Glenn Beck Decides: The Earth Is 7,000 Years Old

Wrestling with a controversial issue
Wingnuts • Views: 32,436

Following Marco Rubio’s comments about the age of the Earth (“I’m not a scientist, man”), it’s been tragically hilarious — and sadly revealing — to watch the entire right wing wrestle with the issue.

Here’s Glenn Beck and his crew struggling to figure out whether the Bible actually gives an age for the Earth, because of course that would be the true age, never mind what those secular elitist eggheads think, they’re going to hell anyway.

Beck eventually decides that since each day for God equals 1,000 years, and God created the universe in 7 days, that must mean the Earth is 7,000 years old.

*headdesk*

Jump to bottom

238 comments
1 Decatur Deb  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:34:51pm

That would be 49,000 years to God's dog.

2 Targetpractice  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:35:28pm

Yeah, but why get hung up over creationism when the benefits are so much greater?

///

3 Ian G.  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:36:19pm

It's amazing how the same country that produced such institutions as NASA and MIT also gave us Glenn Beck. America is indeed a diverse place, but in some categories (like rational thinking), we could stand to be less diverse.

4 3eff Jeff  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:36:27pm

Wow. I know. Right?

5 JeffFX  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:36:42pm

So creation was just finished? Glenn Beck may be mentally handicapped, and I may be a bad person for making fun of him.

6 Four More Tears  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:37:10pm

It's like watching children.

7 dragonath  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:37:31pm

So one day for God is a arbitrary number corresponding to 1,000 puny human years.

Wingnut God is so rinky-dink.

8 Targetpractice  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:38:08pm

re: #3 Ian G.

It's amazing how the same country that produced such institutions as NASA and MIT also gave us Glenn Beck. America is indeed a diverse place, but in some categories (like rational thinking), we could stand to be less diverse.

Beck is a symptom, nay a vector, of the dumbing down of America.

9 jaunte  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:38:19pm
Beck eventually decides that since each day for God equals 1,000 years, and God created the universe in 7 days, that must mean the Earth is 7,000 years old.

The Bishop Ussher version math was just too hard.

10 3eff Jeff  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:39:03pm

re: #7 dragonath

Pretty amazing that God days are the number of digits on our hands cubed times the time it takes for the seasons to cycle? That's not arrogant or human-centric at all.

11 Targetpractice  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:39:06pm

re: #6 Four More Tears

It's like watching children.

No, children can be forgiven because they haven't been taught better and can be educated as to the reality of the universe and of our planet.

12 dragonfire1981  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:39:08pm

That 7000 year theory doesn't even jive with the Bible at all. What about all the years that have passed AFTER creation?

13 moderatelyradicalliberal  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:39:30pm

These are deeply stupid people. Read a fucking geology book! Seriously, I took an Earth Science class in the 5th grade. Glenn Beck and Marco Rubio are dumber than a 5th grader.

14 RadicalModerate  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:39:43pm

re: #3 Ian G.

Speaking of NASA, I'm really interested in what the big news about what the Mars Curiosity rover has apparently found:
[Link: www.npr.org...]
They're still verifying, but a quote from the principal investigator is that if true, it is "one for the history books".
The preliminary readings are from Curiosity's SAM instrument suite.

Personally, I'm hoping that it detected either an amino acid chain, or a Alkane-family hydrocarbon - either of which would completely change the game in relation to discussion of possible extra-planetary life.

15 Skip Intro  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:41:41pm

So if god meant 1 day = 1000 years, why did't he say so? Why does this god guy have so much trouble making himself understood? And why can't anyone agree on what his book is supposed to say?

No wonder he got his ass fired when the management brought the new kid in off the bench.

16 Four More Tears  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:41:43pm

re: #14 RadicalModerate


Damn intrade and the ten-day waiting period for checks...


[Link: www.intrade.com...]

17 ReamWorks SKG  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:43:33pm

If he actually read the Bible, he'd know that the earth was created in SIX days. On the Seventh day, G-d rested.

By ignoring this, he's tossing aside the Second Commandment: REMEMBER THE SABBATH. It thought he loved the "Ten Commandments."

18 Ojoe  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:43:34pm

Dang. It is a meaningless question to ask about time per se. It is spacetime. There is no real answer about time in itself. It is like discussing the "Ether" to go on about this.

Oh well.

19 Ian G.  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:44:06pm

re: #12 dragonfire1981

Forget it, he's rolling.

20 b_sharp  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:46:16pm

Come on people, don't you know math is hard.

21 Ojoe  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:46:53pm

How many sunsets have there been? Only One, if you kept moving...

22 Ian G.  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:47:03pm

re: #14 RadicalModerate

Personally, I'm hoping that it detected either an amino acid chain, or a Alkane-family hydrocarbon - either of which would completely change the game in relation to discussion of possible extra-planetary life.

Boy, would THAT fuck with the Biblical literalists, huh? You think Darwin was bad? Wait until they have to deal with life on other planets.

Given that life on this planet exists in such absurdly inhospitable environments such as the stratosphere, under the Antarctic ice, in volcanic pools, etc. I'd be shocked if life weren't the rule in the universe. We're probably one of billions of inhabited planets.

23 Decatur Deb  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:47:18pm

re: #18 Ojoe

Dang. It is a meaningless question to ask about time per se. It is spacetime. There is no real answer about time in itself. It is like discussing the "Ether" to go on about this.

Oh well.

Did the Modern Whigs hold tight through the elections, or has everyone realized that Obama's Dems are the center party (when they're not being all rapey-stabby)?

24 makeitstop  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:47:37pm

Beck knows his audience, I'll give him that.

I wonder which was more fun - faking being an 'outrageous' Morning Zoo host, or faking being sincere about all this shit he spouts on the daily.

25 b_sharp  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:48:08pm

re: #21 Ojoe

How many sunsets have there been? Only One, if you kept moving...

On which planet?

26 dragonfire1981  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:48:41pm

To me the most appropriate explanation is that the Biblical creation account in Genesis was worded the way it was simply so people who lived back then would be able to easily understand and comprehend what was being described.

The concept of the 24 hour day (which has roots in astronomy) is a relatively recent development, so the notion that the Days mentioned in the Creation account were meant to refer to 24 hour periods seems unlikely.

I personally believe that the account was simply meant to illustrate a natural progression of events that had to occur for our planet and universe to come into existence. There had to be an order or else it couldn't be done correctly.

Think of it in terms of building a house. You can't put the roof on if the foundation isn't up yet.

You have to go in a natural progression. Land clearing ====> Foundation ===> Frame ====> Walls ====> Roof.

So if you wanted to explain to someone how a house gets built in a very simple way, you could say: "First you clear the land, second you build a foundation, third you build a frame, fourth you put up walls, finally you put on a roof."

I think the Genesis account is more about the WHAT than the WHEN.

27 Ojoe  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:49:05pm

re: #23 Decatur Deb

The Whigs supported T.J. O'hara, for whom I cast a write-in vote.

I don't think there is a real center party.

28 RadicalModerate  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:49:41pm

re: #15 Skip Intro

So if god meant 1 day = 1000 years, why did't he say so? Why does this god guy have so much trouble making himself understood? And why can't anyone agree on what his book is supposed to say?

No wonder he got his ass fired when the management brought the new kid in off the bench.

Better yet, if one is omnipotent and omnipresent, you'd think that if there was a message to be sent, especially today, that it wouldn't be only via the passed down texts from 200-odd generations ago by a seemingly-inifinite number of groups of people who can't agree what those texts actually say and mean, much less what rules they might contain.

It's the freaking Information Age. Getting a message-from-above out today would be freaking trivial.

29 Ojoe  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:49:55pm

re: #25 Henchman 26

This one.

It would get funny on the recently discovered planet with four suns.

30 b_sharp  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:50:04pm

re: #26 dragonfire1981

To me the most appropriate explanation is that the Biblical creation account in Genesis was worded the way it was simply so people who lived back then would be able to easily understand and comprehend what was being described.

The concept of the 24 hour day (which has roots in astronomy) is a relatively recent development, so the notion that the Days mentioned in the Creation account were meant to refer to 24 hour periods seems unlikely.

I personally believe that the account was simply meant to illustrate a natural progression of events that had to occur for our planet and universe to come into existence. There had to be an order or else it couldn't be done correctly.

Think of it in terms of building a house. You can't put the roof on if the foundation isn't up yet.

You have to go in a natural progression. Land clearing ====> Foundation ===> Frame ====> Walls ====> Roof.

So if you wanted to explain to someone how a house gets build in a very simple way, you could say: "First you clear the land, second you build a foundation, third you build a frame, fourth you put up walls, finally you put on a roof."

I think the Genesis account is more about the WHAT than the WHEN.

But the accounts are out of order.

31 Four More Tears  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:52:15pm
32 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:53:05pm

The Hebrew Calendar date of 5773 was calculated some time during the Talmudic era. IT IS NOT FOUND ANYWHERE IN SCRIPTURE.

It is not meant as the literal age of the earth. Kabbalists taught that the world is millions of years old.

Yes, some Orthodox Jews got the notion that the earth is 5773 literal years old, but this is a recent idea and they probably picked it up from Christians.

Age of the universe in Jewish tradition.

33 Ojoe  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:53:38pm

re: #28 RadicalModerate

Sure messages come in if you listen in deep enough silence. Then you get info like Thomas Merton did: "Paradise is all around us and we do not understand."

And much else.

But he was a radical, Merton was. Not a fundamentalist.

34 freetoken  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:55:12pm

What idiots.

They don't even know the history of theology.

Bishop Ussher and his type used the genealogies of the Torah/OT to calculate the age of the Earth.

