Cardinal of Paris
A Planet Visitor
newly selected Cardinal of Paris, and one of the more prominent
possibilities of being elected the new Pope, is a 'born Jew.'
http://www.hackwriters.com/Lustiger.htm
Given that so many Europeans believe that no human being can
be a 'born Jew,' it's rather insightful that the Cardinal proclaims even
today that "I am a Jew!" while obviously not observing the orthodox
religious following of Judaism. Is there a European who would deny
his claim that 'he is a Jew'?
PV
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:1o0unvkr0p9hf26q1...@4ax.com...
It so happens that those, in Europe, that are eager to stress Lustiger's
Jewish origins, have connexions with anti-semitic extreme right. Others
don't care for that, and most of the French, who, contrary to you, have been
acquainted with Lustiger for more than 20 years (he became archbishop of
Paris in 1981), don't even know this detail.
Bringing this back to topic, you will be pleased to know that Lustiger is a
staunch opponent to capital punishment, mainly for religious reasons. It is
funny to see that you seem to put him in great esteem, while, a few weeks
ago, you violently blasted someone who developped anti-DP arguments based on
his religious beliefs
(http://groups.google.com/groups?&selm=1bmqkv8fe561kkijnvv8ge07hcl3m8obvk%40
4ax.com, quoting you: "Nothing pisses me off more than a sanctimonious
religious fruitcake... of any persuasion...").
One could have thought that nothing pissed you off more than Lustiger...
Probably one of your usual "seasonal variations" that explains why your
opinions in autumn differ from your opinions in summer, which in turn
differed from your opinions in spring.
You will also note that Lustiger is, in France, one of the prominent
activists for the beatification of Jacques Flesch, sentenced to death and
executed in France in 1957 for the murder of a police officer following a
bungled robbery.
http://www.catholicdigest.org/stories/200108106a.html
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to stress the great moral qualities of
Lustiger, which, by contrast, only displays your lack of such qualities
(apart from the fact that, by talking about Lustiger, you once again
displayed much ignorance of the subjects you address).
Euro
------------------------------------
"Nobody is ever lost in God's eyes, even when society has condemned him."
Cardinal Jean-Marie Lustiger
John Rennie
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
news:1o0unvkr0p9hf26q1...@4ax.com...
Very interesting. Also very interesting is the fact that the Rev.
Hernández never states whether he thinks he is still a Jew. What
people regard themselves is up to them. What the rest of us
regard those of Jewish descent is another matter entirely.
Mount...@nietzsche.com
[...]
>You will also note that Lustiger is, in France, one of the prominent
>activists for the beatification of Jacques Flesch, sentenced to death and
>executed in France in 1957 for the murder of a police officer following a
>bungled robbery.
>
>http://www.catholicdigest.org/stories/200108106a.html
>
>Thanks for giving me the opportunity to stress the great moral qualities of
>Lustiger, which, by contrast, only displays your lack of such qualities
>(apart from the fact that, by talking about Lustiger, you once again
>displayed much ignorance of the subjects you address).
At first, I thought this a joke, but it's a disgrace that this was
even proposed, let alone that it would be sanctioned by a high ranking
"religious" official. Perhaps, given that the Roman Catholic Church
is responsible for more horrors and crimes against humanity than all
other institutions, we should not be surprised. It is, nevertheless,
disgusting and only lowers the status of sainthood beneath it's
current space - under the worms.
The only "moral quality" rendered is immorality beneath contempt.
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:1o0unvkr0p9hf26q1...@4ax.com...
>> One wonders if Europeans consider Jean-Marie Lustiger, the
>> newly selected Cardinal of Paris, and one of the more prominent
>> possibilities of being elected the new Pope, is a 'born Jew.'
>> http://www.hackwriters.com/Lustiger.htm
>>
>> Given that so many Europeans believe that no human being can
>> be a 'born Jew,' it's rather insightful that the Cardinal proclaims even
>> today that "I am a Jew!" while obviously not observing the orthodox
>> religious following of Judaism. Is there a European who would deny
>> his claim that 'he is a Jew'?
>>
>
>It so happens that those, in Europe, that are eager to stress Lustiger's
>Jewish origins, have connexions with anti-semitic extreme right.
What a huge gob of anti-Semitic raving. Now you would deny the
Cardinal can stress his own Jewish origins, in HIS OWN WORDS, which
WERE == "Parce que je suis Juif." "Because I am a Jew." and
presume that only those who are anti-Semites point out the fact that
he is a 'born Jew.' In fact, you accuse HIM of anti-Semitism because of
HIS stressing those Jewish roots. You are again proving exactly what
I mean about European viewpoints. You see something EVIL behind
any claim of being a 'born Jew.' While he admits he IS a 'born Jew,'
you would think he needs to 'hide his Jewish roots,' and any mention
of them... must be from anti-Semites. Do you find L'Express -
anti-Semitic? From --
http://www.lexpress.fr/Express/Info/Societe/Dossier/juifs/dossier.asp
The opening words in speaking of him -- "Juif de naissance.." "Jew by birth."
While there are 632 URLs in google that speak of Cardinal Lustiger as
a "Jew by birth." Yet you believe it is something not 'spoken of in France'
unless one is an anti-Semite!!!
You make it appear that he only BECAME a humanitarian (whether
he is or isn't is beside the point, and has nothing to do with this
dialog- you seem to think he is -- but he could well be a total shit as
far as I'm concerned), when he SET ASIDE his 'Jewish roots,' and
became the Christian you so admire. Little wonder that the European
method in respect to the Jews... has been conversion...expulsion...
extermination. Given that his mother was one of those who perished
in the ovens of Auschwitz, because of rampant anti-Semitism in Europe,
perhaps he found 'conversion' preferable to the latter choices. I have
a feeling I would, as well. But now I sense that your anti-Americanism
is rooted in the same source of other Europeans I have seen here... the
belief that the U.S. is 'run by the Jews,' thus the U.S. is an object of hate,
not really against 'Americans,' but against those 'Jews who run America,'
in your sickening view.
You ignorant evil...ignorant evil... piece of slime.
> Others
>don't care for that, and most of the French, who, contrary to you, have been
>acquainted with Lustiger for more than 20 years (he became archbishop of
>Paris in 1981), don't even know this detail.
>
'This DETAIL'??? That 'minor detail'?? Once again... you are certainly expressing
some clear anti-Semitic feelings. Cardinal Lustiger is quite proud of his Jewish
roots. While you find it is something he should be 'ashamed of,' and hide that
'minor detail' from everyone.
http://www.cin.org/archives/cinjust/200108/0015.html
Do you think that Elie Weitzel is an anti-Semite??? Weitzel has written
of Lustiger long before he was elevated to Cardinal -- "he insists that
having been born a Jew, he will die a Jew." Come on... tell me that
Elie Weitzel is an 'extreme right-wing anti-Semite.'
>Bringing this back to topic, you will be pleased to know that Lustiger is a
>staunch opponent to capital punishment, mainly for religious reasons.
Given that the DP is a secular penalty for a secular crime, his views have
no meaning in that sense. If a murderer expects 'redemption,' from a
spiritual source... he can expect to find it elsewhere than on Planet Earth.
> It is
>funny to see that you seem to put him in great esteem,
Where did you get that impression? My argument has been SOLELY that
he does not embrace the orthodox religious dogma of Judaism, yet claims
to be a 'born Jew.' This is a direct refutation of Ol' Racist Nev's claim that
"One is not 'born Jewish' anymore than one is 'born Cathy' or 'born Athiest'!!"
See --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=a5ec705.0305010549.2586f62f%40posting.google.com
There has been a long running dialog here, regarding the belief of some
Europeans that there is 'no such human as a born Jew.' Presuming that
'being Jewish' is ONLY a religion. The existence of Cardinal Lustiger,
rather disproves that, in his own words. Nor do I really give a shit how
he feels about ANYTHING in respect to Catholic or Jewish religious
dogma. Yet you continually distort my words, as here, where I make
no claim to holding him in 'high esteem.' I am only making the point that he
IS a 'high-ranking' Catholic, who CLAIMS to be Jewish by birth. Thus,
disproving the claim made by Ol' Racist Nev and others. Unless you
wish to call the 'good Cardinal' a LIAR.
> while, a few weeks
>ago, you violently blasted someone who developped anti-DP arguments based on
>his religious beliefs
>(http://groups.google.com/groups?&selm=1bmqkv8fe561kkijnvv8ge07hcl3m8obvk%40
>4ax.com, quoting you: "Nothing pisses me off more than a sanctimonious
>religious fruitcake... of any persuasion...").
>
Given that I find beliefs in the dogma of ALL man-made religions to be absurd,
it has nothing to do with this particular dialog. When will you understand that
I am simply demonstrating that the Cardinal... by his OWN ADMISSION is a
'born Jew,' yet is obviously NOT a follower of Judaism... thus, disputing the
idea that one cannot be a 'born Jew'? Unless you wish to call him a liar... in
which case I call you an anti-Semite for doing so. Once again.. I have made
NO implication that I 'hold the Cardinal in high esteem.' I am simply pointing
out he HAS claimed to be 'born Jewish,' and he is obviously NOT a follower
of Judaism. Thus.. there is the logical conclusion that you must ACCEPT
that someone can be 'born Jewish,' or call the 'good Cardinal' a liar. Your
choice. And it has NOTHING to do with my 'holding him in high esteem.'
Given that I hold NO ONE in 'high esteem' who believes in the dogma of a
man-made religion, because of his believing in such dogma. I find it
stupid in EVERY case.
>One could have thought that nothing pissed you off more than Lustiger...
I don't give a shit about Lustiger, one way or the other. Other than the
fact he ADMITS he is a 'born Jew,' and is also NOT a follower of Judaism,
but a high-ranking Roman Catholic prelate.
>Probably one of your usual "seasonal variations" that explains why your
>opinions in autumn differ from your opinions in summer, which in turn
>differed from your opinions in spring.
>
I never expressed an 'opinion' of him one way or the other. I only
referred to HIS WORDS... which dispute the claim made by Ol'
Racist Nev, and some others. Do YOU believe a person can be
a 'born Jew,' and not be a follower of Judaism? If so... then it is
your task to call Ol' Racist Nev, and some others LIARS! Because
they argue a person CANNOT... while I claim a person CAN.
>You will also note that Lustiger is, in France, one of the prominent
>activists for the beatification of Jacques Flesch, sentenced to death and
>executed in France in 1957 for the murder of a police officer following a
>bungled robbery.
>
>http://www.catholicdigest.org/stories/200108106a.html
>
HO HO HO -- Once again --- "Nothing pisses me off more than a
sanctimonious religious fruitcake... of any persuasion..." That's now
YOU!! While demonstrating that the 'good Cardinal' is just another
'murderer lover.' It figures...
>Thanks for giving me the opportunity to stress the great moral qualities of
>Lustiger, which, by contrast, only displays your lack of such qualities
>(apart from the fact that, by talking about Lustiger, you once again
>displayed much ignorance of the subjects you address).
>
I don't see any 'moral quality' in presuming to 'beautify' (what an UGLY
word for a murderer) a TRUE murderer. But given that you hold murderers
in higher esteem than innocent slaves, I can see how you would agree with
him. I find that the 'conversion' of this rather cruel and selfish murderer
leaves me cold, given the fact that 'there are no atheists in the foxhole.' Faced
with his execution, it is quite unextraordinary, and rather cowardly, that he
would hope for 'redemption' from somewhere other than this temporal world -
for the murder he committed Since it was all that was left for him. I would
think the 'good Cardinal' would try to 'beautify' EVERY innocent slave who
ever turned to "mystical experience, ...fervent spirituality, ... self-conquest, and
...victorious battle against the demons of bitterness and despair," in alleviating
some of THEIR pain and suffering, before turning to 'love' a TRUE
MURDERER. Especially a murderer who seemed more concerned with HIS
FATE, than the fate of his victim... in his words in his diary -- "but good Jesus,
help me!... Only five hours to live! In five hours, I shall see Jesus.” How many
innocent slaves do you think have not felt the SAME? Where is the 'good
Cardinal's' sense for THEIR PAIN?
PV
>Euro
>------------------------------------
>"Nobody is ever lost in God's eyes, even when society has condemned him."
>Cardinal Jean-Marie Lustiger
Then let that God take care of them... because their ass, when they
murder... belongs to society. But of course, you find 'saving' murderers,
much more important than worrying about a few million innocent slaves,
and it seems you are not that concerned with those fated in the holocaust
as well. Contending that speaking of the Jewish roots of a Catholic
Cardinal has a sense of 'extreme right wing anti-Semitism,' to it.
A Planet Visitor
Let's get this straight.... YOUR THINKING... negates THEIR
THINKING... is that about it? Isn't that rather presumptuous
of you? As your 'friend' Jürgen pointed out -- ""My mind is my
mind and not yours." Think of those words in the sense of someone
who claims to be Jewish, having Hebrew descent, who does not
follow the orthodox dogma of Judaism or, perhaps any man-made
religion whatsoever.
I have NEVER claimed that someone who THINKS they are NOT
a Jew, must be argued IS a Jew. My point has always been that
a human being, having Hebrew descent, CAN claim to be Jewish
by birth, without also accepting Judaism as a source of their religious
belief. That is EXACTLY what Cardinal Lustiger has stated,
and THAT represents my argument which disproves any claim that
NO ONE can be 'born Jewish.' Everything else offered is simply
a smoke-screen.
PV
Mount...@nietzsche.com
wrote:
[...]
>I don't give a shit about Lustiger, one way or the other. Other than the
>fact he ADMITS he is a 'born Jew,' and is also NOT a follower of Judaism,
>but a high-ranking Roman Catholic prelate.
He call call himself what he wants - as far as any religious Jew is
concerned, he is an apostate and no longer a Jew.
[...]
Earl Evleth
"Mount...@nietzsche.com" <Mount...@nietzsche.com> wrote:
Well, since this group deals with the death penalty, one can ask
which religions accord the death penalty for apostates.
We know that Islam does and at one time Christians did execute heretics.
Is there any wing of Judaism which adheres to recommending the death penalty
for apostates?
The old testament had a number of capital crimes.
Are any of them still enforced anywhere?
Earl
danh
news:BBA702BE.16229%evl...@wanadoo.fr...
> On 5/10/03 23:27, in article jg21ovofrms02s8uu...@4ax.com,
> "Mount...@nietzsche.com" <Mount...@nietzsche.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 19:59:25 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
> > wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> I don't give a shit about Lustiger, one way or the other. Other than
the
> >> fact he ADMITS he is a 'born Jew,' and is also NOT a follower of
Judaism,
> >> but a high-ranking Roman Catholic prelate.
> >
> > He call call himself what he wants - as far as any religious Jew is
> > concerned, he is an apostate and no longer a Jew.
> >
> > [...]
>
>
> Well, since this group deals with the death penalty, one can ask
> which religions accord the death penalty for apostates.
Wow - back on topic - way to go, Earl.
> We know that Islam does and at one time Christians did execute heretics.
Vigorously, I'll add.
> Is there any wing of Judaism which adheres to recommending the death
penalty
> for apostates?
Not that I'm aware of , nor has there ever been. The "penalty" has simply
been exclusion from observance, which doesn't seem to be much of a penalty
since by definition, an apostate is no longer interested in observing Jewish
ritual.
> The old testament had a number of capital crimes.
>
> Are any of them still enforced anywhere?
Sure - for murder, in the U.S. and other countries. Israel reserves its
capital punishment solely for former Nazis. Eichmann was the last one
executed, and that was 40 or so years ago. I think you meant one of the
myriad "crimes" that have long been left behind. In days before prisons (a
fairly recent phenomenon), the only penalties feasible were death,
exclusion/banishment and fines. Slavery was never countenanced by Judaism
as a penalty.
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:nh60ov8ih7rpur64i...@4ax.com...
(snipping some 350 lines of insults of rantings of PV after he realized that
his attempt to involve Lustiger in one of his obesssional and useless
polemics resulted into endorsing someone whose opinions on death penalty are
so different from PV's).
> I don't see any 'moral quality' in presuming to 'beautify' (what an UGLY
> word for a murderer) a TRUE murderer.
That was beatify, not beautify. We know, however, that no one could neither
beatify, nor beautify you. It happens, however, that Lustiger suggested the
beatification of Flesch, and he has very good reasons for so doing.
Euro
Euro
<Mount...@nietzsche.com>
??????:jg21ovofrms02s8uu...@4ax.com...
That's all PV... He first creates a thread on Lustiger and the way he calls
himself, or others call himself, and then, realizing that the result isn't
what he expected, he magistrally write "I don't give a shit about Lustiger,
one way or the other."
If so, I'd like PV to explain us what his purpose was by opening this
thread.
Euro
Earl Evleth
<da...@lexisnexis.com> wrote:
> "Earl Evleth" <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
> news:BBA702BE.16229%evl...@wanadoo.fr...
>> Is there any wing of Judaism which adheres to recommending the death
> penalty for apostates?
>
> Not that I'm aware of , nor has there ever been. The "penalty" has simply
> been exclusion from observance, which doesn't seem to be much of a penalty
> since by definition, an apostate is no longer interested in observing Jewish
> ritual.
Nor I. In tribal man, exclusion from the group was fairly close to being
a death penalty.
With regard to life imprisonment, this is not exactly the same but close to
it. Social rather than physical death is involved.
>
>> The old testament had a number of capital crimes.
>>
>> Are any of them still enforced anywhere?
>
> Sure - for murder, in the U.S. and other countries. Israel reserves its
> capital punishment solely for former Nazis. Eichmann was the last one
> executed, and that was 40 or so years ago. I think you meant one of the
> myriad "crimes" that have long been left behind. In days before prisons (a
> fairly recent phenomenon), the only penalties feasible were death,
> exclusion/banishment and fines. Slavery was never countenanced by Judaism
> as a penalty.
The Books of Moses are crammed full of rules and regulations. In some ways
they are funny to read. Especially the food taboos, eating flying insects
were OK, ground slithers were not. However, more sinister are those rules,
when broken, being met with death.
Given that the death penalty is no longer applied for most Biblical
offenses, why? What is the theological justification for cancelling out
the death penalty and not the food taboos?
One might invoke local law, the rendering on to Caesar bit. If secular
law says no DP for adultery, even those the Bible says "yes", then
secular law (mostly) trumps religious law. No secular law says you must eat
pork so the religious law remains in force. Is this the right position to
take?
Earl
danh
news:58d034a21bb1fc54...@news.meganetnews.com...
[...]
Lustiger suggested the
> beatification of Flesch, and he has very good reasons for so doing.
What are those reasons? Certainly there have been thousands if not millions
of Catholics who have experienced religious conversion who have not been
nominated for beatification. Why single out a murderer? Why is Flesch to
be considered blessed and worthy of public honor among Catholics? -
especially above non-murderers. The whole thing is very curious and I'd
like to understand that those "very good reasons" are.
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:m0v0ovsuiqq8cmhvr...@4ax.com...
>
> I have NEVER claimed that someone who THINKS they are NOT
> a Jew, must be argued IS a Jew. My point has always been that
> a human being, having Hebrew descent, CAN claim to be Jewish
> by birth, without also accepting Judaism as a source of their religious
> belief. That is EXACTLY what Cardinal Lustiger has stated,
> and THAT represents my argument which disproves any claim that
> NO ONE can be 'born Jewish.' Everything else offered is simply
> a smoke-screen.
Beyond linguistic usage, that justifies expressions like "I was born Jew" or
"Je suis né Juif", you have to distinguish very accurately what you mean
here.
If you mean that someone, after being born, was bread according to the
Jewish religion, by his parents, independently from what this person
afterwards decided to believe, then it would be logically more accurate
(even though it hurts generally admitted linguistic usage) to say that this
person was "bread Jew".
If you litterally say that someone was "born Jew", you actually endorse the
opinion of those who argued that there was a "Jewish race" based on their
genetic or genealogic history.
You tried here - as I already pointed out - to relaunch one of your
obsessive (and useless) polemics. One could just regret that, in this
polemic, you don't take the linguistic precaution to make sure that what you
want to write is not what others could understand you wrote. For doing this,
you'd have to distinguish ideas from the words that translate them, and it
doesn't seem you're able to do that.
Euro
danh
[...]
> If you mean that someone, after being born, was bread according to the
> Jewish religion, by his parents, independently from what this person
> afterwards decided to believe, then it would be logically more accurate
> (even though it hurts generally admitted linguistic usage) to say that
this
> person was "bread Jew".
Matzoh, anyone?
> If you litterally say that someone was "born Jew", you actually endorse
the
> opinion of those who argued that there was a "Jewish race" based on their
> genetic or genealogic history.
Without engaging in your dispute with PV, let me just point out that the
concept of being born Jewish is based on halacha (Jewish law), which is
unequivocal in stating that one born of a Jewish mother _is_ Jewish while
one fathered by a Jewish man is not. Judaism does not proselytize and seek
converts, though converts are welcomed - in varying degrees depending on
whether the person follows a particular wing's tenets. As such, while Jews
are not a race, per se, our Jewish ancestry can be traced because nearly all
Jews are born of Jewish mothers. A converted woman is considered equal to a
woman born of a Jewish mother, so her children are Jewish.
[...]
danh
[...]
> Given that the death penalty is no longer applied for most Biblical
> offenses, why? What is the theological justification for cancelling out
> the death penalty and not the food taboos?
Probably the lack of a theocratic Jewish state makes applying the dp
infeasible. Even the possible use of the dp for Nazis is based on secular
law, not biblical. With the diaspora, it became impossible for secular law
to be violated without running afoul of the authorities (obviously, given
the pogroms, this wasn't a two-way street) and so sanctions for violations
of kosher law were not possible to impose, largely to be replaced by
opprobrium.
