'A Shameless Degree of Outright Partisanship'
Mike Chimeri
I'd like to repeat something I said over at OlbyWatch because it relates to this:
Sadly, neither Oralmann nor any of the other radicals at MSNBC/NBC/CNBC/NBC Sports/NBC affiliates/NBC Universal/USA Network/GE/RCA (hell, they bleed into everything) are going anywhere. While most Americans can't stand them and want them gone so the brand can return to good standing, the screaming minority (as opposed to the silent majority) love them to bits. They're making money hand over fist over hand and everybody's talking about them. They're winning in the demo more often, especially on primary nights and the weekends. They're very satisfied. God help us.
And what's more, they have their middle fingers raised in unison as they say, "F*** those n**c** right-wing lunatic fringe warmongers! F*** Fox! F*** Bill O'Reilly!" I'll bet they're actually doing that.
May 24, 2008, 8:16:06 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
It's amazing that one man has single-handedly destroyed an entire brand. You can throw out names like Matthews, Abrams, and Shuster, but Olby is the ringleader.
May 24, 2008, 8:24:40 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
I had to think for a minute what swear word n**c** was. It's not a swear word, some people might even claim it proudly.
May 24, 2008, 8:31:07 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
I just don't like typing "neocon." I feel like it's an insult that the far-left (and Ron Paul) use to slam conservatives.
May 24, 2008, 8:45:24 PM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
It's (too often) a codeword for "Jews" too, which is why I shy away from it myself.
May 24, 2008, 8:53:02 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
Ron Paul is the truest conservative of them all by the non-neocon definition of conservative. Small fed gov't, low taxes, less social programs, more state and personal independence.
May 24, 2008, 9:00:28 PM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
Ron Paul would make a good Demolish the Federal Buerarcy Czar.
May 24, 2008, 9:04:39 PM EDT – Like – Reply
SteveMG
Ron Paul is the truest conservative of them all by the non-neocon definition of conservative
He's not a conservative by any definition I know.
He's a libertarian who wishes to have a radical change in government.
Radicalism is simply not conservatism. By any definition - Edmund Burke's on down.
May 24, 2008, 9:05:18 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
Why did I bring him up? Let's get back to how KO sadly isn't going anywhere and the things I said in the first two comments here.
May 24, 2008, 9:09:45 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
The only change RP wants is to turn back the radical changes that liberal republicans and liberal democrats have put in place over the years. You know, the massive fed, massive spending, wasteful beaurocracy we have now. Conservatives by definition are not for those things, but the neocons don't mind them so much. That is the difference between a conservative and a neocon.
May 24, 2008, 9:17:46 PM EDT – Like – Reply
david smawley
Once you give the Paulbots an opening, good luck in getting them to just go away. Kinda like Pandora's Box on Crack.
May 24, 2008, 9:18:57 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
Don't call me a Paulbot and I won't call you an idiot who's been duped by the political system. Agreed?
May 24, 2008, 9:23:58 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
I've ruined this thread. I'm very sorry.
May 24, 2008, 9:24:32 PM EDT – Like – Reply
SteveMG
You know, the massive fed, massive spending, wasteful beaurocracy we have now
To undertake what he advocates would be the most radical transformation in our lives.
No conservative would undertake such a massive and radical change.
Every true conservative who wishes to diminish the size and scope of government recognizes that such a change has to be done incrementally and over time.
To try to undertake this overnight would lead to massive social upheaval and chaos.
Something that no real conservative would ever dream of letting happen.
May 24, 2008, 9:27:57 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC!!! Thank you very much.
May 24, 2008, 9:28:45 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
I'll grant you that point SteveMG, Paul is a radical. His intentions, however, are spectacular and honorable.
May 24, 2008, 9:31:50 PM EDT – Like – Reply
SteveMG
I'll grant you that point SteveMG, Paul is a radical
Well, that's my point.
His goals may be conservative; but his approach as to how he plans to attain his goal is radical.
And how one enacts an agenda, it seems to me, is an important as what is being enacted.
Let's move on now 'cause everyone is bored to tears, I'm sure.
May 24, 2008, 9:36:37 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
The end. End of story. No more talking about him. Are we clear?
