This is Darwinism under the guise of Christianity
His Highness Comandante Banana, King of the Apes I & Chief of Quixotic Enterprises
EATS THE LITTLE FISH. Religion, democracy and all that stuff is pure
CAMOUFLAGE IN THE JUNGLE.
Without the complicity of religion, we would find ourselves like NAKED
APES, constantly seeking new prey and new territory to control,
exploit and eventually destroy.
And then we've found enough sheep to believe that Jesus --an ape
dressed in rags-- would approve of this Darwinistic world.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It happened before in Easter Island where the monkeys ended up eating
each other while they watched...
http://greencraft.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/easter-island.jpg
Kleuskes & Moos
Quixotic:
With a handle like that it's hard to take you seriously.
> You see it in plain view and with no shame of any kind: THE BIG FISH
> EATS THE LITTLE FISH. Religion, democracy and all that stuff is pure
> CAMOUFLAGE IN THE JUNGLE.
Using caps like that makes you look like Zippy the Pinhead from my
fortune
database.
> Without the complicity of religion, we would find ourselves like NAKED
> APES, constantly seeking new prey and new territory to control,
> exploit and eventually destroy.
Newsitem 1: for all intents and purposes humans are naked apes.
Newsitem 2: a quick glance at human history seems to confirm the
rest.
> And then we've found enough sheep to believe that Jesus --an ape
> dressed in rags-- would approve of this Darwinistic world.
You seem to have difficulty distinguishing between wat is and what
should
be. Jesus lived in the same darwinistic circumstances as you and i, or
more
likely, even worse. Since then progress has been made and we now have
a
security council to deal with the worst cases. I do not agree with
your
rather cynical brand of "christianity" (mind the quotes).
Stop whining and get over it.
Bob Casanova
appeared in talk.origins, posted by "Kleuskes & Moos"
<kle...@xs4all.nl>:
>His Highness Comandante Banana, King of the Apes I & Chief of
>Quixotic:
>
>With a handle like that it's hard to take you seriously.
You haven't been around for a while; he/she/it appeared and
quickly became one of the Great Ignored/Killfiled. For
cause.
>> You see it in plain view and with no shame of any kind: THE BIG FISH
>> EATS THE LITTLE FISH. Religion, democracy and all that stuff is pure
>> CAMOUFLAGE IN THE JUNGLE.
>
>Using caps like that makes you look like Zippy the Pinhead from my
>fortune
>database.
>
>> Without the complicity of religion, we would find ourselves like NAKED
>> APES, constantly seeking new prey and new territory to control,
>> exploit and eventually destroy.
>
>Newsitem 1: for all intents and purposes humans are naked apes.
>Newsitem 2: a quick glance at human history seems to confirm the
>rest.
>
>> And then we've found enough sheep to believe that Jesus --an ape
>> dressed in rags-- would approve of this Darwinistic world.
>
>You seem to have difficulty distinguishing between wat is and what
>should
>be. Jesus lived in the same darwinistic circumstances as you and i, or
>more
>likely, even worse. Since then progress has been made and we now have
>a
>security council to deal with the worst cases. I do not agree with
>your
>rather cynical brand of "christianity" (mind the quotes).
>
>Stop whining and get over it.
>
--
Bob C.
"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <vg13h59g3n5ev8t0m...@4ax.com>):
> You haven't been around for a while; he/she/it appeared and
> quickly became one of the Great Ignored/Killfiled. For
> cause.
It kept changing its nym. I used other methods to kf it. I didn't know it was
still arround.
--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.
His Highness Comandante Banana, King of the Apes I & Chief of Quixotic Enterprises
> His Highness Comandante Banana, King of the Apes I & Chief of
> Quixotic:
>
> With a handle like that it's hard to take you seriously.
>
> > You see it in plain view and with no shame of any kind: THE BIG FISH
> > EATS THE LITTLE FISH. Religion, democracy and all that stuff is pure
> > CAMOUFLAGE IN THE JUNGLE.
>
> Using caps like that makes you look like Zippy the Pinhead from my
> fortune
> database.
There's a need to drive the important parts to the subconscious mind.
Disregard Internet rules, this is a jungle and bigger is better.
>
> > Without the complicity of religion, we would find ourselves like NAKED
> > APES, constantly seeking new prey and new territory to control,
> > exploit and eventually destroy.
>
> Newsitem 1: for all intents and purposes humans are naked apes.
