In a religious discussion in Skypeland, a fervert fundamentalist became quite irate at the suggestion that Catholics used a "holy bible". As far as she was concerned, ONLY the King James Bible is "holy", or possibly other versions of the Protestant bible. According to her, the bibles used by the Orthodox Churches or Catholic Churches are not holy bibles. She was extremely angry about it. I said she should consider being tolerant. This made her furious of course. (Interestingly, http://www.catholicdoors.com/bible/index.htm advertises a Catholic "holy bible".)
I suggested that people who claim to be Christian should follow the "golden rule" (also known as the ethic of reciprocity) since it appears more than once in the bible, and even was quoted by Jesus when he was asked about the most important commandments. Immediately the fundamentalists claimed the golden rule is not in the bible and that Jesus never said "love they neighbor as thyself" was the most important commandement. Several people in the room disagreed with them. The fundamentalists were incensed, but relatively cowed. I said that the problem I have with fundamentalists is that they use their faith as a reason to hate others who believe something slightly different, even other protestants, or Catholics, or Orthodox, or God forbid, the filthy Jews, or the Muslims, let alone the Hindus etc. I pleaded for tolerance of others beliefs and their right to follow their own spiritual paths.
This of course made the fundamentalists really angry. They claimed that they are ordered to "teach" others about their faith. Others in the room said that teaching is fine, but it should not cross the line into judgement, condemnation, superior attitudes and hatred. I was going to point out that the Pharisees are condemned several places in the bible for similar kinds of attitudes and behavior, but then I lost my connection...
After a while I start to notice a pattern or two. I have previously heard Harold Camping of Family Radio preaching fervently that no good Christian should love his neighbor as himself. I have had other fundamentalists and evangelicals become extremely strident and angry when I suggested that the golden rule is an important precept in Christianity and in Jesus' teaching. Hmm...interesting...
Sunday, December 9, 2007
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Mohammed the Teddy Bear
Sometimes in Skypeland people discuss current events. In a room discussing the dustup over the naming of a Teddy Bear Mohammed in Sudan:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/africa/article3204071.ece,
I tried to say that some things are offensive in some cultures, but not in others, and that what is offensive depends strongly on time and place and culture. This angered the host. Someone in the room tried to draw an analogy to the different sensitivies to the c-word and the n-word, in different times and places. This enraged the host and the host turned off the microphones of two of us. Ah....yes....how rational...
Addendum: Another person in the room also responded in a comment:
I was in this cast and events were even more bizarre than you describe them here. The host was initially saying that under no circumstances would he tolerate the use of the n-word. He stated that ALL other words were acceptable, except this one. S said he didn't know what the n-word was and the host expressly forbade anyone from enlightening him. S was then sent a private message from someone explaining what the n-word stood for. Meanwhile, the host openly waxed lyrical about the word, "c**t" - explaining that he used the term pervasively with his friends, but that he felt it was generally misused by "c**kney types.". He must have used the word, "c**t" at least a dozen times while musing in this way. Shortly after someone entered the room, noting that the room had been called, "Moh**med is a teddy bear" (a clearly deliberately inflammatory, antagonistic name for a cast!). The host then clumsily exposed the fact that he had a very scant knowledge of the story of the arrested schoolteacher in Sudan. S described in more detail what he understood to have happened, and it was at this point that the host's voice started to reveal emotion! He exclaimed, "Why the f**k shouldn't we be allowed to call anything whatever we f**king like?" and shortly after claimed that he was interested in other cultures and developing cultural understanding. S then asked the host, "If you believe it should be permissable to name anything ANYTHING, would you object if a teddy bear in an E**lish classroom was called the n-word?" The host then became very upset and said that no one was allowed to use the n-word and that he had made that very clear. No one HAD used the n-word - they had said, "n-word" but clearly this sensitive masking was as controversial to the host as an actual use of the term. S pointed out to the host that, "You clearly have an appreciation of how a word (even a masked word!) can cause upset, depending on the context. On the one hand, you are very sensitive to the use of the n-word, on the other, you condemn any sensitivity to the use of the name, Moh**med." Somewhat bizarrely, there was a man in the room whose name was Moh**med. The host turned on him, saying, "Should your parents be killed for naming you after the prophet?" The M**lim gentleman (commendably) calmly stated that carrying the prophet's name was a show of respect, but there were no guarantees how that person would turn out in life. They may even turn out to be, "complete c**ts" but the M**lim saw no contradiction in parents naming their children after the prophet. The host said that naming a teddy bear Moh**med was no different to naming a child Moh**med and this made several people, including the M**lim gentleman, laugh. Again, the hosts anger increased. B then asserted that words carried sensitivity depending on where, when and how they were spoken. It was all about context. It was generally agreed that the english schoolteacher had been naive and that before writing to parents about the teddy bear she should've consulted M**lim colleagues. The host then started ranting and ravng about how wrong it was to lash the schoolteacher 40 times. No one was able to point out that she'd only been charged - no actual punishment had been finalised. Again S re-iterated his point about cultural sensitivity, pointing out that the host was being reactionary, much like some of the Sudanese clerics. B again reinforced his point about the context of words. By this point the host was raging and he sent S and B down into listening obscurity, disallowing any further debate. The host turned to a gentleman D who had been up in listening for some time but making no contribution. "You've been very quiet! What do you have to say?" the host asked. "I'm sitting here studying and listening to you c**ts." D said, "And that's how I wish to continue!"
The host also claimed that no one called their children Jesus. I said that in the Hispanic world, this is very common. The host said they do not count, since they are not really part of Christianity. I did not know what to make of this. There are literally hundreds of millions of Spanish speakers on earth, and most are Catholic, or some other form of Christian. Wow...
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/africa/article3204071.ece,
I tried to say that some things are offensive in some cultures, but not in others, and that what is offensive depends strongly on time and place and culture. This angered the host. Someone in the room tried to draw an analogy to the different sensitivies to the c-word and the n-word, in different times and places. This enraged the host and the host turned off the microphones of two of us. Ah....yes....how rational...
Addendum: Another person in the room also responded in a comment:
I was in this cast and events were even more bizarre than you describe them here. The host was initially saying that under no circumstances would he tolerate the use of the n-word. He stated that ALL other words were acceptable, except this one. S said he didn't know what the n-word was and the host expressly forbade anyone from enlightening him. S was then sent a private message from someone explaining what the n-word stood for. Meanwhile, the host openly waxed lyrical about the word, "c**t" - explaining that he used the term pervasively with his friends, but that he felt it was generally misused by "c**kney types.". He must have used the word, "c**t" at least a dozen times while musing in this way. Shortly after someone entered the room, noting that the room had been called, "Moh**med is a teddy bear" (a clearly deliberately inflammatory, antagonistic name for a cast!). The host then clumsily exposed the fact that he had a very scant knowledge of the story of the arrested schoolteacher in Sudan. S described in more detail what he understood to have happened, and it was at this point that the host's voice started to reveal emotion! He exclaimed, "Why the f**k shouldn't we be allowed to call anything whatever we f**king like?" and shortly after claimed that he was interested in other cultures and developing cultural understanding. S then asked the host, "If you believe it should be permissable to name anything ANYTHING, would you object if a teddy bear in an E**lish classroom was called the n-word?" The host then became very upset and said that no one was allowed to use the n-word and that he had made that very clear. No one HAD used the n-word - they had said, "n-word" but clearly this sensitive masking was as controversial to the host as an actual use of the term. S pointed out to the host that, "You clearly have an appreciation of how a word (even a masked word!) can cause upset, depending on the context. On the one hand, you are very sensitive to the use of the n-word, on the other, you condemn any sensitivity to the use of the name, Moh**med." Somewhat bizarrely, there was a man in the room whose name was Moh**med. The host turned on him, saying, "Should your parents be killed for naming you after the prophet?" The M**lim gentleman (commendably) calmly stated that carrying the prophet's name was a show of respect, but there were no guarantees how that person would turn out in life. They may even turn out to be, "complete c**ts" but the M**lim saw no contradiction in parents naming their children after the prophet. The host said that naming a teddy bear Moh**med was no different to naming a child Moh**med and this made several people, including the M**lim gentleman, laugh. Again, the hosts anger increased. B then asserted that words carried sensitivity depending on where, when and how they were spoken. It was all about context. It was generally agreed that the english schoolteacher had been naive and that before writing to parents about the teddy bear she should've consulted M**lim colleagues. The host then started ranting and ravng about how wrong it was to lash the schoolteacher 40 times. No one was able to point out that she'd only been charged - no actual punishment had been finalised. Again S re-iterated his point about cultural sensitivity, pointing out that the host was being reactionary, much like some of the Sudanese clerics. B again reinforced his point about the context of words. By this point the host was raging and he sent S and B down into listening obscurity, disallowing any further debate. The host turned to a gentleman D who had been up in listening for some time but making no contribution. "You've been very quiet! What do you have to say?" the host asked. "I'm sitting here studying and listening to you c**ts." D said, "And that's how I wish to continue!"
The host also claimed that no one called their children Jesus. I said that in the Hispanic world, this is very common. The host said they do not count, since they are not really part of Christianity. I did not know what to make of this. There are literally hundreds of millions of Spanish speakers on earth, and most are Catholic, or some other form of Christian. Wow...
Monday, November 19, 2007
Should we worry?
People in Skypeland often suggest to me that there is no reason to worry about Islamic terrorists, or Islamic radicals. I am told over and over that the Jews, or the Americans, or the West, or Christians, or nonbelievers, or the English, or the AngloSaxons, or the Israelis etc are the biggest threats to World Peace. I will certainly admit that huge mistakes have been made, and there have been serious instances of "blow back" from support of the Mujahideen, or the Shah, or the Saudi Royal Family, or anticommunist movements, etc around the world.
But this does not mean that there are not threats which we should at least be aware of and educate ourselves about. Here is an amazing article from the New York Times which gives some chilling examples:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/15/us/15net.html?_r=1&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Organizations/A/Al%20Qaeda%20in%20Mesopotamia&oref=slogin
I suggest that watching the videos associated with the article (on the left hand side) are quite valuable to help one understand the situation. The West must pay attention to this threat, or there will be increasingly serious consequences.
But this does not mean that there are not threats which we should at least be aware of and educate ourselves about. Here is an amazing article from the New York Times which gives some chilling examples:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/15/us/15net.html?_r=1&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Organizations/A/Al%20Qaeda%20in%20Mesopotamia&oref=slogin
I suggest that watching the videos associated with the article (on the left hand side) are quite valuable to help one understand the situation. The West must pay attention to this threat, or there will be increasingly serious consequences.
Germany is perfect
I heard an amazing account of a discussion between an American friend of mine and a lady who is a diplomat's wife, lives or lived in Canada and always defends Germany, possibly because she lived there. Her husband is of Arabic origin. She lived in Washington DC for a few years and has nothing but contempt for the African Americans in the US and claims that the crime rate of the US proves it is an evil horrible place. She claims that Germany is beyond reproach and is an example of a perfect society. She claims that Germany was a perfect country and that the United States screwed things up by getting involved with World War II and "ruined" Germany. (RUINED Germany??? The United States was one of the biggest investors in Germany before and after World War II. Many in the US were reluctant to go to war with Germany. At the outbreak of World War II, the US had the 23rd largest military in the world; it was not even in the top 10. Perhaps she would have rather lived under the heel of the Soviet Union, the way people in East Germany did? After betraying the Soviet Union and reneging on the 1939 Treaty of Nonaggression [which built on the 1922 Rapallo Treaty and 1926 Neutrality treaties between these nations] and slaughtering tens of millions of soldiers and civilians in the USSR, the Soviet Union was not particularly favorably disposed towards Germany, if I am not mistaken.)