Keith Olbermann, discussed on "Fox News Watch," I say he's sadly not going anywhere and is single-handedly destroying GE, NBC, etc. And...discuss.
May 24, 2008, 9:37:39 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
The end. End of story. No more talking about him. Are we clear?
Keith Olbermann, discussed on "Fox News Watch," I say he's sadly not going anywhere and is single-handedly destroying GE, NBC, etc. And...discuss.
May 24, 2008, 9:37:39 PM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
I've ruined this thread. I'm very sorry.
Mike Chimeri
It's ok. I ruined the Tornado thread.
May 24, 2008, 9:37:55 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
Nobody ruined any threads, we're here for political disscussion right? Are we not all here as friends of J$? Apologies to david smawley.
May 24, 2008, 9:56:50 PM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
Hear that Mike. you ruined this thread by falsely thinking you ruined it.
j/k
May 24, 2008, 10:21:22 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
We're here for cable news discussion. This site is about cable news.
I did ruin the thread. I bring up one name and people rush to that person's defense. Then, another one of those ideological cage matches ensues.
Did anybody even watch the clip? I saw it as "Fox News Watch" was airing, albeit on a live delay on my DVR.
May 24, 2008, 10:39:53 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
Politics are a large part of cable news. What are the usual topics of discussion here? Republicans, democrats, liberals, and conservatives. I watched the clip, and the show (delay on my DVR too). E.D. was a great host on FNW!
May 24, 2008, 10:56:33 PM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
I thikn the person who decided the background color for the news crawler did a great job!
May 24, 2008, 10:58:51 PM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
Can anyone make me aware of what specifically the White House objected to in NBC's editing of the interview?I mean, I assume it's common practice to edit an interview so you can show clips on other shows.What changes were made to Mr Bush's words or intent?
As for the broader issue,I don't think this will be a winner for the Administration.Perhaps the base will be mobilized but to what purpose with 7 months to go. There is no 'Great Silent Majority" to which Nixon appealed.And look at how that worked out for him.
May 24, 2008, 11:07:34 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
You mean President Bush, nvh? Also, why are you comparing Nixon to Mr. Bush?
/see what I did there?
May 24, 2008, 11:24:49 PM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
Fox Fan | 05.24.08 - 11:29 pm |
Loosely comparing,in the sense that campaigning against the press wasn't a winner.
What did you do there?
May 24, 2008, 11:28:04 PM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
> we're here for political disscussion right?
Um, not exactly. It's a cable news thread, and I would ask that it not get diverted into a poiitical smorgasboard. I realize that some disgression is inevitable but would like to keep the main focus on cable news.
That's what I get for allowing myself a break to watch a movie!
PS: The biggest can of worms is always Ron Paul. If the Pauliacs get wind of anyone speaking ill of him you won't be able to get a word in edgewise!
May 24, 2008, 11:28:12 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Grammie
" I had to think for a minute what swear word n**c** was. It's not a swear word, some people might even claim it proudly.
Fox Fan | 05.24.08 - 8:36 pm | # "
On my third time around it hit me like a lightning bolt:
NEOCON
I have a big problem with that word b/c I think it is code from the left (as they have accused conservatives for years of having rascist code words) for Jew. Over my lifetime both the lessons I have learned about the historical background and record of Jews coupled with the history of the West's treatment from 1933 thru 1945 and even the present day has left me totally sensitized to the most disguised antisemetism.
May 24, 2008, 11:30:51 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
>If the [supporters of the person] get wind of anyone speaking ill of him you won't be able to get a word in edgewise!<
I brought him up when Bob Beckel spoke ill of him in a "Fox and Friends" clip on here two weeks ago. It was Bob and Mike Gallagher.
But anyway, thanks for restoring order, Johnny. Now, I'm going to watch the Behind the Break segments on FOXNews.com.
May 24, 2008, 11:40:53 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Gen Escape Goat- Old Style Dry
"I have a big problem with that word b/c I think it is code from the left (as they have accused conservatives for years of having rascist code words) for Jew. Over my lifetime both the lessons I have learned about the historical background and record of Jews coupled with the history of the West's treatment from 1933 thru 1945 and even the present day has left me totally sensitized to the most disguised antisemetism.
