World War 3?

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[statisticool]

Odd... the majority of people elected Bush president.


Not the first time. Funny how you don't mention that.

It is also funny how you leave out the fact that the second time it was by the smallest margin by an incumbent Pres. ...ever.

Your repeatedly used (but never successfully) tactic of saying 'you disagree with so and so, therefore so and so are stupid, according to you' is downright dishonest. One can disagree with so and so without believing they are stupid.

[Mike Sigman]

So Justin... there's absolutely no way anyone seriously has missed the fact that you follow me around, desperately trying to make a negative post followup to as many things I say as you can. Care to sort of loosen up and explain to people why you do it on a public internet forum?

Personally, I'd be interested to hear how you think such bizarre behavior comes across to most reasonably balanced people that watch you.... if you'd care to comment? Are you related to Stephen J. Goodson, the strange guy (another Cheng Man Ching follower, like you, and a student of Robert W. Smith) who has had a "hate Mike Sigman" webpage posted for 10 years? Ten years??!! Tsk.

Mike Sigman

[statisticool]

You're drifting off topic here. I could care less about your petty personal beefs with people who have impeccable credentials such as Goodson and Smith, nor your hypocrisy of 'negative internet posts', given you have what, an easily-found history of at least 10 years doing it?.

So let's stay focused on this thread, M'kay?

So to get back on topic. Do you maintain that Arabs are the same as Islamists?

[statisticool]

Actually, I changed my mind. I will comment on the fued with Goodson. Since Mike brought it up, he apparently wants to discuss it.

What Mike calls a "hate Mike Sigman" page, is simply a page questioning the validy of what Mike calls his "Teacher Test", which is apparently another of many static applications that have nothing to do with martial ability in an actual situation, but are rather more like the Magnetic Girl, unbendable arm, etc, and depending on the setup, can be countered, and therefore don't really shed light on what 'internal' is. This is what Goodson's page (http://ofinterest.net:16080/ttr/) discusses as the main issues.

How anyone, but Mike, can view that as a "hate" page, is beyond me. Well, unless one believes criticism = hate.

[Guilty Spark]

Mike Sigman wrote:
Odd... the majority of people elected Bush president.

Honest question, what were the numbers from the polls?
I've heard Bush 51% Kerry 49%. Is that at all accurate?

[Mike Sigman]

You're drifting off topic here.Oh, please.... the guy who kills thread after thread with the BS stalking stuff is worried now about being "off topic". Go ahead Justin... tell us what your problem is. You might as well be open about it, since everyone can see you have one. The guy with the cool "look at me" stuff on his webpages exposes himself as some sort of nut by stalking another person on the internet. I'm sure a lot of people would be interested in hearing how a real whacko rationalizes it to himself. Critical readers are interested in why you undress yourself in public, Justin, you clever sausage.

Mike Sigman

[Mike Sigman]

Actually, I changed my mind. I will comment on the fued with Goodson. Since Mike brought it up, he apparently wants to discuss it.

What Mike calls a "hate Mike Sigman" page, is simply a page questioning the validy of what Mike calls his "Teacher Test", ... That's what's known as a "tangential evasion", Justin. There are a number of people who have read Stephen J. Goodson's bizarre fixations with Mike Sigman.... they're astonishingly like Justin Smith's, oddly enough. Oh, and another coincidence, he used to ping back to Alexandria, Virginia, too. You guys could be fast friends, I'm sure. Both of you are Cheng Man Ching cultists. The world is small.

Last I saw of Goodson, he was missing from an engagement to kick my butt, Justin. Unfortunately he saw how big I was and realized that his usual habit of bullying people with his weight wouldn't work... so he didn't show. But he made a few attempts to stalk me around the internet again, just for old times' sake.

Why don't you tell us what your problem is, Justin. Lay out the logic of why you would stalk around an Aikido forum when you don't do Aikido, just to slip in nasty little negativities. Have you thought of what your long-term goal is, in doing this weird stuff? Where does it lead?

Mike Sigman

[Guilty Spark]

Lay out the logic of why you would stalk around an Aikido forum when you don't do Aikido

You don't practice Aikido, Justin?

Mike what web page are you getting that from? All I got from his web page was a bunch of numbers on a white screen.

[Mike Sigman]

You don't practice Aikido, Justin?

Mike what web page are you getting that from? All I got from his web page was a bunch of numbers on a white screen.Left click on the dot in the pyramid. It's a little boy's way of saying "I'm cool". ;)

[Neil Mick]

"Confirmation Bias" is the modern term... it used to be called "intellectual dishonesty".

Regards,

Mike Sigman

Coming from the fellow who keeps trying to redefine racism, that's quite...enlightening.

Really, it is.


Why don't you tell us what your problem is, Justin. Lay out the logic of why you would stalk around an Aikido forum when you don't do Aikido, just to slip in nasty little negativities. Have you thought of what your long-term goal is, in doing this weird stuff? Where does it lead?

Mike Sigman

Why don't you answer your own question? What's your agenda?

[Mike Sigman]

Coming from the fellow who keeps trying to redefine racism, that's quite...enlightening. This is what I mean, Neil... you always make untrue tangential remarks. I actually posted the definition of 'racism' from Merriam-Webster, but in your usual rush to make a slam-dunk, you simply lie that I am "trying to redefine racism". You're dishonest. Yet, you try to hold out the idea that yours is always some sort of "moral high ground". Phoney. :rolleyes: Try sometime to have an honest debate, Neil.

Mike

[Neil Mick]

You're dishonest. Yet, you try to hold out the idea that yours is always some sort of "moral high ground". Phoney. :rolleyes: Try sometime to have an honest debate, Neil.

Mike

OK, but enough about you. On to other things. I think that we've padded your ego enough...sometimes I really believe that you post this nonsense just to get a rise out of ppl.

Anyone who cares can look back and see your perfidious lies. Not really interested in pursuing the matter. Go stalk someone else.

***************************

So, BushCo is in a sticky wicket, as it were. What WILL they do, now that their fave client-state violated an agreement with them?

The Bush administration is expected to inform Congress today that Israel may have violated agreements with the United States when it fired U.S.-supplied cluster munitions into civilian areas in southern Lebanon last summer. The New York Times reports officials at the Pentagon and State Department are divided over whether Israel should be sanctioned for its use of the cluster bombs. Israel has already acknowledged it fired thousands of American cluster munitions but it denied violating agreements that prohibit their use in civilian areas.

Funny, but Mikey, Amir, et al, seem not to mention the little dirty details about cluster-bombs when it comes to "defending Israel..." nor, that the IDF fired off a series of cluster bombs known to have a high percentage of failure.

But of course, ppl like Amir would say that I was just being naive, for implying that Israel had any other choice, other than to use a weapon of questionable legality, effectiveness, or control (in terms of high civilian casualty-rate: a factor the IDF often doesn't seem to hold in high regard, when deciding on choices of daily military activities).

