Top Leaderboard, Site wide
August 27, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates


The Best Reporting on California’s Drought






Truthdig Bazaar
The Associates

The Associates

By Richard Rayner
$16.29

more items

 
A/V Booth

‘Dying’ Hitchens Talks Mortality, Religion

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Aug 10, 2010
Hitchens
theatlantic.com

In this frank discussion with The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg and with Martin Amis, an ailing Christopher Hitchens stares down his own mortality and makes it clear that if he appears to embrace religion at any point during his bout with cancer, “the entity making such a remark might be a raving, terrified person whose cancer has spread to the brain.”  —KA

The Atlantic:

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, August 29, 2010 at 12:47 pm Link to this comment

Nemesis,

“Why is it that almost every one of your posts is nothing but ad hominem attacks against individuals? You’ve even gone as far as to disparage the entire Marine Corps Air Wing!”

You should also pay attention to much of the vitriol you expend on others in what you post.  Don’t be a hypocrite, paragraph after paragraph of negativism doesn’t move the points you try to make, forward.

I also served in the 3rdMAW stationed in El Toro and am well aware of the strengths of the air ground assault concept first developed at Bougainville.  Phase lines, UTM’s TPC’s, ONC’s, alot of training.

Still, the premise of the grunt is that an objective is achieved when boots are on the ground.  The air wing, Navy, CIA, NSA, and host of acronyms are all in a support role to that grunt with a flag.

Sorry to hear you won’t be making it to the 2012 party, if it passes as another day it will be cause for celebration, much like the millenium parties.

Report this

By truedigger3, August 29, 2010 at 11:35 am Link to this comment

Re: By nemesis2010, August 29 at 1:41 pm


nemesis2010 wrote addressing me:
“I didn’t quote the liberal Mr. Dershowitz. I simply said that he had a book out titled “The Arab Lobby.” If you want another reference to see just how deep into Arab pockets our so-called leaders live read Craig Unger’s “House of Bush, House of Saud.”
————————————————————————-

nemesis2010,

Come on, you said there was an Arab Lobby and this a book called the Arab Lobby.
By the way, Dershowitz might be a liberal in some cultural wedge issues like being pro-choice, for gay marriage, no prayers in public shool etc etc, but definitely he is a war monger, ardent Zionisst and UNCONDITIONAL supporter of Israel, no matter what Isreal does. He supports the wars, torture and indefinite detention. That is the new kind of liberals which are called neoliberals.
About the book:“House of Bush, House of Saud.”, who do you think is MUCH MORE POWERFUL, the house of Bush or the house of Saud???!! That was extortion money not lobbying mony.!!!!?

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 29, 2010 at 11:29 am Link to this comment

By Shenonymous, August 29 at 2:30 pm

”In your absolute self-centeredness, nemesis2010, you gloss over
much that I criticize and focus only on the one that you could find
absolute fault with because I saw some degree of verbal brutality on
your part while you point out the legendary brutality of women by the
Islamists.”
So, I am not intimidated by any implied or
direct insults you can hurl at me, and I will make statements on what
I see are unjust sexist remarks by you.

I’m more than just a little taken aback by your reaction. You were mistaken in your noted observation. Everyone makes mistakes. It wasn’t a put down, it was nothing more than my pointing out to elisa—not you—that as much as she feigns that goody-two-shoes-woe-is-me bit that she isn’t the saint that she tries to make herself out to be and that others are too often fooled into believing.

There was nothing sexist in what I said and I didn’t hurl any insult at you. I wasn’t even addressing you. And her statements and the low esteem in which I hold them have nothing to with her sex for crying out loud. Just read any post by PH, garth, and TD3 and you’ll find the same illogical disconnects from reality.

Women always demand equality and then when it shows up they can’t stand more than a couple of seconds of it before they’re screaming “sexist!” It’s a cop out and quite frankly I thought you above such cheap tactics. Appareantly I’m MISTAKEN in my inicial assestment of you and will have to reevaluate.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 29, 2010 at 11:11 am Link to this comment

The fact I said you are full of crap, truedigger3, is not name-calling. 
It is an honest assessment of your unmitigated personal opinions and
hence physical state.  And you typically retaliate by denigrating me
personally to wiggle out of providing what I so astutely noticed.  You
prove my point!  In intellectual circles, which I suspect you are never
invited, it would be said, QED.  FYI: quod erat demonstrandum.

Report this

By truedigger3, August 29, 2010 at 10:56 am Link to this comment

Re: By Shenonymous, August 29 at 2:30 pm

Shenonymous wrote:
“you are full of crap and have preconditioned opinions that cannot be substantiated”
_________________________________________________

Shenonymous,

You are back to your true nature of personal attacks and name calling.
Okay, fine by me.! Get Lost!

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 29, 2010 at 10:30 am Link to this comment

In your absolute self-centeredness, nemesis2010, you gloss over
much that I criticize and focus only on the one that you could find
absolute fault with because I saw some degree of verbal brutality on
your part while you point out the legendary brutality of women by the
Islamists.  I completely agree with the offensive, repellent, sickening,
abominable treatment of women by the Islamists and have often said
so, at my own personal safety having been threatened in the past
whenever I even so much as hint that the Palestinians, for instance,
might just take some responsibility for their own misery since 1945
and the creation of Israel.  So, I am not intimidated by any implied or
direct insults you can hurl at me, and I will make statements on what
I see are unjust sexist remarks by you. 


truedigger3 – ” One can see the thrust of his articles and watch some
of his interviews and consquently get a good idea about him.?But about
getting an evidence, I am not sure how someone go about that. I
neither can get a wire-tap on his phones or hack his computers nor get
a record of his finances or read his mail or spy on the US government
and major right wing think-tanks.”

As I said but you insist on ignoring it, I do not know Goldberg outside
of this interview by him of Hitchens. And now, after that fact, I’ve
started to look up his writings and critiques of it but only find
emotional partisan editorials on both sides and no truth is available.  So
your point is completely lost on getting a [consequential] idea about
him.  The fact that you do not have a wire-tap on his phones, or hack
his computers nor get records of his finances, nor read his mail, or spy
on the US government and major right-wing think-tanks shows you are
full of crap and have preconditioned opinions that cannot be
substantiated.  Okay, if that is how you proceed, but you have no
opinions that deserve reading or listening to unless one were interested
in idle time wasting.

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 29, 2010 at 10:22 am Link to this comment

By elisalouisa, August 29 at 12:58 am

”In my post 8/28 at 2:21 pm, last paragraph, I try to set Nemesis straight about the importance of numbers, noticing a lack of comprehension on his part as to how specific numbers fit in to the general scheme of things.”

You couldn’t teach a dog to sit with a hundred pound bag of doggie treats at your side much less “set me straight about the importance of numbers” or anything else.

Your thought processes (I’m being kind here) are best described as dysentery of the brain. The very topic that you are trying to brag about is a perfect example of how disconnected to reality you are.

To be totally honest you have long struck me as someone who either resides in a place with “Sunnydale” in the name or at least should be.

Thank your non-existent god that you are female because if you were a man I’d release the 3/4 of my brain that I put on hold when dealing with you. You really should restrict your sparing to neo-cons only because to me neo-cons are some of the dumbest s-o-bees on the planet. And yet most of them that I know would mop the floor with you.

Report this

By truedigger3, August 29, 2010 at 10:14 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous wrote:
“I appreciate your opinion, I just don’t see any substantial evidence for it.”
___________________________________________________

Shenonymous,

One can see the thrust of his articles and watch some of his interviews and consquently get a good idea about him.
But about getting an evidence, I am not sure how someone go about that. I neither can get a wire-tap on his phones or hack his computers nor get a record of his finances or read his mail or spy on the US government and major right wing think-tanks.

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 29, 2010 at 10:08 am Link to this comment

By elisalouisa, August 28 at 2:10 p

”Among his greatest hits are his observation that women aren’t funny, his pooh-poohing of the Haditha massacre”

Greatest hits? According to whom? Oh… it’s an ad hominem isn’t it?

I don’t know why Hitch thinks women aren’t funny. He obviously hasn’t read any of your posts.

Why don’t you go to the source when possible and check the info before you post your and others’ absurdities? This short video should be a great training source to help you develop an ability to perceive subtlety.


Why Women Still Aren’t Funny:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yestJpXHcD4

ON HADITHA

See why I was against Bush War II? I remember My Lai and all the other incidents from Viet Nam. I remember too well the fickleness of the American people. I know how fickle politicians are. I know how it’s always the ones in the line of fire with their asses on the line who pay the price for the decisions and acts of the politicians and brass. I remember the sense of betrayal that we felt toward the end of the Viet Nam conflict.

What do you and Max desire here elisa? Do you and Max want those young Marines imprisoned for life while the war mongers, the insurgents that planted the IED, and the politicians that voted for the war all get off? 

Can you name a war action where this sort of crap hasn’t taken place? It happened in WWII, Korea, Viet Nam, Panama, Bush War I, and now in Bush War II. This is war! There’s nothing nice about warfare… it’s ugly and brutal and contrary to PH’s claim… It’s all too human; apes going ape on each other!

Here’s a link to an article by Hitchens on the Haditha incident. I don’t see any pooh-poohing. On the contrary I see a very well thought-out and articulated position on the incident. You do understand that in the U.S.—as opposed to Hussein’s Iraq and the Taliban’s Afghanistan—you can have a differing opinion, don’t you? It’s call democracy.

The Hell of War
http://www.slate.com/id/2143011/

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 29, 2010 at 10:04 am Link to this comment

By elisalouisa, August 28 at 2:10 p

”and his defense of the jailed Holocaust denier David Irving, who he hailed as a “great historian.”

Subtle differences aren’t your forte and apparently not Max’s either. This is my first exposure to this issue so I researched it for a few minutes.

Here’s Hitchens debating his stance on Charlie Rose and from what I hear on these videos Hitchens is arguing this as a point of free speech and not holocaust denial.

Christopher Hitchens on Charlie Rose 08-May-96 (Part 1)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMxleCC5VVg&feature=player_embedded

Christopher Hitchens on Charlie Rose 08-May-96 (Part 2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMxleCC5VVg&feature=player_embedded

As for David Irving—with whom I am not familiar—being a “holocaust denier” why haven’t you and Max asked him? Here he is presenting his case.

David Irving speaks out Pt. 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFoFcikCi-o&feature=related

David Irving speaks out Pt. 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw3VuE6wB8w&feature=related

The man clearly denies the charges and admits to the mass murder of Jews as well as many others. Does he not have the right to define himself?

I’m quite taken aback because judging by your and a few others’ comments with respect to Jews I’d think that you be deliriously overjoyed with David Irving’s “style”(?) and Hitch’s defense for his right to free speech.

Do you think it possible that old Max… being a Jew… might be something less than objective?

I don’t see what this has to do with atheists. Are you… How did you say that? ...ummmm, oh yeah, now I remember… ”Your continual determination to put all Christians in a neatly tied package…” Is this what you’re attempting to do here elisa; put all atheists in a neatly tied package?

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 29, 2010 at 10:00 am Link to this comment

By elisalouisa, August 28 at 2:10 pm

”If anyone speaks with authority it is you Nem but once a Truthdigger digs down the clay foundation comes to light”

Here’s another fine example of your comprehension problem. And I’m not the only one that has noticed it so don’t start assaulting me with your “boo hoo woe is me” hurt card.

I was explaining a logic fallacy known as the “argument from authority.” It’s not merely having an expert’s opinion but rather using their “authority” to exempt their statements from criticism and validation of their/one’s claims. It would stand to reason that the “authority” in question would have to have a degree of notoriety and fame… DUH!

Here’s a bit of unsolicited advice; stop feeling and start thinking.

By elisalouisa, August 28 at 2:10 pm

”Yes, numbers are important, not of people but of amount of tax payer money that is not used for the benefit of the people. BLAH BLAH BLAH”

Do you see the mental disconnect, the incoherency, the delusion and inability to address the issue? 

You threw that nasty dinner plate of spaghetti against the wall and I’m not going to clean it up. (argument from verbosity, foundational bias, hasty generalization, non sequitur, failure in logic, and red herring technique.)

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 29, 2010 at 9:57 am Link to this comment

By elisalouisa, August 28 at 2:10 pm

”Your continual determination to put all Christians in a neatly tied package is mind boggling.”

You mean like you do with atheists and neo-cons, and republicans and any one who doesn’t hold to your brand of crazy?

All the religious fall into a main category; the religious category, after which there are subcategories. Atheists fall into a category that is usually labeled non-religious. From that main category it is further broken down into subcategories such as agnostic, atheist, humanists, people who simply answer none (theistic but no preference.), etc.

There are an estimated 25-37 thousand different sects and denominations in Christianity alone. Perhaps that’s my problem. Would you care to teach me about Christianity? I’m willing to listen if you think you can focus long enough to teach the course.

Now stop here and consider how much time and how many words, characters, etc. were required to expose the errors in a single sentence by you. 15 of your words have required three paragraphs—and that’s a minimum—to expose the crazy in one sentence. More resources are required to dispel propaganda than to spread it. Don’t believe it? Grab one of those dinner plates piled with that nasty Wal Mart spaghetti and sauce, think of how much you hate men, throw it against the wall, and then go clean up the mess.

By elisalouisa, August 28 at 2:10 pm

”did your Wolfowitz dish out”

I’ve wanted to address this ever since Shenonymous mistakenly claimed that you never resort to ad hominem. That’s bullshit because you do it all the time and you’re very good at it because you use indirect cheap shots—like the “your” above—then hide behind your being a female and playing the “hurt card.”

If my wife were still alive she’d come here and rip you a new one. Men are at a disadvantage because women are still viewed as the weaker sex. And you do nothing to dispel that belief. (Of course there is an exception… many, if not most, Islamic men would have no problem beating you back into the corral with the rest of the chattel.)

Your being a female and my having been properly raised provide you with protection you’ll never fully appreciate.

