OK, so the latest event to chap the azzes of Moslems worldwide are some comments made by Pope benedict a few days ago.  I might add that the Pope was not very savvy making the comments (actually quoting from some medeival account IIRC).

Anyway, the Moslems are throwing their usual hissy fits.  The newspapers are now reporting that "Palestinians" are firebombing Christian churches on the West Bank.

What they REALLY meant is that MOSLEMS are firebombing those churches.  Of course we all know that many "Palestinians" are members of various Christian faiths.  I rather doubt that the local Anglicans have taken arms against their own churches.

It is the same old cycle of Islamic violence.  And of course we all know by now that in their mass conniption, they will kill far more "fellow" Moslems than they will Christians, Jews, or whatever.

In 2006 by far Islam is the largest religion with worldwide mayhem being conducted in its name and on its behalf.  Let's hope that the moderate and peaceful members of that religion get things back into the right track.

(I now brace to hear all the sins of various other churches, but my remarks reference the present world dynamic.  There are of course whack-os of all faiths, but the present Islam thing is a growing cancer and its perpetrators boldly and proudly proclaim they do it in the name of Allah.  And they are backed and promoted by major religious figures.)

I know, but if anybody proposes altering our foreign policy so the other folks---Moslems or whoever--won't hate America and Israel so much, he gets called an "appeaser" and "a member of the Blame America First crowd." 

Your reference to Islam as "a growing cancer" is just inciteful rhetoric in the manner of (kl)Ann Coulter, invidious and hateful.  Of course, you give yourself an out.  You don't hate Islam, just "the present Islam thing."  Dan Quayle-esque eloquence.

What do we do with cancer cells?  Kill them with radiation.  So you're implying....NUKE IRAN!

::)

It is the same old cycle of Islamic violence.  And of course we all know by now that in their mass conniption, they will kill far more "fellow" Moslems than they will Christians, Jews, or whatever.


So it's not all bad, is it?

/one ticket to hell, please.
//who am I kidding, got a book of tickets.  just upgrade me to first class :)

The Pope's a d!ck. He looks like Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars.

The Pope's a d!ck. He looks like Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars.

Karma point to you for saying what I didn't have the guts to say, and I'm not even Catholic!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/hello2.gif

The Pope's a d!ck. He looks like Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars.


Join me, and together we will conquer the galaxy!!!

I do not think it is fair to paint an entire religion with such a wide brush because a small percentage of wackos ruin it for everyone else.  Seems to happen a lot these days though.

Karma point to you for saying what I didn't have the guts to say, and I'm not even Catholic!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/hello2.gif


I'm going to hell anyways (if such a place exists), so it matters not what I say about the former Nazi.

And it is TRUE. He does look like Palpatine. ;D

Hooold on a second.

First of all, the guy quoted some old ass conversation. Now, I'm not saying this isn't his opinion (Hell, it's my opinion) but he's not saying it in that manner.

Bad choice of words.. err... no sh.it.

Here's the thing that makes me laugh though.

Those Muslims want to go on about how they're not violent, how they don't spread Islam by the sword etc.. so what they do is start riots and firebomb churches, ah yes, wonderful logical islam, never fails.
::)

I loved what one of those Imam fella's said.
This isn't a direct quote, I can't find the text that I read this in, but this is as word for word as I can remember.
"Now is not a time for conflict between religions, Christianity and Islam share many similarities, they are both forgiving religions, based on love and respect. The Pope is playing in to the hands of the Zionists."

My thought here was kind of like.. ya know, you had a great P.R coup going on for all of Islam.. but no, you had to go down the Zionist route.

They're like children.  ::)

The issue with Islamists is that they're people with a 1300s mindset dealing with globalization and a modern economic structure in the 2000s. Under their viewpoint, it's perfectly fine to stone people who disagree with them to death, to firebomb the houses of worship of those who follow a different religion, and to do such things. Not to say the Catholic Church doesn't have a worse track record in the historical sense of atrocities than Islam. It does. For most of its history, the Catholic Church has been a force of oppression and corruption as much as it has been a force of art, culture, inspiration, and architecture in Europe. It is the core of European culture and also the core of its problems, in some ways, if you look at European history in the last several millennia. I refuse to apologize or take blame as a Westerner for what the Islamists are doing, and I also refuse to apologize or make excuses for what the West is doing. As much as I think Israel is wrong and have serious, serious problems with Israeli society in general and what they're doing to Jews worldwide, I think what the Palestinians are doing is equally wrong. It's true that most people in this conflict are fairly innocent people with strong convictions, as human convictions tend to be, being manipulated by geopolitical forces beyond their control.

People need to learn that everything is everybody's fault and no good tends to come of anything in international politics. Most countries do more good than bad, and nothing is purely good or bad. Chomsky and Zinn say that the US has done more bad than good, and yet I think they would also say in the same breath that no country has done more bad than good. However, "bad" and "good" are difficult to quantify AND qualify. "Progress", particularly, is difficult to quantify, and often goes so far and so irrationally that you have to backtrack to undue its destruction. An example is the late 19th century. Labor power was destroyed between 1865 and 1900, and so in the early 20th century this was fixed with labor laws and the growth of the unions, and the breakup of monopolies like the Standard Oil Trust, as occurred in 1911.

There is this American idea that we intend to do good, that there is a possibility of utopianism and pure good in the world. We do not expect corruption and evil from our leaders or from the world, we are "pampered Americans" and so we fall into the lull of disbelief in our principles, a lull that we are ensconsed in now, similar to the lull of the late 19th century. But, soon, again, our bright-eyed belief in reform will rise again, as it did in the early 20th century, and what makes America great and special will come. What makes us "American" is this BELIEF that true change is possible. Now, we need to change America to move us back to that.

^ Karma point for your essay.

Islam is being turned into the boogeyman and I'm sick of it.  Now, I could say a lot of unfavorable things I do think about Islam, but you've heard them all again and again.  Here's what it is, y'dig--

We Americans are not going to change Islam.  Islam in its many cultures across the globe is going to take the road it's going to take.  One thing's pretty certain, if our government sends our military around the world to kill Muslims, if our popular press continually trashes Islam, they will kill our guys and denounce our culture in returns.  Whatever Muslims may be, they're not pacifists.  They love to mix it up, even against impossible odds. American politicians and pundits don't get to point the finger at Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Syria and say, "We don't like your culture and we demand you do XYZ to change it!"  The Iranian mullahs issue condemnations of America as the Great Satan, does it make YOU  burn your rock 'n' roll records and pray to Mecca five times a day?  I didn't think so!  Yet we demand Muslims thousands of miles over seas do what we say! 

