Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

The hysterical left.


  • Please log in to reply
3514 replies to this topic

#41 Zen

Zen

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 11661 posts

Posted 28 September 2005 - 10:39 PM

Originally posted by Miss Astrojet
The islamofascists hate any country that isn't muslim. Europe is on their hit list because France, Germany, Holland, Denmark, Italy, UK, and Croatia are finally cracking down on them. Serbia for example has less of a problem with rabid muslims because no smart muslim would even think about living there. They just handed over a jihadist to Spain who was part of the Madrid 3/11 group. He was passing through Serbia when he got nabbed. Haha.:cheers:



:D :D :D
  • 0

#42 Draco_Annie

Draco_Annie

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8468 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 01:53 AM

Originally posted by Condilover
Brendon,

Good article...

I take issue with the Bush needs to do something over Palestine thing.

Really nothing can be done by outside groups. That has to come from within.



Wrong.

Take away all financial and military aid sent by the US to Israel and see how Israel would survive.

It would have to learn to live in peace with their neighbours, like all other nations of the earth have had to learn throughout history.

They don't have respect for the land, or its people but rather to an abstract ideology that they have constructed and are trying to impose upon the world.

All countries, all nations have had to integrate to their environment in order to survive, not the other way around. Israelis have no experience in history about how to "belong" to a country, to an environment, to a people who are sharing the same natural elements. It takes a lot of love and hard work for a people to be part of a land once that people is displaced.

Look, if we take all ideology away as well as biblical references and claims, let's take a look at the Israeli situation.

For centuries jews have had to roam the earth, integrating in their environment as well as they could, providing goods and services to make themselves useful to the communities they became part of. And they survived that way, as a race. (And here I'm foregoing the ashenazim of whatever theory for the sake of the argument). Ok, so they survived but they kept dreaming of a land all their own, that they had never saw, or that their close ancestors never saw but had only heard of.

Then, after WWII, they have the opportunity to have their own land. But they don't have a real attachment to it. They know nothing about it. They just move to the new Israel and call it home. In reality, and humanly... it is a huge displacement, they become like refugees in a foreign land because they don't have any real claim to this new land they call their home. They feel, and are, strangers in that new home... they feel the hostility not only of their new neighbours but that of their new environment. And unable to relate to it, they have to create strong bonds with biblical times and writings in order to feel at home in a place where they are only refugees.

So they make war... they create new ideologies... and try to fit in. The plight of the Palestinians is nothing to them compared to the shame they feel about this strangeness or whatever it is that makes them so vulnerable. They think that by re-enacting the wars of the vikings or earlier conquerors, they'll be able to get rid of that strangeness.

It takes time, even centuries for these things to happen. It takes a lot of work but genocide is not part of the work that has to be done...
  • 0

#43 farmer

farmer

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1407 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 02:25 AM

Originally posted by Brendon
Worse than mad! The blackguards are left wing! :mad:
:D

:o
...........................................
"Left-Wing" insists on "commons". Bush is "ownership society"......(in order to get out from govt. obligations like helping and saving NO.)...... Get real!

NonZionist would vote NDP in Canada every time (if only he knew it)!

You know guys there are certain situations when "object" and "subject" become the same thing. Ditto with totalitarianism and facsism. Both of them have a vested interest in "living high" while others see to the "nitty-gritty" and die early or on command.

Socialism/left-wingism tries to fend off both the extremes: individual freedom while ensuring investment in common necessities. (shelter, food, education and health-care). Period.............like gated communities are a sign of total failure re: "nation" (under god or anything else).

And yes I know the second and last elements have gotten complicated because the environment figures seperately with most govts.........whereas it is FUNDAMENTAL to all human concerns, but esp. food and health-care.

Down with capitalism!
:o :o:o
  • 0

#44 Brendon

Brendon

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13976 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 03:20 AM

farmer,

If that is what you and Comrade Teapot think, well then, good luck to you.

But I don't buy it. Capitalism is merely a tool which society can use. When it becomes a religion, then we have a prob, and I'll agree with you that it can cause a society to become unjust and oppressive.

