Have You Heard About Republic Broadcasting ?

webgold · Post by **webgold** » Tue Feb 21, 2006 11:38 am

Repbulic Broadcasting is a 24 hr. patriot, talk radio station. It can be heard on

short wave radio or you can listen online at rbnlive.com.

If you are like me you will find this station addictive. They reveal the truth about

the New World Order and the One World Globalism that seeks to destory our

country. Check it out !!

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Tue Feb 21, 2006 11:58 am

webgold wrote: They reveal the truth about the New World Order and the One World Globalism that seeks to destory our country.In other words, they're a bunch of paranoid loonies.

How about a brief but specific summary of some of their beliefs, and the documentation of same? In case you haven't noticed, they're blatantly anti-Semitic. You could start there.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:58 pm

Doesn't look significantly different than the left-wing stuff to me. Some of the comics are better.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:02 pm

Bronwen wrote: In other words, they're a bunch of paranoid loonies.

How about a brief but specific summary of some of their beliefs, and the documentation of same? In case you haven't noticed, they're blatantly anti-Semitic. You could start there.
I didn't see it. But since you did, how about a brief but specific summary of what you saw as some of their beliefs, and the documentation of same?

Post by **spot** » Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:02 pm

Is it just my misperception, or has there been a spate of people coming fresh into ForumGarden with preset agendas recently?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:13 pm

spot wrote: Is it just my misperception, or has there been a spate of people coming fresh into ForumGarden with preset agendas recently?
You think we're on a list or something?

Post by **spot** » Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:16 pm

Accountable wrote: You think we're on a list or something?

Several, I imagine. I'm not suggesting an alternative conspiracy!

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:22 pm

spot wrote: Several, I imagine. I'm not suggesting an alternative conspiracy!
:yh_think Hmmm A conspiracy to get us all pointing fingers at false conspiracies. ........ BRILLIANT!!

Jives · Post by **Jives** » Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:32 pm

Wait a minute....(jives puts on a short sleeve white shirt, and high water pants. Then his tinfoil hat, his 3-D glasses, and his pocket protector... )

OK, now I'm ready to hear about the New World Order!:rolleyes:

Post by **spot** » Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:55 pm

Jives wrote: Wait a minute....(jives puts on a short sleeve white shirt, and high water pants. Then his tinfoil hat, his 3-D glasses, and his pocket protector... )

OK, now I'm ready to hear about the New World Order!:rolleyes:A New World Order conspiracy? That's easy. "If we do not follow the dictates of our inner moral compass and stand up for human life, then his lawlessness will threaten the peace and democracy of the emerging New World Order we now see, this long dreamed-of vision we've all worked toward for so long." -- President George Bush (January 1991, immediately before Gulf I, in a letter to MIT and published at http://www-tech.mit.edu/V110/N59/war6.59n.html ) - I mean, how plain can a guy get?

You might need to start a new thread if you really want to chase this one. I'll enjoy tickling your toes, though.

Dinah rae · Post by **Dinah rae** » Sun May 28, 2006 11:18 am

This long dreamed of vision, we've all worked toward for so long ; LIKE 2500 YEARS

in case you haven't noticed they're blatantly anti-Sematic; and "accountable " wonders why?

John of Patamos explains of one in his revelations;

The Founders of the government

An American President who left his tell all mark on the

and an American President who not only wrote of one , but openly spoke of one in his 1991 inuagural address,

Yes it is a long dreamed of vision, some twenty five hundred years old ? A Mystery Babylon, the Gog and the MaGog. all the governments of the world.

And only the names have been changed to protect the guilty.

The whole conspiracy is Jewish Babylonian, Egyptian, Persian, Greek, and the Roman Catholic Church and presently a government of "we the People" and will soon be a government of a United Nations, OR A NEW WORLD GOVERNMENT.

AND THE BEAST THAT WAS. AND IS NOT, EVEN HE IS THE EIGHTH, AND IS OF THE SEVEN, AND GOETH INTO PERDITION.

And it can't get anymore plain than that either.