Grammie | 05.24.08 - 11:35 pm | # "
And I'd believe you if it wasn't for the fact that Jews overwhelmingly vote Democrat.
May 24, 2008, 11:42:08 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
Notice how I'm not mentioning that person's name whose supporters jumped in here. If I say his name, they'll come back. I can't risk that.
May 24, 2008, 11:42:21 PM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
I assume that the label neocon has been used to differentiate "Conservatives"from the brand of conservativism that emphasizes foreign involvement and de-emphasizes fiscal dicipline.Goldwater and Buckeley would have been lost in todays Republican party.
Grammie,why would you think that neocon is a code word for Jews.Most Jewish people are pro-choice,liberal and traditionally voted Democratic.And most Jews are not Zionists. The two groups are not synonymous.
May 24, 2008, 11:42:32 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
(sing-songy muttering): Stay on topic.
May 24, 2008, 11:47:37 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
I agree 100% nvh.
Neocons and traditional conservatives are different in exactly the respects that you describe.
I have also never heard of neocon being attributed to Jewish people, where does that come from?
May 24, 2008, 11:48:01 PM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
For a while neocon was code word for a group of specific Zionist Israel-supporting Jews who were associated with Bush 1st Term's admin.
That these Jews' true motivation was to use the United States for their goal of benefiting Israel as an end to itself. yadda yadda yadda... and other nonsense that Leftists invent.
I have a hard time accepting this new amnesia over its connotations.
May 24, 2008, 11:49:53 PM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
That comes from two factors: 1. so many of the people who get tagged as "neocons" just happen to be Jewish, and B. the antisemite/white supremacist fringe types who tend to rally around Ron Paul throw the word around all the time, and with them it's almost exclusively used to describes Jews.
I know when Olbermann references "neocons" it seems it's usually someone Jewish he's talking about. There, you see? It IS possible to discuss cable news.
May 24, 2008, 11:50:50 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
You know what? I give up. Go as off topic as you all want. I don't care anymore. I'll help in the driving: RON PAUL! That ought to do it.
May 24, 2008, 11:51:29 PM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
Oh no. Batten down the hatches.
May 24, 2008, 11:52:46 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
I wrote that before you commented, Johnny. Sorry. I still give up, though.
May 24, 2008, 11:54:38 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
1. The biggest figures tagged as neocons are the president, the vp, condi, and many other high-level NON-Jewish admin officials.
B. I know severlal Ron Paul supporters, none of which are white supremacists or "neocon" label bomb-throwers.
May 24, 2008, 11:54:43 PM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
The original and most orthodox definition of Neoconservative is , a group of 60's -type radical Leftists who came to realize that the philosophy of the Left did nothing to advance their causes or solve the problems that needed solving. Particularly in areas of human rights, democracy, etc..
Realizing the policies of the Left were in fact contributing to the problems they switched to a more conservative viewpoint.. thus they are neo-(new)-conservatives.
So the prerequiste for anyone being a Neocon is that they were first a vile Leftist.
May 24, 2008, 11:56:42 PM EDT – Like – Reply
ImNotBlue
One of the alleged attributes of the "neocon" is a strong alliance with Israel. And while NVH suggests that most Jews are not Zionists (not sure how he/she arrived at that conclusion), that is not necessarily true. Most Jews, even if they don't believe whole-heartedly in the Zionist cause, do believe that Israel has the right to exist, and needs to be assisted and defended by its allies, (ie: the United States).
With that in mind, "neocon" is code for "Jew" because of that alliance with Israel and the Jewish people. And while it's true Jews often vote Democratic, their support of Israel is tested by that vote. Proof of this is seen in Barrack Obama's faltering Jewish support, as the Jews are concerned about his attitude towards Israel.
"Hope that clears things up," said ImNotBlue... the Jew.
May 24, 2008, 11:58:58 PM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
FF, I usually hear neocon applied to Feith, Rumsfeld, Kristol, etc. But you are correct; others get tagged with the term as well. As for the Paul connection, there is no doubt that white supremecist and neo-Nazi groups have elements that are strongly for Paul. Perhaps the anti-semitic newsletters he published might have something to do with that.
