This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.
1JGL53
George Galloway is radically entertaining member of the British Parliament. A few years back he was asked to testify before a U.S. Senate subcommittee. It turned out that was a big mistake on their part. He slapped them around like they were three-year-olds.
If you like this sort of thing - skip the first five minutes to where he is sworn in - then the fun begins:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5u1skEoqLs&nohtml5=False
If you like this sort of thing - skip the first five minutes to where he is sworn in - then the fun begins:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5u1skEoqLs&nohtml5=False
2RickHarsch
Seen it, marvelous stuff.
3lriley
Norm Coleman was such a tool. I'd expect somewhat better from Carl Levin than nitpicking over UN Sanctions. Galloway's comments on the mass murderous oil for food program should have been enough.
5JGL53
George Galloway specializes in ye olde "speaking truth to power" ploy. I don't know if he ever changes enough hearts and minds and induces people, parliament in particular, to do the right thing instead of the wrong, bad thing - but someone needs to stand up on his hind legs and air the filthy laundry of the power elites. I'm not being a paranoid or a conspiracy gnome here but oligarchies do tend to form in "democratic" governments and if no one ever finds out what the deals are then they eat everybody else's lunch - in spades, generally.
I like Galloway because he generally has the facts on his side, especially in terms of calling out the many lies and distortions told about his positions. There are videos of him on youtube blasting the crap out of smart-ass newspersons, big wheel politicos and any one else who tries to pass off bullshit as tasty pie.
You know who he reminds me of here in good old Amurica? That's right - Bernie Sanders. Bernie is a thorn in the side of all the rich and powerful that Hillary gives blowjobs to, metaphorically-speaking, all the livelong day.
Here's Bernie in action bending over some Fed chairmen and such, people on whom Hillary would gladly hum Dixie on their balls - for half a million dollars per hour:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJaW32ZTyKE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWXrMCGJT4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnoI9RsQ_wc
Does anyone here think Hillary would ever tell Greenspan, Bernanke or Geithner to go fuck themselves, either in private or on the television box? Yeah, right.
For those who say that talk is cheap and would ask what has Bernie actually done in his long political career - well, I found these sites informative on that subject:
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernie-gets-it-done-sanders-record-pushing...
http://observer.com/2016/03/how-bernie-gets-things-done-in-congress-without-bein...
(As an aside, if Bernie is such a useless ineffective tool then one wonders why he has been elected time and time again, and promoted as it were, by the voters of Vermont, defeating both Democrats and Republicans with a majority most times, and getting 86 per of the Vermont primary vote this year?)
- - - - - -
As to Hillary - here is an entertaining video I found which details her many failures of honesty over the decades:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kypl1MYuKDY&nohtml5=False
I wonder how many of these statements about poor, poor Hillary are just lies and false or misleading accusations about her that have no factual basis?
I would guess maybe two per cent? Three?
lol.
I like Galloway because he generally has the facts on his side, especially in terms of calling out the many lies and distortions told about his positions. There are videos of him on youtube blasting the crap out of smart-ass newspersons, big wheel politicos and any one else who tries to pass off bullshit as tasty pie.
You know who he reminds me of here in good old Amurica? That's right - Bernie Sanders. Bernie is a thorn in the side of all the rich and powerful that Hillary gives blowjobs to, metaphorically-speaking, all the livelong day.
Here's Bernie in action bending over some Fed chairmen and such, people on whom Hillary would gladly hum Dixie on their balls - for half a million dollars per hour:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJaW32ZTyKE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWXrMCGJT4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnoI9RsQ_wc
Does anyone here think Hillary would ever tell Greenspan, Bernanke or Geithner to go fuck themselves, either in private or on the television box? Yeah, right.
For those who say that talk is cheap and would ask what has Bernie actually done in his long political career - well, I found these sites informative on that subject:
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernie-gets-it-done-sanders-record-pushing...
http://observer.com/2016/03/how-bernie-gets-things-done-in-congress-without-bein...
(As an aside, if Bernie is such a useless ineffective tool then one wonders why he has been elected time and time again, and promoted as it were, by the voters of Vermont, defeating both Democrats and Republicans with a majority most times, and getting 86 per of the Vermont primary vote this year?)
- - - - - -
As to Hillary - here is an entertaining video I found which details her many failures of honesty over the decades:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kypl1MYuKDY&nohtml5=False
I wonder how many of these statements about poor, poor Hillary are just lies and false or misleading accusations about her that have no factual basis?