> One might invoke local law, the rendering on to Caesar bit. If secular
> law says no DP for adultery, even those the Bible says "yes", then
> secular law (mostly) trumps religious law. No secular law says you must
eat
> pork so the religious law remains in force. Is this the right position to
> take?
In the context of this discussion, the reference to Jesus is amusing.
Halacha can be suspended for exigencies - for example, keeping kosher was
not possible under the Nazis, so no one can be faulted for not keeping
kosher while under duress. Conflicts in halacha are always resolved by
prioritization. So, if the choice is eating non-kosher food or dying of
starvation, maintaining life takes priority. Incidentally, kosher, which
simply means clean, is composed of two aspects - one is the type of food and
the second is how it's prepared. Eating a steak with asparagus and
hollandaise sauce is not kosher (meat and dairy), regardless whether the
steer was slaughtered by a rabbi.
Most importantly, Judaism is an evolving religion. It's always been
possible, even in light of the ennumerated offenses, to have a lesser
penalty. Many people don't realize this and believe that the "wrathful God
of the Jews" never tempered penalties (and it was necessary for Jesus to do
so) but the concept of justice is a critical one. In fact, the word tzaddik
which means a person who does good (roughly) stems from the word for
justice.
To bring this back to the topic of the ng, while I think a dp statute is a
necessary thing, its imposition should always be a rare thing. Justice
doesn't mean exacting the most onerous penalty, but making the penalty fit
the crime, and applying the ultimate sanction with exquisite care.
John Rennie
It's to do with a thread or threads that you were not involved in.
It's do with whether an American born in America 4th generation
and is an atheist whose parents were atheists but has Jewish descent
is a Jew even if he doesn't call himself one. To PV he is. To me he's
an American.
A Planet Visitor
What he obviously is... aside from anything else - is unbelievably
crass... to find that a murderer, who seemed even at the end
to concern himself with nothing other than his OWN presumed
'salvation,' deserves to be 'beautified. What sense of value
does that offer to us? Aside from euro, of course, who believes
that all murderers should be 'beautified.'
PV
>[...]
danh
news:csa4ov44p09l9hq6l...@4ax.com...
I continue to hope that Euro will respond to my post of yesterday, to wit:
Euro -
"Lustiger suggested the
> beatification of Flesch, and he has very good reasons for so doing.
Me -
Euro
"danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
??????:blrt3u$i5l$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
There are several ways to answer your questions, Daniel. If you read the URL
I gave (http://www.catholicdigest.org/stories/200108106a.html), you will
find the religious ones ("Those who seek Fesch’s beatification point to his
mystical experience, his fervent spirituality, his self-conquest, and his
victorious battle against the demons of bitterness and despair"). One might
add, for those who believe in God, that the Bible stresses itself that the
kingdom of god is promised to those who did evil things but realized this
before dying and tried to redeem themselves. All those are reasons that
followers of the Catholic church would find very good ones to justify a
beatification.
Now, if you look at the facts with no religious feeling, you will realize
that, in some cases, people do have a sudden change in their way of behaving
for religious reasons. They turn from evil to good, and their experience
shows that no murderer can be labelled, for life, as "evil". People change.
The Fesch that murdered and the Fesch that was executed are not the same
character. Fesch's situation is very akin to the Karla Tucker case.
Taking again your questions:
> Certainly there have been thousands if not millions
> of Catholics who have experienced religious conversion who have not been
> nominated for beatification. Why single out a murderer? Why is Flesch to
> be considered blessed and worthy of public honor among Catholics? -
> especially above non-murderers.
I wouldn't say that one singled out a murderer. The overwhelming majority of
those who were beatified were not murderers. Yet, murderers are humans, part
of the human kind and part of what Catholics call (I believe) "the kingdom
of God". Why should one then single out murderers by barring them from
beatification? After all, the way made by a murderer between his act and his
conversion is much more important than the way made by a non murderer who
experienced divine revelation. In this perspective, the move to beatify
someone who underwent conversion in spite of his murderer past is very
powerful and sensitive.
It's all a matter of perspective. I don't think one makes much progress by
separating non murderers (the good ones) and murderers (the evil ones). We
all live in the same world, the same society, the same cities or streets.
Most of us don't kill, and yet some do. Sometimes, one could preview it,
sometimes not. After killing, some amend themselves, others don't. A
manicheian view on crime is bound to fail, because there is no hermetic
border between the "good" and the "evil" ones.
On the contrary, it is much more powerful to accept this and highlight, with
an example (and Fesch is just one example), that we all can repress negative
pulsions that we all have.
Euro
Euro
"danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
??????:blrv35$jtp$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
The argument is valid and it justifies the fact that Lustiger says about
himself that he is «born Jew». However, as a post-Holocaust European,
convinced (whatever PV, in his diffamatory delirium, may suggest) that this
period has been one of the worst, if not the worst tragedy in History, I
can't help feeling indignant when I hear, or read, someone saying about
someone else that he is "born Jew", as if it was an attempt to single out
someone.
Lustiger himself has very often been singled out by the French extreme right
for his origins.
What I contest here to PV, is the fact that the origins of someone matter
less than what this person is, and thinks, now. Lustiger's origins are
interesting only as far as his positions on the dialogue between the
Catholic Church and the Jewish religious authorities are concerned. Outside
of this aspect, stressing his Jewish origins is potentially stinking.
Euro
danh
Thanks for the elaboration. These are some of the good reasons not to be
Catholic, if there were not already thousands of good reasons. <g>
> Now, if you look at the facts with no religious feeling, you will realize
> that, in some cases, people do have a sudden change in their way of
behaving
> for religious reasons. They turn from evil to good, and their experience
> shows that no murderer can be labelled, for life, as "evil". People
change.
> The Fesch that murdered and the Fesch that was executed are not the same
> character. Fesch's situation is very akin to the Karla Tucker case.
Murder is the least repeated crime, but I can't agree that "no murderer can
be labelled, for life, as "evil"." Many cannot be, but some can be. I
wouldn't have executed Fesch, but there are those for whom execution is the
appropriate measure.
> Taking again your questions:
>
> > Certainly there have been thousands if not millions
> > of Catholics who have experienced religious conversion who have not been
> > nominated for beatification. Why single out a murderer? Why is Flesch
to
> > be considered blessed and worthy of public honor among Catholics? -
> > especially above non-murderers.
>
> I wouldn't say that one singled out a murderer. The overwhelming majority
of
> those who were beatified were not murderers. Yet, murderers are humans,
part
> of the human kind and part of what Catholics call (I believe) "the kingdom
> of God". Why should one then single out murderers by barring them from
> beatification?
Er - because their acts are reprehensible. I might have more sympathy were
Lustiger to have suggested beatifying both men. Don't ordinary people who
don't murder get consideration for their lifetime of good behavior? (I
realize we may be bordering on discussing some of the weirder constructs of
Catholicism, with which I am fairly familiar.)
After all, the way made by a murderer between his act and his
> conversion is much more important than the way made by a non murderer who
> experienced divine revelation. In this perspective, the move to beatify
> someone who underwent conversion in spite of his murderer past is very
> powerful and sensitive.
>
> It's all a matter of perspective. I don't think one makes much progress by
> separating non murderers (the good ones) and murderers (the evil ones). We
> all live in the same world, the same society, the same cities or streets.
> Most of us don't kill, and yet some do. Sometimes, one could preview it,
> sometimes not. After killing, some amend themselves, others don't. A
> manicheian view on crime is bound to fail, because there is no hermetic
> border between the "good" and the "evil" ones.
In some cases, there is. I defy you or anyone to balance the scales of good
and evil for the likes of Bundy, Ramirez, Gacy, McDuff or others of their
ilk. God, if such exists, can manage the metaphysics of the issue as it
likes. Men can do the same.
> On the contrary, it is much more powerful to accept this and highlight,
with
> an example (and Fesch is just one example), that we all can repress
negative
> pulsions that we all have.
As PV wrote to Spike recently - don't degrade yourself. I have never had
the impulse to murder and I doubt I'm special in that regard.
Euro
"danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
??????:bm148u$jpr$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
There certainly are plenty of reasons not to be Catholic. But then, there
are also solid reasons not to really care for who is beatified or not, don't
you think so?
Frankly speaking, I don't have much information on Fesch's victim. Maybe his
life didn't justify a beatification. We should remember that Fesch was
proposed for beatification because of his conversion after his crime. That
is a solid, objective element - at least for those who are Roman Catholics.
More generally, your position on murderers reminds me this French novel that
I read when I was a child. It was the story of a high school teacher, in the
30s, who attracted on himself the anger of the parents of his pupils and of
his superiors because he studied, in class, poems written by French poet
François Villon (15th century), because François Villon had been sentenced
to death for the murder of a priest. Yet, even though Villon is a murderer,
his poems (especially those written when he was in jail) are said to be
beautiful - they're not easy to understand for nowadays' French speakers.
> After all, the way made by a murderer between his act and his
> > conversion is much more important than the way made by a non murderer
who
> > experienced divine revelation. In this perspective, the move to beatify
> > someone who underwent conversion in spite of his murderer past is very
> > powerful and sensitive.
> >
> > It's all a matter of perspective. I don't think one makes much progress
by
> > separating non murderers (the good ones) and murderers (the evil ones).
We
> > all live in the same world, the same society, the same cities or
streets.
> > Most of us don't kill, and yet some do. Sometimes, one could preview it,
> > sometimes not. After killing, some amend themselves, others don't. A
> > manicheian view on crime is bound to fail, because there is no hermetic
> > border between the "good" and the "evil" ones.
>
> In some cases, there is. I defy you or anyone to balance the scales of
good
> and evil for the likes of Bundy, Ramirez, Gacy, McDuff or others of their
> ilk. God, if such exists, can manage the metaphysics of the issue as it
> likes. Men can do the same.
If God exists, it is its job to balance the scales of good and evil. It's
not a job men can do with all guarantees of justice and equity.
> > On the contrary, it is much more powerful to accept this and highlight,
> with
> > an example (and Fesch is just one example), that we all can repress
> negative
> > pulsions that we all have.
>
> As PV wrote to Spike recently - don't degrade yourself. I have never had
> the impulse to murder and I doubt I'm special in that regard.
That you never had such impulse doesn't mean they don't exist.
Euro
danh
> "danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
> ??????:bm148u$jpr$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
[...]
> > Thanks for the elaboration. These are some of the good reasons not to
be
> > Catholic, if there were not already thousands of good reasons. <g>
>
> There certainly are plenty of reasons not to be Catholic. But then, there
> are also solid reasons not to really care for who is beatified or not,
don't
> you think so?
No, I don't think so. Regardless of what little regard I personally have
for the RC church, one of their senior people recommending a murderer for
beatification is a message that borders on obscene.
[...]
> > Er - because their acts are reprehensible. I might have more sympathy
> were
> > Lustiger to have suggested beatifying both men. Don't ordinary people
who
> > don't murder get consideration for their lifetime of good behavior? (I
> > realize we may be bordering on discussing some of the weirder constructs
> of
> > Catholicism, with which I am fairly familiar.)
>
> Frankly speaking, I don't have much information on Fesch's victim. Maybe
his
> life didn't justify a beatification. We should remember that Fesch was
> proposed for beatification because of his conversion after his crime. That
> is a solid, objective element - at least for those who are Roman
Catholics.
I suppose one should not be surprised that the RC church would honor a
murderer, given that that particular institution is responsible for more
murders, atrocities and abuses of human rights than any other. Possibly
more than all others together.
> More generally, your position on murderers reminds me this French novel
that
> I read when I was a child. It was the story of a high school teacher, in
the
> 30s, who attracted on himself the anger of the parents of his pupils and
of
> his superiors because he studied, in class, poems written by French poet
> François Villon (15th century), because François Villon had been sentenced
> to death for the murder of a priest. Yet, even though Villon is a
murderer,
> his poems (especially those written when he was in jail) are said to be
> beautiful - they're not easy to understand for nowadays' French speakers.
I don't agree these are the same. I can admire the writing of Jack Abbott
(In the Belly of the Beast) and still be disgusted by his acts and even him,
personally. I am personally acquainted with more than one murderer, and
even like more than a couple of them, however none of them are worthy of
beatification, including the 2 who are now ardent (rabid?) religious
believers.
[...]
> > In some cases, there is. I defy you or anyone to balance the scales of
> good
> > and evil for the likes of Bundy, Ramirez, Gacy, McDuff or others of
their
> > ilk. God, if such exists, can manage the metaphysics of the issue as it
> > likes. Men can do the same.
>
> If God exists, it is its job to balance the scales of good and evil. It's
> not a job men can do with all guarantees of justice and equity.
If God exists, it can darn well do what it pleases. Since it chooses not to
intervene to protect _any_ thus far executed, I can only presume it either
doesn't exist, doesn't give a rat's ass about balancing scales in
humansville or leaves it to humans to develop their own codes of conduct.
[...]
Euro
"danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
??????:bm42os$1vm$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
> "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:374c0f44d1e0d04a...@news.meganetnews.com...
> > "danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
> > ??????:bm148u$jpr$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
[...]
> No, I don't think so. Regardless of what little regard I personally have
> for the RC church, one of their senior people recommending a murderer for
> beatification is a message that borders on obscene.
>
> [...]
>
> I suppose one should not be surprised that the RC church would honor a
> murderer, given that that particular institution is responsible for more
> murders, atrocities and abuses of human rights than any other. Possibly
> more than all others together.
This discussion puts me in an awkward situation, as I certainly wouldn't
like to be looked as a defender of the Roman Catholic Church. One of the
reasons why I became an atheist (apart from the fact I consider God doesn't
exist, of course) is that all religions were used to condone the most
terrible crimes, and that the leaders of those religions usually didn't
react and voice against this. And this is particularly true for the Roman
Catholic Church throughout history - the latest example being the highly
ambiguous position of Pope Pius XIIth on fascism during world war II.
That being said, men changed and the Roman Catholic Church changed as well.
It made efforts (though insufficiently) to apologize for past excesses and
intolerances, and now, on many social issues, it develops positions that,
whether you like them or not, are morally very well argumented.
For this reason, I feel much unease at your words. There is certainly no
connection between the past crimes of the Roman Catholic Church and the
proposal (which, for the moment, is even not endorsed by the Church itself,
but by one of its cardinals) to beatify a murderer.
> > If God exists, it is its job to balance the scales of good and evil.
It's
> > not a job men can do with all guarantees of justice and equity.
>
> If God exists, it can darn well do what it pleases. Since it chooses not
to
> intervene to protect _any_ thus far executed, I can only presume it either
> doesn't exist, doesn't give a rat's ass about balancing scales in
> humansville or leaves it to humans to develop their own codes of conduct.
>
> [...]
The fact that God does even not prevent crime should speak for itself.
Euro
danh
> "danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
> ??????:bm42os$1vm$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
> > "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:374c0f44d1e0d04a...@news.meganetnews.com...
> > > "danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
> > > ??????:bm148u$jpr$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
>
> [...]
>
> > No, I don't think so. Regardless of what little regard I personally
have
> > for the RC church, one of their senior people recommending a murderer
for
> > beatification is a message that borders on obscene.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > I suppose one should not be surprised that the RC church would honor a
> > murderer, given that that particular institution is responsible for more
> > murders, atrocities and abuses of human rights than any other. Possibly
> > more than all others together.
>
> This discussion puts me in an awkward situation, as I certainly wouldn't
> like to be looked as a defender of the Roman Catholic Church.
Let me add that I understand you aren't RC and I don't want to put you in
the position of defending it.
> That being said, men changed and the Roman Catholic Church changed as
well.
> It made efforts (though insufficiently) to apologize for past excesses and
> intolerances, and now, on many social issues, it develops positions that,
> whether you like them or not, are morally very well argumented.
It would be nice to see your tolerant attitude transferred to other areas.
I don't recall if you've expressed the views I'm about to comment on, so the
remarks aren't targeted at you particularly, but in a more general sense.
The U.S. has a past wrt racism that we continue to struggle with but have
made many significant strides toward addressing. One might argue the same
is true of similar issues in European countries. I often have read remarks
that denigrate the entire U.S. population for historical acts that no one
alive participated in and which most citizens and all our laws reject.
Certainly every country in Europe save perhaps Luxembourg and a couple of
others colonized, enslaved, abused, pillaged the people and resources of
most of the world, so it rings false when the U.S. is made the target of so
much abuse for past deeds.
Wrt the current day RC church, I think there are more subtle but just as
egregious behaviors happening today, most not known. Sexual abuse occurs
often enough to wonder whether it's endemic. I cannot believe it is solely
U.S. priests who commit these acts. The essentially military nature of the
RC church has not changed, only the degree of influence has, resulting in
fewer acts committed through conquerors and colonizers. While the acts may
be less overt, their pernicious influence remains. RC is the antithesis of
individual freedom and I don't see it ever reforming itself in that regard.
Even their moral high ground they claim is a farce having more to do with
control than morality. Today, the Pope seems a doddering old man with a
funny hat, but in reality, he's been stacking the cardinal deck for decades
with what can only be described as reactionaries. Truth remains a fungible
commodity, and those who promote such can only be regarded with suspicion.
> For this reason, I feel much unease at your words. There is certainly no
> connection between the past crimes of the Roman Catholic Church and the
> proposal (which, for the moment, is even not endorsed by the Church
itself,
> but by one of its cardinals) to beatify a murderer.
While it's true the RC church hasn't beatified Fesch, one of its senior
leaders supporting that is a message wasted when more good could be done
with that energy.
> > > If God exists, it is its job to balance the scales of good and evil.
> It's
> > > not a job men can do with all guarantees of justice and equity.
> >
> > If God exists, it can darn well do what it pleases. Since it chooses
not
> to
> > intervene to protect _any_ thus far executed, I can only presume it
either
> > doesn't exist, doesn't give a rat's ass about balancing scales in
> > humansville or leaves it to humans to develop their own codes of
conduct.
> >
> > [...]
>
> The fact that God does even not prevent crime should speak for itself.
It does - humans make the temporal rules. The murderer makes the rule that
he can kill, so society can make the rule that he can be killed for his act.
Killing is not intrinsically evil, but murder is and dealing with it via the
dp is not intrinsically wrong, especially with extensive safeguards and
limits.
A Planet Visitor
>Le Sat, 04 Oct 2003 17:27:35 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a écrit :
>
>> One wonders if Europeans consider Jean-Marie Lustiger, the
>> newly selected Cardinal of Paris, and one of the more prominent
>> possibilities of being elected the new Pope, is a 'born Jew.'
>> http://www.hackwriters.com/Lustiger.htm
>>
>> Given that so many Europeans believe that no human being can
>> be a 'born Jew,' it's rather insightful that the Cardinal proclaims even
>> today that "I am a Jew!" while obviously not observing the orthodox
>> religious following of Judaism. Is there a European who would deny
>> his claim that 'he is a Jew'?
>
>As FuckWit seems to be a 'born liar', perhaps that's why he believes that
>one can be 'born Jewish'.
>
You seem to be calling Cardinal Lustiger a liar... not me. Since he was the
one who claims to be 'born Jewish.' Do you find him to 'be a liar'?
Given that you've claimed to be 'born Jewish,' one wonders what your
point is. You certainly are not an orthodox Jew, yet you have claimed to
be Jewish. How is that possible?
>Or maybe it's just his now famous illiteracy, rearing its ... sorry, 'it's'
>(sic [1]) head again ...
>
Think your confusion of Hemingway with Donne... and your pathetic
attempts to hide from that pseudo-intellectual gaffe.
>
>[1] *guffaw!!*
Quite right -- The Nameless One said -- "I'm a lawyer." guffaw...guffaw...guffaw...
PV
>--
>The Nameless One
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_166.html
A Planet Visitor
>On 5/10/03 23:27, in article jg21ovofrms02s8uu...@4ax.com,
>"Mount...@nietzsche.com" <Mount...@nietzsche.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 19:59:25 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> I don't give a shit about Lustiger, one way or the other. Other than the
>>> fact he ADMITS he is a 'born Jew,' and is also NOT a follower of Judaism,
>>> but a high-ranking Roman Catholic prelate.
>>
>> He call call himself what he wants - as far as any religious Jew is
>> concerned, he is an apostate and no longer a Jew.
>>
>> [...]
>
>
>Well, since this group deals with the death penalty, one can ask
>which religions accord the death penalty for apostates.
>
Why??? Are you now presuming that 'religion' has some 'say' in
the secular operations of the State?
>We know that Islam does and at one time Christians did execute heretics.
>
>Is there any wing of Judaism which adheres to recommending the death penalty
>for apostates?
>
>The old testament had a number of capital crimes.
>
>Are any of them still enforced anywhere?
>
Does anyone care?
PV
>Earl
A Planet Visitor
>On 6/10/03 14:43, in article blro1h$286$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com, "danh"
><da...@lexisnexis.com> wrote:
>
>> "Earl Evleth" <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
>> news:BBA702BE.16229%evl...@wanadoo.fr...
>
>
>>> Is there any wing of Judaism which adheres to recommending the death
>> penalty for apostates?
>>
>> Not that I'm aware of , nor has there ever been. The "penalty" has simply
>> been exclusion from observance, which doesn't seem to be much of a penalty
>> since by definition, an apostate is no longer interested in observing Jewish
>> ritual.
>
>Nor I. In tribal man, exclusion from the group was fairly close to being
>a death penalty.
>
Quite clearly the reason for the formation of tribes, themselves.
>With regard to life imprisonment, this is not exactly the same but close to
>it. Social rather than physical death is involved.
>
Huh??? The 'social structure' within prisons is very clearly defined!
It is just a DIFFERENT 'social structure' from those 'social structures'
that have excluded those sentenced to prison, for whatever length of
time they are sentenced.
>
<rest clipped>
PV
>
>Earl
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:nh60ov8ih7rpur64i...@4ax.com...
>
>(snipping some 350 lines of insults of rantings of PV after he realized that
>his attempt to involve Lustiger in one of his obesssional and useless
>polemics resulted into endorsing someone whose opinions on death penalty are
>so different from PV's).
>
>> I don't see any 'moral quality' in presuming to 'beautify' (what an UGLY
>> word for a murderer) a TRUE murderer.
>
>That was beatify, not beautify.
LOL... I just KNEW that you were a 'religious fruitcake.' Whatever the
case... your 'good Cardinal' is simply a murderer-lover.
> We know, however, that no one could neither
>beatify, nor beautify you. It happens, however, that Lustiger suggested the
>beatification of Flesch, and he has very good reasons for so doing.
>
I would expect you to believe that... since you both appear to be
murderer-lovers. Where is the 'good Cardinal's' expression for the
millions of innocent slaves who spent their lives seeking the 'salvation'
that the evil and selfish Flesch, only expressed for HIMSELF, as he
found himself faced with execution for the MURDER he committed?
Obviously, the 'good Cardinal' believes even more than you do in
respect to no gradation between murderers and innocent slaves. He
finds murderers far more 'welcome' into his sickening 'kingdom of
heaven,' than ANY innocent slave, since he has nominated not a
SINGLE INNOCENT SLAVE for 'beautification.' He doesn't
only find murderers JUST LIKE innocent slaves.... he find murderers
FAR MORE MORALLY SUPERIOR and more DESERVING
of his 'kingdom' than innocent slaves.
PV
>Euro
A Planet Visitor
Of course, you fruitcake. The entire thrust of my comment was based
on two principles, and only two --
1) Lustiger is a Cardinal in the Catholic prelate.
2) Lustiger has stated that he is a Jew.
Given those two conditions, it is obvious that Lustiger states he is a Jew,
because of his BIRTH. But it certainly makes no claim to my "great
esteem" for him... which does not exist, nor was it ever expressed by me.
He was 'BORN JEWISH.' He makes such a claim. My comment was
ONLY to refute those who claim that NO ONE can be 'BORN JEWISH.'
Simply that and nothing more. If you argue that he CANNOT be 'born
Jewish,' than you obviously MUST call him a liar. Is he a LIAR, to you?
Lustiger could be a monster... and seems to be quite close to one. But he is
certainly NOT a Jew in following the orthodox views of Judaism, which was
argued as the ONLY way one could BE A JEW.
Ol' Racist Nev made THIS STATEMENT -- "One is not 'born Jewish'
anymore than one is 'born Cathy' or 'born Athiest'!!" See --
"http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=a5ec705.0305010549.2586f62f%40posting.google.com
That particular comment generated a great deal of argument, since I contend
that reasonable people admit that one CAN claim to be a "BORN JEW,"
if they have a Hebrew ethnic descent, and make a claim to being Jewish,
regardless of any orthodox Judaism religious observance. Both the OED,
and the Encyclopedia Britannica, support my view. In other words...
one can claim to be 'born a Jew,' and be an atheist, is one chooses to do
so. Keep in mind, that Ol' Racist Nev said CANNOT... and I say CAN.
He does not say MUST NOT... nor do I say MUST. I do not say that
one having Hebrew descent MUST claim they are Jewish... I say that one
having Hebrew descent CAN claim they are Jewish...irrespective of
ANYTHING else. The 'Cardinal' serves to prove my point, and that point
has nothing to do with even if the 'Cardinal' were a murderer. He is, in fact,
NOT a Jew through religious beliefs, but he CLAIMS he is a Jew through
BIRTH.
PV
>Euro
John Rennie
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
news:3r4eov8m8u5jje7m6...@4ax.com...
So MacGregor, a fourth generation American, can claim to be Scottish
should he wish?
A Planet Visitor
Because euro is a 'murderer-lover.' Other humans have no value whatsoever
to him.
PV
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:m0v0ovsuiqq8cmhvr...@4ax.com...
>
>>
>> I have NEVER claimed that someone who THINKS they are NOT
>> a Jew, must be argued IS a Jew. My point has always been that
>> a human being, having Hebrew descent, CAN claim to be Jewish
>> by birth, without also accepting Judaism as a source of their religious
>> belief. That is EXACTLY what Cardinal Lustiger has stated,
>> and THAT represents my argument which disproves any claim that
>> NO ONE can be 'born Jewish.' Everything else offered is simply
>> a smoke-screen.
>
>Beyond linguistic usage, that justifies expressions like "I was born Jew" or
>"Je suis né Juif", you have to distinguish very accurately what you mean
>here.
>
LOL... I am simply repeating HIS words. You should ask HIM those
questions. He CLAIMS he is JEWISH, but he certainly is not Jewish
by religious preference. I presume you are calling HIM a liar.
>If you mean that someone, after being born, was bread according to the
>Jewish religion, by his parents, independently from what this person
>afterwards decided to believe, then it would be logically more accurate
>(even though it hurts generally admitted linguistic usage) to say that this
>person was "bread Jew".
>
ROTFLMAO... 'bread'???? ROTFLMAO.
>If you litterally say that someone was "born Jew", you actually endorse the
>opinion of those who argued that there was a "Jewish race" based on their
>genetic or genealogic history.
>
Quite clearly, I endorse the opinion of a great many rational people who
find that the Jew has a long linage from His Hebrew ethnic roots. Why
would you attempt to inject 'genetics' into it... unless you have some
Nazi thoughts?
>You tried here - as I already pointed out - to relaunch one of your
>obsessive (and useless) polemics. One could just regret that, in this
>polemic, you don't take the linguistic precaution to make sure that what you
>want to write is not what others could understand you wrote. For doing this,
>you'd have to distinguish ideas from the words that translate them, and it
>doesn't seem you're able to do that.
>
Whatever are you raving about, euro? Are you now attempting to prove
you are an anti-Semite, to add to all your other human deficiencies?
PV
>Euro (alias Buridan's ass)
A Planet Visitor
While euro is an ass to everyone, since he presumed I held that Cardinal in
'high esteem,' and nothing in my comment gave the slightest indication that
I did. euro is always willing to read something other than what is written
into what is written. My comment was provided ONLY to show that
a high-ranking Catholic prelate, who is OBVIOUSLY not a follower of
the Judaic religion, calls himself a Jew... by BIRTH. Whether YOU agree
with that or not... is completely irrelevant, since if you claim he CANNOT
do so... you are calling him a liar. And asserting that YOUR VIEW has
more 'relevance' than HIS VIEW of his own ethnic roots. I am asserting that
he CAN do so... not that he MUST do so. You would DENY him that
'right.' For the professed liberal you are... you seem willing to deny many
some 'rights' that YOU believe they should not have.
PV
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:gq7eovkf255hclsdf...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 14:03:49 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >If you litterally say that someone was "born Jew", you actually endorse
the
> >opinion of those who argued that there was a "Jewish race" based on their
> >genetic or genealogic history.
> >
> Quite clearly, I endorse the opinion of a great many rational people who
> find that the Jew has a long linage from His Hebrew ethnic roots. Why
> would you attempt to inject 'genetics' into it... unless you have some
> Nazi thoughts?
Or unless _you_ have. I don't inject anything in a debate that stinks, and
that you stubbornly repeatedly throw here, on this group. Do you have a
problem with Jews? That's a question _you_ have to answer.
Euro
A Planet Visitor
LOL... What a HYPOCRITE you are, euro. What an ABSOLUTE
HYPOCRITE.
>Now, if you look at the facts with no religious feeling, you will realize
>that, in some cases, people do have a sudden change in their way of behaving
>for religious reasons.
SO WHAT? Given that the murderer has only HIMSELF as his favorite
subject. He never concerned himself with the life he murdered, but now
faced with the end of his own secular life, he would selfishly expect to find a
'reward' to be provided to him in 'another life.'for the act of murder in THIS
life. And the MAN-MADE church turns equally as evil as he is... and
presumes to offer him that 'life,' while ignoring every VICTIM. I find the
CARDINAL to now be an ACCOMPLICE to the murder that Fesch
committed.
> They turn from evil to good,
Exactly what "GOOD" did he turn to? Other than feeling sorry for himself...
and now praying for 'another chance' in 'another life' by writing some words
in his 'diary,' when he had nothing else to occupy his time? How totally selfish
of him. His LAST WORDS -- "“Holy Virgin, have pity on me!” Not have
'pity' on his VICTIM... but have 'pity' ON HIM!!
> and their experience
>shows that no murderer can be labelled, for life, as "evil". People change.
Horseshit. Murderers have murdered. And that CANNOT be erased,
or you might as well erase the holocaust. Secular mercy can be shown
toward some murderers... but an expectation that ANY OF THEM are 'Saintly,'
is an OBSCENITY.
>The Fesch that murdered and the Fesch that was executed are not the same
>character.
Actually.. they were EXACTLY the SAME ... body, soul and spirit.
The fact that I personally do not believe that Fesch should have been
executed, as the situation as described in the murder he committed does
not seem to me to have found the DP necessary, can in no way ERASE
the fact he murdered. Nor can any presumed REDEMPTION... wipe
away that murder. Nor can that murder ever be seen in the sense of
the murderer being SAINTLY.
> Fesch's situation is very akin to the Karla Tucker case.
>
What's your point? That Karla Faye Tucker should be nominated for
SAINTHOOD?? But... of course it is... how silly of me not to have
realized that.
>Taking again your questions:
>
>> Certainly there have been thousands if not millions
>> of Catholics who have experienced religious conversion who have not been
>> nominated for beatification. Why single out a murderer? Why is Flesch to
>> be considered blessed and worthy of public honor among Catholics? -
>> especially above non-murderers.
>
>I wouldn't say that one singled out a murderer. The overwhelming majority of
>those who were beatified were not murderers. Yet, murderers are humans, part
>of the human kind and part of what Catholics call (I believe) "the kingdom
>of God".
Are you presuming that Cardinal Lustiger IS GOD???
>Why should one then single out murderers by barring them from
>beatification?
Ummm... because they have MURDERED???? Or is that actually
'not relevant' in your moral viewpoint?
> After all, the way made by a murderer between his act and his
>conversion is much more important than the way made by a non murderer who
>experienced divine revelation. In this perspective, the move to beatify
>someone who underwent conversion in spite of his murderer past is very
>powerful and sensitive.
>
Again... euro... you are a HYPOCRITE.
>It's all a matter of perspective.
Yes... and YOUR perspective is that of a HYPOCRITE.
> I don't think one makes much progress by
>separating non murderers (the good ones) and murderers (the evil ones).
WHAT??? Once again... You now ADMIT that you find NO DIFFERENCE
between MURDERERS and NON-MURDERERS. Of course... let's not
'separate' non-murderers and murderers -- They are ALL THE SAME
TO YOU!!! I will again remind you from time to time... that YOU do not
SEPARATE 'non-murderers' from 'murderers.' They are ALL THE SAME
TO YOU. Just as murderers and innocent slaves are ALL THE SAME to
you.
> We
>all live in the same world, the same society, the same cities or streets.
>Most of us don't kill, and yet some do.
No shit!! And you find NO DIFFERENCE between those who don't
murder.. and those who do. You really have a screw loose.
> Sometimes, one could preview it,
>sometimes not. After killing, some amend themselves, others don't. A
>manicheian view on crime is bound to fail, because there is no hermetic
>border between the "good" and the "evil" ones.
>
Whatever are you rambling about? Whenever you presume you are being
didactic... is when you demonstrate more fully how totally meaningless
your words are, and how totally full of shit you actually are. Your words
presume that humans cannot differentiate between Hitler and Mother Teresa.
You have this manner of so often grossly insulting the human species... while
placing murderers on such a pedestal... holding them as NO DIFFERENT
from non-murderers and innocent slaves.
>On the contrary, it is much more powerful to accept this and highlight, with
>an example (and Fesch is just one example), that we all can repress negative
>pulsions that we all have.
>
Apparently you are unable to repress yours. To ignore evil... is to become
an accomplice to it. (MLK). And you are now a proven accomplice to
MURDER. It you do not believe that it is EVIL personified to expect to
raise to SAINTHOOD a MURDERER... you, and the Cardinal... are BOTH
accomplices to a murderer. While never have you more clearly stated that
you find NO DIFFERENCE between murderers and non-murderers... thus
providing conclusively my original claim that you find murderers to be JUST
LIKE innocent slaves.
PV
>Euro
A Planet Visitor
Of course... what you REALLY mean is that you 'feel indignant' that an
American would point out that this monstrous tragedy took place in Europe.
And that is the REAL reason why so many in Europe wish to deny the Jew
his birthright, if he chooses to assert that birthright. I will again repeat... and
this time.. pay FUCKING ATTENTION --
ANYONE.. I MEAN == ANYONE == who attempts to take away the
EXISTENCE of those murdered in the death camps... depriving
them of that EXISTENCE by stating that "One is not 'born Jewish'.."
has my eternal scorn. FOREVER. That is what Ol' Racist Nev
tried to do. There is no argument, no parsing of meaning, no pedantic
rule, no semantic distortion, no syntactic rearrangement, no excuse
of man-made religion, no excuse of place of birth, and no excuse of
ANY KIND that can erase that EXISTENCE as a BORN Jew.
They were murdered BECAUSE they were 'born Jews.' And
to take away that possibility, is to take away their EXISTENCE.
It is not only morally impossible... It is fundamentally and axiomatically
impossible. They existed as HUMANS... They existed as
BORN JEWS. And they were MURDERED for that EXACT
REASON. And to deny that reason... is to EXCUSE. Presuming
that those murdered in the death camps HAD no existence
because they were murdered as 'born Jews,' by arguing that there
ARE no 'born Jews,' is as evil a human thought as I have ever
encountered. It provides 'plausible deniability' to the Nazi extermination
machine. Now arguing that the Nazis were not 'evil,' but simply
'stupid,' because they did not KNOW that one 'cannot be born
a Jew.' Now you would argue that Hitler was not 'a murderer,'
but simply 'incredibly ignorant,' because he didn't KNOW that
there were NO HUMANS who were 'born Jews.' If only YOU
could have 'told him.' You evil swine.
And even more evil is the presumption that because I argue that
humans CAN be 'born Jews,' means I support the role that the
Nazis played in murdering those they found were 'born Jews.'
That, of course, has absolutely nothing to do with it. And it
represents a gross canard, which I see implied in your words. How
can ANYONE even express the ugly thought that someone who
believe that a Jew can be 'born Jewish,' MUST ALSO support
extermination of those Jews? Why would I demand the 'born Jew'
be GIVEN EXISTENCE only to then support his extermination?
Only those who would DENY that EXISTENCE, as you presumably
now do... would hope to ERASE that existence.
To claim that because I believe that a Jew CAN (NOT MUST) most
certainly be 'born Jewish,' also means that I support Hitler is one of
the absurdly illogical, and offensive arguments imaginable. And it is a
smoke-screen for a raging anti-Semitism behind the attempt to deny
the Jew his birthright, if he chooses to assert that birthright. IT IS
anti-Semitic in nature. Hitler was intent on murdering EXACTLY
those that I provide EXISTENCE to in my argument. An EXISTENCE
which is denied them in words that argue humans CANNOT be 'born
Jews.' If there are no 'born Jews,' and Hitler murdered those he thought
were 'born Jews,' then the argument that there are 'no born Jews,' implies
that Hitler murdered those humans that did not EXIST. Suddenly... there
'were no murders of Jews,' in the minds of those who would
argue that one cannot be 'born Jewish.' Their MURDERS no
longer mean anything!!! In any sense of their BEING JEWISH...
which obviously attempts to take away from that fact... and is
most certainly anti-Semitic in tone and tint. Reducing those murdered
Jews to 'non-persons.' And the attempt to deny they were murdered
BECAUSE they were 'born Jews,' is a denial of the role that Europe
played, and still plays in anti-Semitism.
I have made the point... quite effectively as far as I'm concerned...
that Hitler tried to exterminate the bodies of those 'born Jewish.'
To deny that they had such an existence... is the first step to
excusing what was done. It strips away a little part of their
existence. Those who would state that NO ONE can be 'born
Jewish,' are intent on destroying the soul, the spirit, and the
rich heritage that rests within the ethnic roots of the Jew.
Every bit as much as the soul, the spirit, and the rich heritage
that rests within the ethnic roots of the Arab. Strange that
no one seems to disagree with the latter, which has no
religious connection, but European heads begin to bob up
and down at the thought of providing the same idea to the
Jew. And insist that the Jew is 'only a religion,' not a people.
While NEVER arguing that the Arabs are 'not a people.'
I state most emphatically, that if someone is born with clear
ethnic Hebrew roots, he can claims he is a 'born Jew,' without
any demand that he also follow the orthodox beliefs of some
man-made religious order. It is insulting to me if someone
presume he cannot do so -- if they assert that most arrogant
of demands on them that -- "One is not 'born Jewish'..."
>Lustiger himself has very often been singled out by the French extreme right
>for his origins.
>
And that means what? Apparently you believe that he should deny that
origin, for the 'sake' of the French extreme right! Or for 'your sake' as
a part of the French extreme right! The French extreme right single
out ALL JEWS for their origin... not just Lustiger.
>What I contest here to PV, is the fact that the origins of someone matter
>less than what this person is, and thinks, now. Lustiger's origins are
>interesting only as far as his positions on the dialogue between the
>Catholic Church and the Jewish religious authorities are concerned. Outside
>of this aspect, stressing his Jewish origins is potentially stinking.
>
What a load of anti-Semitic horseshit. That's what STINKS. You are
arguing that he CANNOT 'stress his Jewish origins,' because that is what
HE is doing. You are presuming he must 'hide that origin,' because like the
'good little anti-Semite' you are... you don't think it's 'nice to be a born Jew.'
That is, in fact, what the 'French extreme right' DEMANDS that he do...
and you AGREE with their view.
The more I see of your views... the more convinced I become that you
are a raving hypocrite Catholic... who hates the Jews.
PV
>Euro
Earl Evleth
Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
>> Well, since this group deals with the death penalty, one can ask
>> which religions accord the death penalty for apostates.
>>
> Why??? Are you now presuming that 'religion' has some 'say' in
> the secular operations of the State?
Yes.
Earl
Earl Evleth
Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
>> Nor I. In tribal man, exclusion from the group was fairly close to being
>> a death penalty.
>>
> Quite clearly the reason for the formation of tribes, themselves.
Clarify unless you are joking!
>> With regard to life imprisonment, this is not exactly the same but close to
>> it. Social rather than physical death is involved.
> Huh??? The 'social structure' within prisons is very clearly defined!
Not from what we observe. It can change rapidly sometimes for the worse and
that is because is lacks being "very clearly defined".
Earl
Earl Evleth
Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
A quirky guy who still keeps quirky hours
"Sat, 11 Oct 2003 01:36:31 EDT"
Earl
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:q6heovkk8u1li2hmo...@4ax.com...
LOL!!! If it were true, I guess I would just look too much like you, then.
Poor PV, always the pot calling the kettle back. The advantage, with you, is
that one only needs to open one of your postings to laugh.
Tell us, since you don't hold the Cardinal Lustiger in great esteem ("one of
the more prominent possibilities of being elected the new Pope", to recall
your words - a comment that you took from God knows where, but that was not
meant to show your disdain to Cardinal Lustiger anyway), why did you
initiate a thread on him?
Euro
--------------------------
""A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:1o0unvkr0p9hf26q1...@4ax.com...
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:0kueovoqiq2htae85...@4ax.com...
Did you manage to make the difference between "beatify" and "beautify"?
Euro
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:4g2fovs8vbc835jl1...@4ax.com...
> >What I contest here to PV, is the fact that the origins of someone matter
> >less than what this person is, and thinks, now. Lustiger's origins are
> >interesting only as far as his positions on the dialogue between the
> >Catholic Church and the Jewish religious authorities are concerned.
Outside
> >of this aspect, stressing his Jewish origins is potentially stinking.
> >
> What a load of anti-Semitic horseshit. That's what STINKS. You are
> arguing that he CANNOT 'stress his Jewish origins,' because that is what
> HE is doing.
If you read carefully what I wrote above, you will find out that I argue
nothing towards Lustiger, but towards you. _You_ are pointing out to
Lustiger's origins, and the question I raise is: do those origins disturb
you?
As for myself, I don't care. The only thing worth saying about Lustiger in
this newsgroup is that he argues for the beatification of Jacques Fesch, a
proven murderer guillotined in France in 1957. Full point. The remaining is
bad, potentially racist-minded polemics that _you_ raise.
But, of course, we know that you call an anti-semitic racist anyone who
disagrees with you. Gimmick n° 133 is here to remind it.
http://www.chez.com/desmondcoughlan/dp/gimmicks/133.html
Euro
Euro
"danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
??????:bm6lus$qpd$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
> "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:32c626dc191cffa8...@news.meganetnews.com...
> > "danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
> > ??????:bm42os$1vm$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
> > > "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:374c0f44d1e0d04a...@news.meganetnews.com...
> > > > "danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
> > > > ??????:bm148u$jpr$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
> >
> > [...]