Post by **spot** » Sun May 28, 2006 11:29 am

I've been using the site for the last two months, and I've heard nothing antisemitic at all on any of their broadcasts. Bronwen, this was your smear originally, perhaps you'd like to substantiate it now. As online broadcasters go, they're not bad.

Acc, I don't think you'd know how to distinguish "left-wing stuff" from anti-establishment stuff even if it carried a government label warning what it was. "Left-wing" died in the USA during the 30s. To all practical intent, it doesn't exist there any longer. You get the occasional flurry like the Yippies but that's not really a threat to your way of life, is it.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon May 29, 2006 4:21 am

spot wrote: I've been using the site for the last two months, and I've heard nothing antisemitic at all on any of their broadcasts. Bronwen, this was your smear originally, perhaps you'd like to substantiate it now. As online broadcasters go, they're not bad.

Acc, I don't think you'd know how to distinguish "left-wing stuff" from anti-establishment stuff even if it carried a government label warning what it was. "Left-wing" died in the USA during the 30s. To all practical intent, it doesn't exist there any longer. You get the occasional flurry like the Yippies but that's not really a threat to your way of life, is it.
I know I've got it good. The only threat to my way of life is the phenominon known as Home Owners Association.

Post by **spot** » Mon May 29, 2006 4:27 am

Accountable wrote: I know I've got it good. The only threat to my way of life is the phenominon known as Home Owners Association.There's a television series originating in the USA called "The Sopranos" where that sort of comment, said at a funeral between underlings, would elicit broad smiles onscreen. I see many parallels.

Sheryl · Post by **Sheryl** » Mon May 29, 2006 7:37 am

Crap! My plot to take over the world with biting Cockatoo's has been uncovered! I thought I was keeping ya'll busy with illegal immigration and pubs. Guess I'll have to rethink my plan. :sneaky:

Post by **spot** » Mon May 29, 2006 7:54 am

Sheryl wrote: Crap! My plot to take over the world with biting Cockatoo's has been uncovered! I thought I was keeping ya'll busy with illegal immigration and pubs. Guess I'll have to rethink my plan. :sneaky:Spot joins the queue, having wanted to bite Cockatoo since first seeing her photo in the Gallery

Spot has trivial moments on occasion, especially where apostrophes are concerned.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon May 29, 2006 1:10 pm

I've know a guy or two that wanted a cockatoo. Don't know if biting was involved.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Tue May 30, 2006 2:46 am

spot wrote: 1. I've been using the site for the last two months, and I've heard nothing antisemitic at all on any of their broadcasts.

2. Bronwen, this was your smear originally, perhaps you'd like to substantiate it now.

3. As online broadcasters go, they're not bad.1. spotster, I'm not questioning that. I have never heard the stattion, nor would I even know how to go about receiving it. I did check out the website and found (a) the usual extremist/paranoid nut material, i.e. everything's part of an enormous conspiracy, and (b) links to really vicious antiSemitic websites.

2. Well, I would prefer that you characterize it as an 'observation'. I wasn't trying to 'smear' anyone. Views that extreme tend to 'smear' themselves and no help from me or anyone else is required. I think the comment at the top of this thread....They reveal the truth about the New World Order and the One World Globalism that seeks to destory our country.....is a good example. Such views, like some of the items on this forum, can be very entertaining, but taking them seriously is something else.

3. Can you give me, briefly, some examples of some things you have heard there that you feel are credible, and that are not available via the 'mainline' news media? Can you also be specific and tell me how they '...reveal the truth about the New World Order and the One World Globalism that seeks to destory [sic] our country'?

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Tue May 30, 2006 3:24 am

Dinah rae wrote: John of Patamos explains of one in his revelations;

The Founders of the government ...

And it can't get anymore plain than that either.Didi, let me see if I've got this straight:

John the Revelator claimed to have had a vision of seven seals.

The USA has an official seal.

Therefore John was referring to the USA.

And nothing can be plainer. Is that about it?

