bleeding heart

Just so.

Yes...so it's the Jesus Sequel, you might say.

Yeah, you went there. And, Zing!

Already been done. Left Behind. Execrable.

Kimmy, I liked your remark about Rob Halford....it took me back. As a teenager in the mid '80s, I was a Judas Priest fanatic. Oh, I know, they're Dramatic, they're so...British Metal, of the old school. But those of us who loved them, loved them a lot. And a lot of bands, from Iron Maiden to Metallica, have named them as an influence. I bring it up because of Halford's homosexuality. I don't know what 16-year-old metalheads think now, but in those days, they were a fairly conservative bunch. Sometimes reactionary. (Ironic, considering that the godfathers, Black Sabbath, wrote so many anti-war and peace n' love songs...they were basically Flower Children with loud guitars and playing in minor key.) Because even in 1984, rumours abounded about Halford's sexual preference. (I mean: "Hell Bent for Leather"? I hate to stereotype, but come on....) And the common reaction was "I don't believe it, man, no way!" Because, you know, God forbid..... Anyway, yeah, thanks for the video, and the nostalgia....and I see what you mean. It's a little touching to me. And there are a couple of old love songs, too, many of them, I see in retrospect, that were gender neutral. No wonder.

But Bonam, as Asimov and Philip K. Dick both addressed, the notion of robots "programmed to serve and obey humans" is complicated by the fact that humans are in constant conflict with one another. A robot cannot "obey and serve humans"....only some humans, and at the expense of other humans.

To ask why Canada "should have to clean up the mess that America created" is the wrong question. To put it generously, and gently. By definition, Canada shares responsibility for the failures; shares them with the NATO partners, and with Afghan officials and authorities. And IF we are to declare that the US is responsible for messing things up...then that automatically means that we are, too, in this situation. How could it be otherwise?

Shady, While I personally don't quite get the Bieber phenomenon--and wouldn't have when I was at the right age, either, being too busy rockin' out to Iron Maiden and Black Sabbath--I don't know why you consider it some sort of partisan thing. First of all, the adoration of young Mr. Bieber is not regulated by political affiliation. Doubtless plenty of "conservative" young ladies consider him quite sublime. (That is, if we wish to relegate children into the unhelpful "conservative" and liberal" categories...based presumably on how their parents vote. On second thought...naahhh, why saddle them with the weaknesses of their parents? Their genes are already poor enough, what with them enjoying the music of Justin Bieber.)) Second, Mr. Bieber considers himself a "religious conservative"....so I suggest he should join the Ted Nugent/Family Values/But Teen Girls Rock/Crazy Train Right Wing Tour.

I'm not asking any such thing. I'm saying that the idea of "Good guys" vs. "bad guys" is being complicated...not least by the possibility of far-right fascist sympathiers, anti-semites and White Nationalists being key players in the opposition...and now in the government itself.

Perhaps a better movie about Jesus is The Last Temptation of Christ. (Better received, anyway...I haven't seen the new one, so can't much comment.) I realize Scorcese's film was controversial in some Christian circles...but it seems to me that it did assume Jesus' actual Divinity.

Ah...never mind. WestCoastRunner corrected you. As you say, "Do you maybe want to get [your] quote right before you call me out?"

I'm not sure how much I enjoy your pedantry, though you seem to like it a lot.. "I don't need to sell anyone on anything....they're already sold." Who exactly is left out of that "anyone"?

AC: You said "everyone" thinks Waldo is lying; this isn't your "opinion"; it's a falsehood, generated, no doubt, from your sense of pique.

Thanks for the response, Rue. Given your remarks, I think you misunderstood me. I was not talking about the general scourge of anti-Semitism, which as you say exists in many places, to various degrees. I was not talking about past types of anti-Semitism in Ukraine. I was talking about elements of the current opposition in Ukraine...and how far-Right groups, with alarming pedigree and history and a possible neo-fascist make-up, are now a greater part of the Ukrainian Government. Some have debunked this...but here's a piece that debunks one of the debunkers, as it were. I've laid out his salient points, as I think anyone concerned about anti-Semitism, and the far-right in Europe, should be aware: Well, that sounds familiar, doesn't it? Now, in case we think these are outliers...wrong: they are now part of Ukranian political office, while Canada, the US et al defends and supports them rhetorically: Also from these ranks come the Chief Prosecutor and the Ministers for Agriculture and Ecology. So, I would argue, Rue, that running the military and the Justice system are quite important positions.. http://www.fair.org/blog/2014/03/07/denying-the-far-right-role-in-the-ukrainian-revolution/

Well, I can't speak to the accuracy of it. I don't know it's all true, or partly true.