> > That being said, men changed and the Roman Catholic Church changed as
> well.
> > It made efforts (though insufficiently) to apologize for past excesses
and
> > intolerances, and now, on many social issues, it develops positions
that,
> > whether you like them or not, are morally very well argumented.
>
> It would be nice to see your tolerant attitude transferred to other areas.
> I don't recall if you've expressed the views I'm about to comment on, so
the
> remarks aren't targeted at you particularly, but in a more general sense.
> The U.S. has a past wrt racism that we continue to struggle with but have
> made many significant strides toward addressing. One might argue the same
> is true of similar issues in European countries. I often have read
remarks
> that denigrate the entire U.S. population for historical acts that no one
> alive participated in and which most citizens and all our laws reject.
> Certainly every country in Europe save perhaps Luxembourg and a couple of
> others colonized, enslaved, abused, pillaged the people and resources of
> most of the world, so it rings false when the U.S. is made the target of
so
> much abuse for past deeds.
Everyone sees the Sun at his door, Daniel. I have also read many posts, on
this newsgroup, denigrating Europeans for many historical facts. I
recognised that I once reacted to a particularly virulent anti-European
attack by recalling, in the same very polemical tone, a few historical facts
on the US history.
Those who open such debates should expect the same rules for everyone, don't
you think so? It may be anti-American bigotry to bash Americans for their
history, but then it is likewise anti-European bigotry to bash Europeans for
their history. In the same register, I find unacceptable the continuous
evokation of what the US did during world war II to ask Europeans to give a
blanket approval to any action taken by the US nowadays. A few months ago, I
posted on several occasions a quotation of Benjamin Franklin related to this
debate.
> Wrt the current day RC church, I think there are more subtle but just as
> egregious behaviors happening today, most not known. Sexual abuse occurs
> often enough to wonder whether it's endemic. I cannot believe it is
solely
> U.S. priests who commit these acts. The essentially military nature of
the
> RC church has not changed, only the degree of influence has, resulting in
> fewer acts committed through conquerors and colonizers. While the acts
may
> be less overt, their pernicious influence remains. RC is the antithesis
of
> individual freedom and I don't see it ever reforming itself in that
regard.
> Even their moral high ground they claim is a farce having more to do with
> control than morality. Today, the Pope seems a doddering old man with a
> funny hat, but in reality, he's been stacking the cardinal deck for
decades
> with what can only be described as reactionaries. Truth remains a
fungible
> commodity, and those who promote such can only be regarded with suspicion.
The Roman Catholic Church has a great job, ahead of them, in modernizing
their functioning and their positions. One of those tasks would be to enable
priests to get married and have a family. That would probably reduce sexual
scandals - there have been some in Europe as well, by the way. I find myself
particularly at odds with the Roman Catholic Church's positions on
prevention of sexually transmitted diseases or the position of gay people in
society, just to mention those issues. I guess such changes will not take
place with the present pope.
But you need to look at the whole picture. On death penalty, the Roman
Catholic Church has changed its position: it used to support it (during its
darkest periods, the ones characterized by the crimes you recalled) and now
defends the reverse position. On this point, I believe their reform is
meaningful - even though I don't agree with all the arguments they put
forward.
(...)
>
> > > > If God exists, it is its job to balance the scales of good and evil.
> > It's
> > > > not a job men can do with all guarantees of justice and equity.
> > >
> > > If God exists, it can darn well do what it pleases. Since it chooses
> not
> > to
> > > intervene to protect _any_ thus far executed, I can only presume it
> either
> > > doesn't exist, doesn't give a rat's ass about balancing scales in
> > > humansville or leaves it to humans to develop their own codes of
> conduct.
> > >
> > > [...]
> >
> > The fact that God does even not prevent crime should speak for itself.
>
> It does - humans make the temporal rules. The murderer makes the rule
that
> he can kill, so society can make the rule that he can be killed for his
act.
> Killing is not intrinsically evil, but murder is and dealing with it via
the
> dp is not intrinsically wrong, especially with extensive safeguards and
> limits.
Well... You know I don't agree with those lines. I don't need to write
anything more than this.
Euro
Mount...@nietzsche.com
>"danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
>??????:bm6lus$qpd$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
>> "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:32c626dc191cffa8...@news.meganetnews.com...
>> > "danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
>> > ??????:bm42os$1vm$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
[...]
>Those who open such debates should expect the same rules for everyone, don't
>you think so? It may be anti-American bigotry to bash Americans for their
>history, but then it is likewise anti-European bigotry to bash Europeans for
>their history.
At the risk of ending all debate, I agree entirely. There's no value
in condemning a continent, however true the charges are. I don't bash
Europe and I have little use for those who bash the U.S., especially
one self loathing expatriate who seems to have a lopsided view of
nearly all things U.S.
[...]
>But you need to look at the whole picture. On death penalty, the Roman
>Catholic Church has changed its position: it used to support it (during its
>darkest periods, the ones characterized by the crimes you recalled) and now
>defends the reverse position. On this point, I believe their reform is
>meaningful - even though I don't agree with all the arguments they put
>forward.
Uh, it isn't that the RCC used to "support" the dp, but that it
eagerly embraced it and used it as a weapon of control. I freely
admit to being anti-RCC - I find the organization corrupt in the
extreme and their policies self serving. They epitomize everything
that's wrong with organized religion and do so into dulcet,
sanctimoniously false tones. While I don't want to bash them for the
crimes of the past, I see no reason to believe what they say or trust
their words when there are 2 millenia of history behind them and they
haven't essentially changed.
[...]
>> > The fact that God does even not prevent crime should speak for itself.
>>
>> It does - humans make the temporal rules. The murderer makes the rule
>that
>> he can kill, so society can make the rule that he can be killed for his
>act.
>> Killing is not intrinsically evil, but murder is and dealing with it via
>the
>> dp is not intrinsically wrong, especially with extensive safeguards and
>> limits.
>
>Well... You know I don't agree with those lines. I don't need to write
>anything more than this.
Nevertheless, what I wrote entirely follows your reasoning. <g>
Euro
"Earl Evleth" <evl...@wanadoo.fr> ??????:BBAD7BFF.16840%evl...@wanadoo.fr...
As far as I know, several Islamist countries provide the death penalty for
apostates. That is, among others, the case of Saudi Arabia.
I'm not sure if this results from a provision of the Qoran or if it is the
result of a more conservative (maybe fundamentalist would be more
appropriate) interpretation.
I don't know of a Christian or a Buddhist country that has the same kind of
provision.
Euro
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
> le Sat, 11 Oct 2003 13:38:54 GMT, dans l'article <ol0govgfftkqbfqa5...@4ax.com>, Mount...@nietzsche.com a dit ...
>
> { snip }
>
>> At the risk of ending all debate, I agree entirely. There's no value
>> in condemning a continent, however true the charges are. I don't bash
>> Europe and I have little use for those who bash the U.S., especially
>> one self loathing expatriate who seems to have a lopsided view of
>> nearly all things U.S.
>
Tossing himself off over pictures of dead bodies, surely?
Mr Q. Z. D.
--
Drinker, systems administrator, wannabe writer, musician and all-round bastard.
"They've got to be protected/All their rights respected ((o))
Until someone we like can be elected." - Tom Lehrer ((O))
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:6n4eov0pamemabgip...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 12:54:13 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > We know, however, that no one could neither
> >beatify, nor beautify you. It happens, however, that Lustiger suggested
the
> >beatification of Flesch, and he has very good reasons for so doing.
> >
> I would expect you to believe that... since you both appear to be
> murderer-lovers.
I note, PV, that you are the one who began a thread on this newsgroup on a
"murderer lover". I guess you must like to shed light on that category of
people.
Not me. In this way, we notably don't have the same values.
Euro
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:6n4eov0pamemabgip...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 12:54:13 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> I don't see any 'moral quality' in presuming to 'beautify' (what an
UGLY
> >> word for a murderer) a TRUE murderer.
> >
> >That was beatify, not beautify.
>
> LOL... I just KNEW that you were a 'religious fruitcake.'
Quoting PV,
(http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=mv4eovc41pif2r8lgn9fpt5nmm9mu9hetu@4ax
.com)
"My 'authority' lies within the
principles expressed by 'your good friend Jesus..' who every so often
made an insightful remark... such as when he noted in John 3:20 that
"Everyone who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light,
lest his deeds should be exposed." My job is to bring your evil into the
light... to expose that evil. Nothing more than that. Live with it. "
And you're a presumptuous crank who believes that God gave him a mission...
Euro
A Planet Visitor
Thank you for demonstrating your ignorance in things of a secular matter.
Obviously, murder means nothing to you... but I already knew that. If
'religion' plays such a large part... then let's simply presume murderers
will find their 'just reward' in the role that religion plays... that of 'another
world.' And we'll handle their secular penalties in 'this world.'
PV
>Earl
Earl Evleth
Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
>>> Why??? Are you now presuming that 'religion' has some 'say' in
>>> the secular operations of the State?
>>
>>
>> Yes.
>>
> Thank you for demonstrating your ignorance in things of a secular matter.
> Obviously, murder means nothing to you... but I already knew that. If
> 'religion' plays such a large part... then let's simply presume murderers
> will find their 'just reward' in the role that religion plays... that of
> 'another world.' And we'll handle their secular penalties in 'this world.'
I responded that religion has some effect on the secular operations of the
State.
Now you translated "some" into "If 'religion' plays such a large part."
You have a practice of overstating things for argumentative purposes.
The role of religion in the State depends on each culture. One size does
not fit all. Religion plays a role in the culture and the culture
formulates the laws. Colonial laws in the US were certainly religiously
ìnfluenced, after all the DP was inflected for sodomy and bestiality,
clearly old testament Biblical crimes.
Next, it is a dodge to say that the secular arm of the State administers
the DP, that religious authorities are not involved in the process.
The Catholic Church continues to try this dodge in getting around
its role in the DP during the Inquisition.
In the US today, most fundamental of the Protestant groups, the Southern
Baptists are pro-DP, largely because they adhere to the old testament.
That support for the DP is heaviest in the South.
Earl
Euro
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
??????:87pq51-...@zeouane.org...
> le Mon, 13 Oct 2003 14:07:08 GMT, dans l'article
<153c5ca1a9271242...@news.meganetnews.com>, Euro
<vs...@hotmail.com> a dit ...
>
> { snip }
>
> >> LOL... I just KNEW that you were a 'religious fruitcake.'
>
> > Quoting PV,
> >
(http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=mv4eovc41pif2r8lgn9fpt5nmm9mu9hetu@4ax
> > .com)
> >
> > "My 'authority' lies within the
> > principles expressed by 'your good friend Jesus..' who every so often
> > made an insightful remark... such as when he noted in John 3:20 that
> > "Everyone who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light,
> > lest his deeds should be exposed." My job is to bring your evil into
the
> > light... to expose that evil. Nothing more than that. Live with it. "
> >
> > And you're a presumptuous crank who believes that God gave him a
mission...
>
> by FuckWit. Quite surprising, all things considered, that he frequently
> lies (no, really ??!!) about bringing his religious mores into the death
> penalty debate, and ramming them down others' throats.
Question: qu'est-ce qu'un jeune con, 70 ans plus tard?
Réponse: PV (=un vieux con).
Euro
--------------------------
«Les bourgeois c'est comme les cochons plus ça devient vieux plus ça
devient...con».
(Jacques Brel)
Euro
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
??????:o0mt51-...@zeouane.org...
le Tue, 14 Oct 2003 11:48:48 GMT, dans l'article
<74e25108000e7080...@news.meganetnews.com>, Euro
<vs...@hotmail.com> a dit ...
{ snip }
>> LOL, thanks for that, Euro ! I hadn't seen that particular 'quote' (sic)
>> by FuckWit. Quite surprising, all things considered, that he frequently
>> lies (no, really ??!!) about bringing his religious mores into the death
>> penalty debate, and ramming them down others' throats.
> Question: qu'est-ce qu'un jeune con, 70 ans plus tard?
>
> Réponse: PV (=un vieux con).
Hih ... comme réponse à son répertoire de gimmicks, dont il se sert pour
éviter le débat ... "les cons osent tout ... c'est même à ça que l'on les
reconnaît ..."
----------------------------------
On avait reconnu PV depuis longtemps.
Euro
A Planet Visitor
>"Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:374c0f44d1e0d04a...@news.meganetnews.com...
>> "danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
>> ??????:bm148u$jpr$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
>
>[...]
>
>> > Thanks for the elaboration. These are some of the good reasons not to
>be
>> > Catholic, if there were not already thousands of good reasons. <g>
>>
>> There certainly are plenty of reasons not to be Catholic. But then, there
>> are also solid reasons not to really care for who is beatified or not,
>don't
>> you think so?
>
>No, I don't think so. Regardless of what little regard I personally have
>for the RC church, one of their senior people recommending a murderer for
>beatification is a message that borders on obscene.
>
But euro holds him in 'high esteem.' Hardly surprising given that euro finds
no difference, no 'reason to separate,' non-murderers and murderers.
They are both the SAME to him... just as murderers and innocent slaves
are the SAME to him.
For all the 'bad images' that are attached to the Catholic Clergy, the
suggestion of Cardinal Lestiger to elevate a murderer to a 'revered
position' within that church, has to rank among the most deplorable
I have ever witnessed in this day and age. And euro found it to be
a 'moral expression' of the RC Church.
<rest clipped>
>If God exists, it can darn well do what it pleases. Since it chooses not to
>intervene to protect _any_ thus far executed, I can only presume it either
>doesn't exist, doesn't give a rat's ass about balancing scales in
>humansville or leaves it to humans to develop their own codes of conduct.
>
Ulp! I had presumed you were Jewish, Dan. Am I to assume you claim
to be Jewish, by birth, rather than as a follower of Judaism? Since I believe
a follower of Judaism does not question the existence of God.
PV
>[...]
>
A Planet Visitor
>"Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:32c626dc191cffa8...@news.meganetnews.com...
>> "danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
>> ??????:bm42os$1vm$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
>> > "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> > news:374c0f44d1e0d04a...@news.meganetnews.com...
>> > > "danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
>> > > ??????:bm148u$jpr$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> > No, I don't think so. Regardless of what little regard I personally
>have
>> > for the RC church, one of their senior people recommending a murderer
>for
>> > beatification is a message that borders on obscene.
>> >
>> > [...]
>> >
>> > I suppose one should not be surprised that the RC church would honor a
>> > murderer, given that that particular institution is responsible for more
>> > murders, atrocities and abuses of human rights than any other. Possibly
>> > more than all others together.
>>
>> This discussion puts me in an awkward situation, as I certainly wouldn't
>> like to be looked as a defender of the Roman Catholic Church.
>
>Let me add that I understand you aren't RC and I don't want to put you in
>the position of defending it.
>
I am constantly amazed at your efforts to 'end up agreeing' with those you
oppose, Dan. I cannot help but find the only word that comes to my mind
is 'pander.' Although at other moments you can be quite forceful. Quite
clearly, euro HAS placed himself in the posting of 'defending the Roman
Catholic Church.' As personified by Lustiger. So why would you not
want to put him into a position that he has placed himself in? See his original
laudatory contribution to the RC Church in ...
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dd7b24844c1b79d34bac9efbb48e2fcd%40news.meganetnews.com
Just one of his comments was -- "Thanks for giving me the opportunity to stress
the great moral qualities of Lustiger..."
Why would you NOT rather confront euro in his very clear 'defense of
the RC Church'? euro, in fact, has now totally intended to alter his original
statement, because he now realizes how inhuman is a suggestion that a
highly ranked member of the clergy of the Catholic Church suggest the
elevation of a MURDERER to a highly revered position within that church.
This is not the first time, nor assuredly the last that he would hope to 'lie
his way,' out of his own words.
<clipped>
>> The fact that God does even not prevent crime should speak for itself.
Now euro will 'define the mind of God,' for all of us. Having never heard
of God providing 'free will.'
>It does - humans make the temporal rules. The murderer makes the rule that
>he can kill, so society can make the rule that he can be killed for his act.
>Killing is not intrinsically evil, but murder is and dealing with it via the
>dp is not intrinsically wrong, especially with extensive safeguards and
>limits.
Well put. The murderer kills the TEMPORAL BODY, and thus must
answer to our PHYSICAL existence. When the murderer kills only the
'soul' (such as Desmond, euro and Earl do) without harm to the body, the
judgment of the wrongs they have committed will have to come from a
source other than what humans are capable of providing (if such a source
exists). Although we know that God is merciful... let us hope that He is
also fair in dealing with those who would try to destroy the human soul,
in our time on earth. If He is fair... it does not bode well for the three
of them.
PV
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:v1gpov8pn6b8t10m2...@4ax.com...(snipped)
> >
> I am constantly amazed at your efforts to 'end up agreeing' with those you
> oppose, Dan. I cannot help but find the only word that comes to my mind
> is 'pander.' Although at other moments you can be quite forceful. Quite
> clearly, euro HAS placed himself in the posting of 'defending the Roman
> Catholic Church.' As personified by Lustiger. So why would you not
> want to put him into a position that he has placed himself in? See his
original
> laudatory contribution to the RC Church in ...
>
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dd7b24844c1b79d34bac9efbb48e2fcd%40news.me
ganetnews.com
> Just one of his comments was -- "Thanks for giving me the opportunity to
stress
> the great moral qualities of Lustiger..."
PV is so stupid that he now makes a confusion between one Cardinal and the
whole Catholic Church...
Sorry PV, but when I praise the moral qualities of Lustiger, I praise his
moral qualities and this is not a laudatory contribution of the Roman
Catholic Church. That _you_ are too nuts to make the difference between a
man and an institution, does not mean that everyone is.
Besides, contrary to you, when I post something on Cardinal Lustiger, I
write on a subject I know.
Euro
FitzHerbert
<snip>
> >If God exists, it can darn well do what it pleases. Since it chooses not to
> >intervene to protect _any_ thus far executed, I can only presume it either
> >doesn't exist, doesn't give a rat's ass about balancing scales in
> >humansville or leaves it to humans to develop their own codes of conduct.
> >
> Ulp! I had presumed you were Jewish, Dan. Am I to assume you claim
> to be of the Jewish race, rather than a follower of Judaism? Since I
> believe a follower of Judaism does not question the existence of God.
Mmmmm... the sweet smell of obsession.
http://www.perfume-bliss.com/o/obsession.asp
> PV
*****
Hope this helps,
Neville
FitzHerbert
<snip>
> PV
Does this fundy cunt ever shut up?
j.rennie1
"FitzHerbert" <FitzHerb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f85d58f0.0310...@posting.google.com...
We missed ypour witty contribution; we still miss them.
FitzHerbert
> > <snip>
> >
> > > PV
> >
> > Does this fundy cunt ever shut up?
> >
> >
> > *****
> >
> > Hope this helps,
> > Neville
>
> We missed ypour witty contribution; we still miss them.
Hello to you too, John Rennie! I'm surprised that you (and indeed the
other Angelic Ones) are still reading this NG. It seems the deathie
scum are now reduced -- almost literally -- to a one-man (freak)show
(i.e. the FuckWit).
It seems the battle is won, peeps. Unless FuckWit is expecting the
cavalry to ride into view any second now it's would appear to be
'game-over' for the evil cockwanking fundy scum that is Team Deathie.
("Hip-hip-Hooray!!" the Free World cheers. And they are right to.)
Now, I suggest we abolitionists pick a topic or two we can disagree
on. It seems the only way a.a.d-p can survive the winter.
Meanwhile I think I'll reprise some old threads I left hanging.
Yrs,
As ever,
Neville FitzHerbert, esq.
A Planet Visitor
wrote:
>le Sat, 11 Oct 2003 10:11:40 GMT, dans l'article <86994101df54cf12...@news.meganetnews.com>, Euro <vs...@hotmail.com> a dit ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>> If you read carefully what I wrote above, you will find out that I argue
>> nothing towards Lustiger, but towards you.
>
>It's all part of FuckWit Patented Gimmick (TM) N° 166, the 'the lie becomes
>the truth' gimmick.
euro is simply a liar.... thus, it is not surprising that you... being a liar
yourself, would attempt to defend that 'religious punk.' See his original
laudatory contribution to the RC Church in ...
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dd7b24844c1b79d34bac9efbb48e2fcd%40news.meganetnews.com
His words -- "Thanks for giving me the opportunity to stress
the great moral qualities of Lustiger..." If you do not find that is
certainly attempting to 'speak for Lustiger,' then you are even more
psychotic than I ever imagined.
> Rip any of FuckWit's racist,
That's YOU, you racist swine -- See -
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/The_Racist_Desmond.html
There is not a single post you can provide which demonstrates any
racism on my past... while MY list of YOUR racism is rather lengthy.
> anti-Semitic
I was not the one who referred to the Jews as committing BUTCHERY...
YOU DID. I was not the only who contended that the holocaust should
be 'forgotten'... YOU DID. Imagine you arguing that the holocaust should
be FORGOTTEN!!! Not for another thousand years, you slimy turd. Nor
again, is there a single post you can provide which demonstrates any
anti-Semitism on my part. But perhaps you believe that because I claimed
that Dachau was a 'death camp' since so many were MURDERED in that
death camp... that 'pointing that out,' makes me an anti-Semite.
> or
>homophobic posts
LOL... I am not the one who fears others have a homophobic attraction to
him. That would be YOU... see
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_153.html
> [1] to shreds, and he'll accuse you of attacking _all_
>those who are _not_ racist.
Actually, I only accuse those who demonstrate they ARE racists... such
as YOU. See your own racist words --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/The_Racist_Desmond.html
Plus your deep affection expressed for a racist murderer --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_71.html
> Take the famous example of the MLK post.
