[ March 04, 2010, 01:34 PM: Message edited by: Lisa ]
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Lisa: Oh, thanks for typing all of that out. Even though I disagree that we should support Israel (or hinder it for that matter), I respect your effort in getting all of that down.
Actually, how do you reconcile this which seems to be a relatively straight-forward call to support Israel with your previous support of Ron Paul's call (IIRC) to simply wash our hands of the whole thing and stop interfering?
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Okay. Nothing there we haven't already heard. Besides, she loses a lot of credibility right off the bat with this:
quote:Beyond all of that, I just love Israel. I don't have to make any excuses about my love for the place where every great thing that has happened in terms of civilization was birthed.
Everything? Really?
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
quote:From Papa Janitor: ...Lisa, please do not respond to any of Clive's posts in any threads (Clive you will not try to take advantage of this)...
Lisa, you're fine. This is for Clive.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
I'm not sure what to make of her flip-flopping of the support for Israel vs. support for the United States. I think America earned a fair share of its Middle Eastern enmity from propping up dictators, but it also doesn't take a genius to see that Israel is often used as a wedge to fire up the troops whenever its time to go America bashing. The idea that Israel is reviled for supporting America more than America is reviled for supporting Israel strikes me as counter-intuitive. I will say that on a micro-level, if you get down to the leaders of the movements and the ones who push the propaganda, she's probably right. But that hardly makes a difference when it's the masses who do the killing who actually believe the propaganda.
1. Archeological proof? I have mixed feelings on that. If we were to begin basing support for nationality on archeology, we'd be in some pretty big trouble. However, in this specific case, I don't have a problem with supporting Israel's claim to exist in that particular spot because that's where they came from. I don't though, think that can be used as a carte blanche excuse to do whatever they want with anyone on the land they have a beef with.
2. Historic right. Well, sort of mixed in with archeology no? I guess it diverges a bit, and it's an interesting argument that depends on a number of things. One, it depends on your belief that ancient possession of land matters in the 21st century. I think this gets us into the same problems that archeology does. But the second premise gives me more problems. Two, she calls the British the founding fathers, and since the British handed over the land, it's all good. Well, there's a fantastic argument for colonialism. This only works if you believe that Britain had the right to give that land away, rather than simply returning it to the natives. I guess it's a bit of a gray area however since Turkey was in control and not an independent native country. (Also, can she stop shouting?)
3. Practical value. Sure. I agree.
4. Humanitarian concerns. Eh. Well alright, she's certainly right about what happened to Jews in WWII. They didn't have anywhere to go, even the United States. Making a state for them back then made a lot more sense than it does today however. She's basing her argument on the fact that in the future, someone is going to try and persecute Jews again, because they always have in the past, so Israel is a place of safety. I'll leave any possible potential for irony in the "humanitarian concern" thing out for now, since it's contentious, and just say that I'm not sure this is a good argument for the continuing support of Israel. For me to support on that ground, I would have to say to myself "The United States is a place where Jews will be persecuted, so I had better support Israel." It's a strange reason to ask non-Jews to support Israel, and frankly, I don't believe it's true.
5. Strategic ally. Sure. I agree here too. I'd say it's in some ways a wash though, as I think we piss a lot of Middle Eastern enemies off just by supporting Israel, but for the most part, Israel soaks up the damage itself rather than having it directed against us. Plus we get some decent intel out of Mossad. So sure. Good argument. I'm not sure how much we can "depend" on them though. Israel acts as Israel should; in their own interests. That interest often comes into conflict with what America's leaders feel is the best path for America. I don't criticize Israel for that one though, that's how it should be.
6. Roadblock to terrorism. Not sure what to make of this one. The whole world opinion thing isn't a good argument for me.
7. God said so. This isn't a good argument for me either. In fact, I think this likely isn't a good argument for most people. The screaming of "if God said it, that settles it!" would probably turn a lot of people off too (like me).
Honestly, the "philosophical" argument that she sidestepped, or that might have been mentioned earlier off camera, shouldn't have been ignored. The fact that Israel has a right to exist and a right to protect itself is a moral imperative that has nothing to do with any of the reasons listed here. I think you have to establish that basis before launching into why to support them. Especially if, as she seems to suggest, the world is full of anti-Semites who probably don't think Israel should exist to begin with.
I think her presentation would have been a lot better if she hadn't been yelling at me the whole time. If my child were forced to watch this in school, I would be screaming bloody murder at the next school board meeting. I don't know what could possibly make you think this should be required watching any more than the Bible should be required reading, or "An Inconvenient Truth" should be required watching. And also, at what grade would you find it most appropriate to begin indoctrinating America's youth in the defense of Israel?
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Clive,
quote:quote removed
You are pretty clearly violating what the mod of this site asked you to do. You should stop and you should edit out your previous posts.
edited to add quote, in case it gets erased. I'll remove the quote after this gets resolved.
[ March 04, 2010, 02:27 PM: Message edited by: MrSquicky ]
Posted by Clive Candy (Member # 11977) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: Clive, You are pretty clearly violating what the mod of this site asked you to do. You should stop and you should edit out your previous posts.
I am not addressing Lisa.
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
I have a strange and funny feeling this was a trap, and Clive fell right in.
Posted by Sean Monahan (Member # 9334) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy: I am not addressing Lisa.
That's not what PJ said.
Posted by Papa Janitor (Member # 7795) on :
Clive, I'd appreciate it if you hold off on participating in this thread until you hear from me by e-mail. If your e-mail address is not the one currently in your profile, please send me an e-mail to which I can respond.
