In the video Galloway also goes on to say that he's had several Israeli citizens on his show and who he's on platform with. Galloway specifically states that he doesn't consider every Israeli citizen the problem

2:45 in Gorillaman's video, "I don't debate with Israelis", again at 8:44 and again at 11:08. Galloway only declares that his problem is not with Jewish people, he repeatedly declares that he absolutely will not debate Israeli's.

What is your response to the gorrilaman video which Galloway explains his reasoning.

My response is disgust, outrage and disbelief. Galloway declares that on principle, his boycott of Israel extends to the point of refusing to even engaging any Israeli in debate. I had hoped that much was clear, and if that point isn't agreed let me know. I don't know how Galloway could make himself any clearer but apparently some still don't hear him.

On the face of it, his position on that isn't even what I find most offensive, though I do find it so. I insist it is no different than any other nationality I've mentioned up thread. What is intolerable is Galloway's own past record.

Saddam Hussein committed genocide against his own people not once, but twice. Killing nearly a half million people across the two. George Galloway did NOT refuse to engage Saddam(let alone Iraqis) in debate. In fact, George went to Baghdad and met Saddam, telling him "Sir, I salute your courage, your strength and your indefatigability. I can honestly say when I was speaking with my comrades about coming here, each one wished me to extend their fraternal greetings and support."

Bashir al Assad is continuing on the work of his father, brutally repressing and killing his own people. Galloway again went to Damascus, to praise Syria and tell the people how lucky they were to have Assad. He even squeezed in praise for the Iraqi suicide bombers then blowing up Shia mosques and neighbourhoods.

Galloway's moral 'high' road towards Israel is revealing in the extreme when looking at his eagerness to not only engage, but actively praise other war criminals in the region.

No, only when his guests refer to the leader of the world's most brutal and repressive dictatorship as their friend, a well respected and overall nice and likable person.

I think anyone's failure to see the importance of that comes from having lived to long in a bubble of safety and security where the severe suffering and horror faced by the slaves in North Korea isn't adequately appreciated.

Frankly, I think George's dismissal wasn't patronizing enough. George's reply came off weak and ineffective. North Korea is a state where the majority of the population lives under conditions the entire rest of the world defines as slavery. Any dictator or world leader is going to be very charismatic, persuasive and come across as someone you just want to like and respect person to person. More needed to be made of the fact that Kim Jong Un is BOTH the man Rodman describes AND the most brutal, cruel and repressive dictator on the planet.

Updated the list

@Sepacore - In the case of Nazi Germany, The Taliban, 1970's Chile and the confederate south, the gun owners were the tyrants. I think gun owners are more likely to support a repressive government smashing it's citizens than stopping it. Even if you don't take recent history into account, guns don't do much against tanks, drones, helicopters, SEAL teams and stealth bombers.

@aimpoint - You make a good point about growing up with guns. To those who grow up in more rural/isolated areas, guns are a useful part of life - hunting, sport, defending your property from nasty critters, etc. Those who grow up in urban/denser settings see guns as things that facilitate crime - drivebys, robbery, murder, domestic abuse, etc.

???

This is appalling. So Gaddafi and Assad's brutal repression of their people had nothing to do with the uprisings. Naturally those uprisings were Israeli manipulation. Meanwhile, Egypt was recently liberated from Mubarak's dictatorship.

So, I guess the summary is that good dictators are those that support Russia or China, and bad dictators are connected with Israel and the west. Legitimate uprisings of the people are those against dictators supportive of the west, and staged 'uprisings' are those that unseat dictators connected to Russia and China.

This is sick minded thinking. I hope someday you look back in horror at the time when you supported Bashir al Assad and Gaddafi's brutal murderous campaigns against their own people.

Radcliffe actually seems a bit repressed, if you ask me... like, he's so careful not to offend anyone that he hardly has anything to say... and while I don't follow him that closely, I know he's been outspoken in a few (relatively safe) political positions (antidiscrimination of homosexuals, I think?) and, even then, he seems reticent and ambivalent. I give him a few years until his breakdown and subsequent reinvention.

