You know technically speaking, George Washington was a whingeing pom. 
HG
Huang, youâre an idiot. Both Arabs and Persians are absolutely clear on the differences between them, even if you are not. They were clear a thousand years ago and theyâre clear now. Yes, theyâre all Muslims. But the point Chewycorns was making was about Arab culture, not about Muslims in general.
Do you understand the distinction, dumbass?
[quote=âCold Frontâ]Mill was influential, but is he as influential as Darwin? No. Nietzche? Not a chance. Even in Germany prior to WW2, Nietzcheâs influence was exaggerated.
Are you even familiar with these thinkers or are you just shooting your mouth off because youâre bored?[/quote]
The latter CF. I was going to include you on my list, too, but ran out of paper.
Thinking about it now, a âwho were the top ten thinkersâ might be an interesting list. It could be of all-time, from the 20th century, etc.
Dear master logician, or should that be mass debater? For someone who so boorishly labours their superior powers of logic you really do fall back on the old name calling donât you.
FYI, I well understand the reason the point was made and find it somewhat wanting, thus the irreverent remark.
Come to think of it, why am I wasting my time with a bigoted clod like you? Nighty night! 
HG
You donât seem to understand that I can be both rude and right.
Yeah, you roll your eyes and bring up George Washington as a whinging pom. Meanwhile you show no appreciation of the points made. Are Persians Arab? No. Were they ever Arabs? No. So if Persians and other non-Arabs make significant cultural contributions as part of the Arab empire, is it unfair and bigoted to make a distinction that they shouldnât be thought of as Arab cultural achievements?
Another roll of your eyes. Are you getting dizzy yet?
[quote=âHakkaSonicâ][quote=âCold Frontâ]Mill was influential, but is he as influential as Darwin? No. Nietzche? Not a chance. Even in Germany prior to WW2, Nietzcheâs influence was exaggerated.
Are you even familiar with these thinkers or are you just shooting your mouth off because youâre bored?[/quote]
The latter CF. I was going to include you on my list, too, but ran out of paper.
Thinking about it now, a âwho were the top ten thinkersâ might be an interesting list. It could be of all-time, from the 20th century, etc.[/quote]
Nobody ever claimed we were solving world hunger with our thoughts here. 90% of the shit you post is just as silly or sillier than a ranking of influential thinkers would be.
Does anyone know why they chose 9-11 at the attack date?
I have a theory, NEVER reported in the media anywhere. September 11 was the date that the state of Israel was founded in 1949. Connect the dots.
Cold Front wrote: [quote]Are Persians Arab? No. Were they ever Arabs? No. So if Persians and other non-Arabs make significant cultural contributions as part of the Arab empire, is it unfair and bigoted to make a distinction that they shouldnât be thought of as Arab cultural achievements?[/quote]
Alexander was a Greek ⌠no no no , a Macedonian . . . etc, ad nauseum.
Full credit where creditâs due but to start splitting achievements on a regional basis overlooks the rich interplay of ideas of that time and that part of the world. Iâm referring here to the world of the medical scholar you mentioned, Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Zakariyaâ al-Razi (Al-Razi). He. like the majority of scholars of his time in that part of the world, wrote in Arabic and could be truly said to be a product of the Arab empire you yourself mentioned. Why do you feel it so necessary to draw on his ethnicity?
It appears to me, and my sincerest apologies if Iâm wrong, that you are trying to write off Arabic culture by suggesting the damned âsand niggazâ never done produced nothing of merit. This would be a sad injustice indeed.
Frankly I donât see the need for rudeness. I gave you a serve because you gave me one and actually I almost regret that I did. Put simply these shitty slagging matches bring down the level of reasoned debate. I note too that the main proponents of this style have tended to reflect the views of die hard Republicans. It does leave me pondering the efficacy of advancing their cause.
You may have noticed a bit of toing and froing I had with Fred lately in the âWhither Iraqâ thread. Interesting to note what came out of that sans the need to resort to calling each other idiots.
HG
Formosa wrote:
Probably the anniversary of the coup in Chile. You see, the Islamofascists had bought heavily on South American wine futures . . .
Or alternatively:
Why the suicide killers chose September 11
Christopher Hitchens
Wednesday October 3, 2001
The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,562390,00.html
HG
[quote=âCold Frontâ][quote=âHakkaSonicâ][quote=âCold Frontâ]Mill was influential, but is he as influential as Darwin? No. Nietzche? Not a chance. Even in Germany prior to WW2, Nietzcheâs influence was exaggerated.