Vince, thank you. You are correct on the true definition of 'neocon', though I have given up trying to make that point because the word has been co-opted. Every time I hear Olby call Bill Kristol a "neocon" I wonder, oh really, when was he ever a liberal?
May 25, 2008, 12:00:42 AM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
Bush, Cheney, Rice, etc were never Leftist radicals.. thus aren't Neocons.
The charge was that they were influenced by (nay... controlled by) the Jewish neocons who served in various roles of the White house and pentagon.
These Jews included
Richard Perle
Paul Wolfowitz
Douglas J. Feith
William Kristol, (not in the admin)
Charles Krauthammer, (not in the admin)
Marty Peretz (not in the admin)
They are linked to the PNAC in the 90s and the think tank AEI, and so they associate with most of the Republcians.
So the connation was that these Jews were controlling US policy.
May 25, 2008, 12:04:13 AM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
ImNotBlue | 05.25.08 - 12:03 am |
Yes,certainly jewish people support the right of Israel to exist.So do liberals.And liberals (ie harry Truman)were in favor of the establishment of the state of Israel.
Today,Zionism has come to mean support of the expansion of settlements in the West Bank.And that's where many differ with the idea.
May 25, 2008, 12:04:43 AM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
PNAC, I forgot about them. I saw a newshounds poster complaining about PNAC.
May 25, 2008, 12:05:18 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
It's well known that Paul published without oversight and did not write the newsletters that you speak of johnny. True that he has hate groups that rally for him, but they certainly don't represent his cause. It could be said that hate groups rally for any of the 3 major presidential contenders.
Nice job VinceP and ImNotBlue for the background info on n**c**.
May 25, 2008, 12:06:29 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Gen Escape Goat- Old Style Dry
"With that in mind, "neocon" is code for "Jew" because of that alliance with Israel and the Jewish people. And while it's true Jews often vote Democratic"
If by, "often vote Democratic" you mean only once since 1920 has the Republican party received more votes from Jews than Democrats, then yeah ok.
It's not even close. Jews vote overwhelmingly Democratic.
The anti-semitic Democrat label doesn't jive when you look at the numbers.
May 25, 2008, 12:08:19 AM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
If a neocon had to be a 60's radical leftist who became a 80's radical conservative,there can't be very many of them besides Horowitz.
May 25, 2008, 12:08:39 AM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
johnny: I agree with you.. the term neocon has lost all meaning becuase different people use it in different ways.
Some use it to refer to the original neocons (usually this is nonoffenseive), and then the other ways that we listed so far.
Now it's so many years later people just think neocon is someone who wants to invade the world.
Its so simpleminded and thoughtless.. When I see people who still use it I devaule my opinion of what they're saying because its' clear they are expressing things without much thought or originality.
May 25, 2008, 12:08:54 AM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
If a neocon had to be a 60's radical leftist who became a 80's radical conservative,there can't be very many of them besides Horowitz.
notveryhow | 05.25.08 - 12:13 am | #
Exactly. The numbers are small. Though they are very influential people in those political circles. The small numbers is what gave "neocon" that sinister almost conspiracy-theory "the gov is being controlled by a small band of zionist Jews" hysteria that was going around for a few years.
By the end of Bush's 1st Term they were all gone. His 2nd term is basically free of neocons. (to his loss I think.. his 2nd term foreign p olicy under Rice is a disaster IMHO)
May 25, 2008, 12:11:50 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
"His 2nd term is basically free of neocons."
Yet, the term is tossed about like parade candy in news and internet sites. The definition has certainly evolved.
May 25, 2008, 12:14:24 AM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
> Paul published without oversight and did not write the newsletters
I didn't say he wrote them. I said he published them, for, what, decades? And over all that time, he never knew what was being printed under his imprimatur, and in some cases in articles purportedly from his pen? This aspect of Paul's behavior is not one I can come to terms with.
May 25, 2008, 12:14:58 AM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
So Wolfowitz,Perle et al were 60's radicals who did a mental 180.Somehow I can't picture them dropping acid and levitating the Pentagon,though that might explain their sudden conversion.
May 25, 2008, 12:16:37 AM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
I'm just realizing that the very same people who shriek in outrage if any the relationships Obama has had with past/present associates are examined have absolutely no problem at all characterizing the President and his whole adminstration by the philsophy held by a few advisors.