We Americans can't change what Islam is.  We can change our government.  We can elect political leaders that have something other than greed, fear, and death to sell the world.  If we stop bullying Islamic nations and ridiculing their religion and their culture, they're not going to invade Podunk, Ohio, and cut our heads off with sabers.  Somehow the administration gets people to believe this propaganda that if we stop beating up on them, they'll come to Yourtown, U.S.A, and kill you!

You don't have to want to be like them.  You don't even have to like them.  Just stop the Bush killing machine, and you'll be surprised how much more progress we can make!
::)

^ Karma point for your essay.

Islam is being turned into the boogeyman and I'm sick of it.  Now, I could say a lot of unfavorable things I do think about Islam, but you've heard them all again and again.  Here's what it is, y'dig--

We Americans are not going to change Islam.  Islam in its many cultures across the globe is going to take the road it's going to take.  One thing's pretty certain, if our government sends our military around the world to kill Muslims, if our popular press continually trashes Islam...

You don't have to want to be like them.  You don't even have to like them.  Just stop the Bush killing machine, and you'll be surprised how much more progress we can make!
::)


The Islamic radicals were out kicking azz long before Bush came into office.  And presently they are causing mayhem in 24 countries across the globe.  They don't like Hindus in India.  They don't like Christians in England.  They don't like Russians in Chechnya.  They hate Jews just about anywhere.  Heck, they don't even like themselves as evidenced in Iraq and Darfur.  Hey, as far as I am concerned if they want to kill each other in their juvenile mentality, that's fine with me.

But when they target US Citizens I call it as I see it.  These "fundamentalists" are indeed a cancer and a threat to peace everywhere.  We have to be ruthless in eliminating the terrorists and those who support them (which of course also would be terrorists).

Whether you like the Pope or not.  All he said were WORDS.  The Moslems immediately CONFIRMED his words with their usual violence.  I'll bet that women throughout the Middle East were uulating wildly as those fire bombs were being thrown.

Interestingly the Pope has not actually retracted his words about Jihad.  Boffo... I think he is simply being honest about "the elephant in the room" that no other public figure will do.  (I still think he coulda used better wording but hey,he's the Pope).

Bush didn't start it.  He exacerbates it and uses the negative outcome to terrify the sheepish American people.  We have an administration in this country that needs to stand trial for war crimes.  Right now Bush is pushing for an ex post facto law permitting the torture the administration ordered.  The U.S. Constitution does not allow ex post facto laws.*  When Bush talks about "strict constructionist," read, "Constitution is a cudgel for rich white man."

*No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
--Article I, section 9.

*Under provisions of Article I, section 10, individual states are also precluded from passing ex post facto laws.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto

But that's what Bush wants to do with his terrorist surveillance act.

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/node/453/print

As the Smirking Chimp article points out, he's using Orwellian newspeak calling torture, an "alternative set of procedures."
I also liked the euphemism "tough interrogation techniques" for the the acronym if nothing else!
:D

So they're trying to save their own azzes should the Dems take the House in November, but the method they are using is itself explicitly forbidden by the United States Constitution! 

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF OUR UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT  IS CROOKED, SLEAZY, SADISTICAL, MENDACIOUS, INCOMPETENT, SILLY, AND INSANE, AND YOU WANT ME TO LISTEN TO YOU CONDEMN ISLAM AS A CANCER???

Geeit outta heeere!!!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/13/jerk.gif

Bush didn't start it.  He exacerbates it and uses the negative outcome to terrify the sheepish American people.  We have an administration in this country that needs to stand trial for war crimes.  Right now Bush is pushing for an ex post facto law permitting the torture the administration ordered.  The U.S. Constitution does not allow ex post facto laws.*  When Bush talks about "strict constructionist," read, "Constitution is a cudgel for rich white man."

*No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
--Article I, section 9.

*Under provisions of Article I, section 10, individual states are also precluded from passing ex post facto laws.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto

But that's what Bush wants to do with his terrorist surveillance act.

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/node/453/print

As the Smirking Chimp article points out, he's using Orwellian newspeak calling torture, an "alternative set of procedures."
I also liked the euphemism "tough interrogation techniques" for the the acronym if nothing else!
:D

So they're trying to save their own azzes should the Dems take the House in November, but the method they are using is itself explicitly forbidden by the United States Constitution! 

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF OUR UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT  IS CROOKED, SLEAZY, SADISTICAL, MENDACIOUS, INCOMPETENT, SILLY, AND INSANE, AND YOU WANT ME TO LISTEN TO YOU CONDEMN ISLAM AS A CANCER???

Geeit outta heeere!!!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/13/jerk.gif


Islam is not a cancer. Islamism is a cancer which Bush is enraging.

The Islamic radicals were out kicking azz long before Bush came into office.  And presently they are causing mayhem in 24 countries across the globe.  They don't like Hindus in India.  They don't like Christians in England.  They don't like Russians in Chechnya.  They hate Jews just about anywhere.  Heck, they don't even like themselves as evidenced in Iraq and Darfur.  Hey, as far as I am concerned if they want to kill each other in their juvenile mentality, that's fine with me.

But when they target US Citizens I call it as I see it.  These "fundamentalists" are indeed a cancer and a threat to peace everywhere.  We have to be ruthless in eliminating the terrorists and those who support them (which of course also would be terrorists).

Whether you like the Pope or not.  All he said were WORDS.  The Moslems immediately CONFIRMED his words with their usual violence.  I'll bet that women throughout the Middle East were uulating wildly as those fire bombs were being thrown.

Interestingly the Pope has not actually retracted his words about Jihad.  Boffo... I think he is simply being honest about "the elephant in the room" that no other public figure will do.  (I still think he coulda used better wording but hey,he's the Pope).


Bravo! Couldn't have said it better myself.

Islam is not a cancer. Islamism is a cancer which Bush is enraging.

