To Susan: No end in sight to gamesmanship?
Submitted by Plato (India), Feb 24, 2007 at 08:24
My comments in bold:
"and you, superior third worlders cannot get back to your ancient splendor?
This was my answer to what you said above: Susan you think we 3rd worlders were scrabbling for roots to survive. We do not consider ourselves superior. You are the ones who have burdened yourself with the 'white man's burdern'. It was your (Macaulay) who claimed that "a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia". Do you subscribe to that view Susan? If not why not?
Your reply now: "not true at all, I always believed chinese people had the greatest past civilization. Somehow china is nowdays a third world, I also always believed the the ancient egyptians (pre-islam) were far more evoluted than the rest so again your assumption is wrong (assumption n. 123876864867)"
If you thought so why did not say so instead of asking a rhetorical question implying 3rd worlders ancient splendour did not exist or maybe are incapable of recreating it? (Let me answer you, you are not here to educate me). Yes Susan most of your post consists of such trick answers or questions. Let me wade through some of them.
"It was you (Thomas Macaulay) who claimed that "a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia". Do you subscribe to that view Susan? If not why not?"
"I am not thomas macaulay, sorry."
My question was to illustrate the contempt felt by Europeans for non-Europeans. I know I am flippant sometimes but never to avoid answering a query which is what you seem to doing now. I cannot stop you. Your put downs don't answer anything. Why are you on this blog. (I am braced for the blast)
"you are talking about muslims right? because slavery still exists nowadays in muslim countries, but you third worlders are too busy than doing something about it, after all, a slave trader is wrong only when he's white, correct? if he's one of your brownish muslim friend, that's ok, especially if the slave is a non-muslim."
Susan I admire your artistry in the art of deflection and you are as good at it as Muslim apologists. Let us read what I said and then look at your answer:
I had said: 'Oh yes it is Europe who gave them so much. You have the nerve to say that after shipping hundreds of thousands as slaves to slave markets. You are Italian so you had no hand in it. Then don't talk about the West or Europe. Keep your comments exclusively to Italy which never had any colonies. Somalia, Eritrea, Libya were just dropped into Italy's lap and all you did there was build hospitals and schools for the savages you found there. Yes you should not have given anything in return it was the birthright of Europeans to exploit them as they did not have the technology to do anything with their own natural resources. Just as now you believe that the West has the right to the oil under their lands as you gave them the technology to pump it. The West has the divine right to the world's natural resources.'
Nicely deflected to Muslim slave trading, which is admitted and not disputed least of all by me (I had sent a post to Noah where a Pakistani leader says he wants to make Indians slaves). And then 3rd worlders brought into the picture to further muddy what is being discussed. And as the finishing touch ask a rhetorical question which squarely makes it clear that what I am suggesting is that slave trading is wrong only if done by whites. What a beauty that was Susan. I wish I have that kind of fiendish skill in dumping manure on my oppponent.
I wrote: "Just as now you believe that the West has the right to the oil under their lands as you gave them the technology to pump it. Yes the West has the divine right to the world's natural resources."
You write: "Would you give a match to nero? Some idiot did it and look what happened"
Okay so Nero has time-ported to the ME and what happened. He pumped out so much oil that now you are hooked on it and can't give it up for dear life. And like any junkie you go out and get your fix by whatever means
"On the contrary, if they refuse to sell it 2 good things
1) the west finally will wake up and find another resource that doesn't involve illiterate mohameddan supremacists
2) they don't sell, they don't earn, they starve, OK in my book"
1)Your alarm clock seems to be defective. You have not woken up since 1973. Good luck to you finding something cheaper than what is under their sands. Till then the illeterate mohammedan supremacist has you spreadeagled over his barrel of oil.
2) They starved even before you showed them the oil beneath their feet. Nothing new for them. But what happens when your (sorry you Italians have small cars, Americans then) SUVs and MUVs stopping humming from oil hunger?
"When British rule is being talked divert attention to Muslim rule and bleat like sheep. bla bla bla. That is a very good attention grabber."
You say british rule was bad, I ask, compared to what?, that's the typical muslim reasoning, dhimmitude was fair, compared to what? compared to pure slavery or murder. Fine.
That is like asking me to compare chicken pox with measles or a cardiac arrest with a brain haemorrhage. As usual you are attempting to lead me up the garden path. Nice try though. This is what I began with:
I wrote: "In Asia, especially India, the local industry was in many cases extinguished. The textile weavers producing some of the finest material were destroyed by favourable conditions for British imports. And progress in India. Read about the famines during the British rule. You are very well informed Susan."
