Helpful hints if you happen upon a Peace Rally
-
So when we see the news tonight and a report comes through of a peace activist who was assaulted we know who did it? lol What inspired this post btw? regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "We would accomplish many more things if we did not think of them as impossible." - Chretien Malesherbes
-
- Approach ignorant person talking about peace and saying there should be "no retaliation. " 2) Have a brief conversation with them and ask if military force is appropriate. 3) When he says, "No, " ask him, "Why not?" 4) When he says, "Because that would just cause more innocent deaths, which would be awful, and we should not cause more violence." 5) Punch him in the face . . . hard. 6) When he gets up to punch you, point out to him that it would be a mistake to (and contrary to his values) to punch you because he would be causing more violence. 7) When he agrees with you that he has pledged not to commit violence, punch him in the face again . . . only harder this time. 8) Repeat steps 2 through 7 until he understands that sometimes it is necessary to punch back. -John
Kinky Friedman (and his band, The Texas Jewboys) had a great country song, "They don't make Jews like Jesus anymore," with the chorus:
They don't make Jews like Jesus anymore. They don't turn the other cheek the way they used to do before. I heard that redneck singing as he hit the barroom floor, "They don't make Jews like Jesus anymore."
Bomb our homes and threaten our children and we will still love you --- Martin Luther King, Jr.
-
so, the appropriate response to anyone questioning your beliefs is to punch that person in the face? great. ------------------------------ Smaller Animals Software, Inc. http://www.smalleranimals.com
-
I think you missed the whole point... in multiple ways. Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
nope, i sure didn't. i was simply offended by the point and chose to respond accordingly. -c ------------------------------ Smaller Animals Software, Inc. http://www.smalleranimals.com
-
Does punching back solve the problem long term ? it will just degenerate into a brawl and nothing will get solved. Perhaps someone should stop and ask why you felt the need to punch in the first instance. "Volience Begets Volience" - Ghandi Regards Ray "Je Suis Mort De Rire"
Does punching back solve the problem long term ? No, but neither does letting him hit you over and over. You do need to do something in order to get him to quit. (In preferred order) talking, running, kicking and running, punching and running, rendering him immobile, or whatever is required to get yourself out of harm's way is only the first step. After you're out of immediate danger, the law needs to step in and punish him for his actions. Getting him to stop in the first place can't always be solved without force (example: trapped in an alley with only one way out). John
-
Does punching back solve the problem long term ? it will just degenerate into a brawl and nothing will get solved. Perhaps someone should stop and ask why you felt the need to punch in the first instance. "Volience Begets Volience" - Ghandi Regards Ray "Je Suis Mort De Rire"
the roshi asked his new student why he left his old master to study with him. the student replied that every time he asked his master what was the true nature of budda the master whould hit him, so he left his master to seek enlightenment elsewhere. the roshi hit his new student and said, "return to your old master and apologise for leaving him and his gentle love!" ----- life, liberty and the persuit of happiness were punched in the face, the foundations of western industrial libertarian society were punched in the face ----- we can have peace in our time... NOT -John
-
Does punching back solve the problem long term ? it will just degenerate into a brawl and nothing will get solved. Perhaps someone should stop and ask why you felt the need to punch in the first instance. "Volience Begets Volience" - Ghandi Regards Ray "Je Suis Mort De Rire"
BZZZZZZZZZZZ. I sorry contestant #2, but that is the wrong answer. 200 points off your score. Imagine what the world would be like if the allies didn't "punch back" against Hitler. Saying the violence is never the solution is like saying the no violence is always the solution. If we lived in a world where everyone thought just like me, we would all get along just fine. But, that isn't the real world. Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
-
Kinky Friedman (and his band, The Texas Jewboys) had a great country song, "They don't make Jews like Jesus anymore," with the chorus:
They don't make Jews like Jesus anymore. They don't turn the other cheek the way they used to do before. I heard that redneck singing as he hit the barroom floor, "They don't make Jews like Jesus anymore."