--PJ
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: I have a strange and funny feeling this was a trap, and Clive fell right in.
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: Lisa: Oh, thanks for typing all of that out. Even though I disagree that we should support Israel (or hinder it for that matter), I respect your effort in getting all of that down.
Actually, how do you reconcile this which seems to be a relatively straight-forward call to support Israel with your previous support of Ron Paul's call (IIRC) to simply wash our hands of the whole thing and stop interfering?
That's the whole thing about statism. It makes people forget that it's people who are the real actors in the world. The government should not support Israel (or any other country or person), but that doesn't mean people shouldn't. It's just that they should be persuaded; not coerced. And having the government do it is coercion.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
What form of support would you suggest the people take? Contributing financially to Israel (and if so, how), or some sort of vocal support? Anything involving the military or nationally funded state aid is the government.
I'm not criticizing by the way, I'm just trying to get a handle on what structure of support you're espousing.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: Clive,
quote:quote removed
You are pretty clearly violating what the mod of this site asked you to do. You should stop and you should edit out your previous posts.
edited to add quote, in case it gets erased. I'll remove the quote after this gets resolved.
I don't know what this was all about. Apparently I missed it. Don't you just hate when work gets in the way of playing on the internet?
(I don't suppose any of you nice people would be willing to e-mail me what I missed?)
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Okay. Nothing there we haven't already heard. Besides, she loses a lot of credibility right off the bat with this:
quote:Beyond all of that, I just love Israel. I don't have to make any excuses about my love for the place where every great thing that has happened in terms of civilization was birthed.
Everything? Really?
Pretty much. Yeah.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
How do you feel about Chicago-style pizza?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: What form of support would you suggest the people take? Contributing financially to Israel (and if so, how), or some sort of vocal support? Anything involving the military or nationally funded state aid is the government.
Really? So you think that sending money and/or weapons is only the government? You know I'm against government aid. I've made that so clear so many times that I'm starting to feel surprised every time someone questions it.
A tremendous amount of charitable giving in this country, particularly from Jews, goes to Israel. And yet there are Israel-hating Jews like J-Street, who would love to get that to stop.
The government shouldn't take my money to give it to Israel. But it shouldn't stop me from giving it of my own free will, and it shouldn't prevent me from trying to convince others to do the same.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
So nothing great happened anywhere else? So much for your credibility, too.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: How do you feel about Chicago-style pizza?
I think it should just be called pizza, and every other kind of "pizza" should take a modifier. Why?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: So nothing great happened anywhere else? So much for your credibility, too.
And... your homework assignment for today is to look up the word "birthed" and ponder its meaning.
You might also want to consider reading just a little more carefully before jumping to ill-advised conclusions.
An apology might be nice, too.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
I'm kind of curious about her use of Mark Twain as an authority on the population of Palestine prior to the establishment of Israel. Something about it seems to be missing, or I'm just ignorant of what things were like there in that particular moment in history.
See...when I went there, the vast desert was broken by towns scattered roughly along a line from Jerusalem to Elat, and then again toward the sea. I'd say the vast majority of those places had permanent settlements that included buildings from every historically possible era (modern, colonial, pre-colonial, the crusades, Roman occupation, pre-Roman, and on back to the Exodus. Some wells are traditionally dated to the time of Abraham. And, even at that, there were people there before then.
So...here's my question: were those cities and towns empty in the 1860s? If not, then what exactly is the point of talking about the desert being empty when Twain rode through?
Also, do the facts of nomadic existence enter into the equation at all? It's becoming a big deal here in the US that land once "occupied" by nomadic tribal groups was usurped in the Western Expansion under the rubric of "they weren't using it." If herders have a practice of letting areas recover for stretches of time, the fact that they weren't around when Mark Twain blew through on a guided tour really wouldn't be relevant.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Lisa, and you might want to either narrow your definition of "birthed" or broaden your definition of "great".
One could, with more accuracy make the same statement about Iraq. Still wouldn't be true, but it would be closer.
[ March 04, 2010, 03:23 PM: Message edited by: kmbboots ]
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
I can't think of anything significant for civilization that Israel has birthed. I mean, I really can't. For the brief period of history where it was at all significant, it was very much a third-rate empire that, as far as I can tell, didn't make any notable contributions to civilization.
Is she talking about Jesus?
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Mr.Squicky,
Actually, Israel is a hotbed of innovation today. There is so much amazing science and technology advancement going on there that they truly can lay claim to being a force for the good of all mankind.
I know the claim was made historically, but it's worth examining from a modern perspective as well.
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
Israel as a country that is 60 years old? I can't either.
If you consider Israel and Judaism the same entity, then yeah, it has birthed a lot.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Yeah, sorry, I meant from a historical perspective, not including the developments since the reestablishment of Israel.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Certainly Jewish people (not necessarily from Israel, but we'll be nice and stretch) have made significant contributions to art and culture, but not "birthed" them all by themselves.
Sumeria had some vague proto-democratic ideas, but that wasn't Israel. Plenty of great things happened in the far East that had nothing to do with Israel.
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Certainly Jewish people (not necessarily from Israel, but we'll be nice and stretch) have made significant contributions to art and culture, but not "birthed" them all by themselves.
Sumeria had some vague proto-democratic ideas, but that wasn't Israel. Plenty of great things happened in the far East that had nothing to do with Israel.
From a purely historical perspective Judaism gave rise to the two largest religious beliefs on the planet.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Oh sure, so we're back to blaming the Jews. I don't think we can blame Islam and Christianity on them.
But on the positive side, I am indeed scratching my head as to the great things that Israel contributed.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: From a purely historical perspective Judaism gave rise to the two largest religious beliefs on the planet.
So? Plenty of great things have been accomplished by people who were not part of either religion.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Stephan, Those are definitely contributions, but I wouldn't consider those as contributions to civilization per se. I'm not trying to denigrate them, just say that they don't fit the criteria that I'd use for that categorization.
Of course, I'm willing to grant them and say, besides that, what did Israel contribute?
It's not like they developed the wheel, or roads, or the stirrup, or writing, or the principles of science, or algebra, or representative government, or well, anything that I can think of a contribution to development of civilization.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Maybe someone could write to that woman and ask what she had in mind.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
I bet it's Jesus.
Posted by Ace of Spades (Member # 2256) on :
That's Puerto Rico.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: I can't think of anything significant for civilization that Israel has birthed. I mean, I really can't. For the brief period of history where it was at all significant, it was very much a third-rate empire that, as far as I can tell, didn't make any notable contributions to civilization.
Is she talking about Jesus?
Seriously? Have you met me?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: Stephan, Those are definitely contributions, but I wouldn't consider those as contributions to civilization per se. I'm not trying to denigrate them, just say that they don't fit the criteria that I'd use for that categorization.
Of course, I'm willing to grant them and say, besides that, what did Israel contribute?
It's not like they developed the wheel, or roads, or the stirrup, or writing, or the principles of science, or algebra, or representative government, or well, anything that I can think of a contribution to development of civilization.
Actually, alphabetic writing is ours. So is the idea of human rights, or limited powers of government (kings).
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: Seriously? Have you met me?
I think he's referring to Joyce Kaufman who apparently is a reborn Christian going to Hopewell Missionary Baptist Church.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Actually, alphabetic writing is ours
When you say alphabetic writing is yours, what exactly do you mean?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:It's not like they developed the wheel, or roads, or the stirrup, or writing, or the principles of science, or algebra, or representative government, or well, anything that I can think of a contribution to development of civilization.
Assuming we're talking about the Jews here, they contributed an enormous portion of a text that has been extremely influential in Western culture since...well, almost since there's been a West.
That's nothing to sneeze at.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Scott, is it everything great?
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
And, as I said, I wouldn't consider that as a contribution to civilization, but I'm willing to grant it and say, okay, besides that?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
You're referring to this?
quote: I don't have to make any excuses about my love for the place where every great thing that has happened in terms of civilization was birthed.
Nah-- that's carrying the Israel-love a bit far.
But let's be realistic: Jewish scripture is a HUGE part of Western culture, and has been for a long, long time. So, in terms of civilization, Israel has contributed. It's a mistake to overlook a text that has inspired poets, writers, laws, etc.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: Actually, alphabetic writing is ours.
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: You're referring to this?
quote: I don't have to make any excuses about my love for the place where every great thing that has happened in terms of civilization was birthed.
Nah-- that's carrying the Israel-love a bit far.
But let's be realistic: Jewish scripture is a HUGE part of Western culture, and has been for a long, long time. So, in terms of civilization, Israel has contributed. It's a mistake to overlook a text that has inspired poets, writers, laws, etc.
QFT
The influence also shows up in laws, public policy, and societal norms.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
I guess Ghanian Universities, Arabic numerals, and Mesopotamian cuneiform were Jewish
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
She might mean that the alphabet is "ours" in a sense other than, "We were the first to have an alphabet."
I dunno, but that's why I asked.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: You're referring to this?
quote: I don't have to make any excuses about my love for the place where every great thing that has happened in terms of civilization was birthed.
Nah-- that's carrying the Israel-love a bit far.
But let's be realistic: Jewish scripture is a HUGE part of Western culture, and has been for a long, long time. So, in terms of civilization, Israel has contributed. It's a mistake to overlook a text that has inspired poets, writers, laws, etc.
Sure. Had she said that instead of "where every great thing that has happened in terms of civilization was birthed", I would have agreed. Since she did go with the delusional fanaticism, she loses credibility.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
I'm going to bow out of this thread for now.
I can't see this whole thing ending well, but I hope some of the questions can be discussed with civility and calm.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R:
quote:Actually, alphabetic writing is ours
When you say alphabetic writing is yours, what exactly do you mean?
You know, I used to work at a bank in Boston. My branch manager was Greek, and she insisted that the Greeks invented the alphabet. I asked her what alpha means in Greek. Silence. I explained to her that all of the letters actually mean something in Hebrew. And only in Hebrew.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus:
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: Seriously? Have you met me?
I think he's referring to Joyce Kaufman who apparently is a reborn Christian going to Hopewell Missionary Baptist Church.
Ah. Well, at least she isn't Jewish.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit:
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: Actually, alphabetic writing is ours.
Providing a link to yourself does not constitute supporting evidence.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:My branch manager was Greek, and she insisted that the Greeks invented the alphabet. I asked her what alpha means in Greek. Silence. I explained to her that all of the letters actually mean something in Hebrew. And only in Hebrew.
I'm not sure what you mean. I don't know why this would make the alphabet "yours."
What do the characters in the Hebrew alphabet mean? Are you sure that there are no other languages where letters have meaning?
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
I thought Sanskrit was the mother of all Indo-European written language.