Have you been a bad girl and gone off your medication again?

Post by **spot** » Tue May 30, 2006 5:39 am

Two points there, then - firstly, "links to really vicious antiSemitic websites" - so does Google. It's the nature of an information website that it points to a lot of places. In both cases it's saying "if you want to read about X then Y discusses it in detail". I don't see that as a commendation. If I introduced some example really vicious antiSemitic websites into this thread, would you consider that I was promoting them? I said "smear" rather than "observation" in that it's a dismissive throwaway comment designed to rubbish something that is very big and complex. An observation would carry justifiable reasoning.

Can I also be specific and tell me how they '...reveal the truth about the New World Order and the One World Globalism that seeks to destory [sic] our country'? Of course I can't - that was some fool called Webgold talking, not me. You rubbished the website, not him. As for "examples of some things you have heard there that you feel are credible, and that are not available via the 'mainline' news media", I've listened to several half-hour interviews with Gore Vidal and with Noam Chomsky through that site, neither of whom have "'mainline' news media" coverage. Their discussions on Iraq and Afghanistan have been informative, though not significantly different to those in the UK press. Very different to US TV coverage though.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Tue May 30, 2006 6:40 am

spot wrote: 1. Two points there, then - firstly, "links to really vicious antiSemitic websites" - so does Google.

2. I've listened to several half-hour interviews with Gore Vidal and with Noam Chomsky through that site, neither of whom have "'mainline' news media" coverage. Their discussions on Iraq and Afghanistan have been informative, though not significantly different to those in the UK press. Very different to US TV coverage though.1. Now you're being disingenuous. Web browsers have pro-Israel links also. Can you find any on Republic's site?

2. That's because, frankly, very few people give a **** what either of them think about anything. They are both successful authors and Chomsky is a truly great ethnologist, but as commentators on current events they are of little interest to the general public. The fact that they have to go to a venue of that sort to be interviewed is proof of that.

Post by **spot** » Tue May 30, 2006 6:53 am

Bronwen wrote: 1. Now you're being disingenuous. Web browsers have pro-Israel links also. Can you find any on Republic's site?

2. That's because, frankly, very few people give a **** what either of them think about anything. They are both successful authors and Chomsky is a truly great ethnologist, but as commentators on current events they are of little interest to the general public. The fact that they have to go to a venue of that sort to be interviewed is proof of that.The news site seems to provide information less readily available to the general public - the mainstream news media has a significant pro-Israeli streak, don't you find? I fear I do, at any rate. The Independent is something of a welcome exception in that regard.

As for the popularity or otherwise of Vidal and Chomsky, I merely note that every single time either of them has spoken at any University on any continent in the last ten years they have filled the hall, theatre or stadium to overflowing. "very few people give a **** what either of them think about anything"? Tosh, madam, and you know it.

downag · Post by **downag** » Tue May 30, 2006 7:55 am

I have a question;

Can any of you folks see a distinction between being Anti-semeticandAnti-ZIONIST?

Just wondering.

d:-5

Post by **spot** » Tue May 30, 2006 8:00 am

downag wrote: I have a question;

Can any of you folks see a distinction between being Anti-semetic and Anti-ZIONIST? Obviously. Many Jews have been anti-Zionist. Few Jews have been anti-Semitic.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Wed May 31, 2006 1:21 am

spot wrote: 1. The...mainstream news media has a significant pro-Israeli streak, don't you find? I fear I do, at any rate.

2. As for the popularity or otherwise of Vidal and Chomsky, I merely note that every single time either of them has spoken at any University on any continent in the last ten years they have filled the hall, theatre or stadium to overflowing. "very few people give a **** what either of them think about anything"?

3. Tosh, madam, and you know it.1. I certainly do find. Why do you suppose that is? Could it possibly be because they are the only democratic country in the region, and they are surrounded by murd erous jackals who have been trying to destroy them since the country's inception? Why should you fear that? Or maybe that is part of the conspiracy too. You were wanting that the American news media should support the jackals perhaps?