Then you blablaad this: bla bla bla, because under the muslim rule india was so much better, you can see it from the outstanding prosperity of muslim countries, in and out of asia.
(And how did your nightmare the Muslims parachute in here? They pop in at the most opportune moments for you.)
As I said it is like my preferring chicken pox to measles. Okay I can see that Muslim rule was like an especially virulent form of measles compared to the British chicken pox. India is now free of both.
"all I know is that i am wasting my time with a third worders from india, that should move to a muslim country if he's so ashamed of the british colonialism."
Yes Susan I wish you would stop wasting your and my time. And yes British colonialism did benefit India much more than the Italian colonialism, that was not colonialism, did for Somalia, Eritrea, Libya. Where I wonder did I say that I was ashamed of British colonialism. From what I said happened I should have thought that anger would be closer to the truth.My being ashamed is your assumption. As to the assumption number unlike you I am bad at Arabic (sorry Hindu) numerals so I keep count in Roman figures. I checked my diary it is XXX.
"Let me think about why the british church separated from the roman one... mhmhmh, a lustful king who wanted divorce? how noble, how spiritual.
Oh yeah, but in this case it's better for you to put down the church compared to your hated british protestants. There's a greater evil."
I see another path being opened up now. The spiritual one. I don't see any flowers at the end just thorns. I am not going to be dragged down there.
"Hated British Protestants". Now you have begun putting words into my mouth. Us Kumbayas don't hate, you must know by now. I have just stated what happened during British rule. The hate word or any similar word never came up. You have much more to learn about us Kumbayas. I will be happy to teach you if you allow me? (I can answer that for you but I would love to hear it from you, there is so much power in whatever you say).
What I wrote: "You are trying to dilute THE CHURCH's guilt in not taking the lead in fighting slavery by bringing in the protestants"
Your comment: LOL, as a matter of fact it's where there is a catholic majority that there is still slavery, it's well known, saudi arabia, mali, mauritania, sudan...
When you get uncomfortable with anything in your world bring in something much worse elsewhere i.e. the Muslim world. And hey presto you begin to smell of roses when compared to the Other. Remember the Nazi and Native Indian trick of the Muslims. Imitation is the best form of flattery you know. You really flatter those Muslims you look down upon.
"I avoid contact with criminals too, is that making a caste?"
Isn't it. Oh yes Susan. Just commit a crime and see what caste you land up in. The criminal caste. You won't get credit no more. The police will question you if your are found within a mile of any crime. Your friends and even relatives will avoid you like the plague. What is caste?
"well let me think... italians had a dictator, removed by USA, italy suffered post war, but worked hard to re-establish itself. Finally it worked. The germans had a dictator, they suffered post war, but worked hard to re-establish themselves, now they are the motor of europe, Japan had a dictator, they suffered post war, but worked hard to re-establish itself, they are a bright economic empire. 3 success out of 3. A normal person would think that the superior iraqui culture could do the same. Well not, it must be because they are so morally superior, thanks to islamic supremacism?"
To answer this one I had to think so hard that I developed a migraine attack. The Iraqis had a dictator. He was once armed by the US. Then when he turned uppity he was attacked but not deposed. But he was so thoroughly hemmed in, his infrastructure all but collapsed, the people he ruled including their children, suffered terrible privations for ten years. Then you (the US) decided to put Iraq out of its misery and shocked and awed them all the way to the hangman's noose. The Iraqi's decided to do some shocking and awing of their own. The only hard work the Iraqi are now doing is picking up the body parts falling around their ears every day. All that Iraqi culture, including the pre-Islamic variety, is now going up in smoke. What remains of iraqi culture is now mostly to be seen in private collections in the West. And it can all be blamed on the moral superiority they claim thanks to Islamic supremacism. Moral superiority turned on its head. Susan I congratulate you.
|"So let me understand, in iraq, sunni are murdering shites inside their mosques, bombing them every day because of USA?"
Why else. Why does the US not just drop everything and leave, nobody will blame the US when bombs go off in their mosques. Its that simple.
"If I remember well, under saddam it was the other way around, a certain chemical ali, gassing kurds and shites, a certain doctor death (a woman expert on poisons) was thinking about how to murder as many shites as possible. After all, why saddam launched the iran-iraq war, killing his brother shites? Because of USA?"
Because of who else? Who gave Ali his gas. You seem to know what that poison woman was thinking about. Except you, probably everyone knows who egged Saddam to attack Iran.
"Could it be that the murderous, revengful muslims have now found another good excuse to murder each other? Why sunni are murdering shites thinking they are hurting USA? is USA shite?"
