Calling Some One a Racist or Bigot

[Guest American Woman]

And you know this because you are a military recruiter? Or high school guidance counselor? Or a current or former service member?

I know this firsthand, but I won't be giving out any private information explaining how, so your personal questions will remain unanswered. But one doesn't have to have firsthand knowledge to be aware of what's going on. One only has to have knowledge, so if you are truly unaware, I suggest you get your head out of the sand and see what's going on. Are you at least aware of the fact that the No Child Left Behind Act requires high schools to provide recruiters with contact information of every student?-- names, addresses, phone numbers. And the military is using these lists to contact our youth; to wave offers in their faces.

So now our youth are impressionable, while fully capable of voting or aborting babies with mature aplomb?

Of course they're impressionable, and they even aren't considered mature enough to make a decision regarding alcohol since they can't even legally drink a beer. Furthermore, many are being signed up before they've even had a chance to vote.

Yes, it did the same thing during WW2....with conscription.

The topic under discussion is "volunteers."

Edited December 1, 2007 by American Woman

[bush_cheney2004]

I know this firsthand, but I won't be giving out any private information explaining how, so your personal questions will remain unanswered. But one doesn't have to have firsthand knowledge to be aware of what's going on. One only has to have knowledge, so if you are truly unaware, I suggest you get your head out of the sand and see what's going on.

Of course...you are an expert but I can be one too without "firsthand knowledge".....such a deal.

Are you at least aware of the fact that the No Child Left Behind Act requires high schools to provide recruiters with contact information of every student?-- names, addresses, phone numbers. And the military is using these lists to contact our youth; to wave offers in their faces.

The longest lines at my state fair this year was for the military recruiters and their weapons demo's. Schools want federal funding for nothing?

Of course they're impressionable, and they even aren't considered mature enough to make a decision regarding alcohol since they can't even legally drink a beer. Furthermore, many are being signed up before they've even had a chance to vote.

So what...they can decide to wrap their car around a tree too.

The topic under discussion is "volunteers."

No, the topic is calling someone a racist or bigot......

[Guest American Woman]

This might come as a shock to you, but schools want federal funding for education. And yes. If you seek knowledge, then you'll have knowledge.

[bush_cheney2004]

This might come as a shock to you, but schools want federal funding for education. And yes. If you seek knowledge, then you'll have knowledge.

Service in the military provides plenty of education. Knowledge too....those "volunteers" in Afghanistan and Iraq can certainly find those nations on a map, which is exceedingly important to some folks here.

[ScottSA]

A passive warmonger is someone who promotes war from his basement but wouldn't, under any circumstances, volunteer for service himself.

I take it that's distinct from an active coward who lurks in his basement and wouldn't, under any circumstances, volunteer for service himself?

[Guest coot]

I take it that's distinct from an active coward who lurks in his basement and wouldn't, under any circumstances, volunteer for service himself?

Sounds like the same thing to me.

[Higgly]

Ghandi? Ghandi? Wasn't he the scurilous fakir who was willing to allow the holocaust and the subjegation of Eurpoe and Asia for the sake of his pet cause?

Honestly I hope he being fed rancid pork in hell.

Dancer, I cannot believe that you posted this.

His pet cause? What that might have been? Might it have been the same sort of cause that Itzhak Shamir and Itzhak Rabin murdered people for? Might that have been the same cause that these two scalliwags might have set off a bomb in the King David Hotel? Were they thinking about India when they did that?

This post does not serve you well, Dancer. Not at all.

[ScottSA]

Not to mention Gandhi molesting his nieces. But no doubt Higgy thinks that's enlightened too?

[M.Dancer]

It's always about the joos for Higgy. Doesn't matter that Ghandi would have danced a jig on our fathers graves and actively worked to get a band to play.....somehow it is always about the joos.

[jazzer]

Not to mention Gandhi molesting his nieces. But no doubt Higgy thinks that's enlightened too?