May 25, 2008, 12:27:14 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
"This aspect of Paul's behavior is not one I can come to terms with."
I trust that he isn't a racist anti-Semite, and you don't. That's OK with me, we disagree. I disagree with a lot of people on much more dividing topics.
May 25, 2008, 12:27:18 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
That's true, VinceP. Similarly, the same people who were outraged about Romney's alleged "cross-like image" in his commercial are silent about Obama's Cross-background photo advertisement. Where's the outrage?
May 25, 2008, 12:29:34 AM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
> I trust that he isn't a racist anti-Semite, and you don't.
It's not so much that. I guess I don't trust that he isn't willing to pander to or use or accept support from them. But we are really getting far astray from cable news. Right, guys?
May 25, 2008, 12:34:41 AM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
VinceP1974 | Homepage | 05.25.08 - 12:32 am |
So you stated that "...they are very influential people in those political circles." But that "... His 2nd term is basically free of neocons. (to his loss I think.. "
You seem to be implying that in his first term Mr Bush followed a neocon path,then abandoned it in his second.
So why would you have a problem with "characterizing the President and his whole adminstration by the philsophy held by a few advisors."
You yourself seem to have suggested that.
May 25, 2008, 12:36:26 AM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
FF: it's like when the News Media or Democrats suddenly take offense on behalf of the Catholic Church.
Normally these folks call the Catholic Church a misogynistic pedophiliac mind control system.
But uh oh John Hagee utters what almost every Protestant Church has at one time in its history uttered that the Catholic Church might be the Great Whore (I disagree)... well!!! That's just offensive!
How dare he speak ill of such a blameless and crucial institution!
May 25, 2008, 12:36:31 AM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
notveryhow:
What we see happening in the 2nd Term is a return to the James Baker type foreign policy approach.
The change Bush made after 9/11 was to realize we can't appease our enemies.. they need to be confronted before they get enough power to really hurt us when the inevitible war comes.
That we're better off if we set the time and place.
[Please dont turn this into an argument about the validity of this viewpoint...I am just telling you the history]
Well for a multitude of reasons that aggressive and assertive approach has become the let Iran violate UNSC resolutions... let NORK continue to not honor its agreements.... force Israel to compromise its security .. etc..
And so all of these problems have basically come to a standstill in his 2nd term.
the blame doesn't fall 100% on Bush... It's clear that the country , Congress, media etc.. wanted a return to Jim Baker diplomacy. So can't blame Bush for giving the people what they want.
It will be a failure just like the 1990s were a failure. Problems will go unaddressed and then one morning on a cloudless beautiful day something shocking will happen.
May 25, 2008, 12:42:26 AM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
VinceP
Would it suprise you to learn that many Catholics are Democrats?
But enough of this.My beautiful wife with her beautiful legs is calling me to bed.
On the topic of cable news.Just what, specifically,does the White House object to in the editing that NBC did with his interview?It surely can't be the editing itself,since every network will do this. They can't expect a network to show a 15 minute clip every time they mention the interview.So how did NBC's editing change the meaning of Mr Bush's words?
May 25, 2008, 12:57:17 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
This was such a nice thread in the beginning. I mention one name and create chaos. That is even sadder than the prospect of Oralmann not going anywhere no matter how many people plead for his dismissal, which I brought up in the first post.
May 25, 2008, 12:59:54 AM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
not:
I'm speaking in broad generalities. I'm aware that not all anything is all one way.
May 25, 2008, 1:04:08 AM EDT – Like – Reply
sharm
[Sorry, MikeC.] It shouldn't surprise nvh that many Catholics don't believe what their church teaches so the fact that many Catholics are dems proves nothing, or at least not his point.
Back to your point MikeC, did you read Robert's comment at OW on the May 23 CD thread? He thinks Olby is going down. I think he is looking for martyrdom.
May 25, 2008, 1:16:09 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
I'm too much of a pessimist, but I hope Bob is right. I really hope that someday GE or NBC brass finally does the right thing and rids themselves of the albatross that is Keith Olbermann.
May 25, 2008, 1:31:05 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
I'm too much of a pessimist, but I hope Bob is right. I really hope that someday GE or NBC brass finally does the right thing and rids themselves of the albatross that is Keith Olbermann.