This is beyond belief. Does no one remember World Wars I and II? Does no one remember the Holocaust? The Battle of Britain? The V2 terror weapons? Does no one remember the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe, including Germany? Does no one remember what the US did in the Berlin Airlift to save Berlin? Does no one remember the Berlin Wall and the US contribution to the Cold War to bring about its fall and the reunification of Germany? Incredible. (World War I killed more than 20 million people:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I
World War II killed 72 million people; 61 million from the allies and 11 million from the axis powers, including about 7.5 million from Germany: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
Even as a fraction of the population, Poland, the Soviet Union, Lithuania and Latvia suffered more deaths than Germany. However, these totals do not include the cold-blooded mechanized torture and murder of millions upon millions of Jews, Catholics, Slavs, Homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, Roma, and mentally and physically disabled. The extent of this horror and the society that gave rise to it cannot be understated. This woman puts herself in the category of the Holocaust Deniers and NeoNazi cretins by her statements. Shameful and atrocious. She has completely discredited herself. Everyone knows what sort of person she is from her hate-mongering and defense of these actions...)
This reminds me of the Serbians, many of who are still fuming that the US intervened to stop them from killing their neighbors, including the Muslim Bosnians and people in Kosovo, because the Europeans were not able to do it themselves and begged the US for help. I guess if your goal was to ethnically cleanse Europe of Jews and to take over the world in a racist totalitarian dictatorship, one might resent the US for stopping it. Yes, Nazi Germany was sure one of the shining examples of the best societies that humans have ever produced. Good heavens...what an attitude. How anyone would even dare to make these claims boggles the mind... On the other hand, it really is interesting to hear. One can learn a lot about people when you hear them unashamedly embrace these sorts of attitudes.
While my friend was trying to discuss her position with her, some "genius" kept kept yelling "who cares about statertiskits". Ah yes...makes for such a rational, reasonable discussion, doesn't it?
This is beyond belief. Does no one remember World Wars I and II? Does no one remember the Holocaust? The Battle of Britain? The V2 terror weapons? Does no one remember the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe, including Germany? Does no one remember what the US did in the Berlin Airlift to save Berlin? Does no one remember the Berlin Wall and the US contribution to the Cold War to bring about its fall and the reunification of Germany? Incredible. (World War I killed more than 20 million people:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I
World War II killed 72 million people; 61 million from the allies and 11 million from the axis powers, including about 7.5 million from Germany: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
Even as a fraction of the population, Poland, the Soviet Union, Lithuania and Latvia suffered more deaths than Germany. However, these totals do not include the cold-blooded mechanized torture and murder of millions upon millions of Jews, Catholics, Slavs, Homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, Roma, and mentally and physically disabled. The extent of this horror and the society that gave rise to it cannot be understated. This woman puts herself in the category of the Holocaust Deniers and NeoNazi cretins by her statements. Shameful and atrocious. She has completely discredited herself. Everyone knows what sort of person she is from her hate-mongering and defense of these actions...)
This reminds me of the Serbians, many of who are still fuming that the US intervened to stop them from killing their neighbors, including the Muslim Bosnians and people in Kosovo, because the Europeans were not able to do it themselves and begged the US for help. I guess if your goal was to ethnically cleanse Europe of Jews and to take over the world in a racist totalitarian dictatorship, one might resent the US for stopping it. Yes, Nazi Germany was sure one of the shining examples of the best societies that humans have ever produced. Good heavens...what an attitude. How anyone would even dare to make these claims boggles the mind... On the other hand, it really is interesting to hear. One can learn a lot about people when you hear them unashamedly embrace these sorts of attitudes.
While my friend was trying to discuss her position with her, some "genius" kept kept yelling "who cares about statertiskits". Ah yes...makes for such a rational, reasonable discussion, doesn't it?
Motor Mouth revealed
A person from India who revels in being as offensive as possible in Skypeland (see my blog article "Want a good argument?") gave an extended performance that I was witness to the other day. I listened closely, and developed a much deeper insight into his self-proclaimed and personally-vaunted powers of argumentation and discourse. Some observations:
*He claims to have a superior knowledge of English to all and sundry, and uses this as a platform from which to decry the mental abilities of all others. However, on close inspection, it is clear his own English is quite deficient, replete with grammatical mistakes and pronunciation errors of various sorts. His own verbal abilities are limited to extremely simple sentence structures and he possesses an extremely limited, juvenile and uneducated vocabulary in English. He covers this up by speaking extremely rapidly, however, so that this does not always register with his interlocutors.
*He declines to answer any questions and is a master of misdirection and obfuscation. However, I did hear his mother speaking to him. He is a child and lives at home with his mommy.
*He bullies others as naturally as he breathes, which he apparently is able to engage in simultaneously while producing copious volumes of verbal diarrhea. I witnessed him berating and chastising and mocking someone for feeling a bit melancholy because a close friend had died a few days previously. What a nice guy...
*He views conversation as a form of verbal combat. His abrasive and pugilistic style drives off others, so he can then try out his powers of seduction on any women remaining, alternating between insults and flirting.
*A common tactic is to answer any question with the claim that the interrogator "already knows the answer", and so should just search their mind. He delights in subtly implying that he is some form of thaumaturge, and making allusions to various evidence of the Vedic sciences.
*His ability to offend and insult is a matter of personal pride for him. I find it somewhat disappointing that he should be devoting so much energy to a shallow cowardly talent for intimidation, empty boasting and swaggering. Perhaps he will mature out of this stage, however.
*He makes wild claims for his own accomplishments, including being the author of several self-help books at the age of 21, and having tapped into some innate sapience for analysis of the human experience. However, there is no evidence that this is more than puffery or blatant braggadocio.
*When appropriately encouraged, he displays a deep animosity towards people from Pakistan, and will deride them quite enthusiastically and vigorously. He is a closet jingoist and racist! These are the very same traits he accuses others of harboring. He exhibits the same knee-jerk disdain for the Pakistani people as he does for the Americans. How predictable, immature, ignorant, unprofound...and ultimately, ennuyant and dégoûtant.
*He claims to have a superior knowledge of English to all and sundry, and uses this as a platform from which to decry the mental abilities of all others. However, on close inspection, it is clear his own English is quite deficient, replete with grammatical mistakes and pronunciation errors of various sorts. His own verbal abilities are limited to extremely simple sentence structures and he possesses an extremely limited, juvenile and uneducated vocabulary in English. He covers this up by speaking extremely rapidly, however, so that this does not always register with his interlocutors.
*He declines to answer any questions and is a master of misdirection and obfuscation. However, I did hear his mother speaking to him. He is a child and lives at home with his mommy.
*He bullies others as naturally as he breathes, which he apparently is able to engage in simultaneously while producing copious volumes of verbal diarrhea. I witnessed him berating and chastising and mocking someone for feeling a bit melancholy because a close friend had died a few days previously. What a nice guy...
*He views conversation as a form of verbal combat. His abrasive and pugilistic style drives off others, so he can then try out his powers of seduction on any women remaining, alternating between insults and flirting.
*A common tactic is to answer any question with the claim that the interrogator "already knows the answer", and so should just search their mind. He delights in subtly implying that he is some form of thaumaturge, and making allusions to various evidence of the Vedic sciences.
*His ability to offend and insult is a matter of personal pride for him. I find it somewhat disappointing that he should be devoting so much energy to a shallow cowardly talent for intimidation, empty boasting and swaggering. Perhaps he will mature out of this stage, however.
*He makes wild claims for his own accomplishments, including being the author of several self-help books at the age of 21, and having tapped into some innate sapience for analysis of the human experience. However, there is no evidence that this is more than puffery or blatant braggadocio.
*When appropriately encouraged, he displays a deep animosity towards people from Pakistan, and will deride them quite enthusiastically and vigorously. He is a closet jingoist and racist! These are the very same traits he accuses others of harboring. He exhibits the same knee-jerk disdain for the Pakistani people as he does for the Americans. How predictable, immature, ignorant, unprofound...and ultimately, ennuyant and dégoûtant.
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Good Parts
Sometimes it is hard to even know how to respond to conversations in Skypeland. A man from Turkey entered our room and said he had lived in the US for 4 years and Canada for 9 years. A woman from Ohio apologized for the United States, and the man from Turkey asked why she did this. I said she was apologizing for the bad parts of the US, since the US has both good parts and bad parts. The man from Turkey asked what the bad parts and good parts were.
I volunteered to talk about some good parts, and mentioned a spirit of entrepreneurship and a powerful assimilation mechanism, which is both good and bad in different ways. When I mentioned the word assimilation, immediately several people in the room from Germany and other places started to speak negatively about the US. I said that the Melting Pot in the US works better than Melting Pots in Canada and Europe and other places, and there is more acceptance in the US of people than there is in Japan or other places. However, I noted that large homogenous groups are assimilated more slowly. Others in the room claimed that assimilation in the US is like being a member of the Borg from Star Trek. Then it was claimed that the American Melting Pot was the same as the "evil spread of Democracy" outside the US, which was the same as Communism. Then it was claimed that the American Melting Pot was the cause of a large wall that is being built around the US (What on earth are they talking about?? How does having a strong ability to assimilate immigrants cause efforts to slow illegal immigration? How does assimilation have anything to do with the spread of Democracy? Why is Democracy the same as Communism? When I hear this kind of reasoning, sometimes I try to disagree. Other times, I just let them say whatever form of nonsense they want. It is as if they just want to fill up the silence with meaningless words, strung together and asserted with an air of confidence. It is interesting that people will just absorb this sort of statement without question, or even quite happily.). I tried to talk about problems with the US instead, but my suggestion that the power of lobbyists in the US was a problem was branded as patently ridiculous, since several in the room claimed there are no lobbyists in the US (This is an astounding statement. No lobbyists? No problems with people with power and money wielding undue influence in US politics? What is interesting is that these people had claimed the same things on other occasions, but then summarily rejected them this time. As I noted above, it is all in the service of creating a mindless, brain dead sequence of words with no content whatsoever, and silencing everyone else.) I gave up talking, and just listened, while the Turk tried to talk about nude beaches and naked people in Youth Hostels. Then the people in the room started talking about drugs and the conversation descended further and further into nonsense... (I think for people really interested in drugs, everything else fades in importance; information, politics, religion, sex. ALL they want to do is talk about drugs and what fun it is to get high and stoned. And they work hard on maneuvering the conversation around to talking about how wonderful intoxicants are, and how great it is to be inebriated.)
I volunteered to talk about some good parts, and mentioned a spirit of entrepreneurship and a powerful assimilation mechanism, which is both good and bad in different ways. When I mentioned the word assimilation, immediately several people in the room from Germany and other places started to speak negatively about the US. I said that the Melting Pot in the US works better than Melting Pots in Canada and Europe and other places, and there is more acceptance in the US of people than there is in Japan or other places. However, I noted that large homogenous groups are assimilated more slowly. Others in the room claimed that assimilation in the US is like being a member of the Borg from Star Trek. Then it was claimed that the American Melting Pot was the same as the "evil spread of Democracy" outside the US, which was the same as Communism. Then it was claimed that the American Melting Pot was the cause of a large wall that is being built around the US (What on earth are they talking about?? How does having a strong ability to assimilate immigrants cause efforts to slow illegal immigration? How does assimilation have anything to do with the spread of Democracy? Why is Democracy the same as Communism? When I hear this kind of reasoning, sometimes I try to disagree. Other times, I just let them say whatever form of nonsense they want. It is as if they just want to fill up the silence with meaningless words, strung together and asserted with an air of confidence. It is interesting that people will just absorb this sort of statement without question, or even quite happily.). I tried to talk about problems with the US instead, but my suggestion that the power of lobbyists in the US was a problem was branded as patently ridiculous, since several in the room claimed there are no lobbyists in the US (This is an astounding statement. No lobbyists? No problems with people with power and money wielding undue influence in US politics? What is interesting is that these people had claimed the same things on other occasions, but then summarily rejected them this time. As I noted above, it is all in the service of creating a mindless, brain dead sequence of words with no content whatsoever, and silencing everyone else.) I gave up talking, and just listened, while the Turk tried to talk about nude beaches and naked people in Youth Hostels. Then the people in the room started talking about drugs and the conversation descended further and further into nonsense... (I think for people really interested in drugs, everything else fades in importance; information, politics, religion, sex. ALL they want to do is talk about drugs and what fun it is to get high and stoned. And they work hard on maneuvering the conversation around to talking about how wonderful intoxicants are, and how great it is to be inebriated.)
