I’m making no ad hominem attacks. That would require me to be attacking his statements by insulting him. I’m not attacking his statements. I don’t give a shit about his points, or if he is right or wrong.
My participation in this thread is for the sole purpose of castigating one of the most obnoxious blowhards on this board, a poster whose self-awareness is so tragically lacking that he can’t even conceive of someone disagreeing with him unless they are racists and liars.
It’s not that he makes “long posts”. That is the sort of fucking understatement that should be celebrated by the International Board of Understatement Appreciation. FinnAgain is well beyond “long posts”; he’s into the realm of Ted Kaczynski and other crazy obsessive weirdos. I seriously would not be at all surprised to see him on the news shooting up a 7-11 or bombing a bus full of brown people.
If, as the shithead in question claims, all of these people are just liars and trolls, then why does he continue to participate? I’ll tell you. It’s because he is some flavor of autistic or obsessive compulsive, or else it’s because his fragile self-esteem doesn’t allow him to ever, ever back down.
I wish he’d get banned for his bullshit, but alas, there is no rule against being an officious boring yeast infection of an intellectual.
Either way, don’t pretend I’m just not able to debate him on the geopolitical situation, because that’s not the point. Readers will take note that the fat douchebag isn’t worth debating because he is as guilty of intellectual dishonesty and polemics as anyone he argues with.
But the fact that Red continually uses token Jews to argue a point, while daring anybody to call them self-hating at the same time as he accuses anybody in politics who has a Jewish sounding name of being a traitor… and alleges that he’s being accused of racism simply for disagreeing with Israeli policies?
That’s somewhat interesting.
Self-hater? Anti-Semite if that’s even possible? Or merely a dissenting and growing voice amongst Jews vis-a-vis Israeli policy?
Not going to cite this rather lengthy article by another confessed self-hating Jew, though a tad dated I think it very much relevant to both this thread and the false accusations being thrown about. Read at your own peril:
A good example of your deceptiveness. They worked for the government, then they didn’t, then they did again. All of which is irrelevant to the point.
Perle wrote the policy paper for Israel in 1996, when he was out of office. When he got back in under Bush, he participated in implementing the same policy he had outlined for Israel.
Why are you talking about PNAC in connection with this policy paper? The policy paper in question (entitled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm) was written for Benjamin Netanyahu on behalf of the Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000. Perle was the study group leader. The study group was part of the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, an Israel-based think tank with an affiliated office in Washington.
“Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right — as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions.”
The paper was written when Clinton was in office, so of course the removal of Hussein would have had to have been carried out by indirect means. When Bush came in, a more direct approach became possible.
As I said in the original thread, I am not arguing for some dark conspiracy. These men supported Israel, and I believe that colored their thinking in pursuing the Iraq war. Nor did I say that they alone pushed us into war. As I said in the original thread, it was a confluence of interests that took us to war. Israel’s interest was but one of the concerns in play.
Rather than re-hash this whole argument, I again encourage anyone still following this train wreck to go back and read the original thread where all this came up. Then decide for yourselves how Finn’s distortions fit what I have actually said.
Sorry, where did I say that? Stop lying about what I have said, jackass. Is honest debate simply not possible for you?
Also, quit editing my posts to make out of context statements seem like they fit your distortions. That is some slimy shit. If you want to quote me, quote me in full and in context.
Sorry, how is it racist? Particularly when most American Jews did not support Bush or his war in Iraq?
Once again for clarity: “AIPAC” is not the same as “American Jews,” much as you might like it to be.
When Republicans see J.C. Watts, Bobby Jindal and Michael Steele up on the podium at rallies, their hearts must thrill with pride at the vast diversity the party represents.
Anyone who argues otherwise is denying the [del]carefully cherry-picked[/del] evidence arrayed against them.
It’s real simple despite your doges, or Lucy’s doges, or Red trying to change the subject:
“[ethnic group] are [pejorative] due to their membership in that [ethnic group]” is a racist thing to say.
See:
“Blacks are potential criminals due to their ethnic identity.”
“Arabs are potential terrorists due to their ethnic identity.”
“Jews are unable to be trusted to hold different opinions than spoke and are potentially either active traitors or blinded and unable to tell two countries apart, due to their ethnic identity.”
Oh, and in before your lie that you’ve never weaselly hinted that it’s reasonable to accuse Jew of an inability to disagree with you and analyze facts if they don’t agree with you due to the traitorous influence of their ethnicity…
Pointing out the fact that you’re lying is deceptive? I think you need a dictionary, bucko. Of course “they were long-time government eployees with decades of experience between them, and they did some consulting when they were out of power” sounds a good bit less, what’s the phrase, oh yeah, conspiratorial than “they were writing policy papers for Israel and then going to work for the US government in pursuit of the very policy they mentioned as a priority for Israel”
Speaking of your relentless dishonesty:
Again, why do you lie quote so blatantly? I’ve already cited and quoted the paper and pointed out your lie here… your response is to ignore the rebuttal and reiterate your lie. Why do you even do that? Rather obviously, they didn’t “implement the same policy” as that policy was for Israel to work, completely without US economic aid and military forces, with the nations of the region to secure their mutual goals. But again, that too sounds less conspiratorial than "
ZOMG, Zionist traitors dominated US foreign policy!"
I can imagine it’s hard to keep track of your racist paranoia, eh? Your original Conspiracy Theory about potential Israeli agents (who just ‘happen’ to be Jewish, honest!) was in the service of you demonizing the PNAC and Wolfowitz, et al.