Ultimately, of course, I'm sure that BushCo will soft-peddle the announcement, possibly offering a weak proposal for Sanctions that will be easily shot down, by pol's under AIPAC's thumb. Just look at how utterly disregarded are ventures like the road-map, to see what I mean. Israel has so gone off the "map," while the State Dept. can do little more than utter the occasional croak of mild deferment.

But it IS interesting (if ultimately uneventful) that members of the Bush Admin can muster enough turbulence to throw any critique at Israel at all, no matter how weak. That, in itself, is telling.

[Mike Sigman]

So, BushCo is in a sticky wicket, as it were. What WILL they do, now that their fave client-state violated an agreement with them?



Funny, but Mikey, Amir, et al, seem not to mention the little dirty details about cluster-bombs when it comes to "defending Israel..." nor, that the IDF fired off a series of cluster bombs known to have a high percentage of failure. Notice in the press release it says "may have", Neil. Notice also that once again you fixate on anything that is anti-Israel, whereas if we count your anti-Muslim outrages they are zero. In other words, you're staying true to "Confirmation Bias".... posting only those things and skewing things to only support your already-held biases.But of course, ppl like Amir would say that I was just being naive, for implying that Israel had any other choice, other than to use a weapon of questionable legality, effectiveness, or control (in terms of high civilian casualty-rate: a factor the IDF often doesn't seem to hold in high regard, when deciding on choices of daily military activities). Gee.... it's almost like Lebanon did not attack Israel, now. Amazing. Oh, but if they DID attack Israel, it was Israel's fault. Spare us your anti-Jewish rants, Neil.Israel has so gone off the "map," while the State Dept. can do little more than utter the occasional croak of mild deferment. The Arabs have not kept one part of the "roadmap", Neil. Israel has made concession after concession. Tell me how it is that your views are "non partisan".... i.e., "truthful". You are not truthful, Neil.

Mike Sigman

[Neil Mick]

Notice in the press release it says "may have", Neil. Notice also that once again you fixate on anything that is anti-Israel, whereas if we count your anti-Muslim outrages they are zero. In other words, you're staying true to "Confirmation Bias".... posting only those things and skewing things to only support your already-held biases. Gee.... it's almost like Lebanon did not attack Israel, now. Amazing. Oh, but if they DID attack Israel, it was Israel's fault. Spare us your anti-Jewish rants, Neil. The Arabs have not kept one part of the "roadmap", Neil. Israel has made concession after concession. Tell me how it is that your views are "non partisan".... i.e., "truthful". You are not truthful, Neil.

Mike Sigman

Gods, you are so predictable...it's almost Pavlovian, how predictable your responses are.

Any other perspectives?

[Mike Sigman]

Notice how Neil dissembles and drops a personal attack once he was caught on the "defining racism" lie/assertion. You can't even admit when you're wrong, can you, Neil? Even when it's in black and white for everyone to read. Yet you want to preach about what the Bush administration should do about "honesty". Hypocrisy.

Why do you constantly bait Israel and Americans who happen to like their country, Neil? Are you happy to gloat over every nuance you can interpret as "failure" for Israel and the US????

;)

Mike

[Neil Mick]

Notice how Neil dissembles and drops a personal attack once he was caught on the "defining racism" lie/assertion. You can't even admit when you're wrong, can you, Neil?

Yes, Mike, I can (unlike, of course, you). But no, Mike, I'm not dissembling. Here's what would happen, should I bother to answer you:

1. I pull up the 3 references that other people made to your racist remarks, along with a dictionary definition of racism...AGAIN;
2. You retreat with a personal remark questioning my
a. patriotism
b. sanity
c. teaching ability
d. martial ability,
with a final jab about how I hate the (misspelling of) the Jews
(you've done all these before, in the past)
3. I point out that you're trying to redirect the topic, and ask you to come up with proof to back your claim
4. You wait a few posts, and then come back, misrepresenting some quickie post you made with Amir as resolving the issue.

I'm tired of your trollish attacks. And, you seem to be a broken record with the same nonsense, over and over.

Why do you constantly bait Israel and Americans who happen to like their country, Neil?

Why do you pretend to be an American who happens to like his country? You certainly don't hold opinions or views that the majority of us do. Nor, do you seem too well-disposed towards your countrymen who hold diverse opinions to your own.

So, how long have you hated being an American, Mike? Was it a slow process, or did it happen all at once?

[Hogan]

Not the first time. Funny how you don't mention that.



It is also funny how you leave out the fact that the second time it was by the smallest margin by an incumbent Pres. ...ever...

By electoral college or popular vote?
By electoral college? Not true:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781450.html

By popular vote? Not true:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781450.html

Presidential returns can be used by both parties for their arguments - notice from the link I posted you can also say that Bush received the most popular votes FOR a president EVER.

[Neil Mick]

By popular vote? Not true:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781450.html

More proof that one should read one's sources, rather than just post blindly...

United States presidential election, 2004 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election,_2004)

At the same time, Bush's 2.5-percent popular vote margin over Kerry is the smallest margin of victory (in percentage terms) for an incumbent president in American history.

[Mike Sigman]

You certainly don't hold opinions or views that the majority of us do. :D :D :D This has got to be one of the funniest remarks ever posted by Neil. ;)

Mike

[Mike Sigman]

More proof that one should read one's sources, rather than just post blindly...

United States presidential election, 2004 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election,_2004)Oh, now you're changing it to "an incumbent president", Neil? If you're going to change the debate, why not be honest and point that out????

Mike Sigman

[Taliesin]

Mike

Since you have asked for honesty. Here is my honest opinion.

We are being honest with you. It is you who have amply demonstrated that honesty and hypocrisy are concepts you can't or won't understand. You have attempted to redefine racism and compounded your hypocrisy for berating Neil Mick for not criticizing 'the Arabs'. You have apparently inferred that you have an expertise of the Islamic faith and provided nothing to back it up.

You automatically deride anyone who criticizes your current president as 'Anti-American' and yourself as patriotic. Yet you have consistently failed to demonstrate you have even the slightest interest in what the word actually means. In fact you have refused to understand what it means.

You seem to feel you are 'morally superior' to those whose opinion you disagree with solely for the reason that they (including myself) dare to disagree with you.

You apparently consider that anyone who notices that the American Troops were sent into Iraq on a totally dishonest pretext stupid (How dare we not believe the lies we're told)

You clearly promote a philosophy of "the end justifies any means" for your own preferred agenda.

You apparently claim that Christians do not have any record of Genocide, I take you don't know where the holocaust took place, you don't know who invented concentration camps, you don't know what religion that the troops who perpetrated the Sand Creek massacre were. I take it you don't know what religion or ethnicity most serial killers appear to be.

Given the rabid venomous desperation that is characteristic of your posts I am left with the feeling of someone is desperately trying to convince yourself of something you know isn't true and have deluded yourself that if you convince one other person, you will be able to believe it yourself.

I also point out that I do not claim to be above making personal attacks.