You mean the ones where you spit in the face of MLK? We are well
aware of them, you racist swine. They can be found in your words in
response to a tribute provided to that great humanitarian on MLK Day
in the U.S., which can be found at --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=fsWW9.113395%24Sa3.2633235%40twister.tampabay.rr.com
And for just a very few of the great many 'spit in the face of MLK' posts
that you provided in commenting on that tribute... we can find YOUR
words in --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=oumni-d3q.ln1%40zeouane.org
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20030306234136.10901.00001580%40mb-dh.aol.com
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20030123212917.01792.00000517%40mb-fi.aol.com
Plus... the quintessential example of someone BEGGING the group to accept
his RACISM... and VOTE FOR HIS RACISM... in your pathetic, dripping
with yellowing bile demands that others _vote_ for your racism, or that they
leave the group -- See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_166.html
>FuckWit posts a sickly 'tribute' to a man whom his own kind destroyed in
>the very flower of his youth.
He was destroyed by YOUR OWN KIND, Desmond... He was destroyed
by RACISTS... YOUR OWN KIND. But his life and works were always
expressed in non-violence... thus you can mend your ways if you wish... even
if it was YOUR KIND who murdered him. You simply have to separate
yourself from THOSE KIND... which you seem unable to do.
>I in turn tear FuckWit to shreds, exposing his racism.
It is not possible to 'expose' what does not exist... and you can provide
not the slightest example that it exists. But I suppose - as you claim I am
an anti-Semite because I argue that Dachau was a 'death camp for Jews,'--
you expect to claim I am a racist, because I have stated on a great number
of occasions that the U.S. is a nation without honor, until it solves the
racism that still exists in the U.S. How many times have you spoken in
your posting history about the hideous effect that racism has? Never...
actually. In fact your pathetic 'denials' to Mr. D., were an unbelievably
gross attempt to hide your own racism. See -
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=20030306234136.10901.00001580%40mb-dh.aol.com
What you despise about me... is not that you see me as a racist... but
that you see me as having been very critical of racism, and you cannot
handle that -- since it exposes the slimy underbelly of your own racism,
which I have often pointed out. You hate all Americans... but have often
focused that hate directly on Black Americans.
> FuckWit's response is (*snigger*) to claim that I am attacking
>anyone who would make a tribute to MLK. Here is what I wrote ...
>
First... let's examine the words written in tribute to MLK that you attacked --
--------------------------------------------------------------
"What would MLK say today? The 'dream'?? Realized 34 years after his
assassination? Does anyone think it has become reality? This is a day of
'RECOGNITION.' Not in platitudes to ourselves of 'how far we have
come.' But in the awareness of 'how far we have to go.'
This is a day to personally reflect on your individual contributions to
EQUALITY, or the lack thereof. Because only TRUE EQUALITY can
fulfill that dream. This is a day for inward contemplation. To paraphrase
Lincoln... and I hope not tritely.. "That from (this) honored
dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which (he) gave
the last full measure of devotion.."
This is a day to honor the dead... to Honor Martin Luther King, Jr.
The man, his principles, his dreams... and yes -- his memory as well.
But let's not forget he is MORE than a 'memory.' He embodies the
very principles which should guide our lives. Where will we be 34
years from today? Will the glass of prejudice and hate still be half-full,
or will we have finally emptied it? I certainly don't know, but I do know that
the answer lies in the future behavior of each and every one of us.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Three paragraphs -- 17 lines -- non-confrontational -- nor accusing
any particular poster here of being a racist. Not even directed at
Europeans, since MLK Day is an American holiday. But directed
at the racism shown against Black Americans, that I see still existing
in the U.S., as that cup that is still half-full.
Now we can see the insult you provided to the life, the works, and
the memory of that great civil rights leader. The words of yours that
would intend to keep that cup half-full and more. The words for which
you should be deeply ashamed of having written. Although I already
know that shame is an emotion you lack --
> Normally, the whole of news:alt.activism.death-penalty considers you a
> perverse joke. In the main, your 'purpose' on this newsgroup is to
> make us all feel good at being normal, and especially, at not being
> _you_*. You make us laugh, but unfortunately for you, we don't laugh
> _with_ you, but _at_ you. You're recognised as the most inefficient,
> most inept, least educated, most unsophisticated, most violent, least
> honest, most sexually depraved poster that is currently posting to this
> newsgroup.
>
> In short, you're a disgusting, laughable prick.
>
> However, that being so (and no one would even contemplate stating the
> opposite), this thread will make no one laugh. That the repulsive
> moron who believes that all Germans are stupid, who will never trust an
> Arab, who believes that study after study showing inherent racial bias
> in the administration of the death penalty in the United States, only
> shows that it is 'pro-black', who does not hesitate to call a German
> 'Adolph', who exhibits rampant homophobia in almost every post, who
> believes that 'anti-Semitic' can only refer to the Jew and not to the
> other half-dozen or so Semitic races, who mouths platitudes against a
> woman's right to choose who uses her body, that such an example of
> sheer, _blinding_, proactive stupidity, should seek to hijack the day
> when his own kind cut down a brave young man in the prime of his life
> ... is beyond the pale.
>
> Martin Luther King Day is not for your kind, Scum. If it were not for
> you, there would be no Martin Luther King Day, for the man himself
> would not have been killed. _You_ bear his blood on your hands. As
> long as your kind exist, then the black will forever be excluded,
> forever the victim, forever a 'second class citizen'.
>
> You _fucking disgusting_ lowlife.'
>
Martin Luther King Day is for everyone, Desmond. Even you!! Even YOU...
In fact, his works were more clearly FOR YOU... as you are a racist... than for
those who hold no racist heart. This is something that is beyond your understanding.
Even though you were spitting in the face of MLK. And stated in another post that
your PURPOSE was to DESTROY the MEANING of that tribute -- His works
and life were because YOU exist. All your excuses will not extract you from having
proven you HATE MLK... and HATED the fact that ANYONE would be so
bold as to mention his life or works. You became FURIOUS that his name might
even be mentioned. Given how hard you have worked to save racists, and express
your own racism. But because YOU exist... his works were necessary.
So in spite of how much you hate him, and all he stood for... his life was for those
such as YOU -- In the hope that you will somehow gain an insight into your own
racism and work to fashion your life in a more productive way to combat racism,
rather than working to build on it. That was the essence of what his life and works
meant, and you are still blind to that fact. Without those such as you, his work
would not have been necessary. Because without the racism that you, and others,
have in your heart, the cup of prejudice I spoke of, would already be empty. You,
and other racists such as you, are the reason it is not... and without you -- MLK's
life would not have taken on the meaning it has. Since you are the reason that cup
is still half-full. You are the yellow-eyed racist, still pouring out your vile
hate for others in keeping that cup of prejudice half-full. Yet... yet... pay close
attention now -- MLK's life was dedicated to changing YOU! Thus, I am sure that
somewhere, he still holds hope for you. Since that was his hope in life. Which
makes him far better than me... since "I" believe you will NEVER be able to remove
the shackles of racism which bind your very soul. Try reading the tribute again...
and then --- look in the mirror.... deeply.
>Of course, the above is a wonderfully effective, crushing blow to FuckWit's
>ego, and exposes him as the spiritual descendants of the Southern WASP
>racists.
You can rant and rave against me all you wish. But it was absolutely
clear that you were spitting in the face of MLK, and not me...when you
wrote those words. I am nothing... MLK was everything. I was nothing
in that post... MLK was everything in that post. You attacked those
WORDS... and in the process attacked the very meaning of MLK's
life. Shame...shame...shame... on you... you f**king racist swine.
> Which is precisely why it incited his rage, and pushed him not
>only into making it one of the main invocations of FuckWit Patented Gimmick
>(TM) N° 166, but also coming very close to being a FuckWit Fabrication.
>
I believe that your rage pushed you into your gimmick 166... that of BEGGING
the group to _vote_ for your racism... and if the group would not not.. you
insulted them by claiming they needed to 'redeem' themselves, and lacked
'backbone.' And then you demanded that they leave AADP if they did not
vote for your racism. To see your pathetic racist appeal to AADP... see your
words in --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_166.html
That begging, more than anything... demonstrated just how desperate you
then realized your situation was, in respect to no longer being able to hide your
own racism. Notice how many _votes_ your begging got you? NONE.
Not a single _vote_ for your racism.
>{ snip }
>
But of course. How typical.
>
>[1] sorry, 'post's' (sic) [2]
>[2] ROTFLMAO !!!
You have always LAUGHED at murder, and any expression of anti-racism.
That's why you've provided so many racist slurs, that proved to me you
were a racist long before you spit in the face of MLK. In fact, it was
only shortly after my first posts to this group... that I recognized you were
a "FUNDAMENTAL RACIST." See --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=wB1m5.2704%24Cc2.119579%40newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net
More than three years ago... I recognized in you what you fear the most...
exposure of your true racist nature. This is what has frightened you the
most about me... my ripping aside that gossamer veil you presume can
hide your idolatry of the most wicked, corrupt and immoral aspects that
humans can possess. And I have continued to rip it aside.. and WILL
continue to do so... While your insult to that tribute to MLK only
cemented the proof of your racism, since there is not a single word in
that post, or in any previous post of mine that would demonstrate MY
racism. But the proof of YOUR racism... is OVERWHELMING. In
effect, your attempts to destroy MLK, only resulted in your self-immolation
before the Gods of idolatry you so admire.
>* I missed an underscore here in the original article, which I have
> corrected in this copy
>
That doesn't change the fact you are a racist slimeball, Desmond. You
will need to 'correct' quite a bit more to shed that image. Not a pedantic
correction of 'English,' but a correction of your entire life's philosophy.
That is an immensely harder task before you. A challenge that I believe
is beyond you. You could begin by admitting your racist past... and
promising your Creator, your species, your countrymen, your neighbors,
and the members of AADP that you will in all of your future acts... respect
all races and all humans on this insignificant planet. But I will certainly not
'hold my breath' until you do.
PV
>--
>Des "the racist" Coughlan
A Planet Visitor
wrote:
>le Fri, 10 Oct 2003 16:29:39 GMT, dans l'article <dhndovsic2l5suls2...@4ax.com>, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a dit ...
>
>{ snip FuckWit Patented Gimmicks (TM) N酒 166, 68, and 172 ...
> url:http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/gimmicks/166.html
See desi beg the group to _vote_ for his racism -- see
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_166.html
> url:http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/gimmicks/68.html
See desi whine about being persecuted and chased from AADP -- see
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_68.html
> url:http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/gimmicks/172.html
See PV explain patiently to Desmond the difference between Murder
and the lawful DP --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_172.html
>}
>
>LOL ... is that all FuckWit can do now ??!! :-(
It appears that it is all you can do... Oh Nameless One.
PV
>
>--
>The Nameless One
Is PV obsessed with fighting 'evil'? Yes... he certainly is... when it comes to
fighting desi's 'forces of evil. 'Cancerous' is almost a compliment when one
views most of desi's comments -- other forms spring more easily to mind -- it
is a parasitic diarrhea of the brain... it is crazy chick disease transferred to our
thinking process -- it is a swarm of latrine flies settling on our ability to process
information --- it is maggots feasting on the bodies of numberless victims of
murder. It is madness. utter madness. It is Desmond Coughlan. He would
have us tremble before his inhuman posturing... but instead we must spit in
his face... ptooo...ptooo...ptooo.... just as he spit in the face of Martin Luther
King.. every Black American... and every murder victim. Contending that
punishing racist murderers was a "miscarriage of justice," and further stating
that he rejects the entire doctrine of punishment for murderers. See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/The_Racist_Desmond.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_145.html
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
>news:3r4eov8m8u5jje7m6...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 13:10:03 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> ><Mount...@nietzsche.com>
>> >??????:jg21ovofrms02s8uu...@4ax.com...
>> >> On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 19:59:25 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> [...]
>> >>
>> >> >I don't give a shit about Lustiger, one way or the other. Other than
>the
>> >> >fact he ADMITS he is a 'born Jew,' and is also NOT a follower of
>Judaism,
>> >> >but a high-ranking Roman Catholic prelate.
>> >>
>> >> He call call himself what he wants - as far as any religious Jew is
>> >> concerned, he is an apostate and no longer a Jew.
>> >>
>> >
>> >That's all PV... He first creates a thread on Lustiger and the way he
>calls
>> >himself, or others call himself, and then, realizing that the result
>isn't
>> >what he expected, he magistrally write "I don't give a shit about
>Lustiger,
>> >one way or the other."
>> >
>> >If so, I'd like PV to explain us what his purpose was by opening this
>> >thread.
>> >
>> Of course, you fruitcake. The entire thrust of my comment was based
>> on two principles, and only two --
>>
>> 1) Lustiger is a Cardinal in the Catholic prelate.
>> 2) Lustiger has stated that he is a Jew.
>>
>> Given those two conditions, it is obvious that Lustiger states he is a
>Jew,
>> because of his BIRTH. But it certainly makes no claim to my "great
>> esteem" for him... which does not exist, nor was it ever expressed by me.
>> He was 'BORN JEWISH.' He makes such a claim. My comment was
>> ONLY to refute those who claim that NO ONE can be 'BORN JEWISH.'
>> Simply that and nothing more. If you argue that he CANNOT be 'born
>> Jewish,' than you obviously MUST call him a liar. Is he a LIAR, to you?
>>
>> Lustiger could be a monster... and seems to be quite close to one. But he
>is
>> certainly NOT a Jew in following the orthodox views of Judaism, which was
>> argued as the ONLY way one could BE A JEW.
>>
>> Ol' Racist Nev made THIS STATEMENT -- "One is not 'born Jewish'
>> anymore than one is 'born Cathy' or 'born Athiest'!!" See --
>>
>"http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=a5ec705.0305010549.2586f62f%40posting.
>google.com
>> That particular comment generated a great deal of argument, since I
>contend
>> that reasonable people admit that one CAN claim to be a "BORN JEW,"
>> if they have a Hebrew ethnic descent, and make a claim to being Jewish,
>> regardless of any orthodox Judaism religious observance. Both the OED,
>> and the Encyclopedia Britannica, support my view. In other words...
>> one can claim to be 'born a Jew,' and be an atheist, is one chooses to do
>> so. Keep in mind, that Ol' Racist Nev said CANNOT... and I say CAN.
>> He does not say MUST NOT... nor do I say MUST. I do not say that
>> one having Hebrew descent MUST claim they are Jewish... I say that one
>> having Hebrew descent CAN claim they are Jewish...irrespective of
>> ANYTHING else. The 'Cardinal' serves to prove my point, and that point
>> has nothing to do with even if the 'Cardinal' were a murderer. He is, in
>fact,
>> NOT a Jew through religious beliefs, but he CLAIMS he is a Jew through
>> BIRTH.
>>
>> PV
>
>So MacGregor, a fourth generation American, can claim to be Scottish
>should he wish?
>
He can CLAIM to be anything he wishes. desi claims to be a fruitcake... and
we all agree with his claim. The point is... such a claim must have some
SUBSTANCE to it. If MacGregor actually traces his ethnic roots back
to those of Scottish, and wishes to assert those ethnic roots, are YOU
presuming he does not have the 'right' to do so? Isn't that a bit presumptuous
of you... demanding that YOUR views take precedence over HIS views of
his own ethnic roots? Now if Luigi Spumoni claims Scottish roots, but
all indications are that for centuries his family roots were in Italy, and he
cannot actually demonstrate having Scottish roots, it is laughable to believe
he can do so. Just as you or I cannot claim roots back to Africa, and claim
to be African... even though theory holds that our original roots probably
are African. When a person can clearly trace their ethnic descent, and
wish to do so, I see no reason to argue that they CANNOT do so. My
problem has always been that Ol' Racist Nev, and I presume you as well,
argue that a Jew CANNOT trace their ethnic roots back and claim to BE
BORN A JEW. Somehow... even in one generation it is presumed as
lost, as far as you are concerned... and in fact NO LONGER EXISTS,
in any form in respect to being 'born Jewish,' except in the form of an
orthodox belief in Judaism... and if a Jew abandons that religion, and
becomes an 'atheist,' say... that person can no longer claim to be Jewish.
This is absolutely ABSURD to me. It is as absurd to me as claiming that
there is no such human as a 'born Arab.'
PV
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
> Meanwhile I think I'll reprise some old threads I left hanging.
Please do. Your return so far has consisted of rote abuse and unilateral
declarations of victory which are both rather tedious, IMHO.
A Planet Visitor
>
>"danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
>??????:bm42os$1vm$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
>> "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:374c0f44d1e0d04a...@news.meganetnews.com...
>> > "danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
>> > ??????:bm148u$jpr$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
>
> [...]
>
>> No, I don't think so. Regardless of what little regard I personally have
>> for the RC church, one of their senior people recommending a murderer for
>> beatification is a message that borders on obscene.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> I suppose one should not be surprised that the RC church would honor a
>> murderer, given that that particular institution is responsible for more
>> murders, atrocities and abuses of human rights than any other. Possibly
>> more than all others together.
>
>This discussion puts me in an awkward situation, as I certainly wouldn't
>like to be looked as a defender of the Roman Catholic Church.
You've never been in any other situations but 'awkward,' with all of your
ignorant, pseudo-moralistic, semi-religious, pontificating drivel. Your words --
"Thanks for giving me the opportunity to stress the great moral qualities of
Lustiger..." If you intend to claim that wasn't intended to be a defender of
the RC Church, you're even a bigger liar than you've demonstrated
yourself to be in the past. See --
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dd7b24844c1b79d34bac9efbb48e2fcd%40news.meganetnews.com
<more ignorant, pseudo-moralistic, semi-religious, pontificating drivel clipped>
>> > If God exists, it is its job to balance the scales of good and evil.
>> > It's
>> > not a job men can do with all guarantees of justice and equity.
>>
>> If God exists, it can darn well do what it pleases. Since it chooses not
>> to
>> intervene to protect _any_ thus far executed, I can only presume it either
>> doesn't exist, doesn't give a rat's ass about balancing scales in
>> humansville or leaves it to humans to develop their own codes of conduct.
>>
>> [...]
>
>The fact that God does even not prevent crime should speak for itself.
>
Once again... you are obviously unfamiliar with 'free will.'
PV
>Euro
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:gq7eovkf255hclsdf...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 14:03:49 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> >If you litterally say that someone was "born Jew", you actually endorse
>> > the
>> >opinion of those who argued that there was a "Jewish race" based on their
>> >genetic or genealogic history.
>> >
>> Quite clearly, I endorse the opinion of a great many rational people who
>> find that the Jew has a long linage from His Hebrew ethnic roots. Why
>> would you attempt to inject 'genetics' into it... unless you have some
>> Nazi thoughts?
>
>Or unless _you_ have. I don't inject anything in a debate that stinks, and
>that you stubbornly repeatedly throw here, on this group. Do you have a
>problem with Jews? That's a question _you_ have to answer.
>
Why would you think that? My entire argument has been to give EXISTENCE
to the Jews. To not ERASE those murders committed in Dachau, and the
other death camps in WW II. Do you contend that the Jews should not
be given existence, as a people, but can only be a religion? If you'd bother to
actually read my comments you would find that my arguments have been
AGAINST those who I find wish to destroy the existence of the Jews... both
in body and soul. My arguments have been directed AGAINST anti-Semitism.
My argument is that a Jew can declare himself to BE a born Jew, if he can
demonstrate his Hebrew roots, even if he does NOT follow the religious Judaic
dogma. Cardinal Lustiger agrees with that... so are YOU calling him a liar?
My arguments have been in support of the U.S. policy which presumably
favors the Jews... since I believe without that support, Europe would simply
demonstrate its continued 'distaste' for the Jews, and not lift a finger if the Jews
in Israel were again threatened with extermination.
There is nothing in my entire body of posts here that would show I have anything
other than a problem with those who hate Jews... anti-Semites. Do you imply that
because someone SUPPORTS the EXISTENCE of the Jews, as a PEOPLE, rather
than a religion, is OPPOSED to that EXISTENCE? If so... that's about the craziest
concept you've ever developed (quite a stretch -- given the crazy concepts you've
developed).
Those who would DENY the possibility of such an EXISTENCE are the only
ones who would be attempting to ERASE that existence. Giving EXISTENCE to those
who perished in the holocaust is ESSENTIAL to recognizing that existence. Those
who would claim it was NOT an existence, expect to erase that existence. I am
certain you would not expect to argue that no one is 'born Arab.' Or would you?
The question is -- do YOU have a problem with my disgust with those who express
anti-Jewish sentiment? Or are you anti-Jewish yourself? That's a question _you_ have
to answer.
PV
>Euro
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:4g2fovs8vbc835jl1...@4ax.com...
>
>> >What I contest here to PV, is the fact that the origins of someone matter
>> >less than what this person is, and thinks, now. Lustiger's origins are
>> >interesting only as far as his positions on the dialogue between the
>> >Catholic Church and the Jewish religious authorities are concerned.
>> > Outside
>> >of this aspect, stressing his Jewish origins is potentially stinking.
>> >
>> What a load of anti-Semitic horseshit. That's what STINKS. You are
>> arguing that he CANNOT 'stress his Jewish origins,' because that is what
>> HE is doing.
>
>If you read carefully what I wrote above, you will find out that I argue
>nothing towards Lustiger, but towards you.
euro is Caught in a lie yet again! If you read your words again, you
will find that you certainly DID argue SOMETHING toward Lustiger --
Your words, just above -- "Lustiger's origins are interesting only as far
as his positions on the dialogue between the Catholic Church and the
Jewish religious authorities are concerned." You certainly ARE
arguing SOMETHING toward Lustiger, and not me.
And if YOU read carefully what you have written in the past... you will
find that you argued quite forcefully FOR Cardinal Lustiger and HIS
position... who as you... is simply another murderer-lover. Your words --
"Thanks for giving me the opportunity to stress the great moral qualities of
Lustiger..." See --
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dd7b24844c1b79d34bac9efbb48e2fcd%40news.meganetnews.com
> _You_ are pointing out to
>Lustiger's origins, and the question I raise is: do those origins disturb
>you?
>
Why should they? I support Jewish origins fully... it is the entire point of
my argument... the SUPPORT of those origins. It is WHY I pointed them
out. It is obvious that they DISTURB YOU!!! Since you are the one
having so fanatically objected to what he has fully, and proudly admitted.
That he is a born Jew. That is a FACT that disturbs YOU. And has
caused you to become rather frantic. Is that somehow connected to
a hate for the Jews by you? Is Lustiger somehow diminished in your
eyes because he claims to be a BORN JEW?
If you paid any attention whatsoever to the reason for my comment,
which had NOTHING to do with the presumed 'moral quality' (which
I find rather disgusting) of Lustiger, you would understand that it was
to rebut an argument that claimed NO ONE CAN BE BORN JEWISH.
It's as simple as that. The argument from another poster -- Ol' Racist
Nev -- was that the Jew is ONLY A RELIGION. Given that Lustiger
claims to BE BORN JEWISH, and obviously does not follow the orthodox
Judaic religion, he represents a COUNTER-EXAMPLE to the claim made
by Ol' Racist Nev, and others, that NO ONE CAN BE BORN JEWISH.
Recognizing your limited intellect, is it conceivable that you can follow this
line of thought, without presuming that I hold Lustiger up as some 'role
model for morality'? Since I do not. Nor has a single word of any of my
comments implied that I do. He is simply a high-ranking member of the
RC Clergy, and claims to be BORN JEWISH. And I believe any human
holding Hebrew descent has a RIGHT to make such a claim. I do not
presume that ALL JEWS are moral... nor that ALL JEWS are immoral, as
some anti-Semites here do..perhaps you among them. Is it possible that you
are thus fighting hard to deny that Lustiger is a Jew, because you feel that
doing so would 'tarnish' your claim that he is 'moral'?
>As for myself, I don't care.
Crap... you 'care' about Lustiger very much. You adore that murderer-lover...
because you are cut from the same mold. And perhaps there is a more
devious reason for you to argue against his claim to Jewish birth.
> The only thing worth saying about Lustiger in
>this newsgroup is that he argues for the beatification of Jacques Fesch, a
>proven murderer guillotined in France in 1957. Full point. The remaining is
>bad, potentially racist-minded polemics that _you_ raise.
>
Lustiger is the one that continues to raise it. My point is that he has. It is
only racist-minded polemics to DENY him being able to claim he
is JEWISH BY BIRTH. Your denial of his right to do so, regardless
of how you feel about him... states that you are calling HIM a liar...
not me... since I only report what he has claimed. And YOURS
is the argument that has vast anti-Semitic implications behind it.
Which could be seen as you presuming that Lustiger must keep HIDDEN
his Jewish roots, because of anti-Semites, as you seem to demand
that he must do.
>But, of course, we know that you call an anti-semitic racist anyone who
>disagrees with you. Gimmick n° 133 is here to remind it.
>http://www.chez.com/desmondcoughlan/dp/gimmicks/133.html
>
It's obvious that YOU are the one calling ME an anti-Semite racist,
for simply reporting what Lustiger himself has fully, and proudly
admitted to. But them... shhhh... it's euro... don't mention the Jews.
At each point in your presence here.. you seem determined to prove
just how disgusting you can become.
PV
>Euro
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:q6heovkk8u1li2hmo...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 19:19:52 +0100, "John Rennie" <j.re...@ntlworld.com>
>wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:6c454a937a36b5eb...@news.meganetnews.com...
>> >>
>> >> <Mount...@nietzsche.com>
>> >> ??????:jg21ovofrms02s8uu...@4ax.com...
>> >> > On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 19:59:25 GMT, A Planet Visitor
><abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > [...]
>> >> >
>> >> > >I don't give a shit about Lustiger, one way or the other. Other
>than
>> >the
>> >> > >fact he ADMITS he is a 'born Jew,' and is also NOT a follower of
>> >Judaism,
>> >> > >but a high-ranking Roman Catholic prelate.
>> >> >
>> >> > He call call himself what he wants - as far as any religious Jew is
>> >> > concerned, he is an apostate and no longer a Jew.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> That's all PV... He first creates a thread on Lustiger and the way he
>> >calls
>> >> himself, or others call himself, and then, realizing that the result
>isn't
>> >> what he expected, he magistrally write "I don't give a shit about
>> >Lustiger,
>> >> one way or the other."
>> >>
>> >> If so, I'd like PV to explain us what his purpose was by opening this
>> >> thread.
>> >>
>> >> Euro
>> >>
>> >
>> >It's to do with a thread or threads that you were not involved in.
>> >It's do with whether an American born in America 4th generation
>> >and is an atheist whose parents were atheists but has Jewish descent
>> >is a Jew even if he doesn't call himself one. To PV he is. To me he's
>> >an American.
>> >
>> While euro is an ass to everyone, since he presumed I held that Cardinal
>>in
>> 'high esteem,' and nothing in my comment gave the slightest indication
>>that
>> I did. euro is always willing to read something other than what is
>> written
>> into what is written.
>
>LOL!!! If it were true, I guess I would just look too much like you, then.
There is no way that you could 'look too much like' me, euro. I am not
in favor of elevating a murderer to Catholic sainthood, as you seem determined
to favor in your love for murderers.
>Poor PV, always the pot calling the kettle back. The advantage, with you, is
>that one only needs to open one of your postings to laugh.
>
You really didn't say anything there, euro. Just what has always been
seen from you... not much of anything
>Tell us, since you don't hold the Cardinal Lustiger in great esteem ("one of
>the more prominent possibilities of being elected the new Pope",
ROTFLMAO... the CURRENT POPE is an idiot. Does that answer your
question in respect to Cardinal Lustiger's possibilities of election to that
same seat? Bush is one of the more 'prominent possibilities of being
elected President again,' and I barf at the prospect. Whatever reasoning
power I expect from those I post to here... seems to desert you completely,
in your absurd conclusions gleaned in your ignorance from my remarks.
My remarks which provide not the slightest intent to convey what you presume
my words convey.
> to recall
>your words - a comment that you took from God knows where, but that was not
>meant to show your disdain to Cardinal Lustiger anyway), why did you
>initiate a thread on him?
>
Once again.. John Rennie has explained it (see where he says -- "It's to
do with a thread or threads that you were not involved in"?)... I have
explained it. Now, I will explain it yet again. Although I simply am
unable to dumb-down my comment any further, thus it STILL might
fly right over your head, unless you ask for your mommy's help. -
------------------------------------------------
My Original words - "Given that so many Europeans believe that no
human being can be a 'born Jew,' it's rather insightful that the Cardinal
proclaims even today that "I am a Jew!" while obviously not observing
the orthodox religious following of Judaism. Is there a European who
would deny his claim that 'he is a Jew'?"
Apparently that European is YOU... and YOU are calling HIM a liar.
This was followed by a much more concise explanation of my comments,
in response to some of your various ravings --
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>It so happens that those, in Europe, that are eager to stress Lustiger's
>Jewish origins, have connexions with anti-semitic extreme right.
What a huge gob of anti-Semitic raving. Now you would deny the
Cardinal can stress his own Jewish origins, in HIS OWN WORDS, which
WERE == "Parce que je suis Juif." "Because I am a Jew." and
presume that only those who are anti-Semites point out the fact that
he is a 'born Jew.' In fact, you accuse HIM of anti-Semitism because of
HIS stressing those Jewish roots. You are again proving exactly what
I mean about European viewpoints. You see something EVIL behind
any claim of being a 'born Jew.' While he admits he IS a 'born Jew,'
you would think he needs to 'hide his Jewish roots,' and any mention
of them... must be from anti-Semites. Do you find L'Express -
anti-Semitic? From --
http://www.lexpress.fr/Express/Info/Societe/Dossier/juifs/dossier.asp
The opening words in speaking of him -- "Juif de naissance.." "Jew by birth."
While there are 632 URLs in google that speak of Cardinal Lustiger as
a "Jew by birth." Yet you believe it is something not 'spoken of in France'
unless one is an anti-Semite!!!
You make it appear that he only BECAME a humanitarian (whether
he is or isn't is beside the point, and has nothing to do with this
dialog- you seem to think he is -- but he could well be a total shit as
far as I'm concerned), when he SET ASIDE his 'Jewish roots,' and
became the Christian you so admire. Little wonder that the European
method in respect to the Jews... has been conversion...expulsion...
extermination. Given that his mother was one of those who perished
in the ovens of Auschwitz, because of rampant anti-Semitism in Europe,
perhaps he found 'conversion' preferable to the latter choices. I have
a feeling I would, as well. But now I sense that your anti-Americanism
is rooted in the same source of other Europeans I have seen here... the
belief that the U.S. is 'run by the Jews,' thus the U.S. is an object of hate,
not really against 'Americans,' but against those 'Jews who run America,'
in your sickening view.
You ignorant evil...ignorant evil... piece of slime.
> Others
>don't care for that, and most of the French, who, contrary to you, have been
>acquainted with Lustiger for more than 20 years (he became archbishop of
>Paris in 1981), don't even know this detail.
>
'This DETAIL'??? That 'minor detail'?? Once again... you are certainly expressing
some clear anti-Semitic feelings. Cardinal Lustiger is quite proud of his Jewish
roots. While you find it is something he should be 'ashamed of,' and hide that
'minor detail' from everyone.
http://www.cin.org/archives/cinjust/200108/0015.html
Do you think that Elie Weitzel is an anti-Semite??? Weitzel has written
of Lustiger long before he was elevated to Cardinal -- "he insists that
having been born a Jew, he will die a Jew." Come on... tell me that
Elie Weitzel is an 'extreme right-wing anti-Semite.'
>Bringing this back to topic, you will be pleased to know that Lustiger is a
>staunch opponent to capital punishment, mainly for religious reasons.
Given that the DP is a secular penalty for a secular crime, his views have
no meaning in that sense. If a murderer expects 'redemption,' from a
spiritual source... he can expect to find it elsewhere than on Planet Earth.
> It is
>funny to see that you seem to put him in great esteem,
Where did you get that impression? My argument has been SOLELY that
he does not embrace the orthodox religious dogma of Judaism, yet claims
to be a 'born Jew.' This is a direct refutation of Ol' Racist Nev's claim that
"One is not 'born Jewish' anymore than one is 'born Cathy' or 'born Athiest'!!"
See --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=a5ec705.0305010549.2586f62f%40posting.google.com
There has been a long running dialog here, regarding the belief of some
Europeans that there is 'no such human as a born Jew.' Presuming that
'being Jewish' is ONLY a religion. The existence of Cardinal Lustiger,
rather disproves that, in his own words. Nor do I really give a shit how
he feels about ANYTHING in respect to Catholic or Jewish religious
dogma. Yet you continually distort my words, as here, where I make
no claim to holding him in 'high esteem.' I am only making the point that he
IS a 'high-ranking' Catholic, who CLAIMS to be Jewish by birth. Thus,
disproving the claim made by Ol' Racist Nev and others. Unless you
wish to call the 'good Cardinal' a LIAR.
> while, a few weeks
>ago, you violently blasted someone who developped anti-DP arguments based on
>his religious beliefs
>(http://groups.google.com/groups?&selm=1bmqkv8fe561kkijnvv8ge07hcl3m8obvk%40
>4ax.com, quoting you: "Nothing pisses me off more than a sanctimonious
>religious fruitcake... of any persuasion...").
>
Given that I find beliefs in the dogma of ALL man-made religions to be absurd,
it has nothing to do with this particular dialog. When will you understand that
I am simply demonstrating that the Cardinal... by his OWN ADMISSION is a
'born Jew,' yet is obviously NOT a follower of Judaism... thus, disputing the
idea that one cannot be a 'born Jew'? Unless you wish to call him a liar... in
which case I call you an anti-Semite for doing so. Once again.. I have made
NO implication that I 'hold the Cardinal in high esteem.' I am simply pointing
out he HAS claimed to be 'born Jewish,' and he is obviously NOT a follower
of Judaism. Thus.. there is the logical conclusion that you must ACCEPT
that someone can be 'born Jewish,' or call the 'good Cardinal' a liar. Your
choice. And it has NOTHING to do with my 'holding him in high esteem.'
Given that I hold NO ONE in 'high esteem' who believes in the dogma of a
man-made religion, because of his believing in such dogma. I find it
stupid in EVERY case.
>One could have thought that nothing pissed you off more than Lustiger...
I don't give a shit about Lustiger, one way or the other. Other than the
fact he ADMITS he is a 'born Jew,' and is also NOT a follower of Judaism,
but a high-ranking Roman Catholic prelate.
>Probably one of your usual "seasonal variations" that explains why your
>opinions in autumn differ from your opinions in summer, which in turn
>differed from your opinions in spring.
>
I never expressed an 'opinion' of him one way or the other. I only
referred to HIS WORDS... which dispute the claim made by Ol'
Racist Nev, and some others. Do YOU believe a person can be
a 'born Jew,' and not be a follower of Judaism? If so... then it is
your task to call Ol' Racist Nev, and some others LIARS! Because
they argue a person CANNOT... while I claim a person CAN.
>You will also note that Lustiger is, in France, one of the prominent
>activists for the beatification of Jacques Flesch, sentenced to death and
>executed in France in 1957 for the murder of a police officer following a
>bungled robbery.
>
>http://www.catholicdigest.org/stories/200108106a.html
>
HO HO HO -- Once again --- "Nothing pisses me off more than a
sanctimonious religious fruitcake... of any persuasion..." That's now
YOU!! While demonstrating that the 'good Cardinal' is just another
'murderer lover.' It figures...
>Thanks for giving me the opportunity to stress the great moral qualities of
>Lustiger, which, by contrast, only displays your lack of such qualities
>(apart from the fact that, by talking about Lustiger, you once again
>displayed much ignorance of the subjects you address).
>
I don't see any 'moral quality' in presuming to 'beautify' (what an UGLY
word for a murderer) a TRUE murderer. But given that you hold murderers
in higher esteem than innocent slaves, I can see how you would agree with
him. I find that the 'conversion' of this rather cruel and selfish murderer
leaves me cold, given the fact that 'there are no atheists in the foxhole.' Faced
with his execution, it is quite unextraordinary, and rather cowardly, that he
would hope for 'redemption' from somewhere other than this temporal world -
for the murder he committed Since it was all that was left for him. I would
think the 'good Cardinal' would try to 'beautify' EVERY innocent slave who
ever turned to "mystical experience, ...fervent spirituality, ... self-conquest, and
...victorious battle against the demons of bitterness and despair," in alleviating
some of THEIR pain and suffering, before turning to 'love' a TRUE
MURDERER. Especially a murderer who seemed more concerned with HIS
FATE, than the fate of his victim... in his words in his diary -- "but good Jesus,
help me!... Only five hours to live! In five hours, I shall see Jesus.” How many
innocent slaves do you think have not felt the SAME? Where is the 'good
Cardinal's' sense for THEIR PAIN?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
End of that post --
NOW -- If you paid any attention whatsoever to the reason for my comment,
which had NOTHING to do with the presumed 'moral quality' (which
I find rather disgusting) of Lustiger, you would understand that it was
to rebut an argument that claimed NO ONE CAN BE BORN JEWISH.
It's as simple as that. The argument from another poster -- Ol' Racist
Nev -- was that the Jew is ONLY A RELIGION, and had no REAL
EXISTENCE in the sense of the Jew being a PERSON... but simply
a 'follower of a religion.' If you find that there is 'something wrong' with
arguing that a Jew is a PERSON...and not just a RELIGION ... then
YOU are the anti-Semite.... and worse.
Given that Lustiger claims to BE BORN JEWISH, and obviously does not
follow the orthodox Judaic religion, he represents a COUNTER-EXAMPLE
to the claim made by Ol' Racist Nev, and others, that NO ONE CAN BE
BORN JEWISH. Recognizing your limited intellect, is it conceivable that you
can follow this line of thought, without presuming that I hold Lustiger up as
some 'role model for morality'? Since I do not. Nor has a single word of
any of my comments implied that I do. He is simply a high-ranking member
of the RC Clergy, and claims to be BORN JEWISH. And I believe any
human holding Hebrew descent has a RIGHT to make such a claim. I do not
presume that ALL JEWS are moral... nor that ALL JEWS are immoral, as
some anti-Semites here do..perhaps you among them. Is it possible that you
are thus fighting hard to deny that Lustiger is a Jew, because you feel that
doing so would 'tarnish' your claim that he is 'moral'?
PV
>Euro
>--------------------------
>""A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:1o0unvkr0p9hf26q1...@4ax.com...
>> One wonders if Europeans consider Jean-Marie Lustiger, the
>> newly selected Cardinal of Paris, and one of the more prominent
>> possibilities of being elected the new Pope, is a 'born Jew.'
>> http://www.hackwriters.com/Lustiger.htm"
>
Obviously, anti-Semites such as you, reject that idea totally... even
though Cardinal Lustiger himself is the originator of that claim. So
those anti-Semites, and you - are calling him a liar. Plain and simple.
Strange that you would call him 'moral,' and also call him a 'liar.'
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:0kueovoqiq2htae85...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 13:04:43 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com>
>> >??????:blrt3u$i5l$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
>> >> "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:58d034a21bb1fc54...@news.meganetnews.com...
>> >>
>> >> [...]
>> >>
>> >> Lustiger suggested the
>> >> > beatification of Flesch, and he has very good reasons for so doing.
>> >>
>> >> What are those reasons? Certainly there have been thousands if not
>> >millions
>> >> of Catholics who have experienced religious conversion who have not
>been
>> >> nominated for beatification. Why single out a murderer? Why is Flesch
>to
>> >> be considered blessed and worthy of public honor among Catholics? -
>> >> especially above non-murderers. The whole thing is very curious and
>I'd
>> >> like to understand that those "very good reasons" are.
>> >
>> >There are several ways to answer your questions, Daniel. If you read the
>URL
>> >I gave (http://www.catholicdigest.org/stories/200108106a.html), you will
>> >find the religious ones ("Those who seek Fesch's beatification point to
>his
>> >mystical experience, his fervent spirituality, his self-conquest, and his
>> >victorious battle against the demons of bitterness and despair"). One
>might
>> >add, for those who believe in God, that the Bible stresses itself that
>the
>> >kingdom of god is promised to those who did evil things but realized this
>> >before dying and tried to redeem themselves. All those are reasons that
>> >followers of the Catholic church would find very good ones to justify a
>> >beatification.
>> >
>> LOL... What a HYPOCRITE you are, euro. What an ABSOLUTE
>> HYPOCRITE.
>
>Did you manage to make the difference between "beatify" and "beautify"?
>
Yeah... you think murderers are 'beautiful,' and thus you hope all murderers are
'beautified,' and because those murderers often 'beat' their victims to death, you
also hope they are 'beatified,' by the RC Church. You murderer lover. It seems
you are more concerned with Catholic dogma than you care to admit. I really
believe you are a 'closet Catholic,' but need to put up another image here... to 'fit
in' with the other Godless abolitionists, who presume that only MURDERERS
have the God-like ability to take a life. Just another ignorant, pseudo-moralistic,
semi-religious, pontificating fruitcake... posting to AADP.
PV
>Euro
A Planet Visitor
>On 10/10/03 19:14, in article 97qdovslfh6rgtfpk...@4ax.com, "A
>Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
>
>>> Nor I. In tribal man, exclusion from the group was fairly close to being
>>> a death penalty.
>>>
>> Quite clearly the reason for the formation of tribes, themselves.
>
>Clarify unless you are joking!
>
>
>
>>> With regard to life imprisonment, this is not exactly the same but close to
>>> it. Social rather than physical death is involved.
>
>> Huh??? The 'social structure' within prisons is very clearly defined!
>
>Not from what we observe.
I recall you claiming how 'child-molesters' had to be especially careful...
because of that 'social structure' within French prisons, which exacted
'prison justice,' when the chance appeared.
>It can change rapidly sometimes for the worse and
>that is because is lacks being "very clearly defined".
>
Rubbish... the 'changes' are defined within that structure. The U.S.
government changes rapidly sometimes, upon the assumption of a new
administration.. but the structure itself -- is 'clearly defined.' In prison..
that 'clear definition' is that the 'weak' are obsequious to the 'strong.'
Or pay the penalty of that 'very clearly defined' social structure. That
definition does not change. Only the personalities shift.
PV
>Earl
>
>
A Planet Visitor
>On 11/10/03 7:36, in article 4g2fovs8vbc835jl1...@4ax.com, "A
>Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
>
>A quirky guy who still keeps quirky hours
>
>"Sat, 11 Oct 2003 01:36:31 EDT"
>
LOL... A 'quirky' guy is one who obsesses over the hours that
another keeps. The fact is I am way...way behind in my posting here...
PV
>
>Earl
A Planet Visitor
wrote:
>le Mon, 13 Oct 2003 11:58:53 GMT, dans l'article <1swib.148886$bo1.1...@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, Mr Q. Z. Diablo <sa...@dodo.com.au> a dit ...
