Chris Alger

[Gamblor]

Having read a few of Mr. Alger's posts I will say the following.

He is clearly knowledgeable of the facts of a wide array of subjects. However, his gross misinterpretations and deliberate omissions of key elements of those facts - especially regarding the Israel debate - is typical.

Having been to the top Academic University in Canada (Toronto), I must admit his responses are typical of those who are of high intelligence, but low maturity (extremely smart and extremely childish - ESEC.

Often, as is my experience, the ESEC and extremely stupid seldom differ, if even with separate rationales.

The ESEC's problem, is that he assumes most of the world would act as he would given his level of intelligence. He often projects his morals and character on those he describes rather than looking objectively.

Mr. Alger clearly has done so with respect to Israel. He assumes that everyone in the world thinks the same way he does. If I want more land, I subjugate the people living there. I have no respect for them because they are not as smart (or rich) as me etc. etc.

In fact, when you realize that everyone has their own ideas of what is moral and immoral, you will realize that everyone, no matter how smart you are, knows that people exist and do not consider wild possibilities that are unfeasible, even in dreams. You give politicians too much credit.

Sure, there are selfish politicians, but it is near impossible for an entire group to be involved in a cover up such as creating a newspaper for the purposes of propaganda. The probability of losing its secrecy is proportional to the number of people who know about it - and a lot of people are involved in the making of the Jerusalem Post.

So, Mr. Alger, good luck with your fantastic conspiracy theories. As long as you have them, nobody will take you seriously.

I served in the Israeli army for 6 months of basic training and I can tell you firsthand, through discussion with Canadian and American troops, that they were thoroughly shocked at the amount of moral and ethical training we went through. Regarding the purity of life, the risks we take to avoid civilian danger, and even our hand to hand combat (Krav Maga) is designed to disarm and calm, not attack.

I know what I am talking about.

Good day, sir.

[brad]

as for imposing his morals, well if he does maybe its because his taxes in part, and the american people in full, support the israelis and all they do.

as for the rest he has a rather mainstream position that is easily supported.

as for me, i think the US is evil (look at their 'peacekeeping' in africa), but other than that (and im not sure chris would disagree btw) i agree with him on everything.

but thats opinion. the main thing is that he has facts on his side.

btw, not surprising an israeli supports israel.

btw, israeli newspapers are much more diverse and critical of israeli policy than american.

[MMMMMM]

Yes brad, it is nice to have facts stored to facilitate producing them on demand, but it is also important to be able to draw meaningful conclusions from those facts and to know what constitutes a meaningful analogy and why.

All the facts in the world won't do you much good if you can't adequately sort through them and draw meaningful conclusions. Just a thought. Of course, they could still be quite useful for propaganda purposes, especially if you choose from amongst them selectively.

[MMMMMM]

brad:..."as for me, i think the US is evil"

This is a vacuous statement.

Every country might be considered "evil." And all larger countries (actual size, GDP, etc. considered too) necessarily have more interactions with others who sometimes get the short end of the stick.

Anyway the only way to compare it is hypothetically since no other country exists which is as "large" as the USA overall. If you want to try, try imagining what China or the USSR or Iraq would be like if they instead of the US were the "largest" country in the world. Go ahead. I tried imagining it and what I envisioned was even more evil than the world has at present. So the only way to quantify it is relatively, and to recognize that interactions with others necessarily sometimes result in someone getting shafted. The larger you are, so to speak, the more times you will shaft someone (no puns intended;-)). That doesn't necessarily mean you are "evil."

Also, your statement entirely fails to address the other side of the question, which is: how much good has the USA done? A lot, obviously. So your statement (and apparently outlook) appears to me to be quite needlessly narrow on this issue.

[Gamblor]

I think it should have been obvious from the start with these two:
Alger and Cyrus are white supremacists. That is the only way they could come up with this crap.
I dont see how everyone else missed this.
So here's to you two: enjoy your lives of misery and blame. Worship Hitler and do all that dumb stuff you guys love to do like burn books and murder doctors and [censored].

[adios]

"He is clearly knowledgeable of the facts of a wide array of subjects. However, his gross misinterpretations and deliberate omissions of key elements of those facts - especially regarding the Israel debate - is typical.


