relatively well. I doubt there are more than a few percent of Iraqis who fall for this nonsense, but look at all of you, hook, line, and sinker. But just to give you a chance to prove me wrong, you can tell me the names of all of the Muslim writers, blogs, homepages, agencies, groups, etc....you have studied to which have led you to your perception about them. (The category will be EMPTY)
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+0vale said:
"Blocking again. Not worth my time."
This IS probably for the best. Attempting to comment and not saying anything really doesn't look good for you. Yes, it's better just to shut up and allow someone with something even remotely resembling an idea to have a try. Besides, you can't afford my time. (Notice once again, as always, vale doesn't challenge anything, give evidence for anything, make an argument, etc....I believe this is called "retreating" in the military, or perhaps running away with your tail between you legs)
==========================================================================
bridge, in yet another typical right-wing attempt to use the concepts they learned from me, said:
"This is what you call Projection."
No, this is NOT projection. If you're going to try and use terms like this perhaps you should try and study them and their meanings first. Oh, and while you're at it you can look up democracy, freedom of speech, and all of those other terms you are unfamiliar with.
"You brought up one sentence that he said or didn't say about Chomsky."
It's irrelevant, as I've said from the beginning, even if I said Chomsky's name in ever other sentence. In fact, I've rarely brought him up. I rarely say anything about his ideas. I've never said that I even like the guy, though I do. Nothing. But, since you've said his name, AGAIN, here, then you TOO should just stop using the word given you know nothing of the subject. After you study a little and have some clue as to what you're referring to THEN perhaps you can start making a debate.
"Perhaps he made one comment in ignorance."
Irrelevant. Your and your cohorts talking about Chomsky without knowing the subject is the only thing ignorant here. Better be careful.
"And then you claim that people become zombies and "follow" him."
I know of no one who "follows" him. No one fro the left anyway. I've studied him and know his work, just as I have Plato Aristotle, Hume, Kant, etc...and all the other famous philosophers in the history books, where, mind you, Chomsky already is and will be more in the future. What's wrong with learning about one of the great thinkers of our time? What's odd is that people would resist knowing about him. I don't recall this much antipathy towards Einstein, even though he probably had many of the same ideas. Nope, 100% irrelevant. If you're going to talk about the subject, try studying it a little first. Hey, I'm not doing this because I get something out of it. On the contrary, I get much more of the data I'm looking for by you maintaining your seemingly proud positions of ignorance on the topic while trying to talk about it all the time. This benefits YOU, not me.
"Utter stupidity."
Now THIS is projection, as I've just demonstrated, again, for the 300th time.
"Besides, this has nothing to do with Chomsky. (again)"
Then quit talking about him.
"Pertaining to This Post, Where is the LIE????????????????????????????"
You really don't see it, do you? Perhaps if you knew a little background, as I've tried briefly to teach you, about the man Malkin is trying to spoon-feed you as a source, then it wouldn't be so difficult to tell. And if someone claims that 2+2=54, and you TOO believe that it's 54, then you probably wouldn't see the problem. Couldn't get much easier than this. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+0bridge said:
"Hmmm....I went to your links...I linked from those links..I read what he has written. I do not see the lies."
You'd have to know what the actual facts were before you'd be able to identify the lies. Unfortunately for you, much of the garbage you are fed from your right-wing sources are NOT facts, and are easily demonstrated not to be. Of course you'd have to actually look, but this is where the problem lies. You do not look for evidence which demonstrates the lies. You're too busy looking for the things which confirm your fairy tales. Pipes has a VERY long history of lying through his teeth, and there there's a LONG history of this fact being demonstrated. And this is the exact opposite of what happens in the case of Chomsky. The exact opposite. So, if you haven't noticed any lies in what he's said, then you either haven't read the words, you haven't understood them, or you don't know what you're looking for. It takes about 10 seconds to find. Just a minute ago I saw on his blog from several years ago when someone asked him a question, and they were more than likely a lefty baiting him just to demonstrate the very point that he lies, and, of course he was too dense to even catch it, if he thought that Chomsky was a Holocaust denier, and he told the guy that Chomsky was, and that he had written the forward to a Holocaust deniers book. Now, this story is VERY old, and was demonstrated to be bunk within minutes after it happened, but, thanks to folks like you, vale, etc...who Pipes knows won't read for themselves, he can tell lies like this, get you folks to unwittingly perpetuate it, and help spread his propaganda. This is quite common. And this is also the problem with you folks not reading anything but the propaganda which confirms those preconceived notions which you have and which you aren't really quite sure where they came from. This is also why these folks are often so hostile to education, information, allowing ANY dissident voices to be heard, etc...Simply put, if they can frame the ideas and debate so that it fits within a certain narrow range, you will not only not know what to look for, as it falls outside that which you have contact with, even if you do come across it, it will sound like it's from space. I've demonstrated this probably 300 times on the very blog. Why do you think I'm here? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -12/+0Funny that Michelle would even think about considering a long time well established liar like Pipes as a source. You folks have no shame.
http://www.mereislam.info/2006/02/danish-cartoons-double-standards-and.html
http://www.voltairenet.org/article136260.html
Daniel Pipes was appointed by President Bush during the Summer Congressional recess in August 2003 (to avoid a problem with Congress, why should Bush's appointments be questioned by anyone?) to the the board of United States Institute of Peace, a Congressionally sponsored think tank dedicated to "the peaceful resolution of international conflicts." He served there until the end of 2004. There is more than a little irony in this. He sees no problem that cannot be solved by militarism. For example, in looking at the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, he has stated that "What war had achieved for Israel," Pipes explained at a Zionist conference in Washington DC, "diplomacy has undone." Nothing short of total military victory will do.
"Conditions of peace have, by and large, been created through military victory"-- Daniel Pipes
So it should really come as no surprise that Pipes, whose hatred of Arab and Muslim people is legendary, would give his backing for military aid to the Iraq regime of Saddam Hussein, back when the Iraqi President was "gassing his own people" (killing Iranians and Kurds). After all, it was a military option. And for Pipes, any military option must be attempted before any alternative is even considered. This is keeping with the Pipes motto of "Give War a Chance!".
So it is in the interest of our understanding of this man, and the thinking of President Bush Jr. and those, like American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and the currently misnamed Anti-Defamation League, that support this extremist, that Pipes' article, which appeared in The New Republic on April 27, 1987 is presented.
http://www.tomjoad.org/pipes.htm - YixilTesiphon, on 10/12/2007, -19/+1They shouldn't be required to transport anybody they don't like. It's their financial loss. Free market wins again.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is