How patriotic are you?

[thalbergmad]

I sympatize with you thalbergmad. It seems everyone is so lost in this "multiculturalism" lie that they forget the country's historical background. As if diversity comes from people who look different, anyway - Those people in the governments who think so are the true racists.

England no longer has a History or at least one that we are allowed to be proud of. It has been erased by the present Government in their continued attempts to avoid offending foreigners and assorted unwanted illegal trash.

Thal

[zheer]

you cant learn Turkey from books especially from foreigner writers, you must live there 

  Yes thats true, though a number of non foreign writers, have made it perfectly clear that this so called brother-hood is false, yeah sure life in turky for a Kurd is ok and one can live with-out the fear of being murderd, so long as he/she lives by the Law of the land, and does not reach for the history books and make any grand anti-goverment speach. Though the fact of the matter is in 50 years time 50% of the turkish population will in-fact be mainly Kurdish, on what many believe to be Kurdish land anyway. However even today many kurds are in turkish prison lucked-up simply for the right to live in a free and democratic Kurdistan, which happens to be the third most popular nation in the mid-east.
   As you know the Kurds of north Iraq are no-longer living under saddams command, but according to some people the Turkish goverment has a serious problem with-that.

[zheer]

England no longer has a History or at least one that we are allowed to be proud of.

  Not true, it does have a history, its a very dark history.

[rallestar]

A country's history will never disappear. It will be forgotten and hidden by historical revisionists and multiculturalists to hide the facts they want to neglect.

[thalbergmad]

  Not true, it does have a history, its a very dark history.

Pretty dark future as well, unless we can step up the deportation rate.

Is there a Country that does not have a dark history?

Thal

[rallestar]

I doubt it - The human itself has a dark history.

[ahinton]

I don't object to Scots coming here, but i do object to them running the bloody Country.

Thal

Well, I'm none too keen to having the particular Scot that's supposedly charged with running the country doing that job right now either, but I'm nonetheless relieved to hear that, in your eyes, some of the rest of us Scots can stay in England (presumably as long as we all have electronic tags and don't compose funny modern piano music)...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Well, I'm none too keen to having the particular Scot that's supposedly charged with running the country doing that job right now either.

I think he might be more dangerous than the last idiot.

It looks like he is about to sign up to a new Constitution (no different than the last one), without the promised referendum.

Every Romanian peg seller in Europe will be able to come here then and our immigration laws will be controlled by unelected fraudsters at Brussels.

Gawd help us.

Thal

[wotgoplunk]

Not patriotic at all.

1. I wasn't born where I live now. I was born in England, which isn't exactly a country that's great to be proud of considering the current problem with youth, no offense intended.

2. Canada has no interesting triumphs. The French fought the English, then the English fought the French, then the French fought the English, and then the English won, but being sofites allowed them to have Quebec. The English then coerced the French into forming a country, causing all the current problems.

3. You can't choose the country you were born in, so why be proud of it?

[rallestar]

Not patriotic at all.

1. I wasn't born where I live now. I was born in England, which isn't exactly a country that's great to be proud of considering the current problem with youth, no offense intended.

2. Canada has no interesting triumphs. The French fought the English, then the English fought the French, then the French fought the English, and then the English won, but being sofites allowed them to have Quebec. The English then coerced the French into forming a country, causing all the current problems.

3. You can't choose the country you were born in, so why be proud of it?

Why does proudness over something have to be something we ourselves achieved? I feel danish, and feel proud when danish people achieve. I don't care whether or not my nation has a glorious history, I don't care whether I chose Denmark or not. Your question is about as stupid as saying that since you can't choose who you fall in love with, love is stupid.

[cmg]

Why does proudness over something have to be something we ourselves achieved? I feel danish, and feel proud when danish people achieve. I don't care whether or not my nation has a glorious history, I don't care whether I chose Denmark or not. Your question is about as stupid as saying that since you can't choose who you fall in love with, love is stupid.

That's certainly true, of course.  But my issues with patriotism are that it divides people against other people.  My country is better than yours, etc.  Don't offend my nationalistic sensibilities, and all that.  How many wars have been generated over this issue? 

It's a small planet.  A global economy now, if you'll forgive my use of that cliche.  Europe is slowly congealing into one economic mass.  We have no choice.  Nationalism as a cult must die someday.  Patriotism/nationalism, I humbly believe,  are just another form of discrimination

[leuthold]

   even today many kurds are in turkish prison lucked-up simply for the right to live in a free and democratic Kurdistan

we dont give our lands for a few fool people in northern iraq and southeast of turkey, do we? maybe tomorrow there will be a kurdistan in northern iraq but some of them want to have some turkish provinces as a part of kurdistan. this will never happen, it s certain.   a kurdistan in northern iraq is maybe ok but in southeastern turkey is impossible, ok? every ethnic group in turkey works for a better turkey, that s another truth... and pls believe that  kurds(or any people) arent locked-up for their rights and thoughts.
 
  anyway, the main problem is global warming ha?

[cmg]

  anyway, the main problem is global warming ha?

Actually, the main problem is my hay fever right now.  And I gotta get back to work.  Pronto!