However, the solution that you and Comrade Teapot suggest, that of world revolution and modernity thru the barrel of a gun, does not appeal to a more conservative type as me.
  • 0

#45 abbracadabra

abbracadabra

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1545 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 04:16 AM

If it's freedom and success 'they' hate, why aren't 'they' attacking Norway?

By Luciana Bohne
Online Journal Contributing Writer

http://www.onlinejou...92105bohne.html

September 21, 2005
  • 0

#46 Draco_Annie

Draco_Annie

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8468 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 05:47 AM

Very good point and article, Abbra...:wonder:
  • 0

#47 Mr Teapot

Mr Teapot

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4631 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 06:49 AM

It does not take long for all the nutters to start shovelling.

Conservatism is the natural politics of a nation state. Support for the Rightwing often increases as patriotism rises. One attribute the Pinkos suffer is the apparent paucity of patriotism in their parasitic existence.

Naturally to the jaundiced eye of a Pinko/Commie (Brendon is a fine example) anything right of centre is the Far Right.
Where would Norway be without massive oil reserves? They can afford to let the nanny government State care for them. Like Kuwait foreign workers do all the grunt work.
  • 0

#48 Brendon

Brendon

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13976 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 06:54 AM

Comrade Teapot: Modernity comes from out of the barrel of a gun.
  • 0

#49 Mr Teapot

Mr Teapot

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4631 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 07:10 AM

In a few cases it does. Iraq and Afghanistan are two good examples.
Generally it just evolves naturally for most nations.
  • 0

#50 JohnathanRGalt

JohnathanRGalt

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1912 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 07:22 AM

Draco_Annie
Very good point and article, Abbra...:wonder:

Actually, the left is quite hysterical. Note how this thread has gone on for many pages.

Let me be the first to say:

Very good point and article, Mr. Teapot ...:wonder:

Here's a link the World_Net_Daily version http://www.worldnetd...RTICLE_ID=46537

I think Dennis Prager is spot-on!

.
  • 0

#51 Mr Teapot

Mr Teapot

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4631 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 07:56 AM

Dennis Prager, Victor Davis Hanson and Daniel Pipes are three world scholars who routinely decimate leftard opinions and doctrines.
:kowt:
  • 0

#52 Brendon

Brendon

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13976 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 08:25 AM

Daniel "KKK" Pipes- In 1990, he said: "Western European societies are unprepared for the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and maintaining different standards of hygiene...-(National Review, 11/19/90)



Yup, I always had you pegged as a racist Comrade Teapot. Boy do you keep "good" company! :rolleyes:

Viva la revolution, eh comrade? ;)

And don't forget the junkie, whatshisname? Oh yeah Drugs-Give-Me-A-Rush Limbaugh.

All of them big Government/Big Spending. Attacking bleeding heart liberals doesn't make you right wing. You could just as easily be extreme left.
  • 0

#53 rozlan

rozlan

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3509 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 02:25 PM

Originally posted by Mr Teapot
In a few cases it does. Iraq and Afghanistan are two good examples.
Generally it just evolves naturally for most nations.



The mujahiddeens from both countries had answered back accordingly...:tralala:
  • 0

#54 farmer

farmer

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1407 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 02:42 PM

Originally posted by Brendon
farmer,

If that is what you and Comrade Teapot think, well then, good luck to you.

But I don't buy it. Capitalism is merely a tool which society can use. When it becomes a religion, then we have a prob, and I'll agree with you that it can cause a society to become unjust and oppressive.

However, the solution that you and Comrade Teapot suggest, that of world revolution and modernity thru the barrel of a gun, does not appeal to a more conservative type as me.


...........................
Capitalism by it's nature is more than a social tool. Money on the other hand could be an excellent social tool once released from the grip of capitalism.

(MrT and I are about as ideologically compatable as oil and water.) He comes across as hard-right.

I was posting mostly to protest the idea that the "left" (that's me) is hysterical. Now it seems to me that the hysteria that dominates these days is in the White House and that hysteria you conservatives, (for hard-to-figure-reasons), call a "left-wing" phenomenon. I'd say you are passing the buck maybe because it's too embarrassing to acknowledge that it is the ultra-right-wing (the people you identify with politically), that has the market on hysteria all sewed up........along with nearly all other markets come to think of it.

I take it back about NonZionist voting NDP. There are actually "conserving" Conservatives in Canada, and NZ maybe more like tham.

