>> ^A10anis:

>> ^dannym3141:
>> ^A10anis:
I hate to sound so cynical, ok, I am, but jeez, It's a multimillionaire footballer, that's all. Get a life.

If it was some fucking chump like john terry i could understand, but beckham deserves every penny and compliment he's ever earned and he's the only modern english footballer i'll say that for. He's less of a professional footballer nowadays than he is an ambassador for whatever good causes he has time to lend his name to.
Well in beckham, you're a source of british pride. Celebrity doesn't impress me but i'd have been well happy to see him pop his head round the corner.

It takes a big man to acknowledge that he was wrong. Luckily, I am a big man
I take my hat off to you Sir, you are quite right. Beckham Is a great ambassador, and doing what he did in this video was, at worst, harmless, and, at best, a moment these people will remember with a smile. My knee jerk comment was, I guess, just a response to the "instant fame" generation. Once again, I humbly accept your reproach.


Glad i see eye to eye with a big man!

>> ^dannym3141:

>> ^A10anis:
I hate to sound so cynical, ok, I am, but jeez, It's a multimillionaire footballer, that's all. Get a life.

If it was some fucking chump like john terry i could understand, but beckham deserves every penny and compliment he's ever earned and he's the only modern english footballer i'll say that for. He's less of a professional footballer nowadays than he is an ambassador for whatever good causes he has time to lend his name to.
Well in beckham, you're a source of british pride. Celebrity doesn't impress me but i'd have been well happy to see him pop his head round the corner.

It takes a big man to acknowledge that he was wrong. Luckily, I am a big man
I take my hat off to you Sir, you are quite right. Beckham Is a great ambassador, and doing what he did in this video was, at worst, harmless, and, at best, a moment these people will remember with a smile. My knee jerk comment was, I guess, just a response to the "instant fame" generation. Once again, I humbly accept your reproach.

>> ^A10anis:

I hate to sound so cynical, ok, I am, but jeez, It's a multimillionaire footballer, that's all. Get a life.


If it was some fucking chump like john terry i could understand, but beckham deserves every penny and compliment he's ever earned and he's the only modern english footballer i'll say that for. He's less of a professional footballer nowadays than he is an ambassador for whatever good causes he has time to lend his name to.

Well in beckham, you're a source of british pride. Celebrity doesn't impress me but i'd have been well happy to see him pop his head round the corner.

This song has been around since the 5th crusade (1217-1221) and has a lot of modern reinterpretations. However Qntals versions are easily some of the best.

Some more information on the Palästinalied kann be found here, including a partial translation into modern english (unfortunately not a side-by-side version of the lyrics).

No, I'm saying the complete opposite. I should have been more clear.

Based on how he behaves and what he says, one would think that Santorum would wear the name "bigot" as a badge of honor.

EDIT: IE... it seems as though he's mostly upset at being called a "bad name" - even though his behavior clearly matches the description... It's like the word "intolerant." Or like those people who say "I'm not racist, but..."

>> ^Duckman33:

So you are saying that railing against gays and gay marriage does not fall under the definition of and I quote:
"A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs. The predominant usage in modern English refers to persons hostile to those of differing sex, race, ethnicity, religion or spirituality, nationality, inter-regional prejudice, gender and sexual orientation, homelessness, various medical disorders particularly behavioral disorders and addictive disorders."?
>> ^braindonut:
I think people have forgotten what bigot means.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bigot
Bigot != asshole, though Santorum may or may not be one of those also.

So you are saying that railing against gays and gay marriage does not fall under the definition of and I quote:

"A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs. The predominant usage in modern English refers to persons hostile to those of differing sex, race, ethnicity, religion or spirituality, nationality, inter-regional prejudice, gender and sexual orientation, homelessness, various medical disorders particularly behavioral disorders and addictive disorders."?

>> ^braindonut:

I think people have forgotten what bigot means.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bigot
Bigot != asshole, though Santorum may or may not be one of those also.

On the website for the Conservative Bible Project they claim,
"Liberal bias has become the single biggest distortion in modern Bible translations...Large reductions in this error can be attained simply by retranslating the KJV into modern English."

Really? King James was a modern liberal?

So what type of thing do they propose removing from the Bible? Here's a notable example:
"Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing."

Man, I can't believe Jesus was such a fucking hippy Liberal. Perhaps we could replace that line with something more Conservative like, "Father...either you're with me, or you're with the Romans."

They go on to say, "The Conservative Bible could become a text for public school courses"

Oh, joy!

^ That's actually ok because it's substituting for the 'e'.

Apostrophes are only used for contractions! They are in place of letters that are no longer pronounced in the spoken language.

For example, the possessive used to be explicit. For example, "Bob's car" used to be "Bob his car". The apostrophe is used in place of the "hi" because we no longer pronounce those letters in modern English. The feminine form got dropped completely, in case you are curious.

This explains the problem with "it's" and "its". We used to say something like "The wagon its wheel came off." Shortened, that would be "Its wheel came off." There's no contraction there, it's just assumed that you know what "it" is. And from there you can see the only proper use of the apostrophe is when you are contracting "it is".