[mephisto]

England no longer has a History or at least one that we are allowed to be proud of. It has been erased by the present Government in their continued attempts to avoid offending foreigners and assorted unwanted illegal trash.

Thal

What is there to be proud of? Colonialism and imperialism?

[pianistimo]

it's called manifest destiny - and it's the way the gospel was spread to the world.  it started with the man 'abraham' who would be a 'father of many nations.'  the nations of the world that are not now known for the bible - but used to be.  the scofield bible was a great national treasure of britain and many translations of the bible were given by edict of the crown. 

i realize we have different ideas about what is good for the world.  now, it is going to be europe.  everybody gets a turn.  let's see who does this better.  i don't think europe (either monetarily or socially) prefers any religion at all.  thus - the phrase 'inalienable rights' will be deleted and/or replaced with rules and regulations that hinder freedom of movement and action with repercussion if gone against and also quite a bit of spying on people - which is truly against human rights.

who gave us equal rights?  God, i believe.  that is why william penn refused to take off his hat in court in front of judges.  i was kinda shocked when i read this - but yes, he stood up and said something like 'i am a free man and i choose to wear a hat.  who are you to tell me how to live.'  if everyone did this - i'm sure there would be some shocked faces - but face it - this is how people lose freedoms.  little by little.

ps blessings are granted to nations from God, i believe.  and, i think we are seeing them taken away for lack of knowledge about God and his ways.  He doesn't bless evil.

as i see it - britain and the usa have lost the pride of their power because of greed.  we used to be very giving nations and still are to some extent - but our social structure has gone down like rome.  so - what should we expect.  to have strength without God?  there is a very big struggle going on right now between the idea of britain joining the eu and not.  they know their powers will be taken away little by little.   laws that will goven the entirety of europe will replace them.

[ahinton]

it's called manifest destiny - and it's the way the gospel was spread to the world.  it started with the man 'abraham' who would be a 'father of many nations.'  the nations of the world that are not now known for the bible - but used to be.  the scofield bible was a great national treasure of britain and many translations of the bible were given by edict of the crown.

When you're at least trying to exercise patient discretion here these days, do you now count to ten (or some other chosen number) Bible-free posts before Bibling again, or what? This thread is about varying degrees of patriotism, not Bible-propounding...

i realize we have different ideas about what is good for the world.

Yes, we do, don;t you!

now, it is going to be europe.  everybody gets a turn.  let's see who does this better.  i don't think europe (either monetarily or socially) prefers any religion at all.

Nonsense! There is plenty of religious activity and no shortage of religions throughout Europe - especially if you define Europe as embracing more than just the 27 nations of the EC.

thus - the phrase 'inalienable rights' will be deleted and/or replaced with rules and regulations that hinder freedom of movement and action without repercussion and also quite a bit of spying on people - which is truly against human rights.

If that is the case, it will be more down to general "big brother" activities (if these are allowed to continue to develop) than to any specific governmental actions for or against religious practice in Europe.

Best,

Alistair

[pianistimo]

the government is who decides what happens to the common folk.  it's not really in the hands of the commoner anymore.  in fact, many huge decisions have been made in the last ten years.  it's only in the last few years that regular people are standing up and noticing that they haven't any voice when it comes to what the congress or (in britian) - the parliament - votes for or against.  it's politics and it's getting down to the wire.

if we really wanted to take our countries back - we'd revert to dumping tea in the ocean and declaring ourselves free of taxation.  also, we'd set our own oil prices and become more self-sufficient and forget about attempting to make profits our number one goal.  and, of course, a gun in every home.  but, that's just not what people have been taught to do in school lately.  i mean, if you speak your mind or have a different opinion - everyone stands back aghast.  'they have their own brain?  what a novel idea!'

[zheer]

  kurdistan in northern iraq is maybe ok but in southeastern turkey is impossible, ok?
  anyway, the main problem is global warming ha?

   Yup the kurds in north Iraq are ready and armed, already it's illegal to hold an Iraqi flag in north Iraq. The Kurds have now military suport and the suport of U.S army, an invation by the Turkish army is strictly out of the question. who knows possibly in a thousand years time the future may belong to the kurds.

   

                   

This is unbelivable 

[ahinton]

the government is who decides what happens to the common folk.  it's not really in the hands of the commoner anymore.  in fact, many huge decisions have been made in the last ten years.  it's only in the last few years that regular people are standing up and noticing that they haven't any voice when it comes to what the congress or (in britian) - the parliament - votes for or against.  it's politics and it's getting down to the wire.

if we really wanted to take our countries back - we'd revert to dumping tea in the ocean and declaring ourselves free of taxation.  also, we'd set our own oil prices and become more self-sufficient and forget about attempting to make profits our number one goal.  and, of course, a gun in every home.  but, that's just not what people have been taught to do in school lately.  i mean, if you speak your mind or have a different opinion - everyone stands back aghast.  'they have their own brain?  what a novel idea!'

Good to see you putting your Bible down and resorting to sense (not that I'm suggesting that the Bible is devoid of sense, of course, but you know what I mean).