Bomb our homes and threaten our children and we will still love you --- Martin Luther King, Jr.
-
so, the appropriate response to anyone questioning your beliefs is to punch that person in the face? great. ------------------------------ Smaller Animals Software, Inc. http://www.smalleranimals.com
-
the roshi asked his new student why he left his old master to study with him. the student replied that every time he asked his master what was the true nature of budda the master whould hit him, so he left his master to seek enlightenment elsewhere. the roshi hit his new student and said, "return to your old master and apologise for leaving him and his gentle love!" ----- life, liberty and the persuit of happiness were punched in the face, the foundations of western industrial libertarian society were punched in the face ----- we can have peace in our time... NOT -John
All i am saying is perhaps we should ask why first ? And then if the other party insists on punching and doesn't want to talk, then start punching them back until they do. Regards Ray "Je Suis Mort De Rire"
-
nope, i sure didn't. i was simply offended by the point and chose to respond accordingly. -c ------------------------------ Smaller Animals Software, Inc. http://www.smalleranimals.com
if someone murdered your children and your wife and you did not retailiate then I would be ashamed to be in your presence. Standing around and making peaceful motions towards terrorists will simply make them think we are even easier targets. I agree punching some idiot who disagrees with something I say is not the way. But when that someone is hiding away behind legions of men, when that someone has murdered 6000 people and when that person declares that it is not the last time he would act then anything but force will fail against him. Ghandi and Luther King all had very, very different situations to our present one. Hence the different reactions. regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "We would accomplish many more things if we did not think of them as impossible." - Chretien Malesherbes
-
if someone murdered your children and your wife and you did not retailiate then I would be ashamed to be in your presence. Standing around and making peaceful motions towards terrorists will simply make them think we are even easier targets. I agree punching some idiot who disagrees with something I say is not the way. But when that someone is hiding away behind legions of men, when that someone has murdered 6000 people and when that person declares that it is not the last time he would act then anything but force will fail against him. Ghandi and Luther King all had very, very different situations to our present one. Hence the different reactions. regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "We would accomplish many more things if we did not think of them as impossible." - Chretien Malesherbes
if someone punches me in the face, i'll punch them back, harder. but what happened on 9/11 was not a punch in the face. can you see the difference? 6,000 dead and billions of dollars in damage vs. a fucking black eye. we're talking many magnitudes of difference. the analogy fails, it doesn't scale. even with your murdered children example, the analogy fails; if it happened, you wouldn't murder a murderer's family (in any civilized country), right? you'd take him to jail and let the law decide what to do. eye-for-an-eye went out with the old testament. punch-in-the-face analogies are an attempt to over-simplify the situation. and they only make matters worse by hiding important details and worse, by suppressing rational thought. who are you going to go kill 6,000 of? afghans? pakistanis? palestinians? will doing that change anything but our sense of dignity? hell no. and the millions we didn't kill will be on our doorstep in no time, avenging the deaths of those we killed. -c ------------------------------ Smaller Animals Software, Inc. http://www.smalleranimals.com
-
if someone murdered your children and your wife and you did not retailiate then I would be ashamed to be in your presence. Standing around and making peaceful motions towards terrorists will simply make them think we are even easier targets. I agree punching some idiot who disagrees with something I say is not the way. But when that someone is hiding away behind legions of men, when that someone has murdered 6000 people and when that person declares that it is not the last time he would act then anything but force will fail against him. Ghandi and Luther King all had very, very different situations to our present one. Hence the different reactions. regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "We would accomplish many more things if we did not think of them as impossible." - Chretien Malesherbes