You sound like a broken record
Sometimes hosts of casts in Skypeland can be a bit imperious. The host was dumped from his own room, and the conversation drifted into impressions people get from the media about other countries and people. A lady from Brazil said she was amazed when someone from the United States told her that the rain forest in Brazil is full of cannibals. I agreed, and mentioned my exerience where a man from Poland on Skype had told me that all Americans were Jewish, or that people from the Middle East were surprised that the US has a substantial fraction of Muslims (as I describe in the posts to this blog titled "What is an American?"). The host returned at this point, and told me in an officious nasty tone that I was out of line and sounded like a "broken record."
Others in the room were puzzled at his interjection, and asked what the host meant. I opined that the host said we should stop all conversation on this subject and just be quiet. The host disagreed in a foul and offensive fashion and said that was not what he meant, his anger growing palpably greater into a seething rage. But I knew what he meant, or at least I was starting to develop a clearer and clearer impression of his personality (after all, he is the same host I referred to in the blog entry titled "Wet Blanket"). And so I knew I had to leave, which I did, thanking him for his "hospitality".
Later I exchanged some text messages with someone else from the room:
[2:41:39 PM] P says: I wonder what I said that was so offensive
[2:41:43 PM] P says: wow
[2:48:02 PM] Q says: as far as i know u didn't say anything wrong...
[2:48:04 PM] Q says: ????
[2:49:07 PM] P says: I sure made E angry
[2:49:16 PM] P says: I have seen him extremely angry two days in a row now
[2:49:18 PM] P says: over nothing
[2:50:55 PM] Q says: oh dear
[2:50:56 PM] Q says: not good
[2:51:24 PM] Q says: he said something about u going to many different rooms and have this agenda... something... i didn't really get him...
[2:51:37 PM] P says: I have no idea what he is talking about
[2:51:39 PM] P says: What agenda?
[2:51:47 PM] Q says: and i wouldn't know... i didn't even get as far as to hear what your point was
[2:51:55 PM] Q says: don't know
[2:52:16 PM] P says: The claim that people depend too much on what they hear in the media and get confused?
[2:52:42 PM] Q says: that's what i thought u were saying
[2:52:44 PM] P says: The claim that we have a substantial population of Muslims in the USA and people find that surprising?
[2:52:53 PM] Q says: maybe he hates u
[2:52:54 PM] Q says: lol
[2:52:59 PM] P says: Well I think it says a lot about him
[2:53:00 PM] P says: frankly
[2:53:12 PM] P says: If he wants to hate me
[2:53:30 PM] Q says: i was a bit shocked by the way he reacted... too blunt
[2:53:32 PM] P says: It says more about him than me
[2:53:39 PM] P says: That is why I left
[2:53:45 PM] P says: I was not going to sit there where I was not wanted
[2:53:47 PM] Q says: he could change the topic in a better way if he really wanted
[2:53:50 PM] P says: and be attacked
[2:53:56 PM] P says: and threatened
[2:54:08 PM] Q says: u should have stayed...
[2:54:11 PM] Q says: lol
[2:54:18 PM] P says: No he would have just been angrier
[2:54:24 PM] P says: and I would not have been able to talk anyway
[2:54:34 PM] P says: I would just have moved to listening and/or muted my microphone
[2:54:38 PM] Q says: i love that...
[2:54:52 PM] Q says: ppl loosing their minds over shit and nothing
[2:55:03 PM] P says: but he is in control....so...I just write him up in my blog
[2:55:10 PM] P says: so we have a nice record of his behavior
[2:55:16 PM] P says: In fact...when it is done
[2:55:17 PM] Q says: but i would have been giving comments to support you... and i would really like to see him mute me
[2:55:18 PM] Q says: lol
[2:55:22 PM] P says: I will make sure he knows I wrote about him
[2:55:33 PM] P says: and think he is not presenting himself in a very positive light
[2:55:42 PM] Q says: i would fall off my chair then...
[2:55:45 PM] Q says: *my thrown
[2:55:48 PM] Q says: :P
[2:56:01 PM] P says: I would not even be in his room except that Skype is malfunctioning
[2:57:54 PM] Q says: lol
[2:57:57 PM] Q says: so true
[2:58:12 PM] Q says: that's forcing ppl to take what ever they can have
[2:59:08 PM] Q says: ok... gotta run
[2:59:16 PM] Q says: talk to you later some time... take care
[2:59:19 PM] Q says: stay strong
[2:59:19 PM] P says: Yes. Otherwise I would start my own room. Or join another. I find his rooms boring in general. You see when I say something even mildly (and I do mean MILDLY) controversial, he throws a tantrum like a child
[2:59:19 PM] Q says: :)
[2:59:21 PM] P says: bye
[2:59:42 PM] Q says: i agree 100% ;)
(Considering my interactions with this host, and those of my friends with this same host, I do start to see a pattern. He is torn between wanting to host a free-ranging discussion, but wanting to control it desperately. He really has almost nothing whatsoever to add to any conversation, and no imagination whatsoever, being a completely boring and uncreative individual with almost no spark of curiousity, and not much knowledge of the world, or even interest in the world around him. He displays a disdain or even hatred of intellectual conversations and learning and education. This is somewhat at variance with his accent, which bespeaks of propriety and refinement, and would assume, education.
He frantically wants to stomp on things he deems inappropriate, and to control all talk in his room and others with an iron fist. And this includes not just potentially controversial conversations, although what he deems polemical is not always readily apparent. In addition, he has a propensity to discourage discussions which are learned or intellectual in any way. This often destroys the conversation in his rooms, and leaves nothing but silence. Granted, the rooms are calm, but there is little that can be learned from these conversations either. So what purpose do they serve?)
Others in the room were puzzled at his interjection, and asked what the host meant. I opined that the host said we should stop all conversation on this subject and just be quiet. The host disagreed in a foul and offensive fashion and said that was not what he meant, his anger growing palpably greater into a seething rage. But I knew what he meant, or at least I was starting to develop a clearer and clearer impression of his personality (after all, he is the same host I referred to in the blog entry titled "Wet Blanket"). And so I knew I had to leave, which I did, thanking him for his "hospitality".
Later I exchanged some text messages with someone else from the room:
[2:41:39 PM] P says: I wonder what I said that was so offensive
[2:41:43 PM] P says: wow
[2:48:02 PM] Q says: as far as i know u didn't say anything wrong...
[2:48:04 PM] Q says: ????
[2:49:07 PM] P says: I sure made E angry
[2:49:16 PM] P says: I have seen him extremely angry two days in a row now
[2:49:18 PM] P says: over nothing
[2:50:55 PM] Q says: oh dear
[2:50:56 PM] Q says: not good
[2:51:24 PM] Q says: he said something about u going to many different rooms and have this agenda... something... i didn't really get him...
[2:51:37 PM] P says: I have no idea what he is talking about
[2:51:39 PM] P says: What agenda?
[2:51:47 PM] Q says: and i wouldn't know... i didn't even get as far as to hear what your point was
[2:51:55 PM] Q says: don't know
[2:52:16 PM] P says: The claim that people depend too much on what they hear in the media and get confused?
[2:52:42 PM] Q says: that's what i thought u were saying
[2:52:44 PM] P says: The claim that we have a substantial population of Muslims in the USA and people find that surprising?
[2:52:53 PM] Q says: maybe he hates u
[2:52:54 PM] Q says: lol
[2:52:59 PM] P says: Well I think it says a lot about him
[2:53:00 PM] P says: frankly
[2:53:12 PM] P says: If he wants to hate me
[2:53:30 PM] Q says: i was a bit shocked by the way he reacted... too blunt
[2:53:32 PM] P says: It says more about him than me
[2:53:39 PM] P says: That is why I left
[2:53:45 PM] P says: I was not going to sit there where I was not wanted
[2:53:47 PM] Q says: he could change the topic in a better way if he really wanted
[2:53:50 PM] P says: and be attacked
[2:53:56 PM] P says: and threatened
[2:54:08 PM] Q says: u should have stayed...
[2:54:11 PM] Q says: lol
[2:54:18 PM] P says: No he would have just been angrier
[2:54:24 PM] P says: and I would not have been able to talk anyway
[2:54:34 PM] P says: I would just have moved to listening and/or muted my microphone
[2:54:38 PM] Q says: i love that...
[2:54:52 PM] Q says: ppl loosing their minds over shit and nothing
[2:55:03 PM] P says: but he is in control....so...I just write him up in my blog
[2:55:10 PM] P says: so we have a nice record of his behavior
[2:55:16 PM] P says: In fact...when it is done
[2:55:17 PM] Q says: but i would have been giving comments to support you... and i would really like to see him mute me
[2:55:18 PM] Q says: lol
[2:55:22 PM] P says: I will make sure he knows I wrote about him
[2:55:33 PM] P says: and think he is not presenting himself in a very positive light
[2:55:42 PM] Q says: i would fall off my chair then...
[2:55:45 PM] Q says: *my thrown
[2:55:48 PM] Q says: :P
[2:56:01 PM] P says: I would not even be in his room except that Skype is malfunctioning
[2:57:54 PM] Q says: lol
[2:57:57 PM] Q says: so true
[2:58:12 PM] Q says: that's forcing ppl to take what ever they can have
[2:59:08 PM] Q says: ok... gotta run
[2:59:16 PM] Q says: talk to you later some time... take care
[2:59:19 PM] Q says: stay strong
[2:59:19 PM] P says: Yes. Otherwise I would start my own room. Or join another. I find his rooms boring in general. You see when I say something even mildly (and I do mean MILDLY) controversial, he throws a tantrum like a child
[2:59:19 PM] Q says: :)
[2:59:21 PM] P says: bye
[2:59:42 PM] Q says: i agree 100% ;)
(Considering my interactions with this host, and those of my friends with this same host, I do start to see a pattern. He is torn between wanting to host a free-ranging discussion, but wanting to control it desperately. He really has almost nothing whatsoever to add to any conversation, and no imagination whatsoever, being a completely boring and uncreative individual with almost no spark of curiousity, and not much knowledge of the world, or even interest in the world around him. He displays a disdain or even hatred of intellectual conversations and learning and education. This is somewhat at variance with his accent, which bespeaks of propriety and refinement, and would assume, education.
He frantically wants to stomp on things he deems inappropriate, and to control all talk in his room and others with an iron fist. And this includes not just potentially controversial conversations, although what he deems polemical is not always readily apparent. In addition, he has a propensity to discourage discussions which are learned or intellectual in any way. This often destroys the conversation in his rooms, and leaves nothing but silence. Granted, the rooms are calm, but there is little that can be learned from these conversations either. So what purpose do they serve?)
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Speciation
I went to a room in Paltalk where someone who claimed to be a Christian just badgered others and would not allow anyone to talk in response to his comments and questions. He proclaimed himself to be a creationist and attacked "evolutionists", insulting them over and over. He defined a strawman position for evolution, and then attacked this spurious strawman. He misrepresented facts.
He claimed that no form of life ever reproduced asexually. He stated that since you needed two life forms of the same kind to get reproduction, and that there was obviously a first life form when life began, this first life form could not reproduce since it had no partner.
He stated that evolution describes the creation of the earth, universe and life, which is not the theory of evolution. He claimed that all people who accept evolution are atheists. He was told that the Catholic Church supported the theory of evolution and he quickly ignored that.
He said that everyone including all creationists believe in speciation, which is definitely not correct. He said that all creationists believe the exact same things, and that all Christians are creationists and believe the exact same thing. He was so confused about what evolution was, and what creationism is, that it was extremely difficult to argue against him.
It was also just impossible to discuss anything with him since he had control of the room. And so I gave up, after hearing him ranting and raving for a while. And I left...
He claimed that no form of life ever reproduced asexually. He stated that since you needed two life forms of the same kind to get reproduction, and that there was obviously a first life form when life began, this first life form could not reproduce since it had no partner.
He stated that evolution describes the creation of the earth, universe and life, which is not the theory of evolution. He claimed that all people who accept evolution are atheists. He was told that the Catholic Church supported the theory of evolution and he quickly ignored that.
He said that everyone including all creationists believe in speciation, which is definitely not correct. He said that all creationists believe the exact same things, and that all Christians are creationists and believe the exact same thing. He was so confused about what evolution was, and what creationism is, that it was extremely difficult to argue against him.