I'm not sure that I quite take to your use of the terms "commoner" and "common folk", however, although I know to whom you refer - the governed. Governments have been doing this for many years in different ways in different places and to different degrees at different times, but apart from the factor of continuing technological developments which make snooping on people's privacy ever easier and more widespread, this remains something of a to-and-fro situation. Take UK, for example. We have far more government interference today than we did a quarter of a century ago when Thatcher promised - although signally failed to deliver - "less" government; it's just possible that the next change of government in UK may embrace less such interference than we have now.

I don't want a gun in my home, thanks; you can have one if you want, but you're an American so that's OK, I guess. No nation can set its prices for oil (or anything else) entirely independently of the prices in other countries as long as it - or even just other countries with whom it engages in trade of any kind - depends on importation and exportation of oil or anything else. The neessity for and levels of taxation in any country will depend in part on its economic success and in part on the extent to which it chooses to formulate and enact legislation; you can usually tell which countries have the highest taxes just by considering the sheer quantity and complexity of its legislative bureaucracy at any given time (although there's far more to it than just this, of course).

Perhaps the most significant part of what you wrote here is the last bit; governments' ability to get away with telling people what to do and how to think is inevitably dependent to some extent on people's willingness to curtail thinking for themselves.

As to patriotism (to return to the nub of the thread topic), I think it important to separate the notion of current patriotism from historical patriotism. Ask any WWII veteran from almost anywhere for his/her slant on that subject and the answer you'll almost certainly get will inevitably differ from that which you'd reckon to hear from someone born well after the immediate aftermath of WWII. So - in the case, say, of UK, some people might claim to be proud to be British in terms of their personal experience of being raised in Britain, whereas others might do so because of the country's past history (and likewise others again may be ashamed of it in either of the same contexts, too). Am I proud of fine Scottish malt whisky, the writings of Walter Scott or Hugh MacDiarmid, fine raspberries and great scenery because they are Scottish? No - because those things are what they are - and they're not just for me or for other Scots, any more than Shakespeare, Purcell, Milton, Pope, Turner, Elgar, etc. are just for the English. There's nothing wrong in principle with admiring aspects of one's country of origin or location if one can find things therein to admire and, after all, if one is incapable or unwilling in this, one would be equally unfit to criticise or deprecate it for those things about it which one finds the very opposite of admirable ("mephisto", for example, mentions colonialism and imperialism which, to my mind, are not 100% shameful but which certainly brought about some shameful consequences).

The point is that being "proud" of a country in that sense does not of itself infer this reprehensible and disgusting "I'm****ish so I'm better than you" attitude; indeed, even a sense of national independence need not do that either. Consider, for example, the proud Catalan who believes him/herself to be independent but rarely if ever bangs on about it with an attitude of preening superiority, even towards the Spanish.

And to close this one, I must ask you to forgive me (if need be) for remembering something that I once heard from an English-speaking Canadian when asked if he was proud to be so: "proud? - yeah, I'm proud NOT to be an American"...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

What is there to be proud of? Colonialism and imperialism?

Yes

[thalbergmad]

it's called manifest destiny - and it's the way the gospel was spread to the world.  it started with the man 'abraham' who would be a 'father of many nations.'  the nations of the world that are not now known for the bible - but used to be.  the scofield bible was a great national treasure of britain and many translations of the bible were given by edict of the crown. 

i realize we have different ideas about what is good for the world.  now, it is going to be europe.  everybody gets a turn.  let's see who does this better.  i don't think europe (either monetarily or socially) prefers any religion at all.  thus - the phrase 'inalienable rights' will be deleted and/or replaced with rules and regulations that hinder freedom of movement and action with repercussion if gone against and also quite a bit of spying on people - which is truly against human rights.

who gave us equal rights?  God, i believe.  that is why william penn refused to take off his hat in court in front of judges.  i was kinda shocked when i read this - but yes, he stood up and said something like 'i am a free man and i choose to wear a hat.  who are you to tell me how to live.'  if everyone did this - i'm sure there would be some shocked faces - but face it - this is how people lose freedoms.  little by little.

ps blessings are granted to nations from God, i believe.  and, i think we are seeing them taken away for lack of knowledge about God and his ways.  He doesn't bless evil.

as i see it - britain and the usa have lost the pride of their power because of greed.  we used to be very giving nations and still are to some extent - but our social structure has gone down like rome.  so - what should we expect.  to have strength without God?  there is a very big struggle going on right now between the idea of britain joining the eu and not.  they know their powers will be taken away little by little.   laws that will goven the entirety of europe will replace them.

You have numerous threads for this kind of rubbish, so why infest this one with your nonsensical religious ramblings?

Thal

[pianistimo]

in regards to the government actions against religion by europe - i would state the following.  when south africa was creating it's constitution in 1996 (under the ANC) - it was forced to omit 'in humble submission to the Almighty God' - even though at the time 70% of the population was christian.  the UN and EU powers prefer these 'world conferences on religion and peace' that promote no religion at all so that no religion will take precidence.  it works against itself and deletes God entirely.  a trick, so to speak.

in place of laws that were once based on a biblical premise (such as murder with cain and abel) we are moving fast towards ALL humanistic laws.  that means humans decide what is good and evil.  so, that is why we have anti-biblical principles set up as law and protected: abortion, pornography, videotaping people without knowledge, wire-tapping, homosexual marriages, gambling, etc. 

now, i realize that this sets people off - but truly - if you have one standard for law and then switch to another - basically - you are saying the old is obsolete.  we are entering a 'new age.'  is it the 'age of aquarius'... or the age of satan?  i think satan.  from the bible we are told that 'he (the world government or beast power) will be fighting Jesus Christ at his return.  'these will wage war with the LAmb, and the Lamb will overcome them, because He is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those who are with Him are called and chosen and faithful....'

didn't mendelssohn write 'why do the nations rage...and the people imagine a vain thing?'  this is the times that we live - being fulfilled, imo.  the 'mark of the beast' is one of the signs of worshipping this world system.  and, if you don't worship it - you will not be able to buy or sell.  revelations 13:7 'and it was given to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them; adn authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation was given to him.  and all who dwell on the earth will WORSHIP him, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the earth in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain....'

i have no idea if this mark is buying and selling through the computer - but, it is a way that the world system can be one.  i'm not saying to junk the computer - but to think about how you can avoid the mark in your 'hand and forehead' that you will either be able to buy or sell with - or avoid and then be stuck with some consquences that faith can help you out of.  the name of the beast or number of his name will be used. (rev 13:17)  sounds like a password and a willingness to give up national sovereignty and identity for a new one that is worldwide.

btw, i believe the lands of britain and usa have already been 'parceled' so to speak.  i just can't prove it.  we have a lot of foreign spies that set their sights on many pieces of property.  the un - for instance - already has access to many military facilities doesn't it?

i'm agree with you, alistair, about being careful to use the word 'proud' in the right context - and frankly i can understand the canadians preference to stay in canada.  although the usa is still the place for me.  i suppose i'll stay here and wait for the signal 'one if by land, two if by sea' and shoot any invading people in the kneecaps.  after all, just because some of us are christians doesn't mean we are sitting ducks.

[thalbergmad]

I had to skip read the above bollox, as i did not have the 5 hours required to read it.

The less effect your ridiculous book has on modern lawmaking, that better off we will all be.

Thal

[pianistimo]

ok.  let's take a simple item like roaming charges.  it's small and simple - but it can lead to other legislation:
https://www.iht.com/articles/2007/06/06/business/roam.php  who do you want to rule britain.  i think national sovereignty is important.  and, yet - everyone is attempting to compete in a world market.  someone's going to win.  just like monopoly.  and, everyone else is going to cowtow (or however you say it). 

according to another article, the eu in the last three years has raided the offices of energy firms it believed were operating uncompetitively and warned 17 member states for failing to implement competition legislation.  new measures could include 'unbundling' the ownership of energy business to avoid conflicts of interest (ie pipelines with distributorship - electrical power companies with distributors).

now, as i see it -even if one is irreligious - there is a precedent being set here. 

[thalbergmad]

You should have taken up mathematics.

You are excellent at going off on a tangent.

Thal

[mephisto]

Yes

Why are you proud of that?

I think there is such a thing as healthy and unhealthy patriotism. For instance hoping taht your country should win a football-match against another country is healthy. At least there is nothing bad about it. But when one starts to think that ones own country is better trhan others there is something wrong, especially when one thinks one is superior to others.

I think people are more patriotic and notionalistic when ones own people is having a bad time.

[leuthold]

   

This is unbelivable 

  ahahah is this power(if they really have!!) turkey has hundreds of them dont compare turkish army with kurdish militants... as i said, we re working for peace in mid-east like everybody(turk,kurd...)in turkey. but some people enjoy picking on turkey, though we dont care 

[thalbergmad]

Why are you proud of that?

Do you think colonialism is all negative or something?

[soliloquy]

American government bites.  But I wouldn't really want to live in Europe, especially not the UK.  The food is sooo horrible.  Maybe Japan.  Or Hawaii

[ahinton]

in regards to the government actions against religion by europe - i would state the following.  when south africa was creating it's constitution in 1996 (under the ANC) - it was forced to omit 'in humble submission to the Almighty God' - even though at the time 70% of the population was christian.  the UN and EU powers prefer these 'world conferences on religion and peace' that promote no religion at all so that no religion will take precidence.  it works against itself and deletes God entirely.  a trick, so to speak.

"Susan exposes herself" (if you'll all pardon the expression). What is so profoundly unacceptable and distasteful about the stance from which you write as you do here is its deliberate, shameless and unwelcome lack of true religious foundation; as in so many other instances that I have observed with such dismay as I can barely express to you, you once again prioritise one sector of the Christian religion (or a specific interpretation thereof, whichever way you or anyone else wants to take the manner in which you choose to express it) not only over atheism and agnosticism in all its forms and manifestations but also over all other religions wheresoever found, as though the only possible and credible God is the Christian one. Even as a non-Christian, I take the liberty to believe that Christ himself would have considered this narrow-minded fundamentalist viewpoint to be - er - remarkably un-Christian as well as deeply offensive and lacking in compossion toward all humanity INCLUDING devout Christians.

in place of laws that were once based on a biblical premise

...which existed only in that relatively small geographical area of the world where such premises originated and were for a short time manifest many years ago in an utterly different set of circumstances to those which pertain anywhere today...