2. Well, no arguments about Chomsky; in fact, when I produced a radio series for the University of Chicago in the 1960's he supplied me with one of the best programs in the series. He discussed politics, as I remember, only peripherally, sticking mostly to subjects on which he is an expert, which is why the audience came to hear him in the first place.

Whether Vidal would fill a college hall I don't know. What would he discuss? His slime novel Myra Breckenridge? Or possibly his long-running feud with the equally limp-wristed Truman Capote?

3. Tosh died years ago. He was a great reggae artist though. Desmond Dekker also died last week. spot wrote: Many Jews have been anti-Zionist. Few Jews have been anti-Semitic.Many ultra-Orthodox Jews were anti-Zionist before the state of Israel was founded because they believed that such a state should only exist in the Messianic Age and they did not see Hillel, or anyone else involved with the establishment of Israel, as the Messiah. Once Israel existed, however, it became no longer a goal which they could not support but rather an established fact of world politics, and most of such opposition ended; indeed, many of Zionism's former detractors moved there! There are still a very small number of anti-Zionist Jews, but if you dig deeply enough, you'll probably find that most of them are anti-Semitic too. Sad.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Wed May 31, 2006 1:37 am

downag wrote: 1. I have a question;

2. Can any of you folks see a distinction between being Anti-semeticandAnti-ZIONIST?

3. Just wondering.1. You are very good at asking questions but very bad at answering them.

2. Anyone who claims that the so-called 'Protocols of...Zion' are genuine has no credibility in any discussion of Jewish issues. If you insist on doing so, however, why not at least learn how to SPELL 'anti-Semitic'?

3. Obviously. 'Without a clue' would be a better description.

Post by **spot** » Wed May 31, 2006 3:50 am

Bronwen wrote: There are still a very small number of anti-Zionist Jews, but if you dig deeply enough, you'll probably find that most of them are anti-Semitic too. Sad.What's sad perhaps, Bronwen, is that you should egg your cake like this. You go far enough to be reasonable, sensible, approvable, and then you bang on the final rider that pushes you into an extremist zone that's unsupportable. Akiva Orr is one of the most principled of writers and yet here you are demonizing him, with a weasel probably and most of. Be specific, if you're going to be so dirty.

As an aside, I was enjoying Gore Vidal while still at school. By all means dispute his political position, but don't mock talent. Of course he'd fill stadia.

downag · Post by **downag** » Wed May 31, 2006 11:02 am

Bronwen wrote: 1. You are very good at asking questions but very bad at answering them.

2. Anyone who claims that the so-called 'Protocols of...Zion' are genuine has no credibility in any discussion of Jewish issues. If you insist on doing so, however, why not at least learn how to SPELL 'anti-Semitic'?

3. Obviously. 'Without a clue' would be a better description.

Bronwen papist cyber mole;

Anyone one with as much time and demonstrated resources to defend the RCC as you do must be on the payroll working to quell anti-Catholic internet activity. Anyone who claims the Roman Catholic Church is the one true church has no credibility in any religious discussion, period. Don't drop that piece of bread. God will get you.

d,:yh_rotfl:,:yh_kiss:

anastrophe · Post by **anastrophe** » Wed May 31, 2006 11:15 am

let's tone down the rhetorical barbs please. attack the idea, not the person expressing the idea. the former is rational debate, even if heated. the latter is a logical fallacy which only weakens one's own position once exposed.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Wed May 31, 2006 12:55 pm

Bronwen wrote:

2. That's because, frankly, very few people give a **** what either of them think about anything. They are both successful authors and Chomsky is a truly great ethnologist, but as commentators on current events they are of little interest to the general public. The fact that they have to go to a venue of that sort to be interviewed is proof of that.

If you actually listen to what they say, it's well thought out and deserves consideration - if only to disagree with it.

The fact that they have to go to a venue of that sort to be interviewed shows the extent of media self-censorship

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Wed May 31, 2006 1:01 pm

downag wrote: I have a question;

Can any of you folks see a distinction between being Anti-semetic and Anti-ZIONIST?