Or is this like arguing Creationism with Lisa, completely unproductive and frustrating (and a little hilarious)?
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven: I thought Sanskrit was the mother of all Indo-European written language.
+1
quote: Or is this like arguing Creationism with Lisa, completely unproductive and frustrating (and a little hilarious)?
-1
Total: 0
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: I'm actually impressed the thread has stayed as civil as it has.
凸
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade:
quote:Originally posted by steven: I thought Sanskrit was the mother of all Indo-European written language.
+1
quote: Or is this like arguing Creationism with Lisa, completely unproductive and frustrating (and a little hilarious)?
-1
Total: 0
Creationism is a JOKE, and defenders of it cannot be taken seriously.
I'm definitely starting to get the feeling that this WILL be like arguing Creationism with Lisa.
I think I might enjoy it. LOL
Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven: I thought Sanskrit was the mother of all Indo-European written language.
Or is this like arguing Creationism with Lisa, completely unproductive and frustrating (and a little hilarious)?
If I remember correctly, Sanskrit is supposed to be one of the oldest indo-european languages, and in theory the closest to some theoretical ancestral language of that family. AFAIK, the actual writing systems aren't supposed to follow the same descent as the languages themselves.
Wikipedia has a decent length, well referenced page on the subject.
The earliest alphabets (as opposed to heiroglyphics and cuneiform) it lists are here. Both were found in modern Egypt, with one found near the Nile, while the other is on the Sinai Peninsula.
Of course, this is just wikipedia, so I'd be open to more authoritative links if anyone can provide them. Still, the articles at least appear to be well formed and decently referenced, so it seems reasonable for an intro overview.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
"The first alphabet emerged around 2000 BCE to represent the language of Semitic workers in Egypt (see Middle Bronze Age alphabets), and was derived from the alphabetic principles of the Egyptian hieroglyphs."
That's a direct quote from the Wiki.
This is great. Egyptians gave their alphabet to the Jews.
How's that taste, Lisa? LOL
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
steven, I think BlackBlade's point was that you're first statement was a good contribution to the discussion, while your second was nothing but falling back on old arguments for no other reason than to prod for a reaction.
This thread is about Israel. You unnecessarily brought up Creationism. And now you are poking Lisa. I disagree with Lisa more often than not, and I may have done some prodding in the past, but it does not breed good discussion. See ricree's post. She(He?) has a similar point as yours, without any bile.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by The White Whale: See ricree's post. She(He?) has a similar point as yours, without any bile.
I rather doubted that Lisa would bother actually clicking on ricree's link. That's reason enough to quote the relevant part.
Also, she craps up this board more than anybody else, with the possible exception of King of Men.
I'm not really sure I agree with the principle that if we're all just nicer, the trolls will somehow untroll. I'm not saying getting ban-happy is the solution, because that has its own pitfalls.
I do think that zero bans in 6 years is a little too far toward the opposite end of the spectrum, given the level/number of trolls here.
Also, who are you to condescend to me? LOL
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven: "The first alphabet emerged around 2000 BCE to represent the language of Semitic workers in Egypt (see Middle Bronze Age alphabets), and was derived from the alphabetic principles of the Egyptian hieroglyphs."
That's a direct quote from the Wiki.
This is great. Egyptians gave their alphabet to the Jews.
How's that taste, Lisa? LOL
Whistled.
Also, you may want to look into the meaning of "Semitic workers".
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky:
quote:Originally posted by steven: "The first alphabet emerged around 2000 BCE to represent the language of Semitic workers in Egypt (see Middle Bronze Age alphabets), and was derived from the alphabetic principles of the Egyptian hieroglyphs."
That's a direct quote from the Wiki.
This is great. Egyptians gave their alphabet to the Jews.
How's that taste, Lisa? LOL
Whistled.
Also, you may want to look into the meaning of "Semitic workers".
All I did was quote the Wiki. Whistle if you want. At least my post is potentially backed up by fact. What about Lisa's claim that Jews invented civilization? What's THAT backed up by? LOL
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
steven, overwhelming niceness won't eliminate trolls, but feeding them isn't a better solution (Lisa, I am not agreeing with steven that you're a troll).
And where did I condescend?
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
She can say anything...she can say just anything at all, and nobody blinks...
I BAN trolls on the boards that I moderate. I don't act like their behavior is appropriate.
My boards are better for it, too. The people I ban contribute nothing.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:All I did was quote the Wiki.
This wasn't quoting the wiki:
quote:How's that taste, Lisa? LOL
Seriously, man. I like to stick it to people that I find annoyingly wrong but a gradeschool taunt like that is just embarrassing to watch.
Posted by Papa Janitor (Member # 7795) on :
Steven, stop being combative, and from here on please refrain from posting in this thread.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by MattP:
quote:All I did was quote the Wiki.
This wasn't quoting the wiki:
quote:How's that taste, Lisa? LOL
Seriously, man. I like to stick it to people that I find annoyingly wrong but a gradeschool taunt like that is just embarrassing to watch.
Yeah, and it was fun.
Posted by LargeTuna (Member # 10512) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven:
Creationism is a JOKE, and defenders of it cannot be taken seriously.
I'm definitely starting to get the feeling that this WILL be like arguing Creationism with Lisa.
I think I might enjoy it. LOL
Steven, people are allowed to have religious beliefs. It doesn't seem ok to me for someone to just attack them and insult people for having their own beliefs. I don't believe in creationism but a post like this makes it seem like you are the one trolling and not the other way around.