And finally I leave you with a little ditty (not my own work unfortunately)

When God erects a house of Prayer
The Devil starts a chapel there
And on later examination
The later has the larger congregation.

Something I believe accurately describes all religions - particularly those whose leaders have a great deal of power.

I won't be on this thread for a whilst - so you have plenty of time to, at least try, and formulate a reasonable response.

[Hogan]

More proof that one should read one's sources, rather than just post blindly...

United States presidential election, 2004 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election,_2004)

What is your link supposed to show?

My link was in response to someone stating that Bush won by the slimmest majority, & I showed that claim to be wrong in both cases (popular or electoral). Did you even read the data on all the elections?

And your link is wikipedia!? Yeah, like that is gospel.

[Ron Tisdale]

And your link is wikipedia!? Yeah, like that is gospel.

Heh, not if Microsoft has it's way.... :D

Best,
Ron

[Neil Mick]

Mike

Since you have asked for honesty. Here is my honest opinion.

We are being honest with you. It is you who have amply demonstrated that honesty and hypocrisy are concepts you can't or won't understand. You have attempted to redefine racism and compounded your hypocrisy for berating Neil Mick for not criticizing 'the Arabs'. You have apparently inferred that you have an expertise of the Islamic faith and provided nothing to back it up.

Given the rabid venomous desperation that is characteristic of your posts I am left with the feeling of someone is desperately trying to convince yourself of something you know isn't true and have deluded yourself that if you convince one other person, you will be able to believe it yourself.

I also point out that I do not claim to be above making personal attacks.

That's it: you hit it right on the head. His posts do have a feeling of someone trying to convince himself of things he really knows isn't true. Not deep down.

Nice post, David.

I won't be on this thread for a whilst - so you have plenty of time to, at least try, and formulate a reasonable response.

Hah...that'll be the day. But, I commend your etiquette. :cool:

Heh, not if Microsoft has it's way.... :D

Best,
Ron

Good 1...:)

[Mike Sigman]

We are being honest with you.No, You are not, David, unless you have a mouse in your pocket. If you are the representative of some group, please name it. Otherwise, you are trying to resort to some sort of "authority" to support your position by claiming the "we". And as you and I have previously discussed in other threads, I think you are intellectually dishonest. But as a self-styled "socialist", I don't think you have much to lose, eh?

Actually, I should make a comment. I think you ARE representative of a certain group of posters on the forum, David. Unfortunately, it is a minor group of "unusual" people like Neil, Justin Smith, and a few others. If that is the group you're claiming in your "we", your opinion is noted and given its due.

Mike

[statisticool]

The guy with the cool "look at me" stuff on his webpages exposes himself as some sort of nut by stalking another person on the internet.


To translate for all irrational people, by "stalking", he means "responding" and "pointing out logical fallacies", and "asking people to back up their claims", and "disagreeing".

[Neil Mick]

No, You are not, David,

I think you ARE representative of a certain group of posters...like Neil, Justin Smith, and a few others. If that is the group you're claiming in your "we", your opinion is noted and given its due.

Mike

And Amir, and Ron, and Mark, as well. Yes, Mike, "we" are all telling you that your posts are racist. But go ahead...deny the truth by attempting to marginalize the messengers.

It's your MO, after all. You can seemingly never be wrong.

[Mike Sigman]

And Amir, and Ron, and Mark, as well. Yes, Mike, "we" are all telling you that your posts are racist. But go ahead...deny the truth by attempting to marginalize the messengers.

It's your MO, after all. You can seemingly never be wrong.I don't think Ron is part of the same grouping of people, Neil. But I'll let you straighten that out with him since you're the one trying to smear him by association. ;)

Regards,

Mike Sigman

[Mike Sigman]

To translate for all irrational people, by "stalking", he means "responding" and "pointing out logical fallacies", and "asking people to back up their claims", and "disagreeing".Justin, you may want to dissemble and pretend that no one has spotted the "real you" and that you're "just responding", but do you really think no one has noticed anything odd about your stalking me around the forum? Seriously? Try to imagine someone you know has this hate thing for someone in, say, Capoiera, and even though they don't do Capoiera, they're on a Cap forum obviously chasing this one person around making negative posts every chance they get... do you really think that's sane or that no one notices? Tell us.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

[statisticool]

Justin, you may want to dissemble and pretend that no one has
(snip)


What I will do, however, is continue to inform you that you constantly engage in many fallacies.

[Mike Sigman]

What I will do, however, is continue to inform you that you constantly engage in many fallacies.Really? Just me, then... no one else? And it's your duty to follow me around and point it out, even though you don't seem to know the *right* answers yourself? So, why am I accorded this answer of you trying to straighten me out, Justin? Why this focus on me? I mean, you must realize that it appears a little bizarre or you wouldn't have had other people noting it aloud numerous times on the forum. And each time you appear to think you're rationally answering with the idea that you're "just responding". You don't see how odd that looks?

Why don't you go visit and actually meet up with Jim Sorrentino or others? Show them your ideas, instead of secretly just "observing" and then downplaying? Why are you so furtive, Justin? Would you be embarrassed for your mom to know that you're stalking people on the internet? If not... well, just get out there and meet people and show them your ideas. The sniping and hiding just leave a bad impression of someone with emotional problems, dear Sausage.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

[statisticool]

Really? Just me, then... no one else?


Please tell me where I said "just" you?

If the logical fallacies happen to be with you for the moment, then I will critique you. If they are made by somene else, I will critique them.


Why don't you go visit and actually meet up with Jim Sorrentino or others?


I've already visited that dojo, was impressed, but it was not for me. I've related this elsewhere.

[statisticool]

There are a number of people who have read Stephen J. Goodson's bizarre fixations with Mike Sigman....


Oh yes, I've no doubt that a lot of people have read Goodson's page (http://ofinterest.net:16080/ttr/). I'm willing to bet more of these people agree with what he wrote than not. But I don't think he's fixated with you as you apparently need to believe. He is probably fixated with pointing out illogical reasoning that he believes is shown in your so-called Teacher Test. That's what I got from his "hate page", as you call it. Other people simply call it "criticism".

Perhaps you could tell me what masters ascribe to your Test? I know Earl Montague had a very similar test many years ago.


, just to slip in nasty little negativities.


Again, to translate for people, "nasty little negativities" means "criticism" and "pointing out logical fallacies". You know, like pointing out a fallacy like saying "Arabs aka Islamists", for example. Then pointing out that you refuse to address your mistake.

Let's explore some examples of interesting behavior from you, since you brought up the topic of negativities. This is just a sampling, from recent memory:


You dislike what Zheng Manqing accomplished and what his students accomplish, to the point of emotionally calling practicioners of his form a cult as some attempted insult. OK, everyone is entitled to their opinions, but that's a rather odd definition of cult. It is probably the most practiced form in the US, with a great number of great practicioners (http://www.zhengmanqing.com/family.htm), many even into the martial side (think William C.C. Chen), students regularly winning push hands competitions (Napoli doing so in Chen Village, William C. Phillips's students, etc.) even though the emphasis is on health. It is more rational to believe you have a case of sour grapes than the alternative you propose.