By elisalouisa, August 28 at 2:10 pm

”For one who clearly states in unequivocal terms that my comments are way off base Nemesis, you take them seriously enough”

Don’t flatter yourself lady. I don’t take anything you say seriously; I enjoy exposing the crazy regardless of who’s spreading the manure.

If Sarah Palin ever finds out about you, you just might find yourself on a nationally televised debate. I’ve no doubt you and Sarah would set womanhood back at least a few thousand years.

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 29, 2010 at 9:52 am Link to this comment

By PatrickHenry, August 28 at 2:41 pm

” For a serial essayist who wants to be taken serially (pun) I find it kind of odd that you take your nom de plume from the malady you attempt to inflect onto others.

Patrick, this is nothing but another straw man argument. What you should be concerned with is learning to think critically.

I am not a “serial” essayist nor even an essayist. I don’t have a blog nor do I write for a blog. Unfortunately, I don’t get a frickin dime to comment. I wish I did! If I did I’d be here bragging about it, not concealing it. Geezeus dude!

The problem with your above statement—foundational bias, personal incredulity, false premise, and straw man fallacies aside—is that some time back I explained that I chose nemesis because I was watching the movie “Snatch” when I registered. Remember when Brick Top explains nemesis to the 3 black thieves? Snatch is one of my all time favorites and when I want a laugh, I pop it into the computer or DVD player. To me “nemesis” is truth!

You’re the one who made the conspiracy theory claims and failed—after being given two opportunities—to make a case for your incoherent accusations. I even put together a long paragraph to demonstrate just how incoherent your comments are when you use pronouns without nouns to which one can relate them.
You’re afraid to state plainly what you believe.

As for your links, all that crap has been discredited for many years now by CREDIBLE engineers, scientists, and investigators. Alex Jones is not your friend. Alex Jones is living high on the hog making a decent living keeping people like you fat, dumb, and fearful.

And I’m not Jeff Goldberg because if my surname was Goldberg I’d have changed it years ago to something very WASPy.

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 29, 2010 at 9:50 am Link to this comment

By elisalouisa, August 28 at 4:17 am

”A Neocon Preps US for War with Iran”

Elisa I love your posts even more than those of PH and garth when they are both wearing the new, super-duper 36 sq. in. base pyramid hats on their heads while eating the mad-hatters’ anti-mind control chip dip of Melox, creamed broccoli, and Metamucil, with canned cheddar cheese consumed with jalapeño and green onion potato chips.

Your posts, more than any other, demonstrate the disconnected, hate-filled, bigoted, deluded mind of an ideologue and religious fanatic. I sincerely hope that you follow my advice and start using an OCR to help you because with your disconnected view of reality and your incredible use of the verbosity logic fallacy the forum becomes a “Marianas Turkey Shoot.”

Please explain the following:

President Clinton:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ps9j22G9HLE&feature=related

Al Gore on Bush 41:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JE48XHKG64&feature=related

Democrats on Iraq:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?hl=en&v=N5p-qIq32m8&gl=US

Democrats debate themselves:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Yd2pql5heg&feature=related

Democrats on Iraq’s WMD
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i87cZ3Og6ts&feature=related

The democrats have controlled the Congress for several years now and also the White House for almost one year. Can you provide us with evidence of the Democrats voting to cease funding of the war?

Does all of the above evidence mean that democrats are neo-cons too?

According to Joe Wiener’s statement during an interview of Hitchens 94% of Americans believe in god and 84% believe in heaven. That leaves only 6% to fall in all the other categories; atheists, agnostics, etc. Please explain to us how what is arguably less than 6% of the population can influence policy?

Please explain your vehement hatred of atheists and love for the democrats when according to the linked Gallop poll 44% of the democratic base is white, non-religious while only 20% is white, religious.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/118937/Republican-Base-Heavily-White-Conservative-Religious.aspx

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 29, 2010 at 9:47 am Link to this comment

By elisalouisa, August 28 at 4:09 am

”to unleash a full-frontal assault on God himself?”

Can you and/or Max provide evidence that god exists?

Can you and/or Max provide evidence that god is a he and not a she or an it?

If you (3rd person) are unable to provide such proof then how could Hitchens have assaulted god himself?

By elisalouisa, August 28 at 4:09 am

”He blasts religion as a form of child abuse”

Will you, Max and/or any other religious person make the statement that carving on an infant male’s genitalia is not child abuse?

Will you, Max, and/or any other religious person unequivocally state that clitoral circumcision and vaginal infibulation of young girls by old hags is not child abuse?

Can you, Max, or any other religious crazy provide us with evidence of the habitual and ritualistic mutilation of infant and child genitalia that is not related to religious practices?

”I don’t blame God.  I blame religion.  I don’t believe there is such a thing as God. Religion makes people do wicked things they wouldn’t ordinarily do. It doesn’t make them behave better—it makes them behave worse.  You couldn’t get people to hack away at the genitals of their newborn children if they didn’t think there was a religious obligation to do so. The licenses for genocide, slavery, racism, are all right there in the holy text.”  -Christopher Hitchens

Can you, Max, or any other religious dweeb deny the validity of the above quote?

By elisalouisa, August 28 at 4:09 am

”claims Jesus Christ never lived”

Can you, Max, and/or any other religious wacko provide us with extra-biblical evidence that the Jesus of the 4 gospels ever existed? (Please do not attempt to post the long ago discredited Josephus forgeries because even believers have long accepted and admitted to their being forgeries.)

Can you, Max, and/or any other religious delusional provide evidence that a human being can walk on water, cure blindness with spittle mixed with dirt, turn water into wine, rise from death, etc. Please explain how physical laws of the universe can be manipulated in such a way.

By elisalouisa, August 28 at 4:12 am

”II.
In the Fall of 2005, Hitchens gladly accepted the invitation of the Family Research Council to speak before its Witherspoon Fellows.”

Thank you very much elisa for providing even more evidence of the Christian establishment’s backing of Bush, neo-conservatism, and Bush War II.

Is the writer making an indirect claim that Hitchens is a closeted Christian elisa? That would be in keeping with the Christians’ propensity for lying and deceiving, would it not?

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 29, 2010 at 9:44 am Link to this comment

By PatrickHenry, August 27 at 6:15 pm

”Just get out of jail? I see you’ve been busy canning long winded baseless rhetoric, i.e. spam.”

Well of course PH! What else could it be? It couldn’t be that I had chemo or perhaps a death in the family or went fishing or took a vacation to the Bahamas or my computer was broken or I was simply reading all the nonsense you and your ilk were spewing and just biding my time.

If it’s so baseless why are you unable to structure an argument and provide evidence to the contrary?

Why is it that almost every one of your posts is nothing but ad hominem attacks against individuals? You’ve even gone as far as to disparage the entire Marine Corps Air Wing!

I don’t know any Marine grunt that despaired at the sound of Marine and Navy F-4s, and A-4s coming in low and dropping napalm and 500 pounders on enemy positions when facing overwhelming odds in a battle. Nor do I know of any that despaired at the sound of the ratta-tat-kat men’s guns on the Huey’s spraying covering fire at great risk to their well-being and/or Cobra gunships during a fire fight. Perhaps you were in a different Corps where your seven eighty-two gear was a shield and a sword?

You’re a dip-shit Patrick… a fucking non-hacker! Tell me; are you a new type of pyramid mad-hatter military strategists? I ask because I know of no military strategist who doesn’t believe air superiority a top priority in combat. Well not since soon after WWI…

I’m going to offer you an olive branch today because I’ll not be here on December 22, 2012, to laugh at the stupid the morning after the predicted end of the world. But even though I’ll be in a state of molecular decomposition I can help you Patrick. I’ve seen men like you before; men that have allowed fear to creep inside of them and let it eat away at their frail humanity. I know that you, as many others, fear the arrival of Nibiru and the Ducaz reptilians the Nibirians created, so here’s a secret code to protect you.

When the Ducaz start to attack humans and you feel that your safety is endangered shout out the following secret code:

Gort, Klaatu barada nikto!

Remember this is top secret so don’t tell anyone about it. This is just for you! 
 
If you doubt my knowledge remember that another common name for Nibiru is… NEMESIS!

By PatrickHenry, August 27 at 6:15 pm

”Regarding God, Hitchens doesn’t know but is too arrogant to admit it, you don’t know and neither do I.”

That’s right Patrick! We don’t know! The difference is that believers claim that they do know while atheists say that there is no evidence to support the hypothesis.

Next time an atheists knocks on your door and tells you that you’re going to suffer eternal damnation for believing in a deity you let us know… okay?

The exceptionalism that fuels the fire of religious hatred and violence is based on belief in a deity PH… think about that.

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 29, 2010 at 9:41 am Link to this comment

By truedigger3, August 27 at 6:33 pm

”You are wrong.! Hitler’s Germany was predominately Protestant with a ratio of Protestants to Catholics ROUGHLY two to one.
Your writing of an Arab Lobby that is comparable and competing with the Zionist lobby made me laugh so hard that I almost fell out from the chair. You are quoting the arch Zionist Dorswitch!!!???. Are you so naive or a bullshit artist??!! Thank you for the good laugh.”

I didn’t quote the liberal Mr. Dershowitz. I simply said that he had a book out titled “The Arab Lobby.” If you want another reference to see just how deep into Arab pockets our so-called leaders live read Craig Unger’s “House of Bush, House of Saud.” 

You’re correct TD3. I was thinking one thing and typed another; no problem, it happens. The point that is being made is that Germany was CHRISTIAN. It wasn’t atheist! That typo works out as a positive because you have backed that up. The make up of catholic to protestant is unimportant; it’s the Christian to atheist.

The problem all of you fear-mongering, true believers have is one of math.

The atheists do not have the numbers to be able to accomplish all the evils that you people are unjustly trying to attribute to them. Hitler was a Catholic, never denounced his catholic faith, and to the best of my knowledge has never been excommunicated.

During the rise of the Nationalist Socialist Party who was its strongest opponent? The Communist! That means that instead of godless communists the Nazis were fighting godly Christian communist.

Is it possible that there were atheist Nazis? Yes. Is it possible that there were atheist communists? Yes. There were also many atheist Jews. The point is that all those people—including the atheists—were not fighting for atheism. They were not fighting for non-belief in a deity. They were fighting for an ideology, nationalism, socialism, social conservatism, etc. They were struggling for what they believed in, not for not believing in a deity.

Current estimates of the world’s religious makeup are (these are approximates): 33% Christian, 23% Muslim, 14% Hindu, while atheists—not including agnostics, non-religious, etc.—are an estimated 2.5% of the world’s population. In the U.S. and Islamic countries atheists are despised. In the U.S. you will never see a politician embracing an atheist and calling him/her an inspiration like we see many politicians doing with so-called spiritual leaders of every stripe.

The atheist population in America is larger than that of the Jewish population yet name atheists holding high level government positions. How many Jews with a high level government position can you name? How about Christians?

Atheists do not have the numbers and are one of the most persecuted minorities on the planet! You’ve a math problem people!

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 29, 2010 at 9:25 am Link to this comment

”I didn’t say receiving a prize is evidence of hackism, but what I
said it makes the receiver a prime suspect and I explained why.”

Barely, and skimpily.

”In my humble opinion, Jeffrey Goldberg is a hack and a war monger
through and through. He and a contingent of writers and journalists
are paving the way for an attack on Iran.”

I appreciate your opinion, I just don’t see any substantial evidence for it. 
I am not saying you are wrong, just without having given any basis for
it.  Essentially you are pontificating.  When it comes to humble opinions,
one is just as worth esteem as another. 

As I noted, I do not know Goldberg, and I was not impressed with his
interview of Hitchens, so I have no way of knowing whether he is a hack
or not.  I do not rely on partisan editorial news such as Antiwar.com.

Report this

By truedigger3, August 29, 2010 at 8:59 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous wrote:
“I disagree with you that receiving prize recognition for one’s work is evidence of hackism.
You use a broad brushstroke which is a fallacy in its essence.”
___________________________________________________

Shenonymous,

I didn’t say receiving a prize is evidence of hackism, but what I said it makes the receiver a prime suspect and I explained why.
In my humble opinion, Jeffrey Goldberg is a hack and a war monger through and through. He and a contingent of writers and journalists are paving the way for an attack on Iran.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 29, 2010 at 6:59 am Link to this comment

truedigger3
As I intentionally qualified my comments about Goldberg, I would
have to agree with your disagreement with me… to a point.  Prizes
do not prove one is or is not a hack.  However, I disagree with you
that receiving prize recognition for one’s work is evidence of hackism.
You use a broad brushstroke which is a fallacy in its essence.  But it
is really a moot point and is self-obvious.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 29, 2010 at 6:51 am Link to this comment

Though not having any German ancestry in my veins, unless one
goes back to Africa to see that we are all descended from the same
tree dweller, the psychology of the Germans that led up to Hitler’s
despicable and monstrous regime is unknown by those who now
populate the earth.  One now also wonders how such grotesque of
mind could itself have evolved and how it could have affected so
many people?  We are led to think that it is a natural inclination for all
men to exploit and bleed their fellow man because they think they
have supernatural genes that bequeaths to them the right to graze
on other people.

One must struggle against being mediocre and able to be conditioned
by the insidiously minded, those depraved of having humane feelings
for great numbers of people, whole populations.  Mass hysteria is a
scientifically proved phenomenon.  We only have to see the effects of
the 1930 Depression, or the mass hysteria over a Martian invasion that
was broadcast by Orson Wells in 1938.  The mass hysteria that led
otherwise good people to burn or drown women accused of being
witches.  Surely the story, The Crucible, is not beyond your literary
experience?  Then for really bizarre evidence of mass hysteria is the
horrid story about the village Oude Pekela:  (copy/pasted from the
article at http://www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume1/j1_1_6.htm 
”...allegations that dangerous child molesters were operating in a
small village in the Netherlands and the subsequent multiple
interrogations of nearly all the preschool children in the village.  This
started as a result of slight anal injuries resulting from sex play
between two small boys.  Over several months the stories grew to
include fecal and urinary games, sexual abuse, vaginal and anal rape,
sadomasochistic performances, manufacture of pornography, drug
administration, bizarre rites, and the sacrificial torture and murder of
infants.  There were no physical injuries apart from the slight anal
injuries in the first two children and no pornography or other evidence
was found and the police eventually declared the episode to be an
outburst of mass hysteria.  However, the allegations are still being
taken seriously by some people and this episode has created much
controversy in the Netherlands.”