I nearly always vote NDP.........sometimes Green and once even for the Marajuana party.

I only get hysterical when I can't see a way to act against injustice............and not for long. I'm typical "left":happy:
  • 0

#55 Mr Teapot

Mr Teapot

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4631 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 09:26 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel "KKK" Pipes- In 1990, he said: "Western European societies are unprepared for the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and maintaining different standards of hygiene...-(National Review, 11/19/90)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


What's racist about that quote Brendon old ****, as in rooster?

Brown skinned?
Massive immigration?
Strange foods?
Standards of hygiene?

Why not link the complete article instead of cherry picking like an accomplished Saddamite?

Is any comment there not true?
You are the bigot here Bubba.
  • 0

#56 Mr Teapot

Mr Teapot

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4631 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 09:48 PM

Stay on your duff Saddamite. I will do it for you. :P

[quote]
.
.
Responding to Immigration

Fears of a Muslim influx have more substance than the worry about jihad. West European societies are unprepared for the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and not exactly maintaining Germanic standards of hygiene.* Muslim immigrants bring with them a chauvinism that augurs badly for their integration into the mainstream of the European societies. The signs all point to continued clashes between the two sides; in all likelihood, the Rushdie affair was merely a prelude to further troubles; already it has spawned a Muslim political party in Great Britain. Put differently, Iranian zealots threaten more within the gates of Vienna than outside them.

Still, none of this amounts to Richard Condon's notion of "another terrible threat" in any way resembling the Soviet danger. Muslim immigrants will probably not change the face of European life: pubs will not close down, secularist principles will not wither, freedom of speech is not likely to be abrogated. The movement of Muslims to Western Europe creates a great number of painful but finite challenges; there is no reason, however, to see this event leading to a cataclysmic battle between two civilizations. If handled properly, the immigrants can even bring much of value, including new energy, to their host societies.

The United States faces less of a problem, thanks to a long tradition of immigration and the healthy attitudes that go with it. Being an American depends far less on ancestry than on shared values, and this encourages enfranchisement. Meritocratic ethics and an open educational system do much to integrate the next generation. Should fundamentalist Muslims move to the United States and choose to remain outside the mainstream culture, that two can be accommodated, as made clear by the Amish Mennonites in Pennsylvania or the Hasidic Jews in New York City.

There is a final point. The prediction that Communists will be replaced by Muslims as the main threat suggests that ideological divisions will be give way to communitarian ones. And this conforms to Francis ***uyama's thesis about the end of history-where the "end of history" means not that time when literally nothing happens but (as befits a term coined by the philosopher Hegel) a time of no further advancement in the understanding of the human condition; that is, the moment when no new ideologies can be devised. If history in this sense should end, what one thinks will lose importance; who one is becomes key.

But ***uyama's prediction seems most improbable. A great and bloody argument over the human condition has been the driving force of history for two centuries, from the French Revolution to the Nicaraguan civil war. Can this deeply divisive intellectual dispute entirely burn itself out, to be replaced by the atavistic hostilities prevailing before 1789? That prospect seems too far-fetched to be taken seriously.

Returning to the issue of Muslims and the West, my skepticism about the end of ideology leads me to the following conclusion: Future relations of Muslims and Westerners depend less on crude numbers or place of residence, and much more on beliefs, skills, and institutions. The critical question is whether Muslims will modernize or not. And the answer lies not in the Qur'an or in the Islamic religion, but in the attitudes and actions of nearly a billion individuals.

Should Muslims fail to modernize, their stubborn record of illiteracy, poverty, intolerance, and autocracy will continue, and perhaps worsen. The sort of military crisis that Saddam Husayn provoked might well become yet more acute. But if Muslims do modernize, there is a reason to hope. In this case, they will have a good chance to become literate, affluent, and politically stable. They will no longer need to train terrorists or target missiles against the West; to emigrate to Europe and America; or to resist integration within Western societies.

_________________

* This sentence has over the years attracted considerable attention. My goal in this article (available at http://www.danielpipes.org/article/198) was to characterize the thinking of Western Europeans, not give my own views. In retrospect, I should either have put the words "brown-skinned peoples" and "strange foods" in quotation marks or made it clearer that I was explaining European attitudes rather than my own. By way of example of those attitudes, here are some quotations from top French politicians from that era.