Typical of what? A spokesman for Hamas? How much difference could there be between what Alger posts in these threads and what a spokesman for Hamas would post?

[adios]

Didn't miss the Cyrus post complementing Hitler, it's old hat for him.

[Chris Alger]

[MMMMMM]

"I think it should have been obvious from the start with these two: Alger and Cyrus are white supremacists."

I can certainly imagine why you might think that, but I have a different take, having had discussions with them off and on over several years on this board.

Actually, my guess is that Alger is an extreme leftist (read communist or near-communist)--but that's only a guess. I don't think he is a white supremacist because in the past he has repeatedly slammed the US and Europe. One might well surmise, from reading Alger's posts, that the USA had done far more in the 20th century to increase human misery and to oppress people, than either the USSR or Red China had done.

Cyrus is a bit more enigmatic, but I don't think he's a white supremacist either (chuckle, chuckle, heh, Cyrus, I see you've made quite an impression already).

Both Cyrus and Alger have recently criticized my statements regarding Arab culture and Islam, when in fact I am only trying to be as objective as possible (and politically correct considerations be damned).

At any rate it is refreshing to see someone like you here who possesses actual intimate knowledge of some of the things we have been debating off and on for over two years. My own knowledge of history is considerably less encyclopaedic than Alger's, but I try to make up for it in our discussions by consistently trying to be more logical in comparisons and analysis than he tends to be. Any factual information you may impart which might shed light on some of Alger's (and Cyrus') claims and arguments will prove very interesting to me (and to others, I believe). Anyways, welcome, and I look forward to reading more of your posts.

[John Cole]

Tom and Mark,

Just when I'm ready to give both of you credit for thinking and writing like rational, articulate conservatives who try to actually look at issues with some understanding, you both support a poster who leaps to a conclusion and makes invidious statements simply because he disagrees with someone's stance. Not that it matters, but I'm disappointed with both of you, for what seems to me either a lack of reading comprehension or for willfully misreading to serve your own purposes.

Respectfully, (really)

John

[brad]

ooops fingerfehler, meant UN is evil, obviously UN has peacekeepers in africa, not United States

[brad]

pretty sure kkk types hate arabs and refer to them as sand-niggers, etc.

[Gamblor]

Perhaps this was taken more seriously than originally intended.

I am making light of the situation.
I do not know anything at all about Chris or Cyrus outside of what I have read in this forum, and therefore cannot jump to any serious conclusion regarding political views.

Obviously, they are somewhat into conspiracy theories, but other than that, I can't realistically say anything.

[John Cole]

If your original post had ended with "I don't see how everyone else could have missed this," the "joke" may have been a bit more obvious. However, given your own tendency to overreact (re: Rushmore's post) you may have been a bit more circumspect with both the post's title and its content.

John

[MMMMMM]

I don't understand.

I explained to Gamblor that I have not, over the years, come to view Alger and Cyrus as "White Power" advocates.

Since Gamblor has considerable knowledge of the Mideast and Israel, I think his contributions should be informative (and hopefully useful in dealing with what I see as Alger's distorted manipulation of facts at times).

Also, his other posts in other threads have been informative and far less vituperative than this one.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Gamblor:

Thanks for your post, and I agree with you completely.

But as you probably know better than most, debating ideas, even ones we don't necessarily agree with or like to hear, is a Jewish tradition. So even though I strongly disagree with what Alger, Cyrus, and a few others post, and I do agree that they frequently twist facts, there is merit to the fact that they are here.

These are important topics and many people have strong opinons about them. But what's more important is that this forum helps all of us in its own small way to understand everyone better. Even Cyrus was able to laugh when I pointed out that the giant asteroid was probably aimed at him.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Chris Alger]

Thanks, brad, but I don't think and I've never said the US is evil. There's a lot of room for reform but in many ways I think the US is great. Like most countries it's too complex to render any such sweeping judgment meaningful.

I think the US government and the mass media act as evil forces in the ways I've mentioned, but both do other good things, and do them pretty well.

My main problem with the US is the prevalence of propaganda as a substitute for information. I think too many people can't rationally think about or discuss important topics because they're overly indoctrinated with "emotionally potent oversimplications," constantly reinforced by the education system and mass media, that prevent them from thinking straight. The kindergarten level of these recent posts are good examples. All these disputes could be condensed into a few statements of principles (upon which most would agree) and a few more questions about what the facts are, and then people could debate differing interpretations of evidence. Instead you get all this crap.