And you just ‘happen’ to ignore the whole part about no US aid no US troops and how that was essential to the dynamic. It couldn’t be so that you could spin your conspiracy nonsense, naw. Likewise, since the fact that Sadaam was a security threat to Israel and you can’t rebut that fact, you just blabber on about how merely pointing out that fact and urging Israel to deal with it on its own points to a dastardly Zionist conspiracy years later. :rolleyes:
And trying to explain to you why it’s significant that you can’t spare a word for Carville, Rumsfeld or Cheney, but Jews with the wrong political opinions are automatically suspected of treason… well, I guess it’s like trying to explain to you why your narrative is built on paranoid racist conspiracy mongering. Or why the sky is green, I keep forgetting.
Yeah, you say a lot of stuff.
Liars need to have good memories spoke. People who build their narratives on racist paranoia and lies, doubly so. Maybe you should try ginko or something? Where did you state that a group of Americans lobying for their political beliefs were really agents of the Israeli government?
Ginko spoke, ginko.
Go back to identifying Jews and ignoring gentiles who advocated Sadaam’s removal and then claiming that only those Jews are possibly secret Dual Loyalist traitors who can’t be trusted because they’re not part of a conspiracy, exactly, they’re all just individually working to subvert America for Israel’s benefit because they’re so crazed by their ethnicity that they can’t tell the difference anymore. But you are shocked, shocked, at why anybody might think that racist (speaking of which, you spoken up yet about Red’s racist tactic of naming anybody who he thinks is Jewish in the US government and calling them a traitor?)
No, no, of course not. After all you found examples on the Internets. What could be more convincing?
Like with women, who supposedly are great supporters of abortion rights. Any time you can find anti-abortion rights websites which are chock full of testimonials from women whose lives have been ruined by legal access to abortion. And even Roe of Roe v. Wade is now anti-abortion! It’s a movement!!
The days of legalized abortion are numbered, you wait and see. :dubious:
You guys are great!
You should’ve been in vaudeville*.
*Rumor has it that elucidator actually was in vaudeville on the Orpheum circuit, until his promising career doing impressions of W.C. Fields and Emma Goldman was ruined by the invention of television.
Oh, and it can hardly have escaped RedFury’s notice that without exception, everyone posting in this thread has to my knowledge expressed disagreement with some aspect(s) of Israeli policy at one time or another.
Obviously, some have not been sufficiently vituperative about the undiluted evil that Israel represents (probably due to their ethnic orientation or outright being on the payroll of Mossad, which we cannot prove but for which there is circumstantial evidence and about which we must be vewy vewy careful) and They must be watched very carefully, very carefully indeed. We must be vigilant. :eek:
But, he found a token Jew and everything! And there were, like, a whole 24 Australian Jews who agreed (or 27, or something), it’s a revolution. It’s very important that when Red has an anti-Israel idea, he can say “See, a Jew also has it! That shows that in general I’m not a racist. Now let’s look at anybody in American politics who has a Jewish name and accuse them of treason.”
I mean, surely there’s a perfectly good reason that Red constantly goes out of his way to find a token Jew for any position he’s advocating and shout “See, a Jew! A Jew agrees! Go and call him self-hating, I dare you, I dare you!!!”
Well, I mean, spoke’s got a really valid point. It’s totally smearing him in order to tamp down the discussion when all he’d like to do is discuss just how treacherous Jews are who dare to disagree with him. It’s like, anybody who says that Jews are potential traitors due to their ethnicity, and we need to watch them closely for their dastardly Jew Treachery? They get accused of racism or something.
Next thing you know they’ll be trying to say that arguing about how being black might make you prone to watermelon thievery is racist too. How silly!
You mean the one that’s already been identified and proven with your own words, or the dodge you’re using?
“Hey, everybody? All those quotes where I talk about Jews not being trustworthy if they disagree with me too much, and about how it’s reasonable to suspect Jews of Dual Loyalty due to their religion or ethnicity, and how I was making shit up about the PNAC and using them as an instance of my claim of dangerous Israeli “influence” in the same breath as accusing AIPAC of being Israeli agents… all while talking about how lots of Jewish members of Bush’s administration had disturbing ‘close personal ties’ to Israel so we should suspect them of possibly be Israeli agents? Well, don’t look at that, because I kinda weaseled somewhere else. Look at the weaseling and ignore everything else I said.”
You’re about as convincing as a Troofer, because both you and them hide your slimy accusations behind weaseling and both of you are just JAQing Off about the evil government or evil Jews. Same difference, same mental caliber.
And I note that you still haven’t condemned Red’s blatant racist behavior of naming any Jew he can remember in American politics accusing them all of ethnic-based-treachery without any evidence at all. Because you condone it. Because you sling racist conspiracy theories and you won’t say a thing about blatant racism like Red’s if it’s in service of an anti-Israel partisan.
And you feign ignorance. And you feign (greater) stupidity. Why, you assure folks, you’re just plum confused as to why it’s important that you routinely ignore Carville and don’t accuse him of treachery, but a Jew who happened to hold the ‘wrong’ political ideology (that just so happens to disagree with yours, how strange) must not just be suspected of treachery but also may be unable to tell the difference between America and Israel due to the influence of his ethnicity and/or religion. That Carville can work for Labor and you don’t mention it but Wolfowitz can advise Likud and you not only suspect him of possible treachery, and hint that he may be a traitor due to ethnic influence? That means nothing. You assure us. :rolleyes:
:eek: