Are You Still A Racist, Xenophobic, and Intolerant Hater?

[Shamgar]

Are You Still A Racist, Xenophobic, and Intolerant Hater?

Are You Still A Racist, Xenophobic, and Intolerant Hater? Am I talking about a white Christian male who is the typical target of this Granfalloon technique of propaganda? No, I am speaking about the racist, xenophobic, and intolerant hater who promotes the propaganda of the melting pot. What? How could that be? The pro-melting pot people are the defenders against racism, xenophobia, intolerance and hate. Actually, they are not. They are defenders of the propaganda of conformity. And like all good propagandists they accuse their opponents of the very crimes the propagandist wants to commit.

“Propaganda by its very nature is an enterprise for perverting the significance of events
and of insinuating false intentions. There are two salient aspects of this fact. First of all, the
propagandist must insist on the purity of his own intentions and, at the same time, hurl accusations
at his enemy. But the accusation is never made haphazardly or groundlessly (9). The propagandist
will not accuse the enemy of just any misdeed; he will accuse him of the very intention that he
himself has and of trying to commit the very crime that he himself is about to commit. He who
wants to provoke war not only proclaims his own peaceful intentions but also accuses the other party
of provocation. He who uses concentration camps accuses his neighbor of doing so. He who intends
to establish a dictatorship always insists that his adversaries are bent on dictatorship. The accusation
aimed at the other's intentions clearly reveals the intentions of the accuser. But the public cannot see
this because the revelation is interwoven with facts. The mechanism used here is to slip from the facts,
which would demand factual judgment, to moral terrain and to ethical judgment. (9) Because political
problems are difficult and often confusing,and their significance and their import not obvious,the propagandist can easily present them in moral language – and here we leave the realm of fact, to enter
into that of passion. Facts, then, come to be discussed in the language of indignation, a tone which
is almost always the mark of propaganda.”

Jaques Ellul, “Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes” (New York: 1973) Page 58. (emphasis added)

All one has to do is look at the definitions of the words: “racist”, “xenophobe”, “intolerance” and “hater” and you will see each of the words are generic. You will notice that not a single definition includes the words “white,” “Christian,” or “male.”

Racist adj
1: based on racial intolerance; "racist remarks."
2: discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion.

Racist n : a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others.

Xenophobe n. A person unduly fearful or contemptuous of that which is foreign, especially
of strangers or foreign peoples.

Intolerance n.
1: impatience with annoyances; "his intolerance of interruptions."
2: unwillingness to recognize and respect differences in opinions or beliefs [ant: tolerance].

Hater n : a person who hates.

Since the words are generic the words listed can just as easily be used to describe the promoters of the melting pot.

Page 1 of 5
However, by an appeal to tradition, they are used against anyone, (specifically against white, Christian males) who would speak against the propaganda of the melting pot. So what is the melting pot?

Melting pot n.
1: an environment in which many ideas and races are socially assimilated.
2: a vessel made of material that does not melt easily; used for high temperature chemical reactions
[syn: crucible].

Melting pot n.
1 a : a place where racial amalgamation and social and cultural assimilation are going on
b : the population of such a place.
2 : a process of blending that often results in invigoration or novelty.

Amalgamate trans. verb: to unite in or as if in an amalgam; especially: to merge into a single body. synonym see MIX.

Assimilate v.
1 : to take in and appropriate as nourishment : absorb into the system.
2 : to absorb into the cultural tradition of a population or group
<the community assimilated many immigrants> assimilate.
Assimilate intrans. v.
1 : to become absorbed or incorporated into the system. <some foods
assimilate more readily than others>
2 : to become culturally assimilated.

From the definitions you can see that the melting pot is a social experiment in which pure or impure races/cultures are brought together and merged into a single body of race and culture. So given the right amount of time, the end result of the melting pot is the destruction of the original unique races and cultures to make a new amalgamated race and culture. (Do sugar and butter maintain their original shape, structure and consistency in a melting pot? Answer: No!) Those failing to conform to the assimilation and amalgamation propaganda program are labeled “racist”, “xenophobe”, “intolerant” and “hater” since they are resistant to the “heat” (social norms) of the melting pot.

“In contrast to this propaganda of agitation is the propaganda of integration – the propaganda
of developed nations and characteristics of our civilization; in fact it did not exist before the
twentieth century. It is a propaganda of conformity. It is related to the fact, analyzed earlier, that in Western society it is not longer sufficient to obtain a transitory political act (such as a vote); one needs
total adherence to a society's truths and behavioral patterns. As the more perfectly uniform the society,
the stronger its power and effectiveness, each member should be only an organic and functional
fragment of it, perfectly adapted and integrated. He must share the stereotypes, beliefs and reactions
of the group; he must be an active participant in its economic, ethical, esthetic, and political doings. All
his activities, all his sentiments are dependent on this collectivity. And, as he is often reminded, he can
only fulfill himself only through this collectivity, as a member of the group.(6) Propaganda of
integration thus aims at making the individual participate in his society in every way. It is a
long-term propaganda, a self-reproducing propaganda that seeks to obtain stable behavior, to adapt the individual to his everyday life, to reshape his thoughts and behavior in terms of the permanent
social setting. We can see that this propaganda is more extensive and complex than propaganda of
agitation. It must be permanent, for the individual can no longer be left to himself. (6) This is one of
the points common to all American works on micro-sociology.”