[John Cole]

M,

I shouldn't have tried to include you both in the same post; I know you defended Chris and Cyrus. I expected, though, you might react a little more strongly to the poster making the comments. Sorry for not explaining myself clearly. Mea Culpa; Mea Maxima Culpa.

Best,

John

[MMMMMM]

"Even Cyrus was able to laugh when I pointed out that the giant asteroid was probably aimed at him."

Yes, but only because he knew it was true, but that it would also miss.

[Cyrus]

Me "complementing Hitler"? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Is that in the musical or the geometrical sense, Tom? I'm intrigued.

[MMMMMM]

Perhaps the sheer delight of seeing someone appear out of nowhere, apparently armed with reams of information to combat what I see as Alger's selective (or dis-) information, caused me to pay little attention to the rest of the post.

[brad]

oops i meant UN.

i just meant i agree with you except i think if u investigate the UN you will find them to be no good, as seen in genocide in africa peacekeeping, forced sterilization programs in 3rd world (women only given vaccines laced with hormones resulting in sterility), and UNESCO, which bush (who is a communist, btw) signed back onto.

[MMMMMM]

"...There's a lot of room for reform but in many ways I think the US is great."...

Well whoda thunk it? Is this really you, Chris? I never would have known.

[Gamblor]

Perhaps his laughter was also due to the fact that he knew it was sent by the American government. If only 3 out of 4 planes they were controlling managed to hit their targets 2 years ago today, then there is a 25% chance he will survive the American-flown asteroid.

[adios]

John,

Cyrus wrote:

"Hitler restored Germany's pride as a leading power in Europe, did away with the hideous, humiliating terms of the Versailles Treaty and brought about a phenomenal recovery of the economy. These things all seem trivial now to us compared to the colossal war crimes of Nazism, but they were extrenely important to Germans and Europe at the time. (Almost all European leaders were admirers.) If Hitler had a stroke and died in 1938, he would have entered History for sure as one of the greatest leaders of all time! As a "good guy" too..."

If you think that Hitler was a good guy before 1938 and would have entered the history books as one of the greatest leaders of all time if he would have died in 1938, I'm really disappointed in you. Hitler had a lot of blood on his hands prior to 1938 and began his persecution of Jews long before then. He basically gave a blueprint of how he would proceed in his book Mein Kampf that he wrote in I believe 1924 while serving a prison term. As far as rebuilding the German economy, he did it by amassing a huge military machine in order to carry out his master plan. Also it was in direct violation of the Versailles treaty. Cyrus has spewed this garbage many times previously and I'm not the only one who's pointed it out.

Tom

[Gamblor]

touche.

As for Rushmore's post, I don't think I was overreacting.
I had many relatives in Poland at the time and we still don't know what became of them.

Naming a situation in which we all die, after a situation in which we almost did, is hardly a joke.

Just my POV...

[Chris Alger]

Of course it's me and I've said it in various ways many times before. You just don't think about what you read before you judge.

[Rushmore]

Just for the record, it was not my post which used the phrase "Final Solution." I responded to the phrase's use, but Gamblor's vitriol was directed at its' originator, I imagine.

John was referring to another post where you all but called me a racist (but we've already cleared that up, I hope).

[MMMMMM]

Just a sidenote, but I somehow managed to miss this or any similar Cyrus posts, or I can't recall them right now.

[Chris Alger]

"Obviously, they are somewhat into conspiracy theories...."

No, obviously we aren't. At least I'm not.

[Gamblor]

Vitriol perhaps.

But the claim of racism was never made and I hope it wasn't taken as such.
I thought it mildly ignorant to use a phrase like that if you weren't meaning to offend someone with ties to the events in question, but racism I don't think exists per se anymore.
I think the world has well accepted that all races deserve equal footing in every way - well, except the radicals in every walk of life - from Christian to Jewish (although, outside of Meir Kahane who was arrested in Israel I can't think of any offhand) to Islamic. It just seems the Islamists are willing to organize a little further to see their ends, as vicious as they may be.

Ultimately, I made no accusation and can assure you I take every point you make seriously and consider it carefully in rebuttal if I disagree.

[Chris Alger]

"How much difference could there be between what Alger posts in these threads and what a spokesman for Hamas would post?"

Hamas urges theocracy, I haven't and hate theocracy; it urges violence against innocents; I haven't and hate violence against innocents; it encourages its followers to destroy Israel; I haven't and would hate to see Israel destroyed; it denies that Jews have any right to a homeland in the former Palestine; I've repeated emphasized the opposite view.

Yours is yet another example of how much respect the American right has for honesty or truth.

[John Cole]

Tom,

Although I do not agree with Cyrus on this point, I'm not willing to call someone an anti-semite based on this, nor would I agree with someone who does. I am aware that many Jews had already left Germany by 1938, sensing what was in the air and as a reaction to the Nuremburg Laws. I have not your encyclopedic knowledge in this area, but I have consulted the basic time line of events.

John

[Gamblor]

Would you care to elaborate on this?
Having read your posts, I don't see how I can reconcile them with your views.
Any and all explanation would be appreciated.

[brad]

why dont u see if you can find an example in any of his posts which contradict what he just said.

having read a lot of his posts i dont think u will be able to do it.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Tom:

If Cyrus would have been correct, Churchill would have been praising him and probably stayed in retirement. But that wasn't the case.

Best wishes,
Mason

[brad]

well tom im 99% sure cyrus is giving the worlds opinion of hitler and not his own. see how he uses ! and ".

i mean hitler was time man of the year in 38 or something. no doubt about it.

i think cyrus is alluding to that. and saying if hitler died in '38 world would keep thinking of him in that way.
actually i think cyrus is right about that.

obviously only a fool would praise hitler in any way.

[Chris Alger]

It would have to be too long and I doubt that you'd read it any more closely than you have anything else. Why bother since those with whom you disagree are by definition neo-Nazi white supremacists?

My views are no different than those of the Palestinian mainstream and the anti-Labor Israeli left, like Gush Shalom (who's website is excellent). Most of my thinking on this topic has been informed by the Israeli historical "revisionists" such as Simha Flapan, Ilan Pappe, Benny Morris, Avi Schlaim, Uri Avnery, Tom Segev and Baruch Kimmerling, American writers like Noam Chomsky, Michael Palumbo, Morman Finkelstein and Kathleen Christison and Palestinian academics like Edward Said, Walid Khalidi and Nur Masala. With the exception of Morris and Flapan (because he's dead), I doubt that I've said much that any of the above would disagree, including my claims that Israel engages in state terrorism, started wars, engages in widespread abuse of human rights, oppresses it's Arab population and so forth. The periodicals I like on this topic are The Economist, Middle East Reports and Journal of Palestine Studies.

[Cyrus]

Hi, Mason.

You wrote "If Cyrus would have been correct, Churchill would have been praising [Hitler] and probably stayed in retirement. But that wasn't the case."

Unfortunately, you are quite wrong on this one, Mason.

Winston was a dyed-in-the-wool anti-Communist who instictively sided with all the repressive, anti-Communist regimes that sprung in Europe, considering them bulwarks against Bolshevism. If you would've checked your History books, you would've noticed that Churchill did indeed have some very high praise for Hitler prior to the war (http://www.politicalcartoon.co.uk/html/history5.html) .

He called Hitler, "The German leader [due] with the highest of praise for his accomplishments as no other foreign statesman ever received from an Englishman."

Here's Winston, on Hitler's pre-war bullying of the West, when the Nazis were not yet perceived as dangerous (so much for prescience!) : "There must not be lacking in our leadership something of that spirit of the Austrian corporal who, when all had fallen into ruins around him, and when Germany seemed to have fallen into chaos, did not hesitate to march forth against the vast army of victorious nations and has already turned the tables decisively against them."

Here's Winston, on Hitler's struggle to gain power :
"While all those formidable transformations were occurring in Europe, [meaning the Socialist/Communist resurgence] Hitler was fighting his long, wearing battle for the German heart. The story of that struggle cannot be read without admiration for the courage, the perseverance, and the vital force which enabled him to challenge, defy, conciliate, or overcome, all the authorities or resistance's which barred his path.".