>
>>>> At the risk of ending all debate, I agree entirely. There's no value
>>>> in condemning a continent, however true the charges are. I don't bash
>>>> Europe and I have little use for those who bash the U.S., especially
>>>> one self loathing expatriate who seems to have a lopsided view of
>>>> nearly all things U.S.
>
>>> Yeah, where _is_ Vlad ??
>
>> Tossing himself off over pictures of dead bodies, surely?
>
>What ??!! Vlad is an alias of FuckWit ????!!!!
>
You're the only one who gets a 'woody' gazing at pictures of a dead and
decaying corpse, Oh Nameless One. Remember the spanking I applied
to you, when you posted those links to those pictures?
PV
>--
>The "I love gazing at corpses" Nameless One
A Planet Visitor
wrote:
>le Mon, 13 Oct 2003 14:07:08 GMT, dans l'article <153c5ca1a9271242...@news.meganetnews.com>, Euro <vs...@hotmail.com> a dit ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> LOL... I just KNEW that you were a 'religious fruitcake.'
>
>> Quoting PV,
>> (http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=mv4eovc41pif2r8lgn9fpt5nmm9mu9hetu@4ax
>> .com)
>>
>> "My 'authority' lies within the
>> principles expressed by 'your good friend Jesus..' who every so often
>> made an insightful remark... such as when he noted in John 3:20 that
>> "Everyone who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light,
>> lest his deeds should be exposed." My job is to bring your evil into the
>> light... to expose that evil. Nothing more than that. Live with it. "
>>
>> And you're a presumptuous crank who believes that God gave him a mission...
>
SLURP... SLURP... SLURP... up goes that 'sperm count.'
>LOL, thanks for that, Euro ! I hadn't seen that particular 'quote' (sic)
>by FuckWit. Quite surprising, all things considered, that he frequently
>lies (no, really ??!!) about bringing his religious mores into the death
>penalty debate, and ramming them down others' throats.
So now "Jesus" is an object of derision. How typical of murderer-lovers
to hate someone who expressed thoughts which have such 'moral'
significance. What's next? Islamic stoning of Mother Theresa claiming
she was 'morally corrupt' because she touched a man? Or possibly a
prohibition on quoting Plato, or Aesop, or a thousand other 'moral'
philosophers. Or would you deny that the various sayings of Jesus
do not represent some 'moral' philosophy? Funny, I quote Jesus... and
euro and you fly into a frenzied paroxysm of hate for him... while you
both express so much admiration for murderers. Who would you two
quote? Ted Bundy? Little wonder that murderer-lovers are seen as
Godless creatures, devoid of every 'moral' instinct known to our species.
Clearly.. both you and euro... certainly DO need to be 'brought into
the light.' Because your deeds are being exposed here. Given that
you've stated YOUR character is more base than Theodore Frank's,
and euro has stated he sees no difference between murderers and
non-murderers... no reason whatsoever to 'separate' them in any
sense of their acts.
Of course the FRIEND of both you and euro is the murderer lover Cardinal
Lustiger. He is the murderer lover, quite unlike Jesus, that euro remarked
"Thanks for giving me the opportunity to stress the great moral qualities of
Lustiger..." See --
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dd7b24844c1b79d34bac9efbb48e2fcd%40news.meganetnews.com.
You and euro and the murderer lover Cardinal form the trifecta of 'murderer
lovers' in AADP. Because I quote (a noun - you illiterate fruitcake) the words
of someone does not presume that I am their follower. Either Jesus or
Lustiger. As my quoting the words of Cardinal Lustiger where he claims to be
a BORN JEW... does not mean I hold him in esteem. I obviously DO
NOT.
Of course we have YOUR lack of character to examine --
Your LAUGHING at murder -
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_100.html
Your admission that your character is more base than Theodore Frank --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_4.html
Your expressed joy at picturing yourself torturing and killing retentionists -
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_150.html
Your imagining yourself as a murderer who wishes he had raped first --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_171.html
And your love for a racist murderer --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_71.html
PV
>--
>Desi (I "LOVE" to look at a corpse) Coughlan
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:4ceuovce5l18u0og5...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 10:11:40 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
> >??????:4g2fovs8vbc835jl1...@4ax.com...
> >
> >> >What I contest here to PV, is the fact that the origins of someone
matter
> >> >less than what this person is, and thinks, now. Lustiger's origins are
> >> >interesting only as far as his positions on the dialogue between the
> >> >Catholic Church and the Jewish religious authorities are concerned.
> >> > Outside
> >> >of this aspect, stressing his Jewish origins is potentially stinking.
> >> >
> >> What a load of anti-Semitic horseshit. That's what STINKS. You are
> >> arguing that he CANNOT 'stress his Jewish origins,' because that is
what
> >> HE is doing.
> >
> >If you read carefully what I wrote above, you will find out that I argue
> >nothing towards Lustiger, but towards you.
>
> euro is Caught in a lie yet again! If you read your words again, you
> will find that you certainly DID argue SOMETHING toward Lustiger --
"What I contest here to PV, is the fact that the origins of someone matter
less than what this person is, and thinks, now. "
I wrote this above. Don't try to twist my words, or at least have the
frankness to recognize that you're too illitterate to understand your mother
language.
> Your words, just above -- "Lustiger's origins are interesting only as far
> as his positions on the dialogue between the Catholic Church and the
> Jewish religious authorities are concerned." You certainly ARE
> arguing SOMETHING toward Lustiger, and not me.
My words, just above, mean that there is no reason to stress Lustiger's
origins outside than in the context of the dialogue between the Roman
Catholic Church and the Jewish religious authorities. That is clear. Trying
to twist it to any other meaning is useless.
Euro
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:rgauovs1nm421v3ku...@4ax.com...
Tell me, PV, how one can interprete the fact of defending the person of one
cardinal as the fact of defending a whole institution that goes much beyond
a single cardinal, without ending with a huge distortion?
The liar is you. Full point. When I stress the moral qualities of a
cardinal, there is no way one can affirm I defend the Catholic Church.
And besides, would it be a shame to defend the Roman Catholic Church? If
that's what you mean, do have the courage to stand up and insult all the
Catholics that, by any chance, may read you.
Euro
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:agcuovcu3ed7d51t3...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 03:03:36 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
> >??????:gq7eovkf255hclsdf...@4ax.com...
> >> On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 14:03:49 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> >If you litterally say that someone was "born Jew", you actually
endorse
> >> > the
> >> >opinion of those who argued that there was a "Jewish race" based on
their
> >> >genetic or genealogic history.
> >> >
> >> Quite clearly, I endorse the opinion of a great many rational people
who
> >> find that the Jew has a long linage from His Hebrew ethnic roots. Why
> >> would you attempt to inject 'genetics' into it... unless you have some
> >> Nazi thoughts?
> >
> >Or unless _you_ have. I don't inject anything in a debate that stinks,
and
> >that you stubbornly repeatedly throw here, on this group. Do you have a
> >problem with Jews? That's a question _you_ have to answer.
> >
> Why would you think that?
Well... because of what you post. Your original thread about Lustiger
sounded very much like "Look at Lustiger... He's a Jew!"
How disgusting...
Euro
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:9qhuovsl7d00677ao...@4ax.com...
(snipped)
>
> There is no way that you could 'look too much like' me, euro. I am not
> in favor of elevating a murderer to Catholic sainthood, as you seem
determined
> to favor in your love for murderers.
Obviously, today, PV decided again to be "vile and insane" and resorted to
his usual set of insults. And you'll see that, in the end, I'll be called an
anti-Semite as well.
"Apparently you find nothing offensive about the word 'deathies.'
If that's the case, I would hope you never comment on your
perception of the offensiveness of the phrase 'murderer lover.'
They are, of course, ONE AND THE SAME... equally vile,
equally insane. Being perverse in one direction, does not
make it right to be perverse in the opposite direction."
PV,
www.google.com/groups?&selm=a_bj8.102512%24Dl4.10290500%40typhoon.tampabay.r
r.com
(long snip... about 15 K of PV's usual hysterical diatribes)
> Obviously, anti-Semites such as you, reject that idea totally...
Nah, you see? True anti-Semites will thank you, PV, for trivializing
anti-Semitism by an exaggerated use of that word.
Euro
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:tbmuovs6m3i1q496g...@4ax.com...(snipped)
> >
> >Did you manage to make the difference between "beatify" and "beautify"?
> >
> Yeah... you think murderers are 'beautiful,' and thus you hope all
murderers are
> 'beautified,' and because those murderers often 'beat' their victims to
death, you
> also hope they are 'beatified,' by the RC Church.
Poor PV... Insults, insults, that's all you can bring here. Of course you
can't offer any URL where I wrote anything like what you wrote above. I
shall hence conclude that it is a by-product of your "insane and vile" mind
("insane and vile" are your own words).
Now, of course, you can still say that when you wrote about "beautifying
Fesch", you were speaking metaphorically... I do notice that the older you
grow, the more you tend to make flat metaphors. I guess it's the stage
before blowing bubbles.
Euro
---------------------------------
PV: "Apparently you find nothing offensive about the word 'deathies.'
If that's the case, I would hope you never comment on your
perception of the offensiveness of the phrase 'murderer lover.'
They are, of course, ONE AND THE SAME... equally vile,
equally insane. Being perverse in one direction, does not
make it right to be perverse in the opposite direction."
www.google.com/groups?&selm=a_bj8.102512%24Dl4.10290500%40typhoon.tampabay.r
r.com
FitzHerbert
> >>> LOL... I just KNEW that you were a 'religious fruitcake.'
>
> >> Quoting PV,
> >> (http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=mv4eovc41pif2r8lgn9fpt5nmm9mu9hetu@4ax
> >> .com)
> >>
> >> "My 'authority' lies within the
> >> principles expressed by 'your good friend Jesus..' who every so often
> >> made an insightful remark... such as when he noted in John 3:20 that
> >> "Everyone who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light,
> >> lest his deeds should be exposed." My job is to bring your evil into the
> >> light... to expose that evil. Nothing more than that. Live with it. "
> >>
> >> And you're a presumptuous crank who believes that God gave him a mission...
> >
> SLURP... SLURP... SLURP... up goes that 'sperm count.'
>
> >LOL, thanks for that, Euro ! I hadn't seen that particular 'quote' (sic)
> >by FuckWit. Quite surprising, all things considered, that he frequently
> >lies (no, really ??!!) about bringing his religious mores into the death
> >penalty debate, and ramming them down others' throats.
>
> So now "Jesus" is an object of derision.
Interesting statement, FW. Especially if one considers how you get
'wood' every time you so much as touch a bible. I think Marlowe
described JHC best when he ventured: "[He] was a bastard and his
mother was dishonest".
<snip more bible-thumping from FW>
> form the trifecta
*snort*
Have you been pinching pens from Ladbroke's again?
> of 'murderer lovers' in AADP. Because I quote (a noun - you illiterate
> fruitcake) the words
Er, no, FW. You appear to be using the word 'quote' as a _verb_...
Hope this helps,
Neville
FitzHerbert
> In article <f85d58f0.0310...@posting.google.com>, FitzHerbert wrote:
>
> > Meanwhile I think I'll reprise some old threads I left hanging.
>
> Please do. Your return so far has consisted of rote abuse and unilateral
> declarations of victory which are both rather tedious, IMHO.
In that case, I won't reprise any: just to spite you! So there,
na-naa-nana-naa!
> Mr Q. Z. D.
Yrs,
Cordially,
Neville FitzHerbert, esq.
P.s. why do you now disapprove of "rote abuse" of the FuckWit? Without
it, this group will die. Have you thought about that, sir?
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:6n4eov0pamemabgip...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 12:54:13 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> I don't see any 'moral quality' in presuming to 'beautify' (what an
>UGLY
>> >> word for a murderer) a TRUE murderer.
>> >
>> >That was beatify, not beautify.
>>
>> LOL... I just KNEW that you were a 'religious fruitcake.'
>
>Quoting PV,
>(http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=mv4eovc41pif2r8lgn9fpt5nmm9mu9hetu@4ax
>.com)
>
>"My 'authority' lies within the
>principles expressed by 'your good friend Jesus..' who every so often
>made an insightful remark... such as when he noted in John 3:20 that
>"Everyone who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light,
>lest his deeds should be exposed." My job is to bring your evil into the
>light... to expose that evil. Nothing more than that. Live with it. "
>
>And you're a presumptuous crank who believes that God gave him a mission...
>
I know how difficult this is for you to understand... but quoting the words
of a 'moral philosopher,' does not mean I am a 'religious fanatic' as you are.
Did you find the meaning of his words difficult for you to understand?
I was trying to express a moral philosophy that you SHOULD embrace... One
that I have recognized you reject. Given that you reject a moral philosophy that
recognizes that those who 'do evil' need to have that evil exposed, I understand
how you would despise my quoting a moral philosophy from ANYONE who
would presume that 'evil should be exposed.' You are recognized as in favor
of 'keeping evil hidden' from view. Thus, I presume that you would more fully
recognize THIS quote as a 'moral philosophy' YOU embrace -- "
"And I can fight only for something that I love, love only what I respect, and
respect only what I at least know."
Sound like your opposition to the DP? Sure does... the author of those words --
Why Adolf Hitler, of course.
PV
>Euro
>
A Planet Visitor
>On 14/10/03 8:14, in article vv4novc6noqaefo9s...@4ax.com, "A
>Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
>
>>>> Why??? Are you now presuming that 'religion' has some 'say' in
>>>> the secular operations of the State?
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>> Thank you for demonstrating your ignorance in things of a secular matter.
>> Obviously, murder means nothing to you... but I already knew that. If
>> 'religion' plays such a large part... then let's simply presume murderers
>> will find their 'just reward' in the role that religion plays... that of
>> 'another world.' And we'll handle their secular penalties in 'this world.'
>
>
>I responded that religion has some effect on the secular operations of the
>State.
>
For the first time in recorded Usenet history, Earl has correctly pointed
out that I did not accurately express myself.
Of course there ARE societies in which 'religion' has some say! My meaning
could have been more accurately stated as --
"Why??? Are you now presuming that 'religion' [SHOULD HAVE] some
'say' in the secular operations of the State?"
Offering a question to Earl, and certainly not attempting to state a FACT
that no State uses 'religion' as a secular instrument of the State. I don't
think anyone actually believes that I think NO State uses 'religion' as a
secular instrument in State policy. Too many Muslim dominated
secular states exist to even begin to believe I would think such.
>Now you translated "some" into "If 'religion' plays such a large part."
>
No, Earl... I simply translated your single word answer of "yes," into
a conclusion that you were answering the question as I believed I
had presented it. Given that my question was inaccurately posed,
your answer of "yes," is quite valid. Now... perhaps you might offer
an opinion as to whether you AGREE or DO NOT AGREE with the
question that I wished to actually pose to you.
>You have a practice of overstating things for argumentative purposes.
>
>The role of religion in the State depends on each culture. One size does
>not fit all. Religion plays a role in the culture and the culture
>formulates the laws. Colonial laws in the US were certainly religiously
>ěnfluenced, after all the DP was inflected for sodomy and bestiality,
>clearly old testament Biblical crimes.
>
>Next, it is a dodge to say that the secular arm of the State administers
>the DP, that religious authorities are not involved in the process.
No more so than any other lobby which all exert influence on the
decisions made by legislators in the creation of laws. In fact, I am
quite certain that the lobbies created in opposition to the DP have
a much stronger influence and exert a great deal more effort than
do religious organizations. Amnesty, The ACLU, Equal Justice USA,
The National Coalition to Abolish the DP, the ABA, the DPIC, and
so many other groups at the individual State level, such as see --
http://people.smu.edu/rhalperi/statelinks.html
lobbying for the abolition of the DP. What is a dodge is to claim that
administering the DP is a religious ritual, as you imply.
>The Catholic Church continues to try this dodge in getting around
>its role in the DP during the Inquisition.
>
>In the US today, most fundamental of the Protestant groups, the Southern
>Baptists are pro-DP, largely because they adhere to the old testament.
>That support for the DP is heaviest in the South.
Talk about "a practice of overstating things for argumentative purposes."
The more intelligent and 'cultured' you believe yourself to be... the greater
amount of humbug you emit. You juggle 'facts' to suit your opinion. The
FACT is that the murder rate is heaviest in the South... which is the
contributing factor to the use of the DP. Nonetheless, you now demonstrate
a bigotry beyond belief... implying that 'Southern Baptists,' are 'evil,' because
they might support capital punishment. Religion has no place in secular
law. But PEOPLE... irrespective of their religious beliefs have a right to
be part of the decisions that are made in secular law. The use of the DP
is not based on BIBLICAL law in any place in the U.S. It is all grounded
in secular STATUTES based on decisions made by legislative bodies
sworn to the separation of Church and State in the creation of such
criminal statutes. When there is NO SUCH SEPARATION, is when
it enters the realm of the obscene.
PV
>
>Earl
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:6n4eov0pamemabgip...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 12:54:13 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > We know, however, that no one could neither
>> >beatify, nor beautify you. It happens, however, that Lustiger suggested
>> >the
>> >beatification of Flesch, and he has very good reasons for so doing.
>> >
>> I would expect you to believe that... since you both appear to be
>> murderer-lovers.
>
>I note, PV, that you are the one who began a thread on this newsgroup on a
>"murderer lover". I guess you must like to shed light on that category of
>people.
>
Yes... I certainly do wish to 'shed the light' of TRUTH, onto those
who express such affection for murderers as both you and Cardinal
Lustiger. You because you find murderers to be JUST LIKE innocent
slaves... because you find you cannot 'separate' murderers from
non-murderers... and because you believe John Wayne Gacy has the
SAME 'human right' to freedom that an innocent slave has... in
addition to the many other loving tributes you have offered in support
of murderers. Cardinal Lustiger because he suggests the 'elevation'
of a murderer to a highly revered position within the RC Church, while
totally ignoring the works of those who NEVER murdered.
>Not me. In this way, we notably don't have the same values.
Of course we do not... I Thank God we do NOT!! I do not hold
murderers in such esteem that it becomes an obsessive hero-worship,
as you do. I do not believe it is 'moral' to raise a murderer to 'sainthood,'
as you believe. I do not believe that murderers are JUST LIKE
innocent slaves as you believe. I would instantly release an innocent
slave from slavery before I would release a murderer from the DP,
if I had such power, which you would not. I do not believe that John
Wayne Gacy... murderer of more than 30 children... had the SAME
'human right' to FREEDOM that innocent slaves have. I CAN
EASILY 'separate' murderers from non-murderers, as you contend
you cannot. I certainly value 40,000 innocent lives more than a paltry
number of lives of executed murderers, while you do not find relevance
in such a valuation. I Thank a munificent Creator that he has not
burdened me with the moral afflictions that consume you...
PV
>
>Euro
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:slvuov8v3fu7cgaub...@4ax.com...
(snipped)
>
> So now "Jesus" is an object of derision.
Does that bother you? Will you launch a kind of fatwa for blasphemy? Well,
maybe the "religious fruitcake" is you after all. Or should I use another
expression, like "Holy Joe"?
Euro
(remaining 4.5K snipped, in which PV expresses his deception to have opened
an off-topic thread on Cardinal Lustiger without knowing that, on topic,
Lustiger was not his type of person. Just like the Pope who insists on
talking about the way to use condoms, PV talks too much of subjects he is
ignorant of, and that puts him in awkward positions)
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:bta1pv0qlbh7t6ckl...@4ax.com...
No. Quoting your own words mean that. I don't expect someone who isn't sure
about the difference between an adjective and an adverb to understand it,
though, but let me quote you again:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=mv4eovc41pif2r8lgn9fpt5nmm9mu9hetu@4ax.
com
"My 'authority' lies within the principles expressed by 'your good friend
Jesus..' who every so often
> >made an insightful remark... such as when he noted in John 3:20 that
"Everyone who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light,
lest his deeds should be exposed." My job is to bring your evil into the
light... to expose that evil. Nothing more than that. Live with it. "
You're a presumptuous crank, PV. Live with it.
Euro
Euro
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
??????:afp561-...@zeouane.org...
> le 17 Oct 2003 11:23:05 -0700, dans l'article
<f85d58f0.03101...@posting.google.com>, FitzHerbert
<FitzHerb...@hotmail.com> a dit ...
>
> { snip }
>
> >> of 'murderer lovers' in AADP. Because I quote (a noun - you illiterate
> >> fruitcake) the words
>
> > Er, no, FW. You appear to be using the word 'quote' as a _verb_...
>
> FuckWit's, instead of just hitting 'c' to mark all as read. Let's see...
>
> 'Because I quote (a noun - you illiterate fruitcake)'
>
> *guffaw!!*
>
> He _still_ doesn't know the difference between nouns and verbs !!
That was a grammatical metaphor. PV is innovative, today.
Euro
Euro
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
??????:r3i1pvokcsbh6c4db...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 14:01:04 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
> >??????:6n4eov0pamemabgip...@4ax.com...
> >> On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 12:54:13 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> > We know, however, that no one could neither
> >> >beatify, nor beautify you. It happens, however, that Lustiger
suggested
> >> >the
> >> >beatification of Flesch, and he has very good reasons for so doing.
> >> >
> >> I would expect you to believe that... since you both appear to be
> >> murderer-lovers.
> >
> >I note, PV, that you are the one who began a thread on this newsgroup on
a
> >"murderer lover". I guess you must like to shed light on that category of
> >people.
> >
> Yes... I certainly do wish to 'shed the light' of TRUTH, onto those
> who express such affection for murderers as both you and Cardinal
> Lustiger.