I would guess maybe two per cent? Three?
lol.
6JGL53
> 3
Norm Coleman was such an obvious douche that the voters of Minnesota replaced him with an long-time member of Saturday Night Live who had, as far as I know, no real previous political experience. Franken only won by a couple of hundred votes, but still, when a U.S. Senator is replaced by a professional comedian you know that that Senator, to quote the late Rodney Dangerfield, "got no respect". lol.
Norm Coleman was such an obvious douche that the voters of Minnesota replaced him with an long-time member of Saturday Night Live who had, as far as I know, no real previous political experience. Franken only won by a couple of hundred votes, but still, when a U.S. Senator is replaced by a professional comedian you know that that Senator, to quote the late Rodney Dangerfield, "got no respect". lol.
7madpoet
Galloway is a great speaker. His debate against Christopher Hitchens over the Iraq War is awesome. He destroys that fat bastard! Classic.
8JGL53
> 7
In the last 10 years of his life, when he avoided the topic of Iraq and only argued with religious leaders about who possibly knows what, if anything, about god and religion and shit, Hitchens kicked the ass of every opponent who had the audacity to face-off with him. Hitchens generally revealed his opponents to be just an absurd cabal of evil gross clowns. One does wonder if Hitchens got many pointers from his debating nemesis George Galloway? lol.
I think the best performance by Hitchens regarding religion - that will be available on the net indefinitely, thank god, for all to peruse - is his debate against some catholic knotheads when he was teamed with comedian Stephen Fry.
The motion they all debated was "The Catholic Church is a Force for Good in the World." lol. I found it interesting how the audience voted. BTW, the opponents were a old white woman and a black catholic prelate, both of some fame, apparently. Hitchens did them the favor of not patronizing them. He pounded on them just like they were members of the white men elite that we all fear so much. lol.
Also, counting the moderator, there were 5 people on stage and Hitchens was the ONLY straight white male. Jesus, what are the odds? lol.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZRcYaAYWg4
In the last 10 years of his life, when he avoided the topic of Iraq and only argued with religious leaders about who possibly knows what, if anything, about god and religion and shit, Hitchens kicked the ass of every opponent who had the audacity to face-off with him. Hitchens generally revealed his opponents to be just an absurd cabal of evil gross clowns. One does wonder if Hitchens got many pointers from his debating nemesis George Galloway? lol.
I think the best performance by Hitchens regarding religion - that will be available on the net indefinitely, thank god, for all to peruse - is his debate against some catholic knotheads when he was teamed with comedian Stephen Fry.
The motion they all debated was "The Catholic Church is a Force for Good in the World." lol. I found it interesting how the audience voted. BTW, the opponents were a old white woman and a black catholic prelate, both of some fame, apparently. Hitchens did them the favor of not patronizing them. He pounded on them just like they were members of the white men elite that we all fear so much. lol.
Also, counting the moderator, there were 5 people on stage and Hitchens was the ONLY straight white male. Jesus, what are the odds? lol.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZRcYaAYWg4
9John5918
>8 JGL53:
Interesting. Anne Widdecombe is of some fame, I suppose, because she was an extreme right wing MP who became a Catholic. Bit of a clown, really, and not someone who can really speak for the Church. Cardinal Onyaiken is a heavyweight, but like many people with an African worldview, he doesn't always come over well in western-dominated conversations. There is probably a big split in opinion between the West and the global South, or at least Africa, on the topic on question. Stephen Fry is always brilliant.
Interesting. Anne Widdecombe is of some fame, I suppose, because she was an extreme right wing MP who became a Catholic. Bit of a clown, really, and not someone who can really speak for the Church. Cardinal Onyaiken is a heavyweight, but like many people with an African worldview, he doesn't always come over well in western-dominated conversations. There is probably a big split in opinion between the West and the global South, or at least Africa, on the topic on question. Stephen Fry is always brilliant.
10JGL53
>9 John5918:
This would be an unusual debate to the eyes of American laypeople in general, no doubt. I don't know about other countries, including the U.S., but this type of formal debate wherein the audience is polled both before and after the debate is apparently sine qua non at the better British universities. It was also unusual in that rarely would Hitchens opponents be, let us say, non-white and/or non-men. lol.
Hitchens debates on religion were, supposedly, usually against the best debaters organized religion had on offer, both of the liberal and the conservative genre, that is to say, quite sophisticated theologians with some experience in polemics. Most were christian, most protestant, but some Jews, muslims and of course catholics.