May 25, 2008, 1:31:05 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
That published twice. Sorry.
May 25, 2008, 1:31:31 AM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
One of the alleged attributes of the "neocon" is a strong alliance with Israel. And while NVH suggests that most Jews are not Zionists (not sure how he/she arrived at that conclusion),
by im not blue
I doubt she does, either.
May 25, 2008, 2:11:37 AM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
I doubt she does, either
65% of American jews beleive it's important to end the occupation. page 11
http://aai.3cdn.net/8ec1590ead8d91637d_hdm6bh9x6.pdf
Party identification among American Jews.Opinion on various Liberal/Conservative issues,war in iraq,attack on Iran etc.
http://www.ajc.org/site/c.ijITI2PHKoG/b.3642849/
May 25, 2008, 8:13:57 AM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
NVH: I really dont think Israel is the problem here... where is the opinion poll of Palestinians who want to live in peace and not send their kids to blow up and kill Jews to get to Allah's brothel?
May 25, 2008, 9:01:02 AM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
Is Allah's brothel where Hagees "Great Whore" works?
But seriously,are you saying that Israel has no part to play in the rage felt by the Palestinians.That if Israel never came to be Palestinians would line up to suicide out blowing up the pyramids or something,just because they are filled with hate.
What would you think/do if you were a young Palestinian?Would you say, "Well,they took my grandfathers farm and 20 years later they took my fathers new farm.Now I have to get a permit and pass armed checkpoints to take my kid to the doctor,but I'm cool with that."
May 25, 2008, 9:25:43 AM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
Let me speak from my heart.
After many years I have come to the conclusion that there are no people on Earth who are more barbaric.. more vile.. more revolting.. more inhumane than the Palestinians.
The Palestinians as a concept exists soley to be a vanguard of agitation against Israel.
There is no comparasion between the decent loving Jewish people and the death-worshiping, child-sacrifcing , Jew-hating Palestinian den of wolves.
May 25, 2008, 9:31:35 AM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
VinceP1974 | Homepage | 05.25.08 - 9:36 am |
Well,then I guess there is no sense in talking about the politics,or the morality, of the situation.
May 25, 2008, 9:43:23 AM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
I dont know how anyone can defend a people that raise their childern from birth with the desire to kill Jewish people.
And this hatred isn't anything new.. what is new is that it's one of the first things the Palestinians instituted when they got automony under the Oslo Accords.
The Palestinians, when speaking in Arabic, dont hide what they're doing .. they're incrementally destroying Israel.. and any "peace treaty" they may make is in the model of the false peace treaties that Mohemmend made to deceive his enemies and cause them to lower their guard while he got strong enough to then break their treaties and destroy the Non-Muslim enemy.
This isn't about land. This is about these Islamic impertives from the Hadith. about what the Muslims must do in order to usher in the promises of the Last Day.
Bukhari:V4B52N176 "Allah's Apostle said, 'You Muslims will fight the Jews till some of them hide behind stones. The stones will betray them saying, "O Abdullah (slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him."'"
Bukhari:V4B52N177 "Allah's Apostle said, 'The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."'"
May 25, 2008, 9:54:48 AM EDT – Like – Reply
tony
If history repeats itself Olby is in a crash and burn phase. He is unable to help himself. Its not because of us or Oreilly or anyone else. It is because Keith is Keith.
May 25, 2008, 10:12:17 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Fox Fan
Wow VinceP- spot on decscription historically and presently!
May 25, 2008, 10:19:39 AM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
I dont mean to harp on this.. but I want to say one final thing..
If anyone thinks the Genocidal tendency ends with Israel, then I invite to look up this phrase , common in the Muslim world, in google. Here is the search link:
First Comes Saturday, Then Comes Sunday
What is happening in Israel vis a vis Muslim terrorism has nothing to do with occupation.
May 25, 2008, 10:47:43 AM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
Is Allah's brothel where Hagees "Great Whore" works?
by 'nvh'
Couldn't you have worked in a "Craig/wide stance" or something about the way Vitter's wife dresses? You're slackin.'