It was also just impossible to discuss anything with him since he had control of the room. And so I gave up, after hearing him ranting and raving for a while. And I left...
No religious freedom
I went to a discussion in Paltalk and heard a man who lives in rural Illinois claim that the US is a horrible country that has no religious freedom. His evidence was that he claimed that 85% of the children in the public high school in his neighborhood were afflicted with the AIDS virus. He said this proved that public high schools were evil since they were not religiously based, and it was evil to allow children to go to public schools since they are diseased. I was just stunned and did not know quite what to say. I said that even in Africa or Haiti or the inner city in Washington DC or in the gay community, an infection rate of 85% is unheard of. He said he would produce proof of this, but of course he did not. And then started to read scripture and to preach. Ah yes....
There is no American food
One hears all kinds of evidence of confusion and ignorance in Skypeland. A man from Poland told me confidently that there is no such thing as American food, or foods that are native to the US. I said there were American foods, and there that many dishes from other countries are altered in the US to suit American tastes, or because of what is easily available in the US. The Polish man was completely disdainful and very self-assured, self confident and pleased with himself when he told me over and over that there are no foods that originate in the US, and no styles of food that are distinctly American, even though he had never met an American or visited the US himself. Incredible...
I mentioned that Italian food in the US is not like Italian food one gets in Italy. I said that Mexican food in the US is quite different from Mexican food one can find in Mexico. For example, it is far more common to use hamburger meat than other forms of meat in "Mexican food" in the US. Indian and Mexican and Korean foods in the US are not near as spicey as they are in their native countries, because Americans favor less spicey dishes. Chinese food in the US is also quite different than Chinese food in China. Chop Suey and General Tsao's Chicken are uniquely American, and not at all Chinese. The hamburger and the hot dog, or frankfurter, are of course of German origin (as can be easily determined from their names), but who would say that a McDonald's Big Mac sandwich is not quintessentially American in presentation, even if its ancestry is back in Hamburg, Germany? (This phenomenon is not unique to the US. Dim Sim is an Australian dish that is only vaguely related to Chinese food, and should not be confused with Dim Sum, the Chinese meal.)
The man from Poland rejected all my statements. I noted that tomato ketchup was really popularized in the US and some claim it was invented in the US. He was completely disgusted at this suggestion, and but then I pointed out that tomatoes originate in the Americas, and were unknown in Europe before the discovery of the New World. At their first appearance, people were afraid to eat them and treated them like ornamental plants since they are a member of the nightshade family (the leaves and stems of tomato plants are indeed poisonous). He was completely bewildered to hear this, and found it hard to imagine.
I then mentioned some truly American foods like pemmican, crab apples, pawpaws, Coca-Cola, cold breakfast cereals like Corn Flakes, wild rice, corn (including popcorn), fajitas, cotton candy, shoefly pie, peanut butter and pumpkin pie. I also pointed out that some foods, like high-fructose corn syrup and magic shell, for good or for ill, originated in the US. Interestingly, he either had not ever heard of these foods (like crab apples, pemmican, pawpaws or wild rice), or was completely oblivious to the fact that they originated in the US, and wanted to argue about it, since he was sure they were not "American" foods. Truely a sign of American marketing prowess; many of the foods he did not even identify with the US he accepted as being from Europe or Poland.
I also noted that many local delicacies like Old Bay seasoning and Crab Cakes and Berger cookies and fry bread and different local variants of clam chowder and funnel cake and salt water taffy and cranberry sauce and frozen custard are just popular in some restricted part of the US, and not even well known outside a small area. Of course someone in another country will be unlikely to have even heard of them. And of course, he had heard of none of them. But nevertheless, he remained convinced that the US had no native foods and had contributed nothing to world cuisine (arguably true, depending on your definitions). However, this is as silly as me claiming that Poland has no native dishes, since I have never been there and know little about it.
I will point out that this person also exhibited boundless ignorance in other areas. When I asked him, he was convinced that close to 100% of the population of the US was Jewish. When I told him it was closer to 3.5%, he was shocked and amazed. He found this almost impossible to believe. What is interesting is that before we talked, he was convinced he knew everything there is to know about the US from television and the movies. He was positive he was an expert on the US. Even after we talked, I had the impression he did not quite believe what I had told him...
I wonder how many people would be surprised to know that there are more Muslims in the US than Jews? It seems that I have never yet met a single person from the Middle East who knew that there was even a single Muslim in the US. This strikes me as odd since they all want to emigrate to the US and seem to have friends and relatives in the US, so why they would assume that the US has no Moslems just seems amazing. But it does say something about how people think and what they assume...
Addendum: Here is a nonexhaustive list of US national dishes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_dishes
Here is a nonexhaustive list of US regional dishes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_regional_and_fusion_cuisines
Here is an article about US cuisine:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuisine_of_the_United_States
I mentioned that Italian food in the US is not like Italian food one gets in Italy. I said that Mexican food in the US is quite different from Mexican food one can find in Mexico. For example, it is far more common to use hamburger meat than other forms of meat in "Mexican food" in the US. Indian and Mexican and Korean foods in the US are not near as spicey as they are in their native countries, because Americans favor less spicey dishes. Chinese food in the US is also quite different than Chinese food in China. Chop Suey and General Tsao's Chicken are uniquely American, and not at all Chinese. The hamburger and the hot dog, or frankfurter, are of course of German origin (as can be easily determined from their names), but who would say that a McDonald's Big Mac sandwich is not quintessentially American in presentation, even if its ancestry is back in Hamburg, Germany? (This phenomenon is not unique to the US. Dim Sim is an Australian dish that is only vaguely related to Chinese food, and should not be confused with Dim Sum, the Chinese meal.)
The man from Poland rejected all my statements. I noted that tomato ketchup was really popularized in the US and some claim it was invented in the US. He was completely disgusted at this suggestion, and but then I pointed out that tomatoes originate in the Americas, and were unknown in Europe before the discovery of the New World. At their first appearance, people were afraid to eat them and treated them like ornamental plants since they are a member of the nightshade family (the leaves and stems of tomato plants are indeed poisonous). He was completely bewildered to hear this, and found it hard to imagine.
I then mentioned some truly American foods like pemmican, crab apples, pawpaws, Coca-Cola, cold breakfast cereals like Corn Flakes, wild rice, corn (including popcorn), fajitas, cotton candy, shoefly pie, peanut butter and pumpkin pie. I also pointed out that some foods, like high-fructose corn syrup and magic shell, for good or for ill, originated in the US. Interestingly, he either had not ever heard of these foods (like crab apples, pemmican, pawpaws or wild rice), or was completely oblivious to the fact that they originated in the US, and wanted to argue about it, since he was sure they were not "American" foods. Truely a sign of American marketing prowess; many of the foods he did not even identify with the US he accepted as being from Europe or Poland.
I also noted that many local delicacies like Old Bay seasoning and Crab Cakes and Berger cookies and fry bread and different local variants of clam chowder and funnel cake and salt water taffy and cranberry sauce and frozen custard are just popular in some restricted part of the US, and not even well known outside a small area. Of course someone in another country will be unlikely to have even heard of them. And of course, he had heard of none of them. But nevertheless, he remained convinced that the US had no native foods and had contributed nothing to world cuisine (arguably true, depending on your definitions). However, this is as silly as me claiming that Poland has no native dishes, since I have never been there and know little about it.
I will point out that this person also exhibited boundless ignorance in other areas. When I asked him, he was convinced that close to 100% of the population of the US was Jewish. When I told him it was closer to 3.5%, he was shocked and amazed. He found this almost impossible to believe. What is interesting is that before we talked, he was convinced he knew everything there is to know about the US from television and the movies. He was positive he was an expert on the US. Even after we talked, I had the impression he did not quite believe what I had told him...
I wonder how many people would be surprised to know that there are more Muslims in the US than Jews? It seems that I have never yet met a single person from the Middle East who knew that there was even a single Muslim in the US. This strikes me as odd since they all want to emigrate to the US and seem to have friends and relatives in the US, so why they would assume that the US has no Moslems just seems amazing. But it does say something about how people think and what they assume...
Addendum: Here is a nonexhaustive list of US national dishes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_dishes
Here is a nonexhaustive list of US regional dishes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_regional_and_fusion_cuisines
Here is an article about US cuisine:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuisine_of_the_United_States
UFOs
In one room in Skypeland, a man from Pakistan entered and tried to start a conversation about UFOs. He claimed that UFOs were evidence of time travel.
The man from Pakistan said that with time, our brains are getting bigger and bigger. Also, he said that we "know" that aliens all have bigger brains. Therefore these UFOs are time machines, piloted by historians of the future.
He was asked how he knew people's brains were getting larger. He said that "according to biology, the next generation after 2500 years will have bigger brains. They will not use their thumbs. We are homosapiens and will grow to 7 feet and look totally like aliens. We will be all white."
A man in the room disagreed and said that with the mixing of the races, in the future humans will all be light brown. That pretty much killed the conversation...
The man from Pakistan said that with time, our brains are getting bigger and bigger. Also, he said that we "know" that aliens all have bigger brains. Therefore these UFOs are time machines, piloted by historians of the future.
He was asked how he knew people's brains were getting larger. He said that "according to biology, the next generation after 2500 years will have bigger brains. They will not use their thumbs. We are homosapiens and will grow to 7 feet and look totally like aliens. We will be all white."
A man in the room disagreed and said that with the mixing of the races, in the future humans will all be light brown. That pretty much killed the conversation...
Wet blanket
Some Skypeland rooms are completely dead. Sometimes this is because of problems with Skype itself, and sometimes it is because of the management by the host. Sometimes some of the residents of the room contribute to the general blandness and ennui.
One host loves to brag about how wonderful his rooms are, and even goes to the extremes of trying to recruit people from other casts for his rooms. This host will even criticize the room management skills of other hosts while they are trying to host a Skypecast. This host will take up time in other rooms by bragging about how superior his rooms are and how much better his room-hosting skills are. However, this host's rooms often collapse into insipid, vapid, boring discussions, often due to his own management of the room.
One man entered this host's room, and complained that his 17 year old daughter was planning to get married to a man in his 20s that she had been involved with 2 years previously. I tried to use this opportunity to broaden the discussion and talk about the general topic, and some related issues. I attempted to give some perspective about how these standards had changed over time, and were different in different places. However, the host took me to task for this and said he was only interested in the laws for marriage here and now, not in other times and in other cultures. Someone else, M, suggested that if one does not know the mistakes of the past, that one is condemned to repeat these errors, and this irritated the host. (I investigated this question a bit. It turns out that under Roman Catholic Canon Law even currently, people who are 14 years old are judged ready for marriage:
http://socialissues.wiseto.com/Articles/EJ3010052212/
In 1371 in Europe, the average male was 24 when he was married and the average female was 16. By 1427 the average male married in his mid-30s and the average female was about half as old, and therefore still a teenager: http://marriage.about.com/cs/teenmarriage/a/teenmarriage.htm This change was apparently associated with the onset of the plague, although I am not sure why and how, exactly.)
I was asked what I would do by B, the man with the daughter, and I said I would try to convince the daughter not to get married by giving her a list of about 20 reasons or so. B, the man with the daughter, was shocked that 20 reasons even existed, and attacked me and ridiculed me for saying so. B asked me to give him 3 reasons that his daughter should not get married at 17. I tried to give a few reasons, and was frequently cut off by B and others in the room. They were quite angry and did not want to hear a thing I had to say.
For my first reason, I suggested that most young marriages failed, but I was interrupted and told that this was not a young marriage. (Oh brother...When I encounter this sort of comment, it makes me really wonder.) I said that one could get statistics to show that marriages of very young people often fail, and people were dismissive of this idea. (A little investigation showed that the Archdiocese of San Diego's marriage handbook states that marriages of people where both parties are teenagers are twice as likely to fail as those of people where both are in their twenties:
http://www.diocese-sdiego.org/Handbook/Handbook_PDFs/Marriage1.pdf)
For my second reason, I tried to talk about the complications of the modern world, and that one needed a lot of education and training to succeed in today's world, but I was repeatedly cut off when I tried to describe this reason for not getting married too young. It was clear to me that B only wanted to fight, and did not want to hear anything from me (or anyone else really). I declined to say any more, partly because B was becoming increasingly abusive and combative. (Interestingly, I found these same reasons from some marriage counsellors that give courses and write articles about the same issues: http://marriage.about.com/cs/teenmarriage/a/teenmarriage.htm It strikes me that in all of these discussions, the conversation could be steered in a more serious vein and the issues explored in a deeper and more responsible manner, to uncover facts and enable everyone to learn things. However, quite often I notice that many would prefer to shut down all dialogue and just engage in angry rhetoric and mindless spewing. Ah well...It says a lot about people. The entire question of how to estimate marriage failure rates and societal attitudes and their evolution are fascinating, but something that people like this cannot address. They would rather yell and scream like buffoons and ignoramuses, and then bemoan their situation.)