Ditto with your constant internet fueding re: Robert Smith, whose friends in the martial world read like a who's who: Zheng Manqing, Bluming, Bowen, Bregman, Guterman, Paul Guo, Shang Dongsheng, Wang Yannian, Harrison, Hong Yixiang, Osako, Svinth, TT Liang, Ben Lo, and many more. He gets blackblets in judo, and studies martial arts while overseas with different people and comes back and later teachers (reads: "gets permissions to teach"). He also puts his writing in book form and articles in the leading martial arts magazine, such as Journal of Asian Martial Arts. I have yet to read a critique from you of Smith writing published in such a magazine. Maybe you are afraid to criticize him in a permanent forum where you'd open yourself to real criticism.

You demonize people or attempt to character assasinate simply when they disagree with you. We've, for example, observed this behavior plently of times on this thread alone- calling people US haters, and on and on.

Apparently, you try to establish 'conspiracy theory' type of connections. For example, everyone who disagrees with you is in a group or in on it- me and Neil, me and Goodson, etc. Taiji people who disagree must be in a cult. They simply can't just disagree.

Saying your through with someone, then continue posting to them. ;) Or posting questions to someone expecting a response, then when they answer accusing them of stalking.

And your threats of 'where do you live', 'my friend has got your location locked down'. Why do you feel the need to make threats? Jun should slap your hand for this, not slap the hands of those who point out your behavior.

Believe static demos show something. I mean, I've seen demos. They are fun and all, and very interesting. But they really have next to nothing to do with using martial arts for self defense. You seem to hold on to many demos, including push hands, as evidence of something. For example, the video of Chen Xiaowang 'fajinning' (ie. punching fast).

Refusing to backup your claims. For example, see http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9901&page=1&pp=25 for such lists.



Nope, this isn't hate, not at all. It is criticism. People are just pointing out rather obvious logical shortcomings- why your arguments are not convincing, nor your debates typically rational. At least in this thread. And it looks like I'm about 1 of 5 or so people on this thread alone that are directly and unambiguously telling you these things.

[Mike Sigman]

Perhaps you could tell me what masters ascribe to your Test? Have you ever read what the test does? It's in a number of places. It's a quick general "test" to see if "someone claiming to be a teacher" can really move from their middle. Do you not understand that? It is probably the most practiced form in the US, with a great number of great practicioners (http://www.zhengmanqing.com/family.htm), many even into the martial side (think William C.C. Chen), students regularly winning push hands competitions (Napoli doing so in Chen Village, William C. Phillips's students, etc.) even though the emphasis is on health. It is more rational to believe you have a case of sour grapes than the alternative you propose. Oh pooh... even the tcc list has people that have quit it because of the muscular bozo's who are "winning push hands" with near-wrestling alone. Don't start talking about "push hands winners"... you don't have any idea what you're talking about. The Chen Village tournament that Napoli went to did not have even a single minimum provincial push-hands champion in it from Chen Village. None of the national winners even bothered to enter the tournament because it was watered down to a buffalo contest. That's easy to check out.

Regardless.... you're telling me all these reasons you have to dislike me.... you disagree with things I do (even though you don't seem to know what they really are; sort of like Brion Toss, eh?) Tell us the reasons why you so obviously follow me around... why not just avoid me? Why come onto an Aikido list just to try to make a statement? Why not fly to Durango and make a statement to my face? Why this bizarre demonstration of emotional instability, followed by the pretense of "Oh, I'm not really doing anything unusual"? Instead of listing all the grudges you've built up inside, tell us why the bizarre behavior, Justin. And if you want to say that you don't recognize any bizarre behavior in what you're doing, how about saying that?

BTW... I realize "it's not hate", Justin, but tell it to the people who have seen you calling me by a name I don't use, using an out-of-context sig from something I said, etc. Tell people it's not about hate or a fixation if you will, but........

Mike Sigman

[Neil Mick]

I don't think Ron is part of the same grouping of people, Neil.

That's because you tend to ignore ppl and posts that disagree with you. I could easily supply the quote by Ron: but I think your ego has been stroked enough, as it is.

How about we all talk about something else besides Mike Sigman's favorite topic...Mike Sigman? What do you all say?

[Mike Sigman]

How about we all talk about something else besides Mike Sigman's favorite topic...Mike Sigman? What do you all say?Actually, studying nut-cases on the internet is a favortie hobby of mine, Neil. Take this engagement with a few people like you who have spent years endlessly smearing anyone, any politics, the US, Israel, etc., that you agree with. Now you howl like the Red Dog (the Dhole) under Mowgli in the trees. A small pack of Dhole. Tsk. You still have yet to see or admit that perhaps you have been extreme in your aspersions over the years... all you see is someone picking on you. Poor thing.

As I've suggested several times, why don't you try to be balanced and logical in your critiques instead of smearing nations and men in your constant hate? You seem to see the bitterness of it quite well when someone sends it back to you.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

[Mark Freeman]

I don't think Ron is part of the same grouping of people, Neil. But I'll let you straighten that out with him since you're the one trying to smear him by association. ;)

Regards,

Mike Sigman

I'd hate to think that Ron would feel 'smeared' by being mentioned along with me and Amir :(

Ron, do you?

regards

Mark

[Steve Mullen]

"and then he stole my ball and pulled my hair" oooops sorry, for a moment there i thought i had logged onto little-girls-bitching.com. I was kinda enjoying the topic before all this he said they said that he said, but i meant this not that BS

[statisticool]

I agree Neil, it gets boring. How about something more exciting, like a dicussion about mold, paint drying, or tax law?

[Neil Mick]

I agree Neil, it gets boring. How about something more exciting, like a dicussion about mold, paint drying, or tax law?

ANYTHING, but "Mike Sigman."

I have a better idea. How about we talk about the thread topic (i.e, the situation in Lebanon), instead of all of Mike Sigman's numerous negative qualities...?

Frankly, Mike: you're entitled to your racist posts. I'm not sure if you really believe them, and I don't really care. I'm just glad to say that your views are increasingly in the minority.

Which, IMO, is a good thing. Now, back to topic.

Now that more information has come out about the US possibly criticizing Israel for its use of cluster bombs, it does put the Bush Admin in an interesting knot...some within the Admin seem for it, some against.

Wonder if this will lead to anything? I doubt it.

And, one thing about the thread title, "World War 3." It was meant ironically, because that was what the media was calling the bombing of Lebanon.

Think about the role the media was playing on American viewers, at that time...hyping up an Israeli overreaction to Hezbollah bombings, framing it as some sort of prelude to WW3--a sexy gloss of overseas mayhem, all on the CGI entertainment of the Little Glass Teat. :disgust:

A thought to all my Aikido-mates overseas...if you ever wonder why we in America do the kooky things we do, why we overreact on some issues, and completely underreact, on others...just look at the media we're watching. CNN, FoxNews, ABC, now...even Jon Stewart/Colbert (at least, they have the cojones to admit that they're entertainment)...all eye-candied out to make war seem exciting, and fun. Almost like a video game. :hypno:

A friend of mine recently pointed out that the int'l media is ablaze with the Israeli Presidential scandal...but what do you hear of it, over in the US media? Barely a peep. We're still analyzing the empty half-words, of the President's SoTU. But we DID have nice parades last Saturday, of (10,000)- 400,000 :cool: ((happy, Mike? ;) ) in DC and several cities, telling W just what we think of his "surge" idea, so we're not totally blind.

So, if the Israeli Knesset is caught dealing poker in a backroom with Al Qaeda and you wonder why the American public is so blase about it? Consider the possibility of a media black hole.

[Guilty Spark]

The gates of Auschwitz were not opened with peace talks.

-Rick Mercer in rebuttle to a woman who felt like (so much) coverage of the war during christmas ruined her holidays.
Thought the quote was a good reminder.

[Amir Krause]

thought to all my Aikido-mates overseas...if you ever wonder why we in America do the kooky things we do, why we overreact on some issues, and completely under react, on others...just look at the media we're watching. CNN, FoxNews, ABC, now...even Jon Stewart/Colbert (at least, they have the cojones to admit that they're entertainment)...all eye-candied out to make war seem exciting, and fun. Almost like a video game. :hypno:
Perhaps this is one reason most Americans have strange ideas about "surgical strikes" and hitting only the "bad guys", things most of the peoples who have had wars on their lands know can only rarely happen, while "civilians casulaties" and "friendly fire" do happen all the time in every war being held in any place world-wide. WAR IS NOT A PRETTY BUISNESS !
A ocuntry may be obliged to enter a war under some circumstances, but one should realize the full meaning of war and not expect some nice movie.


A friend of mine recently pointed out that the int'l media is ablaze with the Israeli Presidential scandal...but what do you hear of it, over in the US media? Barely a peep.
...
Consider the possibility of a media black hole.
Is this the only thing you have not heard about?
* How about the internal struggles in Gaza, having already killed in a couple of weeks more people then most confrontations with Israel?
* How about the Palestinian terror attack in Eilat with 3 civilian casualties?
* How about the Lebanese situation, which has almost escalated to full out war and seems to have calmed some down now, returning to mass protest in a crucial power struggle?

I must say these issues are of much higher significance then the "Israeli Presidential scandal" (a medicur politician who had a job with no authority at all and still has apparently succeeded in screwing up big time), we recently have a long list of politicians being dragged to court over corruption, including the PM himself who finds himself under new investigation on a weekly basis, the finance minister who is being investigated, all the officials of the income-tax are under investigation (and many were arrested), the sentence of the former justice minister (Ramon) is to be decided today on a sexual harassment suit...
So, I do not understand why the president should be given any special attention by world-wide/American media.

This is just a downside of democracy which has come to hit Israel rather strongly lately (or, as some would say - has finally become unacceptable and criminal). Seems we are on good company there, just next to US (I remember Clinton had multiple investigations against him, including sex, money and pardoning), the UK (I understand Blair is under investigation about donations and funding), and many other western democracies :yuck:

Amir
P.S.
Hope this thread will return to course

[Neil Mick]

WAR IS NOT A PRETTY BUISNESS !
A ocuntry may be obliged to enter a war under some circumstances, but one should realize the full meaning of war and not expect some nice movie.

That's the problem...Americans haven't really experienced war firsthand since WW2...and even then, it wasn't on their home-turf.

Is this the only thing you have not heard about?

No, but it's not a complete picture, certainly. Not as complete as the int'l news-fare.

* How about the internal struggles in Gaza, having already killed in a couple of weeks more people then most confrontations with Israel?

Yep, heard of that. Esp on DN!

* How about the Palestinian terror attack in Eilat with 3 civilian casualties?

You've gotta be kidding me. Suicide bombings are almost always front page, or near front-page.

* How about the Lebanese situation, which has almost escalated to full out war and seems to have calmed some down now, returning to mass protest in a crucial power struggle?

Yes, that too.

I must say these issues are of much higher significance then the "Israeli Presidential scandal" (a medicur politician who had a job with no authority at all and still has apparently succeeded in screwing up big time),

Yes, but it's curious that almost nothing about it is reported,,,even on alternative news like Democracy Now! (I think there was a quick blurb on DN! about it, last week)

we recently have a long list of politicians being dragged to court over corruption, including the PM himself who finds himself under new investigation on a weekly basis, the finance minister who is being investigated, all the officials of the income-tax are under investigation (and many were arrested), the sentence of the former justice minister (Ramon) is to be decided today on a sexual harassment suit...

You did...? It's complete news to me.

So, I do not understand why the president should be given any special attention by world-wide/American media.

This is just a downside of democracy which has come to hit Israel rather strongly lately (or, as some would say - has finally become unacceptable and criminal).

Maybe, maybe not. If the President of France were up on charges, I'd be sure to hear of it (and I would be surprised, if not). Israel should be no exception.

Seems we are on good company there, just next to US (I remember Clinton had multiple investigations against him, including sex, money and pardoning), the UK (I understand Blair is under investigation about donations and funding), and many other western democracies :yuck:

That's right, Amir: we did. But I'm betting dollars to donuts that you heard all about those scandals.

Presidential scandals make the news, after all. But not, it seems, if that President is Israeli.

Amir
P.S.
Hope this thread will return to course

Me too.

[Mike Sigman]

Presidential scandals make the news, after all. But not, it seems, if that President is Israeli. For god's sake.... I've been hearing about the "President of Israel's" sex scandal on the news since October of last year.

Mike

[Neil Mick]

For god's sake.... I've been hearing about the "President of Israel's" sex scandal on the news since October of last year.

Mike

Doubtful. Unless Durango, CO is somehow receiving better coverage than the rest of the US (or, you're looking at something I'm not): the US coverage would likely reflect CNN's coverage of the scandal.

And, looking it up on their search engine, (http://search.cnn.com/pages/search.jsp?currentPage=1&query=%22Israeli+President%22&sortby=Date) you DO find one article about it in mid-Oct, but nothing more until 2 more articles about it, popping up on the 23rd and 24th of Jan. Three articles with a 3-month span of silence btw them are hardly a huge coverage (and a bit of an exaggeration to suggest that one's "been hearing about it since last Oct, if CNN is any standard of the US coverage). But then again, it may be that this isn't much of a story.

But the larger point that we have filtered news in the US still stands. Certainly, we had a highly selective version of the news piped into our sets, last July.