The human mind is a most creative thing.  The most creative in the
entire universe and I am only speculating on that.

When we are talking about important issues, things that matter in the
way we live our lives, I believe we must keep constant before our minds
the question of what is truth like an icon that never ever leaves.  How
do we recognize the difference between fact and opinion? How we go
about it is worthy of a depth of thought. Identifying what is true is a
formidable self-assignment, but it’s possible if one learns the difference
between fact and opinion.  Most of what you wrote elisalouisa is not
truth but is opinion.  If this is not ‘true,’ then just ask yourself why you
believe what you quoted is true?  Is it because you respect the writer
and simply believe whatever they say?  Is it because you have always
thought what they said was true?  What evidence did you provide to
yourself that support the purported facts?  Did you ask if what you
accepted as evidence really was credible or was it in fact biased?  Did
you think for even a second it could have been distorted by the writer’s
personal perception?  Were you willing to take the time to examine
what you believed was true?

It is cavalier and dilettante to ask all those who read your comments to
believe what you have copied from another and further that you skimp
at giving your own beliefs about it.  It is most condescending.  Perhaps
you are guilty of the same psychology the German’s are being accused
of?

Report this

By elisalouisa, August 29, 2010 at 5:18 am Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt You are correct in what you say. My comment that to Germans Hitler was God referred to how the German people thought of him. They looked up to him that much. As to Nazism being a new version of Christianity, I don’t see it that way.

It is readily observed that these threads abound with digs, some posters making it a daily event. If a end-of-the-year survey was taken as to wasted words  posted on Truthdig, it might be surprising as to the results. That survey might also include a question as to what posts the readers think are actually
humorous. Of course, the ballots would be secret. Do you read this Truthdig?

The value of a post is between the writer and the reader. Readers do not always agree. When there is an exchange of ideas and one refers back to a string of posts one is responding to it is beneficial to have the numbers sequential. In that sense it does matter. Others have the right to disagree.

Interesting links Patrick Henry Nemesis-star -  I trust that 2012 shall come and go as all other years do. The Metaphysics link is now part of my bookmarks. Can there ever be agreement on such matters? I doubt it, especially in this sphere. However, the continual search for such answers makes life quite interesting.

Report this

By truedigger3, August 29, 2010 at 3:52 am Link to this comment

Shenonymour wrote:
“as he was the recipient of a few journalistic awards.  Which again, doesn’t hold much meaning for me, but does say that he is not simply a published hack.”
___________________________________________
Shenonymous,

I disagree with you. The awarding of these prizes, juournalistic or otherwise, has degenerated lately to the extent that, most of them but not all, are given to people who are in line with the power-that-be ideas and goals. Nobel “peace” prize is a good example. So, a recepient of a journalistic award is a prime suspect of being a hack.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 28, 2010 at 11:32 pm Link to this comment

With 16 million dying, I would transcend any Talibani threat! 
Besides by sending money, one can be a spy from a distance,
with squinty eyes, and neutralize any perceived threat.

Even with the elaborate explanation, what is important about
nemesis2010’s numbering?  Has ridiculousness achieved a capital R? 
Ridiculous!  That complaint was about the most wasted use of words
that I’ve seen in a long time.

The word is fascinating.  The use of words as representatives of our
thoughts is a tricky business.  Not only does one have to have a
vocabulary, which is a list of usable words, particularly when writing,
words have to be put in a certain order so that they make sense.  This
is not exactly quite true in speaking unless it is a formal speech.  For if
you listen to a verbal conversation, you would see that it starts and
stops abruptly and often only single words or even half words get
spoken in the give and take of the conversation.  However, the written
word has much more rules of linguistic logic imposed.  Now why am I
writing about these units of language?  Well I have been reading and
reading some postings here and linking to the original articles, whose
links were not provided by the way, which is a problem that those who
make references ought to do and is sloppy when it is not done, and
seeing how words become servants of opinions whether or not there is
any substantial basis to those opinions.  How they can be strung
together in ways where two or more observations by two or more
persons can be entirely differently described.  And the only thing that
can explain this diametric difference is the emotion behind the words. 

For instance, the description Hitchens gives of his reticence about the
intentions of Imam Rauf and the use of the building, is it a mosque or
is it not a mosque, Cordoba House.  Hitchens’ perception is contrasted
extremely antithetically and highly criticized in another publication,
AntiWar.com, an online political magazine, by M. Junaid Levesque-Alam
(Aug. 28, 2010).  If these essays were placed side-by-side, it would be
impossible to decide which one of these men are right in their
assessment, which told the truth, and it would depend on one’s own
prejudicial emotional and intellectual makeup that would assist in that
decision.  Yet they both use the same words just strung differently.  As
I said, fascinating.

Now I bring this up because of the article produced here by elisalouisa,
and I am not criticizing elisalouisa herself but rather commenting on
the content of the article, A Neocon Preps US for War with Iran, by
Ray McGovern, also printed on AntiWar.com, because I think one must
be extremely careful what one believes to be the truth from printed
material. 

I am not that familiar with Jeffrey Goldberg, and from my first
encounter watching him question Christopher Hitchens in the interview
that is the topic of this forum, I was not impressed.  However, that
ought not to discount everything he says as he was the recipient of a
few journalistic awards.  Which again, doesn’t hold much meaning for
me, but does say that he is not simply a published hack.

If one looks, and it is done more easily these days than it has been in
the past, one can find whatever perspective or critique one is looking
for that supports one’s proclivities on any topic so desired, but myself,
I tend to focus on editorial politics and religion since both of those
institutions affect my life and the life of billions of other people in the
world, but closer to home 309 or so million Americans.

Report this

By elisalouisa, August 28, 2010 at 8:58 pm Link to this comment

In my post 8/28 at 2:21 pm, last paragraph, I try to set Nemesis straight about the importance of numbers, noticing a lack of comprehension on his part as to how specific numbers fit in to the general scheme of things. Apparently, I misjudged how very serious Nem’s problem is. Nemesis in his series of posts starting on August 27 at 4:11 pm posted not 1, not 2, not 3, not 4, not 5 not 6 but 7 pages with a duplicate for #4. However, the numbers on each post only go to 4 and then Nemesis starts to count from #1 again, just as if he had forgotten the numbers 5,  6 and 7. My August 28 at 2:10 post incorrectly stated the number of posts he had submitted because I accepted his count to four. Complicated math gets the best of us.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, August 28, 2010 at 7:17 pm Link to this comment

I smell cop out here. Just one tiny example? There is evidence of animals cooperation to survive. That Evolutionary Anarchist Kropotkin used such observations in the formulation of his idea of the best kind of social condition he called “Mutual Aid” which I subscribe to.

Come on, it was you who opened this can of worms then now withdraw when I didn’t wilt under your pressure, but you did from mine. Disappointing but not surprising. It is to be expected from people holding your perspective. Maybe next time.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, August 28, 2010 at 3:31 pm Link to this comment

Night Gaunt.

We are talking about life….all life, positive and negative energy.  Can I prove that all species can communicate with each other within their group?  I can only state that my observations affirm my beliefs which I don’t really have the inclination to have to prove it to anybody.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, August 28, 2010 at 11:45 am Link to this comment

No vanity, just observations. Tell me again how cuddly a tarantula is or the valor of a sea cucumber or the vanity of a katydid. Blanket statement? If the facts support it yes. And they do. I couldn’t cover all the nuances but I did give little examples. You on the other hand have not. Yours have been the blanket statements saying we know nothing and never will. Wrong on the face of it.

By PatrickHenry, August 28 at 3:18 pm Link to this comment

Night Gaunt,

It is always easier to deny something than prove its existence.

Denial only comes if something is there, it has been shown to be there, like Climate Change & Evolution, but are still said to not exist. So are you saying I am denying you deity because there is proof that I am ignoring? What proof? It is up to you to prove a positive. There is no need for a deity so I deny nothing. Next thing you know I will have to deny that pixies keep the sun burning. Or you will have to do that. See the problem?

Give some examples please like I have.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, August 28, 2010 at 11:18 am Link to this comment

Night Gaunt,

It is always easier to deny something than prove its existence.

You have also made the blanket statement:

“Personality, love, hate and individuality don’t reside in all living things. Some elements do start cropping up the greater the complexity of the life form till it reaches us. But you won’t find any of that in a gall midge or a protozoa or a snake. Now there is variation among individuals that would lend it self to the identification of personality which could just be the human tendency to anthropomorphize. But it isn’t universal among all life. Sorry.”

You have no proof of this, these forms of life have resided on the planet far longer than man in his present form.  It is vain to think otherwise.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, August 28, 2010 at 11:04 am Link to this comment

Until science can explain to me how personality, love, hate and individuality reside in all living things, then I will continue to scoff at those closed minded individuals who fly the banner of disbelief.  I don’t know and neither do they. Patrick Henry

Yes a hypothesis.

First of all your premise is wrong so you will never get that answer you want. Personality, love, hate and individuality don’t reside in all living things. Some elements do start cropping up the greater the complexity of the life form till it reaches us. But you won’t find any of that in a gall midge or a protozoa or a snake. Now there is variation among individuals that would lend it self to the identification of personality which could just be the human tendency to anthropomorphize. But it isn’t universal among all life. Sorry.

I don’t know and neither do they. Patrick Henry

Yes and it is up to them to prove to those like myself that there is actually a there there. No hubris or know nothing either. Just prove it. So far the Universe is slowly yielding its secrets but no deity or deities appear. Sorry.

Also there are Atheists in fox holes and last I heard they had a group! Damn, another myth shattered by reality. Not sorry.

Elisalouisa from some of what I read, Hitler thought himself chosen by his version of God to be the new Messiah (Martin Borman, an Atheist would have disagreed)of what was essentially an extension of the idea of their fictional version of Aryans were the new Jews aka “Chosen Ones” and went on from there. [And the elimination of the old Jews to complete their massive blood ritual.] Nazism was based upon a long accumulation of ideas and prejudices some going back centuries. That and people being brought up in a cruel environment making them prime targets for recruitment. Nazism was essentially a new version of Christianity, with a new cross and everything!

Yes Pakistan is in dire need but so does Louisiana, 5 years after the hurricanes and stupid constructions destroyed it. So don’t forget them.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 28, 2010 at 10:49 am Link to this comment

Just as some here are so sure their opinions to be facts, such thoughtlessness, one could join the Talaban and threaten Americans providing aid to the suffering in Pakistan as spies!

As to the proclamation of a passion to hate which has been stated as fact, acceptance of such a statement, would demand embracing stupidity with open arms,  now…..this would require a real live clown like TD3 who made the statment with the company of Morons.

Turgid thought seems most prevalent! this as the world turns!

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, August 28, 2010 at 10:41 am Link to this comment

Nemesis2001

“Garth, like PatrickHenry and Truedigger3, appears to be suffering from trilateral pyramidion reptilius nibiruous syndrome.”

For a serial essayist who wants to be taken serially (pun) I find it kind of odd that you take your nom de plume from the malady you attempt to inflect onto others.

http://nemesis-star.com/category/tags/nibiru

Report this

By elisalouisa, August 28, 2010 at 10:21 am Link to this comment

II.

          The scotch whiskey blurred his vision, or was it his mind?

A few neocons in the right places and New Atheists with silver tongue spreading their venom can accomplish (pardon the pun) miracles.

truedigger3
nemesis2010 wrote:“Hitler’s Germany was predominately Catholic and about 29% protestant.. ..”?
Truthdigger3: You are wrong.! Hitler’s Germany was predominately Protestant with a ratio of Protestants to Catholics ROUGHLY two to one.

elisa:Once again you are absolutely correct and also fearless Truedigger3. I believe our friend Nem got his stat from Hitchens, who again is wrong, wrong, wrong. The scotch whiskey blurred his vision, or was it his mind?
The facts are:
Excerpts from:United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
German Churches and the Nazi State
A religious census taken in 1925 revealed that of an overall German population of 65 million, 40 million belonged to the main Protestant (Evangelical Lutheran) church, 21 million to the Roman Catholic church, and 620,000 to various smaller, mostly Protestant denominations. The term “Church Struggle” refers to the strained relationship between church and state
in Germany in the 1870s and then again during the Nazi regime. Although Nazi policy at first seemed to tolerate church autonomy, it soon became clear that
official tolerance of Christian religious groups would last only as long as the churches accepted synchronization—the alignment of the church, along with other areas of society, with Nazi goals.


Nem: Is it really necessary to post videos and articles about the Israeli lobby, influence and atrocities taking place in Palestine? I don’t think so.
elisa: Of course not, anymore than it was necessary to post that video showing a Muslim woman (I presume) being beaten. That was way in the beginning. Yet, you kept pounding away on that video, wanting to know what I thought. Was that really necessary, especially considering there was no documentation as to when this took place, who the woman was, etc.
elisaYou could skip the anti Muslim videos also please?