Are you even familiar with these thinkers or are you just shooting your mouth off because youâre bored?[/quote]
The latter CF. I was going to include you on my list, too, but ran out of paper.
Thinking about it now, a âwho were the top ten thinkersâ might be an interesting list. It could be of all-time, from the 20th century, etc.[/quote]
Nobody ever claimed we were solving world hunger with our thoughts here. 90% of the shit you post is just as silly or sillier than a ranking of influential thinkers would be.[/quote]
Kind of disappointed with your 90% figure. I was going for 100%.
Ta ta, CF, old sport!
Alexander was a Greek ⌠no no no , a Macedonian . . . etc, ad nauseum.[/quote]
Again, you evade the questions and try to change the subject. Whether Macedonians were Greeks is debatable. Most modern Greeks think so. Most scholars, however, think not. In any case, Ancient Greece has enough cultural achievements without having to rely on the Macedonians.
Whatâs not debatable is whether Persians are Arabs. They speak two entirely different languages and they have two entirely different cultures and historical traditions that have often overlapped, but are still clearly delineated.
Crediting Arab culture for those intellectual achievements is questionable. There are arguments for it, but the arguments are mainly that the Arabs created a large empire that â as all empires do â allowed a good deal of trade and cultural exchanges and, perhaps most importantly, a lingua franca. But it was the Arabsâ military achievements that created the empire, not their intellectual achievements. (Some scholars have often noted that early Arab empire builders were militaristic townspeople from the desert.) The actual intellectual work was mostly done by others with, in some cases, Arab patronage. The two major Arab cultural additions were their religion and language.
An example of what youâre doing is if I claimed the development of the atomic bomb was a U.S. intellectual achievement even though it was mainly European scientists who were responsible for the work. The U.S. provided the context, money, and the bureaucracy, but that bomb would not have exploded without European brain power. It probably could have exploded, however, without American brain power, if the U.S. still provided its full financial support for the project.
[quote=âHuang Guang Chenâ]Full credit where creditâs due but to start splitting achievements on a regional basis overlooks the rich interplay of ideas of that time and that part of the world. Iâm referring here to the world of the medical scholar you mentioned, Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Zakariyaâ al-Razi (Al-Razi). He. like the majority of scholars of his time in that part of the world, wrote in Arabic and could be truly said to be a product of the Arab empire you yourself mentioned. Why do you feel it so necessary to draw on his ethnicity?
It appears to me, and my sincerest apologies if Iâm wrong, that you are trying to write off Arabic culture by suggesting the damned âsand niggazâ never done produced nothing of merit. This would be a sad injustice indeed.[/quote]
Do you think somebody who has it in for the Arabs as âsand niggasâ is likely to see Persians in a much different light?
We were discussing the proclivities of certain ethnicities for intellectual achievement. Chewycorns brought up the subject and tried to credit the Arabs for achievements that, strictly speaking, were not their achievements. He also mentioned the achievements of three European Jews as Jewish achievements. If Marxâs work â written in German and often based on research in London â can be considered a Jewish intellectual achievement, then it seems fair to point out to Chewycorns that Al-Razi was not an Arab.
Itâs noted by some scholars, by the way, that ethnic Arabs often were not the creators of their most impressive intellectual achievements. The Arab-controlled Middle East was full of different ethnicities at that time, including numerous Christians and Jews (far more so than today). These non-Muslims and non-Arabs were often at the heart of the actual intellectual work that was done then.
Well, donât come in to insult the father of my country and roll your eyes at me then. I donât know what you expected after a comment like that.
I donât see myself here as an advocate for Republicans or trying to win friends for the USA. I argue my points â points that I believe in â and, when I think appropriate, I insult.
Each person has their own style. I am perfectly capable of insult-free debate and I have done so several times here. But I have a low tolerance for people who 1) have silly, unsupported ideas or 2) insult me or my country.
[quote=âformosaâ]Does anyone know why they chose 9-11 at the attack date?
I have a theory, NEVER reported in the media anywhere. September 11 was the date that the state of Israel was founded in 1949. Connect the dots.[/quote]
Reports at the time said that they had planned the attack for later on, but the capture of a few people made them move the date up.