Therefore, if the genealogies are wrong about dates, then they could be, probably are, wrong about actual lineage. **THIS** is what scares fundamentalists.

It all harkens back to Magickal Book thinking.

Writing was always an elitist activity until the past couple of centuries. Thus writings - the actual markings - held power over the masses. Writing == Magic. The Bible is a Magickal Book, a set of words that the masses had to take on faith because they couldn't read it themselves, or have the background to understand it.

Beck is trying to use humor to escape the inevitable: the "conservative coalition" hangs by a thread, with the religious fundamentalists not really in sync with the internationalist capitalist and libertarian/libertine segments.

35 Targetpractice  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:55:20pm

re: #31 Four More Tears

[Embedded content]

Not so much backing away as just entrenching farther back. He's now whining that he wasn't told this earlier and is pulling the usual "What else are they hiding?!" bit. No doubt he still intends to block Rice and any other Obama nominees out of pure spite.

36 Decatur Deb  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:56:01pm

re: #27 Ojoe

The Whigs supported T.J. O'hara, for whom I cast a write-in vote.

I don't think there is a real center party.

He had access in Alabama. No yard signs.

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

37 dragonfire1981  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:56:40pm

re: #30 Henchman 26

But the accounts are out of order.

Oh? I just reread Genesis 1 and it seems to fit to me:

- First God created the Sun and Moon, then He separated the oceans from the sky, then He created land, then He added vegetation, then He added living creatures and finally He added man.

Now I can understand that from an astronomy standpoint the land would probably come before the ocean (to name one example of things being "out of order"). I only said the Genesis events represent a progression, nothing more. There need not necessarily be any scientific basis for that progression.

Regardless this doesn't change my central point which is the events themselves are the most important part of the account, not the order or time frame in which they occur.

38 compound_Idaho  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:57:21pm

re: #1 Decatur Deb

That would be 49,000 years to God's dog.

New International Version (©1984)
But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.

Makes the math very difficult.

39 dragonfire1981  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:57:21pm

re: #31 Four More Tears

[Embedded content]

I think I've been watching too much Simpsons lately. I initially read that as "McBain backs away..."

40 b_sharp  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:57:34pm

re: #28 RadicalModerate

Better yet, if one is omnipotent and omnipresent, you'd think that if there was a message to be sent, especially today, that it wouldn't be only via the passed down texts from 200-odd generations ago by a seemingly-inifinite number of groups of people who can't agree what those texts actually say and mean, much less what rules they might contain.

It's the freaking Information Age. Getting a message-from-above out today would be freaking trivial.

Time to go back to metal cavity fillings.

41 Targetpractice  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:57:44pm

re: #34 freetoken

What idiots.

They don't even know the history of theology.

Bishop Ussher and his type used the genealogies of the Torah/OT to calculate the age of the Earth.

Therefore, if the genealogies are wrong about dates, then they could be, probably are, wrong about actual lineage. **THIS** is what scares fundamentalists.

It all harkens back to Magickal Book thinking.

Writing was always an elitist activity until the past couple of centuries. Thus writings - the actual markings - held power over the masses. Writing == Magic. The Bible is a Magickal Book, a set of words that the masses had to take on faith because they couldn't read it themselves, or have the background to understand it.

Beck is trying to use humor to escape the inevitable: the "conservative coalition" hangs by a thread, with the religious fundamentalists not really in sync with the internationalist capitalist and libertarian/libertine segments.

Let us take a moment and thank a German blacksmith turned printer for breaking that stranglehold over the power of the Book.

42 Decatur Deb  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:58:00pm

re: #33 Ojoe

Sure messages come in if you listen in deep enough silence. Then you get info like Thomas Merton did: "Paradise is all around us and we do not understand."

And much else.

But he was a radical, Merton was. Not a fundamentalist.

I posted a wiki on Tielhard de Chardin yesterday. Lots of dynamics to arrive at the same place.

43 sattv4u2  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:58:05pm

re: #40 Henchman 26

Time to go back to metal cavity fillings.

Upside,,, better AM radio reception!!

44 Sionainn  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:58:31pm

re: #6 Four More Tears

It's like watching children.

Stupid children...because my 7-year-old is smarter than them.

45 freetoken  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:59:05pm

re: #41 Targetpractice

Even then, it took two centuries before schools had been widely established enough to create a system in which literacy could be taught to a wider audience.

46 aagcobb  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:59:15pm

re: #37 dragonfire1981

Oh? I just reread Genesis 1 and it seems to fit to me:

- First God created the Sun and Moon, then He separated the oceans from the sky, then He created land, then He added vegetation, then He added living creatures and finally He added man.

Now I can understand that from an astronomy standpoint the land would probably come before the ocean (to name one example of things being "out of order"). I only said the Genesis events represent a progression, nothing more. There need not necessarily be any scientific basis for that progression.

Regardless this doesn't change my central point which is the events themselves are the most important part of the account, not the order or time frame in which they occur.

I have read the theory that the purpose of Genesis was to explain that all the things that other peoples worshipped, i.e., the Sun, the Ocean, the Earth, are all things, created by God, and he was greater than all of them.

47 Skip Intro  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:59:41pm

re: #24 makeitstop

Beck knows his audience, I'll give him that.

I wonder which was more fun - faking being an 'outrageous' Morning Zoo host, or faking being sincere about all this shit he spouts on the daily.

Definitely his current gig, because it makes him a lot more money.

48 freetoken  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 3:59:59pm

Indeed, the invention of the book in some ways strengthened the Magick Book syndrome, as now every family could have their own paper talisman.

49 RadicalModerate  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:00:23pm

re: #40 Henchman 26

Time to go back to metal cavity fillings.

My name is not Kent, and I will not stop touching myself.

50 Targetpractice  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:00:26pm

re: #45 freetoken

Even then, it took two centuries before schools had been widely established enough to create a system in which literacy could be taught to a wider audience.

Indeed. Education for the masses is still a relatively new concept, one that I feel is a large part of the reason for the diminishing power of the evangelists.

51 b_sharp  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:00:38pm

re: #37 dragonfire1981

Oh? I just reread Genesis 1 and it seems to fit to me:

- First God created the Sun and Moon, then He separated the oceans from the sky, then He created land, then He added vegetation, then He added living creatures and finally He added man.

Now I can understand that from an astronomy standpoint the land would probably come before the ocean (to name one example of things being "out of order"). I only said the Genesis events represent a progression, nothing more. There need not necessarily be any scientific basis for that progression.

Regardless this doesn't change my central point which is the events themselves are the most important part of the account, not the order or time frame in which they occur.

Didn't he create light before the sun and stars.

52 Ojoe  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:00:47pm

re: #42 Decatur Deb

I read Chardin's "The Phenomenon of Man" in college; was very impressed.

There are certainly many ways to get to the Truth, which is not the same as saying that Truth is relative.

53 Batman  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:00:53pm

Creation math is equally as horrendous as creation science.

54 Targetpractice  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:01:24pm

re: #53 Batman

Creation math is equally as horrendous as creation science.

"Why does everything exist? Because God created it, that's why!"

//

55 Ojoe  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:02:03pm

re: #51 Henchman 26

I think re the big bang, that photons separate out before stars form. IIRC.

56 compound_Idaho  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:02:30pm

re: #47 Skip Intro

Definitely his current gig, because it makes him a lot more money.

Once you can fake sincerity you have it made.

57 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:02:40pm

So let's see:

We had a thousand years of just light. That was probably rad.

Then a thousand years of light and the waters being seperated into the waters of the heaven and those of the earth. I assume this means clouds, but in the original text it's kinda clear that they thought that there was water around the earth. Anyway. This is also the home of my favorite phrase in the bible, "And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." God got a little jet-ski-ing in. That's cool.

Then a thousand years of light, water, and now some bare land too. God is obviously a chilll guy who likes to take his time and appreciate what he did. A thousand years of rock and water and light. Very zen.

Then a thousand years with light, the sun and the moon (not sure how that interfaces with light, but hey, it sounds trippy) the rock, the waters.

Then a thousand years where damn, suddenly it's fucking fishes and flying birds everywhere! I'm not sure what the birds were eating-- aside from the fish-eaters-- but God probably has access to some goddamn kick-ass birdseed and suet and shit so no big.

Then a thousand years where he added in the land animals. It was like Mutual of Omaha all the time in that shit. A thousand years of watching bears catch salmon-- that's pretty rad. He was smart, too, he only made one man and one woman, because he knew more of them would just fuck his shit up.

Then he just rested for a thousand years. Now, maybe this means during these thousand year increments he was at work continuously, but it doesn't really make much sense, since God can just poof whatever he wants, and he's omniscient so he always gets it right the first time (never mind that whole flood thing later). So this must be some really primo resting, some like, absolute serene rocking blissfully in a celestial hammock with a big spliff hanging off while he watches the birds and the bees and Adam trying to convince Eve that he looks cool with a beard on.

My question is: Are we still in that thousand years? Did animals only start existing during the Dark Ages? I'm fairly sure that there were, like, cows prior to then.

This shit is tough, man.

58 EPR-radar  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:03:22pm

re: #44 Sionainn

Stupid children...because my 7-year-old is smarter than them.

Most children want to learn, so this is a bit unfair to children.

Adults who are young-earth creationists are deliberately choosing ignorance over knowledge. A long time ago, the science fiction author Isaac Asimov referred to these people as "the Army of the Night". Still seems appropriate.

59 ReamWorks SKG  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:04:05pm

re: #37 dragonfire1981

Putting aside the second creation story, my Torah indicates that the first creation was LIGHT. G-d said "יהי אור" (let there be light).

60 Ojoe  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:04:23pm

re: #54 Targetpractice

It is all held in existence by love, is a good explanation. And why not? Julian of Norwich, lady English mystic of many centuries back, would say that.

61 dragonfire1981  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:04:35pm

re: #51 Henchman 26

Didn't he create light before the sun and stars.

Yes you are correct. I got my lights mixed up. The "light" being referred to in the widely known "let there be light!" scripture is actually Day. God separated the day from the night. I got mixed up for a moment and thought the Light being referenced was the Sun.

You are right though, the Sun, Moon and Stars all came after.

62 watching you tiny alien kittens are  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:04:48pm

re: #13 moderatelyradicalliberal

These are deeply stupid people. Read a fucking geology book! Seriously, I took an Earth Science class in the 5th grade. Glenn Beck and Marco Rubio are dumber than a 5th grader.

A lot of people are, if they weren't that TV show would totally suck (worse).

63 Decatur Deb  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:05:28pm

re: #60 Ojoe

It is all held in existence by love, is a good explanation. And why not? Julian of Norwich, lady English mystic of many centuries back, would say that.

So did Dante, though it could be Tough Love.

64 ReamWorks SKG  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:05:54pm

Don't listen to anyone who can't read it in G-d own language! :-)

65 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:06:08pm

re: #60 Ojoe

It is all held in existence by love, is a good explanation. And why not? Julian of Norwich, lady English mystic of many centuries back, would say that.

Dan Simmons would say that too, thus really fucking up the ending to his otherwise awesome Hyperion/Endymion series.

66 freetoken  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:06:19pm

The bigger picture isn't just about the age of the Earth.

What the American Fundamentalist movement wants, needs, and teaches is that we and our problems can all be answered by some magickal incantations from a Magickal Book.

It is nothing less than escapism on a grand scale.

And this is what the modern "conservative" movement has built its house upon - the sands of ignorance.

67 3eff Jeff  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:06:24pm

re: #57 Obdicut

The funny thing is, if you listen to the geologists, it's billions of years of the early nothing but light and water and rocks stages. God may be even more chill than previously suspected.

68 EPR-radar  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:06:57pm

re: #64 ReamWorks SKG

Don't listen to anyone who can't read it in G-d own language! :-)

Ah. Overly archaic Elizabethan English?

69 Ojoe  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:07:24pm

re: #63 Decatur Deb

Dante is the best.

"State in la mentre io lo enforco."

(Stand aside while I pitchfork him)

Says a small devil in front of a lawyer.

I forget what canto.

70 Targetpractice  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:08:16pm

re: #66 freetoken

The bigger picture isn't just about the age of the Earth.

What the American Fundamentalist movement wants, needs, and teaches is that we and our problems can all be answered by some magickal incantations from a Magickal Book.

It is nothing less than escapism on a grand scale.

And this is what the modern "conservative" movement has built its house upon - the sands of ignorance.

Faith in an omniscient, omnipotent deity who is benevolent and has a plan for all that happens is something that gives them a form of comfort. It is rather amusing that the party of "personal responsibility" likes to put the responsibility for all the world's ills and problems in the hands of a deity that cannot be held accountable or his decisions questioned.

71 wrenchwench  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:09:05pm

Never mind the creation, what about the destruction!!???!

Image: 601628_4775248457688_1017478901_n.jpg

72 dragonath  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:09:14pm

re: #57 Obdicut

I'll sponsor your radio show. All I have is a couple pieces of lint and a dime in my pocket.

73 sattv4u2  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:10:06pm

re: #72 dragonath

I'll sponsor your radio show. All I have a couple pieces of lint and a dime in my pocket.

Can I have the lint? I'm trying to save enough to knit a sweater!

74 dragonath  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:10:08pm

I'll give all I can!

75 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:10:30pm

re: #72 dragonath

I'll sponsor your radio show. All I have is a couple pieces of lint and a dime in my pocket.

Hey, we've got the internet. That'll take us pretty far.

76 freetoken  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:11:09pm

re: #53 Batman

Creation math is equally as horrendous as creation science.

1 Kings 7:23

23 He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten cubits from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits[a] to measure around it.

I know, I know, the writers/editors of 1 Kings were just rounding to 1 significant digit...

77 Decatur Deb  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:11:34pm

re: #69 Ojoe

Dante is the best.

"State in la mentre io lo enforco."

(Stand aside while I pitchfork him)

Says a small devil in front of a lawyer.

I forget what canto.

Last line of the Paradiso suggests he knew the Sun was a star, in 1300. Probably just threw in 'altri' for the meter.

78 RadicalModerate  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:12:06pm

re: #71 wrenchwench

Never mind the creation, what about the destruction!!???!

Image: 601628_4775248457688_1017478901_n.jpg

At least I know now what happened to all of those old AOL CD-ROMs that people were getting in the mail during the last decade.

79 Charles Johnson  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:12:58pm

It's been an exceptionally wingnutty kind of day.

80 sattv4u2  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:13:03pm

re: #75 Obdicut

Hey, we've got the internet. That'll take us pretty far.

Surprisingly, it doesn't take that long to reach the end of it!

Youtube Video
81 ReamWorks SKG  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:13:35pm

re: #76 freetoken

It was a hexagon! Roughly circular in shape, but the ratio of circumference /diameter == 3.

82 Decatur Deb  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:14:10pm

re: #78 RadicalModerate

At least I know now what happened to all of those old AOL CD-ROMs people were getting in the mail during the last decade.

Saving a stack to line an old TV satellite dish. Varek would approve.

83 Targetpractice  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:14:41pm

re: #79 Charles Johnson

It's been an exceptionally wingnutty kind of day.

Well, here's a moment of sanity for ya:

Iowa Governor: Ames Straw Poll ‘Outlived Its Usefulness’

Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad (R) said on Tuesday that the Ames Straw Poll, which has been conducted in Iowa for Republican presidential nominees since 1979, needs to come to an end. Branstad pointed to the failed primary run of the 2011 Ames winner Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), as an example that the poll may not be the best measure of Republican nominees.

“I think the straw poll has outlived its usefulness,” Branstad told the Wall Street Journal. “It has been a great fundraiser for the party but I think its days are over.”

84 Ojoe  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:15:20pm

re: #77 Decatur Deb

Stars are in the last line of the inferno as well:

"E quindi uscimmo a reveder le stelle."

And so we came out again and saw the stars.

Unsurpassed beauty of language...

I should get back to work....

85 sattv4u2  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:15:32pm

re: #82 Decatur Deb

Saving a stack to line an old TV satellite dish. Varek would approve.

You rang !?!?

86 watching you tiny alien kittens are  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:15:47pm

re: #57 Obdicut

Then a thousand years of light and the waters being seperated into the waters of the heaven and those of the earth. I assume this means clouds, but in the original text it's kinda clear that they thought that there was water around the earth.

Your talking about the Water Canopy Theory that even today a lot of creationists believe in. That is where the water for Noah's flood came from and why people lived so long back then, because they were protected from "harmful rays."

Water Canopy...

87 freetoken  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:15:49pm

re: #70 Targetpractice

Faith in an omniscient, omnipotent deity who is benevolent and has a plan for all that happens is something that gives them a form of comfort. It is rather amusing that the party of "personal responsibility" likes to put the responsibility for all the world's ills and problems in the hands of a deity that cannot be held accountable or his decisions questioned.

In some ways, but what the creationists/literalists are doing in this country (and others) is more specific than just deist or theist constructing a religion.

Besides the most basic existential problem that we all face (even though we practice ignoring it most of the time) - our eventual demise, we have on top of that all these nasty problems we have created for ourselves from which we want to escape.

88 freetoken  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:16:59pm

re: #81 ReamWorks SKG

It was a hexagon! Roughly circular in shape, but the ratio of radius/diameter == 3.

Hmmm.... still wont work.

A regular hexagon with total of 30 cubits of diameter would have sides of 5 cubits each. If you do the trigonometry, the distance from one vertex to the opposite one still isn't 10 cubits.

89 Pawn of the Oppressor  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:17:34pm

So he skipped the part where the adopted Babylonian creation story appears to describe the world as a bubble floating in an endless cosmic ocean of water, with earth as a flat disk inside this bubble, and the sky as a dome overhead - a dome which, I have read, the people of the time thought might be made of tin?

I have my problems, but at least I don't wake up in the morning as Glenn Beck. At least I'm not sick in the head like he is. For that, I could be thankful to whatever imaginary Sky Father you prefer.

90 erik_t  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:19:26pm

re: #22 Ian G.

Boy, would THAT fuck with the Biblical literalists, huh? You think Darwin was bad? Wait until they have to deal with life on other planets.

They would, or will, just ignore the science. Never stopped them before.

91 Dancing along the light of day  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:22:26pm

re: #57 Obdicut

AHEM, you forgot the giraffes!
LOL!

92 Varek Raith  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:22:47pm

The earth is 5 minutes old.

93 engineer cat  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:23:29pm

glen beck with his chalk board == (psychotic genius in A Beautiful Mind) minus (genius)

94 HypnoToad  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:23:49pm

The assertion that God made man in his own image is a time bomb ticking away at the heart of Christianity.

A. C. Clarke

95 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:23:57pm

re: #89 Pawn of the Oppressor

The ancient greeks said that the sky was bronze colored. Why? Because it's fucking hot in Attica and if you look up at the sun during the day the main impression you get is heat and blazing radiation, and they didn't think color was solely about the visible spectrum but also what you felt, what its texture was. That's why the sea is the 'wine-dark sea', too-- the ocean, being full of salt and seaweed and dinoflagellates and plankton and crap, moves differently than normal water, more like wine.

