Categories

Sponsored Links

By Debbie Schlussel**** SCROLL DOWN FOR UPDATE ****
Today at the 54th Annual Summer Fancy Food Show in Manhattan, my friends at Sabra hired “sand sculpture” artist Kirk Rademaker to craft busts of the American Presidential contenders. He used 100 pounds of hummus, and my friends at Sabra sent me this photo of Obama and McCain, hummus editions.
As readers of this site know, I’m a fan of Sabra because, despite Arab and Muslim boycotts of Israel, Sabra–a joint venture of Pepsi and Israel’s Strauss-Elite–is the most popular maker of hummus in the world, including in the Arab and Muslim worlds, where it is, ironically, more popular per capita, than in Israel (where it sells far less hummus). So whenever anyone calls it, “Arabic food,” you should correct them. It is Middle Eastern food eaten by plenty of Jews in the region, including the 1 million Jews expelled from their homes in Arab countries around the world, who’ve been eating it for centuries before the creation of Islam.

It is an important statement that the company with the biggest market share of a food consumed mostly by anti-Semites residing largely in anti-Israel, anti-American Muslim Arab nations is a company in the country they most hate and wish to wipe off the map.
The dominance by Sabra is also yet another symbol of the backward nature of the oil-rich, idea-barren Arab world.

The word, “Sabra,” in Hebrew is a cactus. It is also used as slang to describe a native Israeli–prickly on the outside, but sweet on the inside.

Read more on Sabra and how Jews created hummus. Visit Sabra.**** UPDATE, 07/01/08: Sabra in America and Sabra in Israel are separate companies, but the American one is half-owned by Israel’s Strauss-Elite. Sabra sent me this pic, too, from yesterday’s hummus Presidential sculpturing, including Hummus Hillary:

22 Responses

Its the quintessential Israeli appetizer. Can be enjoyed as a prelude to a main course or had together with falafel as a vegetarian meal. Don’t let any one tell you the Arabs have left a mark on Middle Eastern cuisine. They haven’t.

“Don’t let any one tell you the Arabs have left a mark on Middle Eastern cuisine. They haven’t.”
Oh but they have. Our local Moroccan restaurant has the most delightful Tagines you could imagine. And the Sea Bass is to die for.
**
Of course historically there are only three global cuisines, Turkish, Iranian, and Chinese. All modern foods are descended from those three. I’m guessing Arabic and Jewish food is based on a combination of Turkish and Persian (Iranian). But I haven’t really looked into it.
That doesn’t mean that the ‘new’ cuisines aren’t better than the originals. My two favorite styles are Italian which is derived from Turkish food, and North-West (Kashmiri) Indian which is derived from Persian. Both are preferable (in general) from their sources.

Spoken like a true Muslim fanatic. Of course no documentation, let alone mention of Ethopian, German, Mexican, Peruvian, Scandinavian, Indian (one of the best), all the American regional cuisines, etc. Of course, Jewish cuisine was derived from Muslim food. After all, the Jews have only been around for a little over 1,000 years, and the Muslims have been around for almost 6,000 years. Uh Oh!. I guess I meant the reverse. My, my my.

Check the fat content of the humus you’re eating. Here in Israel, the standard packages variety is an amazing 30% or more. That’s like gobbling down your pita with Philly cream cheese – which is quite yummy, actually.
They now make a “lite” humus with about 15-18% fat, by replacing oils with tahina in the mixture. Tahina is ground sesame seed paste, for those who don’t know it yet.
I’ve never tried it but I bet you can make a home made humus with a much lower fat content and tastier than anything off the shelf. Chickpeas on their own are a very healthy food. What they add to it in the manufacturing process kill it and your circulatory system.
Let the buyer beware.

“Of course, Jewish cuisine was derived from Muslim food. ”
CF, you’re so dim witted I’m embarrassed for you. I did not say Jewish cuisine is derived from Muslim food. I said that Jewish food is derived from Persian and Turkish food. Which is not the same thing at all.