Nemesis And it isn’t atheists electing the extremists in different parts of the world. It’s the religious. Atheists simply haven’t the numbers.
elisa: Yes, numbers are important, not of people but of amount of tax payer money that is not used for the benefit of the people.  Money, money, money that can buy just about anything and everything including the Kurds. How many millions did your Wolfowitz dish out to the Kurds for them to think
of him as a blood brother?  How many millions did it take to put in the Senate and Congress those who would cast their votes as dictated by the Neocons? How many millions does it take to assassinate global leaders and put in their place puppets that no longer think of the needs their people and
acquiesce to the view of the U.S. All those shenanigans that go on in the financial world, why aren’t they investigated? Money, money, money Nem.
Count the money that is splashed around. Those billions easily negate the vote of the people.
The number of WMDs a nation possesses is also of utmost importance. A nation with WMDs, can eradicate nations with millions and millions of people and leave an entire country devastated. So again, you are not looking at the right numbers. Count the WMDs a nation possesses, not the population of the enemy.
Nem:This thread has taken a curious turn. What I find most interesting is how the reactionaries have acted exactly as historical evidence predicts with respect to fanaticism and true believers.
elisa: So who’s who?

Think I’ll skip the Tiramais, my stomach is a bit queasy.

Report this

By elisalouisa, August 28, 2010 at 10:10 am Link to this comment

I.
For one who clearly states in unequivocal terms that my comments are way off base Nemesis, you take them seriously enough to respond in not one, not two not three but four pages minus many of your coined phrases; no Jeebus on a Ritz cracker, no put down of women, no vagina talk. By the way, do you have a recipe for that ovarian something or other that was to be served at your feast? An outlet also as your Wal Mart does not offer exotic morsels.  Along with comments what that pass for knowledge you must add some zest to your posts. Clearance sale items at Walmart just doesn’t do it. Your comments on Hitchens and the New Atheists just are not enough reason to read your posts. You must provide entertainment such as the man you so admire does although obviously not with his style, go ahead ridicule someone. Hint from the grandstand: You’ll get more laughs if it’s a woman.

NemWho are most dangerous?
elisa Those who are most dedicated to what is erroneous , such as you Nem conveying the harmlessness of the neocons and New Atheists.
elisaYour continual determination to put all Christians in a neatly tied package is mind boggling. The Christian Right was courted and seduced by Irving Kristol.
Nemesis:It wasn’t the New Atheists that had direct contact to the RNC and the Bush administration… it was believers like Ted Haggard, John Hagee, Pat Robertson, Rod Parsley, Bob Jones University, The Discovery Institute, James Dobson and Focus on the Family, etc.
elisaAt whose instigation? Another authority speaks. Irving Kristol who is given credit for starting the Neocon movement.

<Excerpts Irving Kristol’s Alliance with the Anti-Semites
byMax Blumenthal
In my book, “Republican Gomorrah: Inside The Movement That Shattered The Party,” I describe how Kristol initiated the alliance in July 1984, urging that American Jews, “enmeshed in the liberal time warp,” ally with Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority. Kristol’s apologia was inspired by the anti-Semitic ravings of a
preacher named Bailey Smith. “I don’t know why God chose the Jews,” Smith had said. “They have such funny noses.” When Jewish groups pounced on those remarks and on those of Jerry Falwell, who told his followers that Jews “can make more money accidentally than you can on purpose,” Kristol rushed to the
preachers’ defense.“Why should Jews care about the theology of a fundamentalist preacher when they do not for a moment believe that he speaks with any authority on the question of God’s attentiveness to human prayer?”
Kristol wrote. “And what do such theological abstractions matter as against the mundane fact that this same preacher is vigorously pro-Israel?”

Pass the antipasto and garlic bread please.

If anyone speaks with authority it is you Nem but once a Truthdigger digs down the clay foundation comes to light.
Nemesis Does anyone have a clue how convoluted and contorted a belief system it takes to believe that?
elisa On the contrary, it is your belief systems that is
messed up.

Nem:Germans believed that Hitler was sent from God.
elisa:Wrong. Germans believe that Hitler was God.

Report this

By truedigger3, August 28, 2010 at 9:55 am Link to this comment

Re:By Shenonymous, August 28 at 9:55 am


Shenonymous wrote:

“I wonder why Fritz resorted to suicide to solve his conflicts with this world?  He had withstood so much prior to that something must have dawned on him of the absolute futility of life?  That is the hardest part of being a conscious human being, I think.  Coming to terms with our mortality and the absurdity of being a conscious organism in this world. 
Ergo, religion and all the insanity it brings with it. But it does assuage the fearful of mind.”
_______________________________________________

Shenonymous,
That was very good. It is insightful, simple and understandable.
About JudywisemongerPHD, she is one of those clueless cruel far Right Wingers who blame poverty on people themselves, which sometimes is true, but ignores the tricks, shenanigans and greed of Wall St. and the big banks that ruined, unrepairably, millions of lives, the effect of outsourcing millions of good living wage jobs, the regressive tax system etc etc… . Her posts exprss her callous cruel attitude perfectly.
In the richest country in the planet, there is no justification, whatsoever, that many people have to work two and sometimes three jobs just to provide the necessities for their families and still are poor.!

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 28, 2010 at 9:23 am Link to this comment

Your generous heart, Leefeller, is only exceeded by your genuine
compassion for the truly destitute and babies dying of dysentery. 
I thank you on behalf of the starving Pakistanis.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, August 28, 2010 at 9:07 am Link to this comment

Leefeller, still playing with dolls?

Report this

By truedigger3, August 28, 2010 at 8:55 am Link to this comment

Re:By Leefeller, August 28 at 11:57 am

Leefeller wrote:
“I am sending a care package which includes a bakers dozen blow up dolls with Berkas to the Talaban and threw in a few copies of the Book “How to win friends and influance people”!! ........ I figure some of the special posters here can get their own!”
__________________________________________________

Weefeller,

There is a tragedy with wide spread suffering and misery affecting millions, and your response to that is a sick humorless clowning???!!
That speaks volumes about what kind of a person you are!!

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, August 28, 2010 at 8:52 am Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt,

My hypothesis?  I will gladly share my point of view and yes, my belief. Its a fairly established one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics

Not being a fatalist like Hitchens or a firm believer in the hubris of organized religion, I see Man’s existence as another cog in the wheel of natural law which dominates all things.

‘There are no atheists in foxholes’, a place where humans are demoted to the lowest common denominator, kill or be killed, survival of the fittest, religions morality is out the window.

One only has to view natural things and their interaction with each other in the wild to understand our own interactions as ‘civilized’ men and women, we are not apart from nature but are a part of it.

Alpha males whe world over believe themselves as god and have the women admirers to attest and swear to it.  On the flip side many less assertive men believe god resides between the legs of women.

Until science can explain to me how personality, love, hate and individuality reside in all living things, then I will continue to scoff at those closed minded individuals who fly the banner of disbelief.  I don’t know and neither do they.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 28, 2010 at 7:57 am Link to this comment

I am sending a care package which includes a bakers dozen blow up dolls with Berkas to the Talaban and threw in a few copies of the Book “How to win friends and influance people”!! ........ I figure some of the special posters here can get their own!

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 28, 2010 at 4:44 am Link to this comment

By the way, send money to Pakistan, they could sure use the help.
It is really bad there.  Find a reputable charity and donate.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 28, 2010 at 4:03 am Link to this comment

Everybody is deluded and gets to print about it!  hahahahaha….

Report this

By elisalouisa, August 28, 2010 at 12:17 am Link to this comment

A Neocon Preps US for War with Iran
by Ray McGovern
I guess I was naïve in thinking that The Atlantic and its American-Israeli writer Jeffrey Goldberg might shy away from arguing for yet another war - this one with Iran - while the cauldrons are still boiling in Afghanistan and Iraq. Even
world-class chutzpah must have its limits, I had thought.
I was reflecting on the bizarre ways in which Goldberg helped to make the case for the U.S. invasion of Iraq. For instance, on Oct. 3, 2002, as America’s war fever was building just a week before Congress caved to the President, Goldberg wrote in Slate, the online magazine:“The [Bush] administration is planning ... to launch what many people would undoubtedly call a short-sighted and inexcusable act of aggression. In five
years, however, I believe that the coming invasion of Iraq will be remembered as an act of profound morality.”
Looking back on Goldberg’s commentaries at the time also brought to mind how many U.S. publications considered centrist or even liberal were bending over backward to get in line with cheerleaders for the coming invasion.
Even earlier, on March 25, 2002, Goldberg filled the pages of The New Yorker with a mammoth 17,000-word story hyping Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein’s ties to terrorism and glossing over the ambiguities regarding the gassing of civilians in the Kurdish city of Halabja during the Iran-Iraq war.

Report this

By elisalouisa, August 28, 2010 at 12:12 am Link to this comment

II.
In the Fall of 2005, Hitchens gladly accepted the invitation of the Family Research Council to speak before its Witherspoon Fellows. Hitchens subsequently regaled an audience of young Christian right cadres with excerpts from his book, “Thomas Jefferson: Author of America.” For attending Hitchens’
lecture and participating in several similar events, the FRC’s Witherspoon Fellows received academic credit for study at Pat Robertson’s Regent University, a school that has placed 150 of its graduates in Bush administration posts.
Presumably Hitchens was aware of the mission of the James Dobson-founded Family Research Council. How could such an intellectual giant be unaware of the FRC’s charge to “promote[] the Judeo-Christian worldview as the basis for a just, free, and stable society?” How could Hitchens have missed the FRC’s many
“Justice Sunday” rallies staged at mega-churches and telecast across America to advance the confirmation of George W. Bush’s most theocracy-minded judicial picks? (To my knowledge, these rallies occured well after happy hour).
And how could Hitchens have been ignorant to the FRC’s vitriolic crusade to ban abortion and undermine gay rights?
Regarding FRC President Tony Perkins’ ties to white supremacists, I would like to paraphrase Scripture and say, forgive Hitchens for he knows not what the hell he is doing. My well-publicized report detailing how Perkins once
purchased the phone bank list of former Klan leader David Duke for the price of $82,500 and how he headlined a 2001 fundraiser for the white supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens had only been out for a few months. Maybe Hitchens was too busy dancing with Wolfowitz to read it.
But there is no excuse for Hitchens’ hypocrisy. With the release of “God Is Not Great,” Hitchens owes his readers an explanation for his appearance at the Family Research Council, the nerve center of a theocratic movement determined to weaken the foundations of constitutional democracy. Hitchens must explain why he accepted the FRC’s invitation to speak and whether he was paid for his appearance.
While awaiting Hitchens’ response, I will pray that in the future his version of the Straight Talk Express designates a driver.?_______

Report this

By elisalouisa, August 28, 2010 at 12:09 am Link to this comment

The Contrarian Delusion: How Hitchens Poisons Everything
Max Blumental   April 30, 2007

Christopher Hitchens has made a career out of offending polite society. Among his greatest hits are his observation that women aren’t funny, his pooh-poohing of the Haditha massacre, and his defense of the jailed Holocaust denier David Irving, who he hailed as a “great historian.” More recently, Hitchens has volunteered himself as the licker of Wolfowitz’s comb, claiming
that the corrupt World Bank president “did nothing wrong.”
Hitchens has cast these seemingly untenable positions as “contrarian,” lending himself not only an air of intellectual bravado, but a veneer of integrity as well.
Despite his myriad personal flaws and political contradictions, Hitchens has managed to appear principled by trafficking in opinions that consistently outrage conservatives and liberals alike. He poses as a maverick, an intellectually macho literary gun-slinger who loves nothing more than provoking the indignant howls of the madding crowd. For Hitchens, everything
is sacred, and therefore, everything is fair game.
Those who have followed the trajectory of Hitchens’ career knew it was only a matter of time before he set his sights on religion. What better way to piss off (and on) the masses than to unleash a full-frontal assault on God himself? So to great fanfare and perhaps nobody’s surprise, Hitchens has produced “God Is
Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything,” an atheist manifesto intended to supplement Richard Dawkins’ “The God Delusion,” and (New Age torture fanatic) Sam Harris’ “The End of Faith.”
Hitchens spares no sacred cows in his latest work. He blasts religion as a form of child abuse, claims Jesus Christ never lived, and declares that those who give their children bar mitzvahs are “planning your and my destruction and the destruction of all hard-won human attainments.” The requisite attacks on
Islam, so satisfying to his newfound neocon pals, are also featured at length.Hitchens’ book might be mean-spirited and even bigoted; little more than a barely legible screed larded with predictable arguments and a scattershot of pretentious literary references, but who can say its author is unprincipled? This
is contrarianism, right?
Please.
“God Is Not Great” represents little more than the disingenous posturings of a certified fraudmeister who has openly cavorted with the most reactionary elements of the Christian right. If Hitchens had any principles at all—if he truly feared the cultural and political consequences of the encroachment of
religion into public life—he would have used his still-considerable influence to support organizations and causes that shore up the wall between church and state and which defend the rights of non-believers. Instead, Hitchens has done
exactly the opposite.

Report this

By truedigger3, August 27, 2010 at 8:44 pm Link to this comment

Lefeller wrote:
“Germany was mostly Catholic, I would have thought otherwise, but I do not really know like TD3, who sounds as if he may have been there!
__________________________________________________

Yes, I was there. I lived in Germany for a whole summer about 45 years ago.
As I said, Hitler’s Germany was mostly Protestant with ratio of Protestants to Catholics two to one.
About the Zionist lobby versus the so called “Arab lobby”, I think the ratio is 10 to 0. Commonsense, if you have any, and awareness is the best judge of that.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 27, 2010 at 5:53 pm Link to this comment

“Does anyone have a clue how convoluted and contorted a belief system it takes to believe that?”; Nemesis wrote the above in regard to comments by Elsa,

Well in answer to the question, any person capable of reason would answer yes! ..... Though Convoluted and contorted seem way too polite definitions of what seems more like a pious self righteousness.  That is to say,  wearing blinders feeding their not housebroken dogmas; fanatics need to shove blind causes down any disagreeing persons throat!

Germany was mostly Catholic, I would have thought otherwise, but I do not really know like TD3, who sounds as if he may have been there!

We also know the Arab lobby is inconsequential in the grand scheme of things, especially in those minds already made up. Again, I do not know! One thing I do know,  The Leefeller lobby ain’t worth a crap, from the results I have seen!