But I still say focus on what is good Islam versus what is bad Islam is a distraction from the criminal syndicate that now passes for the U.S. government.  I don't endorse bad acts by Muslims nor do I apologise for them.  In any case, I think the religion itself is rarely (if ever) the true motivation for terrorism.  No, they don't "hate us for our freedom."
::)

But I still say focus on what is good Islam versus what is bad Islam is a distraction from the criminal syndicate that now passes for the U.S. government.  I don't endorse bad acts by Muslims nor do I apologise for them.  In any case, I think the religion itself is rarely (if ever) the true motivation for terrorism.  No, they don't "hate us for our freedom."
::)


The whole "they hate us for our freedom" spiel is cockamamie mishagas. I agree that religion is very rarely the true motive for terrorism, and religion is never the true motive for religious wars, and oftentimes, religious persecution. In many ways, the Thirty Year's War was as much a war between the dying feudal-agricultural state structure of endless principalities and the emerging commercial nation states of Europe. The persecution of Jews in Europe for nearly a thousand years was partially instigated, for example in England, because when you got rid of the moneylenders, you got rid of the massive debt you owed them. Westminster Abbey was constructed with the funds of the Jews of England, who "belonged to the king." When the king was up to his ears in debt to the moneylenders, he expelled them to northern France, thereby cancelling their debts, and implicitly encouraged the pogroms against Jews in medieval English cities for the reason of "Jews putting the blood of gentile children in their matzoh." Personally, I think there was more to the periodic and long-term persecution of Jews that ended in the 20th century than that Jews were thought to be those to kill Jesus. The issues of ethnic and national identity in Europe could be resolved when you could agree that you all hated the Jews. In Czarist Russia and in Poland, Romania, and Austria-Hungary, class issues were resolved by general persecution of the Jews. 

When I mentioned Chomsky and Zinn saying America has done more bad than good, what I meant to say is that they probably would agree most powerful nations have done more bad than good.

The whole "they hate us for our freedom" spiel is cockamamie mishagas. \


Actually they hate us because they themselves are historically so damned stupid.

I mean, way back when, their ancestors were intelligent, and quite advanced in science and mathematics.  They gained this expertise in pursuit of being able to extremely accurately know what time it was, and in what direction Mecca stood.  So that they could faithfully say their prayers 5 times a day.  'Twas a great time in scientific development.

But somewhere along the line they became stupid and fractious.  As evidenced by the fact that Moslems by far are more likely to be killed by fellow Moslems than by Jews, Christians, or whatnot.

They see civilizations such as Japan (that has almost no natural resources), Austrailia, and the US thriving economically, while many of the Moslem dominated countries have a wealth of oil reserves and yet the people live in poverty.

They spend so much time in their precious mosques conjuring up dreams of jihad so much that the average Moslem is illiterate and stupid (with a notable exception in iran, which has a very highly edcated populace).

Of course, the ringleaders behind "jihad" are fairly well educated.  And like all despots, they feed off the frustrations of the uneducated masses, which exist in spades in the Moslem world...

Their resentment originates in their own self-humiliation and depravity.  They hate the Western world because, despite all of our faults, we are educated and have not piddled away our wealth to the same extent that they have.

Interesting points about the Jews as money-lenders.  I used to joke about "Lenders" bagels!
;D

According to the 1275 Statute of Jewry in England, Jews could buy land, but could not own it for more than a few years, then Big Ed had them all thrown out anyway fifteen years later!

Also from the Statute, "Each Jew, after he is seven years old, shall wear a distinguishing mark on his outer garment, that is to say, in the form of two Tables joined, of yellow felt of the length of six inches and of the breadth of three inches."  Sounds eeeeerily familiar!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/sceptred_isle/page/27.shtml?question=27

At the time of the crusades, Gentiles referred to Jews as Christ-Killers and raged about the usurious money-lending practices of the Jews.  We heard all this crap again 900 years later, and it still hasn't quite died down.  What thoughts, images, and sentiments does the "Rothschild" evoke?  Of course, some still quarrel about whether or not the Rothschilds are properly Jewish because of their Ashkenazi heritage.  The claim is Ashkenazis are Jewish by faith, but not Jewish by blood (by genes, more properly), but what does it mean to be Jewish by blood and who gets to define what a proper Jewish bloodline is?  
(I always found it sickly humorous that you can't spell "Ashkenazi" with out "Nazi."  Just something I couldn't help noticing!)

But in medieval times when land-owning was the principal form wealth and socio-political power, how would Jews be able to accumulate great monetary wealth without doing the "dirty work" in the employ of the bearers of real wealth, the landed Gentile aristocracies?  Thus, weren't the Jews scapegoats in centuries past, and are they still scapegoats today?

Speaking of Rothschild, I first knew the name Rothschild as a name of line of sweets, which I think were manufactured by Warner-Lambert, and later by Switzer.  Rothschilds candies seem to have disappeared from the face of the Earth with scant info about the brand on the web.
I recall seeing them and purchasing them between c. 1978--1982.  They were toffees, butterscotches, licorice and chocalate chews packaged in garish gold-colored foil with a dark brown (if I remember right) outer paper imprinted with "Rothschilds."  The confections were slightly higher quality than your NECCOS, Lifesavers, and M&Ms, but vended from the same candy racks.  They sort of disappeared in my early teens, and I never heard the story behind it, other than a clue from this NYT blurb:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990DE1D7123BF934A1575BC0A967948260

The whole "they hate us for our freedom" spiel is cockamamie mishagas


If they hated us for our freedom, you'd think they'd love us now that we've gotten rid of the right to free speech, free assembly, implied right to privacy, right to keep and bear arms, right to security in our homes and persons, right not to get shafted without due process of law, right to a speedy trial, right to a jury trial for anything over $20, right not to be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment...

We gave up the the Ninth and Tenth more than a century ago, so the only beef Osama has left with us is that we don't yet billet soldiers in our homes.

So yeah, they can't possibly hate us for our freedoms.  We're all done on that front :)

Actually they hate us because they themselves are historically so damned stupid.

I mean, way back when, their ancestors were intelligent, and quite advanced in science and mathematics.  They gained this expertise in pursuit of being able to extremely accurately know what time it was, and in what direction Mecca stood.  So that they could faithfully say their prayers 5 times a day.  'Twas a great time in scientific development.

But somewhere along the line they became stupid and fractious.  As evidenced by the fact that Moslems by far are more likely to be killed by fellow Moslems than by Jews, Christians, or whatnot.

They see civilizations such as Japan (that has almost no natural resources), Austrailia, and the US thriving economically, while many of the Moslem dominated countries have a wealth of oil reserves and yet the people live in poverty.

They spend so much time in their precious mosques conjuring up dreams of jihad so much that the average Moslem is illiterate and stupid (with a notable exception in iran, which has a very highly edcated populace).

Of course, the ringleaders behind "jihad" are fairly well educated.  And like all despots, they feed off the frustrations of the uneducated masses, which exist in spades in the Moslem world...

