Amazon.com Widgets

« Pardon Me | Main | A Game »

Links With Your Coffee - Saturday


 

Comments

Will Norm be posting about the Palestinians soon? Maybe a call to boycott Hamas?

Although, it could be Israel and America's doing, because Fatah is of course "Jew-American Army":

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/13/AR2007061300408.html

Voices seem to fall silent on the Palestinians when the Israelis can't be blamed.

That reads more sarcastic than I meant it to, sorry. But otherwise...

Maybe a call to boycott Hamas?

What, we're not boycotting Hamas already? Do we provide any aid at all for Hamas?

Do you have a point, or do you just make shit up in order to have something to criticize.

HUGE thx to 1984 for lnx. Nice to learn something relevant.

user-pic

"What, we're not boycotting Hamas already?"

wish i knew how to put that in a little grey box. norm, you're talking jewish! and you are absolutely right, btw.

user-pic

are you gonna let us know how you did in the chess thingy?

The chess thing. I had a great time, but my play was quite spotty. I turned into a mindless blob when playing the black pieces and lost all three games from that black side. I fared better when provided with White. I won two and drew one. In the end I confirmed my title as patzer. This was the first time I'd played over-the-board in several years. It did rekindle the fire and I'll probably play more often in the near future and in the recent past.

If you'd like to put something in a little grey box precede it with a greater than sign.

user-pic

I'll probably play more often in the near future and in the recent past.

very kurt vonnegut of you. is that what you meant? cuz, like, i dig.

trying the grey box thing. hope you enjoyed yourself. whats a patzer? that sounds jewish too.

What is there is say about Palestine? It is a deplorable situation, most likely consciously created to prevent Arab unity or development during the period of invaluable resource extraction. There's also the bit about the politics of religion.

The reality isn't pretty. The West will not back down until the oil is gone. The Arabs cannot back down because they are already against the wall.

History is easy to read: Malcolm X got a bullet. MLK jr got drug-ridden ghettos. In SA Mandela brought far greater poverty and the entrenchment of an economic exsanguination of political power. Mossadegh? Allende? JFK, for that matter.

Yes, it sux in Palestine. Maybe the West even covertly armed Fatah recently, prompting the Hamas actions of late. What should we say about it, other than a private prayer?

The way forward (my brothers) is to work toward democracy at home. The U.S. cannot seat its own elected President, but we should have the hubris to think we can control Gaza? Get real!

Billy Pilgrim is getting unstuck in time!

Good to hear of your chess exploits, dude. It's a helluva game.

Maybe the West even covertly armed Fatah recently, prompting the Hamas actions of late.

It wasn't all that covert.

I hope I wasn't rude in my post; I apologized immediately after (I couldn't find a way to edit it), and yet your response didn't acknowledge that, and indeed swore. But maybe I was that rude, but I never swore. However I do have a point to make.

I am not a contributor here, so again sorry if I'm talking out of turn. But I have been visiting often. And I visit many right wing sites as well (not to pigeon hole you as a left wing site).

I am aware of the purpose of blogs, I believe, and I think they're great for the process.

But, from a site with an owner/moderator who actively points out or attacks everyone else's "fallacy" (and I think you have sometimes used that word inaccurately, and certainly too freely; it seems a bit of a conversation stopper), I wonder, and I might be wrong, if there isn't some pont where (almost) only attacking Republicans or the right wing (on matters besides religon) is self evidentially, a little unreasonable, or at least unlikely? (I extend that to the links you choose to post.)

I'm qualifying everything because I think you - Norm - jump on any hole you find in someone's reasoning, and then denegrate the poster and end the conversation.

I agree with most of your posts and links, and I disagree with most right wing blogs I visit. But what bothers me most about both types of blogs are the consistency with the politics of particular parties. This blog could very easily be labled "left wing" and "anti-Bush". Well, generally, but not always, I'd fit in there. But are you that consistent? I mean, how often have you posted anything supporting a Republican? Are they always that wrong? I am not an expert on your site, so I very well might be that wrong.