So the 'tin' might have been partially indicative of how goddamn hot it gets out there, like being under a reflective tin mirror.

96 sattv4u2  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:24:21pm

re: #92 Varek Raith

The earth is 5 minutes old.

time enough to make a three minute egg!!

(HEY ,, i'll bet thats how we can figure out that the egg came 1st before the chicken!!!)

97 engineer cat  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:25:05pm

re: #92 Varek Raith

The earth is 5 minutes old.

now it's 8 minutes old

98 A Man for all Seasons  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:25:42pm

re: #91 Dancing along the light of day

AHEM, you forgot the giraffes!
LOL!

Snakes on an a Ark!
Aaayeee!

99 Lidane  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:25:52pm

re: #13 moderatelyradicalliberal

These are deeply stupid people.

Yes. And not just about evolution or the age of the Earth. They're deeply stupid about a lot of things.

100 wrenchwench  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:26:52pm

re: #92 Varek Raith

The earth is 5 minutes old.

Didn't you just say that five minutes ago?

101 watching you tiny alien kittens are  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:27:51pm

re: #100 wrenchwench

Didn't you just say that five minutes ago?

Hey no do-overs!

102 freetoken  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:28:14pm

re: #99 Lidane

I would not use the word "stupid" to paint them all.

I propose that what we are seeing is the public working-out of the existential angst of a large segment of the American populace, whose worldview can no longer work in the 21st century world.

103 Ghost of Tom Joad  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:28:24pm

re: #99 Lidane

Yes. And not just about evolution or the age of the Earth. They're deeply stupid about a lot of things.

Well...if you're going to believe that the Earth is only ~7000 years old, then believing in just about any other crazy, ignorant, unintelligent belief is not exactly a big leap. Like believing 2+2=5, after that, everything mathematical is a lost cause.

104 dragonfire1981  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:29:19pm

re: #98 A Man for all Seasons

Snakes on an a Ark!
Aaayeee!

"Days of Genesis" starring Samuel L. Jackson

That would be...interesting.

105 wrenchwench  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:31:05pm

re: #103 Ghost of Tom Joad

Well...if you're going to believe that the Earth is only ~7000 years old, then believing in just about any other crazy, ignorant, unintelligent belief is not exactly a big leap. Like believing 2+2=5, after that, everything mathematical is a lost cause.

The problem I have with it is when they start legislating based on those beliefs.

106 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:31:40pm

God took 7000 years to make the earth (in 7 god days) is what he said. He didn't say that was the age, but since the best biblical evidence we have is about 6000 years, then we won't be finished for another 1000 years.

I know this is hard for some to believe, but trust me, I know it's true. God works in mysterious ways, slowly.

107 Four More Tears  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:32:37pm
108 EPR-radar  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:34:06pm

re: #92 Varek Raith

A young earth creationist could claim that the earth/universe was created 6000 years ago (or at any point in time, of course), and that all of the evidence for greater age (e.g., fossils, human memories, cosmic background radiation) was planted by god.

This is a actually a coherent philosophical position, because it makes it clear why the evidence is being dismissed. Few creationists are this honest.

The trouble comes when the creationists argue that the evidence actually _supports_ a young Earth.

109 Ghost of Tom Joad  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:35:14pm

re: #105 wrenchwench

The problem I have with it is when they start legislating based on those beliefs.

They're obviously willing to believe anything, but they also tend to go against anything scientific because to them, science goes against what they believe (of course, then they fly home on a jet, while talking on a smartphone, typing on a lap-top, taking their medication etc.)

But it's not just legislating on those beliefs. If they are going to believe something that easily disprovable (I'm talking age of the planet, not existence of higher power so I don't piss off the believers), then they'll believe just about anything. It's actually scary.

110 watching you tiny alien kittens are  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:35:45pm

re: #102 freetoken

I would not use the word "stupid" to paint them all.

I propose that what we are seeing is the public working-out of the existential angst of a large segment of the American populace, whose worldview can no longer work in the 21st century world.

I've been thinking along those lines myself, it has just been too much change too quickly and they are regressing to hide from it. The social and technological changes of the last 6 decades or so have caused a lot of fear and uncertainty in those afraid of the unknown.

111 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:37:03pm

re: #107 Four More Tears

112 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:38:22pm

re: #111 Obdicut

113 Ghost of Tom Joad  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:39:46pm

re: #109 Ghost of Tom Joad

And, hey, people can believe whatever they want. I have 0 problems with any religious beliefs. I think most people are the same way. It's when those beliefs influence the decision-making process in any way that affects me, or those around me (especially children, who are ill-equipped to make their own decisions about such complex issues at a young age).

114 sattv4u2  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:42:02pm

And on that note, the long quiet drive home beckons

115 watching you tiny alien kittens are  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:43:04pm

re: #106 Achilles Tang

God took 7000 years to make the earth (in 7 god days) is what he said. He didn't say that was the age, but since the best biblical evidence we have is about 6000 years, then we won't be finished for another 1000 years.

I know this is hard for some to believe, but trust me, I know it's true. God works in mysterious ways, slowly.

Lies...

Bishop Ussher calculated that the earth was created on the night before Sunday, 23 October 4004 BC, so the earth is exactly 6016 years and 29 days old!

116 A Man for all Seasons  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:43:17pm

re: #114 sattv4u2

And on that note, the long quiet drive home beckons

Be safe bro

117 Four More Tears  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:45:20pm
118 RadicalModerate  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:47:58pm

re: #117 Four More Tears

[Embedded content]

Is it wrong to say that I have really mixed feelings about this?

119 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:48:01pm

re: #117 Four More Tears

Because that will bring peace to the Middle East.

About as effective as slapping a smiley sticker on a tank.

I wouldn't want to be the poor IT guy getting yelled at right now.

I bet $5 his password was like Shalom or something. Or they social-engineered it.

120 Four More Tears  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:48:49pm

re: #118 RadicalModerate

Is it wrong to say that I have really mixed feelings about this?

No, not wrong. Though it's really dickish and accomplishes nothing.

121 watching you tiny alien kittens are  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:49:24pm

re: #117 Four More Tears

[Embedded content]

That is just stupid and counterproductive, but hey whatever floats their boat.

How much do you want to bet he had the same password on both sites?
Does it really count as "hacking" if someone just manages to guess or blunt force your password?

122 watching you tiny alien kittens are  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:49:42pm

re: #118 RadicalModerate

Is it wrong to say that I have really mixed feelings about this?

No

123 kirkspencer  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:49:59pm

re: #121 watching you tiny alien kittens are

That is just stupid and counterproductive, but hey whatever floats their boat.

How much do you want to bet he had the same password on both sites?
Does it really count as "hacking" if someone just manages to guess or blunt force your password?

Yes it counts.

124 Four More Tears  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:50:23pm

re: #121 watching you tiny alien kittens are

That is just stupid and counterproductive, but hey whatever floats their boat.

How much do you want to bet he had the same password on both sites?
Does it really count as "hacking" if someone just manages to guess or blunt force your password?

Technically yes.

125 RadicalModerate  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:51:51pm

re: #120 Four More Tears

No, not wrong. Though it's really dickish and accomplishes nothing.

It is a dickish thing to do, but it does inconvenience, without permanent personal harm, an individual who made some incredibly vile statements in support of genocide.

126 engineer cat  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:52:24pm

in 7 god days

i don't recall any scriptural justification for deciding that one god day == one thousand years, altho it's very popular

it must be recorded in the hidden Book Of Stuff Pulled Outta Mah Butt

127 kirkspencer  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:54:39pm

re: #126 engineer cat

in 7 god days

i don't recall any scriptural justification for deciding that one god day == one thousand years, altho it's very popular

it must be recorded in the hidden Book Of Stuff Pulled Outta Mah Butt

2 Peter 3:8 "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."

128 Four More Tears  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:55:00pm

re: #125 RadicalModerate

It is a dickish thing to do, but it does inconvenience, without permanent personal harm, an individual who made some incredibly vile statements in support of genocide.

He did? Or are you thinking of Sharon's son's op-ed from a few days ago?

129 engineer cat  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:55:32pm

a 'hacker' can also be a bad pgrmr who 'hacks' a solution rather than craft it carefully, or in its broadest meaning it's just an informal synonym for software engineer

my suggestions of 'bit-pusher' and 'data janitor' failed to catch on...

130 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:55:39pm

re: #125 RadicalModerate

Wrong guy. I think. Unless there's more of 'em now.

131 kirkspencer  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:55:45pm

re: #127 kirkspencer

Oh, yeah. And Psalm 90:4 "For a thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night."

132 engineer cat  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:56:02pm

re: #127 kirkspencer

2 Peter 3:8 "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."

ah

133 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:56:55pm

re: #126 engineer cat

in 7 god days

i don't recall any scriptural justification for deciding that one god day == one thousand years, altho it's very popular

it must be recorded in the hidden Book Of Stuff Pulled Outta Mah Butt

I've never understood why they obsess about this in the first place. What's wrong with simply saying a god day is a nanosecond, or less? I mean the thing is omnipotent and outside time isn't it?

134 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:57:01pm

re: #125 RadicalModerate

It is a dickish thing to do, but it does inconvenience, without permanent personal harm, an individual who made some incredibly vile statements in support of genocide.

Uh, Silvan Shalom is not the same individual as Gilad Sharon who wrote that horrible article in the Jerusalem Post.

What incredibly vile statements in support of genocide have been made by Silvan Shalom?