Their resentment originates in their own self-humiliation and depravity.  They hate the Western world because, despite all of our faults, we are educated and have not piddled away our wealth to the same extent that they have.

I think it had something to do with incursions from the Mongols, from which Europe was spared by a whisker.

I think it had something to do with incursions from the Mongols, from which Europe was spared by a whisker.


Yeah, the Mongol incusions definitely speeded up the decline of Islamic civilization.

But, it is true that in the later days of the Ottoman empire they simply became lazy when it came to science/academics. They also lagged in the industrial revolution. The Sultans had their wealth, and didn't seem to care about educating the general populace or modernizing. They paid for it.

Although, the final blow came from the West. It was Britain and France's boneheaded idea to carve up the Ottoman empire, and THEN leave most of their former colonial states in the region in charge of aristocrats & despots.  Its the same thing the Brits did in British India, although, India has been able to overcome that legacy in many ways.  Pakistan and Bangladesh haven't though.

Yeah, the Mongol incusions definitely speeded up the decline of Islamic civilization.

But, it is true that in the later days of the Ottoman empire they simply became lazy when it came to science/academics. They also lagged in the industrial revolution. The Sultans had their wealth, and didn't seem to care about educating the general populace or modernizing. They paid for it.
And that's what I see historians saying about the United States in 100 years.  Replace Ottoman with American.  Replace Sultans, with "billionaires, CEOs, Bushes," or whoever you want to represent the "Sultans" of this neo-gilded age. 
1. America is lagging behind other nations on many fronts, and lagging behind because it helps our "Sultans" attain short-term wealth at the expense of our nation and our future.
2. The American "Sultans" are on a mission to destroy not only public education, but the public sphere as a whole, and are fighting tooth-and-nail to keep out a national healthcare plan, which would benefit everybody except the "Sultans."
3. Contrary to our delusions, the rest of the Western world has a higher standard of living than the U.S., and many European countries are surpassing the U.S. in disposable income.  You won't hear this from Katie Couric and Tucker Carlson, sorry.
4. The U.S. is not a rich country.  It was.  It is not anymore.  America owes more money than any other country.  America is a poor country with a small financial elite.  That spells trouble!

Although, the final blow came from the West. It was Britain and France's boneheaded idea to carve up the Ottoman empire, and THEN leave most of their former colonial states in the region in charge of aristocrats & despots.  Its the same thing the Brits did in British India, although, India has been able to overcome that legacy in many ways.  Pakistan and Bangladesh haven't though.

There is visible India and invisible India.  We think of India as a country of whipsmart professionals who will work for 1/10 want American workers will accept as wages.  Thus, in the Ayn Rand candyland we know as the mainstream media, Americans are portrayed as deserving to lose their jobs to Indians because the American worker is greedy.  We see the cultural centers of India.  We see Bollywood schtick and listen to Indian pop music.  The Indians we meet in America are from the fortunate few percent who can have the money and education to get here. 

Then there is the invisible India.  A dear friend of mine, a native Sherpa, traveled the subcontinent far and wide.  There you find not just the mass of the "untouchable" caste, but the ethnic subcultures that don't even figure in the caste plan.  Hundreds of millions live in stone age conditions with one remaining hold-out from the empire, they all play football!  Picture a dusty dirt road and it's 110 degrees.  You hold a handkerchief to your face and step gingerly about the rotting corpses on the road shoulder.  They carted the dead away on Tuesday, but you see today is Thursday!  India is still better off than it was under the Brits, but have no delusions as to the economic status of all but a tiny percentage of the billion souls who live there.

Interesting and well-stated posts on this page. Karma for all.

Actually they hate us because they themselves are historically so damned stupid.

I mean, way back when, their ancestors were intelligent, and quite advanced in science and mathematics.  They gained this expertise in pursuit of being able to extremely accurately know what time it was, and in what direction Mecca stood.  So that they could faithfully say their prayers 5 times a day.  'Twas a great time in scientific development.

But somewhere along the line they became stupid and fractious.  As evidenced by the fact that Moslems by far are more likely to be killed by fellow Moslems than by Jews, Christians, or whatnot.

They see civilizations such as Japan (that has almost no natural resources), Austrailia, and the US thriving economically, while many of the Moslem dominated countries have a wealth of oil reserves and yet the people live in poverty.

They spend so much time in their precious mosques conjuring up dreams of jihad so much that the average Moslem is illiterate and stupid (with a notable exception in iran, which has a very highly edcated populace).

Of course, the ringleaders behind "jihad" are fairly well educated.  And like all despots, they feed off the frustrations of the uneducated masses, which exist in spades in the Moslem world...

Their resentment originates in their own self-humiliation and depravity.  They hate the Western world because, despite all of our faults, we are educated and have not piddled away our wealth to the same extent that they have.


Again, very well said.

The biggest problem in the Islamic world is indeed the stupidity of the general population. This is easily exploited.
With the current power vacuum that exists, the only place to be educated or experience and sort of stability and order is in the mosque and the people who do the educating in the mosque tend to be the same sort of people who'd like to see ever guy wearing a skull cap blown out of his shoes.
If the smartest guy you know.. hell, the only guy you know that can read tells you that, you'll probably believe it.

After all, if you tell a 3 year old that a horse is a cow, he'll probably believe you.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060919/ap_on_re_mi_ea/muslims_pope

Ah, so when we draw cartoons of Mohammed, that's a big no no. But burning an effigy of the pope, that's fine.

'Islam will take over the world.' Sure, you can have it with the cockroaches.  ::) ;D

It's like dealing with small children.

Hmm...I guess we aren't quite really Jewish in terms of bloodline. However, we do have physical features in common with the Arabs, like the strong facial structure with high cheekbones, tan skin in some cases, thicker lips, and long nose, in some cases. We married with each other for so long that we became a separate ethnic group. Though, on the other hand, that all CAN be pretty ridiculous. My great-grandfather was blonde and blue-eyed, and my grandmother was shown by a member of the Hitler Youth to come into her school class in the mid-'30s to be an "ideal Aryan child" until he found out she was 100% ethnically German Jewish. As I've explained before, the Ashkenazi Jews who today compose 85% or more of world Jewry, are the result of the intermarriages between formerly pagan, converted Germanic and Baltic brides in the northern reaches of the Roman Empire and Jewish traders brought forth from the Levant.