Be careful with your choice of words man. Not having substancial evidence is not the same as telling someone everything they think is a joke.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven: "The first alphabet emerged around 2000 BCE to represent the language of Semitic workers in Egypt (see Middle Bronze Age alphabets), and was derived from the alphabetic principles of the Egyptian hieroglyphs."
That's a direct quote from the Wiki.
This is great. Egyptians gave their alphabet to the Jews.
How's that taste, Lisa? LOL
Tastes like Wikipedia. Imbecile.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by The White Whale: She(He?) has a similar point as yours, without any bile.
But bile is steven's specialty.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by Papa Janitor: Steven, stop being combative, and from here on please refrain from posting in this thread.
Dude, just because the Cards are embarrassingly incompetent at moderating doesn't mean that YOU have to be. Take a stand. Take a poll of Hatrackers. Ask how many would like to see some temporary or permanent bans. OSC is supported by his FANS. No fans=no money=no Hatrack. WE pay for this board, in part, with our book purchases. I've probably spent 2-3 hundred dollars on his books over the years, and encouraged dozens of others to read and buy his work. I'm raising my KID on his books. I deserve a voice. This board should not be entirely autocratic. There should be some elements of democracy.
Posted by Godric (Member # 4587) on :
Bob bowed out in a timely fashion. Almost uncanny.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven: She can say anything...she can say just anything at all, and nobody blinks...
I BAN trolls on the boards that I moderate. I don't act like their behavior is appropriate.
My boards are better for it, too. The people I ban contribute nothing.
Aw, is widdle stevie upset? He can't be a dictator on Hatrack because it isn't his, and his inability to be in control is making him all sulky? Poor, poor stevie. <sob!>
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by LargeTuna: a post like this makes it seem like you are the one trolling and not the other way around.
"Makes it seem"? Honestly.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven: I deserve a voice. This board should not be entirely autocratic. There should be some elements of democracy.
What are you, 19 years old? You sound like a troubled adolescent. Go make your own frakking forum and boss everyone around there. You come to a forum that's being provided by someone else, at their expense, you show some gratitude, you spoiled brat.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by The White Whale: steven, overwhelming niceness won't eliminate trolls, but feeding them isn't a better solution (Lisa, I am not agreeing with steven that you're a troll).
That's good, because it's clear that steven is trolling here. But to paraphrase Pix, it's like being made fun of by the retarded kid on the playground. I know I should be offended, but I can't stop laughing.
Posted by LargeTuna (Member # 10512) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by LargeTuna: a post like this makes it seem like you are the one trolling and not the other way around.
"Makes it seem"? Honestly.
Yeah I'm not the type of person that is going to accuse people of being trolls. I can't help it I felt his post was innapropriate, but I'm not gonna call him a name.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Lisa: If there is such a thing as a moral lowlands you're certainly not avoiding the path that leads there.
You know better, you don't have to act in anger.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by steven: I deserve a voice. This board should not be entirely autocratic. There should be some elements of democracy.
What are you, 19 years old? You sound like a troubled adolescent. Go make your own frakking forum and boss everyone around there. You come to a forum that's being provided by someone else, at their expense, you show some gratitude, you spoiled brat.
Wow. You are the most ridiculous poster on this forum (or any forum for that matter) I have seen in quite a while. Just because somebody intelligent disagrees with you doesn't give you the right to flame them. Even Clive doesn't stoop to this level. I don't understand how people can get angry at people over their computer. What does this say about your actual life.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by SoaPiNuReYe: I don't understand how people can get angry at people over their computer.
Oh, the IRONY!
Posted by natural_mystic (Member # 11760) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by SoaPiNuReYe: I don't understand how people can get angry at people over their computer.
Oh, the IRONY!
Posted by Sean Monahan (Member # 9334) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven: WE pay for this board, in part, with our book purchases. I've probably spent 2-3 hundred dollars on his books over the years, and encouraged dozens of others to read and buy his work. I'm raising my KID on his books. I deserve a voice. This board should not be entirely autocratic. There should be some elements of democracy.
Buying his books gives you ownership over those books. Not what OSC spends those earnings on.
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
Drama is entertaining.
Posted by sinflower (Member # 12228) on :
The thing is, Lisa isn't a troll. She's not just stirring up drama, she believes in what she posts.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: Drama is entertaining.
Oy. Please don't encourage it.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
There's so much ironic content in this thread that it's making my head spin.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: I'm going to bow out of this thread for now.
I can't see this whole thing ending well,
yo can I hire you to gamble for me? you have a more-obvious-events version of the shining.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
This thread is like watching a public toilet flush.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by SoaPiNuReYe:
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by steven: I deserve a voice. This board should not be entirely autocratic. There should be some elements of democracy.
What are you, 19 years old? You sound like a troubled adolescent. Go make your own frakking forum and boss everyone around there. You come to a forum that's being provided by someone else, at their expense, you show some gratitude, you spoiled brat.
Wow. You are the most ridiculous poster on this forum (or any forum for that matter) I have seen in quite a while. Just because somebody intelligent disagrees with you doesn't give you the right to flame them. Even Clive doesn't stoop to this level. I don't understand how people can get angry at people over their computer. What does this say about your actual life.
When someone intelligent disagrees with me, I don't flame them. But in this case, it was steven throwing a tantrum. That's very different.
Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: Drama is entertaining.
Sure, but not nearly as much as interesting, rational discussion.
It's like seeing a car wreck as you drive to Disneyworld. Sure, you're gonna turn your head to look, but if it gums up the highway to a standstill it's pretty far from a net win.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R:
quote:My branch manager was Greek, and she insisted that the Greeks invented the alphabet. I asked her what alpha means in Greek. Silence. I explained to her that all of the letters actually mean something in Hebrew. And only in Hebrew.
I'm not sure what you mean. I don't know why this would make the alphabet "yours."
What do the characters in the Hebrew alphabet mean? Are you sure that there are no other languages where letters have meaning?
Posted by jebus202 (Member # 2524) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven:
quote:Originally posted by Papa Janitor: Steven, stop being combative, and from here on please refrain from posting in this thread.
Dude, just because the Cards are embarrassingly incompetent at moderating doesn't mean that YOU have to be. Take a stand. Take a poll of Hatrackers. Ask how many would like to see some temporary or permanent bans. OSC is supported by his FANS. No fans=no money=no Hatrack. WE pay for this board, in part, with our book purchases. I've probably spent 2-3 hundred dollars on his books over the years, and encouraged dozens of others to read and buy his work. I'm raising my KID on his books. I deserve a voice. This board should not be entirely autocratic. There should be some elements of democracy.
Yea, steven, exactly. When I buy one of OSC's books, I'm not just exchanging money for a creative work of his that took a lot of time and effort on his part to make, I'm buying his life. The money he's living big off comes from (in very small part) me. I'm basically his boss, only I'm more than his boss, I'm like his owner. That means his sh*t is MINE. His website, his house, his wife and kids, all MINE. MIIIINE. NOW GET OUT OF MY WAY BECAUSE THIS THREAD ONLY HAS ENOUGH ROOM FOR ONE OVERGROWN SENSE OF ENTITLEMENT! GET OFF MY FORUM!
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: But in this case, it was steven throwing a tantrum.
This is actually true. Lisa posted something non-factual, easily checkable, and didn't even admit she was wrong after being shown that she was wrong.
I have a flaw. I despise incompetence and factual inaccuracy, particular when/where it is spoken in a tone of authority. It drives me nearly crazy. I've had this flaw for at least 15 or 20 years. I haven't figured out how to beat it, at least not yet. Meanwhile...
One of the reasons I ban so frequently and quickly on my own message boards is because of the ongoing mess here. I see what comes of never banning anyone, ever, and I don't like it. I'm not saying my behavior is perfect. I know it's not. The same flaws I have IRL show up here.
quote:Originally posted by sinflower: The thing is, Lisa isn't a troll. She's not just stirring up drama, she believes in what she posts.
I think you're right about that, and that fact doesn't make me hopeful. I really don't like the idea of banning people who have looked at the facts, and who nevertheless still don't come to the right conclusions. However, my frustration with her is a real thing, and the whole thing is making me start to question my participation here. I really am not 100% sure the problem is solvable without either heavy moderation or outright banning, and I'm not sure that either one of those things will ever happen.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
steven, didn't Papa Janitor ask you to stop posting in this thread?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Originally posted by Papa Janitor: Steven, stop being combative, and from here on please refrain from posting in this thread.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R:
quote:My branch manager was Greek, and she insisted that the Greeks invented the alphabet. I asked her what alpha means in Greek. Silence. I explained to her that all of the letters actually mean something in Hebrew. And only in Hebrew.
I'm not sure what you mean. I don't know why this would make the alphabet "yours."
What do the characters in the Hebrew alphabet mean? Are you sure that there are no other languages where letters have meaning?
I'm sorry I missed this before, Scott. Aleph means ox, and the original letter was a pictograph of an ox. Bet means house, and ditto about the original letter being a pictograph of it. Gimel is a camel, dalet is a door, etc. Whereas alpha, beta, gamma and delta have no meaning at all in Greek.
And no, there are no languages older than Hebrew which have an alphabetic writing system with letters whose names mean something in that language.
Because of a misdating of the strata in the Levant, inscriptions in Hebrew have been attributed to Canaanites, so you'll see such attributions in links like the one the Rabbit posted. But there's actually no evidence that the Canaanites left any writing at all, other than that which arises as an artifact of the dating.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R:
quote:Originally posted by Papa Janitor: Steven, stop being combative, and from here on please refrain from posting in this thread.
Yeah, moderating me is like replacing the steering wheel when the wheels have already fallen off.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Hm... why would the language develop that way? IIRC, Hebrew is a phonetic script...why tie the image that represents the human sound to a object, rather than a valueless symbol?
I still don't understand why this makes the alphabet "yours."
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
You can't see it, but that stick figure is posting on Hatrack.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
quote:And only in Hebrew.
This isn't true. The names are definitely of semitic origin (and quite possibly from early Hebrew), but there are several semitic languages in which the terms have meaning. Notably including Phoenician.
I'd be interested in reading your sources for the dating errors you mention.
Not that steven's really paying attention, but while Egyptians did have a writing system for which the names of the pictographs had meaning in their language, it definitely wasn't an alphabet. A subset of it could have been used as an alphabet, but wasn't, except by semitic people living in Egypt (well, an alphabet without vowels, which has a special name, but the big technical leap is the total abstraction of character sound from meaning).