It was as if I was the 25 year old trying to marry B's daughter. Frankly, although I did not say this in the room, I started to get the impression that the reason the daughter wanted to get married was to get away from her father, and possibly her mother as well, based on his behavior in the room. Sometimes people communicate far more than they intend in conversation. In my discussions with people who were married young, it is revealed that this is often one of the main reasons people decide to get married when they are still children; their lives at home are a living hell. And from my interactions with B, this time and previously, it would not take too much to convince me that B is hellish to live with. He is often angry, abusive, obnoxious and crude, and not just stupid, but aggressively stupid, and even proud to be stupid. Who would not want to get away from that?
I stopped talking. Then someone entered the room with a high-pitched whine being emitted from their equipment and the host dropped everyone to listening, abusing many of his listeners in the process. After finding the offending microphone, some of the people were allowed back into the talking area. However, the room descended into complete silence, punctuated by the host and others trying to encourage someone, anyone, to talk. No one said a thing. Who would want to talk, just to be cut off and abused? I decided to not ask to ask to talk and to just stay in the listening area, and just listen. As the host says in his advertising for his room, "When in listening, listen". So I decided to do just that.
My friend M from Philadelphia tried to start up a conversation, and said that he had a truckload of wood to split. He was asked how much wood that is. M said it was enough to fill a truck bed to the rim. B said it was about 4 feet by 4 feet by 8 feet of wood. At this, M had his microphone shut off. M asked to be able to speak again, and the host declined, and started to berate him for some purportedly inappropriate behavior. I asked several people in text what M had done, and I did not receive any satisfactory answers. Perhaps M had sent some nasty message to the host, E, in private, but I certainly did not hear it or see it. Sometimes, there are obvious reasons that rooms are boring...
I exchanged some text messages with M and T, trying to ascertain what was going on:
[10:10:07 AM] A says: What did YOU do?
[10:10:15 AM] A says: What the heck?
[10:10:34 AM] A says: You were annoying people?
[10:10:41 AM] A says: by talking about the pickup truck?
[10:10:43 AM] M says: apparently
[10:10:44 AM] A says: huh?
[10:10:48 AM] A says: That is annoying?
[10:10:53 AM] A says: I missed something
[10:11:00 AM] A says: Do you understand?
[10:12:46 AM] A says: He even dropped you? what the heck?
[10:13:42 AM] M says: i sent a message to T asking him to give E a message for me lol
(E is the host of the room)
[10:13:52 AM] A says: oh i see
[10:13:55 AM] A says: something nasty?
M sent me this exchange he had with T:
[10:14:16 AM] M says: [10:10:23 AM] M says: do me a favor and tell E that I will not bother his cast anymore with my sensless ramblings and apologize for intruding upon your delicate sensibilities...
[10:10:27 AM] M says: good day sir
[10:10:59 AM] T says: (y) See you next time (handshake)
I did try to come up and talk a few times, but was accused of being M secretly, and was berated for wanting to speak. Finally, after abusing M repeatedly for a few minutes, B asked the host E to let me up, thinking I was M, and wanting to pick a fight with B. When my microphone was turned on, Skype did not function properly and whatever I said did not get transmitted by Skype. This caused the host E and B to engage in more derogatory and derisive comments about M. And my non functioning microphone was shut off again...
I sent M a few final text messages, but he had probably logged off already:
[10:15:30 AM] A says: hmmm
[10:32:56 AM] A says: What the heck did you say?
[10:33:04 AM] A says: Wow they are angry at you
Addendum: I am slowly learning more about B. Today I heard him say that his philosophy of raising children is to use physical means to address problems. As he said "bigger children, bigger hammer". He also said that his family situation is the reason he is a "wino". I recall several instances in the past where he has been severely inebriated and offensive, cursing and insulting others in casts. It all starts to make more sense...
One host loves to brag about how wonderful his rooms are, and even goes to the extremes of trying to recruit people from other casts for his rooms. This host will even criticize the room management skills of other hosts while they are trying to host a Skypecast. This host will take up time in other rooms by bragging about how superior his rooms are and how much better his room-hosting skills are. However, this host's rooms often collapse into insipid, vapid, boring discussions, often due to his own management of the room.
One man entered this host's room, and complained that his 17 year old daughter was planning to get married to a man in his 20s that she had been involved with 2 years previously. I tried to use this opportunity to broaden the discussion and talk about the general topic, and some related issues. I attempted to give some perspective about how these standards had changed over time, and were different in different places. However, the host took me to task for this and said he was only interested in the laws for marriage here and now, not in other times and in other cultures. Someone else, M, suggested that if one does not know the mistakes of the past, that one is condemned to repeat these errors, and this irritated the host. (I investigated this question a bit. It turns out that under Roman Catholic Canon Law even currently, people who are 14 years old are judged ready for marriage:
http://socialissues.wiseto.com/Articles/EJ3010052212/
In 1371 in Europe, the average male was 24 when he was married and the average female was 16. By 1427 the average male married in his mid-30s and the average female was about half as old, and therefore still a teenager: http://marriage.about.com/cs/teenmarriage/a/teenmarriage.htm This change was apparently associated with the onset of the plague, although I am not sure why and how, exactly.)
I was asked what I would do by B, the man with the daughter, and I said I would try to convince the daughter not to get married by giving her a list of about 20 reasons or so. B, the man with the daughter, was shocked that 20 reasons even existed, and attacked me and ridiculed me for saying so. B asked me to give him 3 reasons that his daughter should not get married at 17. I tried to give a few reasons, and was frequently cut off by B and others in the room. They were quite angry and did not want to hear a thing I had to say.
For my first reason, I suggested that most young marriages failed, but I was interrupted and told that this was not a young marriage. (Oh brother...When I encounter this sort of comment, it makes me really wonder.) I said that one could get statistics to show that marriages of very young people often fail, and people were dismissive of this idea. (A little investigation showed that the Archdiocese of San Diego's marriage handbook states that marriages of people where both parties are teenagers are twice as likely to fail as those of people where both are in their twenties:
http://www.diocese-sdiego.org/Handbook/Handbook_PDFs/Marriage1.pdf)
For my second reason, I tried to talk about the complications of the modern world, and that one needed a lot of education and training to succeed in today's world, but I was repeatedly cut off when I tried to describe this reason for not getting married too young. It was clear to me that B only wanted to fight, and did not want to hear anything from me (or anyone else really). I declined to say any more, partly because B was becoming increasingly abusive and combative. (Interestingly, I found these same reasons from some marriage counsellors that give courses and write articles about the same issues: http://marriage.about.com/cs/teenmarriage/a/teenmarriage.htm It strikes me that in all of these discussions, the conversation could be steered in a more serious vein and the issues explored in a deeper and more responsible manner, to uncover facts and enable everyone to learn things. However, quite often I notice that many would prefer to shut down all dialogue and just engage in angry rhetoric and mindless spewing. Ah well...It says a lot about people. The entire question of how to estimate marriage failure rates and societal attitudes and their evolution are fascinating, but something that people like this cannot address. They would rather yell and scream like buffoons and ignoramuses, and then bemoan their situation.)
It was as if I was the 25 year old trying to marry B's daughter. Frankly, although I did not say this in the room, I started to get the impression that the reason the daughter wanted to get married was to get away from her father, and possibly her mother as well, based on his behavior in the room. Sometimes people communicate far more than they intend in conversation. In my discussions with people who were married young, it is revealed that this is often one of the main reasons people decide to get married when they are still children; their lives at home are a living hell. And from my interactions with B, this time and previously, it would not take too much to convince me that B is hellish to live with. He is often angry, abusive, obnoxious and crude, and not just stupid, but aggressively stupid, and even proud to be stupid. Who would not want to get away from that?
I stopped talking. Then someone entered the room with a high-pitched whine being emitted from their equipment and the host dropped everyone to listening, abusing many of his listeners in the process. After finding the offending microphone, some of the people were allowed back into the talking area. However, the room descended into complete silence, punctuated by the host and others trying to encourage someone, anyone, to talk. No one said a thing. Who would want to talk, just to be cut off and abused? I decided to not ask to ask to talk and to just stay in the listening area, and just listen. As the host says in his advertising for his room, "When in listening, listen". So I decided to do just that.
My friend M from Philadelphia tried to start up a conversation, and said that he had a truckload of wood to split. He was asked how much wood that is. M said it was enough to fill a truck bed to the rim. B said it was about 4 feet by 4 feet by 8 feet of wood. At this, M had his microphone shut off. M asked to be able to speak again, and the host declined, and started to berate him for some purportedly inappropriate behavior. I asked several people in text what M had done, and I did not receive any satisfactory answers. Perhaps M had sent some nasty message to the host, E, in private, but I certainly did not hear it or see it. Sometimes, there are obvious reasons that rooms are boring...
I exchanged some text messages with M and T, trying to ascertain what was going on:
[10:10:07 AM] A says: What did YOU do?
[10:10:15 AM] A says: What the heck?
[10:10:34 AM] A says: You were annoying people?
[10:10:41 AM] A says: by talking about the pickup truck?
[10:10:43 AM] M says: apparently
[10:10:44 AM] A says: huh?
[10:10:48 AM] A says: That is annoying?
[10:10:53 AM] A says: I missed something
[10:11:00 AM] A says: Do you understand?
[10:12:46 AM] A says: He even dropped you? what the heck?
[10:13:42 AM] M says: i sent a message to T asking him to give E a message for me lol
(E is the host of the room)
[10:13:52 AM] A says: oh i see
[10:13:55 AM] A says: something nasty?
M sent me this exchange he had with T:
[10:14:16 AM] M says: [10:10:23 AM] M says: do me a favor and tell E that I will not bother his cast anymore with my sensless ramblings and apologize for intruding upon your delicate sensibilities...
[10:10:27 AM] M says: good day sir
[10:10:59 AM] T says: (y) See you next time (handshake)
I did try to come up and talk a few times, but was accused of being M secretly, and was berated for wanting to speak. Finally, after abusing M repeatedly for a few minutes, B asked the host E to let me up, thinking I was M, and wanting to pick a fight with B. When my microphone was turned on, Skype did not function properly and whatever I said did not get transmitted by Skype. This caused the host E and B to engage in more derogatory and derisive comments about M. And my non functioning microphone was shut off again...
I sent M a few final text messages, but he had probably logged off already:
[10:15:30 AM] A says: hmmm
[10:32:56 AM] A says: What the heck did you say?
[10:33:04 AM] A says: Wow they are angry at you
Addendum: I am slowly learning more about B. Today I heard him say that his philosophy of raising children is to use physical means to address problems. As he said "bigger children, bigger hammer". He also said that his family situation is the reason he is a "wino". I recall several instances in the past where he has been severely inebriated and offensive, cursing and insulting others in casts. It all starts to make more sense...
Thursday, November 15, 2007
You hate Muslims!
I often encounter people from the Muslim world in Skypeland who want to impose Sharia Law in the USA, or to kill all Americans, or who cannot understand why the US and the West are the way they are. Here is a text exchange with one of these gentlemen from Syria, spread out over a few months, although there were also some audio portions to this conversation as well.
He and others had told me that Americans should all be killed if they do not convert to Islam. I had told him that the US does not want to replace its legal system with Sharia law.
[8/12/2007 2:58:58 PM] M says: Why?
[8/12/2007 2:59:15 PM] M says: What do you say If you become Muslem?