I don't think Lustiger expressed any kind of affection for a murderer.
Neither did I. One more lie from you.
But it remains true that you contributed a lot to put Lustiger on focus on
this newsgroup, and I'm still waiting for your reasons for so doing.
I'm also wondering whether you consider the Pope, who elevated Lustiger as a
cardinal, to be also a "murderer lover" (using here your "vile and insane"
words).
Euro
----------------------------
"Apparently you find nothing offensive about the word 'deathies.'
If that's the case, I would hope you never comment on your
perception of the offensiveness of the phrase 'murderer lover.'
They are, of course, ONE AND THE SAME... equally vile,
equally insane. Being perverse in one direction, does not
make it right to be perverse in the opposite direction."
PV,
www.google.com/groups?&selm=a_bj8.102512%24Dl4.10290500%40typhoon.tampabay.r
r.com
A Planet Visitor
>A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message news:<nsfpovgcj7ha8nedl...@4ax.com>...
>
><snip>
>
>> >If God exists, it can darn well do what it pleases. Since it chooses not to
>> >intervene to protect _any_ thus far executed, I can only presume it either
>> >doesn't exist, doesn't give a rat's ass about balancing scales in
>> >humansville or leaves it to humans to develop their own codes of conduct.
>> >
>> Ulp! I had presumed you were Jewish, Dan. Am I to assume you claim
>> to be of the Jewish race, rather than a follower of Judaism? Since I
>> believe a follower of Judaism does not question the existence of God.
>
>Mmmmm... the sweet smell of obsession.
>
Uggggggghh.. the putrid smell of a returned racist and anti-Semite... Ol'
Racist Nev.
>http://www.perfume-bliss.com/o/obsession.asp
How pathetic.
Hope this helps... but I doubt it....
PV
>> PV
>
>*****
>
>Ol' Racist Nev
A Planet Visitor
>A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message news:<v1gpov8pn6b8t10m2...@4ax.com>...
>
><snip>
>
>> PV
>
>Does this fundy cunt ever shut up?
Spoken like the true fascist that you are. Of course... I must worry that you
might try to murder me to 'shut me up,' as you've threatened me with murder
before, in your words --
"stay the fuck out of Derbyshire, scum, else you'll be swimming in the Erewash
Canal with all the other old boots." See --
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=a5ec705.0304300639.5cfabaf4%40posting.google.com
Hope this helps... but I doubt it...
PV
>
>*****
>
>Ol' Racist Nev
A Planet Visitor
>"j.rennie1" <j.re...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:<kkfjb.380$wM6.5...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>...
>
>> > <snip>
>> >
>> > > PV
>> >
>> > Does this fundy cunt ever shut up?
>> >
>> >
>> > *****
>> >
>> > Hope this helps,
>> > Neville
>>
>> We missed ypour witty contribution; we still miss them.
>
>Hello to you too, John Rennie! I'm surprised that you (and indeed the
>other Angelic Ones) are still reading this NG. It seems the deathie
>scum are now reduced -- almost literally -- to a one-man (freak)show
>(i.e. the FuckWit).
>
>It seems the battle is won, peeps. Unless FuckWit is expecting the
>cavalry to ride into view any second now it's would appear to be
>'game-over' for the evil cockwanking fundy scum that is Team Deathie.
>
Given that Desmond has claimed he will attempt to murder all retentionists,
and you have stated your wish to murder me, it's a wonder that any
retentionist still exists in AADP. There are a few posting here who have
certainly expressed a great desire to go on a murderous rampage, slaughtering
retentionists.
>("Hip-hip-Hooray!!" the Free World cheers. And they are right to.)
>
'Cheering' for murderers, Ol' Racist Nev? How familiar that refrain
from you. Tell us again how Dachau 'wasn't a death camp,' but
Guantanamo is in danger of becoming a death camp.
>Now, I suggest we abolitionists pick a topic or two we can disagree
>on. It seems the only way a.a.d-p can survive the winter.
>
>Meanwhile I think I'll reprise some old threads I left hanging.
>
Try this one where you threaten me with murder...
"stay the fuck out of Derbyshire, scum, else you'll be swimming in the Erewash
Canal with all the other old boots." See --
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=a5ec705.0304300639.5cfabaf4%40posting.google.com
Come on, Racist Nev... 'fess up... you REALLY DO wish you could MURDER
ME... don't you?
PV
>Ol' Racist Nev.
A Planet Visitor
>X-No-archive: yes
>
>A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message news:<nsfpovgcj7ha8nedl...@4ax.com>...
>
><snip>
>
>> >If God exists, it can darn well do what it pleases. Since it chooses not to
>> >intervene to protect _any_ thus far executed, I can only presume it either
>> >doesn't exist, doesn't give a rat's ass about balancing scales in
>> >humansville or leaves it to humans to develop their own codes of conduct.
>> >
>> Ulp! I had presumed you were Jewish, Dan. Am I to assume you claim
>> to be of the Jewish race, rather than a follower of Judaism? Since I
>> believe a follower of Judaism does not question the existence of God.
>
>Mmmmm... the sweet smell of obsession.
>
Uggggggghh.. the putrid smell of a returned racist and anti-Semite... Ol'
Racist Nev.
PV
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:v1gpov8pn6b8t10m2...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 12:15:17 -0400, "danh" <da...@lexisnexis.com> wrote:
>>
>(snipped)
>> >
>> I am constantly amazed at your efforts to 'end up agreeing' with those you
>> oppose, Dan. I cannot help but find the only word that comes to my mind
>> is 'pander.' Although at other moments you can be quite forceful. Quite
>> clearly, euro HAS placed himself in the posting of 'defending the Roman
>> Catholic Church.' As personified by Lustiger. So why would you not
>> want to put him into a position that he has placed himself in? See his
>original
>> laudatory contribution to the RC Church in ...
>>
>http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dd7b24844c1b79d34bac9efbb48e2fcd%40news.me
>ganetnews.com
>> Just one of his comments was -- "Thanks for giving me the opportunity to
>stress
>> the great moral qualities of Lustiger..."
>
>PV is so stupid that he now makes a confusion between one Cardinal and the
>whole Catholic Church...
>
Let's get this straight. If you criticize Rumsfeld... you are claiming that
are NOT also criticizing the U.S.? Pardon me for calling you a liar if you
claim that piece of lying shit. Since you have already admitted that you
are anti-American when you see expressions from those in power in
the U.S. which cause you to be anti-American.
The Cardinal REPRESENTS the WHOLE Catholic Church. He is not
a layperson of the RC Church, who goes to Mass on Sunday. Nor is he
a Deacon assisting at that Mass. Nor is he the parish Priest who
conducts that Mass. Nor is he a Monsignor, nor a Bishop, nor
an Archbishop. He IS a Cardinal... second only to the Pope, and
most certainly represents the whole of the RC Church. You are an
idiot to presume that expressing the views you did, does not hold
a meaning within the WHOLE of the RC Church.
>Sorry PV, but when I praise the moral qualities of Lustiger, I praise his
>moral qualities and this is not a laudatory contribution of the Roman
>Catholic Church. That _you_ are too nuts to make the difference between a
>man and an institution, does not mean that everyone is.
What a lying piece of shit you really are. One has only to look at the
thrust of your entire post, to recognize that you felt HE represents the
RC Church, and that HE was a 'model of morality.' Now you do the
'euro two-step.'
>
>Besides, contrary to you, when I post something on Cardinal Lustiger, I
>write on a subject I know.
>
What subject would that be? The love of a murderer? Or how you find
murderers to be more 'moral' than innocent slaves?
Tell me straight up, euro... Why do you "LOVE" murderers? Is it something
to do with your pseudo-religious ravings, claiming how 'moral' a RC Cardinal
is for hoping to elevate a murderer to the status of "Blessed," by that church?
Psychological aberrations such as you demonstrate always interest me.
PV
>Euro
A Planet Visitor
wrote:
>le Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:23:48 GMT, dans l'article <8MFjb.153702$bo1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, Mr Q. Z. Diablo <sa...@dodo.com.au> a dit ...
>
>>> Meanwhile I think I'll reprise some old threads I left hanging.
>
>> Please do. Your return so far has consisted of rote abuse and unilateral
>> declarations of victory which are both rather tedious, IMHO.
>
>No, no, Q., you're not reading headers: the post to which you responded
>_wasn't_ made by Planet 'AIDS is a virus' Visitor ...
>
SLURP... SLURP... SLURP...
You'll need all the 'ose to butt' help you can apply to get by this --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=YGN9b.107258%24bo1.58923%40news-server.bigpond.net.au
How I pity you.
Gentle reader... I have shed my hate for Desmond... given his mental decline
now demonstrated by wishing to murder all retentionists... I can only hold
pity for him. See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_150.htm
PV
>--
>Desmond 'murderer lover' Coughlan
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
> "Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <sa...@dodo.com.au> wrote in message news:<8MFjb.153702$bo1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...
> P.s. why do you now disapprove of "rote abuse" of the FuckWit? Without
> it, this group will die. Have you thought about that, sir?
I do not "disapprove" of rote abuse of PV. It's terribly boring but I don't
disapprove of it. Nor do I particularly approve of it. I merely tire of it.
As you were.
Mr Q. Z. D.
--
Drinker, systems administrator, wannabe writer, musician and all-round bastard.
"They've got to be protected/All their rights respected ((o))
Until someone we like can be elected." - Tom Lehrer ((O))
A Planet Visitor
What an ignorant swine you are. My original post simply remarked
on what HE has stated he is. Only you have cast a 'dirty name' to
his claim to be a Jew. I've never found anything wrong with ANYONE
claiming to be a Jew... yet you now imply it is something to BE ASHAMED
OF. I am ashamed of the Cardinal for being a murderer-lover, but he
is not the only Jew who is a murderer-lover. Nonetheless, the point was
that he is a born Jew, who does not practice the orthodox Judaic religion,
which was the ENTIRE ARGUMENT... until you, in your murderer-loving
persona claimed he was 'moral' for being a murderer-lover.
Let's put this in the proper context... if I HAD said "Look at Lustiter...
He's a Jew!" Would you find that was an INSULT toward him? Of
course you would! That is your entire implication. So what does that
make YOU?? You find that calling someone a Jew.... IS AN INSULT!!
Which makes you an anti-Semite... and somewhat of a hater of Jews...
with YOU presuming it is an INSULT to be called a Jew.
>How disgusting...
>
Yes, you certainly are, euro. And another representative of what I've
been claiming... that anti-Semitism is still strong in Europe... and my
opinion again FORCES me to find you an anti-Semite. Since you've
implied that calling someone a Jew... IS AN INSULT!! Maybe you
expect that he can only BE a Jew... if he wears the YELLOW STAR.
The fact that you cannot see yourself... is utterly depressing to me.
PV
>Euro
A Planet Visitor
wrote:
>le 17 Oct 2003 11:23:05 -0700, dans l'article <f85d58f0.03101...@posting.google.com>, FitzHerbert <FitzHerb...@hotmail.com> a dit ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> of 'murderer lovers' in AADP. Because I quote (a noun - you illiterate
>>> fruitcake) the words
>
>> Er, no, FW. You appear to be using the word 'quote' as a _verb_...
>
>LMAO !!! That almost makes me wish that I had read that post of
>FuckWit's, instead of just hitting 'c' to mark all as read. Let's see...
>
> 'Because I quote (a noun - you illiterate fruitcake)'
>
>*guffaw!!*
>
>He _still_ doesn't know the difference between nouns and verbs !!
I was simply pointing out that YOU had used it as a noun, and added
your illiterate (sic) to it when you did. In your words "I hadn't seen that
particular 'quote' (sic)." Your use did not require that (sic), since quote
is a noun as well as a verb. Are you now admitting that your use of a
(sic) was inappropriate?
> What's
>even more ... _delicious_, is that he fucks up by using 'quote' the way
>it's supposed to be used (i.e. as a verb), and then follows it with, 'a
>noun - you illiterate fruitcake' !!!
>
><fx: bent over double, laughing so much>
>
>url:http://www.google.fr/groups?ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=slvuov8v3fu7cgaubo0rpg1fmdfesvmnm0%404ax.com&lr=&hl=fr
>
>There it is, in all its [1] glory.
>
>
>[1] or is that 'it's' (sic), FuckWit ..? Heh ...
Gentle reader... I have shed my hate for Desmond... I realize that all that is
left for me here in this imaginary medium is to be horrified by the horror of
his racism and the murderous instincts he expresses here, which have
horrified so many others, witness to the horror of his words, that they have
departed from reading or commenting to this group. See --
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=bmhgpm%24nvc%241%40mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com
Another reasonable poster, unable to any longer stomach Desmond, forced
to depart. Another one chased away by Desmond. But given Desmond's
mental decline now demonstrated by wishing to murder all retentionists, and the
very clear evidence that he is a racist, I can only hold pity for him. See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/desmond_gimmick_150.htm
PV
>--
>Desmond "The murderer lover" Coughlan
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:4ceuovce5l18u0og5...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 10:11:40 GMT, "Euro" <vs...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>> >??????:4g2fovs8vbc835jl1...@4ax.com...
>> >
>> >> >What I contest here to PV, is the fact that the origins of someone
>matter
>> >> >less than what this person is, and thinks, now. Lustiger's origins are
>> >> >interesting only as far as his positions on the dialogue between the
>> >> >Catholic Church and the Jewish religious authorities are concerned.
>> >> > Outside
>> >> >of this aspect, stressing his Jewish origins is potentially stinking.
>> >> >
>> >> What a load of anti-Semitic horseshit. That's what STINKS. You are
>> >> arguing that he CANNOT 'stress his Jewish origins,' because that is
>what
>> >> HE is doing.
>> >
>> >If you read carefully what I wrote above, you will find out that I argue
>> >nothing towards Lustiger, but towards you.
>>
>> euro is Caught in a lie yet again! If you read your words again, you
>> will find that you certainly DID argue SOMETHING toward Lustiger --
>
>"What I contest here to PV, is the fact that the origins of someone matter
>less than what this person is, and thinks, now. "
>
You can 'contest' it all you wish... you are still a liar.
>I wrote this above. Don't try to twist my words, or at least have the
>frankness to recognize that you're too illitterate to understand your mother
>language.
>
I never twist your words, euro. It is not necessary to do so, to demonstrate
that you actually don't have a clue. You express a hero-worship for the
most obscene members of our species... and a total disregard for any
other members of our species. Your failure as a human being has been
duly noted here. Your love for murderers has clearly been demonstrated,
by your argument that it is 'moral' to elevate a murderer to a position of
"BLESSED" in ANY man-made religion. Of course, I know that in YOUR
MIND... all murderers are "BLESSED" as far as you're concerned. Even
John Wayne Gacy...murderer of more than 30 young children... you would
find him to have the same 'human right' to freedom that an innocent slave
obviously has, and is deprived of.
Aren't you a bit 'pissed off' that Mother Teresa 'made it' to being "BLESSED"
before the murderer you love so much? See --
http://msnbc.com/news/982030.asp?0sl=-31
I will recall for you your choice of being Buridan's ass, and note that inaction
and NOT making a choice which will achieve what one perceives as 'good' is
as deadly as making a choice which one realizes will achieve 'evil.' Your
indecision to 'save' NEITHER murderers or innocent slaves, in which you have
claimed you find to both be 'good'... turns out to be a decision to achieve 'evil.'
Live with it. Because every rational human.. and every philosopher of the
ages, recognizes that inaction... can be deadly... and demonstrate a lack
of moral courage. You are thus branded a coward, having chosen 'evil'
by not choosing what you would consider the 'greater good' from two
choices you state that you consider as both good, fully realizing that NOT
choosing... neither 'good' will be achieved.
>> Your words, just above -- "Lustiger's origins are interesting only as far
>> as his positions on the dialogue between the Catholic Church and the
>> Jewish religious authorities are concerned." You certainly ARE
>> arguing SOMETHING toward Lustiger, and not me.
>
>My words, just above, mean that there is no reason to stress Lustiger's
>origins outside than in the context of the dialogue between the Roman
>Catholic Church and the Jewish religious authorities. That is clear. Trying
>to twist it to any other meaning is useless.
>
Your WORDS were -- "I argue nothing towards Lustiger." But you
certainly DO... thus, again... euro is caught in yet another lie.
PV
>Euro
A Planet Visitor
You're protesting a bit too much, euro. You realize 100% that the Cardinal
REPRESENTS the RC Church, just as much as Rumsfeld represents the
U.S. And you would not for one moment agree that it is 'reasonable' to
separate the 'man' from the 'entity' he represents in the case of Rumsfeld.
But you become hysterical here, in your denial of such a connection with
Cardinal Lustiger... knowing full well how hypocritical you are.
>The liar is you. Full point. When I stress the moral qualities of a
>cardinal, there is no way one can affirm I defend the Catholic Church.
>
By the same token... when you attack Rumsfeld, or ANY highly placed
person within the entity, including the Pope who represents the RC Church,
and Bush, who represents the U.S., government, you are attacking that
entity. You have agreed before that doing so, making you anti-American,
is fully understood and accepted by you. But now you are 'changing your
story.' Your past words --
"I shall however keep my freedom to criticize the US as a country, or the
Bush administration as a government, regardless of the "anti-American" label
some hypocrites will like to stick on me. As I said it before, if criticizing the US
means being an anti-American, then, yes, I am an anti-American."
You are not attacking them as 'individuals' but as WHAT they
represent. Bush as the government... the Cardinal as the RC Church.
You calling the Cardinal 'moral' for hoping to find a murderer "BLESSED"
is connected to the RC Church. He is NOT the 'man on the street,' writing
a letter to the editor claiming that Fesch should be "BLESSED," but
REPRESENTS the RC Church.
>And besides, would it be a shame to defend the Roman Catholic Church? If
>that's what you mean, do have the courage to stand up and insult all the
>Catholics that, by any chance, may read you.
>
Given that Cardinal Lustiger REPRESENTS the RC Church, and finds
a murderer should be "BLESSED," then YES... I will CONDEMN the
RC Church for having elevated him to that high position in the clergy.
You, however, because Cardinal Lustiger does REPRESENT the RC
Church have PRAISED that church for viewing a murderer in such a
way. And aside from all that, euro.. the basic issue is that YOU find
it moral to take such a view. YOU would SUPPORT that elevation
of that murderer. Thus, we return to the basic argument... YOU are
a murderer-lover... and Cardinal Lustiger is ALSO a murderer-lover.
Neither of those have anything to do with the RC Church... but more
to do with YOU and the CARDINAL... as human beings... finding that
a MURDERER should be raised to such a revered position, where
many followers of the RC Church would venerate him.
PV
>Euro
A Planet Visitor
>
>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq>
>??????:9qhuovsl7d00677ao...@4ax.com...
>(snipped)
>>
>> There is no way that you could 'look too much like' me, euro. I am not
>> in favor of elevating a murderer to Catholic sainthood, as you seem
>determined
>> to favor in your love for murderers.
>
>Obviously, today, PV decided again to be "vile and insane" and resorted to
>his usual set of insults. And you'll see that, in the end, I'll be called an
>anti-Semite as well.
I believe you've now convinced me that you are... since in your
other post, there was the clear implication that because I had
posted that the Cardinal claims he is a born Jew... you felt I
was insulting him. Thus, you presume that to be called a Jew...
is the worst form of insult. The Cardinal claims to be born
Jewish... I find nothing wrong with that... never have. It is
only some Europeans who find there is something 'wrong' with
that... presuming that to admit one is a Jew, or to mention that
one has admitted to being a Jew (as has Cardinal Lustiger),
is an INSULT toward that person. Do you see how 'dirty' you
have tried to make the Jews? Essentially, you are DENYING
that existence... and arguing that anyone 'mentioning' that
existence of another is actually INSULTING that person,
because they have been called a Jew. Let's put this in an
exact meaning. The Cardinal admits he is a born Jew... I
fully accept that there is nothing wrong with that claim...
and mention that he has made such a claim. You now claim
I have INSULTED him by reporting what he admits to.
I can thus presume that you would consider it an INSULT
to call ANYONE a Jew... even a Jew.
If you cannot see that there is anti-Semitism behind you
believing that it is an INSULT to be called Jewish... there
is no hope for you. If perhaps you CAN see you are
expressing anti-Semitic sentiment... then you certainly
need to reevaluate your feelings about the Jews.
>
>"Apparently you find nothing offensive about the word 'deathies.'
>If that's the case, I would hope you never comment on your
>perception of the offensiveness of the phrase 'murderer lover.'
>They are, of course, ONE AND THE SAME... equally vile,
>equally insane. Being perverse in one direction, does not
>make it right to be perverse in the opposite direction."
>PV,
>www.google.com/groups?&selm=a_bj8.102512%24Dl4.10290500%40typhoon.tampabay.rr.com
>
What's your point? Given that you're a murderer lover?
>
>(long snip... about 15 K of PV's usual hysterical diatribes)
>
>> Obviously, anti-Semites such as you, reject that idea totally...
>
>Nah, you see? True anti-Semites will thank you, PV, for trivializing
>anti-Semitism by an exaggerated use of that word.
>
Sure... HIDE from it. Claim that when it's used it's not actually
there... but simply being exaggerated. That comment in itself,
is a DENIAL of the existence of anti-Semitism. Once someone
claims that anti-Semitism is being trivialized... there is the clear
meaning that they hope to trivialize it themselves.
You've rather proven you're an anti-Semite, euro, just as you've
proven you're a murderer lover. You found it an INSULT to be
called a Jew, and found it MORAL to call a murderer "BLESSED."
PV
>Euro