135 Majacita  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:57:56pm

My grandfather told me that God put the dinosaur bones in the earth to test our faith. He also said that if I didn't have the faith of a little child when I was a little child that I might as well give up and go to hell. I was 7.

136 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:59:58pm

re: #125 RadicalModerate

It is a dickish thing to do, but it does inconvenience, without permanent personal harm, an individual who made some incredibly vile statements in support of genocide.

For the record, he made vile statements in support of complete and indiscriminate destruction, not the killing of every Palestinian, the latter being genocide.

137 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:01:05pm

re: #136 Achilles Tang

Oh give it a rest. You're not even pedantically right. Genocide also includes killing a people, or attempting to, in part.

138 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:01:20pm

re: #136 Achilles Tang

For the record, he made vile statements in support of complete and indiscriminate destruction, not the killing of every Palestinian, the latter being genocide.

Who made the vile statements? The same person whose Facebook was hacked?

139 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:03:59pm

Why are people here applauding cyber mischief done to someone WHO DID NOT write the "flatten Gaza" op-ed?

Is it OK because all those Hebrew names sound alike?

140 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:06:03pm

re: #138 Vicious Babushka

Who made the vile statements? The same person whose Facebook was hacked?

No, the other guy.

141 watching you tiny alien kittens are  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:06:07pm

Who is applauding?

142 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:10:00pm

...

143 steve_davis  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:10:19pm

re: #1 Decatur Deb

That would be 49,000 years to God's dog.

Or approximately 4.5 billion years in God years. But then again, what does God know?

144 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:10:52pm

re: #137 Obdicut

Oh give it a rest. You're not even pedantically right. Genocide also includes killing a people, or attempting to, in part.

He didn't say kill them all, or attempt to kill them all. He said make them so miserable the would have to give up. That is not the definition of genocide except to people who like to apply the worst word they can think of to every situation, for effect.


By your definition the Palestinians are guilty of genocide, since they certainly attempt indiscriminate killing of Israelis and claim to want to do it to all of them.

145 erik_t  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:13:37pm

re: #144 Achilles Tang

He didn't say kill them all, or attempt to kill them all. He said make them so miserable the would have to give up. That is not the definition of genocide except to people who like to apply the worst word they can think of to every situation, for effect.

Uhhhhhhh. Are we still talking about 'flatten all of Gaza'? That guy?

I wonder how you flatten a heavily-built-up territory without basically killing everyone.

146 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:17:59pm

re: #144 Achilles Tang

He didn't say kill them all, or attempt to kill them all. He said make them so miserable the would have to give up.

No he didn't. He said to flatten Gaza, and render it without electricity, water, or cars. That'd result in the death of hundreds of thousands. If you want to quibble about whether that's genocide, sure, get your freak on. I don't really give a shit, you just make yourself look bizarre.

By your definition the Palestinians are guilty of genocide, since they certainly attempt indiscriminate killing of Israelis and claim to want to do it to all of them.

"The Palestinians" aren't guilty of anything. Many individual Palestinians definitely are guilty of wanting to commit genocide, since they talk about it a lot. Those Hamas guys, especially.

What you're doing is the equivalent of correcting someone who called a a fifty-five year old man caught molesting a fourteen year old girl a pedophile, and telling him "actually, that'd be an ephebophile." in very certain circumstances, it might be a worthwhile correction.

This ain't one of 'em.

147 Four More Tears  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:19:24pm
148 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:19:34pm

re: #145 erik_t

Uhhhhhhh. Are we still talking about 'flatten all of Gaza'? That guy?

I wonder how you flatten a heavily-built-up territory without basically killing everyone.

Oh dear. The bastardization of the language continues. Next you will defend the creationists use of the word theory, because words mean what one wants them to.

149 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:20:04pm

Damn it, I don't know how to make my text big. But I don't get how Sharon gets confused with Shalom. It's like confusing "Thomas" and Thobod".

Good o'l Thobod.

150 A Man for all Seasons  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:20:13pm

re: #145 erik_t

Uhhhhhhh. Are we still talking about 'flatten all of Gaza'? That guy?

I wonder how you flatten a heavily-built-up territory without basically killing everyone.

Well Erik we haven't seen any old fashion carpet bombing since Vietnam.
I'm with Randy Newman here.. Let's drop the big one and see what happens
*wink*

151 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:21:42pm

re: #148 Achilles Tang

Oh dear. The bastardization of the language continues. Next you will defend the creationists use of the word theory, because words mean what one wants them to.

How dare you debase the English language by fucking up your possessive there, and end your sentence with a preposition.

Seriously, if you're going to be a pedant, can you at least get your own shit right?

152 Varek Raith  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:22:21pm

re: #144 Achilles Tang

And those references he make to Hiroshima and Nagasaki were just some irrelevant tangent?
Methinks not.

153 erik_t  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:23:35pm

Really, this is an unbelievably stupid conversation and I refuse to take part or let it make me angry.

Good day, everyone.

154 SpaceJesus  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:23:42pm

what an incredibly stupid pasty ham person thing to say

155 Killgore Trout  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:23:48pm

IDF Strikes House of Commander of Central Gaza Hamas Training Bases

Youtube Video

Looks like he had some goodies in the basement
156 kirkspencer  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:24:33pm

re: #148 Achilles Tang

Oh dear. The bastardization of the language continues. Next you will defend the creationists use of the word theory, because words mean what one wants them to.

Wait. You're complaining of the bastardization of (American) English language? Really?

The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that the English language is as pure as a crib-house whore. It not only borrows words from other languages; it has on occasion chased other languages down dark alley-ways, clubbed them unconscious and rifled their pockets for new vocabulary. -- James Nicoll

157 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:24:38pm

re: #146 Obdicut

Yes I should have said Hamas, not Palestinians. My mistake and you caught it. Congratulations.

As to "that" Israeli, he would certainly be guilty of mass murder, but unless the objective was to solve the problem by killing all of them, it would not be genocide. There is reason for respecting the meaning of words.

158 Varek Raith  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:25:04pm
We need to flatten entire neighborhoods in Gaza. Flatten all of Gaza. The Americans didn’t stop with Hiroshima – the Japanese weren’t surrendering fast enough, so they hit Nagasaki, too.
159 researchok  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:25:33pm

re: #155 Killgore Trout

That gives a whole new meaning to 'There goes the neighborhood'.

160 wrenchwench  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:25:37pm
161 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:26:09pm

re: #152 Varek Raith

And those references he make to Hiroshima and Nagasaki were just some irrelevant tangent?
Methinks not.

So you think the US was guilty of genocide too, do you? Not to mention all the allies in WWII.

162 researchok  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:26:36pm

re: #160 wrenchwench

An irrefutable truth.

163 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:28:14pm

re: #151 Obdicut

How dare you debase the English language by fucking up your possessive there, and end your sentence with a preposition.

Seriously, if you're going to be a pedant, can you at least get your own shit right?

I'll try if you do better with your adjectives.

164 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:28:18pm

re: #157 Achilles Tang

Yes I should have said Hamas, not Palestinians. My mistake and you caught it. Congratulations.

As to "that" Israeli, he would certainly be guilty of mass murder, but unless the objective was to solve the problem by killing all of them, it would not be genocide. There is reason for respecting the meaning of words.

There's reason for respecting grammar too, but not apparently for you; you just shit all over it whenever you want.

Genocide doesn't have a precise definition. Pretending it does is ludicrously stupid.

165 wrenchwench  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:29:10pm

re: #162 researchok

An irrefutable truth.

Retweet it. You can do it right from this page.

166 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:29:41pm

re: #156 kirkspencer

Wait. You're complaining of the bastardization of (American) English language? Really?

That's why it is so rich, unlike French there is no prohibition in stealing from elsewhere.

167 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:29:58pm

re: #163 Achilles Tang

I'll try if you do better with your adjectives.

I'm like a goddamn meteoric ambergris-scented star with my adjectives. And my adverbs? Falling lightly from the sky, skipping breathily from aether to fundament they rebound clangingly and ring the welkin with their tumultuous breath.

Stop trying to kill the English language. The rooster ain't gonna die.

168 kirkspencer  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:30:17pm

re: #157 Achilles Tang

Yes I should have said Hamas, not Palestinians. My mistake and you caught it. Congratulations.

As to "that" Israeli, he would certainly be guilty of mass murder, but unless the objective was to solve the problem by killing all of them, it would not be genocide. There is reason for respecting the meaning of words.

Please. If you're going to be a pedant, be an accurate pedant. The definition of genocide is:

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such :
(a) Killing members of the group;
(£) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(e) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to
bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(rf) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

(my emphasis)
That's per the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide -- see [Link: treaties.un.org...] .

169 Alexzander  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:30:55pm

I wonder what one's final moments are like when your apartment building gets his buy a missile.

170 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:31:32pm

re: #164 Obdicut

There's reason for respecting grammar too, but not apparently for you, you just shit all over it whenever you want.

Genocide doesn't have a precise definition. Pretending it does is ludicrously stupid.

There is one very important reason for respecting the formal meaning, as opposed to what lawyers might want to make their case easier, and that is to remember the holocaust, which most definitely was genocide.

171 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:32:09pm

re: #170 Achilles Tang

There is one very important reason for respecting the formal meaning, as opposed to what lawyers might want to make their case easier, and that is to remember the holocaust, which most definitely was genocide.

There is no formal meaning. Pretending there is one is ludicrously stupid.

172 researchok  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:32:15pm

re: #165 wrenchwench


Where is the retweet button?

173 Killgore Trout  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:33:15pm

re: #162 researchok

An irrefutable truth.

Unfortunately we can oppose Hamas all we want but as long as the Palestinians like them the problem remains.