[8/12/2007 2:59:27 PM] M says: :)
[8/12/2007 2:59:45 PM] M says: Really i MADE A polish man Muslem
[8/12/2007 3:00:59 PM] M says: And If you saty with me just a week I'm sure to make you Muslem :)
[8/12/2007 3:02:30 PM] B says: haha
[8/12/2007 3:02:45 PM] M says: I'm sure
[8/12/2007 3:02:50 PM] M says: and I can
[8/12/2007 3:12:14 PM] M says: Islam Will be increase the problem won't solve at all Bye I hope you become Muslem too Amin
[8/12/2007 3:13:12 PM] B says: I am not interested in joining Islam
[8/12/2007 3:13:13 PM] B says: Sorry
[8/12/2007 3:13:57 PM] B says: I hope you reject the hate of extreme Islam
[8/12/2007 3:14:02 PM] M says: can we chat for only 5 minuts
[8/12/2007 3:18:33 PM] B says: There are many wars that have nothing to do with Islam (He had said that all wars were against Islam).
[8/12/2007 3:18:49 PM] B says: But the extremist Islamists must be condemned by the moderates
[8/12/2007 3:18:53 PM] B says: or else it creates a bad impression
[8/12/2007 3:19:01 PM] B says: things like the two fatwahs against me to have me personally killed
[8/12/2007 3:19:08 PM] B says: things like the fatwah against Salman Rushdie
[8/12/2007 3:19:20 PM] B says: things like the Danish Cartoon Riots associated with the drawings of Mohammed
[8/12/2007 3:19:33 PM] B says: things like the beheadings of the South Korean missionaries by Islamists in Afghanistan
[8/12/2007 3:19:44 PM] B says: Normal moderate Moslems should condemn these actions
[8/12/2007 3:19:57 PM] B says: or else a very bad impression is created
[8/12/2007 3:20:22 PM] M says: those are Muslems or Islam
[8/12/2007 3:20:58 PM] M says: dso you think that killing Children is Islam
[8/12/2007 3:21:32 PM] B says: If Muslims say over and over that all Americans must die
[8/12/2007 3:21:42 PM] B says: If Muslims say that suicide bombings are good
[8/12/2007 3:21:48 PM] B says: It is from an Islamic fatwah
[8/12/2007 3:21:53 PM] B says: and if I hear that over and over
[8/12/2007 3:21:55 PM] B says: and no one objects
[8/12/2007 3:22:07 PM] B says: it creates a very very bad impression
[8/12/2007 3:22:26 PM] B says: Actions speak louder than words
[8/12/2007 3:22:30 PM] B says: I dont care if they "go to the hell fire"
[8/12/2007 3:22:34 PM] B says: Actions speak louder than words
[8/12/2007 3:22:52 PM] B says: Islamic extremism is evil
[8/12/2007 3:22:58 PM] B says: It is full of hate
[8/12/2007 3:22:59 PM] B says: and anger
[8/12/2007 3:23:11 PM] B says: Listen to Salman Rushdie
[8/12/2007 3:23:27 PM] B says: Listen to Wafa Sultan
[8/12/2007 3:23:44 PM] M says: Salamn Rushdi
[8/12/2007 3:23:51 PM] B says: Listen to Ahmadinejad
[8/12/2007 3:24:36 PM] B says: Look, things are equal.
[8/12/2007 3:24:39 PM] B says: If Muslim extremists want to kill us
[8/12/2007 3:24:42 PM] B says: we will kill them
[8/12/2007 3:24:43 PM] B says: Is that clear?
[8/12/2007 3:24:47 PM] B says: IS IT CLEAR?
(He said he did not understand why Salman Rushdie should be allowed to write his books or the Danish should be allowed to publish those cartoons).
[8/12/2007 3:24:56 PM] B says: FREE SPEACH
[8/12/2007 3:25:02 PM] B says: IT IS THE LAW
[8/12/2007 3:25:18 PM] M says: go down the stret with out clothes can you?
[8/12/2007 3:26:09 PM] B says: There are two fatwahs against me
[8/12/2007 3:26:11 PM] B says: to kill me
[8/12/2007 3:26:15 PM] B says: So what if I issued a fatwah against you
[8/12/2007 3:26:16 PM] B says: to kill you
[8/12/2007 3:26:18 PM] B says: Is that fair?
[8/12/2007 3:26:20 PM] B says: fair enough?
[8/12/2007 3:26:22 PM] B says: It is equal
[8/12/2007 3:26:26 PM] B says: Let's be equal
[8/12/2007 3:26:30 PM] B says: You want to kill?
[8/12/2007 3:26:33 PM] B says: Should we kill in return?
[8/12/2007 3:26:57 PM] M says: What do you blieve in ?
[8/12/2007 3:27:58 PM] B says: I believe in not killing
[8/12/2007 3:28:01 PM] B says: I like Islam
[8/12/2007 3:28:06 PM] B says: But Islamic extremists are full of hate and anxious for more killing
[8/12/2007 3:28:12 PM] B says: and full of evil, hate-filled people
[8/12/2007 3:28:14 PM] B says: who want to kill me
[8/12/2007 3:28:46 PM] M says: Fatwa?
[8/12/2007 3:28:46 PM] B says: FATWAH
[8/12/2007 3:28:54 PM] B says: FATWAHS TO KILL ME
[8/12/2007 3:29:15 PM] B says: You want fatwahs against us?
[8/12/2007 3:29:17 PM] B says: Then we can have fatwahs against you.
[8/12/2007 3:29:20 PM] B says: This is equal
[8/12/2007 3:29:22 PM] B says: This is fair
[8/12/2007 3:30:36 PM] B says: If you want to be treated like civilized human beings
[8/12/2007 3:30:42 PM] B says: you will renounce violence
[8/12/2007 3:31:08 PM] B says: But all things have to be equal and fair
[8/12/2007 3:31:11 PM] B says: Do you like Mecca?
[8/12/2007 3:31:13 PM] B says: or not ?
[8/12/2007 3:31:16 PM] B says: What if we got rid of Mecca?
[8/12/2007 3:31:18 PM] B says: So there was no more Mecca ?
[8/12/2007 3:31:37 PM] B says: Behave like civilized human beings
[8/12/2007 3:31:39 PM] B says: and not animals
[8/12/2007 3:31:46 PM] B says: and you will be treated like civilized human beings
[8/12/2007 3:31:49 PM] B says: or else...
[8/12/2007 3:32:05 PM] B says: If you threaten to kill me...I might threaten to kill you
[8/12/2007 3:32:10 PM] B says: That is fair, is it not?
[8/12/2007 3:32:20 PM] B says: That is bad
[8/12/2007 3:32:22 PM] M says: that is right
[8/12/2007 3:32:25 PM] B says: We should not threaten to kill each other
[8/12/2007 3:32:29 PM] B says: We should live in peace
[8/12/2007 3:32:37 PM] M says: Oh peace
(Somehow this option always seems like something to dismiss, or a ridiculous option to some of these people... Coexistence, and living together in peace seems like a silly notion and something that should never be considered. Strange...)
[8/12/2007 3:32:37 PM] B says: You can have Sharia law in your country
[8/12/2007 3:32:43 PM] B says: and we will have our law in our country
[8/12/2007 3:32:48 PM] B says: We will not have Sharia law in our country
[8/12/2007 3:33:13 PM] B says: You can cut off the hands of thieves if you want
[8/12/2007 3:33:17 PM] B says: You can stone girls if you want
(He brought up the claim that the US went to Iraq to steal Iraqi oil. Always, if they want to disrupt the conversation, they bring this red herring up.)
[8/12/2007 3:33:35 PM] M says: Iraq
[8/12/2007 3:33:44 PM] B says: Iraq... the US takes no oil from Iraq
[8/12/2007 3:33:46 PM] B says: Nothing
[8/12/2007 3:33:50 PM] B says: You are wrong
[8/12/2007 3:33:50 PM] M says: USA is far 10000000 kilo meters
(Actually, the distance from New York, New York to Damascus, Syria is 5671 miles (9126 km), or 4928 nautical miles. The distance from New York, New York to Baghdad, Iraq is 6009 miles (9670 km), or 5222 nautical miles.)
[8/12/2007 3:33:59 PM] B says: The US tries to stop the Sunni and Shia from killing each other
[8/12/2007 3:34:00 PM] M says: that is not true
[8/12/2007 3:34:05 PM] B says: They kill each other because of an undercurrent of hate and violence in Islam
[8/12/2007 3:34:07 PM] B says: They are full of hate
[8/12/2007 3:34:10 PM] B says: They hate each other
[8/12/2007 3:34:19 PM] M says: asif you are not in the earth
[8/12/2007 3:34:26 PM] M says: Man
[8/12/2007 3:34:26 PM] M says: and asif you are from ..
[8/12/2007 3:34:27 PM] B says: You do not understand much
(Actually we did not understand each other, because I found it difficult to understand where he was coming from as well. I can only imagine the kind of negative information he is fed in his Mosques and in the Arab media and in the coffee houses in his town. However, I have heard others say that no Sunni Moslem has ever killed a Shiite and no Shiite has ever killed a Sunni. And then a few minutes later, this same Moslem will tell me how much he hates Sunnis or Salafis or Sufis or Shiites and wants to kill them all since they are not real Moslems...)
[8/12/2007 3:34:28 PM] B says: Sorry
[8/12/2007 3:34:40 PM] B says: That is why we will not have Sharia law in the USA
[8/12/2007 3:34:42 PM] B says: Never
[8/12/2007 3:34:43 PM] M says: USA took every thing from Iraq
[8/12/2007 3:34:48 PM] M says: until freedoom
(I really do not know what that last comment meant. Until freedom?? What does that mean?)
[8/12/2007 3:34:52 PM] B says: We got rid of Sadam Hussein
[8/12/2007 3:34:55 PM] B says: The Iraqis are glad
[8/12/2007 3:35:10 PM] M says: And now What is ging on there
[8/12/2007 3:35:21 PM] M says: bring the peace to it again
(Of course, this seems to be the current goal of the US to me, but it is made worse by Iraq's neighbors including Syria with their agitation and interference.)
[8/12/2007 3:36:02 PM] M says: USA goverment until now coudn't give one iraqian man safe why ?
[8/12/2007 3:36:07 PM] M says: tell me why?
[8/12/2007 3:36:26 PM] M says: every day 19 0r 70 people die why?
[8/12/2007 3:36:33 PM] M says: Oh I know
[8/12/2007 3:36:38 PM] M says: this is USA LAW
(This is a common sentiment I have heard over and over. They feel that it is somehow American law that Iraqis and/or Moslems should be killed. An astounding misunderstanding on someone's part, and I do not think it is on my part.)
A few weeks later:
[9/17/2007 2:09:38 PM] M says: this is you B really you are welcome
[9/17/2007 2:10:02 PM] B says: haha
[9/17/2007 2:10:03 PM] M says: you are who was talking about : Fatwa
[9/17/2007 2:10:12 PM] M says: I remmeber you
[9/17/2007 2:10:18 PM] B says: oh ok
[9/17/2007 2:10:25 PM] M says: speak please
[9/17/2007 2:12:50 PM] B says: where?
[9/17/2007 2:13:07 PM] B says: oh I see
[9/17/2007 2:13:11 PM] B says: yes I am going back and forth
[9/17/2007 2:13:13 PM] B says: I will be back
[9/17/2007 2:13:13 PM] M says: in the public chat which you are in
[9/17/2007 2:13:19 PM] B says: I am in 2
[9/17/2007 2:13:22 PM] M says: I hope
[9/17/2007 3:23:41 PM] B says: i will be back
And later:
[11:56:23 AM] M says: When I see you in I feeel frightened
[11:56:31 AM] M says: Why really I don't know
[11:56:38 AM] B says: Why?
[11:56:47 AM] M says: May because of you hide smile
[11:56:55 AM] B says: I hide smile?
[11:57:23 AM] M says: I think your name is B isn't it ?
[11:57:29 AM] B says: Yes it is
[11:57:31 AM] B says: I am B
[11:57:47 AM] M says: oh I still remeber you but may you don't
[11:59:15 AM] M says: do you still hate Islam or you changed your mind ? :)
(Where on earth he obtained this impression is beyond me. Because I do not want to become a Moslem, I automatically hate Islam? Because I do not want to live under Sharia law, I automatically hate Islam? Because I object with being threatened with death, I automatically hate Islam? However, it is interesting that he believes this...)