Page 2 of 5
Jaques Ellul, “Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes” (New York: 1973) Page 74-75.
(emphasis added)

So in reality the pro-melting pot propagandists are actually the “racists”, “xenophobes”, “intolerant” and “haters” since they:
1.Believe mixed races are superior to pure races and cultures.
2.Are fearful of the teachings and zealots that promote pure races, religions, and cultures.
3.They are intolerant to beliefs that do not embrace the melting pot.
4.And they hate those zealots who follow the teachings of God. God spoke against amalgamation and assimilation of race and culture.

If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the
world would love its own. But because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the
world, therefore the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you, The servant is not
greater than his master. If they have persecuted Me, they will also persecute you. If they have kept My saying, they will also keep yours. John 15:18-20

I have given them Your Word, and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, even
as I am not of the world. I do not pray for You to take them out of the world, but for You to keep them
from the evil. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. John 17:14-16

Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers; for what fellowshipdoes righteousness have with lawlessness? And what partnership does light have with darkness? And what agreement does Christ
have with Belial? Or what part does a believer have with an unbeliever? And what agreement does
a temple of God have with idols? For you are the temple of the living God, as God has said, "I will dwell
in them and walk among them; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people." Therefore come
out from among them and be separated, says the Lord, and do not touch the unclean thing. And I will receive you and I will be a Father to you, and you shall be My sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty.
2 Corinthians 6 14-18

When the LORD your God shall bring you into the land where you go to possess it, and has cast out
many nations before you, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and
the Perizzites,and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than you, and the
Lord your God shall deliver them before you, you shall crush them, completely destroy them. You shall make no covenant with them nor show mercy to them. Nor shall you make marriages with them. You
shall not give your daughter to his son, nor shall you take his daughter to your son. For they will turn
away your son from following Me, so that they may serve other gods. Deuteronomy 7:1-5

For if you were cut out of the natural wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree; how much more these being according to nature will be grafted into their own olive-tree?
Romans 11:24

As stated before the melting pot is a propaganda of conformity. In order to insure conformity the individuals who resist conformity must be vilified and dehumanized. So they are labeled “racists”, ”white supremists”, “xenophobes”, “intolerant” and “haters.” This is accomplished by the Granfalloon technique of propaganda:

'What makes the Granfalloon tick? Researchers have uncovered two basic psychological processes, one cognitive and one motivational. First, the knowledge that “I am part in this group” is used to divide up
and make sense of the world, much in the same way that words and labels can be used to pre-persuade
Page 3 of 5
(see Chapter 6). Differences between groups are exaggerated, whereas similarities among members of
the granfalloon are emphasized in the secure knowledge that “this is what our type does.” One serious consequence is that the out-group members are dehumanized; they are represented in our minds by a simple, often derogatory label – gook, jap, redneck, southerner, kike, nigger – as opposed to unique individuals – Nguyen, Susumu, Anthony, Elliot, Doug. It is a lot easier to abuse an abstraction. Second, social groups are a source of self-esteem and pride, a form of reverse Groucho Marx - “I'd be more than happy to join a club that would have me as a member.”* To obtain the self esteem the group has to offer, members come to defend the group and adopt its symbols, rituals,and beliefs. Herein lies the secret to
the persuasiveness the granfalloon. If the professional persuader, the advertiser, the politician, the televangelist can get us to accept his or her granfalloons, then we have a ready-made way to make
sense of our lives – the propagandist's way – and as our self-esteem becomes increasingly linked to
these groups, we have a strong motivation to defend the group and to go to great lengths proudly to
adopt its customs. What the propagandist is really saying is: “You are on my side (never mind
that I created the teams); now act like it and do what we say.”'

Pratkanis, Anthony and Aronson, Elliot. “Age of Propaganda: The Everyday Use and Abuse of Persuasion” (New York: 2001) Page 217. (emphasis added)

So remember the next time someone accuses you of being a “racist”, “xenophobe”, “intolerant” or “hater” don't be a victim of their propaganda. Tell that propagandist that it is they who are the “racist”, “xenophobe”, “intolerant” or “hater” since they:

1.Believe mixed races are superior to pure races and cultures.
2.Are fearful of the teachings and zealots that promote pure races, religions, and cultures.
3.They are intolerant to beliefs that do not embrace the melting pot.
4.And they hate those zealots who follow the teachings of God. God spoke against amalgamation and assimilation of race and culture.