Rocket lands near West Bank Arabs: 'Not angry with Hamas'

Hussam Habru justified Hamas' attacks. "Hamas is doing what it has to do when Israeli planes are killing children in Gaza. We are prepared to suffer and are not angry with Hamas for firing in this direction and we hope it will continue to protect the Palestinians."

The media is running with the sensationalist story of the execution and public lynching of suspected Israeli spies but nobody seems really upset or surprised by it. There will be no public outcry.

174 kirkspencer  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:33:35pm

re: #171 Obdicut

There is no formal meaning. Pretending there is one is ludicrously stupid.

Please look at my 168 - there is a formal meaning.

However, Achilles Tang is wrong as to what the formal meaning is.

175 Killgore Trout  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:34:31pm

re: #169 Alexzander

I wonder what one's final moments are like when your apartment building gets his buy a missile.

I guess that depends if the IDF gives you a warning call or not.

176 researchok  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:35:19pm

re: #165 wrenchwench

Found it, but it doesn't seem to work.

177 Bubblehead II  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:35:21pm

re: #144 Achilles Tang

He didn't say kill them all, or attempt to kill them all. He said make them so miserable the would have to give up. That is not the definition of genocide except to people who like to apply the worst word they can think of to every situation, for effect.

By your definition the Palestinians are guilty of genocide, since they certainly attempt indiscriminate killing of Israelis and claim to want to do it to all of them.

And didn't we do just exactly that during W.W 2 with the Fire Bombings of Dresden and Tokyo. What about nuking Nagasaki and Hiroshima?

Was that Genocide?

178 wrenchwench  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:36:12pm

re: #176 researchok

Found it, but it doesn't seem to work.

Are you logged in to Twitter?

179 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:37:02pm

re: #174 kirkspencer

Please look at my 168 - there is a formal meaning.

However, Achilles Tang is wrong as to what the formal meaning is.

That's the formal meaning according to that group. Very few words have a formal meaning, mostly technical and scientific ones. Genocide is from the Greek-- the killing of a people. We committed genocide against many tribes of Indians without actually trying to wipe them out-- I'm not even talking about smallpox and the rest, but just creating unlivable conditions for them. Kind of like what would happen if you flattened Gaza.

I am done with this stupid argument, because it is insanely dumb and serves no useful purpose.

180 researchok  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:37:46pm

re: #173 Killgore Trout

We're a long way from a solution. And I take no joy in knowing that.

Makes me angry.

181 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:37:57pm

re: #177 Bubblehead II

And didn't we do just exactly that during W.W 2 with the Fire Bombings of Dresden and Tokyo. What about nuking Nagasaki and Hiroshima?

Was that Genocide?

One more: The equivalent would be if we had nuked all of Japan. All of it. Or if we had flattened Germany. All of it. We didn't.

Because yeah, that would have been genocide.

182 researchok  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:38:19pm

re: #178 wrenchwench

Yup, I found it and says retweeted.

183 austin_blue  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:38:58pm

re: #171 Obdicut

There is no formal meaning. Pretending there is one is ludicrously stupid.

Huh. Things get testy when the thread goes off-topic.

Respect, people, respect please.

184 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:39:58pm

re: #183 austin_blue

Huh. Things get testy when the thread goes off-topic.

Respect, people, respect please.

I'm not even wearing pants.

185 SpaceJesus  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:40:30pm

So, there is a Freep thread about what good Freepers should do when faced with relatives during Thanksgiving who are anywhere to the left of Santorum/Hitler

[Link: www.freerepublic.com...]

To: albie
I’m with you. I consider obama voters to be either idiots or traitors and I refuse to have any truck with either. They are not welcome in my house.


4 posted on Tue Nov 20 2012 15:13:30 GMT-0600 (Central Standard Time) by pgkdan (We are witnessing the modern sack of Rome. The barbarians have taken over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traditional1
I agree. Obama and his voters are my mortal enemy. They will shorten my life with Obama Care, they will reduce my ability to care for my family with their liberal policies, they are destroying my childrens’ dreams and futures. They are mortal enemies. I will not tolerate them, be polite around them, nor accomodate them in any way. Nor should anyone who understands the truth of what Obama’s election means, and everyone older than 18 should understand that.

Not in my house, period.


18 posted on Tue Nov 20 2012 15:18:35 GMT-0600 (Central Standard Time) by C. Edmund Wright ("WTF?: How Karl Rove and the Establishment Lost....Again")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
I’m with you! My sister-in-law and her jackass Columbia grad, elitist, NYC liberal, douchebag husband are no longer welcome. They are the enemy! F them!! Go to Obama’s house for Thanksgiving!


29 posted on Tue Nov 20 2012 15:24:20 GMT-0600 (Central Standard Time) by Batman11 (We came for the chicken sandwiches and a Sweet Tea Party broke out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: albie
Have them over but wear a sidearm to the table and while saying grace thank God that you haven’t had to shoot a mouthy socialist YET today.


23 posted on Tue Nov 20 2012 15:20:15 GMT-0600 (Central Standard Time) by CrazyIvan (Obama's birth certificate was found stapled to Soros's receipt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

186 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:40:59pm

re: #168 kirkspencer

The word in my experience has the following simple definition:

The term "genocide" did not exist before 1944. It is a very specific term, referring to violent crimes committed against groups with the intent to destroy the existence of the group.

I am perfect well aware that it has been broadened since to incorporate many levels of war crimes, which eases prosecution, and it would apply retroactively to the US and others as well under those sub categories.

Why people get in such a tiff here whenever word meanings come up for debate, I don't know.

187 wrenchwench  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:41:01pm

Image: 484963_493800920640073_1129999211_n.jpg

Later, lizards.

188 researchok  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:41:30pm

re: #187 wrenchwench

LOLOLOL

189 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:41:42pm

re: #174 kirkspencer

Please look at my 168 - there is a formal meaning.

However, Achilles Tang is wrong as to what the formal meaning is.

The term "genocide" did not exist before 1944. It is a very specific term, referring to violent crimes committed against groups with the intent to destroy the existence of the group.

190 Patricia Kayden  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:42:19pm

re: #35 Targetpractice

And 100 Republican congresspersons have written a letter to President Obama pre-attacking a Susan Rice nomination for Secretary of State.

I love that McCain has called Rice "not too bright" after he picked Palin as VP. As if Palin was even remotely qualified for that position.

191 Patricia Kayden  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:43:10pm

re: #160 wrenchwench

True.

192 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:44:00pm

re: #179 Obdicut

I am done with this stupid argument, because it is insanely dumb and serves no useful purpose.

You have a way of sometimes saying that.

193 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:44:24pm
194 kirkspencer  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:44:46pm

re: #186 Achilles Tang

The word in my experience has the following simple definition:

The term "genocide" did not exist before 1944. It is a very specific term, referring to violent crimes committed against groups with the intent to destroy the existence of the group.

I am perfect well aware that it has been broadened since to incorporate many levels of war crimes, which eases prosecution, and it would apply retroactively to the US and others as well under those sub categories.

Why people get in such a tiff here whenever word meanings come up for debate, I don't know.

erm, looking back it is you got got into a tiff over the meaning.

Legally, and therefore formally, whole or in part is the broad meaning. There is a great deal of legal squabble as to how much qualifies as "in part" but none that less than the whole still qualifies as genocide.

So when Mr. Sharon made his proposition it was a proposition to commit genocide.

195 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:45:49pm

re: #192 Achilles Tang

You have a way of sometimes saying that.

Become a better writer. Take a page out of Horse e-books' book. That little broken robot does wonders with the English language.

196 watching you tiny alien kittens are  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:49:42pm

How about if we stop using "genocide" and just use "ethnic cleansing" instead?
I mean since it sounds so much better and is a more accurate description.

good luck arguing with that one

///

197 austin_blue  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:49:57pm

re: #186 Achilles Tang

The word in my experience has the following simple definition:

The term "genocide" did not exist before 1944. It is a very specific term, referring to violent crimes committed against groups with the intent to destroy the existence of the group.

I am perfect well aware that it has been broadened since to incorporate many levels of war crimes, which eases prosecution, and it would apply retroactively to the US and others as well under those sub categories.

Why people get in such a tiff here whenever word meanings come up for debate, I don't know.

Tell that to the Neanderthals, bubba.

Ook!

198 Etaoin Shrdlu  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:49:59pm

Following Ussher, I argue that the Earth was created in 4004BC. Further, Christ was born exactly 4000 years later, in 4BC (consistent with what is known of King Herod's reign). Finally, exactly 2000 years later, in 1997, the Rapture swept all True Christians™ bodily into Heaven.

199 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:50:14pm

re: #194 kirkspencer

erm, looking back it is you got got into a tiff over the meaning.

Legally, and therefore formally, whole or in part is the broad meaning. There is a great deal of legal squabble as to how much qualifies as "in part" but none that less than the whole still qualifies as genocide.

So when Mr. Sharon made his proposition it was a proposition to commit genocide.

I really hate to put myself in the position of defending him, which I am not, but he did say make them suffer enough to surrender, like the US did to Japan in WWII. He did not say kill them all, and the US did not say kill all the Japanese, but by the definitions wanted here, the US is guilty, and I don't think it was, so I stick to the pure definition and to hell with the lawyers.

I'll quit now. What's next?

200 Alexzander  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:53:05pm

re: #198 Etaoin Shrdlu

Following Ussher, I argue that the Earth was created in 4004BC. Further, Christ was born exactly 4000 years later, in 4BC (consistent with what is known of King Herod's reign). Finally, exactly 2000 years later, in 1997, the Rapture swept all True Christians™ bodily into Heaven.