Actually, our dining room rug has swastikas on it. It was also a Yiddish good luck symbol dear to my great-grandparents who originally owned it, Polish and Lithuanian Jews. Through history, we've been essential scapegoats and patsies that the government places to dispose of later, something Jews enchanted by the deceptive Zionist ideals of Israel and inculcated into the far-right (like Goldberg and Wolfowitz) will soon discover again about. Heck, my 4th cousin was Alfred Dreyfuss on my father's side!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060919/ap_on_re_mi_ea/muslims_pope

Ah, so when we draw cartoons of Mohammed, that's a big no no. But burning an effigy of the pope, that's fine.



Tell that to Sinead O'Connor

My great-grandfather was blonde and blue-eyed,



A lot of that in my family also.  My son was born blond and blue-eyed, as was my sister, and I have another sister with green eyes.  The genetic truth has a habit of telling its tale..Thomas Jefferson didn't forsee that, now did he?.

Rome, 19 Sept. (AKI) - Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad reportedly defended on Monday Pope Benedict XVI over his quotation of Medieval commentary linking Islam to violence. Addressing a joint press conference with Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez in Caracas, Ahmadinejad said "we respect the pope and everyone must be interested in peace." Speaking one day after Iran's supreme leader Ali Khamenei accused the pontiff of being part of a "US-Zionist crusade" against Islam, Iran's president said the pontiff's words were taken out of context.

Ahmadinejad was leaving for New York, where he will attend with world leaders a UN General Assembly on Tuesday.

"There is no doubt that there are those who release incorrect information," Ahmadinejad was also quoted as saying, hinting that Benedict's words were "modified."

http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level_English.php?cat=Religion&loid=8.0.341785719&par=

And don't forget, the Pope himself said that these were not his own views.  Rather, they were a direct quote from a 14th century writing that he was giving for a lecture about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_XVI_Islam_controversy

A lot of that in my family also.  My son was born blond and blue-eyed, as was my sister, and I have another sister with green eyes.  The genetic truth has a habit of telling its tale..Thomas Jefferson didn't forsee that, now did he?.


An interesting story about a blue-eyed African-American is Carson McCullers' A Clock Without Hands, a great but lesser-known book about race, sexuality, and class in the South. My family has alot of coloring variation. My aunt is black-eyed and black-haired with dark tan skin, actually as dark when she goes out in the sun as some lighter Puerto Ricans or African-Americans, and her sister, my mom, has dark brown hair, very pale skin, and green eyes.

Tell that to Sinead O'Connor


Well, I wouldn't mind too much if somebody felt like burning her.

Tell that to Sinead O'Connor

On an off-topic note, when they released her debut album in 1987, "The Lion & The Cobra," I had a mjor crush on her.  I had a GIANT poster of her in my bedroom.  I still love the songs on that first album. 
By the time her follow-up, "I Do Not Want What I Haven't Got" came out in 1990, I couldn't stand her.  The initial publicity she got sold her as a tough street kid from Dublin.  Her rhetoric, however, turned out to be that of a Mt. Holyoke sophomore from Darien!  Hypocrisy soured every political stance she took.  I won't list the many counts of hypocrisy from Sinead, but I would go so far as to say I felt betrayed!  It seems silly in retrospect.  She wasn't much older than I was.  Late teens/early twenties is a confusing time if you're from a dysfunctional background--even if you're rich and famous.  We had that much in common, except I was an anonymous dork. 
I still feel "Nothing Compares 2U" compromised her integrity.  Sinead is an outspoken feminist, and Prince is one of the sleaziest misogynists in show biz.  He's a great songwriter, musician, and producer, but his sexual attitudes are repulsive.  If he'd recorded that NC2U himself, I would have liked it much better.
Anyway, I saw the infamous pope photo incident on the original broadcast of SNL.  IMO, the only sacrilege on that broadcast was what she did to that Bob Marley song!  However, what she was protesting, child abuse within the Catholic church, was right on!  Subsequent events proved her 100% correct to be disgusted with the papacy.  The problem was the spoiled princess crybaby act she put on afterward.  If you're going to be a public iconoclast, you'll suffer consequences.  Ditto her prohibition of the American national anthem at her concert. Sinead acted as though she was entitled to all the world's adoration.  I would have respected her statements if she had the nerve of a Bob Dylan, or a Bob Marley for that matter, to walk out on stage and say, "Boo if you want to.  This is who I am, and this is what I believe.  You don't like it? Tough sh*t.  Don't buy my records."  Anyway...


Again, very well said.

The biggest problem in the Islamic world is indeed the stupidity of the general population. This is easily exploited.

Uhhhh, let those without stupidity cast the first stone.  How many ways can I say it? We ridicule the Moslems for being easily led, yet our country is run by war criminals...incompetent war criminals at that.  We decided the French were the enemy too.  Why?  Because a knuckle-dragging TV personality from Long Island said so.  "Easily exploited"?  Easily exploited who?
::)
::)

I wonder if the Pope likes to move it in M C Hammer pants? ???

;D

I wonder if the Pope likes to move it in M C Hammer pants? ???

;D

Whaaaah?
Does the name "Sinead O'Connor" call to mind the early '90s or something?
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/dontknow.gif

Whaaaah?
Does the name "Sinead O'Connor" call to mind the early '90s or something?
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/dontknow.gif


It indeed brings back memories of the late 1980;s, when Phil Hartman was playing an incorrigible Frank Sinatra in a Saturday Night Live skit.

-"Hey Sine-Aid.."
-"Hey Uncle Fester!..."
-'What did you say, Sinbad"
-"Eight ball in the corner pocket"

Uhhhh, let those without stupidity cast the first stone.  How many ways can I say it? We ridicule the Moslems for being easily led, yet our country is run by war criminals...incompetent war criminals at that.  We decided the French were the enemy too.  Why?  Because a knuckle-dragging TV personality from Long Island said so.  "Easily exploited"?  Easily exploited who?
::)
::)


Here's the difference.

First of all a vast majority of the population don't believe this, they're just apathetic. I know the left likes to claim America has moved so far right it's not funny... and the right likes to claim that the Socialist mob is waiting to pounce, but in all honesty, look around, America is one of the most Liberal places in the world. Our free use of drugs, alcohol, pornography and profanity is greater than just about any other country in the world.  ;)

We haven't been easily exploited, just a small percentage of the population.. who are now waking up and saying "Wooooah, hold on a second." Look at these people I'm talking about.. they'll never wake up.

Here's the difference.