Jacques Chirac, then president of RPR (Republican Party) and mayor of Paris, July 1983: "Le seuil de tol?rance [de l'immigration] est d?pass? dans certains quartiers et cela risque de provoquer des r?actions de racisme."

Fran?ois Mitterrand, president of France, December 12, 1989: "Le seuil de tol?rance [de l'immigration] a ?t? atteint d?s les ann?es 70 o? il y avait d?j? 4,1 ? 4,2 millions d'?trangers. ... Autant que possible, il ne faut pas d?passer ce chiffre, mais on s'y tient depuis des ann?es et des ann?es."

Jacques Chirac, June 19, 1991: "Notre probl?me, ce n'est pas les ?trangers, c'est qu'il y a overdose. C'est peut-?tre vrai qu'il n'y a pas plus d'?trangers qu'avant la guerre, mais ce n'est pas les m?mes et ?a fait une diff?rence. Il est certain que d'avoir des Espagnols, des Polonais et des Portugais travaillant chez nous, ?a pose moins de probl?mes que d'avoir des musulmans et des Noirs [...] Comment voulez-vous que le travailleur fran?ais qui travaille avec sa femme et qui, ensemble, gagnent environ 15000 francs, et qui voit sur le palier ? c?t? de son HLM, entass?e, une famille avec un p?re de famille, trois ou quatre ?pouses, et une vingtaine de gosses, et qui gagne 50000 francs de prestations sociales, sans naturellement travailler... si vous ajoutez le bruit et l'odeur, h? bien le travailleur fran?ais sur le palier devient fou. Et ce n'est pas ?tre raciste que de dire cela."

Translated into English: "Our problem is not foreigners, it's that there is an overdose. It may be true that there are not more foreigners [now] than before the [Second World] War, but they are not the same ones, and that makes a difference. It is certain that having Spanish, Polish, and Portuguese working here with us creates fewer problems than having Muslims and Blacks. ... How do you want the French worker, who along with his wife earns altogether about 15,000 francs [a month], and who sees across the landing a family with a father, his three-four wives, and twenty or so kids, and which receives 50,000 francs from welfare, of course without working.
  • 0

#57 Incubus

Incubus

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2347 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 10:01 PM

When left isn't right, all that's left is right.
  • 0

#58 Brendon

Brendon

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13976 posts

Posted 29 September 2005 - 11:02 PM

Originally posted by Mr Teapot
.........of cherry picking like an accomplished Saddamite?



Comrade Teapot,

I think you will find the spelling is "sodomite".

And no, I am not a "sodomite". I'm hetrosexual. But that is another thing I have found about you: You are a homophobe too!

Fancy that, Teapot is a racist, pinko, homophobe! Outrageous!:mad:





:P
  • 0

#59 Mr Teapot

Mr Teapot

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4631 posts

Posted 30 September 2005 - 03:00 AM

You are hanging around SourKraut's *** too long Brendon. You have picked up his M O.

Mark Steyn first coined the term "Saddamite". No doubt he had pinko jerks like you in mind.

You should study his columns Brendon. Read them under the covers with a flashlight if you are afraid Mommie will frown on your education and slap you sillier than you are.

Here is a primer;
http://www.littlegre...log/?entry=6344

No need to thank me .......................
That's what I do ...............................
Educate leftard Saddamites.............
So that they are not just useless idiots......
:kowt:
  • 0

#60 Californian

Californian

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1897 posts

Posted 30 September 2005 - 10:49 PM

Farmer:
>>Now it seems to me that the hysteria that dominates these days is in the White House and that hysteria you conservatives, (for hard-to-figure-reasons), call a "left-wing" phenomenon.<<

That's becasuse the far right is as totalitarian, dominate everyone as any Stalinist - they simply found out there's more money in capitalism. In short they are Communists, but a different branch, which makes them 'left.'

Stalinists want to overthrow society by revolution. Trotskyites operate by infiltration, as they have done in the US. But they used Stalinist concepts to overthrow Iraq with 'revolution' from outside.

See why people here are calling them 'left'?
It has nothing to do with economic philosophy.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2020 Pravda.Ru