[12:01:27 PM] B says: I never hated Islam
[12:01:29 PM] B says: You are confused
[12:01:33 PM] B says: That is not me
[12:02:06 PM] M says: no man you told me that you hate Isalm
[12:02:23 PM] B says: You are mistaken
[12:03:35 PM] B says: I am afraid
He and others had told me that Americans should all be killed if they do not convert to Islam. I had told him that the US does not want to replace its legal system with Sharia law.
[8/12/2007 2:58:58 PM] M says: Why?
[8/12/2007 2:59:15 PM] M says: What do you say If you become Muslem?
[8/12/2007 2:59:27 PM] M says: :)
[8/12/2007 2:59:45 PM] M says: Really i MADE A polish man Muslem
[8/12/2007 3:00:59 PM] M says: And If you saty with me just a week I'm sure to make you Muslem :)
[8/12/2007 3:02:30 PM] B says: haha
[8/12/2007 3:02:45 PM] M says: I'm sure
[8/12/2007 3:02:50 PM] M says: and I can
[8/12/2007 3:12:14 PM] M says: Islam Will be increase the problem won't solve at all Bye I hope you become Muslem too Amin
[8/12/2007 3:13:12 PM] B says: I am not interested in joining Islam
[8/12/2007 3:13:13 PM] B says: Sorry
[8/12/2007 3:13:57 PM] B says: I hope you reject the hate of extreme Islam
[8/12/2007 3:14:02 PM] M says: can we chat for only 5 minuts
[8/12/2007 3:18:33 PM] B says: There are many wars that have nothing to do with Islam (He had said that all wars were against Islam).
[8/12/2007 3:18:49 PM] B says: But the extremist Islamists must be condemned by the moderates
[8/12/2007 3:18:53 PM] B says: or else it creates a bad impression
[8/12/2007 3:19:01 PM] B says: things like the two fatwahs against me to have me personally killed
[8/12/2007 3:19:08 PM] B says: things like the fatwah against Salman Rushdie
[8/12/2007 3:19:20 PM] B says: things like the Danish Cartoon Riots associated with the drawings of Mohammed
[8/12/2007 3:19:33 PM] B says: things like the beheadings of the South Korean missionaries by Islamists in Afghanistan
[8/12/2007 3:19:44 PM] B says: Normal moderate Moslems should condemn these actions
[8/12/2007 3:19:57 PM] B says: or else a very bad impression is created
[8/12/2007 3:20:22 PM] M says: those are Muslems or Islam
[8/12/2007 3:20:58 PM] M says: dso you think that killing Children is Islam
[8/12/2007 3:21:32 PM] B says: If Muslims say over and over that all Americans must die
[8/12/2007 3:21:42 PM] B says: If Muslims say that suicide bombings are good
[8/12/2007 3:21:48 PM] B says: It is from an Islamic fatwah
[8/12/2007 3:21:53 PM] B says: and if I hear that over and over
[8/12/2007 3:21:55 PM] B says: and no one objects
[8/12/2007 3:22:07 PM] B says: it creates a very very bad impression
[8/12/2007 3:22:26 PM] B says: Actions speak louder than words
[8/12/2007 3:22:30 PM] B says: I dont care if they "go to the hell fire"
[8/12/2007 3:22:34 PM] B says: Actions speak louder than words
[8/12/2007 3:22:52 PM] B says: Islamic extremism is evil
[8/12/2007 3:22:58 PM] B says: It is full of hate
[8/12/2007 3:22:59 PM] B says: and anger
[8/12/2007 3:23:11 PM] B says: Listen to Salman Rushdie
[8/12/2007 3:23:27 PM] B says: Listen to Wafa Sultan
[8/12/2007 3:23:44 PM] M says: Salamn Rushdi
[8/12/2007 3:23:51 PM] B says: Listen to Ahmadinejad
[8/12/2007 3:24:36 PM] B says: Look, things are equal.
[8/12/2007 3:24:39 PM] B says: If Muslim extremists want to kill us
[8/12/2007 3:24:42 PM] B says: we will kill them
[8/12/2007 3:24:43 PM] B says: Is that clear?
[8/12/2007 3:24:47 PM] B says: IS IT CLEAR?
(He said he did not understand why Salman Rushdie should be allowed to write his books or the Danish should be allowed to publish those cartoons).
[8/12/2007 3:24:56 PM] B says: FREE SPEACH
[8/12/2007 3:25:02 PM] B says: IT IS THE LAW
[8/12/2007 3:25:18 PM] M says: go down the stret with out clothes can you?
[8/12/2007 3:26:09 PM] B says: There are two fatwahs against me
[8/12/2007 3:26:11 PM] B says: to kill me
[8/12/2007 3:26:15 PM] B says: So what if I issued a fatwah against you
[8/12/2007 3:26:16 PM] B says: to kill you
[8/12/2007 3:26:18 PM] B says: Is that fair?
[8/12/2007 3:26:20 PM] B says: fair enough?
[8/12/2007 3:26:22 PM] B says: It is equal
[8/12/2007 3:26:26 PM] B says: Let's be equal
[8/12/2007 3:26:30 PM] B says: You want to kill?
[8/12/2007 3:26:33 PM] B says: Should we kill in return?
[8/12/2007 3:26:57 PM] M says: What do you blieve in ?
[8/12/2007 3:27:58 PM] B says: I believe in not killing
[8/12/2007 3:28:01 PM] B says: I like Islam
[8/12/2007 3:28:06 PM] B says: But Islamic extremists are full of hate and anxious for more killing
[8/12/2007 3:28:12 PM] B says: and full of evil, hate-filled people
[8/12/2007 3:28:14 PM] B says: who want to kill me
[8/12/2007 3:28:46 PM] M says: Fatwa?
[8/12/2007 3:28:46 PM] B says: FATWAH
[8/12/2007 3:28:54 PM] B says: FATWAHS TO KILL ME
[8/12/2007 3:29:15 PM] B says: You want fatwahs against us?
[8/12/2007 3:29:17 PM] B says: Then we can have fatwahs against you.
[8/12/2007 3:29:20 PM] B says: This is equal
[8/12/2007 3:29:22 PM] B says: This is fair
[8/12/2007 3:30:36 PM] B says: If you want to be treated like civilized human beings
[8/12/2007 3:30:42 PM] B says: you will renounce violence
[8/12/2007 3:31:08 PM] B says: But all things have to be equal and fair
[8/12/2007 3:31:11 PM] B says: Do you like Mecca?
[8/12/2007 3:31:13 PM] B says: or not ?
[8/12/2007 3:31:16 PM] B says: What if we got rid of Mecca?
[8/12/2007 3:31:18 PM] B says: So there was no more Mecca ?
[8/12/2007 3:31:37 PM] B says: Behave like civilized human beings
[8/12/2007 3:31:39 PM] B says: and not animals
[8/12/2007 3:31:46 PM] B says: and you will be treated like civilized human beings
[8/12/2007 3:31:49 PM] B says: or else...
[8/12/2007 3:32:05 PM] B says: If you threaten to kill me...I might threaten to kill you
[8/12/2007 3:32:10 PM] B says: That is fair, is it not?
[8/12/2007 3:32:20 PM] B says: That is bad
[8/12/2007 3:32:22 PM] M says: that is right
[8/12/2007 3:32:25 PM] B says: We should not threaten to kill each other
[8/12/2007 3:32:29 PM] B says: We should live in peace
[8/12/2007 3:32:37 PM] M says: Oh peace
(Somehow this option always seems like something to dismiss, or a ridiculous option to some of these people... Coexistence, and living together in peace seems like a silly notion and something that should never be considered. Strange...)
[8/12/2007 3:32:37 PM] B says: You can have Sharia law in your country
[8/12/2007 3:32:43 PM] B says: and we will have our law in our country
[8/12/2007 3:32:48 PM] B says: We will not have Sharia law in our country
[8/12/2007 3:33:13 PM] B says: You can cut off the hands of thieves if you want
[8/12/2007 3:33:17 PM] B says: You can stone girls if you want
(He brought up the claim that the US went to Iraq to steal Iraqi oil. Always, if they want to disrupt the conversation, they bring this red herring up.)
[8/12/2007 3:33:35 PM] M says: Iraq
[8/12/2007 3:33:44 PM] B says: Iraq... the US takes no oil from Iraq
[8/12/2007 3:33:46 PM] B says: Nothing
[8/12/2007 3:33:50 PM] B says: You are wrong
[8/12/2007 3:33:50 PM] M says: USA is far 10000000 kilo meters
(Actually, the distance from New York, New York to Damascus, Syria is 5671 miles (9126 km), or 4928 nautical miles. The distance from New York, New York to Baghdad, Iraq is 6009 miles (9670 km), or 5222 nautical miles.)
[8/12/2007 3:33:59 PM] B says: The US tries to stop the Sunni and Shia from killing each other
[8/12/2007 3:34:00 PM] M says: that is not true
[8/12/2007 3:34:05 PM] B says: They kill each other because of an undercurrent of hate and violence in Islam
[8/12/2007 3:34:07 PM] B says: They are full of hate
[8/12/2007 3:34:10 PM] B says: They hate each other
[8/12/2007 3:34:19 PM] M says: asif you are not in the earth
[8/12/2007 3:34:26 PM] M says: Man
[8/12/2007 3:34:26 PM] M says: and asif you are from ..
[8/12/2007 3:34:27 PM] B says: You do not understand much
(Actually we did not understand each other, because I found it difficult to understand where he was coming from as well. I can only imagine the kind of negative information he is fed in his Mosques and in the Arab media and in the coffee houses in his town. However, I have heard others say that no Sunni Moslem has ever killed a Shiite and no Shiite has ever killed a Sunni. And then a few minutes later, this same Moslem will tell me how much he hates Sunnis or Salafis or Sufis or Shiites and wants to kill them all since they are not real Moslems...)
[8/12/2007 3:34:28 PM] B says: Sorry
[8/12/2007 3:34:40 PM] B says: That is why we will not have Sharia law in the USA
[8/12/2007 3:34:42 PM] B says: Never
[8/12/2007 3:34:43 PM] M says: USA took every thing from Iraq
[8/12/2007 3:34:48 PM] M says: until freedoom
(I really do not know what that last comment meant. Until freedom?? What does that mean?)
[8/12/2007 3:34:52 PM] B says: We got rid of Sadam Hussein
[8/12/2007 3:34:55 PM] B says: The Iraqis are glad
[8/12/2007 3:35:10 PM] M says: And now What is ging on there
[8/12/2007 3:35:21 PM] M says: bring the peace to it again
(Of course, this seems to be the current goal of the US to me, but it is made worse by Iraq's neighbors including Syria with their agitation and interference.)
[8/12/2007 3:36:02 PM] M says: USA goverment until now coudn't give one iraqian man safe why ?
[8/12/2007 3:36:07 PM] M says: tell me why?
[8/12/2007 3:36:26 PM] M says: every day 19 0r 70 people die why?
[8/12/2007 3:36:33 PM] M says: Oh I know
[8/12/2007 3:36:38 PM] M says: this is USA LAW
(This is a common sentiment I have heard over and over. They feel that it is somehow American law that Iraqis and/or Moslems should be killed. An astounding misunderstanding on someone's part, and I do not think it is on my part.)
A few weeks later:
[9/17/2007 2:09:38 PM] M says: this is you B really you are welcome
[9/17/2007 2:10:02 PM] B says: haha
[9/17/2007 2:10:03 PM] M says: you are who was talking about : Fatwa
[9/17/2007 2:10:12 PM] M says: I remmeber you
[9/17/2007 2:10:18 PM] B says: oh ok
[9/17/2007 2:10:25 PM] M says: speak please
[9/17/2007 2:12:50 PM] B says: where?