Mostly when we take a shower or make love.
> Newsitem 2: a quick glance at human history seems to confirm the
> rest.
So what's the "civilizing role" of Christianity?
>
> > And then we've found enough sheep to believe that Jesus --an ape
> > dressed in rags-- would approve of this Darwinistic world.
>
> You seem to have difficulty distinguishing between wat is and what
> should
> be. Jesus lived in the same darwinistic circumstances as you and i, or
> more
> likely, even worse. Since then progress has been made and we now have
> a
> security council to deal with the worst cases. I do not agree with
> your
> rather cynical brand of "christianity" (mind the quotes).
>
> Stop whining and get over it.
In the monkey world, MAKING NOISE is a way to draw attention to the
issues.
But I believe that nations are forced into civilization, as it is the
case of Germany in the last decades. There's some hope of the most
predatory nation on Earth.
His Highness Comandante Banana, King of the Apes I & Chief of Quixotic Enterprises
> On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 08:59:15 -0800 (PST), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by "Kleuskes & Moos"
>
> - Show quoted text -
I don't take the Christianity seriously either. But at least I don't
claim to be a superhero like Jesus. Or was he a loser?
His Highness Comandante Banana, King of the Apes I & Chief of Quixotic Enterprises
BELIEVE THE HUMAN BEING CAN BE TAMED to a high degree where they act
civilized most of the time.
There are many instances in history where humans acted like animals...
the Vikings, the Germans, etc, and today they are the most civilized
people in the world. There's a particular place where we still behave
like beasts, and thus we need some whip and treat (the banana) on our
roads...
HONK IF YOU ARE FOR THE REVOLUTION!
After so long in the cage, I decided to go out and enjoy the cool day.
You know, one of those days that you have to live, even if you die
because of it... We went out through the back streets, but later we
had no choice but to ride the main street for a few blocks in order to
make a quick left. I decided to ride like a car TAKING THE LEFT LANE,
and soon enough there were the predators behind us blasting the horn,
while I waved them to pass on the right. Hey, the road had 3 lanes, so
I don't see the reason for all that noise and intimidation. I do not
recommend though doing this without some plug-style headphones playing
loud music. You pretend to ignore them...
But I thought of a way to put all that NOISE AND AGGRESSION to work
for a good cause. It's good they know you are not alone, so they think
twice before actually acting on their animal instincts...
http://www.zazzle.com/i_like_banana_revolution_tshirt-235884093374828058
If you are banana shy, I can work around the word. But hey, let's be
real, if they are hungry, don't they deserve a banana?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
more serious t-shirt here (and no commission)
Kleuskes & Moos
> On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 08:59:15 -0800 (PST), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by "Kleuskes & Moos"
>
> >His Highness Comandante Banana, King of the Apes I & Chief of
> >Quixotic:
>
> >With a handle like that it's hard to take you seriously.
>
> You haven't been around for a while; he/she/it appeared and
> quickly became one of the Great Ignored/Killfiled. For
> cause.
Glad to be back, though. I've missed yanking troll's chains,it helps
alleviate stress. It seems a shame to killfile this lunatic, but i
guess there are reasons and everyone is God in his own killfile.
<snip gaga>
Kleuskes & Moos
Zippy the Pinhead... to a tee...
>
> But I believe that nations are forced into civilization, as it is the
> case of Germany in the last decades.
Ah... So germany wasn't civilized prior to what? 1989? 1953? 1945?
> There's some hope of the most predatory nation on Earth.
Ummm... Lets see... Germany, in contrast with, say, The UK had
relatively few colonies, certainly none as depraved a Belgian Congo,
did no have any involvement in slave trade (like the UK, the US and
the dutch), they did not devide the world between them, like the
spanish
and portugese and massacre the
original inhabitants like the US....
Of course they did suffer a period of national psychosis, but that
lasted only 12 years and the germans payed a heavy price for it.
Wanna talk Germans? How many have you met, lately?
J.J. O'Shea
(in article
<f5cc490b-8e8e-4ef5...@o10g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>):
they don't play cricket, and so are still uncivilized.
>
>> There's some hope of the most predatory nation on Earth.
>
> Ummm... Lets see... Germany, in contrast with, say, The UK had
> relatively few colonies, certainly none as depraved a Belgian Congo,
You might want to have a look at the pre-1915 history of South West Africa.
Yes, not as bad as the Belgian Congo, but that's setting the bar rather high.