>> ^My_design:

Wow, the "free thinkers" lash out.
Not a corporate shill, but work in a corporate environment. Not saying that corporate actions are always right, but you guys only ever want to tear down, and never propose how to fix it. Your own hatred blinds you to reality.
So F_ck Walmart, F_ck Target, F_ck Coke and Pepsi and all the other companies that make "ridiculous" profits at the expense of consumers and employees. Stop buying their crap, form a commune and move to the hills. Consumerism and free market are screwing up the country/planet right? So let's seize corporate profits, block them at every angle and get us back to the good old days, you know before Carnegie, Ford, JP Morgan, and Rockefeller. Hell before Edison while we're at it. Oh wait there has always been corporations doing business in the US. Oh well, enjoy your new life with the Amish.
No options for jobs?
Here's a 160 pages of options just for the 50 miles around Chicago:
http://www.careerbuilder.com/JobSeeker/Jobs/JobResults.aspx?lr=cbcb_ct&siteid=cb_ctnpqsb&use=all&s_rawword
s=Chicago&s_freeloc=Il&s_jobtypes=ALL&uJobsF
oundCount2%3Ajlrd=50&Submit=GO
There are always options. We tend to forget that just 50 years ago people were subsistence farming, living with 3 generations in a household, working 2 jobs, and no health insurance. Hell in some places that is still going on. But now we complain and strike because the manager bullies us and causes unnecessary stress (0:22) If that is really the case, then document it. It is called contributing to a hostile work environment and is covered under the sexual harassment laws in the US.
"Because I'm tired of working at a company where workers get cheated and cheaters get rewarded" What? Umm that would be a class action lawsuit like the ones that hit Walmart in the past.


For me it's much simpler. Requires very little thinking through, this hatred for all that Walmmart represents. The worst form of mega-corporate usurping of the individual, of regional infrastructure, local architecture....Walmart has killed the souls of so many small towns and has done it through a systematic cheapening of goods and services. The hydra is self-perpetuating with your help....One of her strongest tentacles is this inbred bitch's legal department working tirelessly to maintain the machine's tactics and contempt for the people who have bought their line and their sub-standard goods from a country that has gone from a fundamentally repressive government with the largest population of any country to one, massive sweatshop PLANETOID of human wage-slaves.

People have been groomed for accepting quantity over quality, convenience over consciousness.
Apologies for the harsh words, glad to hear you have nothing to do with this particular beast-I fucked Coke, Pepsi, Target, etc. years ago...Don't frequent any chain restaurants or purchase new cars either. Shop at thrift stores for clothing and order consumer goods online through "ma and pa" internet businesses.
From America, in America, but not OF America.

Have to say, love the video, love the message that they are trying to get across that women have more options than the standard sexy-whatever on Halloween. Thanks for the vid.

But also this (while, parts of this anyway.. not sure if I buy the Mary Magdalene bit):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPPsf-Mi8FY

Women shouldn't criticize each others dress - this is divisive, not unifying. Also it just validates patriarchal notions of the chaste-loose binary and further sexualizes women's bodies. Revealing costumes are not always meant to be provocative, and even if they are, so what? Women should be free to express their sexuality without criticism from men or other women - anything else is repressive.

And I don't think the video is overtly trying to be critical of women who chose to dress "sexy", but I can't help but wonder if its underlying message is perhaps just that.

Overall I think it is a good video, showing women (perhaps young women in particular) that there are options beyond the types of costumes they may feel pressured into wearing. However, I think we also have to be careful not to fall into the same trap of categorizing women who chose to wear these costumes as shallow, sexually irresponsible, immoral or whatever other social meanings go into phrases like "keep your tits in".

I guess what I'm trying to say is that if the message is simply "make your own choices and don't let society pressure you into being sexually objectified" then cool. But let's not hate on the women who choose to express their sexuality in the process.

but yeah.. I do like the video, just had to add my small stipulation

>> ^Fusionaut:

He's just trying to get people interested in the election! Sheesh!>> ^TheSluiceGate:
Are you fucking kidding me. How about a poll for "Ugliest Gold Star Videosifter"?



Nah dude-Trying to get folks head out of their own assess regarding the election by calling attention to the haggditude of certain women of dubious distinction. The current president's wife did not make the list because there are only eight cretin-slots available and the maybe president-elect's wife is of the Stepford persuasion, if ya know what I mean....Ladybird planted flowers on state highways to deal with her repressed bullshit, I could give a fiddler's fistfuck about any so-called election...This is about ugly wenches married to influential and possibly indiscriminate assholes.

>> ^Stormsinger:

Pardon me? You think the Republicans should win based on the economy that their platform was primarily responsible for crashing and keeping anemic? No. Not even a faint maybe, but hell no!
For nearly my entire life, the Republican party has preached one set of things (fiscal responsibility and smaller government), and done the exact opposite when in power (record deficits and increased government). The economy does significantly better under a Democratic administration. Everything they say is a lie. Or at least you'll be right more often than not if you assume it to be so.
WHY would anyone who actually looks at facts EVER vote Republican, unless they're rich enough to buy the candidates for their own personal benefit?
>> ^Xaielao:
I think after this election, if Obama wins, the republican party is going to think long and hard about their issues. By all rights they should be winning this thing simply based off the economy. However, the fringe of their party is ever-increasing and the number of growing voting blocks they shun and hate and try to repress is continuing to rise. I think that most won't ever accept that they are a fringe party, and that wing will become a minority party after a few more elections, which they may well lose as their voting block diminishes. I don't expect this to happen in the next four years however, and that their attempt to suppress the voting rights of the poor, minorities, the old and young will continue and become even more severe, as will their ever-growing hate against such groups. It is a vicious cycle that in the end might mean the death of the party. People scoff at this but it has happened before.
I personally put the blame on things like fox news, which has helped create the persistent bubble of misinformation and hate. As long as millions of republicans continue to watch it heavily and believe every word, including republicans holding office, and even the presidential candidate (as this clip so clearly shows).. that spiral will continue.



I of course, agree with you. It is all a grand masquerade that the republican party has dappled itself in fiscal responsibility when they never have backed up such claims. Perhaps I should have stated that. I meant more that with an economy like this, no president has ever won re-election (though it is improving quickly now) and that this should have been a much easier election for republicans based upon that, but that their crazy attitude and policies toward women, minorities, the poor, the old and the young has dwindled their voting block to such a point that they can no longer win a strait up election without doing the things Romney has done. Running to the middle while also denying everything you said during the primary, and the overwhelming voter ID laws, registration purges, laws against registration groups, etc in republican states, though thankfully every last one of them was shut down in the courts. I personally actually support voter ID, but not in the draconian sense the republicans are trying to instate them.

Ah, yeah, I guess that could be what he was implying. If so, I'd have to admit that stupidity has generally ruled in the last 200 years (or 2000, or probably 200000), that much is true.
>> ^VoodooV:

>> ^Stormsinger:
Pardon me? You think the Republicans should win based on the economy that their platform was primarily responsible for crashing and keeping anemic? No. Not even a faint maybe, but hell no!
For nearly my entire life, the Republican party has preached one set of things (fiscal responsibility and smaller government), and done the exact opposite when in power (record deficits and increased government). The economy does significantly better under a Democratic administration. Everything they say is a lie. Or at least you'll be right more often than not if you assume it to be so.
WHY would anyone who actually looks at facts EVER vote Republican, unless they're rich enough to buy the candidates for their own personal benefit?
>> ^Xaielao:
I think after this election, if Obama wins, the republican party is going to think long and hard about their issues. By all rights they should be winning this thing simply based off the economy. However, the fringe of their party is ever-increasing and the number of growing voting blocks they shun and hate and try to repress is continuing to rise. I think that most won't ever accept that they are a fringe party, and that wing will become a minority party after a few more elections, which they may well lose as their voting block diminishes. I don't expect this to happen in the next four years however, and that their attempt to suppress the voting rights of the poor, minorities, the old and young will continue and become even more severe, as will their ever-growing hate against such groups. It is a vicious cycle that in the end might mean the death of the party. People scoff at this but it has happened before.
I personally put the blame on things like fox news, which has helped create the persistent bubble of misinformation and hate. As long as millions of republicans continue to watch it heavily and believe every word, including republicans holding office, and even the presidential candidate (as this clip so clearly shows).. that spiral will continue.