When Gandhi maintained that nonviolence was the appropriate response to the British machine-gunning a peaceful demonstration in Amritsar in 1919, killing over 400, or when King maintained that nonviolence was the appropriate response to a terrorist bombing of a Sunday School, what was so different about their situations? Should King have demanded that we bomb Alabama, for at the highest levels, that state was clearly harboring terrorists and helping them evade justice for decades. What's interesting is to see how little effect military response has on terrorism. For decades, the English have been trying it in Northern Ireland, and Israel has been trying it against the Palestinian terrorists. As far as I can see, neither has managed to reduce terrorism significantly through force. Only diplomacy with the IRA seems to have reduced the level of terrorism, and even that has only been moderately effective. Gene Sharp, a professor at Harvard, has spent decades studying effective nonviolent methods of political struggle. He has collected case histories that show how nonviolence was even effective against the Holocaust (Civil disobedience and demonstrations by the Danes prevented the Nazis from deporting their Jews to the death camps. A peaceful protest by women in Berlin got the Nazis to release their Jewish husbands). Rather than reacting with violence for violence's sake, let's calm down and look at what might actually be most effective against terrorism. The sad fact is that for the most part, we don't have a clue what would be effective against terrorism. As Martin Luther King repeatedly said, "War is obsolete." (I would recommend reading what he had to say about war, particularly in his 1967 Christams sermon on peace, published in "The Trumpet of Conscience"). We need to find something that will be effective now that we see how impotent military power is against an invisible foe who does not fear death. Bomb our homes and threaten our children, and, as difficult as it is, we will still love you --- Martin Luther King, Jr.
-
if someone punches me in the face, i'll punch them back, harder. but what happened on 9/11 was not a punch in the face. can you see the difference? 6,000 dead and billions of dollars in damage vs. a fucking black eye. we're talking many magnitudes of difference. the analogy fails, it doesn't scale. even with your murdered children example, the analogy fails; if it happened, you wouldn't murder a murderer's family (in any civilized country), right? you'd take him to jail and let the law decide what to do. eye-for-an-eye went out with the old testament. punch-in-the-face analogies are an attempt to over-simplify the situation. and they only make matters worse by hiding important details and worse, by suppressing rational thought. who are you going to go kill 6,000 of? afghans? pakistanis? palestinians? will doing that change anything but our sense of dignity? hell no. and the millions we didn't kill will be on our doorstep in no time, avenging the deaths of those we killed. -c ------------------------------ Smaller Animals Software, Inc. http://www.smalleranimals.com
Ok Chris, then tell us, what should we do? I would love to know. regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "We would accomplish many more things if we did not think of them as impossible." - Chretien Malesherbes
-
if someone punches me in the face, i'll punch them back, harder. but what happened on 9/11 was not a punch in the face. can you see the difference? 6,000 dead and billions of dollars in damage vs. a fucking black eye. we're talking many magnitudes of difference. the analogy fails, it doesn't scale. even with your murdered children example, the analogy fails; if it happened, you wouldn't murder a murderer's family (in any civilized country), right? you'd take him to jail and let the law decide what to do. eye-for-an-eye went out with the old testament. punch-in-the-face analogies are an attempt to over-simplify the situation. and they only make matters worse by hiding important details and worse, by suppressing rational thought. who are you going to go kill 6,000 of? afghans? pakistanis? palestinians? will doing that change anything but our sense of dignity? hell no. and the millions we didn't kill will be on our doorstep in no time, avenging the deaths of those we killed. -c ------------------------------ Smaller Animals Software, Inc. http://www.smalleranimals.com
But asking them nicely to stop won't do anything either. Which of course is a moronic oversimplification of your position, but the idea that most want to level Afghanistan is just as moronic. I don't want a war. But if that is the only option THEY leave us, then so be it. Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
-
When Gandhi maintained that nonviolence was the appropriate response to the British machine-gunning a peaceful demonstration in Amritsar in 1919, killing over 400, or when King maintained that nonviolence was the appropriate response to a terrorist bombing of a Sunday School, what was so different about their situations? Should King have demanded that we bomb Alabama, for at the highest levels, that state was clearly harboring terrorists and helping them evade justice for decades. What's interesting is to see how little effect military response has on terrorism. For decades, the English have been trying it in Northern Ireland, and Israel has been trying it against the Palestinian terrorists. As far as I can see, neither has managed to reduce terrorism significantly through force. Only diplomacy with the IRA seems to have reduced the level of terrorism, and even that has only been moderately effective. Gene Sharp, a professor at Harvard, has spent decades studying effective nonviolent methods of political struggle. He has collected case histories that show how nonviolence was even effective against the Holocaust (Civil disobedience and demonstrations by the Danes prevented the Nazis from deporting their Jews to the death camps. A peaceful protest by women in Berlin got the Nazis to release their Jewish husbands). Rather than reacting with violence for violence's sake, let's calm down and look at what might actually be most effective against terrorism. The sad fact is that for the most part, we don't have a clue what would be effective against terrorism. As Martin Luther King repeatedly said, "War is obsolete." (I would recommend reading what he had to say about war, particularly in his 1967 Christams sermon on peace, published in "The Trumpet of Conscience"). We need to find something that will be effective now that we see how impotent military power is against an invisible foe who does not fear death. Bomb our homes and threaten our children, and, as difficult as it is, we will still love you --- Martin Luther King, Jr.
-
lol I reckon that would have been a good idea... right now I feel like a HumourMint :-D regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa "We would accomplish many more things if we did not think of them as impossible." - Chretien Malesherbes
-
Does punching back solve the problem long term ? it will just degenerate into a brawl and nothing will get solved. Perhaps someone should stop and ask why you felt the need to punch in the first instance. "Volience Begets Volience" - Ghandi Regards Ray "Je Suis Mort De Rire"
No. But a short term solution, if reapplied on a regular and escalating basis, can be an effective alternate to a long term solution. The easiest long term solution is to eliminate the problem. Kill them all- end of problem. If the perfect solution is not attainable, and I'm not yet convinced of that, an answer may be found in making them so fearful that they will not be tempted to do anything again. In order to accomplish that we should just kill as many as practically possible. And leave a threat hanging over the head of the terrorist(s) that any activity on his/her part to bring him/her to the worlds attention will result in his/her early departure from the toils and troubles of a worldly existance. While on an abstract basis they may want to be martyers I'm a firm beliver that when the abstract becomes concrete they will have a different attitude. f you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and a man. - Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar
-
i got it in an email and thought you guys would appreciate it (esp. john outlaw and stan). -John
Sure, slam the old guys! Actually, I don't have a problem with the peace movement. I also don't have a problem with the Klan or Neo-Nazi's (so long as they aren't actually killing people). The existence of such groups simply prooves that *our* civilization is great enough to tolerate morons. "I never met anyone I didn't like" Will Rogers.
-
if someone punches me in the face, i'll punch them back, harder. but what happened on 9/11 was not a punch in the face. can you see the difference? 6,000 dead and billions of dollars in damage vs. a fucking black eye. we're talking many magnitudes of difference. the analogy fails, it doesn't scale. even with your murdered children example, the analogy fails; if it happened, you wouldn't murder a murderer's family (in any civilized country), right? you'd take him to jail and let the law decide what to do. eye-for-an-eye went out with the old testament. punch-in-the-face analogies are an attempt to over-simplify the situation. and they only make matters worse by hiding important details and worse, by suppressing rational thought. who are you going to go kill 6,000 of? afghans? pakistanis? palestinians? will doing that change anything but our sense of dignity? hell no. and the millions we didn't kill will be on our doorstep in no time, avenging the deaths of those we killed. -c ------------------------------ Smaller Animals Software, Inc. http://www.smalleranimals.com
Chris, I don't follow your logic either. We are already under attack, isn't it kind of late to worry about makeing someone else angry? "I never met anyone I didn't like" Will Rogers.