The greeks did invent the alphabet with vowels, for which they deserve a certain amount of credit.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by fugu13:
Not that steven's really paying attention, but while Egyptians did have a writing system for which the names of the pictographs had meaning in their language, it definitely wasn't an alphabet. A subset of it could have been used as an alphabet, but wasn't, except by semitic people living in Egypt (well, an alphabet without vowels, which has a special name, but the big technical leap is the total abstraction of character sound from meaning).
Borrowing somebody else's symbols doesn't exactly equal inventing an alphabet from scratch. It also doesn't make the Hebrew alphabet somehow mystical or magical, contrary to Dan Winter's crazy assertions.
Mentioning Dan Winter in a thread on the Hebrew alphabet is probably not going to help much. Or maybe it will, I have no idea.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
FWIW, I would very much like to understand the whole thing about nobody being there in 1868. I've heard the argument that there were no people called "Palestinians" before the creation of the Israeli state (or at some recent-ish period just prior to that).
What I don't get is the claim that the area was either: a) Completely empty, or b) Populated only by Jews
when it seems contrary to the on-the-ground information if you just visit the locales in question, and understand how the rural goat and sheep herding lifestyles work.
Anyway, if anyone has a good source for that assertion, and why Twain's remarks are relevant to the case, I'd sure like to know.
Thanks!!!
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: Hm... why would the language develop that way? IIRC, Hebrew is a phonetic script...why tie the image that represents the human sound to a object, rather than a valueless symbol?
I still don't understand why this makes the alphabet "yours."
Maybe you're not familiar with that turn of phrase. "Yeah, that's mine" can mean, "Yes, that's something I made".
As far as why it would develop that way, think about it. There's no such thing as a phonetic script. You want to create one. So you have a word: bayit, which means house. And you want a symbol to represent the first sound in that word. So you sketch a little house and call it beyt. You want a word to represent the first sound in the word gamal (camel), so you draw a little stylized camel and call it gimmel. You do this for all of the initial consonants you can think of, and presto: you have an alphabet (alephbet, rather).
I think the idea of valueless symbols is a fairly recent development in human history. It's like names. Nowadays, most people don't think of the meanings of names. It's all polly parrot. Names are picked for their sounds or after other people who had that name. It used to be that names weren't meaningless symbols, but actually said something.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by fugu13:
quote:And only in Hebrew.
This isn't true. The names are definitely of semitic origin (and quite possibly from early Hebrew), but there are several semitic languages in which the terms have meaning. Notably including Phoenician.
Phoenician is just an Aramaicized dialect of Hebrew.
quote:Originally posted by fugu13: I'd be interested in reading your sources for the dating errors you mention.
The problem is, I'm lazy, and haven't gotten around to writing it yet.
quote:Originally posted by fugu13: The greeks did invent the alphabet with vowels, for which they deserve a certain amount of credit.
Yes, fair enough.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: FWIW, I would very much like to understand the whole thing about nobody being there in 1868. I've heard the argument that there were no people called "Palestinians" before the creation of the Israeli state (or at some recent-ish period just prior to that).
What I don't get is the claim that the area was either: a) Completely empty, or b) Populated only by Jews
I don't claim that. But it was extremely sparsely populated, and a significant percentage of the Arab population there was nomadic, and didn't see crossing the Jordan as crossing a border.
And when we started moving back there in larger numbers, the demographics changed. It led to an influx of more Arabs as well.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: when it seems contrary to the on-the-ground information if you just visit the locales in question, and understand how the rural goat and sheep herding lifestyles work.
There wasn't really a huge amount of that, either. The ground cover had been pretty much destroyed by the goat and sheep herding that had gone on for centuries.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: Anyway, if anyone has a good source for that assertion, and why Twain's remarks are relevant to the case, I'd sure like to know.
Twain's remarks are relevant because they're an eyewitness account, and not from a Jewish source. You can read it in context at http://www.gutenberg.org/files/3176/3176-h/3176-h.htm if you like.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Lisa, thanks for explaining. That makes sense.
Do the Chinese, Japanese, and Hindu languages not have an alphabet? I'm not sure of the distinction.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
quote:Phoenician is just an Aramaicized dialect of Hebrew.
I assume no evidence will be forthcoming for this one, either?
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
I have always loved Twain's quotes about the Jewish people.
Scott: Chinese has a logographic system, Japanese has a hybrid logographic/syllabary, and there is no Hindu language (that's a religion). Hindi, however, is written in several different alphabets, all of which are not so distant cousins of the early semitic alphabets (with some variations that are probably home-grown).
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
I have read it. The small bit she quotes is but a snippet from a larger context of them traveling through villages and tribal areas with larger populations. He's not exactly thrilled by the level of civilization he encounters there, true, but to pick the one spot he talks about as not having many people (he mentions three in an area of "some miles". Call it a day's ride -- what's that? At best we're talking 20 miles or so in a more-or-less straight line?
She ignores all the preceding and succeeding parts where he talks about people they encountered along the way, towns they went through.
It seems less than accurate of her.
At any rate, I think it's interesting, but it doesn't prove much.
Did you see my questions about the actual towns in the area and who might've lived there?
It seems germane to the issue of who might've been there.
On a related note: The "nomads aren't really the residents" argument is one that North America is trying to come to grips with now (200 years or so later) in relation to native peoples who were here before European settlers. In particular, the Western Expansion was considered a "better use"of "empty land" when in reality, it displaced people who had prior claims, did it generally without compensation, and in some (many cases) with violence -- on both sides.
From the Native American perspective, the fact that they crossed borders isn't really relevant. They had different borders.
I think the case could be made that nomadic Arab populations in Palestine have a similar claim.