I don't see why a balance between respect and self-respect demands "nationalism," however. Maybe we're seeing the word itself differently.

True, so "point of order," as they say. Dre clearly called Putin a thug--twice I think. He wasn't arguing for the decency of the Russian leader.

Who was I stereotyping, though? I have been referring explicitly and only to a single political party, who may or may not have fascist sympathies. Now, it's true that every party get some crazies involved, who say unfortunate things...like the Svoboda member who ranted about the "Jewish mafia"....and in some cases, such folks are expelled form the party (as that particular gentleman was). So far, so good. But there appears to be a pattern with these guys...if I'm wrong, like I say, that's excellent. But (full disclosure: I'm talking Wikipedia here, and there may well be disputes as to the accuracy) the list of controversies--statements about Jews, statements about the Nazis, admiring references to men like Goebbels (more than one over the years) have aroused concern about this alleged pattern.

Gosthacked makes good points. The conundrum, one that will not soon go away, is that we cannot trust Western governments. They are untrustworthy; and I don't mean that in a vague "the government"! sort of Pliny way; I mean they are behooved to act in horrible ways thanks to institutional lunacies, quite separate from the individual decency of the leaders and policymakers themselves. Canada helping in the thoroughly illegal overthrow of the Haitian elected government (with a greater popular mandate than our own, by a large measure) is simply one example; it tells us, and by definition, that Canada has a certain detestation for democracy when the democratic outcomes are not the "proper" ones. And as for allies like the US and UK and France...forget it. Their records are dank ones as well, and speak for themselves. But the conundrum is real, because places like Russia too are, obviously, untrustworthy and behave badly. So it is right for Canada et al to decry their behavior; it is just what we should be doing. But the hypocrisy is real, and so long as only the far left and a minority segment of right-wing libertarians are willing to point out the awful hypocrisies (the suborning of democracy, the murders, the terrorism) of our own countries, certainly nothing is ever going to change.

Well, Argus, you and I agree that Russia is far down on the list of "freedom" in any meaningful sense. But since the leadership of Snowdon's own country are hysterical, whining hypocrites on the issue, he doesn't feel safe from persecution at home. Obama is less friendly to whistleblowers even than previous administrations....a low bar to begin with.

ASIP, Thanks for your civil response. In a sense, we were arguing around each other a little; so to clarify, I agree with you that Putin is way, way out of line. I guess my interest and concern in the matters I've been raising come down to that old worry: "here comes the new boss, same as the old boss." As exemplified in Orwell's "Animal Farm," for example. That is, if neo-fascists (or far-right politicos with fascist sympathies) are to become major players in the new Ukraine, then I would not defend them for anything. However, as you say, it could well be that such fears are overblown. We'll see what happens.

OK, but what is and is not a "healthy dose of nationalism"? It takes very little for nationalism to become a profound human weakness, bigoted and dangerous.

Accountability Now, Why are you claiming that "everyone is sold in [sic] Waldo's dishonesty"? This is patently not the case. You're playing at an argument ad populum; but worse, actually, because it doesn't even rise to the low level of that fallacy. That is, claiming God exists because most people believe it is an argument ad populum. (The second clause is true, but the first one does not follow from it.) Claiming that Waldo is dishonest because "everyone is sold" on the idea isn't even accurate by the low standards of argument fallacies.

Ah. Since I cannot speak Ukrainain or Russian, I can never get the real info on the subject. Awesome. I guess I'll have to rely on ASIP, who reads "party platforms," to give me the inside scoop. by the way, I don't know why you're so sensitive about these far-right losers anyway? You said you knew very little about them.

ASIP, I am not "obsessed with the fascism and anti-Semitism of the Ukrainian people"; I'm not "obsessed" with anything. I wasn't discussing the Ukrainian people as a whole. Rather, I express interest and curiosity on the question of whether Svoboda are anti-Semitic fascists...which is frequently an allegation laid against them. As I've said, I have no horse in this race; if there is any counter-evidence (that is, if Wiki, and so many other sources, are wrong) then that's great. In fact, it would be better if I were wrong than right.