Just wondering.

d:-5

If, by anti-semitic you mean against Jews and anti-zionist you mean against Isreal, then of course there is - a massive difference.

I would imagine that there are many Jews who disagree with the actions of the Israeli government.

There are certainly many others that do - that doesn't make them, per-se, anti semitic.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:22 am

spot wrote: What's sad perhaps, Bronwen, is that you should egg your cake like this. You go far enough to be reasonable, sensible, approvable, and then you bang on the final rider that pushes you into an extremist zone that's unsupportable. Akiva Orr is one of the most principled of writers and yet here you are demonizing him, with a weasel probably and most of. Be specific, if you're going to be so dirty.

As an aside, I was enjoying Gore Vidal while still at school. By all means dispute his political position, but don't mock talent. Of course he'd fill stadia.spot, I have never heard of Akiva Orr, therefore it would be very difficult for me to demonize him or be specific about anything he's written.

I don't dispute that Gore Vidal is enjoyable if one likes freak shows, as many contributors to this forum obviously do. That he would fill stadia I seriously doubt, but I have lived in Europe for the better part of a decade now so perhaps I am missing something. There's always been a market for the outrageous (witness, for example, the success of the late Lenny Bruce, who wouldn't have been very funny with 'mainline' material), but that market is limited.

While I generally enjoy our exchanges, you still seem to have a chip on your shoulder and try to foment argument where there is really very little to argue about. Since, for example, you didn't challenge my characterization of Israel's position in the Middle East, I assume you basically agree with it. If not, please be specific and explain why you think it's wrong and I have no doubt we can discuss it rationally. That might be a subject for a new thread on one of the other forums here.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:45 am

Bryn Mawr wrote: 1. If you actually listen to what they say, it's well thought out and deserves consideration - if only to disagree with it.

2. The fact that they have to go to a venue of that sort to be interviewed shows the extent of media self-censorship

3. If, by anti-semitic you mean against Jews and anti-zionist you mean against Isreal, then of course there is - a massive difference.

4. I would imagine that there are many Jews who disagree with the actions of the Israeli government.

5. There are certainly many others that do - that doesn't make them, per-se, anti semitic.1. That may be true, Bryn, but it's more a matter of the breadth of one's base. If either of them had broad appeal they wouldn't be restricted to esoteric venues.

2. Well, I'm not sure what you mean by 'self-censorship'. The big commercial media operations have to attract as large an audience as possible, which is by definition somewhere in the middle of the road. If you are implying that there is some sort of conspiracy to restrict certain views, you are certainly on the right forum but I don't see that. One can go to any well-stocked American newsstand or a bookstore like Barnes & Noble or Border's and choose from probably as wide a range of political viewpoints as anywhere in the world. Even there, though, they are not going to give shelf space to publications that don't sell. That is selection, not censorship.

3, 4 & 5. I'm not sure the difference is massive nor that there are that many Jews who disagree SUBSTANTIALLY with the Israeli government. There is an old saying that if you ask two Jews about anything you will get at least three different opinions, but it's unlikely that many Israelis, or Jews living elsewhere, support the terrorists that have vowed to destroy Israel, which is to say, nearly every Middle-Eastern country except the small number that have shown the good sense to live in peace with Israel. But, as I told spot in the previous post, this could be a discussion for a different thread on a different forum.

Post by **spot** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:08 am

Bronwen wrote: spot, I have never heard of Akiva Orr, therefore it would be very difficult for me to demonize him or be specific about anything he's written.

I don't dispute that Gore Vidal is enjoyable if one likes freak shows, as many contributors to this forum obviously do. That he would fill stadia I seriously doubt, but I have lived in Europe for the better part of a decade now so perhaps I am missing something. There's always been a market for the outrageous (witness, for example, the success of the late Lenny Bruce, who wouldn't have been very funny with 'mainline' material), but that market is limited.