(such as murder with cain and abel)

You make it sound like a television game show...

we are moving fast towards ALL humanistic laws.  that means humans decide what is good and evil.  so, that is why we have anti-biblical principles set up as law and protected:

Leaving aside the extent to which Biblical laws were ever intended to apply either to people outside the areas in which they were designed or to anyone anywhere in eras far removed from Biblical times, why, logically speaking, would the decisions of human lawmakers necessarily be by definition "anti-Biblical"? - after all, do not forget that some of these human lawmakers are Christians...

abortion, pornography, videotaping people without knowledge, wire-tapping, homosexual marriages, gambling, etc. 

Now we're being very conveniently selective here, are we not?! - not to mention at the same time severing all conceivable reality-based connection with anything that can credibly be described as "Biblical law"; videotaping and wire-tapping aren't mentioned in the Bible, gambling is a relative term in the sense that most of us who undertake honest and legitimate work in the hope of being paid for it are gamblers to some degree, pornography as currently understood would be largely incomprehensible to people in the Middle East in Biblical times and I'm not sure that the Bible is especially proscriptive about abortion (in legal terms of what is and is not acceptable or for what reason or to what deadlines) or homosexual marriages (which, in any case, are not yet legalised in all countries in Europe, let alone globally).

now, i realize that this sets people off

So it does - although not so much as it seems to set YOU off first...

but truly - if you have one standard for law and then switch to another - basically - you are saying the old is obsolete.

So - do you advocate immutable laws for all at all times and for all time, then? - for, if you do, your stance is tantamount to implying that all human develoment is evil and a contravention of such laws; in such circumstances, were they to pertain universally, we'd never have any pianos...

we are entering a 'new age.'  is it the 'age of aquarius'... or the age of satan?  i think satan.

Well, you would, because you cannot seem to - or just won't - step outside this depressingly narrow fundamentalist Biblical mindset to which you adhere as if somehow superglued thereto.

from the bible we are told that 'he (the world government or beast power) will be fighting Jesus Christ at his return.  'these will wage war with the LAmb, and the Lamb will overcome them, because He is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those who are with Him are called and chosen and faithful....'

You just refuse, do you not, to recognise poetical imagery for what it is, as though it has become a habit of yours (which of course it long since has)...

didn't mendelssohn write 'why do the nations rage...and the people imagine a vain thing?'

No, he didn't; he set those words to music but he didn't compose them. One thing he did compose, however, was his magnificent String Quartet in F minor, Op. 80 - surely his greatest work of all - which is about as far from the glutinous sentimentalitarian posturings of his Elijah and other similar cod-religious stuff that he (of Jewish origin, please note) turned out with ease and undeniable technical brilliance as crowd-pleasers for revoltingly complacent establishment-"Christian"-English Victorian stick-in-the-muds as it was possible to get in those far-off days; almost his final work, it was written not so much in sorrow as in anger at the death of his beloved sister and it has a raw emotional power and energy that, whilst obviously owing no small debt to the example of Beethoven's Op. 95 Quartet in the same key, was perhaps never to be encountered in string quartet writing again until Bartók.

this is the times that we live - being fulfilled, imo.  the 'mark of the beast' is one of the signs of worshipping this world system.  and, if you don't worship it - you will not be able to buy or sell.  revelations 13:7 'and it was given to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them; adn authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation was given to him.  and all who dwell on the earth will WORSHIP him, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the earth in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain....'

i have no idea if this mark is buying and selling through the computer - but, it is a way that the world system can be one.  i'm not saying to junk the computer - but to think about how you can avoid the mark in your 'hand and forehead' that you will either be able to buy or sell with - or avoid and then be stuck with some consquences that faith can help you out of.  the name of the beast or number of his name will be used. (rev 13:17)  sounds like a password and a willingness to give up national sovereignty and identity for a new one that is worldwide.

btw, i believe the lands of britain and usa have already been 'parceled' so to speak.  i just can't prove it.  we have a lot of foreign spies that set their sights on many pieces of property.  the un - for instance - already has access to many military facilities doesn't it?

Susan, may I remind you once more (for what I despairingly fear will be of no use whatsoever) that this thread is about PATRIOTISM?

i'm agree with you, alistair, about being careful to use the word 'proud' in the right context - and frankly i can understand the canadians preference to stay in canada.  although the usa is still the place for me.  i suppose i'll stay here and wait for the signal 'one if by land, two if by sea' and shoot any invading people in the kneecaps.  after all, just because some of us are christians doesn't mean we are sitting ducks.

I've no idea what that "signal" of which you write is supoposed to mean, but I'll bear in mind that since you, as an American, have the right to arm bears (as our these days almost always absent "ada" would put it), I'll probably give PA as wide a berth as I can, since even though my kneecaps are not physically essential to my work at the composition desk, I would still prefer to preserve them intact, if it's all the same to you...