NP, true, you didn’t say that. I read very quickly sometimes because there other things I do besides read this column. I was expecting to see pro-Muslim, anti-Jewish comments. However, your remarks about cuisine are undocumented, you omit cuisines that obviously have nothing to do with the Near East, and like virtually all your comments, are unable to avoid gratuitous, nasty comments. Shows your resentment and hostility towards society, typical of socialist/commies. Everything is society’s fault, not NP’s fault.

“I was expecting to see pro-Muslim, anti-Jewish comments. ”
Which demonstrates how desperate you are.
I’m not pro-Muslim for the rather obvious reason that God doesn’t exist. I just refuse to hate them because people like you tell me I should. And of course it goes without saying that I’ve never said anything anti-Jewish.
But you knew that, you were just using a standard consevative cheap-smear tactic.
**
“However, your remarks about cuisine are undocumented…”
No they are well documented. You can agree or disagree but you can’t say they are undocumented.
**
“you omit cuisines that obviously have nothing to do with the Near East…”
Irrelevant to my argument. You want me to list every cuisine in the World? How would this change anything?
Good to see you agreeing with the French.
**
“…and like virtually all your comments, are unable to avoid gratuitous, nasty comments. ”
There are no gratuitous nasty comments here, except yours.
More right-wing smear tactics.
**
“Shows your resentment and hostility towards society…”
I have no resentment or hostility towards my society, I like it very much thank you. There are other societies I don’t care for, but that’s not my problem.
**
“…typical of socialist/commies. Everything is society’s fault, not NP’s fault.
Nothing is my fault, nothing is society’s fault.
I love my life.

B”H
Debbie,
I’m sorry, but there are certain things one should not be allowed to do with hummous, OK?
;-}
Oh, and Norman, it’s not just an appetizer. It is a staple, and was the most substantial portion of my humous and cucumber on pita, dinner tonight.

No Pasaran types, “I’m not pro-Muslim for the rather obvious reason that God doesn’t exist.”
The logic in this statement is staggering, which NP probably was — out of one of his Amsterdam pubs — shortly before he wrote it.
First, the existence or non-existence of God is irrelevant to your opinion of a group of people.
Second, modern science estimates the universe to be @ 13.7 billion years old, and predicts at least another 100 billion years of its existence. It also posits that this universe extends @ 46 billion light years in any direction.
And this 40-something creature (assuming NP can be believed in his earlier statement that he was born in the 1960s), occupying perhaps 2 cubic feet of space, declares with absolute confidence that in all those billions of past years, all the future eons to come, and all the trillions of cubic miles, there is not now, never has been and never will be any evidence for God.
NP, having previously established himself by his own words on this forum as: a liar, a hypocrite, a coward, a libeler, an intellectual prostitute, a disingenuous debater, a would-be totalitarian, an attempted murderer, a lousy proofreader (not that that matters, except he mocks others for same), and (just today!) a flip-flopper, can also be fairly described as a megalomaniac.
And the amazing thing is, Jesus loves him ANYWAY. Talk about a challenge to one’s faith…

You can’t really blame NP for trying again and again on this blog. This person sees that claptrap like this gets accepted in the mainstream media, by professors, academic pundits and most large employers. His comments do seem to be undergoing a degeneration; the logical leaps have become staggering, and even though he has always included insults and epethets they are becoming more common. I think bhparkman is right about him.