While I generally enjoy our exchanges, you still seem to have a chip on your shoulder and try to foment argument where there is really very little to argue about. Since, for example, you didn't challenge my characterization of Israel's position in the Middle East, I assume you basically agree with it. If not, please be specific and explain why you think it's wrong and I have no doubt we can discuss it rationally. That might be a subject for a new thread on one of the other forums here.It was your "There are still a very small number of anti-Zionist Jews, but if you dig deeply enough, you'll probably find that most of them are anti-Semitic too. Sad." - That's the accusation levelled at Akiva Orr, a man whose integrity I have no reason to doubt and from whose books I have learned much, who is anti-Zionist and justifies his position lucidly. He isn't the least bit anti-Semitic. If you and golem would like to propose the motion that "this House is Zionist" I will more than happily engage you on the subject.

Gore Vidal's historical novels dealing with American history introduce many people to the subject. I can't think of many better ways of acquiring a background in that area.Freak shows? Not at all, he's intelligent and reasonable. Your bigotry drives your view, Bronwen. "equally limp-wristed" is shameful. As Vidal wrote, "The American passion for categorizing has now managed to create to nonexistent categories - gay and straight. Either you are one or you are the other. But since everyone is a mixture of inclinations, the categories keep breaking down, the irrational takes over."

I have no problem with anything I can remember of your position on Israel. It's a wonderful country, I have enjoyed visiting, and I wish its inhabitants long life and many joys. Its political position on Palestine annoys me. The number of unarmed civilians killed by the IDF disturbs me. The parallels with South African Apartheid in the artificial maintenance of a Jewish majority within the expanded borders disturbs me.

The only reason we're fighting is your tendency to smear - as in the case of anti-Zionist Jews like Akiva Orr who rationally want to remove the religious constraints from the Israeli state - which I ascribe to a lack of information on your part combined with a willingness to express a vew regardless when potent buzz-words appear. The simple way to avoid such criticism is to, for example, in his case, have at least googled the man before replying to the thread.

Post by **spot** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:48 am

Bryn Mawr wrote: I would imagine that there are many Jews who disagree with the actions of the Israeli government.Lack of precision, I think - "I would imagine that there are many Jews who disagree with the existence of a Jewish State" would be required, and I'm not sure I could say that myself. That's anti-Zionism though.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:57 am

spot wrote: 1. It was your "There are still a very small number of anti-Zionist Jews, but if you dig deeply enough, you'll probably find that most of them are anti-Semitic too. Sad." - That's the accusation levelled at Akiva Orr, a man whose integrity I have no reason to doubt and from whose books I have learned much, who is anti-Zionist and justifies his position lucidly.

2. He isn't the least bit anti-Semitic. If you and golem would like to propose the motion that "this House is Zionist" I will more than happily engage you on the subject.

3. Gore Vidal's historical novels dealing with American history introduce many people to the subject. I can't think of many better ways of acquiring a background in that area.

4. Freak shows? Not at all, he's intelligent and reasonable. Your bigotry drives your view, Bronwen. "equally limp-wristed" is shameful.

5. As Vidal wrote, "The American passion for categorizing has now managed to create to nonexistent categories - gay and straight. Either you are one or you are the other. But since everyone is a mixture of inclinations, the categories keep breaking down, the irrational takes over."

6. I have no problem with anything I can remember of your position on Israel. It's a wonderful country, I have enjoyed visiting, and I wish its inhabitants long life and many joys.

7. Its political position on Palestine annoys me. The number of unarmed civilians killed by the IDF disturbs me.

8. The parallels with South African Apartheid in the artificial maintenance of a Jewish majority within the expanded borders disturbs me.

9. The only reason we're fighting is your tendency to smear - as in the case of anti-Zionist Jews like Akiva Orr who rationally want to remove the religious constraints from the Israeli state - which I ascribe to a lack of information on your part combined with a willingness to express a vew regardless when potent buzz-words appear. 1. We are going around in circles about Mr. Orr, whom I have never read and whose very name was unknown to me until you mentioned it. Under those circumstances, it would have been impossible for me to level anything at him. If you mean that others have done so, I have no reason to doubt that.