Boy!..... How does one obtain the self deluded noble status of opinionated absolutist?  Garth, TD3 and of course Patrick Henry; such experts on everything!...... I ask Where in hell ...did this moronic trio attend classes in “Absolutism 101”?

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, August 27, 2010 at 2:45 pm Link to this comment

PatrickHenry, really we believe in non-belief? Well in a word—-no. You have to prove to us there is something there, we see that the universe functions without a “fifth wheel” as you and your believers accept without proof. There is no room for a preformed intelligence creating everything. Who created it? (Recursion problem.) Curious how your invisible deity retreats as the search for knowledge moves forward. Curious indeed.

For me it is a logical stance. I have no impulse to worship anything just respect the natural world for it keeps us alive. We are formed from it and will go back to it as time goes on. Despite Chesterton‘s canard that we have nothing solid in our minds so we are open to anything. However your point of view does leave it open to all kinds of things you must accept as real. Talking animals, a flood the encompassed the earth yet all the animals of the earth were represented on a small ship and somehow all that water drained away. It is mostly a-historical and is really myth* in the form of a play. You can call it historical fiction, where real things are mixed with the fantastic. The Bible, in all its chapters or books are written like a stage play by many hands, most go under one name, a pseudonym.

I like a challenge PatrickHenry so give an example of your hypothesis for us to dissect. Bring It On!!!

* Myths can have a historical basis like the Flood, but it can be distorted and exaggerated and rewritten over time.

Report this

By truedigger3, August 27, 2010 at 2:33 pm Link to this comment

nemesis2010 wrote:
“Hitler’s Germany was predominately Catholic and about 29% protestant.. ..”
__________________________________________________

nemesis2010,

You are wrong.! Hitler’s Germany was predominately Protestant with a ratio of Protestants to Catholics ROUGHLY two to one.
Your writing of an Arab Lobby that is comparable and competing with the Zionist lobby made me laugh so hard that I almost fell out from the chair. You are quoting the arch Zionist Dorswitch!!!???. Are you so naive or a bullshit artist??!! Thank you for the good laugh.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, August 27, 2010 at 2:15 pm Link to this comment

nemesis2010, August 27

Just get out of jail? I see you’ve been busy canning long winded baseless rhetoric, i.e. spam.

Aside from your idiotic diagnosis of make believe maladies, which I find much like your posts, proactive atheists and new atheists such as yourself are just members of a religion of a different stripe, a sect, cult or (dis)belief system and nothing more.

Regarding God, Hitchens doesn’t know but is too arrogant to admit it, you don’t know and neither do I.  Holy rollers vote, send contributions to their elected officials and follow the herd off the cliff, as long as they pay taxes and vote as the majority I’m afraid we’re stuck with them.

I’m no fan of lobbys either.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 27, 2010 at 1:51 pm Link to this comment

Christopher Hitchens is not completely amoral.  He would probably
agree that he was a smidgen amoral.  I would stake my life that each
human reserves a ‘bit’ of amorality.  But then that would be a lot of
people I’d have to survey (like over 6 billion and I’m just not up to
it).  But then morality is relative, isn’t it?  What universal morals, if
there were any, would he have violated anyway to qualify to be
amoral?  Mother Theresa dedicated her life for 45 years to the really
poor, the sick and dying.  If she took some missteps or stumbled as
a mere human well so what really?  Her missionary work left over 600
missions of hospices including for those with AIDS, leprosy, and
tuberculosis and more.  The fact that she may have privately doubted
her faith that became known publicly I think was nevertheless
extraordinarily brave. 

As the Wikipedia entry disclosed, privately, Mother Teresa experienced
grave doubts about religion and her beliefs.  She struggled dreadfully
over her religious beliefs which lasted nearly fifty years until her death,
during which “she felt no presence of God whatsoever”, “neither in her
heart or in the eucharist or the body of Christ that was injested in an
alleged communion with God.  Mother Teresa expressed deep and
abiding doubts about God’s existence and suffered great anxiety over
her lack of faith:  As she is quoted: “Where is my faith?  Even deep
down ... there is nothing but emptiness and darkness ... If there be God
—please forgive me. When I try to raise my thoughts to Heaven, there is
such convicting emptiness that those very thoughts return like sharp
knives and hurt my very soul ... How painful is this unknown pain—I
have no Faith. Repulsed, empty, no faith, no love, no zeal, ... What do I
labor for? If there be no God, there can be no soul. If there be no soul
then,  Jesus, You also are not true.”
  This is a remarkable indictment
about the pretensions of religion.

But hedging her bets, as did Pascal, she took the usual last rites as well
as permitted a cultish exorcism which is part of the insanity of the
Catholic Church doctrines.  Oh well.  She did do a herculean amount of
truly humanitarian work and should be given unlimited credit for it. 

If Hedges has never been amoral, or a hypocrite, let him strike the first
machete blow!

Report this

By elisalouisa, August 27, 2010 at 1:11 pm Link to this comment

Anyone who makes money ridiculing someone who has dedicated her life helping others and who cannot defend herself is amoral. That scotch that Hitchens drinks helps him to have the stomach for such verbal attacks. This provides a welcome break and also humor during his interviews and commentaries.  The fact that Mother Teresa is who she is makes her a perfect target; a woman, Catholic, elderly and gone, gone gone. Would such ridicule of a man be an humorous? Such derision also sends a clear message, don’t be like this woman because if you follow her footsteps you too will be torn apart. You don’t agree?  I don’t agree with many of your posts. This is not a popular subject and I am not on the side that most Truthdiggers are on. Nothing new under the sun.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, August 27, 2010 at 12:55 pm Link to this comment

nemesis2010 you do know that this goes from the bottom up so you put your carefully constructed points in reverse each time? One first then two… and it will be just fine.

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 27, 2010 at 12:14 pm Link to this comment

IV. (Screwed up posting… this follows the 3 below it)

For those of you who falsely believe that it’s just Israel that has an evil influence on our government, you’d better guess again. Check out Alan Dershowitz’s new book: “The Arab Lobby.”

Is it really necessary to post videos and articles about the Israeli lobby, influence and atrocities taking place in Palestine? I don’t think so.

As an atheist I want all of them out of the lobbying business… the Jews, the Muslims and the Christians.

I haven’t even scratched the surface. There is neither time nor space to address the religious violence taking place in the Buddhist and Hindu worlds. There’s neither time nor space to address the internecine violence within the different religious systems themselves—Iraq, Afghanistan, the Balkan States, the African nations, etc.

As for being part of the establishment: WTF? If you voted democrat you voted for and support the establishment! If you are a believer in any way, shape or form of any of the big 3 monotheistic religions you are the establishment.

Given all this plus the fact that atheists comprise a mere 2.5% of the world’s population and the so-called New Atheists only a very small, immeasurable, fraction of that, elisa and her ilk would have you believe that it is the New Atheists that represent the big threat to world peace.

Does anyone have a clue how convoluted and contorted a belief system it takes to believe that?

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 27, 2010 at 12:11 pm Link to this comment

I.

With regards to comments by elisa… geezeus! Where to begin? Elisa’s posts are like a large plate of spaghetti with sauce dripping off the sides. It’s a mess made with generic canned sauce purchased from Wal Mart on a clearance sale.

It would probably take about two complete chapters in a book to deal with all the cognitive dissonance, fallacy errors, red herrings and out right lies with respect to her comments on this one thread only.

One of the most obvious fallacy errors is elisa’s argument from verbosity. One gets a sense of desperation and frenzy with all that typing of excerpts of books and articles. The point of the verbosity argument is to overwhelm the opponent with feeble and/or erroneous data in an effort to avoid close scrutiny. And it works! Who the hell wants to pick apart all that bullshit? It would take hours and to what purpose? (Elisa… scan it, then process it through an OCR into text and save yourself a lot of time plus wear and tear on your fingertips.)

Another of elisa’s favorite fallacy errors is the argument from authority. Anything that the “authorities” cited by elisa say is automatically presented as gospel and thus indisputable. That’s the point of using the argument from authority. The “authorities” positions, comments, opinions, etc. are above criticism. 

She first resorted to an article by Chris Hedges where he stated that he thought Hitchens was amoral. I then provided evidence—in place of innuendo—that demonstrates that not only is Hitchens moral but that in many ways he holds to a much higher standard of morality than most religious adhere to –especially with regards to religion’s treatment of women.

Elisa then resorted to using a work by an author who, on the second page of his screed, admits to being biased, does not agree that the Christian world view is correct, and admits he isn’t a historian as her next “authority.” Her authority negates his own authority!

In short, David Bentley Hart’s “Atheist Delusions”—IMO—is nothing more than a rawhide chew for pets. It’s a metaphorical chew for the religious fanatics whose concern for the truth is secondary to ideology, dogma, creed, etc.

She then turns to Hitchens’ brother—with whom Hitch has much sibling rivalry—and automatically presents his position as the latest unquestionable authority. Anything that Hitch’s brother says is gospel and therefore proves Hitch’s positions wrong. No evidence, no structured argument, just authority.

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 27, 2010 at 12:08 pm Link to this comment

II.

By elisalouisa

” The Nazis also eliminated those who did not fit into their new world views. Genocide through our wars is accomplishing this. The New Atheists are hacks for the neocons who have helped bring about the wars we are engaged in and so-to-be wars in Iran and North Korea. The New Atheists are aggressive about crushing Christianity and setting up a new order.”

Statements like the above provide evidence of elisa’s “true believer fanaticism.” When you add to that her obvious problems with comprehension you’ve got what Lenin called a “useful idiot.” (I’m not calling elisa a useful idiot… that’s Lenin’s label of that type of true believer. I believe an ostrich provides a kinder, gentler metaphor)

What’s really interesting is that to believe that statement requires an incredible amount of “unbelieving.” There are so many logic fallacies, outright lies, and red herrings that it’s beyond the pale. No evidence to support the claims, no knowledge of New Atheists’ goals, and all those cognitive disconnects.

My contention has always been that the real threats that we humans face are not from those who do not believe in a deity but rather from true believers of every stripe. And—IMO—the most dangerous “true believer” is that one who has a political and religious ideological mix. Anyone who knows anything about history knows full well the Nazi weren’t atheists –quite the contrary. Hitler’s Germany was predominately Catholic and about 29% protestant, with only 1% atheist. Anyone who knows anything about history knows that the Roman Catholic Church not only embraced Hitler and Nazism but participated in the systemic imprisonment, torture and genocide of Serbs, Jews, and Gypsies in Nazi Croatia.

Here is the link for the first of seven videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=related&hl=en&v=pWGyTPu6UDE&gl=US

You’d do well to view all 7. This is religious fundamentalism teamed with political ideology working hand in hand. Nazi Germany was Christian nationalism, social conservatism, and fascist socialist ideology mixed into one of the deadliest poisons ever invented by Homo sapiens. Germans believed that Hitler was sent from god. For Zeus sake people; Germany was fighting “godless communism”! The Catholic Church couldn’t praise Hitler and Nazism enough. The New Testament is rife with anti-Semitism. Christianity is founded upon Jew on Jew hatred, it was old vs. new.

It wasn’t the New Atheists that had direct contact to the RNC and the Bush administration… it was believers like Ted Haggard, John Hagee, Pat Robertson, Rod Parsley, Bob Jones University, The Discovery Institute, James Dobson and Focus on the Family, etc. 

In what political party is one more apt to find an atheist, among the democrats or republicans?

It isn’t the atheists—not even New Atheists—who believe in the apocalypse and the rapture or that Islam is the religion of the anti-Christ and that Iraq is Babylon reborn and believes that Israel is entitled by the word of god to all of the so-called holy land or that the 12th imam is coming to set the world right and make it an Islamic paradise. That’s religious fundamentalism!

”Betrayal: German Churches and the Holocaust” by Robert P. Ericksen and Susannah Heschel

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 27, 2010 at 12:05 pm Link to this comment

III.

The following links will provide you with a look into the past right before the Iraq invasion. Watch all of the videos and listen very well to the rhetoric and decide for yourselves who backed the wars in “Babylon” and who saw Bush as a 21st century messiah. If you watch them you’ll see that it is the “Christian Church” that believes the anti-Christ lives and is—at present—a Muslim determined to take control of the world. It is Islamic believers that believe in a 12th imam and the end of the world is soon to be. It’s the Jews that believe the words in an ancient text grants them rights to lands that have been occupied by others for 2 millennia and who wait for the arrival of their messiah.

It’s not atheism—the not believing in a deity—that is promoting divine exceptionalism. It’s religion, it’s nationalism, it’s fanaticism, it’s ideology and dogma and creeds! And it isn’t atheists electing the extremists in different parts of the world. It’s the religious. Atheists simply haven’t the numbers.

The following is a 7 part interview of John Hagee by Glen Beck. Listen very well to the comments. Pay attention to the rhetoric from the Islamic side also… they’re discussing Ahmadinejad’s U.N. speech. (I’ve only provided the link for the 1st part. Do yourself a favor and listen to all of the crazy.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOsYSwNrlBo&feature=search

In all of these videos you must consider the absolute certainty maintained by these prophets of dumb and doom. You must also consider that neither they nor the dupes in their flocks remember any of the innumerable “false prophecies.”

This is Hagee’s opinion of the Shrub:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jP4PIQXUOLY&feature=related

Note “the spirit of this one” comment speaking of the “spirit of war.” Atheists don’t believe in ghost and goblins and witches and evil spirits… it’s the religious that believe all that crazy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qT8GW4F1u6Y&feature=related

BTW… Hagee has a 19,000 member congregation and millions more from his radio and TV programs and is heavily involved with AIPAC. Hitchens, meanwhile, is reviled throughout the nation! Which do you suppose has the votes required to “influence” policy? Hinn has a jeebus cures all except real disease and amputees scheme that sucks riches from the pockets of multimillions world-wide. Which of the two—Hitch or Hinn—do you suppose carries the weight of influence that make politicians wet their panties?