“And Peter and the apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.”
Acts 5:29

Here are some questions to ponder:

1. How can you have diversity without diverse races and cultures being separate?
2. How can you have diverse and unique races by interracial marriage?
3. Why does a racist, xenophobic, and intolerant God hater have to re-define the word "diverse" which means separate to promote the melting pot term "diversity" which means the opposite?

diverse adj.
1. Differing one from another.
2. Made up of distinct characteristics, qualities, or elements: “Prague... offers visitors a series of excursions
into a rich and diverse past” (Olivier Bernier).

Caveat: Don't be alarmed or upset if no Racist, Xenophobic, and Intolerant God Hater wants to listen to you and give up their belief in the melting pot. Why?

For action makes propaganda's effect irreversible.(3) He who acts in obedience to propaganda
can never go back. He is now obligated to believe in the propaganda because of his past action.
He is obligated to believe from it his justification and authority, without which his action will seem
Page 4 of 5
to him absurd or unjust, which would be intolerable. He is obligated to continue to advance in the
direction indicated by propaganda, for action demands more action. He is what one calls committed –
which is certainly what the Communist party anticipates, for example, and what the Nazis accomplished.

Jaques Ellul, “Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes” (New York: 1973) Page 29.(emphasis added)

Canon found that, as one's confidence is weakened, a person becomes less prone to listen to
arguments against his or her beliefs. Thus the very people you want to convince and whose
opinions might be the most susceptible to be changed are the ones lest likely to continue to expose themselves to a communication designed for that purpose. Information campaigns frequently fail to

change attitudes, a fact of life persuasive life that was observed by Herbert Hyman and Paul Sheatsley
as far back as 1947. (2) In explaining the frequent failure of information campaigns, Hyman and
Sheatsley noted that people tend to acquire information mostly about things that they find of interest
and tend to avoid information that does not agree with their beliefs. Should someone find that they
have been unavoidably exposed to uninteresting and disagreeable information, a common
response is to distort and reinterpret that information, thus ignoring its implications for updating beliefs and attitudes.

Pratkanis, Anthony and Aronson, Elliot.“Age of Propaganda": The Everyday Use and Abuse of
Persuasion” (New York: 2001) Page 281-282. (emphasis added)

There are at lest four ways in which the members of an audience can reduce their discomfort: (1) They
can change their opinion; (2) they can induce the communicator to change his or her opinion; (3) they
can seek support for their original opinion by finding other people who share their views, in spite of what
the communicator says; or (4) they can derogate the communication – convince themselves the communicator is stupid or immoral – and thereby invalidate the person's opinion.

Pratkanis, Anthony and Aronson, Elliot.“Age of Propaganda": The Everyday Use and Abuse of
Persuasion” (New York: 2001) Page 192. (emphasis added)

"Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love
of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness." 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12

Feel free to reproduce and redistribute this article.
Page 5 of 5

[micatala]

Just a note from a moderator. One of the rules states:

8. Extensive quotes from another source (particularly other websites) should state the source to avoid plagarism.

From what I can tell, the Opening Post is 5 pages pasted in from elsewhere.

I would suggest summarizing in your own words the main points, and presenting the questions for debate.

Also, please be aware of rule 7.

7. Do not post frivolous, flame bait, or inflammatory messages.

I think it is possible to have a discussion on some of the points raised in this article, but there the author is being fairly contentious. Debaters on this forum should endeavor to be civil and respectful, regardless of the subject matter.

[Shamgar]

Just a note from a moderator. One of the rules states:

8. Extensive quotes from another source (particularly other websites) should state the source to avoid plagarism.

If you bothered to read the post you will see it is well documented by something called footnotes. . . .and since I constructed the article. . . .I can't hardly plagerize myself now can I?

Also, please be aware of rule 7.

7. Do not post frivolous, flame bait, or inflammatory messages.

I think it is possible to have a discussion on some of the points raised in this article, but there the author is being fairly contentious. Debaters on this forum should endeavor to be civil and respectful, regardless of the subject matter.

Yeah I could see where you would consider it "inflammatory" since it reveals that you have been living a lie your whole life . . . . and victims of propaganda hate to have their lie exposed. . . go figure. . . . .

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.”

Edward Bernays, “Propaganda” (Brooklyn: Copyright 1928/ ReCopyrighted 2005), page 37.
U.S. Committee on Public Information – WWI

“Fortunately, the sincere and gifted politician is able, by the instrument of propaganda, to mold and form the will of the people.”
Edward Bernays, “Propaganda” (Brooklyn: Copyright 1928/ ReCopyrighted 2005), page 109.

“Ours must be a leadership democracy administered by the intelligent minority who know how to regiment and guide the masses. Is this government by propaganda? Call it, if you prefer, government by education.”

Edward Bernays, “Propaganda” (Brooklyn: Copyright 1928/ ReCopyrighted 2005), page 127-128.

The majority vote is by no means the real public opinion. Its basically irrational character greatly reduces its power to rule in a democracy. Democracy is based on the concept that man is rational and capable of clearly seeing what is in his own interest, but the study of public opinion suggests this is a highly doubtful proposition. And the bearer of public opinion is generally a mass man, psychologically speaking, which makes him quite unsuited to properly exercise his right of citizenship.
Jaques Ellul, “Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes” (New York: 1973) Page 124.

[Shamgar]

hahahahahahaaa. . . . . .

Therefore, anti-Zionism is not a politically legitimate point of view but rather an expression of bigotry and hatred.

Abraham H. Foxman, “Never Again?: The Threat of the New Anti-Semitism,“ (New York: 2003) Page 18.

[The Persnickety Platypus]

Shamgar, I would encourage you to make your posts a bit shorter and more concise. You have posted some great debate material here, but it is so watered down with extensive rambling and excessive quotes that few will be able to appreciate or contribute to it. Post a clear question for debate at the end of your post (and in the event of a particularly lengthy post, enlargen it so that it is easily distinquishable).

For those of you who are not interested in reading Shamgar's narrative in it's entirety, he (like most contemporary Muslims) is mostly expressing comtempt at the assertive Western/democratic influences which, in his own eyes, seek to destroy the unique Muslim culture and assimilate it with the rest of the world.

This subject touches on the direct cause of the current friction between the Middle East and Judeo/Christian democracies. Shamgar, your people are a proud race, and I respect that. I too enjoy cultural diversity- however, not to the point of absolute cultural independance.

Technology and communications are becomming ever more sophisticated, and the world is becomming smaller and smaller. It has become impossible for groups of people (such as the conservative Middle East) to hide their societies from outside influence and isolate their cultures, as was possible in the past. For centuries free market societies have had little to do with the Middle East. However, the markets are ever expanding, and have now come to encompass the very region in question.

Why is this? Why is the United States asserting it's politics in the Middle East? Why the sudden clashing of cultures? Why the recent spurts of terrorism? What is at the center of this entire struggle?

O I L


Let's not make this more complicated than it has to be, because it really is this simple. Oil. Half of the world's most valuable resource resides under the sands of the Muslim dominated Middle East. The political/economic climate in Iraq and it's comtemporaries is not suited to properly quell the world's enormous demand. Consequently, the United States invades Iraq to set up a free market democracy that would better suit their economic interests. Muslims such as yourself, resistant to such dramatic change, and the unavoidable effects it will have on their way of life, have lashed out.

Put two and two together. Is it a coincidence that the attacks on September 11 happened when oil demand (and consequently, foriegn activity in the Middle East) had hit an all time high? Why was the US (the world's biggest oil consumer) the leading proponent for political change in the Middle East, while France (who derives 90% of their energy from nuclear power) was the leading opposition? Oil. Oil. Oil.

Shamgar, I can understand your desire to keep Muslim culture unique. But is it necissary (or beneficial) to completely isolate it? Surely there is some middle ground here that we can all agree on.

Look at the world's developed nations. Look at their standards of living. How did such nations achieved this success?

(1) They made and accepted certain changes when the need became apparent
and
(2) They became involved in foriegn economies and learned from other's successes/mistakes

Muslim societies have yet to do either. Free and democratic systems have consistantly produced the most successful societies, yet the Middle East remains stuck in the failures of closed ecomomies and ultra-conservative totalitarian regimes.

The essential lesson you should glean from this is that no western society has consciously intended to inhibit your culture and force you to assimilate; frankly, they just want your oil. Through simple democratic reform, Muslim societies can meet these needs, get western cultures off their backs, and most importantly, improve their standards of living.

The Middle East has within it's control an infinitely valuable resource, giving it the potential to become a major world player. To capitalize upon this potential does not require you to abandon your treasured religious traditions. What it does require, however, is a willingness to make some essential changes. Likewise, the western nations contributing to this struggle must concede some changes as well. Both sides need to put religious/cultural issues aside, and concentrate on the real matter at hand.

If both sides are ever willing to cooperate, we can put an end to this pointless violence, and drasticly improve the livlihoods of everyone involved.

It's your move. Fight, or adapt for the better?

[Wyvern]

The big question is whether the rest of the world is willing to put up with the fits the middle east is going through before the price of oil goes high enough that the vaste reserves that both the U.S. and Canada have in oil shale become economically/politicallty viable. No this argument has little to do with religion and more about economics, however it needs be said that the oil reserves of non-OPEC nations far exceeds that of OPEC nations, the only real determinator is price and of course the developed nations need for oil before the switch to other resources is made real.