[Mike Sigman]

Doubtful. Unless Durango, CO is somehow receiving better coverage than the rest of the US (or, you're looking at something I'm not): the US coverage would likely reflect CNN's coverage of the scandal. Looking at the "facts" you often post, I am sure we're looking at different sources. You need your own equine sanitation service to collect some of the stuff you print. ;)But the larger point that we have filtered news in the US still stands. Certainly, we had a highly selective version of the news piped into our sets, last July.The US notoriously carries little news from other countries, other than the highlights, but if you think we're "filtered", you should go to Europe and see the left-wing noise on most of their TV and other outlets. I even heard one Hollywood liberal say that he was "shocked" at how anti-American the european press is. Well, duh.... it's been that way in Europe forever (except right after a couple of wars that we bailed them out of... and even then, don't forget Helmut Kohl and Charles DeGaulle using anti-American platforms with highly skewed facts).

Mike

[Mike Sigman]

: the US coverage would likely reflect CNN's coverage of the scandal. CNN? The ClintonNewsNetwork? Are you serious? Remember Eason Jordan having to resign? Remember CNN admitting that they only gave the news Saddam allowed them to give? Remember the founder "Red Ted" Turner, the liberal drunk? C'mon. CNN notoriously skews the news. I saw some survey that showed only about 2 or 3 news networks are sort of close to a middle-of-the-dial metric and CNN wasn't one of those.

Mike

[Luc X Saroufim]

if any of you have a problem with Mike, sent a PM to this site's administrator. we would be exercising all the power we have.

there are plenty of issues we could be talking about in the Middle East right now that are relevant to this thread.

how Israel's President is officially an accused rapist :freaky: hmm, just a few weeks after Halutz resigns....i wonder......

why not frame Olmert? not even the Israeli's like him. what did Katsav do?

Siniora just received $7.6B in soft loans and grants. will this help prop him up, or will the political instability in Lebanon negate any foreign intervention?

will Israel attack Iran? does Israel need to attack Iran?

enough about Mike; if i wanted his negative attention i'd face east and say, "ALLAAAAAAAH AKHBAR!"

[Mike Sigman]

if any of you have a problem with Mike, sent a PM to this site's administrator. we would be exercising all the power we have.Well, gee.... I'm sorry that I upset the anti-Semite, anti-US group that have had free rein in "Open Discussion" for so long, Luc. You'd be right to complain about someone who doesn't see things your way..... er... or not. Interestingly enough, I enjoy watching these attempts to shut up anyone that doesn't agree with the anti-US or anti-Israel faction. It's sort of what goes on at many American colleges nowadays, too. :rolleyes:

Mike

[Neil Mick]

CNN? The ClintonNewsNetwork? Are you serious? Remember Eason Jordan having to resign? Remember CNN admitting that they only gave the news Saddam allowed them to give? Remember the founder "Red Ted" Turner, the liberal drunk? C'mon. CNN notoriously skews the news. I saw some survey that showed only about 2 or 3 news networks are sort of close to a middle-of-the-dial metric and CNN wasn't one of those.

Mike

I'm trying to puzzle the relevance of all this misinformation, to the number of times CNN did any articles on the Presidential scandal.

Care to enlighten the reading audience? Or is this more smoke?

Well, gee.... I'm sorry that I upset the anti-Semite, anti-US group that have had free rein in "Open Discussion" for so long, Luc. You'd be right to complain about someone who doesn't see things your way..... er... or not.

Did you ever notice how many online Conservatives have some sort of "messianic" zeal to "protect" the "Open Discussions" from the depredations of the "anti-US" (whatever that means)?

If it weren't so prevalent, I'd say that it's the extemist few, on an overweaning ego-trip.

But once more, briefly:

COMPLAINING ABOUT RACISM does not = CENSORSHIP.

Beef about CNN, Clinton, Democrats, Nader, Wilson, et al, all you want. Pillory 'em in virtual effigy, if it makes you happy.

But, what the majority the ppl who've posted about it here don't appreciate are the racist remarks.

[Mike Sigman]

I'm trying to puzzle the relevance of all this misinformation, to the number of times CNN did any articles on the Presidential scandal.

Care to enlighten the reading audience? Or is this more smoke? It's pretty obvious.... the question is why would you view CNN as an impartial and perceptive news source? In response to your own comment. Did you ever notice how many online Conservatives have some sort of "messianic" zeal to "protect" the "Open Discussions" from the depredations of the "anti-US" (whatever that means)? Another dissimulation, Neil. Why attempt to deflect the subject to me.... do you have some sort of dishonesty gene that prevents you from saying, "Yes, I skew facts to make my arguments reflect my liberal beliefs"? COMPLAINING ABOUT RACISM does not = CENSORSHIP. But you're NOT complaining about racism... you're trying cry "racism" to stop any topic or person who doesn't hold your views. Your posts are nothing but negative judgements of the Jews, me, Bush, yada, yada, yada. It's the hallmark of liberalism.... denigration.... while complaining that others are being devisive. You're a whiner.But, what the majority the ppl who've posted about it here don't appreciate are the racist remarks. OK, let's both play. You're racist. You hate the Jews. Your posts have shown it for years. Luc hates the Jews. He's racist. I'll bet I have more evidence of "racism" by you than you can ever produce on me, Neil. Want to play? :cool:

As I've said a number of times now.... have you ever thought about presenting both sides of issues so that you're known as a rational human being instead of a partisan, dishonest fanatic?

Mike

[Amir Krause]

Will try to respond to each topic seperately:

That's the problem...Americans haven't really experienced war firsthand since WW2...and even then, it wasn't on their home-turf.

Well, thats true for most of Europe too, and in some ways, all the western society.It is one of the reasons your expectations of war are not-realistic and it definitly encourages your politicians to lie to you when they believe some type of military war like operation is required for the interests of your nation, regardless of the objective correctness of their logic, the leaders know they have to get the public support, and it is easier to do by lying and not by promising "Blood and Sweat and hard times ...".


Amir

[Amir Krause]

...

No, but it's not a complete picture, certainly. Not as complete as the int'l news-fare.
...
I must say these issues are of much higher significance then the "Israeli Presidential scandal" (a medicur politician who had a job with no authority at all and still has apparently succeeded in screwing up big time),
Yes, but it's curious that almost nothing about it is reported,,,even on alternative news like Democracy Now! (I think there was a quick blurb on DN! about it, last week)

we recently have a long list of politicians being dragged to court over corruption, including the PM himself who finds himself under new investigation on a weekly basis, the finance minister who is being investigated, all the officials of the income-tax are under investigation (and many were arrested), the sentence of the former justice minister (Ramon) is to be decided today on a sexual harassment suit...
You did...? It's complete news to me.


Neil, Did you ever look at the local US news and compared them to the Int'l version?
I have visited several countries, and so, had the opportunity to view the huge difference between internal and international coverage all around the world. Corruption, crime and sexual harassment always get much more space in the local news then in the Int's ones.

I often talk to many Israelis who are sure all the western world is devoid of corruption, and Israel is the worst country ever. Then I talk with someone who does business or lives at some other country, and he claims the corruption there is beyond any imagination (for example - recently spoke with someone who works in real-estate in Germany. He claimed judges are bought as part of the regular business process and "who could imagine that in our society ...").

I am sure you could point to 3-5 significant scandals currently ongoing at your senate and congress. I did not see any coverage for any in the Israeli media, including the international specific news reports.
Its the same about the weather, when you have a record breaking storm, it will get a 30 seconds item here, and I bet you have no idea this winter has hardly brought any rain here ...

P.S.
Ramon, a past justice minister, was convicted of sexual misconduct, in forcing a kiss to a young female military officer. This captured all the headlines here yesterday and most of the TV items relate to it. Did it get any int’l coverage at all?


So, I do not understand why the president should be given any special attention by world-wide/American media.

This is just a downside of democracy which has come to hit Israel rather strongly lately (or, as some would say - has finally become unacceptable and criminal).
Maybe, maybe not. If the President of France were up on charges, I'd be sure to hear of it (and I would be surprised, if not). Israel should be no exception.

Seems we are on good company there, just next to US (I remember Clinton had multiple investigations against him, including sex, money and pardoning), the UK (I understand Blair is under investigation about donations and funding), and many other western democracies
That's right, Amir: we did. But I'm betting dollars to donuts that you heard all about those scandals.

Presidential scandals make the news, after all. But not, it seems, if that President is Israeli.
(the bold is by Amir)

Neil, sorry, but this last statement is an indicator of ignorance. You can not compare the Israeli president with the US or French presidents. The latter two are figures of authority and have real power and influence over events, the Israeli president is mostly a formal and ceremonial role, having the same influence at a normal situation as I understand your vice president has, e.g. next to non.

The Israeli president role is limited to the following things:
* After elections - appointing a parliament member to try and create a coalition and become the prime-minister. But, he must find the candidate most likely to succeed (thus is decision is of little actual consequences, and there were times he had to appoint a second person to have another try ...).
* Approving pardons - this is the one thing that is totally under his discretion, and he has to get a recommendation from the justice ministry first.
* Signing laws and accepting new ambassadors - he may not refuse to sign!

Can you compare this with the US president? The head of the executive branch, supreme military commander ...
AS far as I recall, the french president also has much more authority...

If anything was worth reporting internationally, it would have been the criminal investigations of the Israeli PM, yet even that is hardly news these days, since there is a new investigation on a weekly basis for quite a while (on topics related to finance - contributions, real-estate, over paying while buying his wife paintings etc.). Once things become monotone, the international media rarely reports them, even if those things are US / Israel related.


Amir

[Amir Krause]

Luc hates the Jews. He's racist

I disagree, I have not found Luc to hate the Jews in some general non specific way.

I do not agree with all his opinions, we do belong to groups with conflicting interests. But being against one's opinions in some topics does not immediately equate to racisem. I have seen Luc resent Israeli actions, but he resented similar actions when they were performed by others, just as vehemently ...


Not that Luc needs me as a recommender.
Amir

[Luc X Saroufim]

You'd be right to complain about someone who doesn't see things your way...

what are you talking about? i was getting people off your back so that we could continue this thread. like i said, if you don't like what someone is saying, you have the power to PM the administrator.

and considering what you've been saying about me out in the open, i'd hardly consider what i said an insult.

funny Mike how you're so educated on internal strength, in ways i wish i could be - until you turn to political discussions and just try to kick people in the nuts all day.

[Luc X Saroufim]

Not that Luc needs me as a recommender.
Amir

appreciate it Amir; i just choose to ignore Mike's low blows, he's just trying to get me to say things.

[Mike Sigman]

funny Mike how you're so educated on internal strength, in ways i wish i could be - until you turn to political discussions and just try to kick people in the nuts all day.I disagree. I kick the usual "nut-kicking" group back in the nuts and they howl.... yet they have posted negatively and viciously (in some cases) for several years, demeaning people like John and others who disagree with them. This sudden "victimhood" that can only see one victim is fairly sickening.

And Luc, Amir may be babbling about how you're sort of impartial in your negativeness, but I (and many others) would quickly disagree. Your posts are heavily slanted against Israel. Do you deny it? BTW... where are your cries of outrage for the still imprisoned (or dead) 2 Israelis? Your comments when you were demanding a "cease fire" were all pointed at Israel, right?

Mike Sigman

[Amir Krause]

And Luc, Amir may be babbling about how you're sort of impartial in your negativeness, but I (and many others) would quickly disagree. Your posts are heavily slanted against Israel. Do you deny it? BTW... where are your cries of outrage for the still imprisoned (or dead) 2 Israelis? Your comments when you were demanding a "cease fire" were all pointed at Israel, right?

Mike Sigman


Mike

Please do not misrepresent my positions and statements.

I never claimed Luc is impartial about Israel. But there is a vast difference between Luc and the position he presents, as a Lebanese with family there and between being anti-Jew or anti-Israeli. Just as German & French could say their countries struggle over supremacy position in the EU and disagree over lots of issues with regard to the EU actions, from subsidies, to unemployment to foreign affairs. And yet non of them would be considered racist.

Luc is expecting Israel to assist Lebanon beyond Israeli reason. And is much more aware and considerate to his own countries weaknesses. But this is to be expected of everyone. I have the same fault on the inverse direction – expecting the Lebanese to do things they would consider impossible, just because those things are in Israeli interest, etc.

I recall stating this early on in this thread. Almost everyone cares for his family first, then his relatives, his neighborhood, his city, his country …
An attitude of “if you misstep on a stranger, he should forgive you, if you misstep on my brother\mother – you should be punished” is very human, and almost everyone presents it. Blaming a person who behaves in such an self-centered manner, as though that person hates another, is misleading, he simply could not care less.


Amir

[Mike Sigman]

I never claimed Luc is impartial about Israel. But there is a vast difference between Luc and the position he presents, as a Lebanese with family there and between being anti-Jew or anti-Israeli. I think you are being naive, Amir.Blaming a person who behaves in such an self-centered manner, as though that person hates another, is misleading, he simply could not care less. Luc's posts do not show that he couldn't care less.... he fully faults Israel for everything (with occasional lip-service against the Islamists when he gets caught).... that is not a case of "couldn't care less". If Israel is destroyed by Iran or Hezbollah or whatever, there would be no cries for any Jews around the MIddle East, I assure you. You Israelis are living a much more tenuous existence than you think... and each generation of Israels grows more and more suicidal and willing to appease, in an effort to be more European. The "angst" gene has diluted your bloodstock. ;)

The mood in many parts of the world now is "it's too bad that Israel must be destroyed, but I wish someone would hurry up and get it over with. THEN the Muslims will be happy and leave the rest of us alone." See? It's just like the lead-up to World War III.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

Mike

[Luc X Saroufim]

Your posts are heavily slanted against Israel. Do you deny it?

appreciate it Amir; i just choose to ignore Mike's low blows, he's just trying to get me to say things.

11

[Neil Mick]

It's pretty obvious.... the question is why would you view CNN as an impartial and perceptive news source?

There is no such thing as an "impartial" news source. In fact, it is quite easy to show how "biased" mainstream news sources, are very pro-Israeli.

And besides, you use mainstream sources (CNN, AP, etc) all the time...even (as we have seen) as it comically disputes your own point.

So, why is it "OK" for you to use "biased" sources, and "not OK" when I do?

You're racist. You hate the Jews. Your posts have shown it for years. Luc hates the Jews. He's racist.

Give 'em enough rope...

I'll bet I have more evidence of "racism" by you than you can ever produce on me, Neil. Want to play? :cool:

Not really, Mikey. I wouldn't want you to feel mentally overpowered. Why not go find some OTHER people on the same maturity-level--say, pre-k or thereabouts--so they can appreciate the level of humor you employ?

[Neil Mick]

You know, Amir? I like a lot of your posts...appreciate the sincerity and depth of thought (even when I disagree)...but you have one weakness.

You over-evaluate. This point was an idly-made after-thought, not some deep, probing comment (well, OK, the comment about the difference of US media vs int'l media certainly isn't an idle comment, but you didn't really go after that one, didi you?)

Neil, Did you ever look at the local US news and compared them to the Int'l version?

Yep, sure have. All the time.

I have visited several countries, and so, had the opportunity to view the huge difference between internal and international coverage all around the world. Corruption, crime and sexual harassment always get much more space in the local news then in the Int's ones.

I often talk to many Israelis who are sure all the western world is devoid of corruption, and Israel is the worst country ever. Then I talk with someone who does business or lives at some other country, and he claims the corruption there is beyond any imagination (for example - recently spoke with someone who works in real-estate in Germany. He claimed judges are bought as part of the regular business process and "who could imagine that in our society ...").

I am sure you could point to 3-5 significant scandals currently ongoing at your senate and congress. I did not see any coverage for any in the Israeli media, including the international specific news reports.
Its the same about the weather, when you have a record breaking storm, it will get a 30 seconds item here, and I bet you have no idea this winter has hardly brought any rain here ...

I'm betting dollars to donuts you heard about Jack Abramoff...

But come on, Amir: seriously...it is so easy to document the media silence around the situation of Palestine, here. Do you know that they don't even call the settlements by that name, on the news? They call them "neighborhoods," now. :rolleyes:

Start a thread if you like, and I'll be glad to show you some.

P.S.
Ramon, a past justice minister, was convicted of sexual misconduct, in forcing a kiss to a young female military officer. This captured all the headlines here yesterday and most of the TV items relate to it. Did it get any int'l coverage at all?

Nope, missed that one.

Neil, sorry, but this last statement is an indicator of ignorance. You can not compare the Israeli president with the US or French presidents.

OK, fine. Let's compare the media, then, from a comparable figure with little actual power...how about the Iranian president, then?

I'm pretty sure that if I counted all the various impecadillos that the Iranian Prez did last year, versus all the media reports of the Israeli Prez, that I would find more news covering the Iranian President.

Can you compare this with the US president? The head of the executive branch, supreme military commander ...
AS far as I recall, the french president also has much more authority...

No, obviously not. But, as far as I recall, the media seems somewhat blind to the actual powers of presidents. Notice how most ppl really don't know that all those pronouncements by Achmedenidijad about Israel were a lot of hot air.

Once things become monotone, the international media rarely reports them, even if those things are US / Israel related.


True enough.

[Neil Mick]

But, what the majority the ppl who've posted about it here don't appreciate are the racist remarks.

You're a whiner. OK, let's both play. You're racist. You hate the Jews. Your posts have shown it for years. Luc hates the Jews. He's racist.

Mike

Now, what's wrong with this picture? Who is calling whom the racist, here? Notice? I call Mikey's posts racist: while Mikey doesn't hesitate to resort to personal attacks.

Perhaps you missed this,,,?

Frankly, Mike: you're entitled to your racist posts. I'm not sure if you really believe them, and I don't really care. I'm just glad to say that your views are increasingly in the minority.

Hate the game, Mikey: not the player.

Now, here's where you come in and bleat that there isn't any difference....

wait for it....

[Mike Sigman]

You know, this is too consistent, Neil. Do you have some sort of reading disorder?

Mike

[Neil Mick]

There is no such thing as an "impartial" news source. In fact, it is quite easy to show how "biased" mainstream news sources, are very pro-Israeli.

And besides, you use mainstream sources (CNN, AP, etc) all the time...even (as we have seen) as it comically disputes your own point.

So, why is it "OK" for you to use "biased" sources, and "not OK" when I do?

WHAT HE SAID, in response:

You know, this is too consistent, Neil. Do you have some sort of reading disorder?

Mike

WHAT HE MEANT:

It's "OK" for ME to use these sources, because I'm pro-American, and you're not, and the mainstream media is in league with anti-American'ism, everywhere.

WHAT HE REALLY MEANS: My debating stance is so weak, so threadbare, that it makes "strawman" sound like Mr. Atlas.

No, I have no explanation why it's "OK" for me, and "not OK" for you, to post mainstream news sources. And so, I will defer to my fallback position...personal attack.

P.S. In fact, Mikey, I was reading "The Divine Comedy" by the 8th grade. You?

[Cady Goldfield]

Some say, that Signor Bononcini,
Compared to Handel's a mere ninny;
Others aver, to him, that Handel
Is scarcely fit to hold a candle.
Strange! That such high dispute should be
'Twixt Tweedledum and Tweedledee.
—John Byrom (1692-1763), On the Feuds Between Handel and Bononcini

:D :p

[Mike Sigman]

[b]WHAT HE REALLY MEANS: Don't tell me what I mean, Neil. You take facts that mean one thing and distort them to mean another; you take spurious facts, like e.g., the Lancet Study on Iraqi Deaths, and trumpet them as proving your point. I.e., you either can't read or you're dishonest. Before and even now, I still think it's simple dishonesty, but I was giving you a chance to opt out... mainly because it's hard to believe one person can be that dishonest. Maybe you're twins. P.S. In fact, Mikey, I was reading "The Divine Comedy" by the 8th grade. You?You know, the one thing I notice in common about you, Justin, David, and some others, is that you really seldom miss an opportunity to tell us how great you are, how much you're appreciated, who your teachers are, what "authority" supports you, etc. Try debating a point on the issues... and try to leave your brags at home.

Mike

[Mike Sigman]

Some say, that Signor Bononcini,
Compared to Handel's a mere ninny;
Others aver, to him, that Handel
Is scarcely fit to hold a candle.
Strange! That such high dispute should be
'Twixt Tweedledum and Tweedledee.
—John Byrom (1692-1763), On the Feuds Between Handel and Bononcini Better yet:
"He that makes himself an ass must not take it ill if men ride him."

[akiy]

Thread closed. Too many personal attacks by too many participants.

Everyone, please take a minute to read <http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2484>. I really don't have time to reiterate everything that I have written there.

-- Jun