Proof of molestation please.

[M.Dancer]

Proof of molestation please.

Then, nowhere does Gandhi's great Christian morality find more expression than in his attitude towards sex. All his life he felt guilty about having made love to his wife while his father was dying. But guilt is truly a Western prerogative. In India, sex has (was at least) always been put in its proper place, neither suppressed, as in Victorian times, nor brought to its extreme perversion, like in the West today. Gandhi's attitude towards sex was to remain ambivalent all his life, sleeping with his beautiful nieces "to test his brahmacharya," while advocating abstinence for India's population control. But why impose on others what he practised for himself?

http://www.rediff.com/news/1999/aug/13india.htm

Oh goodness gracious Nieces, I failed again!

[Higgly]

It's always about the joos for Higgy. Doesn't matter that Ghandi would have danced a jig on our fathers graves and actively worked to get a band to play.....somehow it is always about the joos.

Well at least it certainly appears to be for you, Dancer. You are, after all, the one who keeps dragging them into the discussion.

Here's a link to a Wikipedia article listing Nazi collaborators at he time of the Second World War. You will note that the Stern Gang (Lehi) is listed. I thought you might be interested since you seem to sift absolutely everything for evidence that will support your pathological need to be viewed as a victim.

Edited December 3, 2007 by Higgly

[Guest coot]

http://www.rediff.com/news/1999/aug/13india.htm

Oh goodness gracious Nieces, I failed again!

Are you illiterate or dishonest? I'm honestly not sure which. That citation does not say he molested anyone; in fact, it explicitly states the contrary. It was also immediately followed by this sentence: "Again, this is a very Christian attitude: John Paul II, or Mother Teresa, fifty years later, enjoined all Christians to do the same."

When you read this, did you think that John Paul II and Mother Teresa were trying to get people to molest children and this is a Christian attitude? That didn't ring any bells that perhaps you were misunderstanding what you were reading?

In any case, resorting to character assassination to try to prove a point in an argument is totally pathetic, but consistent on the morality scale for a passive warmonger I suppose. I don't agree that pacifism is a viable approach either for many of the same reasons, but I believe I have the debating skills to make that point without having to sabotage a person's reputation.

Gandhi did not have the perspective on the just how evil Hitler was at that time, but he was well aware of how evil the British could be in India. Given the information he had, his position was justifiable.

[ScottSA]

but he was well aware of how evil the British could be in India. Given the information he had, his position was justifiable.

Really? Just how evil were the British in India? They united a series of squabbling decaying empires, commanded the loyalty of millions with a few hundred troops (so it was hardly enforced to any real degree), and aside from two occurences (Indian mutiny, Calcutta), both of Indian making, they did it more or less peacefully, after the original conquests. You really ought to learn what you're talking about instead of slurping up post-colonial revisionism uncritically.

[Guest coot]

You really ought to learn what you're talking about instead of slurping up post-colonial revisionism uncritically.

I have refuted pretty much everything you said while you lie prostrate with no defence and I don't know what I'm talking about? Where's your source that Ghandi molested his nieces? Oh yeah, you don't have one because you're full of crap.

But here's a primary source depicting British atrocities. Perhaps you should learn what you're talking about instead of pretending you're holding up your end of the debate.

http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation...ities-india.htm

[M.Dancer]

Are you illiterate or dishonest? I'm honestly...........

And you think that sleeping nekkid with your nekkid nieces isn't molestation?

poor poor coot.....

[ScottSA]

I have refuted pretty much everything you said while you lie prostrate with no defence and I don't know what I'm talking about? Where's your source that Ghandi molested his nieces? Oh yeah, you don't have one because you're full of crap.