"The wagon isn't here. Its wheel came off. It's in the shop."

See? Not possessive, just contraction.

Don't get me started on "your" and "you're".

>> ^spoco2:
so... after a quick read around, it would seem that Pentecostals are a subset of other Christian faiths in that they are pretty heavy on the whole being born again thing through babtism. (hence the bathing in Jesus's blood line I guess)
Again it's a whole spinoff thing based on reading of a COUPLE OF LINES of text written by some guy a long time ago... I will never fathom why people follow these things so blindly, so with utter conviction that what it says is true.
Baffling... still, upvote because it made me go and look up Pentecostals


Actually, baptism isn't the most identifying part of any Pentecostal doctrine. Many Christian groups are very focused on baptism (like Baptists!). Pentecostals are mainly distinguished by their focus on the day of Pentecost, when God gave the Holy Spirit to believers.

It should be noted that the group performing this song is even a subset of Pentecostals, and hardly representative of Pentecostalism as a whole, let alone Christianity. Most Pentecostal churches follow Christian belief on the revealed persons of God, and His triune nature, however this group is "oneness", a modern revival of modalism. Since they reject the Nicene Creed (among other statements of faith) and trinitarian doctrine most Christian denominations do not recognize so called "Apostolic" Pentecostal churches as being part of the Christian faith.

They're also pretty obsessed with J-E-S-U-S being the name of God, that must be spoken (with the modern English mangled pronunciation) during baptism to be saved. The don't believe the traditional Christian model of "In the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit" can save because it doesn't have the right magic word in it.

It works because in modern english we read the word "of" as "ov" but still register "f" with the fff sound, which is what most people search for.

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is as anti-semitic as possible by the very definition of the term, and also a forgery. You've been fooled.

You said something about a documentary. I've just posted the trailer to a documentary on the Protocols of Zion -- http://www.videosift.com/video/Protocols-of-Zion-Documentary-Trailer. In the comments section I've posted a link to the full documentary that I've just learned Fedquip has posted.

Like I said -- you've been fooled.

By the way, that very disturbing site you sent me in the above post and your earlier comment in my profile (this one: http://newsfromthewest.blogspot.com/2007/10/protocols-of-zion-in-modern-english.html) has direct links to several hardcore racists like David Duke, former grand poobah or whatever of the KKK. Nice work, kiddo!



Constitutional_Patriot wrote:

-----

The wikipedia article you linked to doesn't show this as a hardcore anti-semitic document, and claims that it's not a hoax, however there is someone on there according to the history of the entry that keeps trying to purvey it as such. It's claimed that it's not anti-semitic, but is a doctrine for ultimately achieving world domination. Whether it is true or not I don't know, but if anything it correlates with some of your past comments and I didn't know about it until you sparked my interest in the subject. I think it's definitely a topic of discussion and maybe a documentary or two might help to focus the light on the document and it's validity.

-----


Wrong, wrong and wrong again. That's plain crazy what you just wrote.

Re DailyKos: I've heard of the Daily Kos but it's hardly "extreme far left," ie. Stalinist/Maoist. It's merely a run-of-the-mill USian liberal website. 'Left-wing' and 'liberal' are not interchangeable terms.

The article you will find at that site you refuse to read references the original content on Ron Paul's racism -- which you asked for.

I've also noticed that's the second time you've insinuated that I've altered a wikipedia article for the sake of my argument. For the record, I've never edited or written an entry at wikipedia. The very suggestion is, quite frankly, beyond the pale.

well... for one, I have been robbed by a black teen-aged male when I grew up in Miami.. He was fleet-footed, holding my gold necklace in his hand while others like him gathered to defend him against me by throwing rocks when I tried to chase him. That being said, I've never told anyone about that incident before and I don't dislike black people... it's just what happened one day and being fleet-footed really has nothing to do with race.

I think you really enjoy bringing up racial issues and making them your pinnacle of debate. You tried to make me out to be anti-semetic before while I had absolutely no inclination of the subject. However you did spark my interest to find out what you were talking about on some points and I ended up reading a very revealing document called the Protocols of Zion, thanks.

There are good and bad people in all walks of life.. but some are heavily influenced by their communities.

Secondly.. can you please cite these statements? when and where were they said by him?

and what exactly do you mean by "blame the employee" excuse?

So you think we don't spy on our allies? You really think they will get the same results by "asking"? Have you read the protocols of Zion? There's plenty of explanation as to why they would spy on us there. I'm not against Israel, I like many of their people, however I can't say that I trust them. I've seen too many wolves in sheep clothing throughout my life.

I've read it front to back 4 times, 3 in modern english and once in the old style.

LOL. Yep Blank, that scene and more hilarity are already here in http://www.videosift.com/video/Best-Scenes-from-The-Wicker-Man, which had me look for anything of the original on the Tube. I was just a going for a comedic description Smibbo (I actually thought of just leaving the original for authenticity's sake), the version I listed was the Modern English interpretation of that song from Wiki. Glad this didn't die in the queue!