Here’s the Berean’s point of view about what is taking place in the world. Notice their love for their Catholic brothers in Christ:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsOV7wZ8kVo&feature=related

and their conclusion as to who is the “Whore that sits upon the dragon.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5Ke7Tn3uOU&feature=related

Perhaps some of you will recall John McCain embracing this man and calling him his spiritual leader…

You really need to listen to all 7 parts… the crazy just keeps getting better.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5Ke7Tn3uOU&feature=related

Who is it that wants war as a part of their BELIEF (as opposed to NON-belief) system?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5Ke7Tn3uOU&feature=related

Pots calling kettles black:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgL8FDUtkWQ&feature=fvw

And here is a great example of the other side… the other religion of peace:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-yJp4EcZJA&feature=related

Reaction over a cartoon in Europe!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-IIU-Ekd3w

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 27, 2010 at 12:03 pm Link to this comment

IV.

For those of you who falsely believe that it’s just Israel that has an evil influence on our government, you’d better guess again. Check out Alan Dershowitz’s new book: “The Arab Lobby.”

Is it really necessary to post videos and articles about the Israeli lobby, influence and atrocities taking place in Palestine? I don’t think so.

As an atheist I want all of them out of the lobbying business… the Jews, the Muslims and the Christians.

I haven’t even scratched the surface. There is neither time nor space to address the religious violence taking place in the Buddhist and Hindu worlds. There’s neither time nor space to address the internecine violence within the different religious systems themselves—Iraq, Afghanistan, the Balkan States, the African nations, etc.

As for being part of the establishment: WTF? If you voted democrat you voted for and support the establishment! If you are a believer in any way, shape or form of any of the big 3 monotheistic religions you are the establishment.

Given all this plus the fact that atheists comprise a mere 2.5% of the world’s population and the so-called New Atheists only a very small, immeasurable, fraction of that, elisa and her ilk would have you believe that it is the New Atheists that represent the big threat to world peace.

Does anyone have a clue how convoluted and contorted a belief system it takes to believe that?

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 27, 2010 at 12:00 pm Link to this comment

I.

This thread has taken a curious turn. What I find most interesting is how the reactionaries have acted exactly as historical evidence predicts with respect to fanaticism and true believers.

Reading garth and elisa’s comments one gets a peek inside the minds of ideologues. In their comments are all the proofs one needs to verify the truth that to ideologues evidence is secondary or totally unimportant to the ideology. What matters to an ideologue is the ideology, the dogma, the creed, the propagation of the belief system –the truth be damned!

I’ve counted about 15 or so logic fallacies and cannot take the time to pick apart all of the errors in their so-called reasoning because it would require far too many 4,000 character posts to do it; especially with elisa’s—because of her argument from verbosity—which interests me most. It would make for an interesting read though.

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 27, 2010 at 11:58 am Link to this comment

II.

I’m going to point out a few of the errors and perhaps others can reread the commentary and locate logic fallacies on their own.

With garth we see a lot of foundational bias, ad hominem, hasty generalization, non sequitur, personal incredulity, argument from ignorance, and two techniques which are not really logic fallacies; the red herring and the outright lie.

A couple of examples:

”A person who is 66 and who is an ex-marine and whose father died when he was 10, and who suppored his mother with his pay check from the Marine Corps, does not sound like that.”

The 3 most obvious fallacies here are personal incredulity, false premise, and foundational bias. He also uses the outright lie technique.

Where is it written that former marines have to fit into garth’s (as well as that of PatrickHenry and Truedigger3) ill-conceived and laughable mold? Don Knots was a former marine as was Lee Harvey Oswald and I wonder how does Oliver North, fit into garth’s mold?

The outright lie is that I said I supported my mother. What I said—and it’s easily verified—was that one of my “intentions” when I joined was to be able to “help” support my mother. I then stated that I hadn’t realized that $80 a month wouldn’t get it. (Please… I don’t remember what the exact pay for a private was back in 1965. It wasn’t much.)

Report this

By nemesis2010, August 27, 2010 at 11:55 am Link to this comment

III.

”Just watch where he is goes with his arguments, and, also, does he question the historicity of Moses or the rest of the Patriarchs? I haven’t read a word about that.
In this case, the game is to keep Iran in the the focus.  Notice, the Arab emphasis has diminished.  The Iranians are Persian.
In the end, the only business of these people is WAR.  It’s like the announcement of a new product. As General Smedly Butler entitled his book, “War is a Racket”.”

There are too many fallacies and use of the outright lie and red herring to point them all out. But we now have a clue for garth’s vision of what every former marine should be… Smedley Butler!

His remarks about Moses and the patriarchs are a red herring, hasty generalization, and a probability argument (a sophisticated straw man) as well as a set up for false premise, foundational bias, etc. Those familiar with the Hitch-22 article know full well that I believe the entire Old Testament (as well as any other so-called holy book) to be a fabrication. I have also stated, many times, that there is no archeological evidence to substantiate the exodus story –including the supposed enslavement of Hebrews in Egypt. 

How can one be an atheist and believe the Old Testament? DUH!

Iranians are Persians. I know Iranians who, when asked, say they are Persians not Iranians. The use of the term Persian in place of Iranian was for the benefit of the dumbed-down Americans who think that all Muslims from the Middle East are Arabs. Look at the disconnect in reviling me for having substituted Persian for Iranian then accusing me of attempting to keep the focus on Iran.

How many times have I stated that I was against the Iraq invasion? Many times! But it’s irrelevant in garth’s world because truth and evidence have nothing to do with ideology. Everyone who doesn’t hold to an ideologue’s contorted view of reality belongs to the same camp. There cannot exist—at least in an ideologue’s mind—anyone who can realize that whether pro or con with respect to Bush War II the can of worms was opened and we cannot change that fact. Garth’s comments make it clear that he is more interested in blaming and criticizing rather than addressing the much more important issue of what are the options and considerations and what are the best possible solutions to resolve the Iraq crisis.

Garth, like PatrickHenry and Truedigger3, appears to be suffering from trilateral pyramidion reptilius nibiruous syndrome.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, August 27, 2010 at 11:04 am Link to this comment

Sorry Leefella but the Touretts-Godwinning of Adolf Hitler must be stopped. Especially since there are bigger, badder (by degree) mass murders out there that are also safely dead. Like Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot and Hirohito for starters. I’m sure there are many others up to this day. So give them some publicity please?

Hitchens may be brilliant but that is a neutral characteristic and is separate from a person’s morality. Just as you can be a scholar of the American Constitution/Bill of Rights and still be a Machiavelli. Just look at what Obama has done with his knowledge of it and his connexions to the Left.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 27, 2010 at 10:01 am Link to this comment

Yeah, and then there is Ronald Raygun’s son, Michael, Sieg Heil, on
a Republican TV ad asking people to write in to stop the ending of the
tax breaks for the wealthy!  I think the Democrats need to get their
poopy together to fight fire with fire.  They need a write in campaign
to end the Bush tax cuts.  They do not reinvest any thing they save
from those tax breaks, if they did for the last 10 years from the Bush
boon, this country would not be in the deep financial hole it is in.  Yeah,
that and not having gone to Iraq preemptively and 10 years later when
the War Industrialist have swiped all of the US Treasury’s money.  Such is
Ronald Reagan’s mortality and amorality.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 27, 2010 at 9:33 am Link to this comment

Lets change the name of Mother Teresa to Adolf Hitler. The argument it is amoral to criticize any demised person seems ridiculous.  So the idea is, dieing excuses any historical figure,  hiding behind the fact they are demised from any…. criticism?

Thus, it would be construed Amoral to criticize or make fun of Adolf Hitler, well…. now that he is dead and cannot defend himself.  Maybe I should also keep from voicing my opinions of disagreement against Ronald Regan’s supporters and their proclamations regarding his great acting abilities.

Report this

By elisalouisa, August 27, 2010 at 8:02 am Link to this comment

When Mother Teresa received the Nobel Prize some years back I had my reservations Night-Gaunt. It was as suspicious as electing a Polish Cardinal the Pope amid all the struggle between the USSR and what was called the free world. Suddenly, through the promotion of Mother Teresa,  private charity was the thing, government should be out of social programs. The money really started rolling in after she received the Nobel Prize. The Vatican being the head of such Orders as Mother Teresa’s has a say as to how donations are allocated. Again, Mother Teresa was used. Perhaps not enough was given to those in need. Most sisters who choose to remain in an Order must follow the dictates of the Vatican, either that or leave. Mother Teresa agreed to use monies donated to set up more locations where the poor could be served. Is this so horrible? You must also remember that through the years Mother Teresa had been brain washed. Thus the reticence to distribute and discuss birth control methods. Yes, we do have a choice but that choice is limited because of who we are, our education, present circumstances and also inner being. As to her comments on suffering: Can there be total happiness or joy? Do not the wealthy suffer? There is something within that gnaws, a restless nature that cannot be denied, what you might call inner suffering that is part of life. You speak of it Night-Gaunt, although not in those exact words. The Right Wing used her to promote private charity, the Vatican used her to increase donations and also promote their agenda and Christopher Hitchens dealt the final thrust of the sword through her heart with his verbal abuse. Sister Teresa could delude herself about the first two traitors, the third thrust of the sword, Christopher Hitchens’  savage comments, could not and cannot be denied. The fact that Hitchens continues to use Mother Teresa’s name for a laugh, when she no longer can defend herself,  reveals more about Hitchens than it does about Mother Teresa and also puts me in agreement with Chris Hedges’ comment that Christopher Hitchens is amoral.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, August 26, 2010 at 5:33 pm Link to this comment

Of course Hitchens expose of her was done while she was still alive. That she looked at suffering as necessary which is why with the millions of dollars she got she didn’t alleviate such long term agony of those in her care.

In 1950 President Harry S. Truman wanted to dissolve the Marine Corps and integrate them into the regular military. [Not sure of the details but as we all know it didn’t happen.]

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, August 26, 2010 at 4:44 pm Link to this comment

Leefeller

“Anyway, their is homeless guy who walks around with a shopping cart, he has a large sign plastered on the side of the cart with a small American Flag flapping from a broom stick, the sign says;  “Former:with “Ex” crossed off; Marine and Vietnam Vet””

Not a fellow Marine heh, some esprit de corps you have there. I hope you bought him lunch and showed him some respect.

Its a sad day when a veteran, down on his luck and obviously suffering from a mental illness is mocked by one of his so-called comrades in arms.

I guess you were too busy being a celebrity pumber at Aardvark day to give a shit.

Keep digging, your almost there.

Report this

By elisalouisa, August 26, 2010 at 2:30 pm Link to this comment

As to liberating women in other countries I would say that it would have to start with the men and women that live in those countries whose policies discriminate against women. It would help to have a leader, preferably a woman, dedicated to that cause.  Education of women that includes their right to vote and living in a system of government where all are encouraged to participate. There must be leaders who point out the injustice that is taking place. Women must demand that they have an equal voice. It is not an easy fight for men do not easily relinquish any power they may hold. In many societies women are not admired for the qualities of womanhood. Ridicule of persons such as Sister Teresa demeans all women for she is attacked for qualities that are part of womanhood, namely, nurturing. When Mother Teresa feeds the poor and sick she is nurturing. Yet powerful men take it upon themselves to demean the simple act of helping others.
Could there be an easier target than Sister Teresa, especially considering the fact that she has been dead for 13 years.

Report this

By elisalouisa, August 26, 2010 at 2:17 pm Link to this comment

Afghanistan has been invaded for its strategic location and resources as is indicated below.
Quotes from The Syndicate by Nicholas Hagger
Afghanistan is another country attacked for its strategic location and resources.
There have long been rumors that the Taliban were created in 1994 by the CIA and Pakistan. If this is so, it can now be seen that the US and Pakistan created the Taliban as a strong force that would guard the oil and gas piplines they envisaged building between the former Soviet republics and Pakistan-hence the Taliban’s visit to Unocal.
The US and British governments plan to control the Caspian’s oil and gas. To the west a pipeline has to cross Chechyna. To the south, as Iran is hostile it has to cross Afghanistan, which is therefore critical to the Anglo-American plan. It was reported in the American Free Press of January 21, 2002 that
the US have established military tent bases in 13 locations in nine countries encircling Afghanistan and the Caspian, including Bulgaria, Uzbekistan, Turkey and Kuwait. The Arab media have seen the development of these bases as an American plan for hegemony and control of the region.
According to the American Free Press October 8, 2001 Unocal plan to build a 1,030-mile Central Asian Oil Pipeline from Chardzhou in Turmenistan, via Russia’s Siberian oilfield pipeline, to Pakistan’s Arabian coast. This would run parallel to the gas pipeline through Afghanistan and branch off in Pakistan to the Indian Ocean terminal in Ras Malan. Unocal top advisor during the negotiations with the Taliban to construct the
CentGas pipeline from Turmenistan through western Afghanistan to Pakistan was none other than Hamid Karzai, installed by the Bush Jr. Administration as the new rule of Afghanistan. He had links with the CIA and Bush Sr. while
fighting the Soviet Union in the 1980s.
****
Iran is next.

See link below as our role in the governments of other countries.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/US_Interventions_WBlumZ.html

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 26, 2010 at 12:07 pm Link to this comment

n the big town of Soggybits; (Which used to be named Soggytits, named after the large red light district by the courthouse, they changed the name after the church folks got their panties in an uproar!).  Anyway, their is homeless guy who walks around with a shopping cart, he has a large sign plastered on the side of the cart with a small American Flag flapping from a broom stick, the sign says;  “Former:with “Ex” crossed off; Marine and Vietnam Vet” Most of the time when I see him, he is wearing Marine Corps winter issue uniform and even seen him wear dress blues on special occasions like “Aardvark Day”. Sometimes he wears Marine Corps Utilities with different names stenciled on them.  He must have dug up my old seabag out of a tipsy dumpster, because, for a while he was wearing Utilities with the Name “Leefeller” stenciled on them.  Though, he seems not be the brightest bulb on the street, which reminds one of some people here on Truthdig, he does seem respectful and addresses everyone as sir including women, childern and pooches.  He seems to make his money by standing on street corners, with his hat out collecting money by playing the Marine Corps Hymn not very well on a Kazoo .......  Many people have asked him to play Far away, his standard reply is,......  “I don’t know that one”.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 26, 2010 at 7:24 am Link to this comment

Hello elisalouisa – ”Continual invasion of countries that have the
resources we desire and wish to control is really not the answer,
especially under the pretext of women’s lib.  You do not liberate
women by killing their husbands and children and destroying the
structure of everyday life in their communities.”
 