Everything since 1997 has been the collective fever dream of the remaining heathens.
Explains a lot really (especially Lady Gaga and Nicki Minaj).

201 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:54:49pm

re: #196 watching you tiny alien kittens are

How about if we stop using "genocide" and just use "ethnic cleansing" instead?
I mean since it sounds so much better and is a more accurate description.

good luck arguing with that one

///

Like in "self deportation"?

202 Dancing along the light of day  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:55:02pm

re: #184 Obdicut

Ooogles out of the corner of her eyes....

203 Ghost of Tom Joad  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 5:58:59pm

re: #173 Killgore Trout

Is there a definitive reason why Hamas came into power in Gaza? There's so much muddled information out there. It's obvious they've been militant for their existence, and the Gazan people turned to them (well, more voted for them than Fatah, which led to infighting between the 2 groups, which Hamas won, which is where we are now.)

Was the PLO (Fatah) that ineffective in governing the area that they turned to Hamas (which they had to know was militant)? Forgive my ignorance, but would I be at least somewhat correct in saying that the Gazans (Palestinians, or whatever people want to call them) were unhappy about the negotiations being conducted by the PLO at the time (mostly over historical boundaries with Israel) and the occupation?

I think everyone agrees Hamas is evil, there are innocents in Gaza, and that Israel needs to defend itself. Figuring out why Hamas was supported in the first place may be an important question to answer so that once they are removed from power (which I think is the only thing Israel can do at this point) they, or a group similar to them, will never come back into power (which means creating a stable Gaza so that they never feel the need to support a group like Hamas.)

Again, sorry for a lack of understanding, but I'm trying to figure out the underlying issues behind this conflict.

204 BongCrodny  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:00:59pm

If each day is 1,000 years to God, and God rested on the seventh day, that's a pretty long nap.

205 Bubblehead II  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:05:22pm

re: #181 Obdicut

One more: The equivalent would be if we had nuked all of Japan. All of it. Or if we had flattened Germany. All of it. We didn't.

Because yeah, that would have been genocide.

But we didn't. We killed civilian men, women and children without remorse, with the sole sole of goal of destroying an enemy's capabilities to produce war/use war materials.

So what are the Israelis doing that is any different? Other than holding back from total warfare against a weaker opponent out of fear of negative press?

Hit them and hit them hard. Make them realize they are going to loose and loose big.

That is the only way to bring this to an end,

206 Peter Kaufman  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:08:56pm

Last spring, I stopped in the new Natural History Museum of Utah. They have fantastic exhibits on geology and dinosaurs. A hard-core Mormon was the docent who let us into the lab where they work on bones.

Mormons accept that the Earth is billions of years old. I asked him how they handled people who don't believe that. He said he just smiled (in a way way nicer than the native New Yorker in me could ever muster).

207 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:13:36pm

re: #205 Bubblehead II

But we didn't. We killed civilian men, women and children without remorse, with the sole sole of goal of destroying an enemy's capabilities to produce war/use war materials.

I wouldn't assume that there was no remorse, but the goal was not to reduce their capabilities, it was to gain surrender, because the Japanese did not know that we had only two bombs. They were already unable to wage war outside their country and the alternative to surrender was full scale invasion, which they estimated could cost hundreds of thousands of US lives.

I believe there were actually more civilians killed in German city firebombings than in Japan, for what that is worth.

208 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:14:20pm

re: #205 Bubblehead II

But we didn't. We killed civilian men, women and children without remorse, with the sole sole of goal of destroying an enemy's capabilities to produce war/use war materials.

We did so with a great deal of remorse in many cases, and against an enemy that was fielding a well-equipped army, an enemy that could concievably defeat us or cause us hellish numbers of casualties-- and themselves, as well.

So what are the Israelis doing that is any different?

Yes, very. A much, much more limited scope of war, as befits the much, much more limited engagement.

Other than holding back from total warfare against a weaker opponent out of fear of negative press?

I think it's a massive insult to Israel to say that it's because of fear of negative press. Is that really your view of the Israeli people?

Hit them and hit them hard. Make them realize they are going to loose and loose big.

That is the only way to bring this to an end,

Oh for fuck's sake.

How hard, do you think? Would the death of a hundred thousand Palestinians bring the rest to their senses? What if the pesky devils kept on fighting after that, if they rose from the ashes and fired off some rounds? Another hundred thousand?

There is no comparison to WWII. none. Absolutely none. It makes no sense to try to compare it. There are no relationships between the conflicts. Zero. In the least. It is its own thing, in its own time, with its own causes and attempting to apply simplistic solutions to it is never, ever, ever going to work.

209 Killgore Trout  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:15:01pm

re: #203 Ghost of Tom Joad

Is there a definitive reason why Hamas came into power in Gaza? There's so much muddled information out there. It's obvious they've been militant for their existence, and the Gazan people turned to them (well, more voted for them than Fatah, which led to infighting between the 2 groups, which Hamas won, which is where we are now.)

Was the PLO (Fatah) that ineffective in governing the area that they turned to Hamas (which they had to know was militant)? Forgive my ignorance, but would I be at least somewhat correct in saying that the Gazans (Palestinians, or whatever people want to call them) were unhappy about the negotiations being conducted by the PLO at the time (mostly over historical boundaries with Israel) and the occupation?

I think everyone agrees Hamas is evil, there are innocents in Gaza, and that Israel needs to defend itself. Figuring out why Hamas was supported in the first place may be an important question to answer so that once they are removed from power (which I think is the only thing Israel can do at this point) they, or a group similar to them, will never come back into power (which means creating a stable Gaza so that they never feel the need to support a group like Hamas.)

Again, sorry for a lack of understanding, but I'm trying to figure out the underlying issues behind this conflict.

I think you're asking the right questions. There are no easy answers and much of what passes for answers is kind of unpleasant.I'll give you a short version of my take. Part of it has to do with the discussion on this thread. In the old days of warfare, if you're enemy refused to surrender you'd flatten their cities and totally devastate them. This is no longer acceptable in modern warfare and Hamas, along with other resistance factions, exploit this loophole to keep fighting with the knowledge that Israel won't destroy them.
Other Muslim countries have been exploiting the Palestinians for ages. Paying martyr payments to the families of suicide bombers, sending them useless weapons to annoy Israel with, assisting in smuggling and just keeping the Palestinians fighting a war they can't possibly win.
There is also the issue of Palestinian culture. Generations of war, executions, corruption, religiously endorsed hate, sense of victim hood and humiliation has poisoned their society. You see the same thing in African or Asian countries who have stayed at war too long. People lose their humanity and common sense.
It's really hard for us to understand why the Palestinians still support Hamas. I don't think we'll ever really be able to understand it.

210 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:22:48pm

re: #203 Ghost of Tom Joad

Anyone trying to sum up how Hamas came into power or the problems in Palestine in a single post is going to fail, and fail miserably. It's not something that can be reduced to a few simple slogans or some cheap pop psychology. It's a fraught geopolitical mess.

This book is good, reasonably neutral, it doesn't give quite enough background on Israel during the time period but for the pure Fatah vs. Hamas struggle, it's a very good one.

[Link: www.amazon.com...]

211 engineer cat  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:24:52pm

re: #207 Achilles Tang

the alternative to surrender was full scale invasion

people usually say that but i think not

there could have been a siege on a gigantic scale

i saw a documentary where they said that by the summer of '45 the u.s. high command had pretty much decided that an invasion was going to be impracticable

212 Ghost of Tom Joad  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:24:57pm

re: #209 Killgore Trout

Thanks. Forgot about the outside influence using the Palestinians as a proxy to fight Israel. Hopefully Egypt will tighten up since most of the border is controlled by Israel (as well as the Med being patrolled by the U.S. as well) and help keep arms from making it in.

213 Ghost of Tom Joad  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:27:39pm

re: #210 Obdicut

Anyone trying to sum up how Hamas came into power or the problems in Palestine in a single post is going to fail, and fail miserably. It's not something that can be reduced to a few simple slogans or some cheap pop psychology. It's a fraught geopolitical mess.

This book is good, reasonably neutral, it doesn't give quite enough background on Israel during the time period but for the pure Fatah vs. Hamas struggle, it's a very good one.

[Link: www.amazon.com...]

Heh, can't argue there. Thanks for the info, maybe later in the winter I'll look into that book.

214 Four More Tears  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:30:51pm
215 Petero1818  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:32:45pm

re: #203 Ghost of Tom Joad

Is there a definitive reason why Hamas came into power in Gaza? There's so much muddled information out there. It's obvious they've been militant for their existence, and the Gazan people turned to them (well, more voted for them than Fatah, which led to infighting between the 2 groups, which Hamas won, which is where we are now.)

Was the PLO (Fatah) that ineffective in governing the area that they turned to Hamas (which they had to know was militant)? Forgive my ignorance, but would I be at least somewhat correct in saying that the Gazans (Palestinians, or whatever people want to call them) were unhappy about the negotiations being conducted by the PLO at the time (mostly over historical boundaries with Israel) and the occupation?

I think everyone agrees Hamas is evil, there are innocents in Gaza, and that Israel needs to defend itself. Figuring out why Hamas was supported in the first place may be an important question to answer so that once they are removed from power (which I think is the only thing Israel can do at this point) they, or a group similar to them, will never come back into power (which means creating a stable Gaza so that they never feel the need to support a group like Hamas.)

Again, sorry for a lack of understanding, but I'm trying to figure out the underlying issues behind this conflict.