[Shamgar]

Shamgar, I would encourage you to make your posts a bit shorter and more concise. You have posted some great debate material here, but it is so watered down with extensive rambling and excessive quotes that few will be able to appreciate or contribute to it. Post a clear question for debate at the end of your post (and in the event of a particularly lengthy post, enlargen it so that it is easily distinquishable).

hahahahaha that is funny since your long and rambling post is hardly short and concise. . . .and if you bothered to read my post you would see it does contain 3 questions. . . . which you failed to respond to answer. . . and my quotes substantiated what I say. . .why don't you give it a try. . . oh and btw I am not arab or muslim either. . .

Here are some questions to ponder:

1. How can you have diversity without diverse races and cultures being separate?
2. How can you have diverse and unique races by interracial marriage?
3. Why does a racist, xenophobic, and intolerant God hater have to re-define the word "diverse" which means separate to promote the melting pot term "diversity" which means the opposite?

------------------
Propaganda can only go in the direction of world opinion – that of Asia, Africa, almost all of Europe. Above all, when it is anti-racist, it is helped along by the myth of progress. It follows that propaganda cannot be applied everywhere alike, and that – at least up to now – propaganda in both Africa and Asia must be essentially different from propaganda in the rest of the world. We stress “at least up to now” because those countries are being progressively won over by Western myths and are developing national and technological forms of society. But for the moment these myths are not yet everyday reality, flesh and blood, spiritual bread, sacred inheritance, as they are with us. To sum up, propaganda must express the fundamental currents of society.(1)

Jaques Ellul, “Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes” (New York: 1973) Page 42.

For those of you who are not interested in reading Shamgar's narrative in it's entirety, he (like most contemporary Muslims) is mostly expressing comtempt at the assertive Western/democratic influences which, in his own eyes, seek to destroy the unique Muslim culture and assimilate it with the rest of the world.

This subject touches on the direct cause of the current friction between the Middle East and Judeo/Christian democracies. Shamgar, your people are a proud race, and I respect that. I too enjoy cultural diversity- however, not to the point of absolute cultural independance.[/quote]

Ah for one thing there is no such thing as "Judeo-Christian" in the Scriptures. . only the cult of Christian Zionists call themselves that title who are the ones who promote Islamaphobia. . . but denounce Judeophobia. . .aka antisemitism. . . . even though they say their form of antisemitism is necessary. . .
----
With the rise of Arab nationalism and especially Palestinian aspirations towards self-determination, the polemics against Arabs has grown. Comparisons between Hitler and Arabs are now frequent in the writings of contemporary Christian Zionists. (129) Van der Hoeven of the ICEJ is typical: 'Just as there was a definite ideology behind hatred and atrocities of Hitler and the Nazis, there is one behind the hatred and wars by the Arabs against the Jews and people of Israel.'(130)

Stephen Sizer, Christian Zionism: Road-map to Armageddon? (Leicester: 2004) p. 242.

Antipathy for Arabs generally has led to the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and the demonization of Islam, while Arab leaders such as Yasser Arafat and Saddam Hussein are cast for the role of Antichrist. (118) In such a dualistic and polarized world, Christian Zionists are best skeptical and at worst hostile towards the Middle East peace process.

Stephen Sizer, Christian Zionism: Road-map to Armageddon? (Leicester: 2004) p. 240.

An anti-semite “is someone who hates Jews more than he's supposed to.” - TV Evangelist James Robison

Grace Halsell, “Forcing God's Hand: Why Millions Pray For A Quick Rapture - - - And Destruction Of Planet Earth” (Beltsville: 2003) Page 79.

-----------
Second, there is no Scriptural authority for any Christian to form a "democracy"
----------
And when they found them not, they drew Jason and certain brethren unto the rulers of the city, crying, These that have turned the world upside down are come hither also; Whom Jason hath received: and these all do contrary to the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, one Jesus. Acts 17:6-7

----------------
Third, there is no Scriptural authority to asssimilate and amalgamate in a "smaller and smaller world."

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.
2 Cor 6:14-18

Why is this? Why is the United States asserting it's politics in the Middle East? Why the sudden clashing of cultures? Why the recent spurts of terrorism? What is at the center of this entire struggle? O I L

Wrong. . . . "Christtian" Zionism invaded the region long before oil was ever discovered. And Iraq was in the jew's gun sights well in the 1940's.

-----

Aaronsohn's friend William K. Bullit, a member of the U.S. Mission to the Paris Peace Conference, later recalled: 'Many times during the Peace Conference in Paris I joined him [i.e., Aaronsohn] and Dr. Weizman at a time while both were considering and assessing policies and plans. Aaronsohn's proposal was the following: While Palestine must be made a Jewish state, the vast valley of Iraq, which is irrigated by the Euphrates and Tigirs, should be restored, through the use of planned irrigation, to be a paradise of the world ... and furthermore the Arabs of Palestine should be offered lands there ... to which as many Arabs as possible should be persuaded to emigrate.'(26)

Expulsion of the Palestinians: The Concept of “Transfer” in Zionist Political Thought, 1882-1948. Nur Masalha. (Washington, D.C.: 1992) Page 13.