Let's just say that South African policies post 1919 were considered liberal
in comparison...
> did no have any involvement in slave trade (like the UK, the US and
> the dutch),
Don't leave out the Spanish, the Portuguese, the French, and the Danes...
(Yes, the Danes. Who do you think the US got the US Virgin Islands from?)
And, off course, assorted Arab nations, some of which are _still_ at it. (The
Sudan, for one...)
> they did not devide the world between them, like the
> spanish
> and portugese and massacre the
> original inhabitants like the US....
Not for lack of trying. See further 'South West Africa', as noted above...
>
> Of course they did suffer a period of national psychosis, but that
> lasted only 12 years and the germans payed a heavy price for it.
>
> Wanna talk Germans? How many have you met, lately?
>
--
Kleuskes & Moos
> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 04:55:25 -0500, Kleuskes & Moos wrote
> (in article
Hmmm... Since when is playing a rather quaint and inintelligble game
any measure for civilisation?
> >> There's some hope of the most predatory nation on Earth.
>
> > Ummm... Lets see... Germany, in contrast with, say, The UK had
> > relatively few colonies, certainly none as depraved a Belgian Congo,
>
> You might want to have a look at the pre-1915 history of South West Africa.
Ah, yes, the Herrera... I was practically waiting for it. Still... It
puts them right up there with other nations.
> Yes, not as bad as the Belgian Congo, but that's setting the bar rather high.
> Let's just say that South African policies post 1919 were considered liberal
> in comparison...
Yes... And i hear the treatment of Apache, Sioux and Australian
Aborigines and many other tribes worldwide wasn't all that nice,
either. Remember the point we were argueing?
> > did no have any involvement in slave trade (like the UK, the US and
> > the dutch),
>
> Don't leave out the Spanish, the Portuguese, the French, and the Danes...
> (Yes, the Danes. Who do you think the US got the US Virgin Islands from?)
I would not dream of it. Thanks for making my point.
> And, off course, assorted Arab nations, some of which are _still_ at it. (The
> Sudan, for one...)
Right...
> > they did not devide the world between them, like the
> > spanish
> > and portugese and massacre the
> > original inhabitants like the US....
>
> Not for lack of trying. See further 'South West Africa', as noted above...
First off, Germany did not exist in the heyday of colonialism,
secondly the point being argued was that the title of "the most
predatory nation on Earth" has far too many contenders. The British
Empire being (by far) the best candidate.
Eventhough they _do_ play cricket for some reason.
Cheers... Kleuske.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article
<1efd6fe0-bfbe-4055...@c34g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>):
Those who don't play cricket cannot possibly be civilised.
>
>>>> There's some hope of the most predatory nation on Earth.
>>
>>> Ummm... Lets see... Germany, in contrast with, say, The UK had
>>> relatively few colonies, certainly none as depraved a Belgian Congo,
>>
>> You might want to have a look at the pre-1915 history of South West Africa.
>
> Ah, yes, the Herrera... I was practically waiting for it. Still... It
> puts them right up there with other nations.
Yep.
>
>> Yes, not as bad as the Belgian Congo, but that's setting the bar rather
>> high.
>
>> Let's just say that South African policies post 1919 were considered liberal
>> in comparison...
>
> Yes... And i hear the treatment of Apache, Sioux and Australian
> Aborigines and many other tribes worldwide wasn't all that nice,
> either. Remember the point we were argueing?
Yep.
>
>>> did no have any involvement in slave trade (like the UK, the US and
>>> the dutch),
>>
>> Don't leave out the Spanish, the Portuguese, the French, and the Danes...
>> (Yes, the Danes. Who do you think the US got the US Virgin Islands from?)
>
> I would not dream of it. Thanks for making my point.
Denmark lost money on the Virgin Islands, even after the US paid cash for
'em. I'm really not sure what Denmark thought it was accomplishing, other
than keeping up with the Dutch, French, British, Spanish, and Portuguese
Joneses... Other Danish colonies included Iceland and Greenland, Denmark was
actually in the colony business before England/Britain, but was very bad at
it. I mean, seriously, if you had the choice between Iceland and Greenland on
the one hand and Jamaica and Barbados on the other, would _you_ take Iceland?
Denmark had a lot of other stuff, in Africa, India, elsewhere. Most people
just don't know about it.
>
>> And, off course, assorted Arab nations, some of which are _still_ at it.
>> (The
>> Sudan, for one...)