I think what he means, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that historically speaking, in the US, any time there is a significant slump in the economy, regardless of who started it, whether or not the incumbent is fixing things, the incumbent typically loses. a knee jerk reaction if you will.

>> ^Stormsinger:

Pardon me? You think the Republicans should win based on the economy that their platform was primarily responsible for crashing and keeping anemic? No. Not even a faint maybe, but hell no!
For nearly my entire life, the Republican party has preached one set of things (fiscal responsibility and smaller government), and done the exact opposite when in power (record deficits and increased government). The economy does significantly better under a Democratic administration. Everything they say is a lie. Or at least you'll be right more often than not if you assume it to be so.
WHY would anyone who actually looks at facts EVER vote Republican, unless they're rich enough to buy the candidates for their own personal benefit?
>> ^Xaielao:
I think after this election, if Obama wins, the republican party is going to think long and hard about their issues. By all rights they should be winning this thing simply based off the economy. However, the fringe of their party is ever-increasing and the number of growing voting blocks they shun and hate and try to repress is continuing to rise. I think that most won't ever accept that they are a fringe party, and that wing will become a minority party after a few more elections, which they may well lose as their voting block diminishes. I don't expect this to happen in the next four years however, and that their attempt to suppress the voting rights of the poor, minorities, the old and young will continue and become even more severe, as will their ever-growing hate against such groups. It is a vicious cycle that in the end might mean the death of the party. People scoff at this but it has happened before.
I personally put the blame on things like fox news, which has helped create the persistent bubble of misinformation and hate. As long as millions of republicans continue to watch it heavily and believe every word, including republicans holding office, and even the presidential candidate (as this clip so clearly shows).. that spiral will continue.



I think what he means, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that historically speaking, in the US, any time there is a significant slump in the economy, regardless of who started it, whether or not the incumbent is fixing things, the incumbent typically loses. a knee jerk reaction if you will.

Pardon me? You think the Republicans should win based on the economy that their platform was primarily responsible for crashing and keeping anemic? No. Not even a faint maybe, but hell no!

For nearly my entire life, the Republican party has preached one set of things (fiscal responsibility and smaller government), and done the exact opposite when in power (record deficits and increased government). The economy does significantly better under a Democratic administration. Everything they say is a lie. Or at least you'll be right more often than not if you assume it to be so.

WHY would anyone who actually looks at facts EVER vote Republican, unless they're rich enough to buy the candidates for their own personal benefit?
>> ^Xaielao:

I think after this election, if Obama wins, the republican party is going to think long and hard about their issues. By all rights they should be winning this thing simply based off the economy. However, the fringe of their party is ever-increasing and the number of growing voting blocks they shun and hate and try to repress is continuing to rise. I think that most won't ever accept that they are a fringe party, and that wing will become a minority party after a few more elections, which they may well lose as their voting block diminishes. I don't expect this to happen in the next four years however, and that their attempt to suppress the voting rights of the poor, minorities, the old and young will continue and become even more severe, as will their ever-growing hate against such groups. It is a vicious cycle that in the end might mean the death of the party. People scoff at this but it has happened before.
I personally put the blame on things like fox news, which has helped create the persistent bubble of misinformation and hate. As long as millions of republicans continue to watch it heavily and believe every word, including republicans holding office, and even the presidential candidate (as this clip so clearly shows).. that spiral will continue.

I think after this election, if Obama wins, the republican party is going to think long and hard about their issues. By all rights they should be winning this thing simply based off the economy. However, the fringe of their party is ever-increasing and the number of growing voting blocks they shun and hate and try to repress is continuing to rise. I think that most won't ever accept that they are a fringe party, and that wing will become a minority party after a few more elections, which they may well lose as their voting block diminishes. I don't expect this to happen in the next four years however, and that their attempt to suppress the voting rights of the poor, minorities, the old and young will continue and become even more severe, as will their ever-growing hate against such groups. It is a vicious cycle that in the end might mean the death of the party. People scoff at this but it has happened before.

I personally put the blame on things like fox news, which has helped create the persistent bubble of misinformation and hate. As long as millions of republicans continue to watch it heavily and believe every word, including republicans holding office, and even the presidential candidate (as this clip so clearly shows).. that spiral will continue.

You'll find no argument from me about whether our government has been rattling the hornets nest over there for some time. However, I don't place the blame for Muslim outrage on America, or the KGB, I place the blame on Islam. The reason they are so stirred up is because their religion teaches them to hate Jews, Christians, and anyone else who isn't a Muslim. In their eyes we are all the devil and need to be destroyed, or subjugated.

What's going on in the middle east right now, specifically in Iran, cannot be understood unless it is seen through the lens of their particular eschatology (beliefs about the end times). What the Iranians believe is that the coming of their Messiah, called the Mahdi, or the 12th Imam, is imminent. They believe what ushers in the Mahdis return is a series of great wars at the end of time. They also believe that Iran will be the spark to that flame. This is what Irans top general said recently:

"With having the treasure of the Holy Defense, Valayat (Guardianship of the Jurist) and martyrs, we are ready for a big war Of course this confrontation has always continued; however, since we are in the era of The Coming, this war will be a significant war

The Islamic republic is going to create a new environment on the world stage, and without a doubt victory awaits those who continue the path of martyrs. … we can defeat the enemy at its home and our nation is ready for jihad. Martyrdom has taught us to avoid wrong paths and return to the right path. Martyrdom is the right path, it’s the path to God"

http://glblgeopolitics.wordpress.com/2012/09/21/iran-official-big-war-means-mahdis-coming/

So what you have here, essentially, is a doomsday cult looking to acquire a nuclear weapon so that they can start a global war to usher in the coming of their Messiah. They believe that their Messiah will subjugate every nation under Islam and bring about worldwide sharia law.

So, everyone who thinks that the middle east is a problem we can straighten out with diplomacy, or instituting democratic reforms, is extremely foolish. It's the same with these sanctions; Iran is not going to break or change their mind. Their top general stated it in very clear terms; that they believe martyrdom is the only true path to God. It is reported that their leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, ascends to the sky (in the spirit) once a year to meet with the Mahdi, and that the Mahdi ordered him to continue the nuclear program because it would be what facilitates his coming.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/iran-preparing-now-for-armageddon/

If you look at Ahmadinejad's speech to the UN last week, it was all about the soon coming of the Mahdi:

http://flashtrafficblog.wordpress.com/2012/09/26/exclusive-ahmadinejad-gives-most-detailed-explanation-of-twelfth-imam-to-date-says-mahdi-will-soon-re
ign-over-whole-world/

This is why our policies in the Mideast fail again and again. Everything we try to do there ends up creating the exact opposite effect. Even when they themselves overthrow repressive governments, they end up electing even more repressive governments. It's not a problem we can solve. This is the way things are headed, and there is absolutely nothing we can do about it. Their Messiah is most likely our Antichrist and regardless of how it all comes about, the end result was predicted over 2000 years ago;

There will be a one world government, one world economy and one world religion, with the Antichrist at the head. There will be some kind of global calamity in the near future, such as an economic crisis, or perhaps a war, involving Israel, and that is when the Antichrist will enter the world stage. He will come preaching peace and safety, and will head off the calamity by establishing a 7 year peace treaty between Israel and the rest of the world. At around the 3.5 year mark the Antichrist will take off his mask and declare himself to be God, and cause the entire world to worship him. Anyone who doesn't know Jesus Christ at this time will follow the antichrist. Anyone who takes the mark of the beast will be eternally condemned. If you're curious about what the mark of the beast is, it will probably be something like this:



The purpose of the mark is to control who can buy and sell. Anyone without the mark will be unable to participate in the economic system.

Don't count on believing later, or that you won't be deceived into taking the mark, because it will be under threat of death. Today is the day of salvation, so do not harden your heart because He is calling to you. The fact is that He loves you and is knocking on your door:

Revelation 3:20

Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me.

>> ^Stormsinger:

The problem with that claim is that the animosity goes back well before Pacepa's time. We overthrew the elected government of Iran in 1953, because they were threatening oil company profits. By 1967, the KGB was doing very little except throwing gasoline on a fire we'd already started and built up to four alarm status. It's not reasonable to try and put the blame on the KGB...it clearly belongs on our own government agencies, which have proven over and over again to be extremely shortsighted and unwilling to accept any ethical boundaries.