But, and I'm sorry if this post is too long, and feel free to ignore it, but I think you seem appreciate a reasoned conversation (I hope you give me that much credit), but to the original topic that I posted:

You have criticized Israel in the topics of posts or links many times, and they often or maybe usually deserve it. But how often have you criticized Hamas or Hezbollah, for example? I know this is an old point - not on this site, but everywhere - but I think it's a legitimate one. Gaza is in the middle of something like a civil war. Have you no posts about it? Would you if Israel were more directly or actively involved?

I would never ask this question on a fanatical right or left wing blog (because they usually are ridiculous in many ways and I wouldn't expect them to do anything but get angry and swear and mock) -- it would be a waste of time, or at least a flame war. Still, I have slightly more respect for your site (sorry, but that's about it) and your POV (much more for that), and I wonder about your reasons.

I'll be honest, and I think you'll appreciate it. I don't expect good reasons or responses from you or your commentors. But I'm not being facetious - I'd like to hear your explanations. You might be able to point out a fallacy I've made, or many, but instead of just naming them, maybe you could point out my logical missteps.

I think calling out Israel for boycotts or divesiture, while not calling out Hamas or Hezbollah about anything, ever (I might be wrong, again, but not very), just for example, is strange and, to me, makes your site as one-sided as, well, take your pick. You will find holes in those points. But your blog seems very partisan and unproductive to me. Good for the party and democracy, maybe, but bad for reason.

patzer I believe comes from the German and there very well may be a jewish connection, there always is isn't there?

and yet your response didn't acknowledge that, and indeed swore. But maybe I was that rude, but I never swore.

Well, you'll never get any special recognition from me by restricting yourself to only a subset of the language, did you expect that I would find that praiseworthy. Perhaps, I'm being a little too snarky, but I find the obsession with 'swearing' ludicrous.

There are a couple of points when it comes to my views on the Israel/Palestinian question. The question of balance, the way I believe you are applying it, is simply a red herring. It relies on the fallacious assumption that two wrongs make a right. I mean if you argue that Hamas uses terrorism in trying to accomplish their goals. A practice, I understand, but don't condone. I'd simply agree with you. There is nothing left to discuss and simple repetition of the point is in my opinion is an attempt to excuse or at least lessen the perception that Israel has a fair amount of blood on their hands. Secondly Israel gets special attention because the United States of which I'm a citizen provides billions of dollars in aid, something they don't do for Hamas or Palestinian's in general. So I believe I have a responsibility to make my views known when I object to the actions of a country that is dependent on our largesse. If we were providing millions to Hamas and little or nothing to Israel my criticism would be primarily of Hamas. The goal is to change our national policy and not support activities I find abhorrent. I don't want a part in the atrocities Israel perpetrates on others. Cluster-bombs, disregard for civilian population, Destruction of infra-structure for example. The same types of things the United States is guilty of in Iraq and that I often speak out on. My criticism of the U.S. here is the type of statement I think you believe I should make about Hamas and other Palestinians, when discussing Israel, but it really is superfluous and just a phony kind of balance that is unnecessary to make the argument, and in fact gets in the way of making the point in an uncomplicated way.

Please if you find logical mistakes in my reasoning point them out. I'm happy to acknowledge any such lapses, and correct the record.

You might be able to point out a fallacy I've made, or many, but instead of just naming them, maybe you could point out my logical missteps. -- A

Jeeebus, take a breather, dude. Let Norm tell us about his Chess exploits.

Seriously, Norm -- give us some notations, why dontcha?

I'll probably play more often in the near future and in the recent past.

Actually I meant to say 'than in the recent past, but when I reread the sentence before posting I decided to leave it knowing how much you enjoy such. . . I've been jealous of the lavish praise you've bestowed on, I think it was, one evil axis, for similar tom-foolery and wanted in on the game.

user-pic

one evil axis doesn't seem to want to cough up the key to his anagram. as a chess master, that is someone who's better than me at games and puzzles, maybe you want to take a shot at it. if you succeed, i promise to bestow upon you lavish praise. as a downpayment, you're the bees knees! the cats' pajamas!

i think, to get you started, that the word "sex" must be involved somehow.

and i still don't know what patzer means.

user-pic

Maybe the West even covertly armed Fatah recently, prompting the Hamas actions of late.

it wasn't the "west". it was israel, and it certainly wasn't covert.

a patzer is a poor player or a novice, a bungler. I was using it in the sense of, I played like a patzer"

one evil axis => I love sex in a...

Good on you Norm for patience.

Still wondering what 'A' has 'B'een wanting to s'A'y about Palestine?

Just as soon as the Arabs manage the not-so-amazing feat of loving their own children just a little bit more than they hate the Jews, their problems will be over. Until then -- fuck 'em. I have no sympathy.

I knew a dude in college who explained that "his people" had a fortress in the desert, and they let a bunch of Jews in, who were being pursued by bandits... The Jews repaid them by opening the gates to the fortress for the bandits -- in return for a cut of the loot. The Arabs were all murdered. This took place some 3-4,000 years ago. And this was the reason why he hated Jews. This was an educated man, from a wealthy family.

I mean, what the fuck? If English people were even half as insane as that, you'd expect them to knee every Norwegian they met in the groin...

Primitive fucking screwheads.

user-pic

Mickleby's is better,

e.e. (cummmings?), lax vision?

Pretty insipid. There was once a visitor to this site, blog, less informed/intelligent than I, his name was David, I believe, he thought that the Piltdown hoax was breaking news, disproving atheism.

But I'm not so stupid I don't know what's going on here. I debuted by repeatedly calling Norm, "Worm". He insisted on taking it good-naturedly despite my worst efforts. When Sheliphone castigated him, I "defended" him with faint praise about his "Worm's-eye" views. It's his blog, he can take it however he wants I guessed. But it was then I first began to suspect the truth.

I dropped broad hints that he was emotionless, Spock. He ignored it.

Finally I insinuated unununambiguously that I knew it: "Norm" is a chess-playing computer program. A bot. A Cyber-.

I elaborated, contrasted Max Stirner with Max Headroom. There were no denials. Never. Only an accusation of "trolling", which I had never heard of.

In response to the accusation I hinted that if he were human there would be some way to get his goat, something about pastures being greener on the other side of the bridge with the Troll under it his goat would have to cross to get to the greener pastures.

At last he made his move, the bogus trip to Las Vegas ("the Meadows," the greener pastures).

I not that stupid. I'm not fooled. I think he has subtlely acknowledged that the truth is out, he hasthis, been outted, with the post of the marquee, "God doesn't believe in Atheists, therefore Atheists Don't Exist". Norm doesn't "exist" in this sense: He is a bot, not a bod.

Has anyone actually seen him? Did anyone go to high school with him? Sure, maybe he hired an actor for "Las Vegas," but does he have the resources to totally fake a fake past?

I don't think so. He is no anagram, though he might be a hologram.

Has anyone actually touched him?

Morn. A new day has dawned. The light of truth. So he is an anagram, still...

The bot chuckles mildly.

user-pic

So?

Where can "I" get some of that Turing-testosterone?

Does it work at cycling Turenaments?

Battles of the (techno) bands?

Do you know what it's like to be a Bat?

The bat that flits at close of eve

Has left the brain that won't believe.

user-pic

So?

Where can "I" get some of that Turing-testosterone?

Does it work at cycling Turenaments? Battles of the (techno?) bands? (Sequenced)Bass-ball?

.

Do you (also) know what it's like to be a Bat?

.

(The Bat that flits at close of eve

Has left the brain that won't believe.)

.

Keep up the good works. {But watch out for spontaneous combustion. [You know, dirty rags piled up off in the corner somewhere, in a (laugh, er, chuckle) barrel, maybe.]}

Navigation

Support this site

Google Ads


Powered by Movable Type Pro

Copyright © 2002-2017 Norman Jenson

Contact


Commenting Policy

note: non-authenticated comments are moderated, you can avoid the delay by registering.

Random Quotation

Individual Archives

Monthly Archives