2. I'm not sure which 'house' you're referring to. Certainly not the FG. I would describe myself as a Gentile Zionist, fully supportive of the State of Israel as a concept and as a political reality, and my support stems partly from my Christian religion and partly from understanding the history of the region, which many of Israel's detractors, especially younger ones, do not.

I am old enough to remember the Six-Day war and the Yom Kippur war, and to remember the slimeball Arabs at the UN saying, in effect, 'We said we would drive the Israelis into the sea, and how dare they fight back! We demand that you stop them!' War is hell, and war has consequences.

3. His historical books are excellent.

4. Well, here you are hiding behind the label of 'bigotry' rather then addressing the issue straightforwardly. Gore Vidal does not have to go around acting like a prancing swish. He has chosen that persona and I would guess that it is as distasteful to most gays as it is to me. Some entertainers, like the late Paul Lynde, and Alan Sues (who I'm not sure is really gay) have done so to successful comedic effect, but Vidal isn't the least bit funny.

5. He is, of course, welcome to his opinion.

6. Here I agree with you, of course, and I also applaud for courage for having gone there. Living as I do just a few hours away by plane, I would love to visit there but so far have not mustered up the guts to do so for fear that some Islamic MANIAC will walk up along side me, or be a passenger in the same bus, and blow us all to pieces. When that danger ceases, once and for all, I will on the first plane to Tel Aviv.

7. They are killed because the terrorists use them as shields. The world is full of cowards, but that is cowardice of the worst kind.

8. Talk about apples and kumquats. I see no such parallels. Once again, you need to take the region's entire history into account. It is nothing like that of South Africa.

9. See 1. If I have time to read any of his writings I will gladly discuss him with you.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:04 am

Bronwen wrote: 1. That may be true, Bryn, but it's more a matter of the breadth of one's base. If either of them had broad appeal they wouldn't be restricted to esoteric venues.

2. Well, I'm not sure what you mean by 'self-censorship'. The big commercial media operations have to attract as large an audience as possible, which is by definition somewhere in the middle of the road. If you are implying that there is some sort of conspiracy to restrict certain views, you are certainly on the right forum but I don't see that. One can go to any well-stocked American newsstand or a bookstore like Barnes & Noble or Border's and choose from probably as wide a range of political viewpoints as anywhere in the world. Even there, though, they are not going to give shelf space to publications that don't sell. That is selection, not censorship.

3, 4 & 5. I'm not sure the difference is massive nor that there are that many Jews who disagree SUBSTANTIALLY with the Israeli government. There is an old saying that if you ask two Jews about anything you will get at least three different opinions, but it's unlikely that many Israelis, or Jews living elsewhere, support the terrorists that have vowed to destroy Israel, which is to say, nearly every Middle-Eastern country except the small number that have shown the good sense to live in peace with Israel. But, as I told spot in the previous post, this could be a discussion for a different thread on a different forum.

1 & 2. The media will print what sells - within their political agenda. Or are you seriously suggesting that the media is totally unbiased and inpartial?

3, 4 & 5. I thought we were discussing the broad subject - not just the opinions of the Jews themselves. In that wider context I would still maintain that there is a big difference between the two.

In another post Spot has pointed out that my definition of anti-zionist is in error and that, rather than against the actions of the secular state of Israel it is against the existance on the state of Israel. That closes the gap but in no way closes it.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:18 am

Bryn Mawr wrote: In another post Spot has pointed out that my definition of anti-zionist is in error and that, rather than against the actions of the secular state of Israel it is against the existance on the state of Israel. That closes the gap but in no way closes it.No no no! Good Lord. "disagree with the existence of a Jewish State". There's a strand of anti-Zionism that wishes to remove Jewish exclusivity from within the legal framework of Israel, rather like the ANC wanted to remove the Apartheid laws in South Africa.

Zionism from its inception was the establishment of a Jewish Homeland. This distinction between "Jewish State" and "Israel" needs to be established. Israel could indeed be secular, but isn't. Were it secular it would not be Zionist.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Sun Jun 04, 2006 2:10 am

Bryn Mawr wrote: 1 & 2. The media will print what sells - within their political agenda. Or are you seriously suggesting that the media is totally unbiased and inpartial?

3, 4 & 5. I thought we were discussing the broad subject - not just the opinions of the Jews themselves. In that wider context I would still maintain that there is a big difference between the two.

In another post Spot has pointed out that my definition of anti-zionist is in error and that, rather than against the actions of the secular state of Israel it is against the existance on the state of Israel. That closes the gap but in no way closes it.1. Oh, certainly not, nor should it be. The broadcast media, which occupy air space considered to be in the public domain, are required by their licenses to observe certain standards of fairness - they still have a right to state their management's opinions on public issues. The print media are completely unfettered, subject only to the laws concerning libel and copyright. Bryn, you can print just about anything, post it on the web, or hawk it on the nearest busy corner. Of course, if no one's interested, well, at least you had the satisfaction of seeing it in print!

3. We were discussing both. I maintain that most non-Jews who oppose Zionism are either anti-Semitic or don't fully comprehend the history of the region. But that is something that is open to discussion, on a different forum, since it has little to do with conspiracy theories.

Daniyal · Post by **Daniyal** » Fri Jul 18, 2008 7:49 am

spot;314662 wrote: No no no! Good Lord. "disagree with the existence of a Jewish State". There's a strand of anti-Zionism that wishes to remove Jewish exclusivity from within the legal framework of Israel, rather like the ANC wanted to remove the Apartheid laws in South Africa.

Zionism from its inception was the establishment of a Jewish Homeland. This distinction between "Jewish State" and "Israel" needs to be established. Israel could indeed be secular, but isn't. Were it secular it would not be Zionist.

Question ; Who And What Are The Zionist.???

I Hope Can Discuss This Without Getting Into This Anti-Crap !!!!

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:03 pm

Daniyal;921029 wrote: Question ; Who And What Are The Zionist.???

I Hope Can Discuss This Without Getting Into This Anti-Crap !!!!

Zionism was a movement started in Russia in the 1870's / 1880's dedicated to the setting up of a Jewish homeland.

Daniyal · Post by **Daniyal** » Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:32 pm

I Hope We Can Discuss This Without Getting Into This Anti-Crap !!!!

Maybe you'll answer question you get back on line

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:43 pm

Daniyal;923154 wrote: I Hope We Can Discuss This Without Getting Into This Anti-Crap !!!!

Nothing anti so far.

What's your opinion on the subject?

Daniyal · Post by **Daniyal** » Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:51 pm

spot;314662 wrote: No no no! Good Lord. "disagree with the existence of a Jewish State". There's a strand of anti-Zionism that wishes to remove Jewish exclusivity from within the legal framework of Israel, rather like the ANC wanted to remove the Apartheid laws in South Africa.

Zionism from its inception was the establishment of a Jewish Homeland. This distinction between "Jewish State" and "Israel" needs to be established. Israel could indeed be secular, but isn't. Were it secular it would not be Zionist.

Question ; Who And What Are The Zionist.???

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:54 pm

Daniyal;923284 wrote: Question ; Who And What Are The Zionist.???

Question - what is your opinion on the subject.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:57 pm

Daniyal;922939 wrote: Dr . , Ever Notice How They Change The Subject At Will . And Tell You How You Should See Things ? ...
:yh_rotfl

Daniyal · Post by **Daniyal** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 3:51 pm

Spot Question ; Who And What Are The Zionist.???

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 3:56 pm

Daniyal;926229 wrote: Spot Question ; Who And What Are The Zionist.???

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showp ... stcount=30

and how about a reply to my question?

Daniyal · Post by **Daniyal** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:16 pm

Spot where are Question ; Who And What Are The Zionist.???

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 4:02 am

Don't feel bad, Bryn. It's not you. Danny has a crush on Spot, that's all.