Churchill was an early fan of Benito Mussolini (http://www.fsmitha.com/h2/ch12.htm), too. He visited Italy in 1927 and caused an uproar back home in Britain when he spoke of the facist dictator as having a "gentle and simple bearing" and saying that if he, Churchill, were an Italian he would have given Mussolini his "whole-hearted support, from start to finish, in the triumphant struggle against the bestial appetites and passions of Leninism."

<font color="red">BONUS QUOTE!</font> As a freebie, for you, Mason, and the Gamblor in you, here's a choice quote from a Churchill editorial on Jews, written the Illustrated Sunday Herald on February 8, 1920 :
"It may well be that this same astounding race, the Jewish Bolshevists, may at the present time be in the actual process of providing another system of morals and philosophy, as malevolent as Christianity was benevolent, which if not arrested, would shatter irretrievably all that Christianity has rendered possible..... this movement among the Jews is not new..... it has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the nineteenth century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire." Nice.

I can fully understand how Gamblor, a person who equates the value of the work of respected Jewish scholars, such as Finkelstein, with the Protocols of Zion, would claim that I'm a Hitler acolyte. But Tom Haley?

Not much of a read, that 'un.

Regards,

--Cyrus

PS : As we all know, when the monster that so many in the West were admiring, turned, with teeth bared, against Britain's interests, Winston Churchill, "a man born to wage war", did not "retire", he was of course there, early and resolutely, with his oratory in full force against the Nazis. The rest is History.

[Cyrus]

Tom,

Where do you get this ..stuff? /images/graemlins/cool.gif

As if this needed (again!) clarifying, this is no Hitler fan you're talking to. (I don't look good in brown shirts, anyway.)

I merely commented on how Hitler would, unfortunately, enter History's record as a great man, had he suddenly died before the war. Hell, I'd bet he'd still have the same fate if he'd have croaked in 1941, before attacking Russia, when he was master of Europe! This is how, (again : unfortunately!) History is written.

Adolph Hitler was Man of the Year for Time magazine before the war. This was done without the slightest adversarial intent. (When you're talking pre-war American industrialists and newspapermen, you're talking big time anti-communists and anti-semites). And, as I pointed out to Mason in this thread (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Number=339894&amp;page=0&amp;view=ex panded&amp;sb=6&amp;o=14&amp;vc=1), Winston Churchill was an early fan, as well.

All the above are boringly known and well-established facts of History.

You should be more sober and less prejudiced in your judgement of people, me humbly thinks, Tom. ('T'd be great for your game, too.)

Take care.

--Cyrus

PS : The Hitler comment came as part of the argument about Leni Riefenstahl's fascination with the Nazis and her powerful films made at the time.

[nicky g]

"forced sterilization programs in 3rd world (women only given vaccines laced with hormones resulting in sterility)"

Brad d'you have any evidence for this?

[brad]

yes.

want me 2 start new threaad?

[nicky g]

Sure.

[John Cole]

Rushmore,

Yes, I was referring to the post in which you asked the questions about the quotes from the Talmud. Perhaps I should have been more specific.

John

[Gamblor]

You are absolutely right.

All of those authors WOULD agree with Israel as a practitioner of state-terrorism.

Unfortunately, those authors are, as is typical of the left, not involved in the administrations they critique, and subscribe to opposing political ideologies.

I have yet to read a response you have made to anything I have written that does not contain some sort of unfoudned personal slander.

Chomsky, Finkelstein, et al are often referred to as self-hating Jews and communists. Their writings are so full of rhetoric and bias that they can hardly be taken seriously.

The reason historical "revisionists" cannot be credited with valuable input, is that they did not participate in the situations they criticize.

As we all know, there is no objective history. This would seem to conflict with my claim of bias above, but the only people qualified to criticize something are those that EXPERIENCED it. Why? Because only they know what it was like, what they were thinking and feeling at the time.

Everyone else can only speculate about intentions. Chomsky and Finkelstein are perfect examples of those the actual participants have little to no respect for.

They are the LEAST respected writers within the Israeli community and are often discarded as wackos, because they criticize events they are far removed from. You may claim this gives them an objective viewpoint, but as I just stated, an objective viewpoint does not exist, in anything.