ìFirst, the existence or non-existence of God is irrelevant to your opinion of a group of people.î
I disagree.
If a group of people (in this case Muslims) define themselves as a group by their belief in a God – A God which I donít believe exists – then logically that must affect my opinion of them.
**
ìAnd this 40-something creature (assuming NP can be believed in his earlier statement that he was born in the 1960s), occupying perhaps 2 cubic feet of space, declares with absolute confidence that in all those billions of past years, all the future eons to come, and all the trillions of cubic miles, there is not now, never has been and never will be any evidence for God.î
The size of the universe has nothing to do with the existence of God you twerp, itís not like heís hiding out in a cave on planet Zzzogg13.
Heís omnipresent, innit.
Or not.
**
ìNP, having previously established himself by his own words on this forum as: a liar, a hypocrite, a coward, a libeler, an intellectual prostitute, a disingenuous debater, a would-be totalitarian, an attempted murderer, a lousy proofreader (not that that matters, except he mocks others for same), and (just today!) a flip-flopperÖî
You always know when a conservative is losing a debate he starts pilling on the insults and juvenile name calling. Debating with you guys is like being back in high-school. No that you guys made it as far as high-school ñ so youíll have to take my word for it.
**
ìÖcan also be fairly described as a megalomaniac.î
Only if you were a disaffected right-winger surrounded by empty pizza boxes and beer cans., depressed by the fact that he has lost every singe debate he has had with the alleged megalomanic.
**
ìAnd the amazing thing is, Jesus loves him ANYWAY.î
No he doesnít, Jesus is dead.
He has been for some time.

NP, again: you have also declared with absolute confidence that in all the billions of past and future years and all the trillions of square miles, there is ZERO evidence for God. That is a statement of faith, not fact. You have also declared that you are right and the billions of people who claim an experience of God are wrong. This too is a statement of faith, not fact. And the kind of statement that a megalomaniac would make.
Now, citing your own lack of perception of God is shaky evidence at best, rather like a tone-deaf man claiming there is no such thing as music.
As proof of your possible tone-deafness, let me review for the record my “name-calling:”
ìNP, having previously established himself by his own words on this forum as:
1) a liar
You called me a racist. That is a lie.
2) a hypocrite
You call yourself a “socialist,” yet you’ve also boasted of your “50% ownership” of an advertising agency. You also indignantly attempt to distance yourself from the horrors perpetrated by your fellow socialists Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler, ad nauseum, and yet you’ve boasted of trying to kill people who disagree with you; and, you’ve called me a “wimp” for objecting to the tactic.
3) a coward
If the people with whom you had political disagreements were armed, or even started the confrontation with you before you resorted to “house-bricks,” you neglected to mention it.
4) a libeler
See point 1, and also your rather more feeble “empty pizza boxes and beer cans” thrust.
5) an intellectual prostitute
Given 300+ page academic books as citations of evidence against your position, you call that “quoting a title.”
6) a disingenuous debater
A kind phrase for anyone who resorts to Bulverisms and the nearly-omnipresent rejoinder, “You’re stupid!”
7) a would-be totalitarian
Your glee over your fantasized IRS audits and SS watch lists of myself and other conservatives is proof.
8) an attempted murderer
See points 2 & 3 above.
9) a lousy proofreader (not that that matters, except he mocks others for same)
10) a flip-flopper
After coming out as a “Red comrade,” you claim you didn’t mean what you said.
To that, I’ll add “hair-splitter” — you call yourself a “socialist” but no longer a “Marxist” and never a “communist.” This is, I suppose, similar to a Mafiosi who soldiers in the Bonnano family but not the Columbo mob, or a Hell’s Angel who take offense at being called a Bandido or a Mongol.
Now, as far as your incipient megalomania — where, when and by whom, pray tell, were you declared the “winner” of any debate with me or, for that matter, anyone at all?
Two final points. First, I have done you the courtesy of treating your self-descriptions as true. That having been said, I expect the same from you. Therefore, let me just say that the “Doc” in my handle is earned, so an apology for your slur of my education should be forthcoming.
Second, I’m going to keep your proven offenses above in a word file, and repost them when you show up again.
Oh — Jesus loves you!

Jeeze Doccy, is that it?
Is this your big moment?
Your big “I’m going to deliver the knockout blow” play?
Kind of weak all things considered, doncha think?
**
1) a liar
You called me a racist. That is a lie.
Nope, it’s the truth. You know it is. You come to a website written by the openly racist Debbie Schlussel and you agree with pretty much everything she says. I can find no incidence of you calling her out.
**
2) a hypocrite
:You call yourself a “socialist,” yet you’ve also boasted of your “50% ownership” of an advertising agency. ”
There is nothing hypocrtical about a Socialis owning an advertising agency. I exploit nobody, and by employing 23 people I am adding to the sum total of human happiness.
**
“You also indignantly attempt to distance yourself from the horrors perpetrated by your fellow socialists Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler, ad nauseum…
None of those people listed are Socialists.
**
“…and yet you’ve boasted of trying to kill people”
No, I didn’t. I took on the National Front, on their terms using their methods. As I said the last time we “debated” this subject, the worst thing about fascism is that you have to use fascist methods to defeat it.
**
“… who disagree with you; and, you’ve called me a “wimp” for objecting to the tactic.”
Correct that’s because you are a wimp.
I took on Fascism on the streets, and we smashed them from the streets. Had people done that to the Brown Shirts in Munich in 1928, 6,000,000 Jews would not have died in the holocaust.
Think about that.
People like you are like the Weimar politicians who buried their heads in the sand until it was too late. You pay lip service to opposing anti_semitism yet you are not prepared to do anything about it.
**
3) a coward
If the people with whom you had political disagreements were armed, or even started the confrontation with you before you resorted to “house-bricks,” you neglected to mention it.
Christ, that’s weak. It was the NATIONAL FRONT you twerp. Fascist skinheads – of course they were armed.
**
4) a libeler
“See point 1, and also your rather more feeble “empty pizza boxes and beer cans” thrust.”
Your a funny guy Docco – you should be on TV.
That constitutes Libel now does it? The truth hurts sometimes – doesn’t it?
**
5) an intellectual prostitute
“Given 300+ page academic books as citations of evidence against your position, you call that “quoting a title.”
Yep, here’s the thing Docco. I need you to concentrate very carefully because this is an important point that I’ve explained to you about 10 times and you just don’t get it. Stop me if I go to fast for you…
SIMPLY QUOTING THE TITLE OF A BOOK, DOESN’T CONSTITUTE ‘PROOF’ OR ‘EVIDENCE’.
It’s just the title of a book.
You have to quote text, give references explain what point the writer was trying (and in this case no doubt, failing) to make.
Otherwise I could quote the learned and scolarly book “1001 Reasons Why Doc Liberty is a Complete and Utter Twunt” and I would have won the debate right there.
Doesn’t work, does it?
**
“6) a disingenuous debater
A kind phrase for anyone who resorts to Bulverisms and the nearly-omnipresent rejoinder, “You’re stupid!”
Riiiiiight. And just to get this straight, you are attempting to claim that this is some way unusual on this website. have you ever read any of the comments directed at me on this site?
**
7) a would-be totalitarian
“Your glee over your fantasized IRS audits and SS watch lists of myself and other conservatives is proof.”
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. You DO amuse me, Doccy.
It’s YOUR country, Doccy.
YOU voted for these people who are destroying your human rights – a thousand years in the making – in the name of this idiotic “War on Terrorism”.
You voted for totalitarianism – not me.
**
“8) an attempted murderer
See points 2 & 3 above.”
You’re repeating yourself again in a desperate (and failed) attempt to reach your 10 points. Simply making the same point in two different ways doesn’t make you look clever, Doccy – especially when I have already ripped the logic of that ‘point’ to shreds.
**
“9) a lousy proofreader (not that that matters, except he mocks others for same)”
Yep guilty as charged.
**
10) a flip-flopper
“After coming out as a “Red comrade,” you claim you didn’t mean what you said.”
I said no such thing. I am a Red, I am a Comrade, but I’m not a Marxist or a Communist, I’m a proud Socialist.
**
“To that, I’ll add “hair-splitter” — you call yourself a “socialist” but no longer a “Marxist” and never a “communist.” This is, I suppose, similar to a Mafiosi who soldiers in the Bonnano family but not the Columbo mob, or a Hell’s Angel who take offense at being called a Bandido or a Mongol.”
Clearly demonstrating that you have about as much knowledge of left-wing politics as you do of basic logic. I.e not very much.
**
“Now, as far as your incipient megalomania — where, when and by whom, pray tell, were you declared the “winner” of any debate with me or, for that matter, anyone at all?”
Well I just took it from the fact that you always run away when the going gets tough. What else am I going to think?
**
“Two final points. First, I have done you the courtesy of treating your self-descriptions as true. That having been said, I expect the same from you. Therefore, let me just say that the “Doc” in my handle is earned, so an apology for your slur of my education should be forthcoming.”
No, no no, no.\
Your ‘Doc’ is not earned, you have little or no knowledge of logic or reasoned argument and clearly no knowledge of ‘peer-reviewed’ literature.
When I was at school, at the age of about 12 I debated with rightists who gave me that old ‘Hitler was a socialist’ line. By the age of about 13 they had grown up and moved on. You are an adult and you are STILL using it!!! And yet you claim to be a Doc – ha!
Even C F is smarter than you – and that’s saying something.
**
“Second, I’m going to keep your proven offenses above in a word file, and repost them when you show up again.”
Can’t wait, I’ll just respond with my usual blistering demolition of your alleged ‘facts’ and you will look ever stooopider.
**
“Oh — Jesus loves you!”
No, he’s dead.
And if he wasn’t dead, he would owe us an apology.

No Pasaran,
1) If you can’t find instances of me disagreeing with Deb, you haven’t read very long or very well.
2) “There is nothing hypocrtical about a Socialis owning an advertising agency.” I assume by “Socialis” you mean “socialist”. At any rate, the whole “community distribution of wealth” is OK as long as it does not apply to you. Thus, hypocrite.
2a) Look, I understand your particular biker-gang (metaphorically speaking) doesn’t want to be associated with the Mao biker-gang, the Stalin biker-gang, and the Hitler biker-gang, but could you at least stop pretending that they’re not all Socialist biker-gangs? They all claimed Socialism — why should we not believe them?
2b) “As I said the last time we “debated” this subject, the worst thing about fascism is that you have to use fascist methods to defeat it.”
You said nothing of the kind.
2c) Incidentally, your boasts about your use of brute force to “smash” those with whom you disagree confirms your kinship with Mao, Stalin, and of course Hitler. They just had guns.
3) Again, you did NOT say they were armed. Given Britain’s rather strict weapons polices, and given the fact that you’re just now “remembering” this, I place no credence in your testimony.
4) Actually it’s not the truth — I don’t drink alcohol, beer or anything else. Nor am I a racist, and since you have provided no proof of such (because it is nonexistent) it’s a lie and a libel.
5) I have referred you to entire books refuting your point, (usually giving publication information as well), and have specified the point which they refute. When you write the equivalent of “Harry Truman spent his entire life as a Trappist monk,” I need only say, “David McCullough’s TRUMAN disagrees with you.”
6) Using the “everybody else does it” excuse does nothing to refute my charge — in fact it strengthens it.
7) I’m glad I amuse you, but that does not change the fact that you (and Audacious) APPROVED the use of state power to suppress those with whom you disagree. In other words, you’re a totalitarian.
8) Actually, I am not “making the same point.” Your celebrated “House-Bricks” episode [IF it ever happened] proves three things simultaneously; that you are an attempted murderer (bricks being deadly weapons), a coward (I would not believe you now if you claimed self-defense, any more than I do your claim of armed opposition) and a hypocrite (you didtance yourself from other Socialist biker-gangs wile using the same methods).
9) Then don’t mock others for the same fault, hypocrite.
10) DL, previously: “After coming out as a “Red comrade,” you claim you didn’t mean what you said.”
NP: I said no such thing.
From the “”Global Warming” Fatigue: Denver Airport Cancels Carbon Offset Program” thread:
“No Burt, I’m a solidly red comrade.
Posted by: No Pasaran! at July 1, 2008 01:29 PM”
LIAR. (Really, NP, I can understand you counting on the unwillingness of any of us to dig back through the archives to cite your self-contradictions, but that was just four days ago!)
“Well I just took it from the fact you always run away when the going gets tough.”
Here I am. By your own rules, guess that means you’re the loser, “innit?”
“Your ‘Doc’ is not earned, you have little or no knowledge of logic or reasoned argument and clearly no knowledge of ‘peer-reviewed’ literature.”
Very well. You never got any closer to “smashing Fascism from the streets” than seeing news reports on the BBC. You couldn’t hit a house with a “house-brick.” And the closest you come to “employing 23 people” is handing out 1% tips to the bartenders in your 23 favorite bars. Fair’s fair, after all.

No Pasaran: One more thing — rather than weary everyone with what a truly reprehensible human being you have shown yourself to be (but Jesus still loves you!), I’ve condensed my file to point 10. You’re a liar — and, really, that says everything anyone would need to know.

ì1) If you can’t find instances of me disagreeing with Deb, you haven’t read very long or very well.î
Well hereís the thing Docco. There are a variety of post here from Debbo, dissing black people. In fact there is scarcely a mention of black people on this site, unless it is to portray them in a bad light. Coincidence? I think not.
Now, Iíve just taken a half hour looking through some of these threads, and I canít see any evidence of you taking issue. Neither can I find evidence of you taking issue with any of the vicious racist outpourings of scum like ëoneshotonekillí. I could be wrong, in which case I would withdraw my accusation, but I suspect I am not wrong.
**
2) “There is nothing hypocrtical about a Socialis owning an advertising agency.” I assume by “Socialis” you mean “socialist”. At any rate, the whole “community distribution of wealth” is OK as long as it does not apply to you. Thus, hypocrite.
Oh purleaze is this the 1930ís? Socialism is about equality of opportunity. I came from a solid working-class background ñ Dad a car-mechanic, Mom a nurse. I left school with almost no formal qualifications, bit with hard work at night school I got a degree and then eventually an MBA. We have worked really hard to grow this thing, we exploit nobody, we donít take clients we donít approve of, and our employees have rights you guys could only dream of. We started in 1999 with the money we had from cashing in our pension funds. The agency is now worth about Ä9million (if you take the ëthree-times-annual-invoicingí rule ñ which most do for communications agencies. So 50% of that is mine, and 50% my wifeís. Thereís no hypocracy here, Iím a democratic Socialist and not a Marxist or Communist.
**
2a) ìLook, I understand your particular biker-gang (metaphorically speaking) doesn’t want to be associated with the Mao biker-gang, the Stalin biker-gang, and the Hitler biker-gang, but could you at least stop pretending that they’re not all Socialist biker-gangs? They all claimed Socialism — why should we not believe them?î
Again, your knowledge of Left Wing politics is so laughable, I donít know where to start. But consider this, if Hitler was a Socialist why did he slaughter 400,000 of them? If Stalin was a communist why did he slaughter 600,000 of them?
**
2b) “As I said the last time we “debated” this subject, the worst thing about fascism is that you have to use fascist methods to defeat it.”
You said nothing of the kind.î
I absolutely DID. Stop lying.
**
ì2c) Incidentally, your boasts about your use of brute force to “smash” those with whom you disagree confirms your kinship with Mao, Stalin, and of course Hitler. They just had guns.î
Pathetic, youíre really desperate now.
We smashed them form the streets and probably prevented a second holocaust. Sorry if that makes me a ëbruteí. If thatís what it takes to prevent racism and anti-Semitism, I can live with your weak insults. I’m sorry that the prevention of the extermination of Jews is such a low priority for you.
**
ì3) Again, you did NOT say they were armed. Given Britain’s rather strict weapons polices, and given the fact that you’re just now “remembering” this, I place no credence in your testimony.î
Firstly, Iím not ìJust remembering itî -you never asked before.
Secondly, they werenít (as far as i know) armed with guns, they were armed with motor-bike chains, clubs, hammers, cricket bats, baseball bats, knuckle-dusters and knives. You know, your standard Nazi skinhead fare.
**
ì4) Actually it’s not the truth — I don’t drink alcohol, beer or anything else. Nor am I a racist, and since you have provided no proof of such (because it is nonexistent) it’s a lie and a libel.î
I think you are a racist, and the fact that you have not taken issue with the openly racist posts on this site is proof of that.
**
ì5) I have referred you to entire books refuting your point, (usually giving publication information as well), and have specified the point which they refute. When you write the equivalent of “Harry Truman spent his entire life as a Trappist monk,”
You did nothing of the sort, you simply quoted the title of a book.
**
ìI need only say, “David McCullough’s TRUMAN disagrees with you.”
No, no, no, no a thousand times no.
You need to say WHY he disagrees and what evidence he has for disagreeing.
**
ì6) Using the “everybody else does it” excuse does nothing to refute my charge — in fact it strengthens it.î
But that presumes that your original charge was actually true, when of course it was patent bollocks.
**
ì7) I’m glad I amuse you, but that does not change the fact that you (and Audacious) APPROVED the use of state power to suppress those with whom you disagree. In other words, you’re a totalitarian.î
No I didnít APPROVE. I simply noted its inevitability, given Bush’s largely unnoposed war on YOUR human rights.
**
ì8) Actually, I am not “making the same point.” Your celebrated “House-Bricks” episode [IF it ever happened] proves three things simultaneously; that you are an attempted murderer (bricks being deadly weapons), a coward (I would not believe you now if you claimed self-defense, any more than I do your claim of armed opposition) and a hypocrite (you didtance yourself from other Socialist biker-gangs wile using the same methods).î
1. Iím not an attempted murderer, I was fighting a war, in war there are casualties. It was them or us, I would rather it was them.
2. I am absolutely NOT claiming self-defense. You disingenuously tried to claim that the skinheads were unarmed, I pointed out that they absolutely were armed. Thatís all.
**
ì9) Then don’t mock others for the same fault, hypocrite.î
What does this mean?
**
ì10) DL, previously: “After coming out as a “Red comrade,” you claim you didn’t mean what you said.”
NP: I said no such thing.
From the “”Global Warming” Fatigue: Denver Airport Cancels Carbon Offset Program” thread:
“No Burt, I’m a solidly red comrade.
Posted by: No Pasaran! at July 1, 2008 01:29 PM”
There is no contradiction here. I never once said that I didnít men what I had said.
I did say Iím a red comrade (though somewhat tongue-in cheek, which is a mistake with you notoriously humorless far-right types) but we Socialists call each other Comrade, and our flags are red (coloured with the blood of workers dead) ñ but that doesnít make me a Marxist or a Communist.
**
ìLIAR. (Really, NP, I can understand you counting on the unwillingness of any of us to dig back through the archives to cite your self-contradictions, but that was just four days ago!)î
Dealt with. Feel stoooopid yet Doccy? You should.
**
“Well I just took it from the fact you always run away when the going gets tough.” Here I am. By your own rules, guess that means you’re the loser, “innit?”
Well given that I havenít run away, then no. But YOU will run away from this debate eventually ñ your type always does.
**
“Your ‘Doc’ is not earned, you have little or no knowledge of logic or reasoned argument and clearly no knowledge of ‘peer-reviewed’ literature.” Very well. You never got any closer to “smashing Fascism from the streets” than seeing news reports on the BBC. You couldn’t hit a house with a “house-brick.” And the closest you come to “employing 23 people” is handing out 1% tips to the bartenders in your 23 favorite bars. Fair’s fair, after all.î
You just have to admit, youíve completely run out of arguments, havenít you?