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

American government bites.  But I wouldn't really want to live in Europe, especially not the UK.  The food is sooo horrible.  Maybe Japan.  Or Hawaii

Pardon me, but have you lived - or at the very least spent a reasonable amount of time in - UK? - and recently? The food here admittedly used to be far from the nation's calling card but, whilst things remain far from perfect in that regard here, they have improved considerably over recent years, especially if you know where to shop and go out to eat. OK, it's often blisteringly expensive, especially by American standards, but...

Best,

Alistair

[mephisto]

Do you think colonialism is all negative or something?

Is this a joke?

I admit not having a full knowledge of all colinialism that has ever happened. But tell me what is good about it?

[pianistimo]

alistair, i appreciate where you are coming from - but yes, i do feel that law is for all-time and quite universal (just not the way universal law is applied with the eu constitution).  basically they give you a list of all your freedoms and then in article 54 bash it all down (telling people what they can't talk about).  it's crazy.  and hans pottering had the gall to say this:  the constitution is not negiotiable for members of the eu parliament.  it's like - he's ramroding his ideas despite dissent. 

and what about his sidekick?  she's telling him out of one side of her mouth that it's not nice to hold a seminar that is basically anti-israel in the eu parliament - but he tells her 'we're not sponsoring it, but merely making our facilities available for the participants.'  then she says something about - 'oh, why don't we hold it at the espace leopold complex' in brussels.  they're both strange phenomenon - although i must say that i do see the palestinian plight a thing for all nations to work out.  NOT JUST ISRAEL.  there are a multitude of arab nations and they stick this completely on israel?  this is just like the kurds of iraq and turkey.  if they can work it out - surely other nations such as syria could do something other than bomb the heck out of israel.  they think that this very small (smallest) nation in the middle east can sustain all the palestinians?  they're lunatics.  well, i think Jesus Christ will return and show everyone how to share land.  it's not so hard.  but, you have to think 'ok, how much land will support how much population.'  it's not that difficult to reason.

everyone wants the holy sites. why don't they explain that as the real reason behind the problem.  it's religious and always will be until the end of time. at least it is in my humble opinion.  it used to be that the palestinians had free access to come into jerusalem and work and all - but the amount of terrorism got to be too much to take.  who's fault is that?  israel is hated because they don't lie down and say - 'take it all.'  they stand up and fight.  that is what free countries do.  if you don't do anything - it's all taken away.  well, the european union talks a fine talk about peace - but we'll see how israel is divided up in the next few years.  peace at a COST.

we haven't even spoken of the unspoken 'law of the seas.'  they think they own the seas now, too.  i realize the bible says not to use the word 'idiots' - but this is a monopoly to own everything in the world.  property, speech, oceans, what next?  i mean - they remind me of the homeowner's association on a bigger scale.  i think if one is to own the world properly - one should wreck every last vestage of the roman empire again - including crematoriums.

[thalbergmad]

they're lunatics.  well, i think Jesus Christ will return and show everyone how to share land. 

Holy crap, you accuse others of being lunatics and you follow that statement with absolute proof that you are.

Thal

[mephisto]

everyone wants the holy sites. why don't they explain that as the real reason behind the problem.  it's religious and always will be until the end of time. at least it is in my humble opinion.  it used to be that the palestinians had free access to come into jerusalem and work and all - but the amount of terrorism got to be too much to take.  who's fault is that?  israel is hated because they don't lie down and say - 'take it all.' 

No, pianistimo. You are simply wrong.

[thalbergmad]

Is this a joke?

I admit not having a full knowledge of all colinialism that has ever happened. But tell me what is good about it?

No joke, it was not ALL negative.

Positives:
Education
Medicine
Railways
Rural Electrification
Telecommunications
Economic stability

Negatives:
Christianity

Thal

[mephisto]

No joke, it was not ALL negative.

Positives:
Education
Medicine
Railways
Rural Electrification
Telecommunications
Economic stability

Negatives:
Christianity

Thal

Ok that's fair. Certainly mass murderer and slavery should also be considered bad.

[thalbergmad]

Of course, many more can be added onto the negatives.

Positives:
Cricket

[mephisto]

Positives:
Cricket

 

That's true of course.

[wotgoplunk]

Why does proudness over something have to be something we ourselves achieved?

Pride is a sense of self-respect. How do you have self-respect if you had no control over what gave it to you in the first place?

[ahinton]

alistair, i appreciate where you are coming from

Do you? Really? Maybe you do, but it seems to make no diffrerence at all (see below).

but yes, i do feel that law is for all-time and quite universal (just not the way universal law is applied with the eu constitution).  basically they give you a list of all your freedoms and then in article 54 bash it all down (telling people what they can't talk about).  it's crazy.  and hans pottering had the gall to say this:  the constitution is not negiotiable for members of the eu parliament.  it's like - he's ramroding his ideas despite dissent.