But here's a primary source depicting British atrocities. Perhaps you should learn what you're talking about instead of pretending you're holding up your end of the debate.

http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation...ities-india.htm

Sorry to break the news to you coot, but if you take off your clothes and crawl into bed with two young relatives, the police will put you in jail. Explaining to them that you're developing your self-control won't fare very well I suspect, and at the very least you'd be castigated for ignoring the emotional harm you're doing to them. I suppose it works in a culture which considers women chattel and in which it's a custom to disfigure your wife if you're unhappy with her, but hey, we're not there yet, despite our best effors to import it.

[M.Dancer]

Sorry to break the news to you coot, but if you take off your clothes and crawl into bed with two young relatives, the police will put you in jail. Explaining to them that you're developing your self-control won't fare very well I suspect, and at the very least you'd be castigated for ignoring the emotional harm you're doing to them. I suppose it works in a culture which considers women chattel and in which it's a custom to disfigure your wife if you're unhappy with her, but hey, we're not there yet, despite our best effors to import it.

So, you are saying Michael Jackson may have been guilty? Had he only been the Mahatma of Pop....

[Guest coot]

So, you are saying Michael Jackson may have been guilty? Had he only been the Mahatma of Pop....

Maybe, maybe not. If it were Michael Jackson, I’d say yes. But I guess it depends on what he was thinking at the time. People do lots of freaky things in the name of religion.

But even if were true, which you haven’t come close to proving, how does that discredit pacifism? What difference does it make in a political discussion? Are you so entrenched in the right wing mindset that you consider character assassination to be an acceptable means of making an ideological argument?

For the rest of us, it just proves you can’t.

[M.Dancer]

Maybe, maybe not. If it were Michael Jackson, I’d say yes. But I guess it depends on what he was thinking at the time. People do lots of freaky things in the name of religion.

But even if were true, which you haven’t come close to proving, how does that discredit pacifism?

Pacifism discredits itself. This discredits Gandhi who wasn't a committed pacifist. He was will to allow others to fight when it served his interests, and use civil disobediance when it served him aswell.

[Guest coot]

Pacifism discredits itself.

Why does it discredit itself? I sense your argument would be that it doesn't work in the face of tyranny, but if the tyrants also adopted it as a philosophy (however unlikely the prospect), then it would solve all our problems. The problem is not necessarily in the philosophy itself but in the fact that everyone isn't willing to accept it.

But I suppose there will always be your preferred form of pacifism--that is, talk in favour of war but act in favour of peace.

[M.Dancer]

How well did pacifism work on Nazi Germany? Japan? Italy.......

That fact the hardly anyone will adpot it pretty much renders it useless......I mean really...shall we all smoke a doob and have a group hug.....how about some non sexual naked slumber party.....

Or are we going to live in the real world where the life span of a pacifist in the face of a tyrant is 1 second.

[Guest coot]

How well did pacifism work on Nazi Germany? Japan? Italy.......

That fact the hardly anyone will adpot it pretty much renders it useless......I mean really...shall we all smoke a doob and have a group hug.....how about some non sexual naked slumber party.....

Or are we going to live in the real world where the life span of a pacifist in the face of a tyrant is 1 second.

I live in the same real world. I have already stated I agree that pacifism would never work. The reason I believe this is so is because there are just far too many dirtbags who love war (whether or not they have the balls to fight one), and not enough people willing to smoke a doob and have a naked group hug.

The world would be a far better place if there were more of those people and fewer of the ones who mock them.

[M.Dancer]

I live in the same real world. I have already stated I agree that pacifism would never work. The reason I believe this is so is because there are just far too many dirtbags who love war (whether or not they have the balls to fight one), and not enough people willing to smoke a doob and have a naked group hug.

The world would be a far better place if there were more of those people and fewer of the ones who mock them.

So if you already agree pacifism is a dead end, why are you bothering to go the extra mile to make yourself look silly?

[Guest coot]

So if you already agree pacifism is a dead end, why are you bothering to go the extra mile to make yourself look silly?

You think it's silly to respect an idealistic dream even though it may not be realistic? It's not as silly as respecting war but being afraid to take part in it.