May 25, 2008, 10:48:43 AM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
Thank you MikeC for trying to get back onto a cable news topic...any cable news topic.
May 25, 2008, 11:01:49 AM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
I'm glad ED Hill is getting more air time.
I have a lot of respect for her.
May 25, 2008, 11:32:11 AM EDT – Like – Reply
Grammie
Vince, I really enjoyed your comments on this thread very much.
I can only add dittos from me.
May 25, 2008, 1:23:24 PM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
I wonder why the Palestinians didn't exterminate the Jewish and Christian communities in Palestine before the partition?
May 25, 2008, 3:18:14 PM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
1 - There were no substantial Christian communities in that region for awhile... since the Muslims destroyed them so long ago and made it impossible for anyone to want to remain a Christian and live there.
2 - The Land of Israel was in complete desolution the entire time of the Jewish exile... no one wanted to live there in any numbers.. the arabs that were there were nomadic.
Jerusalem was a sad dreary wreck.. but it had a Jewish-majority population even before the Zionist movement got started.
There were plenty of Muslim attacks on the Jews to keep the jews in line.
But there was no attraction for the Arabs to live around there... for what.. it was a wasteland.
Arabs didn't start populating the area in any significant numbers until after many many Jews started to immigrate there and the land was restored and an economy began.
How could you not know any of this? this is basic history..
Perhaps you should examine your viewpoint since its seems to not be rooted in actual history..
May 25, 2008, 3:55:13 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
PLEASE STOP!!!
May 25, 2008, 4:29:55 PM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
Are you proposing a hudna?
May 25, 2008, 4:43:08 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Grammie
Eeyore, you also might want to do a little research into the options that were available to the so called Palestinians, who has the historical claim on the land and what happened at the birth of modern day Israel.
Vince, one of your comments hit a chord with me. The Palestinians and much too large a percentage of the Muslim world have left so much of their humanity behind that the regular rules don't apply. Western civilization relaxed their rules, rightfully, to defeat the Fascists and Imperialistic Japan who had also deliberately moved way beyond acceptible behavior. As a side note, Churchill in referencing the alliance of Britain, the USA and the Stalinist Sovets, said he would make a pact with the devil to defeat Fascism and would worry about the Devil later.
Some years back there was an interview with a Palestinian mother (she wolf?) whose husband, several sons and maybe even a daughter had martyred themselves to kill Jews. She was defiantly proud and only regretted that she had not given birth to more martyrs to kill the Jewish pigs.
Whether this woman was legitimately the wife and mother of so many that had murdered many people in "cold blood" (KO you might note what "cold blooded" really means) is immaterial. She was put forth as the ideal Palestinean mother much as Nazi Germany put forth the ideal Aryans, the SS and Lieberstraum.
They are the culture of death and destruction just as our enemies (hell, even some of our allies) were in WWII. They will shy from no atrocity to achieve their goal. Although I don't think this is the by product of the enormous poverty and religious shackles on the average citizen (OBL and his top lieutanants are from the very upper classes) that class has rallied behind those very same upper class who keep them in the 19 th century at best.
Let me sign off before Mike C takes me to task.
May 25, 2008, 4:43:37 PM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
Grammie:
Check out this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8uOa2e5Ygk
I think it's very effective in demostrating what we're facing.
The mother you mentioned is in it.
May 25, 2008, 4:58:01 PM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
> Let me sign off before Mike C takes me to task.
I'm going to join MikeC and take a lot of you to task. Please try to think about cable news and why you are at a cable news site when you compose your comments. I'm trying to keep things on track without clamping down, so a little cooperation will make everything go better.
May 25, 2008, 5:01:59 PM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
j$: sorry
May 25, 2008, 5:03:40 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Grammie
Johnny, me too sorry!
After the wild free for all at OW I do have trouble conforming sometimes to rules.
MikeC, I apologize to you too.
May 25, 2008, 5:15:09 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Mike Chimeri
Apology accepted. Just remember what Johnny said and don't do it again.
May 25, 2008, 5:36:56 PM EDT – Like – Reply
Grammie
" Apology accepted. Just remember what Johnny said and don't do it again.
Mike Chimeri | Homepage | 05.25.08 - 5:41 pm | # "
SIRRR! YES SIR! SIRRR!