There is no definitive reason but there are many reasons why. Here are a few.
1. The inability of Fatah to ever achieve any measure of success over a 40 year period.
2. Fatah was and is horribly corrupt. Arafat and his wife socked away millions as did many of his cronies. Yet life did not improve.
3. israel fostered the early growth of Hamas in the region to weaken Fatah and divide the people.
4. Politics is local (even in the territories). Fatah was a more West Bank centered regime. Gaza was the periphery.
5. Life is clan based in Gaza and many of the most important clans in Gaza are Hamas members and supporters.
6. Hamas ruthlessly beat down Fatah opposition in Gaza with intimidation and brutality.
7. Hamas (like Hizbullah) focussed a great deal of attention in provifing social services Fatah should have but did not provide. It is certainly true that many Hamas supporters in Gaza are not jihadists but are citizens who have found Hamas has met their needs better than Fatah.

216 Etaoin Shrdlu  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:34:21pm

re: #204 BongCrodny

If each day is 1,000 years to God, and God rested on the seventh day, that's a pretty long nap.

If the Earth is six-thousand-something years old, then God is still resting, and that's why you don't see Him talking to prophets and performing miracles and all that recently.

If I'm ever short of honest work, I'll see about turning that idea into a compound of followers and a great big pile of cash.

217 Killgore Trout  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:35:15pm

re: #215 Petero1818

Good points.

218 Bubblehead II  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:35:45pm

re: #208 Obdicut

I am going to give you a clue. Look at my Nick and Avatar.

I am a Cold Warrior.

This is who I am.

Live with it

219 Petero1818  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:36:44pm

re: #217 Killgore Trout

thanks !

220 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:37:35pm

re: #218 Bubblehead II

There are no comparison to be drawn between Palestine/Israel and WWII. None. Anyone making them is being extremely foolish.

And the cold war is over. You can come in from the cold. Have a hot toddy. Put your feet up. There's a new round of horrors just coming on screen.

221 Petero1818  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:44:28pm

re: #220 Obdicut

I tend to agree with you about most of the points you made. But there is one inherent truth I think is worth noting. Israel has fought and won at least 3 wars and a series of minor skirmishes (depending on how you define them) with the Arabs. Yet never in any Arab history book or politician's statement will you find an admission of defeat. In fact, the Arabs have not lost a war to Israel if you ask them. Because of this, there is no treaty, no peace, only a continued state of war. Although Egypt and Jordan made peace, neither admitted defeat. In that context it is easy to think " they need to be beat so badly that they will acknowledge defeat and make peace". The reality is however it is not within them to do it. By the time they are so defeated they will admit it and make peace, there will be none left to make peace with. It is something of a conundrum.

222 Ghost of Tom Joad  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 6:48:34pm

re: #215 Petero1818

Thanks.

223 Bubblehead II  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 7:07:29pm

re: #220 Obdicut

There are no comparison to be drawn between Palestine/Israel and WWII. None. Anyone making them is being extremely foolish.

And the cold war is over. You can come in from the cold. Have a hot toddy. Put your feet up. There's a new round of horrors just coming on screen.

And I think you are just as misinformed. They are the same ones that were there. Now, Just as then. Nothing Changes.

224 Varek Raith  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 7:11:09pm

re: #223 Bubblehead II

And I think you are just as misinformed. They are the same ones that were there. Now, Just as then. Nothing Changes.

Nope, nothing today compares with MAD during the Cold War.
You know, when we were with in moments of annihilation on several occasions?
;)

225 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 7:38:34pm

re: #223 Bubblehead II

And I think you are just as misinformed. They are the same ones that were there. Now, Just as then. Nothing Changes.

AGW is new. That's what I was talking about. Not this.

226 jaunte  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 7:58:51pm
227 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 8:31:54pm

re: #208 Obdicut

There is no comparison to WWII. none. Absolutely none. It makes no sense to try to compare it. There are no relationships between the conflicts. Zero. In the least. It is its own thing, in its own time, with its own causes and attempting to apply simplistic solutions to it is never, ever, ever going to work.

Excuse the late reply. I took a break.

I agree entirely with this, as I think I indicated earlier, except to the extent that the word we were debating is relevant, because that word as you were promoting it in legalistic or semantic terms, makes no excuses for circumstances of the situation.

228 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 8:35:12pm

re: #211 engineer cat

people usually say that but i think not

there could have been a siege on a gigantic scale

i saw a documentary where they said that by the summer of '45 the u.s. high command had pretty much decided that an invasion was going to be impracticable

Perhaps, because the cost would be too high, compared to the bomb. Who knows what the outcome would have been had that technology not been available. Material for a book or just a moot point?

229 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 8:36:41pm

re: #227 Achilles Tang

There aren't any excuses.

230 RadicalModerate  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 8:44:25pm

re: #117 Four More Tears

[Embedded content]

re: #118 RadicalModerate

Is it wrong to say that I have really mixed feelings about this?

Sorry for the late reply here, busy night.

Time for a mea culpa on my part - I misread the name of the hacked account as that of Gilad Sharon - way too much multitasking going on tonight on my end.

In this case, the mixed feelings are withdrawn, the Anonymous members are completely unjustified in compromising his account, and I condemn their attack in no uncertain terms.

231 labman57  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 8:44:27pm

The Bible is a collection of allegories and parables (with some elements loosely based on actual historical events) designed, in part, to provide answers for people who asked questions about matters which they could not yet comprehend and to provide guidelines for expected moral behavior as determined by the religious order of the time.

Anyone who claims that the Bible is a literal account of actual historical events is living in a state of denial.

Enter Glenn Beck ...

In any case, his math is wrong. He forgot to multiply by his age and divide by the square root of his IQ.

232 Achilles Tang  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 8:51:39pm

re: #229 Obdicut

There aren't any excuses.

So you feel the US WAS guilty of genocide, in retrospect?

233 jaunte  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 9:03:43pm
234 Obdicut  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 9:07:34pm

re: #232 Achilles Tang

So you feel the US WAS guilty of genocide, in retrospect?

Nope. Jesus fucking christ, I don't get what the fuck isn't getting through.

He said to flatten Gaza, and to nuke it repeatedly. Gaza is only 141 square miles. Gaza city itself is tiny but densely packed. A single nuke would kill a hundred thousand. Several nukes, more. Flattening it, demolishing all buildings, removing all transportation and electricity and water, that'd kill even more.

Germany, we did not flatten. Japan, we did not flatten. We poured ordinance on them, but we didn't have the ability, even if we'd had the desire, to flatten them. The comparison is stupid as shit and I am really fucking sick of people making it.

We did commit war crimes. We did things that were war crimes at the time, like unrestricted ground targets for fighter/bomber sorties-- Chuck Yaeger attests to participating in this war crime and acknowledges it as a war crime. Some of the bombing campaigns were war crimes, definitely. But the reason they actually 'worked' to break German morale was because the Germans thought the Luftwaffe could protect them, they thought their armies were superior. The Gazans have no such ideas. They know they don't have the military capabilities of Israel. They already know that Israel bombs them at will.

What is being proposed is a set of actions that would kill a significant percentage of the Gazan people. Might kill about half, all told. Many more would die in the ensuing humanitarian disaster. Starvation and disease would sweep through, even if Israel wanted to provide supplies to everyone they wouldn't be able to. More and more would die, probably many would, in vengeance, attack Israel and die. Widows and orphans and old men and those too sick of the fighting would be left. Sure. They might sue for peace, though I"d keep an eye on the teenage boys that survived, they'd probably start up a terrorist campaign. They might even acquire rockets from Iran or something and start firing them at Israel in a couple of years.

That is what is being proposed. A massacre in a densely packed urban area for the purposes of prompting surrender with no actual reason why it would, since it'd amount to an attempt to destroy a significant portion of the Gazan people. And if they did surrender, what then? Re-occupy? Leave them to rebuild from the rubble, many more dying year after year from the conditions? Have them attempt to flee into Egypt or Lebanon and probably get shot? Or will Israel set up refugee camps and spend enormous resources sheltering these people-- better have tight security.

For fuck's sake, drop this dumbass bullshit.

235 Egregious Philbin  Tue, Nov 20, 2012 10:25:20pm

Yeah, that is gonna win you elections... And the earth is flat because the bible says so. While you are at it, don't eat figs...God hates Figs!

236 Achilles Tang  Wed, Nov 21, 2012 6:07:08am

re: #234 Obdicut

I read an over the top frustrated rant, you read a serious plan that nobody would ever imagine be carried out.

I debate the very serious meaning of the original word, You react with venom and obscenities.

That's it.

237 Obdicut  Thu, Nov 22, 2012 2:03:33am

re: #236 Achilles Tang

You didn't debate the meaning of the word. You asserted it, and then got really fucking upset with anyone who was telling you that your meaning was, in fact, incorrect.

And no, I don't think it's a 'serious plan'. I think it's a fucking ludicrously obscene fantasy of revenge and group punishment.

238 Achilles Tang  Thu, Nov 22, 2012 5:48:23am

re: #237 Obdicut

Listen to yourself, and a few others. I became annoyed at the rudeness, not to mention your four letter spews, because I dare challenge the usage of a word. This seems familiar for some reason.

My understanding of the word is what the originator of it meant. Since then lawyers/prosecutors have added to it, and you should be able to argue that you think that is fine (I don't) without sounding like a foul mouth petulant child.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Harper’s Magazine: Slippery Slope - How Private Equity Shapes a Ski Town …Big Sky stands apart for other reasons. The obvious distinction is the Yellowstone Club, a private resort hidden in the mountains above the community that Justin Farrell, a professor of sociology at Yale and the author of Billionaire Wilderness, ...
teleskiguy
Yesterday
Views: 153 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0