While I completely agree with you, except for Iraq, what other
countries are you talking about as the US having invaded for their
resources?  And do you think women who are subjected to the worst atrocities and enslavement ought to be championed at all?  If not,
why not?  If yes, then what would be the best way to be effective?

Report this

By elisalouisa, August 26, 2010 at 5:03 am Link to this comment

Hopefully, my world view is still evolving. Too often I have seen those who have everything really have nothing.  Our revered modern technology is responsible for the WMDs that may be used to eliminate those who do not fit into the future blueprint of global government.  Continual invasion of countries that have the resources we desire and wish to control is really not the answer, especially under the pretext of women’s lib.  You do not liberate women by killing their husbands and children and destroying the structure of everyday life in their communities.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 26, 2010 at 4:39 am Link to this comment

Well, Leefeller, you will have to produce, like Obama’s birth certificate,
proof of your having been a Marine! LOL   Semper fi!  (Just so you know,
I believe you! since the Conduit of the Great Unyun could not lie, not in
a million billion years!)

Report this

By truedigger3, August 26, 2010 at 4:35 am Link to this comment

Leefeller,

If you were a Marine in Vietnam, then you should have shown a level of seriousness, maturity and understanding of the realities of war which you utterly don’t have. All what are you showing is boring clowning.
You are a clown and a pretender through and through.!

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, August 26, 2010 at 3:29 am Link to this comment

Leefeller,  Some things you just don’t forget, like taking incomming.

Rifleman in Vietnam? Then you should know full well the difference between a grunt and a basic rifleman.

Your claim of being a Marine in Vietnam is not supported by your poor memory.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 25, 2010 at 10:10 pm Link to this comment

Patrick Henry, the rifleman thing came in kind of handy when I was in Vietnam, so what are you telling me?  Maybe this is why I prefer to call myself an ex Marine,.... hell I cannot even remember what I had for breakfast this morning, so I should remember something from 50 years ago?  What…. did you just get out of boot camp?  I remember that I had a sharpshooter badge and wore size 10w boots for what it’ss worth.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, August 25, 2010 at 6:05 pm Link to this comment

Leefeller,

Being a ‘former’ Marine, you should know the nuance but apparently don’t.  Within the Corps they deal with only one form of POG (pronounced pogue), not the 31 acronyms you guessed on and every Marine is a basic rifleman, not a grunt, like they teach you in boot camp.

And you have your suspicions, what a laugh.

Report this

By Night-Gaunt, August 25, 2010 at 8:59 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

You, Leefeller, Annoy-us-She-must,(Shenonymous) and Night-Gaunt are Froods, not even worthy of being called frauds.Garth

Froods? Definition please of this neologism? Before creating new words there are literally thousands out there that are not in use. Learn a few and widen your capacity to express ideas. Strengthen your mind. Push harder into areas that aren’t easy. I do as much as I can including here.

What exactly have I said that is fraudulent? Thems is fight’n words feller! Put up or shut up on that. I fight with words and ideas. Do you? Prove it.

The firs time I encountered you in a forum you went off halfcocked attacking me but apologized soon after. But now?

Concerning dying—-I came fairly close in 2006, the emergency room, Mom afraid I would die without giving my soul to “Christ” etc. But I pulled back from the brink. I had no intention of a dealth bed confessional. My blood was so viscous they couldn’t draw blood till they put 4 packets of saline solution in first. Stablized they kicked me out as per someone without health insurance. My family aided me in that. Still an Atheist. They have to prove it to me first is my criterion. Otherwise stay out of my pants, laws and gov’t!!!!

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 25, 2010 at 8:05 am Link to this comment

Yes Patrick Henery, it dost make sense, former wife would be one who passed away or left without a proper divorce proceeding, which then would be otherwise construed as an ex wife!

So since my wife ran off with the bible sales man, she is not an ex wife but instead a former wife?

Looking at the Marine Corps, one could say it does seem more proper to say former;  like a former girl friend compared to….. say an ex wife?

Though in some cases it could be proper to say Widower Marine?

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, August 24, 2010 at 3:46 pm Link to this comment

Leefeller,

Former Marine.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 24, 2010 at 2:58 pm Link to this comment

Well Night Gaunt from one brain dead person to another, I agree with the idea of considered analysis and criticism of others points with constructive comments,..... which is necessary for information exchange. Though this is something I would prefer to see or read, me thinks this may be a pipe dream.

As for toilet paper, in our neck of the woods those of us who are lucky use pine cones and consider ourselves lucky we don’t live in Death Valley!

It is possible to not agree with Hitchens on every issue or his assessment and opinions on everything, but I do enjoy his writing just as I find myself enjoying Nemesis’s comments and others.

How about this Garth or Trughdig3, could you possibly refute Nemesis on what points you feel so much contention on, instead of name calling, possibly you could make a counter point or two, though this may be more of a pipe dream!

Report this

By garth, August 24, 2010 at 12:15 pm Link to this comment

I’ve known a better mind than you are showing here. (You, no doubt, thought you knew many thing.) That wire must be giving you much psychic pain! (I am afraid I have no idea what you are referring to here.) You are treading stinky waters.  (Is that some kinfd of warning before a shot across the bow?)Be careful you are not sucked under by your own cheap shots and conceits.  (You’re one to talk about sucking.  You and LeeNut carry the spears for nemesis2010 in his assigned task to build up consensus for an attack on Iran.  You two are traitors to the country and to humanity.  Be gone!)
They are fatal (Is this some kind of threat?)anchors.  Parrying with small minds like yours will not be my agency of action. You, madam or whatever you are do not have a mind.  You gave up that gift long ago.  You are the result of intelligent design.  Like a wasp that lives and dies and shows no behaviour, so to speak.  You are a disgrace to the time and money wasted on your education.

Finally.

Surely you have better things to do with your life?  Bye bye.  As I said with Leefeller, one can only hope.
———————————————————-

You must be between classes, on break, or just working a little OT for Boss.

You are a Queen Frood.  Not worthy yet of being a fraud.

And you talk about name-calling.  Now, you just shush, little girl.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 24, 2010 at 11:25 am Link to this comment

“Shenonymous, annoyusall, after a while, cuteness wears thin.” 

garth annoyingyouandyourilk, a thin, flat brain will most noticeably
be annoyed by my cuteness in nothing flat. You think I care?  You just
can’t keep up, boy.  You resort to pathetic infantile name-calling, I am
surprised.  I’ve known a better mind than you are showing here.  That
wire must be giving you much psychic pain!  You are treading stinky
waters.  Be careful you are not sucked under by your own cheap shots
and conceits.  They are fatal anchors.  Parrying with small minds like
yours will not be my agency of action. Surely you have better things
to do with your life?  Bye bye

Report this

By garth, August 24, 2010 at 11:17 am Link to this comment

“In conclusion, this is why I apologized above to the Imbecile TD3 and his fellow moron Garth, because I really do hate Imbeciles and Morons with a passion, this is a proclamation from one of the brain dead!
———————————————————
‘In conclusion’ one can only hope.

You, Leefeller, Annoy-us-She-must,(Shenonymous) and Night-Gaunt are Froods, not even worthy of being called frauds.

Go get the latest talking points, why don’t you.

Report this

By garth, August 24, 2010 at 10:50 am Link to this comment

Unfortunately, one’s primitive conditioning often keeps one (from, my addition) stepping in chickenshit.  And the older one gets the harder it is to unbind oneself from the ancient habit of walking barefoot or to find better shoes.

—————————————————————-

Yes, barefoot into chickenshit I walk, unsullied and unbowed.

Yes, ‘the older one gets the harder it is to unbind oneself’.  I use Sunflower seeds.  What is your recommendation?
——————————————————-
You continue where fools dare to tread,

“An editorial news magazine on TV the other day, 60 Minutes, (You pay attention to them?) discussed the dying of a breed of public journals, magazines and the fact that the electronic media is so much cheaper a way of doing what was their original intention of presenting points of view to the public
and though they did not say it, save the trees from the paper industry.  (Ho-hum.)

Yes, that is their point-of-view.  And I add theirs only.  Watch out for Net neutrality.  Unlees of course, you like to be bullshitted. Or ‘shat upon’.
————————————————————————
“Hey, we need the paper for toilet paper, as that is much more critical than glossy magazines. (They used to rely on the Sears Catalogue.) (She goes on) Indeed, needed more for critical thinking since the toilet is a place of great and deep thinking.  No doubt monumental thought that solved many of humanities problems occurred there when squeezing creative thoughts out as one squeezed out the contents of one’s bowels.

Shenonymous, annoyusall, after a while, cuteness wears thin.


What else you got?

 

Let’s face it, Shenonymous, you don’t think.  You react.  You forte is creative writing, or uncreative writing.  It grabs and flailingly stabs.

If you want to carry water for these people, come out and say so.

You imprimatur to Jeffry Golberg; (nemesis2010) led me to doubt your sincerity.

Daye’s (unregistered commenter) remark supporting nemesis2010, which followed my reaction, was simpley unshameful self-promotion.

Stayin’ alive seems to be the mode.

Report this

By Night-Gaunt, August 24, 2010 at 9:51 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I too come from a divergent world view than elisalouisa but agree with her in that it is the people’s selves who must be looked at first, then their theosophy or philosphy of life. Mine is first and foremost Humanism. The act of being friends and helpers to all Humanity. Such pan-altruism is separate from religion or lack thereof, and is necessary. Without it one is just a machine-like monster where no horror or depredation of others will be limited in their minds to achieve their goals—by any means. Whether it is a Constantine or Mao, Stalin, Mussolini, Tojo, Hitler, or any other king, emporer, president, premier or despot will be so crue. Morality and personal rights of others are fictions to them, alien concepts they find anathema to their world view. The natural psychopath is an example.

I follow the Anarchist ideal of Kropotkin and the Evolutionary function of Mutual Aid. He saw it in Nature and it guided his philosophy of life. It is a good and positive one we need now more than ever in an increasingly harsh and crowded planet.

I get no joy from the simplistic and egotistical attacks of others errors by some. (This is vastly different from considered analysis and criticism of others points which is necessary for information exchange.) It does no real good even to the parasites that feed off such rancore for their own sick pleasures. I hope it will end. I will not contribute to it if I can.

Maybe in a week I will get my computer back so I won’t have to go to the library anymore.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 24, 2010 at 8:43 am Link to this comment

Setting the “So Tic” aside…
Unfortunately, one’s primitive conditioning often keeps one stepping
in chickenshit.  And the older one gets the harder it is to unbind
oneself from the ancient habit of walking barefoot or to find better
shoes.

An editorial news magazine on TV the other day, 60 Minutes,
discussed the dying of a breed of public journals, magazines and the
fact that the electronic media is so much cheaper a way of doing what
was their original intention of presenting points of view to the public
and though they did not say it, save the trees from the paper industry. 
Hey we need the paper for toilet paper, as that is much more critical
than glossy magazines. Indeed, needed more for critical thinking since
the toilet is a place of great and deep thinking.  No doubt monumental
thought that solved many of humanities problems occurred there when
squeezing creative thoughts out as one squeezed out the contents of
one’s bowels.

And when it comes to hubris, why one will take any argument that
appears to support one’s justification for it.  But that does not justify it
in any case.  One does have to have a certain amount of necessary
pretension just to walk across the floor believing there to actually be a
there there.

And who knows how many will be murdered after “this” is over.  It is
funny how the future tense can be expressed by both before and after.

Actually, elisalouisa, I was not criticizing the practice of copy/paste and
I would not know except, now in retrospect, I notice that you ‘typed’
the texts you posted and the meaning of “The Typist” as a signature. 
Most texts are not available for copy/pasting anyway but if they are, it
is a boon to copy/paste as there is less chance for mistakes.  I am sorry
you had to suffer that arduous physical exercise, but on the other hand,
it is an excellent way to commit to memory the contents of what is
considered worth learning. There are various ways of learning intricate
material, and writing is one way.  I learn best by writing, having to read
and reread several times if I want to try to memorize the material that
way.  The synapses of my brain type is conditioned towards writing. 
Some people learn by hearing lectures, others only through illustrations
or through the metaphoric, albeit poetical.  Yes you have as is expected
respectfully given credit to authors.  And it should be noted because
there are those who selectively tend to forget. Thank you for the link to
the Goldberg variation (ha, a wordplay on some of Bach’s works though
I highly doubt this Goldberg attains the height of a Bachian).  I will
watch it for Goldberg’s missteps, right?

Not true, truedigger3.  The Leefeller remains the only real comic on
Truthdig and continues to shuffle in the shadow of Carlin and provides
much needed intermissions, in spite of the many beers he enjoys, to
the tripe that too often shows up in commentaries.  Contrary to what
you might think, many look forward to his esoteric wisdom that is
concealed among what only on the surface appears as humor.  Not all
are capable to appreciate it.  Speak only for yourself as your habit of
sheltering yourself within an inclusive “we” is an obvious beggarly
defense.

Report this

By truedigger3, August 24, 2010 at 8:05 am Link to this comment

Leefeller,

You are insisting on being a clown, unfortunately you are not funny anymore and peole are not laughing but expressing derision and disgust. Lay off the hooch and try to find a different job or just beg in the streets.

Report this

By garth, August 24, 2010 at 7:35 am Link to this comment

In keeping with the current speech tic,  beginning every sentence with ‘so’.