As for the cities and towns, who lived there? Hebron, for example, seems to have had a large Arab population for centuries, but I don't have actual data. Is that incorrect? Was Hebron empty in 1868? Or...was it mostly Jewish at that time?
And, who were the Crusaders fighting in the Holy Land? Where did they live between battles. Did they claim the land as "theirs?"
You know, it just doesn't make a lot of sense to claim (as the woman in your original link) does that people other than Jews have no claim to "the land."
The land includes a lot -- the cities, the towns, the oases and wells, etc.
Anyway, I'm repeating the same questions. She is clearly a fan of Israel, but I think she let her view get colored by her fandom.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by fugu13:
quote:Phoenician is just an Aramaicized dialect of Hebrew.
I assume no evidence will be forthcoming for this one, either?
I could ask a language historian pretty soon.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
Also, the earliest alphabets w/ letter meanings was developed in either Egypt (this one is likely but not confirmed yet) or the Sinai Peninsula (this is the current oldest record holder until the Egyptian findings are confirmable), not Israel.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I think, Samprimary, her point was that the alphabet was created by Semitic people; not that it was necessarily done in Israel.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
the semitic languages as i recall are a branch of afroasiatic, and they originated before the jewish state and bled far more heavily into arabic cultures than jewish cultures. so unless there's a giant "3. ??? 4. Israel!" point of bragging rights I'm missing in this conversation, I don't see how that realistically translates into "yo, so alphabets are our doing, peace"
the earliest alphabet also had more egyptian influence in it than anything else and was even based off of hieroglyphics, soooooooo
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Yeah, that's been covered. It pretty clearly developed from hieroglyphs, and that was very likely in Egypt, but by a semitic group (which one is unknown, but there were only so many semitic people at the time).
Posted by natural_mystic (Member # 11760) on :
Samprimary, you're just not getting this: all elements of the alphabet that are not directly attributable to jewish cultures are completely trivial. Further, this is self-evident so don't bother asking for evidence.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
And, clearly, that semitic people proabably developed an alphabet thousands of years ago makes it okay to take land away from people today.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by fugu13: Yeah, that's been covered. It pretty clearly developed from hieroglyphs, and that was very likely in Egypt, but by a semitic group (which one is unknown, but there were only so many semitic people at the time).
yes, and not all of them have an applicable linear association that ends up "4. Israel!"
Here is a comparison: 2,000 years in the future, some guy in the new north american union or w/e claims we Americans 'birthed' the locomotive. It's untrue — it was birthed elsewhere. He can't substantiate the claim by using notions like 'well, it was done by a specific people, some of whom went on to birth the American state' or 'and ultimately it was the americans who made the most important early use of the train' or w/e. 'birthed' is still the wrong term for America as a national entity to claim in any real sense, just like it is incorrect to claim israel can take claim for having 'birthed' the alphabet
see, if I love a national entity, I would at least represent it by supporting its supposed greatness only with factual claims. to do otherwise is a disservice to it.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by natural_mystic: Samprimary, you're just not getting this: all elements of the alphabet that are not directly attributable to jewish cultures are completely trivial. Further, this is self-evident so don't bother asking for evidence.
oic
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
quote:Originally posted by natural_mystic:
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by SoaPiNuReYe: I don't understand how people can get angry at people over their computer.
Oh, the IRONY!
Because I flame people all the time and attack them on a personal level when they disagree with me, yup. I'm guessing you're referring to the OK GO thread? EDIT: steven was out of line too.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
no, they're referring to that post. it sounds angry. that's what makes it ironic
sam: dissecting frogs every day™
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: no, they're referring to that post. it sounds angry. that's what makes it ironic
Precisely.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: no, they're referring to that post. it sounds angry. that's what makes it ironic
Precisely.
oh lol
Posted by Papa Janitor (Member # 7795) on :
I appreciate that this thread has for the most part gotten back on a reasonable track, though I still don't like the snark much.
As I said elsewhere, I'm working with the Cards toward a more workable set of guidelines for forum participation. It's a slow process, especially the way my life has been going the past couple of months. However, there's no doubt that "deliberately, defiantly ignoring requests/directions from the moderator is not acceptable" (or something similarly worded) will be in there. Please consider it to be in force now. I consider flouting the rules because one feels it justified to be one of the biggest current problems (along with admittedly unclear rules -- again, working).
Also, for the time being (until it's determined whether subject banning is going to be a regular occurrence), when someone has been directed to stop participating in a thread, please try not to address them in a manner that encourages response. Take it to a separate thread (if the interaction isn't directly related to the reason the person was asked out of the thread) or to e-mail (or other method of communication outside the forum).
--PJ
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
You're more than free to subject ban me anytime. The first time I get subject banned, and I don't see someone else getting it too, I promise I'll leave entirely. That's why I left Ornery, a nonsense 2-week suspension, and I'll be willing to leave here too, I think.
You better apply that stuff fairly, or it's going to be the GrenMe effect all over.
Posted by Papa Janitor (Member # 7795) on :
Please check your e-mail, steven.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
PJ, I was reading this thread and planning on whistling at least one of the places where I felt Lisa went far over the line in what is acceptable. But, with you weighing in, that seems kind of moot. Should we consider that issue dead?
Posted by Papa Janitor (Member # 7795) on :
I think so, yes. Hopefully it will not zombify.
Posted by Papa Janitor (Member # 7795) on :
Lisa, knock it off, and please check your e-mail.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)