>
> Right...
And they're damn nasty about it, too.
>
>>> they did not devide the world between them, like the
>>> spanish
>>> and portugese and massacre the
>>> original inhabitants like the US....
>>
>> Not for lack of trying. See further 'South West Africa', as noted above...
>
> First off, Germany did not exist in the heyday of colonialism,
They certainly tried to make up for lost time. They had lots of stuff in
Africa (mostly parts that no other European power wanted, usually for good
reason) and all over the Pacific. (They came close to war with the US over
Samoa, for example; most of the Marianas were German, and got handed over to
Japan at the end of WWI 'cause Japan had been on the right side in that war,
and then got grabbed by the US after WWII, in both cases as 'trust'
territories, yeah, right) and also in Asia. The reason why the Germans were
called 'Huns' by the British in both world wars was because dear old Kaiser
Bill himself told his troops to behave like Huns when he sent 'em off to
shoot Chinese during the fighting around the time of the Boxer Rebellion.
They did as instructed. They made quite an impression, they did. Note that
the Imperial Japanese Army of the time acquired a reputation for _good_
behaviour, in direct contrast.
> secondly the point being argued was that the title of "the most
> predatory nation on Earth" has far too many contenders. The British
> Empire being (by far) the best candidate.
Rule, Britannia! What's a little blowing rebels off the muzzles of cannon
between friends?
>
> Eventhough they _do_ play cricket for some reason.
It is entirely possible to be predatory _and_ to play cricket. Those who do
not play cricket are not civilised. It does not follow that those who do play
cricket are.
Besides, the main reason for being thankful that England plays cricket is
that they're so bad at it that just about anyone can beat the hell out of
them at it.
>
> Cheers... Kleuske.
His Highness Comandante Banana, King Of The Apes I & Chief of Quixotic Enterprises
> > But I believe that nations are forced into civilization, as it is the
> > case of Germany in the last decades.
>
> Ah... So germany wasn't civilized prior to what? 1989? 1953? 1945?
May 1945... Ask the Jews if you don't believe me.
>
> > There's some hope of the most predatory nation on Earth.
>
> Ummm... Lets see... Germany, in contrast with, say, The UK had
> relatively few colonies, certainly none as depraved a Belgian Congo,
> did no have any involvement in slave trade (like the UK, the US and
> the dutch), they did not devide the world between them, like the
> spanish
> and portugese and massacre the
> original inhabitants like the US....
>
> Of course they did suffer a period of national psychosis, but that
> lasted only 12 years and the germans payed a heavy price for it.
>
> Wanna talk Germans? How many have you met, lately?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Nice folks. I used to have a lot of German friends in the Canary
Islands. Both the Germans and the Canarians are very civilized people.
His Highness Comandante Banana, King Of The Apes I & Chief of Quixotic Enterprises
> >> But I believe that nations are forced into civilization, as it is the
> >> case of Germany in the last decades.
> > Ah... So germany wasn't civilized prior to what? 1989? 1953? 1945?
>
> they don't play cricket, and so are still uncivilized.
One effective way to see if a nation is civilized is to look at its
roads.
Then you realize that America is not that far ahead of Congo.
Can a nation that plays American football be civilized? ;)
Mike Lyle
> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 06:49:03 -0500, Kleuskes & Moos wrote
>> secondly the point being argued was that the title of "the most
>> predatory nation on Earth" has far too many contenders. The British
>> Empire being (by far) the best candidate.
>
> Rule, Britannia! What's a little blowing rebels off the muzzles of
> cannon between friends?
Quite a bit of history makes sense if one thinks of the US as the
British Empire Phase Two.
>
>>
>> Eventhough they _do_ play cricket for some reason.
>
> It is entirely possible to be predatory _and_ to play cricket. Those
> who do not play cricket are not civilised. It does not follow that
> those who do play cricket are.
And the first international match was between the US and Canada.
>
> Besides, the main reason for being thankful that England plays
> cricket is that they're so bad at it that just about anyone can beat
> the hell out of them at it.
>
Maybe you need a dozen solid Collingwoods. And of course too many of the
potentially best English cricketers are making crazy money playing
Association Roundball instead. Ah, Compton!
--
Mike.
Kleuskes & Moos
> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 06:49:03 -0500, Kleuskes & Moos wrote
> (in article
They tried to made up for lost time, but did not stand a chance
against the real colonial powers. Your listing of small islands in
the pacific and some unnamed african territories, just adds to my
point.