So you simply feel that you have the right to rip to shreds the principles and ambitions of the European Parliament (not that I am supporting these in principle myself, you understand), only to put in its place the even more fundamentalist "principles" of inflexible, impractical and insensitive law as you personally happen to see it...

and what about his sidekick?  she's telling him out of one side of her mouth that it's not nice to hold a seminar that is basically anti-israel in the eu parliament - but he tells her 'we're not sponsoring it, but merely making our facilities available for the participants.'  then she says something about - 'oh, why don't we hold it at the espace leopold complex' in brussels.  they're both strange phenomenon - although i must say that i do see the palestinian plight a thing for all nations to work out.  NOT JUST ISRAEL.  there are a multitude of arab nations and they stick this completely on israel?  this is just like the kurds of iraq and turkey.  if they can work it out - surely other nations such as syria could do something other than bomb the heck out of israel.  they think that this very small (smallest) nation in the middle east can sustain all the palestinians?

You've tried to pull together a whole raft of political problems in that relatively brief and somewhat chaotic sentence that would require volumes to address adequately - but then you resort to your customary simplistic attitude and declare that

they're lunatics.

without specifically identifying who "they" are and why you say this - but then why would one be surprised at that, since your self-evident understanding and recognition of lunatic status is then immediately revealed in what you write next, namely that you

think Jesus Christ will return and show everyone how to share land.  it's not so hard.  but, you have to think 'ok, how much land will support how much population.'

Who is "you" in this last sentence? Whoever or not it may be, it doesn't take a Jesus Christ to recognise that the question of how much land can support how many members of a population is one not only of immense importance but which will inevitably vary enormously from place to place, depending upon climate, water supply facilities and the possibilities for farming, etc.

it's not that difficult to reason.

So why not do it, then?...

everyone wants the holy sites. why don't they explain that as the real reason behind the problem.  it's religious and always will be until the end of time. at least it is in my humble opinion.  it used to be that the palestinians had free access to come into jerusalem and work and all - but the amount of terrorism got to be too much to take.  who's fault is that?  israel is hated because they don't lie down and say - 'take it all.'  they stand up and fight.  that is what free countries do.  if you don't do anything - it's all taken away.  well, the european union talks a fine talk about peace - but we'll see how israel is divided up in the next few years.  peace at a COST.

I think that, the best will in the world notwithstanding, much of what you write here is potentially dangerous in the extreme. I agree with you that there are major problems in the Middle East (though not only there) but I am convinced that these are not at all easily amenable to simplistic solutions such as you assume will be found somehow.

we haven't even spoken of the unspoken 'law of the seas.'  they think they own the seas now, too.

Who's "they" now? The EU? Israel? YOu really must be more specific and clear in your use of pronouns if you really want to reduce the confusion that typically pervades most of what you write.

i realize the bible says not to use the word 'idiots' - but this is a monopoly to own everything in the world.  property, speech, oceans, what next?  i mean - they remind me of the homeowner's association on a bigger scale.  i think if one is to own the world properly - one should wreck every last vestage of the roman empire again - including crematoriums.

Er - pardon? You've completely departed from sense yet again. It can often get very hard to follow whatever it is to which you resort in place of reasoning, you know...

Best,

Alistair

[mephisto]

there are a multitude of arab nations and they stick this completely on israel? 

This is a downright racist remarks

What you are basicly doing is considering Palestinians to just be just like any other arab state. Don't you understand that the Palestinians also have their own history, thier own culture and their own stories to tell their children? Do you think all Norwegians would be fine if they had been forced to go to Sweden(or all US citizens to Canada if that makes more sense to you.? Certainly Sweden is a Scandinavian country just like Norway.....


About Palestinians:

Religion: Currently, no reliable data are available for the worldwide Palestinian population. But an estimated percentage suggests 60% Muslim (mainly Sunni, but also a few Sufis), 30% Christian (predominantly Greek Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and others) and 10% Other (i.e. Druze, Baha'i, Jewish, Samaritan, etc).

However, within the West Bank and Gaza Strip, according to the Palestinian Academic Society for the Study of International Affairs, the (non-Jewish) Palestinian population is 97% Muslim and 3% Christian; there are also about 350 Samaritans and a few thousand Jews. 

Still Palestinians stand united for their internationally recognized rights. Even though Israel and the world society has tried their best and now almost succeeded in making Palestinians into to different people(Fatah and Hamas). The truth is that you can find pro-Fatah and pro-Hamas supports amaong the same familly. Not to mention Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

My guess is that you Susan have no idea about anything concerning the middle east.

[ahinton]

This is a downright racist remark

I'm afraid that, whatever the intent may have been, this is also how it reads to me.

What you are basicly doing is considering Palestinians to just be just like any other arab state. Don't you understand that the Palestinians also have their own history, thier own culture and their own stories to tell their children? Do you think all Norwegians would be fine if they had been forced to go to Sweden(or all US citizens to Canada if that makes more sense to you.? Certainly Sweden is a Scandinavian country just like Norway....

It rather seems that this kind of understanding is in short supply from the source you mention - a particularly sad fact given that the said source is purportedly Christian...

About Palestinians:

Religion: Currently, no reliable data are available for the worldwide Palestinian population. But an estimated percentage suggests 60% Muslim (mainly Sunni, but also a few Sufis),

By "Sufis" don't you mean Shi'a (i.e. Shi'a Muslims)? - not that I'm suggesting that there aren't and Sufis in what ought to be Palestine, mind...

My guess is that you Susan have no idea about anything concerning the middle east.

I think that, on the evidence presented so far, the understanding on that front from that quarter is probably limited to the middle eastern part of Philadelphia...

Best,

Alistair

[wotgoplunk]

By "Sufis" don't you mean Shi'a (i.e. Shi'a Muslims)? - not that I'm suggesting that there aren;t and Sufis in what ought to be Palestine, mind...

Some Shi'a's are Sufi, but not all Sufi are Shi'a.

From what I gather, anyway.

[pianistimo]

mephisto, i realize that you probably know more about this than i.  i suppose alistair is right about my biblical leanings (and jewish/christian) - which in the ultimate sense should seek peace...which i truly do in my heart.  i don't feel that i treat muslims any different - and btw, my son has a muslim friend which i've treated pretty much the same as my son.  i think he's cool.  very bright, too.

the thing is - both sides have been wronged.  the israelis were only allowed to settle since 1967.  what they did before that was basically nomadic wasn't it?  divided between many countries.  so they do understand the palestinian plight more than an american like me -that was born and raised in the same country.

i visited israel only once in the late 70's and found that at that time despite a little rock throwing - many areas seemed to be shared more peacefully than today.  perhaps i do not remember so well - but it seemed to be that the only scary situation was crossing the border of jordan to israel.  once we were in israel - i wasn't particularly scared of the palestinians any more than i would have been an ultra-orthodox jew.  not that they should scare anyone, mind you - but you know - being a christian and going on one of those 'tours.'  i will say - the bus driver was completely out of his/her mind -but no matter - we got around fine.  (we turned around mid-traffic somewhere's along the line). 

it was a fantastic experience and truthfully, i can say that once you have been in jerusalem - there is a mystical and wonderful presence (i feel of God) that makes one want to return there again and again.  i suppose that the religious sites are a bone of contention even though they are worshipping basically the same God.  i don't believe in muhammad myself - but wasn't abraham a father to both nations?  so - the presence of both palestinian and jew COULD be worked out peacefully if they both appreciated and took care of each other's holy sites.  i know they fight over the temple mount - but only to fulfill prophecy as i read it.  if one is religious - one believes that jerusalem was always holy and always will be.  a future capital of the entire world.

the comparison christians sometimes make (not all) is that manifest destiny has played a part in the anglo-saxon and jewish national identities only coming to fore in recent history.  the us being only slightly over 200 years old and israel since 1967.  these 'babies' of history don't forget the fights for freedom so easily - and are quite attached to their histories.  so, if anyone tries to modify them - they want to correct them according to what they believe their ancestors died for (much the same as the palestinians). 

now the belief is that one side won out over the other because of divine help during each of the wars.  an israeli mig-fighter was on tv last night explaining how he was left to fight nine or so other migs alone.  how people survive the odds?  and, how they win?  divine intervention some say.  of course, the losing side probably would not take that stance - but it is interesting nontheless. 

in christianity - all are winners.  noone is left out.  Jesus died for all.  of course, crusades and things done supposedly in the 'name' of christianity were wrong.  but - JEsus himself did not promote violence or killing.  in fact, he said to turn the other cheek.  so why don't people do it today?  maybe they are not taught from childhood to seek peace and pursue it earnestly?  and yet - defending a country from harm is not always an easy job.  as we find in the usa - terrorism can happen very suddenly and unexpectedly.

[ahinton]

mephisto, i realize that you probably know more about this than i.

Yes, I do think that this is the case.

i suppose alistair is right about my biblical leanings

Well, it took me many hours of painstaking investigative research and deliberation, but I did indeed figure that our in the end, yes...

if one is religious - one believes that jerusalem was always holy and always will be.  a future capital of the entire world.

If one is a Buddhist, Zoroastrian, Hindu, etc. I rather think that such a belief is about as unlikely as the possibility that Jerusalem will become a "world capital" as you most absurdly suggest.

Back to patriotism, anyone?...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

i don't believe in muhammad myself

And there are some of us that don't believe in the nonsense you do, so why don't you give the ranting a rest just for a few days.

Thal

[pianistimo]

patriotic people are just that.  if patrick henry hadn't said 'give me liberty or give me death' - we'd have all thought death was the only choice.

[thalbergmad]

Its not a choice, its a certainty.

Thanks for posting something without mentioning J----.

Goodnight.

Thal

[soliloquy]

Pardon me, but have you lived - or at the very least spent a reasonable amount of time in - UK? - and recently? The food here admittedly used to be far from the nation's calling card but, whilst things remain far from perfect in that regard here, they have improved considerably over recent years, especially if you know where to shop and go out to eat. OK, it's often blisteringly expensive, especially by American standards, but...

Best,

Alistair

Yes I spent three months in Porlock Weir near Bristle a couple years ago, and a month in London a couple years before that.  I liked the Indian food but not much else.  The Bombay Brosserie was where i ended up eating like... half of the days I was there ^^  I also hate the fact that you don't get free refills.  what.  Oh, and what in the HELL is "seafood sauce"?  I ordered a shrimp salad and it had some mysterious pinkish, gloopy stuff on it called "seafood sauce" and it just tasted like a mixture of ketchup and mayonnaise.  I thought I was going to throw up.