Some news stories made much of the idea that some of the hijackers may have been duped into thinking that they were going to hold people for ransom; Iâm pretty sure the media misinterpreted that, though â all of them were hell-bound on a suicide mission, they just didnât know it was happening that particular day.
IMHO they just did it as soon as they felt ready to go.
Donât get me wrong. When I post something it is because I find it interesting to the topic at hand, not necessarily because I agree with it. I am trying to be fair and balanced and present opposing views if well made or just for general interest to reveal prevailing attitudes or concerns. So how so toing and froing?
Second, I believe the âaccomplishmentsâ of the Arabs and the Islamic world are highly exaggerated in a kind of historical revisionism that is more concerned with making Arabs feel ârespectedâ and âvalidatedâ than any historical fact or truth. This is why I have a problem with it and mentioned it. In that context, the failures of the Arab world today are not so difficult to understand and then it becomes imperative to look even more closely at the failures of the society.
-
Failure to educate and give rights to women. Who is raising the children? Who will not be educating the children? Who will be filling little minds with superstitious hatred at an early age?
-
No rule of law. Crucial to justice, economic system, investments, etc.
-
No free exchange of ideas. Yes, the Islamic World was great during the 700s to 900s when there was free flow of ideas. What happened afterward? This is and has been the problem for the last millenium and not to be brushed aside with âBut we must remember that blah blah blah historical accomplishments blah blah blah.â
So I think it is fair to make distinctions of this kind if we are looking at cultural successes and failures. Why not with the Arabs? This is done each and every day with other nations. Go to the book store and read about the Japanese and how their culture made it possible for Japan Inc. or Chinaâs Confucian culture is responsible for this, that or the other. Remember all the books on British culture and how it was responsible for the economy that was the âsick man of Europeâ in the 1970s and early 1980s. The German approach to labor relations, the French statist approach, the American "innocence, naivete, mission to serve God, etc. so where the hell does anyone get off jumping on this discussion simply because Arabs are involved? You have ended the debate just as the debate is ended in these repressive regimes. AND THAT is the problem.
freddy
Fred wrote:
Simply refers to an exchange of ideas . . . a debate essentially. Is there some kind of linguistic problem here in addition to the very clear cultural gap?
Yes, your attitude to Arabs is well documented throughout this site. However, I was making reference to a particular period of Arab history and made no pretence to telescope that out to the present other than to suggest that there seemed to be a desire to belittle all Arab endeavours. I made reference to a particular point in history where the culture was especially rich. Frankly I canât be bothered getting into a stoush about the diversity of present day Arab culture and opinion. That should be obvious enough. However, suffice it to say that you may have seen me refer to Islamofascists, which is how I view the terorrists that decked the WTC and any attempts to constrain by the use of religion (any religion in fact).
Simply not applicable to anything Iâve suggested Iâm afraid.
Huh? Please explain.
Coldfront:
You have heard of analogy, yeah?
Should I abuse you? Could you perhaps be a little less general and actually give instances of some of these authorities your arguments tend to rely rather heavily on?
As for insulting the father of your country I donât think I did. I called him a whingeing pom, a common enough extension of the term pom (English). Certainly not an insult in my book. Perhaps you could broaden your cultural knowledge?
On this I believe I, like many other posters on this site have been exceptionally restrained in our disscussions with Americans in part as acknowledgement of how sensitive it seems many of you have become snce 911 and too for the hostility that is drawn by any criticism of your governmentâs POLICIES (note not you personally or even your government), no matter how valid we deem them.
I for one am not trying to just heap shit but rather am sincerely attempting to understand whatâs going on. I believe Iâm coming at this with an open mind, way more open than I would have previously. This has come in part through reading posts on this site and through my encounters with Americans. I donât see much attempt by some off you to reciprocate the favour and Iâm getting mighty fucking tired of it.
I am concerned by an apparent siege mentality among some Americans since 911 as I referred to in an earlier post. I stand by it. (The typo was deliberate by the by). What is odd is that while 911 did occur in the US, there have been other attacks and victims (Bali for example) and clearly being âEuropeanâ poses some level of risk in the current state of the world. Why is it that Americans in particular seem so het up about it?
HG
Sorry HGC:
Was not referring to You specifically but⌠the general you as in those on the other side of my debate.
Second, I am not belitting Arabs and I do not believe that has ever been my main point. I have said treat them with the same condemnation that others receive for similar actions. I have questioned the need to inflate the accomplishments of the Arab culture etc. I am worried that whenever a group such as Muslims, Arabs or Blacks is attacked, the criticizer automatically becomes a racist. Great latitude is given for joking around, insulting, presenting harsh facts when it comes to Americans, Germans, French, Chinese, Taiwanese, Europeans, etc. but wham as soon as the debate heads over to âsensitiveâ peoples, thatâs it we have to protect them and their sensitivities. Why?
I have lived and studied in the Middle East and traveled there frequently. I have a real relationship with many Arabs and Muslims and therefore do not feel the need to tiptoe around their sensitivities within reason.
That said, I wonder how many here have ever been to the Middle East at all? On the same note, how would those who have lived in Taiwan for many years find it if a right off the boat arrival (one week, one month, one year in Taiwan) would jump on every criticism that they made of Taiwan, the Taiwanese, the culture, the bureaucracy, the traffic, the air pollution, the service by saying it was racist and belitting of the Taiwanese. How many years does it take and how many experiences does one have to have before one is entitled to judge? Just curious.
Have you or has anyone else on this site laughingly or scornfully questioned Chinaâs claim to have 5,000 years of history? How is that different from what I am saying about the Arab culture? Did I say there was nothing there at all or is my argument being taken in a black and white context by the listener/reader to mean all or nothing when that was clearly not my intention.
Has anyone on these threads ever referred to a short dicked Chinese mama boy or a psycho xiaojie?
THAT is my point. Why must we tiptoes around these groups? Why must any criticism be labeled as racist immediately? Read the French threads. WE had a field day insulting the WHITE French and no one EVER said boo about it. Why not? Donât the French need to be spared as well? Ditto for the German thread so please HGC donât âWe all know how you feel about the Arabs on this threadâ me if you are not going to say âWe all know how you feel about the Frenchâ or âWe all know how you feel about the Germansâ or for others with the preface âWe all know how you feel about the Taiwanese.â See what I mean?
Cheers Fred.
Your analogy with the newbie rocking up to Taiwan does help, me at least, better understand some of your more general statements on the Arab world.
HG
Thanks HGC:
It is so difficult being RIGHT all the time. haha Seriously, I appreciate the understanding. I would promise to be less sarcastic and mouthy but I am afraid it is in my nature. It would merely come off as condescending and patronizing instead. I know I have tried to be nice and it never seems to achieve my desired aims. Seems to unnatural and phony I guess.
freddy
Smith, you say that criticizing Muslims, Arabs, and Blacks leads to being called a racist, yet you leave out, (on purpose I believe), the Jews. Whenever anyone comes close to criticizing Israel or Jews you and your butt-budy CF are the first to cry anti-semetism. Talk about double standards and gross hypocrisy. You also say that itâs alright to criticize America; yet you attack everyone that does.
Ishmael2:
You need to take that down a few notches.
First, I have never said you cannot critize the US. Criticize away but donât expect to sway me with some Noam Chomsky argument about how all evil in the world started with America. I am arguing left right and center with Rascal and various French. Prove your point and I will listen. Engage in bashing and I wonât put you in the flame forum (funny all the gross criticisms of the French, Germans and Americans never end up there) but I will slap you back. Whatâs wrong with that?
I donât care about the Jews one way or another on this particular political point or let me say I would prefer not to argue it but prove to me that given the circumstances the Arabs would even let them live and we can have a rational argument about the subject.
I referred ONCE to something that you said that sounded anti-Semitic and you are still jumping all over me even though I graciously deflected the point by saying I was perhaps mistaken in my interpretation of your remarks (even though they did sound anti-Semitic).
AND I am not the one after all who said quoting others or not: âA good Muslim is a dead Muslim.â Right?
So lay off the Alien-induced âbutt buddyâ remarks and aspersions (funny that kind of remark hasnât drawn any of our politically correct guardians of niceness and virtue) as well as the sliming ala Hakkasonicâs âI know this guy in a bar who is always making black jokesâ to attack me rather than my positions. (And whatâs wrong with doggy style anyway?! 
Add to this that Fred continually whines that people are overly sensitive whenever Muslims, Arabs and Blacks are criticized, but is quick to accuse his critics of being politically correct, of trying to shut him up, etc. Got a heavy-duty persecution complex there, Fred? A bit of transference going on, Fred? Poor Fred.