> > secondly the point being argued was that the title of "the most
> > predatory nation on Earth" has far too many contenders. The British
> > Empire being (by far) the best candidate.
>
> Rule, Britannia! What's a little blowing rebels off the muzzles of cannon
> between friends?
Think nothing of it. Especially if you're the sucker tied to a cannon
muzzle. But thanks for conceding the point.
> > Eventhough they _do_ play cricket for some reason.
>
> It is entirely possible to be predatory _and_ to play cricket. Those who do
> not play cricket are not civilised. It does not follow that those who do play
> cricket are.
Ah... Quaint... Must be something for islanders, they're always a bit
on the whacky side...
J.J. O'Shea
(in article
<53856c2c-9958-483f...@r24g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>):
> They tried to made up for lost time, but did not stand a chance
> against the real colonial powers. Your listing of small islands in
> the pacific
Lots and lots of small islands in the Pacific, that the United States Marine
Corps and the United States Army and the Australian Imperial Force would pay
a lot of lives to take from the Imperial Japanese Army and Navy. Places like
Tarawa, and Peleliu, and Saipan, and Tinian.
> and some unnamed african territories,
South West Africa, now known as Namibia. South East Africa, a.k.a. Tanganika,
now part of Tanzania. (The other part, Zanzibar, was the valuable bit, and
the Germans never did get hold of it. Tried hard, though.) That, and
Cameroun, now part of the (exceedingly French) Federal Republic of the
Cameroons.
> just adds to my
> point.
Not at all. They had a really good body-count in SW Africa and substantial
ones in other parts of Africa, plus a whole bunch of dead Chinese in the
German-held parts of China. They actually killed more Chinese, in a shorter
time, than the British and French did. Combined. Inexperience, I'd guess.
Their record stood, unchallenged, for 30-40 years until the Imperial Japanese
Army set about breaking it in the 1930s. And even with the advantages of
shorter lines of communication, determined leadership, and better technology,
Imperial Japan still had put some effort into it to surpass the Huns of
Germany.
>
>>> secondly the point being argued was that the title of "the most
>>> predatory nation on Earth" has far too many contenders. The British
>>> Empire being (by far) the best candidate.
>>
>> Rule, Britannia! What's a little blowing rebels off the muzzles of cannon
>> between friends?
>
> Think nothing of it. Especially if you're the sucker tied to a cannon
> muzzle. But thanks for conceding the point.
I think that you miss the point. You may want to look up "O'Higgins" and
"Cochrane" for two examples.
>
>>> Eventhough they _do_ play cricket for some reason.
>>
>> It is entirely possible to be predatory _and_ to play cricket. Those who do
>> not play cricket are not civilised. It does not follow that those who do
>> play
>> cricket are.
>
> Ah... Quaint... Must be something for islanders, they're always a bit
> on the whacky side...
'tis the non-cricketeers who are whacky.
>
>> Besides, the main reason for being thankful that England plays cricket is
>> that they're so bad at it that just about anyone can beat the hell out of
>> them at it.
>
--
Ernest Major
<try.n...@but.see.sig> writes
>
>South West Africa, now known as Namibia. South East Africa, a.k.a. Tanganika,
>now part of Tanzania. (The other part, Zanzibar, was the valuable bit, and
>the Germans never did get hold of it. Tried hard, though.) That, and
>Cameroun, now part of the (exceedingly French) Federal Republic of the
>Cameroons.
Also Togoland (now divided beween Ghana and Togo). Note also that Rwanda
and Burundi were part of German East Africa.
A little bit of Cameroun ended up in Nigeria.
--
alias Ernest Major
His Highness Comandante Banana, King of the Apes I & Chief of Quixotic Enterprises
> > Not for lack of trying. See further 'South West Africa', as noted above...
>
> First off, Germany did not exist in the heyday of colonialism,
> secondly the point being argued was that the title of "the most
> predatory nation on Earth" has far too many contenders. The British
> Empire being (by far) the best candidate.
>
> Eventhough they _do_ play cricket for some reason.
>
To look civilized?
Whatever the reasons they play cricket, they are not a strong
candidate nowadays for the title of MOST PREDATORY. They have become a
SECOND CLASS LION, and the tittle goes to the NATION THAT CONSUMES 25%
OF THE EARTH RESOURCES, and still haven't learned proper manners on
its roads.