First of all a vast majority of the population don't believe this, they're just apathetic. I know the left likes to claim America has moved so far right it's not funny... and the right likes to claim that the Socialist mob is waiting to pounce, but in all honesty, look around, America is one of the most Liberal places in the world. Our free use of drugs, alcohol, pornography and profanity is greater than just about any other country in the world.  ;)

We haven't been easily exploited, just a small percentage of the population.. who are now waking up and saying "Wooooah, hold on a second." Look at these people I'm talking about.. they'll never wake up.

Yes, and on 9/11 the apethic, who didn't even take to the streets when the Bushies stole the election ten months before, finally got the living daylights scared out of them.  Since they had no prior orientation to suggest otherwise, they bought hook line and sinker the canard that Saddam was behind the 9/11 massacres.  So they slathered the country with Old Glory, demonized the Moslems, and then went right back on the nod still believing Saddam bombed the WTC!  They went from apathy to ignorance to apathy in the space of 36 months.  What's the difference between ignorance and apathy?  I don't know, and I don't care.

What are you talking about "free use"?  If I got caught with a joint, they'd throw me in jail!  Funny about our priorities with alcohol and pornography.  We live in the only country in the world where an 18-year-old can't walk into a bar and order a beer, but she can have intercourse with twenty men at once on videotape!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/13/icon_scratch.gif

Yes, and on 9/11 the apethic, who didn't even take to the streets when the Bushies stole the election ten months before, finally got the living daylights scared out of them.  Since they had no prior orientation to suggest otherwise, they bought hook line and sinker the canard that Saddam was behind the 9/11 massacres.  So they slathered the country with Old Glory, demonized the Moslems, and then went right back on the nod still believing Saddam bombed the WTC!  They went from apathy to ignorance to apathy in the space of 36 months.  What's the difference between ignorance and apathy?  I don't know, and I don't care.

What are you talking about "free use"?  If I got caught with a joint, they'd throw me in jail!  Funny about our priorities with alcohol and pornography.  We live in the only country in the world where an 18-year-old can't walk into a bar and order a beer, but she can have intercourse with twenty men at once on videotape!
:D



::) I'm sorry the whole country isn't as switched on as you. Here's the thing.. and I understand what you're saying.. but here's the thing.
The vast majority of the American public dosen't pay attention.. to.. pretty much anything. So as soon as the flashing news ticket say's something, they buy it.. then when they've had time to work it out.. straight back to not paying attention.

::) I'm sorry the whole country isn't as switched on as you. Here's the thing.. and I understand what you're saying.. but here's the thing.
The vast majority of the American public dosen't pay attention.. to.. pretty much anything. So as soon as the flashing news ticket say's something, they buy it.. then when they've had time to work it out.. straight back to not paying attention.

I wonder if Joe Average is really less informed now than he was in 1955. 

I do hear people justify inattentiveness--if not apathy.  "Who's got time? I've got three jobs and three kids to take care of.  Those guys in Washington are all a bunch of crooks anyway.  What's the point of voting? Doesn't change anything!"
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/07/nixweiss.gif

I don't agree with not giving a sh*t about politics...but I can't dismiss the above sentiment either!

I wonder if Joe Average is really less informed now than he was in 1955. 

I do hear people justify inattentiveness--if not apathy.  "Who's got time? I've got three jobs and three kids to take care of.  Those guys in Washington are all a bunch of crooks anyway.  What's the point of voting? Doesn't change anything!"
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/07/nixweiss.gif

I don't agree with not giving a sh*t about politics...but I can't dismiss the above sentiment either!



Especially when (This is tough for me to say) there are only a handful of objective media sources in the country.

Especially when (This is tough for me to say) there are only a handful of objective media sources in the country.


There are?

:D

Especially when (This is tough for me to say) there are only a handful of objective media sources in the country.

I see plenty of objectionable.  Objective is pretty scarce.  That's what's funny about my friends at the Failing Air America Network.  They're not objective at all.  They're whole raisinette is arguing against what the unobjective right-wing media says.  The difference is in the power of their backers.  FOX News and Rush Lindbergh are the spokesmen for those who control the levers of corporate power.  Air America and the Nation magazine....are not.  Air America did have one show host as p*ssed off as I am, Mike Malloy, but they canned him last month.  I would rather listen to Mike Malloy than Al Franken.  I like Franken, but he's too soft on the fascists and he doesn't pack the wallop called for by the temper of the times.

"Reality has a well-know liberal bias."
--Stephen Colbert.

I see plenty of objectionable.  Objective is pretty scarce.  That's what's funny about my friends at the Failing Air America Network.  They're not objective at all.  They're whole raisinette is arguing against what the unobjective right-wing media says.  The difference is in the power of their backers.  FOX News and Rush Lindbergh are the spokesmen for those who control the levers of corporate power.  Air America and the Nation magazine....are not.  Air America did have one show host as p*ssed off as I am, Mike Malloy, but they canned him last month.  I would rather listen to Mike Malloy than Al Franken.  I like Franken, but he's too soft on the fascists and he doesn't pack the wallop called for by the temper of the times.

"Reality has a well-know liberal bias."
--Stephen Colbert.


This is for ANYONE follow that media followups...from Washington (Post) paper, I'm just posting it for discussion, I am too 'politicized/politically correct BS'd' out to comment:




THE POPE AND KISSINGER WARN THE WORLD
By Tony Blankley
-----------------------------------------------------------
There is an historically fairly predictable pattern to the unfolding
strategies and views of great wars. They often start with a morally
ambiguous view of the enemy, a more limited conception of the war's
magnitude and a restrained application of violent tactics.

    Eventually, moral clarity is obtained, war objectives expand

Erm, Tony, do you have any heroes who aren't racists or war criminals?
::)

And do you, Saver, refer to me as "politically correct"?  I don't even know what that means anymore.  Do you?

Erm, Tony, do you have any heroes who aren't racists or war criminals?
::)

And do you, Saver, refer to me as "politically correct"?  I don't even know what that means anymore.  Do you?


Maxwell...I had said I was too fed up with being politically correct, so if I find anything that really says what it's all about, I think I will post it...you won't find me calling 'ILLEGALS' guests or undocumented...
the Pope MAY have had a point to what he said and the resulted violence(from some extremists), MAY have proved it. So, as people discuss what's in the news, if I find something to support the issue/topic, I will forward it to be discussed...I know you sometimes dig up articles regarding the topic, so that's wwhat I did in this case.(Whether you or anyone puts faith in the WP or NYTimes-HAH!- but it may encourage others tospeak out.

:)   

Maxwell...I had said I was too fed up with being politically correct, so if I find anything that really says what it's all about, I think I will post it...you won't find me calling 'ILLEGALS' guests or undocumented...
the Pope MAY have had a point to what he said and the resulted violence(from some extremists), MAY have proved it. So, as people discuss what's in the news, if I find something to support the issue/topic, I will forward it to be discussed...I know you sometimes dig up articles regarding the topic, so that's wwhat I did in this case.(Whether you or anyone puts faith in the WP or NYTimes-HAH!- but it may encourage others tospeak out.

:)   

Ah yes, those America-hating commie broadsheets the New York Times and the Washington Post.
::)

I know, but if anybody proposes altering our foreign policy so the other folks---Moslems or whoever--won't hate America and Israel so much, he gets called an "appeaser" and "a member of the Blame America First crowd." 

::)


Late to the conversation, but anyway...

Somehow I'm less than convinced that we can ever really change the way the Moslems or other current firestarters feel about us. Some folks just like to start trouble, dig? You know what they say about perception being reality...

Late to the conversation, but anyway...

Somehow I'm less than convinced that we can ever really change the way the Moslems or other current firestarters feel about us. Some folks just like to start trouble, dig? You know what they say about perception being reality...


Just like to start trouble? ;D

Jah, because our policies have in no way wronged them...

Just like to start trouble? ;D

Jah, because our policies have in no way wronged them...


You must really have it in for me tonight. S'alright.  :)

The following is an overly simplistic worldview that doesn't necessarily reflect the opinions of anyone but myself: you can't please all the people all the time. With that in mind, how do we get everybody to love us? Is it too late? I am not an isolationist, so not giving a damn about other countries' opinions of us is not an option.

Late to the conversation, but anyway...

Somehow I'm less than convinced that we can ever really change the way the Moslems or other current firestarters feel about us. Some folks just like to start trouble, dig? You know what they say about perception being reality...

The first thing NOT to do when you've got firestarters is do what Bush done did:
GIVE THEM MATCHES AND A CAN OF GASOLINE!

http://www.meateatingleftist.com/mt/archives/Bush_stupid1.jpg
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/14/sign5.gif

"It takes two to tango."
--My Jr. High vice principal,
when I was in detention hall for belting the school bully in the nose after he'd tormented me for the whole semester.
Oh, and he and his little hooligans held me down and mauled me all over again later in the week.  Hence, the first Allen Ginsberg quote I ever appreciated: "You can't win, you can't break even, you can't even quit the game!"

[quote author=

Beth if you honestly believe theres anything wrong in defending yourself when someone jumps you.. :D

Beth if you honestly believe theres anything wrong in defending yourself when someone jumps you.. :D



What post are you referring to?  I posted something, thought twice, removed it.  No need to comment further.

[quote author=

Maxwell quoted it before you decided to delete it.



Well, it's gone now.  Like I said, no need to comment on it further.  Once he saw I deleted it, he should have deleted his response.

[quote author=

That was an adjunct editorial to my main point, which you tend to miss quite often.  And it was about 24 years ago!
Fighting back makes me worse than them?  Put a little more brainpower behind your conclusions!
If you were applying for a job as a school principal and the superintendent asked you what you thought about bullying, you wouldn't get hired thise days.  What you left out of the "two-wrongs-don't-make-a-right" conclusion was a solution for my predicament.  So, I'm supposed to just take the abuse? 

Let me explain,
Mr. Vice Principal abdicated his authority when he told me the week before, after I made numerous attempts to go through rule-abiding channels to get the hooligans to leave me alone, "Uhhh-uh, there's nothing I can do about it, Max, this is, uh, this is just what eighth grade guys do."  Did you ever see the principal on "Beavis and Butt-head," well that was Mr. Strom.  I left his office in tears.  I thought, "What am I supposed to do, shoot them?"  Turns out that would have been more productive.  Schools kept up the "boys will be boys" attitude toward bullying, until the bullied ones starting bringing loaded firearms to school. Bang bang bang bang bang!  Kids die before they even get to go to the prom for chrissakes.  They gotta clean blood, gristle, viscera, brains, and dura mater from surfaces far and wide, and hire a dozen grief counselors.  This happened not once, not twice, not three times....nope it took Columbine before the started saying, "hmmm...let's take another look at bullying.  Maybe it's not such a good idea to let it happen!"  DUH!
  http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/09/sig.gifhttp://www.inthe00s.com/smile/13/icon_scratch.gif
The difference between me and the Columbine kids was I never had a gun, and I never wanted to hurt anyone.  Just wanted to be left alone, but that was f**king too much to ask!  Noooo, you will accept you role as punching bag in our exercise in suburban pathology!



You think you're the only kid to get tormented in school?  I got the same treatment if not worse, and I never punched anyone in the face.  No one said you had to take anything, but punching someone in the face doesn't make you better than the people pushing you around.  Guess what I did?  I didn't give them reason to push me around anymore.  Once they saw I wasn't reacting to their bullsh*t anymore, they left me alone.  The more you react, the more they feed off it, the more they give it back to you.  That's what every single teacher I ever had in elementary school told me, it's what my parents told me, it's what my friends told me.  Once I stopped giving them what they wanted......they backed off.  THAT'S what you do.  It may suck, it may not seem easy, but you suck it up and do it anyway.  It's better than getting in trouble for fighting back. 

Why did you say it if you didn't want that out there in the first place?



Because it's what I felt, but I'm tired of getting into pissing matches with that guy.  So I deleted it.

I'm sorry but the natural reaction is to fight back when you're physically assaulted and to question someone for that is just weird.

I'm sorry but the natural reaction is to fight back when you're physically assaulted and to question someone for that is just weird.



If I felt like getting expelled, I would have punched them back.  But since I liked the school and these 2 girls were the exception to the rule in said school, I chose not to turn into Steven Segal.

It may be the natural reaction, but that doesn't make it right.  You have to find other ways to deal with drama without resorting to physical violence.  It doesn't solve a goddamned thing.  I chose to not fight back and ignore them and not let them think they were getting to me.  When they realized their pathetic attempts to piss me off weren't working anymore, they left me alone.  I never had to once raise a hand/fist to them.  I am not a fighter, I don't get physically agressive when I'm angry, so I probably wouldn't have been able to do much damage if I tried.  Telling kids that if they get bullied in school they should fight them back is wrong.  Teaching them to physically assault people who bother them will do them no good when they get to later grades.  I've seen this with my own two eyes. 

I had two choices....turn the other cheek and do nothing, or become as bad as them and fight back. 

[quote author=

Bullsh*t. I think you're being rather naive. You just cannot allow someone to stand there and physically beat up on you.

And I would take getting expelled too(btw- what a F*CKED UP policy- expelling someone for defending themself? If I was the parent of a child expelled for defending themselve I would sue that school or something).  There's just no justification for allowing physical harm to come to yourself, I don't care what kind of abstract idealism you put behind it.




You call it naive, I call it "not wanting to get into a fight".  I don't "do" fights.  I find some other way to deal with it so that I can avoid getting into situations where I might have to physically defend myself.  Now if we're talking about someone trying to rape/kill me, all bets are off.  But some dumbf*cks in school calling me names?  No. 

Besides, I was never physically assaulted in school.  Why would I escalate 2 catty girls calling me a fatty into a physical altercation?  That makes no sense to me.  And even if they were beating the sh*t out of me, I tell my parents.....they call the school.  The school either expells them, or they go to the school board.  When I was in 8th grade, a similar situation occured and the kid's parents went straight to the school board and told them that if they didn't do something, they were going to the police.  The school board expelled them. 

I personally would never physically assault someone in retaliation unless my life was in danger.

Beth, it should have been more than obvious I was only talking about when someone physically attacks you, not 2 girls calling you names. :D

Beth, it should have been more than obvious I was only talking about when someone physically attacks you, not 2 girls calling you names. :D



If you read my post, you'll see that I also discuss the situation if the 2 girls were in fact, beating me up.  For clarity, I'll say it again. 


And even if they were beating the sh*t out of me, I tell my parents.....they call the school.  The school either expells them, or they go to the school board.  When I was in 8th grade, a similar situation occured and the kid's parents went straight to the school board and told them that if they didn't do something, they were going to the police.  The school board expelled them.

I personally would never physically assault someone in retaliation unless my life was in danger.

[quote author=

Do you think I think that?
:D
I avoided violent confrontation as much as possible.  Verbal taunts are one thing.  Physical threats and battery are quite another.  What I did didn't solve the problem.  When the police don't do anything about crime, that's when vigilantism occurs.  Same thing happened at my school.  The man in authority told me explicitly he could do nothing.  I had no choice but to do something myself.  Non-combative options had been exhausted.  I wish it was like in the movies.  You know, George K-O's Biff and that's the end of the bully forever.  Not in real life.  Some kids get picked on when they're available to be picked on.  A few kids get hunted.  The bully and his two-bit little thugs had a vendetta against me.  The vendetta started with me hurting the Ben's pride (that was the bully's name "Bennie").  He wanted to play the dozens, I outplayed him.  Shouldn't have done that!  Once the kid's macho pride was hurt, he started pushing me around without let up!  True, punching him didn't help.  I got the snot kicked out of me all over again!  The thing that stopped it was the end eigth grade, and Bennie and the cavemen going to the vocational school the next year!
::)
Funny thing was, at the end of senior year, I ended up at a party hosted by one of the runts that used to go around with Bennie.  We'd grown out of all that, so it was cool.  Brian said, "Hey, you remember Ben, he's here!"  Ben comes around the corner looking bigger and meaner than ever after four years!  For a second I was like, "Ohhhhh shiiiii.....," but he just said, "Heyyy! Max, how ya doing?," gave me vigorous handshake and handed me a beer!
;D
That's what they did to me, the a-holes.  It was sort of like in "Escape from Alcatraz," when Frank (Eastwood) clobbers Wolf, the guy who was going to stick a shiv into him!  Then the lieutenant sent Frank to solitary for fighting.
"Me? But he was going to..."

I didn't mind getting detention so much as the vice principal saying he couldn't do anything about it, and then saying to me, "It takes two to tango."  Thanks a lot for the fine educational experience, pal!
::)


Everyone who's ever picked on me for being bookish (I used to read at recess), short, periodically overweight, and very openly gay has gotten it back in being made fun of worse, and smarter, than they made fun of me. 
The worst thing is when your teachers pick on you. My 2nd grade teacher picked on everyone who was smart, and I'm fairly sure she was an anti-Semite. She picked on me and K. Ross-Heifetz, since we were the two smartest kids and the two Jewish kids in the class. She made my life a living hell and tried to get me classified as mentally disabled. B*tch.

Everyone who's ever picked on me for being bookish (I used to read at recess), short, periodically overweight, and very openly gay has gotten it back in being made fun of worse, and smarter, than they made fun of me. 
The worst thing is when your teachers pick on you. My 2nd grade teacher picked on everyone who was smart, and I'm fairly sure she was an anti-Semite. She picked on me and K. Ross-Heifetz, since we were the two smartest kids and the two Jewish kids in the class. She made my life a living hell and tried to get me classified as mentally disabled. B*tch.

I had teachers berate me and bully me under the old BS approach, "You gotta be mean to boys to make them tough."

It's a very Irish-Catholic thing.  I didn't go to Catholic school, but a lot of people who did talked about how they were constantly hassled by the faculty and the jocks were exalted beyond belief!

I had teachers berate me and bully me under the old BS approach, "You gotta be mean to boys to make them tough."

It's a very Irish-Catholic thing.  I didn't go to Catholic school, but a lot of people who did talked about how they were constantly hassled by the faculty and the jocks were exalted beyond belief!


The ex-Catholic boys' school teachers, with some exceptions, don't last long in the public schools. One person at my school, my 8th and 9th grade math teacher, Mr. Hamp, was just a real jerkwad. He got fired from a boy's Catholic prep school for telling somebody, "I'm gonna rip your head off and sh*t in it if you don't shut up!" He screamed at us incessantly, and made racially/ethnically offensive comments to me and other students, and even tickled students. He officially got fired for telling a Mexican-American girl who was reading a math problem in the wrong direction "I know you Spanish people can't read too well, but..." And he said to me, since I have just about the most common Jewish name next to Cohen, "I know Jewish people read backwards, but..." Not that I complained, or anything. He was just an asswipe.

I avoided violent confrontation as much as possible.  Verbal taunts are one thing.  Physical threats and battery are quite another.  What I did didn't solve the problem.  When the police don't do anything about crime, that's when vigilantism occurs.  Same thing happened at my school.  The man in authority told me explicitly he could do nothing.  I had no choice but to do something myself.  Non-combative options had been exhausted.


The way this thread wound up seguing towards school bullying reminds me of one of my favorite novels:  Ender's Game.

Ordinarily I'd swing over to the literary board - but I think the first ten pages Ender's Game (and, without spoiling anything, at least one of the plot points from one of the sequel lovels) are as germane to the current war as they are to the schoolyard.