I don't know if that is the correct form but I saw it a movie once.
May 25, 2008, 6:00:50 PM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
"Fair and balanced..
Announcing it doesn't make it true..
CNN and MSNBC far more objective..
Ken | Homepage | 05.25.08 - 12:33 pm | #
Remember that commercial yrs ago when they would drop the egg in the frying pan? It would say, "This is your brain on drugs."
May 25, 2008, 6:17:06 PM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
VinceP1974 | Homepage | 05.25.08 - 4:00 pm |
Don't appreciate the snark,and your basic history is wrong.Biased Zionist sources,I'd guess.
please read.
May 26, 2008, 6:01:58 PM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
Forgot the link.
http://www.mideastweb.org/palpop.htm
I apologize J$.
May 26, 2008, 6:03:16 PM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
Snark is what you get. Your attempt at refutation consists of giving a URL to something written by Ami Isseroff.
Due to lack of any specific arguments, your refutation is an utter failure.
May 26, 2008, 6:57:12 PM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
About this page - This page is the result of an ongoing analysis. It is not intended to be an exhaustive demographic study. Corrections and additions are most welcome.
IMPORTANT NOTE
Many of the figures presented on this page must be incorrect, because they conflict with other reports.
><
Is this what you use as proof, nvh or whoever you are today?
May 26, 2008, 7:20:35 PM EDT – Like – Reply
notveryhow
Oblio,
That is the way that academics deal with numbers if there is uncertainty involved.And if you read the post you know the sources of uncertainty.
Vince,
You are an ideologue.The ONLY people who I have read who say that Palestine "was a wasteland" before the Jews are dyed in the wool Zionists with the agenda of rationalizing the appropriation of Palestinian land.It's interesting that the same arguments were used to justify taking land from the Native Americans.
Now I'm the fool for attempting to discuss this with you.I'm familiar with your monomania,and I should know better.
May 26, 2008, 7:40:58 PM EDT – Like – Reply
olby sucks
I'm familiar with your monomania
by nvh
Likewise.......
May 26, 2008, 7:52:45 PM EDT – Like – Reply
johnny dollar
OK enough with the Palestinian business. It has nothing to do with cable news.
May 26, 2008, 8:01:54 PM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
Nothing there [Jerusalem] to be seen but a little of the old walls which is yet remaining and all the rest is grass, moss and weeds. [English pilgrim in 1590]
The country is in a considerable degree empty of inhabitants and therefore its greatest need is of a body of population. [British consul in 1857]
There is not a solitary village throughout its whole extent [valley of Jezreel] -- not for 30 miles in either direction... One may ride ten miles hereabouts and not see ten human beings. ... For the sort of solitude to make one dreary, come to Galilee ... Nazareth is forlorn ... Jericho lies a moldering ruin ... Bethlehem and Bethany, in their poverty and humiliation... untenanted by any living creature... A desolate country whose soil is rich enough, but is given over wholly to weeds ... a silent, mournful expanse ... a desolation ... We never saw a human being on the whole route ... Hardly a tree or shrub anywhere. Even the olive tree and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil had almost deserted the country ... Of all the lands there are for dismal scenery Palestine must be the prince. The hills barren and dull, the valleys unsightly deserts [inhabited by] swarms of beggars with ghastly sores and malformations. Palestine sits in sackcloth and ashes ... desolate and unlovely ... [Mark Twain, The Innocents Abroad, 1867]
Left to themselves, the Arabs of Palestine would not in a thousand years have taken effective steps towards the irrigation and electrification of Palestine. They would have been quite content to dwella handful of philosophic peoplein wasted sun-drenched plains, letting the waters of the Jordan flow unbridled and unharnessed into the Dead Sea."
[Churchhill 1920]
I could go on. You could use the education... actually, this makes me think you might be a Muslim since you so stridently get offended by the plain facts that the Land of Israel was desolate until the return of the Jews. Most Jew-hating Leftists (who dont really care about the Arabs to begin with) would find nothing offensive about that.
May 26, 2008, 10:40:33 PM EDT – Like – Reply
VinceP1974
JD: I just saw your order. sorry.
May 26, 2008, 10:40:55 PM EDT – Like – Reply