‘So’, the fact that Rudyard’s, nemesis2010, writings does not correlate with his writings as they appear in the Atlantic has little weight.  Most, if not all, articles that appear in these journals and especially the ones written by young writers like Goldberg, are heavily edited.

A friend who used to write for the Boston University Sociology Journal told me that he was shocked after he turned in his first study on how the Boston police force treated the homeless, which he said was painstakenly written, only to find out that the writing in the article that was finally printed in the journal bore no resemblance to what he’d written.

It went through a rigorous editorial process.

Which brings me to another opinionated conclusion.

Magazines like the Atlantic are dying.  So, instead of paying writers, they probably accept payment FOR writers from groups who want to further their agendas.  In this case, it’s Israel and the American War Lobby.

When Jeffrey Goldberg (the pudgy curmudgeon wannabe) is allowed such forums as the Atlantic Magazine and Meet the Press to skate through the contradictions in his arguments and plant the seed for American approval of an attack on Iran, then I think it’s high time to settle someone’s hash.

Yes, I have a high opinion of my opinion.  As Sting and Martin Amis point out, pretension is a necessary and good thing for those who want to let their opinions be known.

But, in the meantime, pass the canolis.  Who knows how many more will be murdered before this is over.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 24, 2010 at 7:13 am Link to this comment

It seems the practice of character assassination runs dear to those who would rather not discuss a point of which they may find some disagreement.  As an observer on this thread for some time now, I feel it would be nice if some posters would state their opinion or contention instead of name calling. So in this light I apologize for saying Garth has his head up his ass, and please let me apologize for calling Trughdigger 3 a schmuck and Imbecile and of course I apologize to my fellow ex-Marine Patrick Henry for being a not so smart grunt.

As for atheism,  new or old; my opinion is it should be kept to ones self in the scheme of things, sort of like other personal preferences, such as sexual proclivities or Religious beliefs; well in ones daily life anyway! But, here on this thread we should be able to discuss our differences in some sort of civil way, bringing these differences out in the open, as things to play with.

If I recall, elisalouisa or it may have been another poster and I agreed to respect each others beliefs or the right to have those beliefs.  Not sure if I support the opinion that religion kills everything, but religion sure does not seem to have very nice track record. 

Sadly the fanatics or those who feel the need to support blind causes, prefer not to see any agreed respect of opinions, for them it is all or nothing.  Since I believe in the freedom of speech,  the concept and idea in which people should try to seek harmony and embrace differences with open arms,  rather than decisive name calling. 

In conclusion, this is why I apologized above to the Imbecile TD3 and his fellow moron Garth, because I really do hate Imbeciles and Morons with a passion, this is a proclamation from one of the brain dead!

Report this

By elisalouisa, August 23, 2010 at 10:03 pm Link to this comment

Actually, I really didn’t copy/paste, I typed excerpts from Atheist Delusions or Chris Hedges columns, as the case may be,  ones I most agreed with and in that sense I more readily absorbed what was written. Also, I always credited the author.I have a MacPro notebook which I can take with me so in some ways it was fun. Perhaps I should say, is fun. grin It ain’t over till it’s over.
A link to Jeff Goldberg and his Meet the Press roundtable Sunday. Once you get to the website you can scroll down, the caption in the video window is Iran Iraq war or something similar. Hope it works.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/vp/38806214#38805895

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 23, 2010 at 8:35 pm Link to this comment

Well let me tell you something, you might be right, garth, but
extolling the tricks of a novelist is trivial.  Because someone uses
effective language it is cause sometimes for those whose language is
on the mediocre side to try to reduce the one who is articulate down
to their own lesser ability.  Setting aside its content, for that could be
debatable and which it should be and should be the only thing that is
debatable, he is being demeaned for things other than what he says. 
And besides, you have not argued against his points, you have argued
that nemesis2010 is what you imagine him to be.

Apparently you have developed a propensity for an exaggerated self-
opinion which made you think you could say so cavalierly that Night-
Gaunt and Leefeller were brain-dead implying self-righteously that
what you think you know is better than what they do.

”In expository writing, the person doing the writing has a much more
difficult problem hiding behind a string words that form sentences and
sentences that form paragraphs.”
 

Perhaps, but no one is breaking the novelist’s arm to be the exposer
and often their logic is full of flaws, fallacies.  And if they are based on
fallacies, then someone needs to be able clearly to show it instead of
simply dogmatically declaring that it is the case.

”You might like his atheism, but that might be a clue as to what
sounds like ‘Critical and Creative Thinking’ to you.”

You sound bitter.  It is ridiculous to censure me for someone else’s
beliefs.  Do you wish to diminish me because I find his writing better
than, say, yours?  If you want to be relevant, start analyzing better, for
at the moment you are just an ordinary disgruntled glib blogger.

While I highly appreciate good and original writing, as that is my
profession, I frequently acknowledge it when I see it, and it might
coincide with some beliefs I have personally but that is a side issue.  If
you want to argue against my beliefs that is one thing, but to attempt
to minimize me because you have some kind of wire up where the sun
doesn’t shine, that is really a problem between you and the wire.
_______

I might not agree with elisalouisa, we have different world views, but
she has tenacity and whether or not she copy/pastes is irrelevant.  She
is giving examples of what someone else may be saying that expresses
what she thinks but that she might find difficult to do herself.  Not
every one is a clever novelist.  Long posts ought not to be a problem.
The concepts or issues can be complex. It is the content that is what is
important to be assessed and said why there is a defect in the premises
of the logic.  If anyone has ADS that is too bad and they ought to just
let their eyes glaze over or not bother with the thread.

Report this

By elisalouisa, August 23, 2010 at 6:39 pm Link to this comment

You are correct Garth, the business of some people on the blogs is war.  Personally, I think Truedigger 3 may be right in some of his conclusions. As to Jeffrey Goldberg, he’s not the greatest interviewer, nor round table participant. His writing doesn’t leave me begging for more either. Yet, he seems to
be in that inner circle of msm and perhaps other inner circles. His beliefs are put forward and the sheeple not knowing any better may believe what he tells them but certainly not because of his winning ways.
I have noticed for sometime Shenonymous, how helpful you have been when some have had problems with the everyday functions of posting, links, or whatever. You have always jumped in to help. I have been reticent to mention it before. So often on these threads there is nary a good word, only put downs, but I’m afraid that is the nature of the beast.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 23, 2010 at 5:37 pm Link to this comment

Who is who,....... seems now the most important question of the day, so this must mean one must ignore the message….. for it was deemed unacceptable and defined as drivel by the deciders’, so now the message has become what the self appointed deciders want it to be?

Suspect and suspicions, promoted by those getting their asses handed to them on a platter, seems most suspicious in its own right.

If indeed someone believes they are right about something especially those inclined to piousness or a healthy proclivity to self righteous it seems the normal manifestations of the world must stop turning and give pause, for the deluded seemingly for those acting so put off and bored actually themselves seem quite boring.

Now I must ask my brother Clyde’s girl friend, if she knows who the Nemesis really is, for my world will never be right if I do not!

May I suggest if ones dogma is not house broken, it may be prudent to watch where one steps!

Report this

By garth, August 23, 2010 at 4:16 pm Link to this comment

Their writing is very different.  A much
better critical observation is needed if an accusation of identity is being
charged.

Even though they are diametrically and fiercely opposed, elisalouisa
deals with what nemesis2010 says
———————————————————-
Let me tell you something.  There’s anothe dimension to a person’s writing than just the string of words.  Novelists know this and good ones use it effectively.

In expository writing, the person doing the writing has a much more difficult problem hiding behind a string words that form sentences and sentences that form paragraphs.  The logic is the loudest. 

I guessed the writer to be in his 30s, and I guessed the marines and the supporting his mother with $80 bucks a month were just objective correlatives to give him his bona fides.

A person who is 66 and who is an ex-marine and whose father died when he was 10, and who suppored his mother with his pay check from the Marine Corps, does not sound like that.

You might like his atheism, but that might be a clue as to what sounds like ‘Critical and Creative Thinking’ to you.

If you want to hear atheists, go to a beginner’s meeting of Alcoholics Anonymous.

Frankly, the argument is boring.

Report this

By garth, August 23, 2010 at 3:57 pm Link to this comment

In their world, the ends justify the means. 

I’d call it, Imposterville.


Just watch where he is goes with his arguments, and, also, does he question the historicity of Moses or the rest of the Patriarchs? I haven’t read a word about that.

A writer of a Truthdig blog visited the comments before.  Except in that case, the one I witnessed, the blogger identified himself and reponded in an intelligent manner, sans the namecalling.

In this case, the game is to keep Iran in the the focus.  Notice, the Arab emphasis has diminished.  The Iranians are Persian.

In the end, the only business of these people is WAR.  It’s like the announcement of a new product. As General Smedly Butler entitled his book, “War is a Racket”.

The US Defense Department and the Israeli homicidal government has brought this to full tilt.


Check out the locations for say. General Dynamics, one of the larger defense contractors. 

They are in every Congressional district in the country.  That way, all votes can be counted on to ensure a military build up and eventually a War.

Fuck the niceties like who believes in God, or god, and who doesn’t, what we’ve got here is a PR pincer movement to get all the Americans to say Yes to War and no to Common sense.

NB He said ‘no one reads me’.  Well, apparently he did. 


Let’s face it.  Logically speaking, the writer is schmuck.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 23, 2010 at 3:38 pm Link to this comment

Correcting lenses:
Jeffrey Goldberg, born in 1965, he is 45 years old.  nemesis2010
admitted to being 66.  Goldberg was not a US Marine, nemesis2010
says he was.  We have quite a few US Marines who post on Truthdig,
and they ought to be able to tell who is or is not present or former
semper fi.  Goldberg’s award winning journalistic political concerns
are fairly narrow, nemesis2010 shows only contempt for the ignorant
and brainwashed regardless of whether religious or non-religious and
he shows he is well-educated.  Their writing is very different.  A much
better critical observation is needed if an accusation of identity is being
charged.

Even though they are diametrically and fiercely opposed, elisalouisa
deals with what nemesis2010 says; and having read her last several
posts she does not ever attack his or anyone else’s person who
disagrees with her.  In spite of presenting excellent and sound
arguments, I have seen nemesis2010 as well as others blister her
character, and in my opinion this is not exemplary of principled
practice.  But I have also read others denigrate him.  While he is very
good at fielding such drivel, Leefeller’s character is often besmirched as
well.  The name-callers own character are diminished by those pathetic
remarks.  It would be noticeably adult to desist in the maligning of
other posters.

Report this

By elisalouisa, August 23, 2010 at 3:20 pm Link to this comment

You put me in good company Nem when you say in your post that neither I nor the author of the screed understands the prefix “a.“However that is neither here nor there. Please show me where I have written “godless atheism” and those “evil atheists.” My posts are about the New Atheists for reasons stated in my August 22 at 4:30 pm post and my other posts also. Atheist or Christian, it’s what’s in your heart that really matters but you
wouldn’t understand that.The Typist

Report this

By garth, August 23, 2010 at 11:19 am Link to this comment

Thimk! (sarcasm) as Watson used to remind his IBM employees.  What’s causing this imbroglio?  Did you pain yourself to watch ‘Meet the Press’ with David Gregory yesterday?  I did.

One of his guests was none other than our interviewer of Christopher Hithcens, Jeffrey Goldberg.

Ladies and gentlemen, I unmask nemesis2101 as Jeffrey Goldberg, writer for the Atlantic.

His goal is to steer the conversation to the point where everyone thinks they agree on one point:  Iran must be confined if not invaded.  And we, the slice of American life that pays any attention to blogs, will all come around to his (Israel’s) way of thinking.  Namely, Iran-Bad, Israel-Good.

It’s as simplistic as that.

With the critical eye and ear of Paul Gigot, the noted editor of the Wall Street Journal, at the same discussion, Goldberg’s sophomoric rambling eventually tied him into knots.  (It must be tough with a writing ability of an idiot savant and nothing at all to say, at least, nothing one can make sense of.)


Again I ask, Who sent this fool on this errand?

I think Jeffrey Goldberg is an example of the failure of the American education system, not the African-Americans who fail to graduate high school.

They, at least, have ‘Street smarts’ and common sense.

Jeff, mi’boy, you’re a mental bumbler.

Learn something.  Then, write about that. Maybe fly fishing.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 23, 2010 at 10:15 am Link to this comment

” You know She… there just might be something to this religion
thing…and with all that in mind… Go fetch me a drink woman!”

nemesis2010, I don’t do no windows and I don’t do no floors, and I
don’t fetch no stinkin nuttin’ fer nobody.  So go get your own f’n
drink. 

And Mrs. John Sanford can go straight to, way…ell, I’ll be a laidie,
and if and only if there was a hell.  Yes, Zinn was an amazing human
being, too bad there isn’t anyone filling that vacancy.  Or George
Carlin’s.  Edmund Burke was not completely wrong about a few things
but he was quite the misogynist and for that I have dumped him into
the Bastards Heap.  Ta da.

That being said, you are still the most well-spoken writer on the entire
Truthdig website and I always look forward to your detailed opinions
and responses in spite of what witless others might criticize.  One
needs only to objectively reflect instead of running to a subjective
retreat in a desperate search for redemption.  I know you don’t need
any approval from anyone, but I thought I’d say it anyway.  Setting the
record straight on atheism and who committed the most murder and
atrocities in the history of the world does unbelievers a great service,
and in the great spirit of Sam Harris and Chris Hitchens.

”If you are an individual sitting on the fence and not sure what to
believe, I recommend the Holy Bible. Read it from start to finish, just as
you would any other book, and if that doesn’t cause you to stop
believing… nothing will!”
 

I suggest the Qur’an as a second choice.  But it is predicated on reading
both texts with an unpolluted mind from centuries of dogma in either
tradition.

Report this

Page 3 of 6 pages  <  1 2 3 4 5 >  Last »

 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.