It could be my biased opinion speaking here, since I am a non-theist, but Hitchens always presented dilemmas to the pious that they really had no answer for except for highly developed forms of obscurantist talk, or jazzed-up bad logic presented as irrefutable logic, or cherry-picked facts expounded upon like such were the only facts, or at least the only facts that mattered.
In the last 20 years, and I presume continuing in the indefinite future, atheist/humanist/secular/scientific debaters, using the findings of modern science as the basis of their argument, have and will continue to kick the asses of (presumptive intellectual types of) religious apologists, severely and often, in all the various media outlets, college campus venues, etc.
The poor and ignorant, the disadvantaged and put upon billions, who mainly exist in the undeveloped countries, will continue to be superstitious and thus victims of the organized exploitive institutions we commonly know as religion(s). But in the various educated cohorts of humans world-wide, especially among the more white-skinned ones, the influence and cache of religion will continue its slide into irrelevancy and oblivion, little by little, each and every day.
Sad? Well, anyway, undeniably true. Religion is becoming increasingly, every day, more of a subject of satire and parody at best, and disgust and embarrassment at worst. To take religious claims seriously these days does nothing more than engender suspicion of oneself by a growing number of people that one may be suffering from some form of schizophrenia or paranoia or egomania, either mildly or perhaps potentially evolving into clinical significance.
The upshot will eventually be that no one like Hitchens will exist anymore because such will not be needed - the idea becoming more apparent in time that to lower oneself to seriously argue with a crazed person is a crazed act itself. Thus, the only "sin" possible to a secular person regarding religion would be to take religion as a topic of serious debate.
I will not live to see that day dawn fully, but I am happy nonetheless. I have supreme confidence (faith? lol.) that the psychological evolution of the species will continue apace. With a 7 billion-plus world population the only other alternative will be an eventual return to the cave person level of existence in some future dystopia wherein, e.g. a sick person will go to a witch doctor to have the evil spirits removed from his body by magic potions and rituals.
This would be an unusual debate to the eyes of American laypeople in general, no doubt. I don't know about other countries, including the U.S., but this type of formal debate wherein the audience is polled both before and after the debate is apparently sine qua non at the better British universities. It was also unusual in that rarely would Hitchens opponents be, let us say, non-white and/or non-men. lol.
Hitchens debates on religion were, supposedly, usually against the best debaters organized religion had on offer, both of the liberal and the conservative genre, that is to say, quite sophisticated theologians with some experience in polemics. Most were christian, most protestant, but some Jews, muslims and of course catholics.
It could be my biased opinion speaking here, since I am a non-theist, but Hitchens always presented dilemmas to the pious that they really had no answer for except for highly developed forms of obscurantist talk, or jazzed-up bad logic presented as irrefutable logic, or cherry-picked facts expounded upon like such were the only facts, or at least the only facts that mattered.
In the last 20 years, and I presume continuing in the indefinite future, atheist/humanist/secular/scientific debaters, using the findings of modern science as the basis of their argument, have and will continue to kick the asses of (presumptive intellectual types of) religious apologists, severely and often, in all the various media outlets, college campus venues, etc.
The poor and ignorant, the disadvantaged and put upon billions, who mainly exist in the undeveloped countries, will continue to be superstitious and thus victims of the organized exploitive institutions we commonly know as religion(s). But in the various educated cohorts of humans world-wide, especially among the more white-skinned ones, the influence and cache of religion will continue its slide into irrelevancy and oblivion, little by little, each and every day.
Sad? Well, anyway, undeniably true. Religion is becoming increasingly, every day, more of a subject of satire and parody at best, and disgust and embarrassment at worst. To take religious claims seriously these days does nothing more than engender suspicion of oneself by a growing number of people that one may be suffering from some form of schizophrenia or paranoia or egomania, either mildly or perhaps potentially evolving into clinical significance.
The upshot will eventually be that no one like Hitchens will exist anymore because such will not be needed - the idea becoming more apparent in time that to lower oneself to seriously argue with a crazed person is a crazed act itself. Thus, the only "sin" possible to a secular person regarding religion would be to take religion as a topic of serious debate.
I will not live to see that day dawn fully, but I am happy nonetheless. I have supreme confidence (faith? lol.) that the psychological evolution of the species will continue apace. With a 7 billion-plus world population the only other alternative will be an eventual return to the cave person level of existence in some future dystopia wherein, e.g. a sick person will go to a witch doctor to have the evil spirits removed from his body by magic potions and rituals.