It should not be imagined that the concept of transfer was held by only maximalists or extremists within the Zionist movement. On the contrary, it was embraced by almost all shades of opinion, from the Revisionist right to the Labor left. Virtually every member of the Zionist pantheon of founding fathers and important leaders supported it and advocated it in one form or another, from Chaim Weizmann and Vladimir Jabotinsky to David Ben-Gurion and Menahem Ussishkin. Supporters of transfer included such moderates as the “Arab appeaser” Moshe Shertok and the socialist Arthur Ruppin, founder of Brit Shalom, a movement advocating equal rights for Arabs and Jews. More importantly, transfer proposal were put forward by the Jewish Agency itself, in effect the government of Yishuv.

Expulsion of the Palestinians: The Concept of “Transfer” in Zionist Political Thought, 1882-1948. Nur Masalha. (Washington, D.C.: 1992) Page 2.

Shamgar, I can understand your desire to keep Muslim culture unique. But is it necissary (or beneficial) to completely isolate it? Surely there is some middle ground here that we can all agree on.

I am speaking in only the most general terms. . . .to keep the muslim culture out of our white Christian culture. . .and cetainly our wealth and prosperity has never been dependent upon democracy, oil, world markets, arabs or jews. . .but upon God.

Muslim societies have yet to do either. Free and democratic systems have consistantly produced the most successful societies, yet the Middle East remains stuck in the failures of closed ecomomies and ultra-conservative totalitarian regimes.

Yeah democracies have been succesful at producing secular humanism; rights for homos, feminists, agnostics, atheists etc; made pornography one of the largest money makers in the US economy; etc. . . .yeah I can see why the muslims call us the GREAT SATAN. . . . as America has become the whore of Babylon ruled by the antichrists. . . . all spoken against by the Christian religion. . . .so "Yes" democracy is succesful at helping to destroy Christainity. . . .

The essential lesson you should glean from this is that no western society has consciously intended to inhibit your culture and force you to assimilate; frankly, they just want your oil. Through simple democratic reform, Muslim societies can meet these needs, get western cultures off their backs, and most importantly, improve their standards of living.

Thanks for your unsubstantiated opinions. . . .but the democratization of the Middle east is to force democracy down the throats of arabs by "Christian" zionist who are xenophobic and intolerant of the arab cultures. . . which is clearly printed in every newspaper article. . . .

It's your move. Fight, or adapt for the better?

Yeah resist or willingly come into the mass of unthinking drones. . . .
--------------
“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.”

Edward Bernays, “Propaganda” (Brooklyn: Copyright 1928/ ReCopyrighted 2005), page 37.
U.S. Committee on Public Information – WWI

“Fortunately, the sincere and gifted politician is able, by the instrument of propaganda, to mold and form the will of the people.”
Edward Bernays, “Propaganda” (Brooklyn: Copyright 1928/ ReCopyrighted 2005), page 109.

“Ours must be a leadership democracy administered by the intelligent minority who know how to regiment and guide the masses. Is this government by propaganda? Call it, if you prefer, government by education.”

Edward Bernays, “Propaganda” (Brooklyn: Copyright 1928/ ReCopyrighted 2005), page 127-128.

The majority vote is by no means the real public opinion. Its basically irrational character greatly reduces its power to rule in a democracy. Democracy is based on the concept that man is rational and capable of clearly seeing what is in his own interest, but the study of public opinion suggests this is a highly doubtful proposition. And the bearer of public opinion is generally a mass man, psychologically speaking, which makes him quite unsuited to properly exercise his right of citizenship.
Jaques Ellul, “Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes” (New York: 1973) Page 124.

[The Persnickety Platypus]

hahahahaha that is funny since your long and rambling post is hardly short and concise. . .

But the main difference is, people actually know what I am talking about.

I have only just realized that in the previous post I mistook you for a hardline Muslim, instead of the other way around. Yes, that is how incoherent you are.

I truly want to know where you are comming from on this issue. Please state your religion, denomination, nationality, and political alignment.

This would clarify a lot, thanks.

Second, there is no Scriptural authority for any Christian to form a "democracy"

The Bible provides no scriptural authority on any political matter. You are right, Jesus never explicitly commands us to form a democracy. However, he also never commands us to utilize preventive medicines or protect environmental resources. Does this mean a true Christian should let himself die of a deadly disease or dump toxic chemicals in the ocean?

If not democracy, what sort of political ideology do you think the Bible suggests we employ?

Third, there is no Scriptural authority to asssimilate and amalgamate in a "smaller and smaller world."

Matt 19:19
Love your neighbor as you love yourself.

Love as Christ would have it cannot persist in a divided, ethnocentric world. While it is necissary that we maintaining some form of cursory cultural independance, a divided house cannot stand. There must come a point where differing peoples can feel comfortable intermingling and establishing proper communication, else another race becomes nothing more than "the people on the other side of the fence". Such attitudes have always lead to hatred, suspicion, and war, as is demonstrated most aptly in the current war on terrorism. A seemingly unbreachable wall of culture and ideology divides Christian's and Muslims. If both sides had previously sought to communicate and establish a proper understanding of one another, this silly war need never have been fought.
Eph 4:31
Get rid of your bitterness, hot tempers, anger, loud quarreling, cursing, and hatred.

Hatred can only exist where there is no understanding. Shagmar, your ideals of a divided world create an atmosphere where understanding is untenable.

Jam 2:9
But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.

Act 10:28
And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

The Bible teaches that all people are equal, no matter what race, creed, culture, or religion. Why should such people be prohibited from intermingling and sharing ideas?

Wrong. . . . "Christtian" Zionism invaded the region long before oil was ever discovered. And Iraq was in the jew's gun sights well in the 1940's.

This is true, but Iraq is not, nor has ever been part of the holy land. Christians and Jews have no roots in the area around Iraq (aside from their enslavement under the Babylonians, which is hardly something anyone wants to glorify). The land related to the Zionist movement does not extend much further than current-day Isreal.

Any foriegn involvement in Iraq relates directly to the vast petroleum reserves under currently under unstable Iraqi control. Oil (the new god, it seems) is responsible for a large portion of Muslim hostility, due to vast western economic activity in the area.

I am speaking in only the most general terms. . . .to keep the muslim culture out of our white Christian culture

It is this attitude that allows Muslim-Christian violence to pervade.

Can you not see that the dissconnection between these two cultures is what breeds the hatred and intolerance we see in today's global climate?

What is the benefit of walling off our cultures? We need to remove all barriers in hopes of allowing greater understanding to permeate.

Does building a fence between two warring neighbors solve anything? Of course not- suspicion will grow and their hatred of one another will fester. Such neighbors must seek diplomacy if they ever hope to solve their differences.

our wealth and prosperity has never been dependent upon democracy, oil, world markets, arabs or jews. . .but upon God.

But God only helps those who help themselves. By establishing a free economy and a tenable political climate, the citizens of America and other nations of the like have capitalized upon their abilities, and worked hard towards their goals, the pay-off being a successful country with notable world influence.

One could say that God has rewarded us for working hard and utilizing the proper policies, but without such policies (amoung them, democracy), we would never have attained the success we enjoy today.

Yeah democracies have been succesful at producing secular humanism; rights for homos, feminists, agnostics, atheists etc; made pornography one of the largest money makers in the US economy; etc. . . .yeah I can see why the muslims call us the GREAT SATAN. . . . as America has become the whore of Babylon ruled by the antichrists. . . . all spoken against by the Christian religion. . . .so "Yes" democracy is succesful at helping to destroy Christainity. . . .

So you prefer the totalitarian theocracies of the past? Systematic murder of so-called "infidels", oppression of minorities, and neglect of the poor?

Look at the successful nations of our day and age. They are all democracies; every last one of them.

Behold, the richest nations on Earth (in order):

(1) Luxembourg (democracy)
(2) Norway (democracy)
(3) Switzerland (democracy)
(4) United States (democracy)
(5) Denmark (democracy)
(6) Iceland (democracy)
(7) Japan (democracy)
(8) Sweden (democracy)
(9) Ireland (democracy)
(10) United Kingdom (democracy)
(11) Finland (democracy)
(12) Austria (democracy)
(13) Netherlands (democracy)
(14) Belgium (democracy)
(15) Germany (democracy)
(16) France (democracy)
(17) Canada (democracy)
(18) Australia (democracy)

Amoung these nations you will find the highest standards of living, the greatest safeguards for the poor, and the best standards of justice.


You should rethink your stances on freedom. For one, it guarantees you the right to write the very things you have posted on this forum; a freedom you seem to be taking for granted.

[Shamgar]

hahahahaha that is funny since your long and rambling post is hardly short and concise. . .

But the main difference is, people actually know what I am talking about. I have only just realized that in the previous post I mistook you for a hardline Muslim, instead of the other way around. Yes, that is how incoherent you are.

hahahahahahaaa the discernment of a three years old bent crowbar. . .

I truly want to know where you are comming from on this issue. Please state your religion, denomination, nationality, and political alignment. This would clarify a lot, thanks.

Well use your "superior" discernment skills and figure it out. . . . .as it should be painfully obvious from the orginal post. . . . .

The Bible provides no scriptural authority on any political matter. If not democracy, what sort of political ideology do you think the Bible suggests we employ?

Wrong. . . . . Romans 13:1-17, Deut 17:14-20. . . .. at least you are consitstent but being consistently wrong is no virtue. . . .and I don't need to "think" as I know as it is clearly indicated in the Scriptures which you cannot discern. . . go figure.. .

Third, there is no Scriptural authority to asssimilate and amalgamate in a "smaller and smaller world."

Matt 19:19
Love your neighbor as you love yourself.

hahahahaha the babble of someone with no discernment of Scriptures. . . . as I don't see
the concept of assimilation and amalgamation in that verse or the other verses. . . .

The Bible teaches that all people are equal, no matter what race, creed, culture, or religion.

Must be why you forgot to quote the verse which states this fantasy you claim. . . .and must be why equal rights were not an invention of a Christian movement hundreds of years ago. . . .not to mention thousands of years ago. . . .

Romans 9: 18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. 19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? 22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

This is true, but Iraq is not, nor has ever been part of the holy land. Christians and Jews have no roots in the area around Iraq (aside from their enslavement under the Babylonians, which is hardly something anyone wants to glorify). The land related to the Zionist movement does not extend much further than current-day Isreal.

Wrong again. . . (Hey you are batting 1000). . . .as the zionists claim part of Egypt, Lebannon, Jordan as Israel proper. . .and the the zionist were quoted from their own diaries in the book mentioned so they had designs on Iraq also. . . .

Can you not see that the dissconnection between these two cultures is what breeds the hatred and intolerance we see in today's global climate? What is the benefit of walling off our cultures?

Yeah I can see there was peace between the west and the east before the zionist moved into the region. . . .and now there isn't. . . .and I can see that when there was isolation between the cultures there was peace. . now there isn't. . . .and the benefit. . .all the benefits God listed for being walled off. . . .

But God only helps those who help themselves. By establishing a free economy and a tenable political climate, the citizens of America and other nations of the like have capitalized upon their abilities, and worked hard towards their goals, the pay-off being a successful country with notable world influence.

hahahaha more pseudo-relgious garbage from a lover of money. . . .capitalist . .aka a lover of money. . .

1 Tim 6: 6 But godliness with contentment is great gain. 7 For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. 8 And having food and raiment let us be therewith content. 9 But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. 10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

So you prefer the totalitarian theocracies of the past? Systematic murder of so-called "infidels", oppression of minorities, and neglect of the poor?

I prefer following God's law unlike you. . . .and since you hate God and His laws you add vomit to it to make it appears God favored "equal rights" and "civil rights" which never appears in the Scriptures nor was practiced at the time of Christ. . . .your revisonist history. . . .aka vomit. . .

Is 28: 7 But they also have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, they are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment. 8 For all tables are full of vomit and filthiness, so that there is no place clean .

For one, it guarantees you the right to write the very things you have posted on this forum; a freedom you seem to be taking for granted.

Hahhahaaa pseudo patriot garbage. . .since "freedom" of speech" is not a right in the Scriptures. . .as the liberal vomit you are spewing would not be tolerated. . .

[Wyvern]

hahahahahahaaa the discernment of a three years old bent crowbar. . .

It's funny how your first new post called for people to show humility. The hypocrisy is strong in you young padawan.

Well use your "superior" discernment skills and figure it out. . . . .as it should be painfully obvious from the orginal post. . . . .

Its okay if you don't want to, it's quite obvious you come from the lunatic fringe. This is proven out by your behavior. Start taking your meds again.

Matt 19:19
Love your neighbor as you love yourself.

hahahahaha the babble of someone with no discernment of Scriptures. . . . as I don't see
the concept of assimilation and amalgamation in that verse or the other verses. . . .

Strange how you say you base everything on the bible but ignore this single most important commandment. Either that or you are filled with self loathing. You can't pick and choose the bible, it's all or nothing.

Must be why you forgot to quote the verse which states this fantasy you claim. . . .and must be why equal rights were not an invention of a Christian movement hundreds of years ago. . . .not to mention thousands of years ago. . . .

Good old Matt 19:19 fits the bill quite nicely, it tells you to treat everyone as you want to be treated, i.e. everyone gets treated equally.

Yeah I can see there was peace between the west and the east before the zionist moved into the region. . . .and now there isn't. . . .and I can see that when there was isolation between the cultures there was peace. . now there isn't. . . .and the benefit. . .all the benefits God listed for being walled off. . . .

Well then you should be happy to know that Israel has separated its culture from the palestinian culture that surrounds it from its inception. Ignorance breeds hatred, america and japan were separated before ww2 and that didn't keep war from happening. It's just amazing the hoops you can jump through to justify blaming everything on jews.

I prefer following God's law unlike you. . . .and since you hate God and His laws you add vomit to it to make it appears God favored "equal rights" and "civil rights" which never appears in the Scriptures nor was practiced at the time of Christ. . . .your revisonist history. . . .aka vomit. . .

I see you prefer the OT god over the NT one.

Hahhahaaa pseudo patriot garbage. . .since "freedom" of speech" is not a right in the Scriptures. . .as the liberal vomit you are spewing would not be tolerated.

You use freedom of speech but deny any such right exists, your hypocrisy has risen to the point of irony now. Not allowing free speech is a sign of weakness, you can't stand criticism so you merely squash it look to the example of the soviet union.