Still Hating America.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
I know you are old as dirt, but you have anything for me since, I dunno, the Iranian Revolution of 1979?

I'm guessing not, since folks like you are always trotting out incidents from centuries ago when trying to morally equivocate Christianity (or Judaism) with Islam.

Whereas, yet another typical day in martyr-land:

Big fucking deal. The Islamic Fundamentalists are still living in the 12th Century. Other than a few guys like Matt Hale and his followers, the Christians haven't engaged in organized killing of Jews since the first half of the 20th Century.

Here's your new slogan: Goyim - Less Bloodthirsty Since 1945!

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Really? "Death" or "Forced Conversion"?

Do you have a recent cite for this?

Hey, read the Salon article - Amanda Marcotte's email box filled up with emails that promised violence - so even if she hadn't bumped into them before, I'm sure she now has the email addresses of any number of Christofascists.

The real drag is, I don't think we've got any posters here in the Christofascist camp. It would be nice to have one or two as foils. Spanky, do have any hate emails lying around? Maybe you could email them back and ask them to post?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Big fucking deal. The Islamic Fundamentalists are still living in the 12th Century. Other than a few guys like Matt Hale and his followers, the Christians haven't engaged in organized killing of Jews since the first half of the 20th Century.

Here's your new slogan: Goyim - Less Bloodthirsty Since 1945!

Yes, indeed, there is that small issue that "Fascist" may not need "Christo" to amend it.

[Adder]

Originally posted by taxwonk
I don't know if there were millions of Christofacists involved in the French and Spanish Inquisitions, the pogroms in Russia, the Glorious Revolution or the Protestant Reformation.

I'm also not sure if branding, the Iron Maiden, drawing and quartering, breaking upon the rack, burning at the stake, etc. count as being substantially equivalent to beheading.

Can you clear that up for me so I know whether the term is more or less offensive?

There were plenty of pogroms outside of Russia too. Although I guess the ones I am thinking of were not specifically about forced conversion as much as retrobution for things like allegedly causing the Black Death.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
The Cossacks in particular were a royal pain in the neck to the Ottomans.

Why? Did they revolt a lot? Did they side with the Russians?

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Adder
I did not link to the Variety article, as I didn't think there was much else interesting in it.

As for the quote, I am not sure that it is anti-Israel. He doesn't say that Israel would be wrong to bomb Iran. He says that that is the most likely non-peaceful event on the horizon. He is probably right.
o

He may not have meant it as anti-Isreal, but to say that they are the biggest threat to world peace can definitely be taken that way. Either way I don't think the American Isreali lobby is going to take kindly to the comment.

Clearly, among the far left, Isreal bashing is in vogue. But the issue is just how acceptible it is in the main stream of the Democrat party is the big question.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Spanky
Why? Did they revolt a lot? Did they side with the Russians?

There were sizable Cossack states in much of what is now the Ukraine, and they won more battles than they lost. The Ottomans usually tried to ally with them rather than fight them, though would try to assert sovereignty over them when they were weak. It never lasted. And they periodically lost Azov to them, which was very valuable.

[SlaveNoMore]

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Hey, read the Salon article - Amanda Marcotte's email box filled up with emails that promised violence - so even if she hadn't bumped into them before, I'm sure she now has the email addresses of any number of Christofascists.

FWIW, in case for some reason you think this is isolated, Michelle Malkin has received so many death threats from lefty crazies that she had to relocate her entire family.

[SlaveNoMore]

Spanky
Clearly, among the far left, Isreal bashing is in vogue. But the issue is just how acceptible it is in the main stream of the Democrat party is the big question.

Have you read KOS lately?

Or Adder?

[SlaveNoMore]

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Yes, indeed, there is that small issue that "Fascist" may not need "Christo" to amend it.

I would argue that since "Islamist" is a synonym for "bloodthirsty, misogynistic, irrational zealot" - the "fascist" part is rather unnecessary.

Hell, the fascists we're familiar with kept the trains running on time. These guys would loot the train for parts.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
I would argue that since "Islamist" is a synonym for "bloodthirsty, misogynistic, irrational zealot" - the "fascist" part is rather unnecessary.

Hell, the fascists we're familiar with kept the trains running on time. These guys would loot the train for parts.

Ah, yes, your defense of Fascists. Why does it not surprise me? You do realize where those trains were going?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

So, here's the RNC on indicted terrorist and RSCC "Inner Circle" Member Alishtari:

We are extremely concerned and disturbed by these charges but we need to be careful not to rush to judgment as the judicial process moves forward.

So, everyone at Gitmo just needs to pony up $15K to the RNC and they can get a fair trial?

Trains running on time, indeed.

[SlaveNoMore]

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
You do realize where those trains were going?

Palermo?

[Nut Case, Sensitive]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Palermo?

Nutzi!

[Tables R Us]

Originally posted by Spanky
What are your favorite authors: Lyndon LaRouche? L. Ron Hubbard? Do you believe the Trilateral Commission runs the world in concert with the Pope? I could "research" all this stuff, but it wouldn't increase my understanding of any subject. You need to reacquaint yourself with legitimate economic theory, and stop reading intellectually dubious books that are not based in fact or reality.

Actually, I'm thinking of Paul Samuelson's 2004 article in the Journal of Economic Perspectives posing serious questions about whether the US will benefit from free trade with India and China.

I'm also thinking about the September 2006 world survey in The Economist (which is about as pro-free trade as you get) arguing that many developed world workers don't benefit from free trade. And arguing that this will cause a protectionist backlash against free trade unless politicians in the developed world provide money for re-training, social insurance, and more controversially, tax redistribution policies with heavily progressive taxation.

You can pretend free trade is always beneficial because that jives with your libertarian philosophy, and Adder can pretend free trade is always beneficial because it jives with his liberal philosophy of helping the poor in the third world, but serious economists have begun questioning these policies and thinking developed world workers won't support them without substantial redistribution of the benefits of free trade.