Susan this is one of those news flashes you are so fond of, only this one is nearly 1400 years old. The shias and sunnis don't need the USA to murder each other. They have been at it since Ali's time. What makes you assume that they think they are hurting the USA. Your assumption number what now. I can't count beyond XXX.
"Dictionary.com says a supremacist is a person who believes in or advocates the supremacy of a particular group, esp. a racial group: a white supremacist. "
what would be my group? I advocate the suprematism of chinese people, which are not my people at all. Assumption n. 26588954545444 wrong again for you.
"In full agreement there. Also you will be surprised (?) to know that the blockade that killed millions in Iraq were not by the Muslim people."
yes, it was mohammedan people
Another of your beauties. When you tell a Muslim, Muslims are killing Muslims in say Darfur, they reply promptly it is the crusader (Christian) USA. Any linkage visitble with 'yes, it was mohammedan people.
You write in this post:"what would be my group? I advocate the suprematism of chinese people, which are not my people at all. Assumption n. 26588954545444 wrong again for you."
This is what you wrote in a previous post: "sorry, I am not a suprematist like yourself that thinks there is a "largest democracy" or the "mother of parliaments". I just think there are stupid people elected as politicians that waste time for silly things. If you are so much offended by what is said by a TV show why don't you pull a muslim and burn a flag or kill someone?"
This was my reply:Mentioning that Indian is the largest democracy and that the British parliament is considered the mother of parliaments makes me a supremacist. Susan like the Muslims, who you are beginning to resemble, you are using a dictionary with peculiar definitions. Dictionary.com says a supremacist is a person who believes in or advocates the supremacy of a particular group, esp. a racial group: a white supremacist. Where can I buy the dictionary you use so that I can follow the train of your thoughts better.
And I brought up that subject because you sneeringly told me that unlike me you don't watch third rate Western TV shows."
Assumption no. 26588954545445. You are a Chinese supremacist. You told me so. They may not be your people but so also Arabs are not the people of the Pakistanis, but every Pakistani Muslim and a good number of other Muslims believe Arabs are superior (chosen by Allah) people. Exactly what are you trying to read into my posts Susan. You are way above my head. (I know your answer to that one too. But please tell me anyway, you tell it so well. Me being a blog masochist after all)
"I can come with many other such claims. Let the experts accept it."
one one thing the experts agree, inventions of writing has nothing to do with iraq or islam, since that land was inhabitated by assyrians and babilonians. The descendants of those people are modern assyrians, all of christian religion. Now spread all over the world since xenophobic, racist and suprematist muslims cannot cope with that."
I was talking about your Armenian claim. I have absolutely no quarrel with that if the experts say so. I only said in the original reply that the region of Iraq or thereabouts is credited with the invention of writing and you make it into a big deal about the Muslims not having invented it, that it was the Assyrians and Babylonians etc. You simply pass by what was said: 'Oh so the West brought civilisation to the 3rd world. And we have to be happy we were conquored and brutalised for centuries for the 'civilisation' you brought us. Apparently you have not heard of China, Japan, India, Korea, Egypt, Persia, the people who invented writing, right there in Iraq.'
Nothing was said about Islam's or Iraq's inventing writing, even I in my Kumbaya stupidity know that writing was invented much before Islam, and yet you have to bring in your favourite nightmare to spice up the discussion. The sense of what is sought to be said is buried. Iraq was brought up along with many other places to show that the location of various cultures were not all Western. That brought on a torrent of nice sounding invectives: xenophobic, racist, supremacist.
That is a cute subtgerfuge you have of trying to refocus my attention to what is happening at the periphery of what is being said. Wave a red rag at the periphery of my vision hoping I will turn my head to bring it into focus and then pour ridicule on that red rag (herring?) which you think is now the focus of my attention.
Susan this gamesmanship has gone on long enough. Will you let me summarise. You can conclude as you can have a lot of fun with that, red gag (er..rag) and all.
1)Muslims are the pits. They can't reform.
2)They are out to dominate the world with their Muslim supremacist attitudes.
3)The only way to save ourselves from the Islamic nightmare is to supress Muslims and destroy them (is that my Assumption no. 26588954545446?)
1) Muslims are near the pits. They can be pulled back and reformed.
2) They are out to dominate the world with their Muslim supremacist attitudes.
3) Suppression and destruction have never been solutions to human problems. They are self-defeating. Better men than me, both among Muslims and non-Muslims, will find a way out of the Muslim problem..
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".
Reader comments (2098) on this item
Comment on this item
Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes