Re: [epistemology] Re: [WDDM] King Charles' Head

[Georges Metanomski <zgmet(at)yahoo.com>]

Strange that I pop up in Antonio's kites like the head of King
Charles in those of Mr Dick. I believe that if he tried very very
strongly, he could eventually keep me out. But then, I'm a layman,
not a psychiatrist like Antonio. So, Medice Curate Ipsum.

Georges



--- On Wed, 9/3/08, Antonio Rossin <rossin(at)tin.it> wrote:
From: Antonio Rossin <rossin(at)tin.it>
Subject: [epistemology] Re: [WDDM] Fw: PROFESSOR WICHMAN EMAIL
To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
Cc: epistemology(at)yahoogroups.com, "mikebispham" <mikebispham(at)aol.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 3, 2008, 6:00 AM

Doug, and all,

I strongly appreciate your well-balanced post.

Let me add, the evil trouble is not the contents of the misleading,
brainwashing or otherwise convincing mechanism.

Instead the evil trouble appears to be just the the misleading,
brainwashing or otherwise convincing mechanism itself - no
matter which the contents of "truth", be it a holy, a political
or else a scientific truth may be.

This is why I cannot appreciate Georges'  posting, since and
until the communication mechanism he adopts to defend and
support his scientific topics suffers from the same misleading,
brainwashing or otherwise convincing attitude (including the
recurrent capitalization of the Holocaust) .

Best regards,

antonio

============ ========= ========= ========= ====


Doug Everingham ha scritto:

Georges and all,

I agree that we should condemn all crimes and movements
that declare criminal aims.

I am sure there are promoters of Sharia law and Jihad who
should be charged, tried and duly restrained or treated for crimes.
However, just as there were Nazis who did good things despite
the crimes done in the name of Nazi 'justice' there are (until
proven guilty) Moslems misled, brainwashed or otherwise
convinced that THEIR Jihad means a just struggle for a just world
order under a merciful god and THEIR Sharia a just legal system.

Many such innocents in policy discussions appear to be trying
to reason and negotiate on an equal basis with upholders of other
creeds and regimes, as sincerely as some in armed forces
occupying Palestine (including some Jews), Iraq (including some
Christians), or West Irian/Papua (including some Moslems)

I apologize if in seeking to avoid 'tarring' the whole of some group
with the same 'brush' I may have done the opposite.

For humanity and our planetary ecosystem united n diversity,

– Doug

===



  From: Georges Metanomski <zgmet@yahoo. com>
Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 12:32:23 AM Australia/Brisbane
To: wddm@world-wide- democracy. net
Subject: Re: [WDDM] Fw: PROFESSOR WICHMAN EMAIL
Reply-To: wddm@world-wide- democracy. net


--- On Mon, 9/1/08, Doug Everingham <dnevrghm@powerup. com.au>
wrote:


George Metanomski and all friends,

Like Prof. Wichman I am offended by personal, religious or
institutional breaches of human rights.
However, I don't distribute his email because he also offends USA,
religious and UN human rights – by accusing indiscriminately the
Islamic organizations for the offenses of some of their minorities and
individual members. He condemns Sharia law but not Old Testament and
some churches' and anti-Islamic governments' laws which prescribe
similar vindictive and atrocious penalties.

============ =

G:


I'm disappointed by these assertions of a reasonable and
civilized person like yourself. "He" does not condemn
Sharia Law, but concrete atrocious crimes committed
by Islamists colonizing the West. Do you really not see
the difference between "prescriptions" of some old
parchment and concrete contemporary crimes?

Mutatis mutandis, would you condemn an Auschwitz inmate
for "indiscriminately" accusing Nazis? Strictly speaking
he would be wrong. Indeed, only a small minority of Nazis
perpetrated atrocities. Most were busy building one of
the best ever Socialisms with wonderful KDF welfare, full
employment, etc. Some, like Schindler or Herr Happke who
saved our family, were outright humane and courageous,
as it took risks to be humane. And yet, in Warsaw Uprising
and in the partisans I shot at view at any Nazi within the
range of my Sten and have no pangs of conscience about it.
Because, you see, we were at war, at a just defensive war
against a cruel inhumane aggression and in war you don't
justify your aggressor by some stupidity, your ancestors
could have written thousands of years ago, but defend
yourself an fight him.

And so are we now. In WWIII, aggressed by Jihad. Since
1948 locally in Israel and since 9/11 worldwide. I lived
both aspects. First, in Israel as commandos involved
in numerous actions including liberating two shools taken
hostage by Fatah. Feeling again like in Warsaw Ghetto,
besieged by overwhelming power openly aiming at
extermination of my people, through pitched invasions
alternated with terrorism. It was tough, but upright.
Embodying Mordechai Anielewisz's "don't pull your pants
down, but stand up and fight", which I followed in Warsaw.
Ghetto.

Having moved to Europe I found the disgusting attitude of
pulling the pants down in face of the ignoble invasion,
hypocritically dressed up as Tolerant Humanism.
The fact is that we are facing the third invasion of the West by
the barbaric Islamist Jihad. The first was pushed away
by Charles Martel at Poitiers, the second by the Polish king
Sobieski at Vienna and the third we are losing mainly due to
pseudo-humane intellectuals of Cambridge Club type,
forming invader's fifth column. Recently the British
Government pulled its pants lower than ever by barring
the Holocaust teaching from the compulsory school
curriculum. It hurt the delicate feelings of Pakistani
colonisers and thugs periodically training in Al-Quaida
camps.

Working as Gestapo penetration agent, I have formed
a friendship with an IS officer on a coordination mission.
Having learnt this cowardly act, he wrote to me saying -
I never thought that I could be ashamed to be English.

============ =

We should condemn the illegal jailing and torture of Moslems, Arabs or
other suspects by western governments as we condemn suicide bombing of
westerners and innocents.

============ ===

G:
Why this tendentious enumeration? Should we not condemn
all crimes? And, good Lord, should we innocent some
crimes because of some other ones? An attorney defending
his pedofile murderer by saying that somewhere else
somebody broke in a bank and killed the cashier would
soon be barred.

Islamist crimes should be considered as such, without
being diluted by irrelevancies such as smuggled in anti-
semitism.


Georges


============ =