[9/17/2007 2:13:07 PM] B says: oh I see
[9/17/2007 2:13:11 PM] B says: yes I am going back and forth
[9/17/2007 2:13:13 PM] B says: I will be back
[9/17/2007 2:13:13 PM] M says: in the public chat which you are in
[9/17/2007 2:13:19 PM] B says: I am in 2
[9/17/2007 2:13:22 PM] M says: I hope
[9/17/2007 3:23:41 PM] B says: i will be back
And later:
[11:56:23 AM] M says: When I see you in I feeel frightened
[11:56:31 AM] M says: Why really I don't know
[11:56:38 AM] B says: Why?
[11:56:47 AM] M says: May because of you hide smile
[11:56:55 AM] B says: I hide smile?
[11:57:23 AM] M says: I think your name is B isn't it ?
[11:57:29 AM] B says: Yes it is
[11:57:31 AM] B says: I am B
[11:57:47 AM] M says: oh I still remeber you but may you don't
[11:59:15 AM] M says: do you still hate Islam or you changed your mind ? :)
(Where on earth he obtained this impression is beyond me. Because I do not want to become a Moslem, I automatically hate Islam? Because I do not want to live under Sharia law, I automatically hate Islam? Because I object with being threatened with death, I automatically hate Islam? However, it is interesting that he believes this...)
[12:01:27 PM] B says: I never hated Islam
[12:01:29 PM] B says: You are confused
[12:01:33 PM] B says: That is not me
[12:02:06 PM] M says: no man you told me that you hate Isalm
[12:02:23 PM] B says: You are mistaken
[12:03:35 PM] B says: I am afraid
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
You no speak
Many people in Skypeland are very proud of their linguistic prowess, but it is not always deserved. I was in a room hosted by someone from Turkey who spoke a little English, and a bit of French and Russian as well. He said that it gets very cold in Ankara in the winter. I asked how cold it gets, and he said 10 degrees. Ah yes...freezing.
I asked him about the recent election in Turkey, and asked him if he voted. He did not understand however, and in response he said that he was sick in the bed and had to go to the doctor this morning. The doctor had prescribed some sort of "serum", which I gather included an antibiotic and possibly other medications. The Turkish man was also treating himself with alcohol and hashish. He said he normally does not drink much, but he had become sick after attending a 3 day long birthday party for a friend and drinking for three days straight. Well that might do it... (Interestingly, this man worked as a bartender, but claimed to be a fervent Muslim.)
A man entered from Kazakhstan with a very thick accent. I really could not understand almost anything he said. However, he was very proud of his ability to speak English. He claimed that the reason the Americans in the room could not understand him was that he spoke "reeleeh Eengleesh, propeert Eengleesh", by which I think he meant the English of the United Kingdom. However, his accent did not sound very British to me, just thick and unintelligible. I asked him to speak more slowly so that we might understand him, and he became a bit indignant, but consented to speak slowly for those of us who were so poor in English compared to him. He then spewed a completely incomprehensible, incoherent and unscrutable stream of sounds, in an exaggeratedly slow fashion, "Eet eez pow life let vix ur me tell have too aye you is how it iz where a ooh dobre hun double. Ah bee full emok sog to luke und..." and so on and so forth. I realized that this was basically pointless, since he was so sure that his English was perfect. I suggested he might try Russian instead, since we had some people in the room that spoke Russian, which he did successfully. Then his computer connection dropped and we lost him... Such a shame, since I am sure he had something very insightful to say...
I asked him about the recent election in Turkey, and asked him if he voted. He did not understand however, and in response he said that he was sick in the bed and had to go to the doctor this morning. The doctor had prescribed some sort of "serum", which I gather included an antibiotic and possibly other medications. The Turkish man was also treating himself with alcohol and hashish. He said he normally does not drink much, but he had become sick after attending a 3 day long birthday party for a friend and drinking for three days straight. Well that might do it... (Interestingly, this man worked as a bartender, but claimed to be a fervent Muslim.)
A man entered from Kazakhstan with a very thick accent. I really could not understand almost anything he said. However, he was very proud of his ability to speak English. He claimed that the reason the Americans in the room could not understand him was that he spoke "reeleeh Eengleesh, propeert Eengleesh", by which I think he meant the English of the United Kingdom. However, his accent did not sound very British to me, just thick and unintelligible. I asked him to speak more slowly so that we might understand him, and he became a bit indignant, but consented to speak slowly for those of us who were so poor in English compared to him. He then spewed a completely incomprehensible, incoherent and unscrutable stream of sounds, in an exaggeratedly slow fashion, "Eet eez pow life let vix ur me tell have too aye you is how it iz where a ooh dobre hun double. Ah bee full emok sog to luke und..." and so on and so forth. I realized that this was basically pointless, since he was so sure that his English was perfect. I suggested he might try Russian instead, since we had some people in the room that spoke Russian, which he did successfully. Then his computer connection dropped and we lost him... Such a shame, since I am sure he had something very insightful to say...
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Impeach Cheney!
In Skypeland, one can encounter a lot of people in the US who seem to have a very negative view of their own country, but are unwilling to try to fix things. Two Americans claimed that the US is a dictatorship, and that Cheney should be impeached for being a dictator. I asked if they actually thought that the US was a dictatorship, and that Cheney is actually a dictator of the US. They agreed that this was not true, but that the US is a fascist state. I asked if they knew what fascism is, and they said they did. They said fascism is when business and government work together. (I did some reading about what fascism is, and I found that there is a wide variation in definitions of fascism. Most definitions of fascism focus on its totalitarian aspects, which is definitely contrary to the democratic system in the US, and its division of powers. Some definitions of fascism state that it is capitalist, and some that it is anti-capitalist. Some definitions of fascism state that it is conservative, and some that it is anti-conservative. And so on and so forth: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism )
I said that the US has the government it deserves, and if they wanted to change it, they were free to do so. They did not agree and became abusive. So I turned off their microphones.
Sometimes it is good to be in control of the microphones. People can be incredibly disruptive and unwilling to let others voice their views. They often will not let others respond to their questions or complaints. They complained bitterly that I was silencing dissent, but actually I was clearing the way for people to actually have a dialogue. Their goal was to shut down all communication with catcalls, and abusive language and interruptions, something like the Nazis did in their Beer Hall Putsch. Of course, when they were unable to talk in the room at will, interrupting others, they did not want to wait their turn, and left in a huff. Oh well.
I said that the US has the government it deserves, and if they wanted to change it, they were free to do so. They did not agree and became abusive. So I turned off their microphones.
Sometimes it is good to be in control of the microphones. People can be incredibly disruptive and unwilling to let others voice their views. They often will not let others respond to their questions or complaints. They complained bitterly that I was silencing dissent, but actually I was clearing the way for people to actually have a dialogue. Their goal was to shut down all communication with catcalls, and abusive language and interruptions, something like the Nazis did in their Beer Hall Putsch. Of course, when they were unable to talk in the room at will, interrupting others, they did not want to wait their turn, and left in a huff. Oh well.
More UK troops killed by the US
In Skypeland, one man from the UK claimed that more soldiers from the UK had been killed by US soldiers in friendly fire incidents, target practice, intentional attacks, etc than had been killed in combat with the enemy. I asked him what his evidence was. He said he heard this in the news. We asked him for references. He told us to do our homework. Several people in the room searched for this evidence, unsuccessfully. Finally someone from Ireland found this news item, which supposedly provided evidence for this claim:
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90777/6215944.html
Unfortunately, this news item makes the statement that a greater proportion of people from the UK have been killed in Iraq than troops from the US. I pointed out that this was irrelevant and was like comparing apples to oranges. Someone else from the UK also claimed to have found evidence that UK soldiers were mainly being killed by US troops, and presented us with the following link:
http://search.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/search/results.pl?scope=all&edition=i&q=friendly+fire&go.x=0&go.y=0&go=go
Again, these articles are completely irrelevant and do not provide evidence for the claim. When the people from the UK were confronted with the fact that they were making irrational irrelevant and unsubstantiated claims, they were unrepentent...
There are of course all kinds of friendly fire incidents in a war. Here is an example of a US soldier killed by a UK security firm:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2201538,00.html
One man from Scotland over and over asked why the US needs UK military assistance. It was pointed out to him repeatedly that it was mainly for public relations purposes, because the size of the UK forces are not really large enough to make a significant difference. However, he just repeatedly brought up the same issue, over and over and over. He tried to bolster his argument by claiming that several single states in the US had more population than all of the UK, and claimed that the US was 50 times larger in area than the UK, so they did not need the UK for its military assistance. (Although I told him repeatedly he was incorrect, he persisted in repeating this. Of course, the population of the United Kingdom is 60,776,238 [July 2007 est.] according to http://www.worldstatesmen.org/United_Kingdom.html
and the population of the most populous US state, California, is 37,700,000 [2007 estimate by US Census Bureau: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California#Population] The second most populous state is Texas, with 23.5 million, followed by New York at 19.3 million and Florida at 18 million: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_population. Obviously, the Scottish man's claims about the population of US states are wrong, even though he repeatedly refused to acknowledge this, undercutting his position quite badly.
The area of the United States is 9,826,630 square kilometers, and the area of the United Kingdom is 244,820 square kilometers, so that the United States is about 40 times larger in area than the UK. However, only 9,161,923 square kilometers of the US is land, and the area of Alaska is 1,717,855 square kilometers [mainly uninhabited wilderness], so the lower 48 states really have a land area of about 7,400,000 square kilometers, or about 30 times the size of the United Kingdom. This is far different than a factor of 50, but in any case the area of the country is irrelevant in this context; after all, Canada has an even larger area [9,984,670 square kilometers] and this does not mean that Canada should be expected to have a larger military than the US.
The military budgets of the countries are probably far more relevant. The US has a yearly military budget of about 553 billion dollars, and the UK has the world's second largest yearly military budget, spending about 69.8 billion dollars. The European Union spends about 300 billion dollars per year on its military:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_federations_by_military_expenditures
By this measure, the Scottish man looks like he is just plain full of nonsense. The UK has a substantial military, which is not burdened and diluted by international commitments as the US military is.
Also another problem is that if the US acts unilaterally, people complain that the US is acting alone internationally. And if the US acts in concert with other countries, then people like this Scottish man complain. It seems like people complain no matter what. Some in the room also complained that the US should have worked through the UN, but I and others pointed out that the UN is not a panacea and not always the best solution. After all, where was the UN in Kampuchea? In Rwanda? In the former Yugoslavia ? What is the UN doing right now in Darfur? What did the UN do to stop Hizbollah in Lebanon? )
Well this does show exactly what sort of reasoning exists out there in the general populace I guess...
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90777/6215944.html
Unfortunately, this news item makes the statement that a greater proportion of people from the UK have been killed in Iraq than troops from the US. I pointed out that this was irrelevant and was like comparing apples to oranges. Someone else from the UK also claimed to have found evidence that UK soldiers were mainly being killed by US troops, and presented us with the following link:
http://search.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/search/results.pl?scope=all&edition=i&q=friendly+fire&go.x=0&go.y=0&go=go
Again, these articles are completely irrelevant and do not provide evidence for the claim. When the people from the UK were confronted with the fact that they were making irrational irrelevant and unsubstantiated claims, they were unrepentent...
There are of course all kinds of friendly fire incidents in a war. Here is an example of a US soldier killed by a UK security firm:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2201538,00.html
One man from Scotland over and over asked why the US needs UK military assistance. It was pointed out to him repeatedly that it was mainly for public relations purposes, because the size of the UK forces are not really large enough to make a significant difference. However, he just repeatedly brought up the same issue, over and over and over. He tried to bolster his argument by claiming that several single states in the US had more population than all of the UK, and claimed that the US was 50 times larger in area than the UK, so they did not need the UK for its military assistance. (Although I told him repeatedly he was incorrect, he persisted in repeating this. Of course, the population of the United Kingdom is 60,776,238 [July 2007 est.] according to http://www.worldstatesmen.org/United_Kingdom.html
and the population of the most populous US state, California, is 37,700,000 [2007 estimate by US Census Bureau: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California#Population] The second most populous state is Texas, with 23.5 million, followed by New York at 19.3 million and Florida at 18 million: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_population. Obviously, the Scottish man's claims about the population of US states are wrong, even though he repeatedly refused to acknowledge this, undercutting his position quite badly.
The area of the United States is 9,826,630 square kilometers, and the area of the United Kingdom is 244,820 square kilometers, so that the United States is about 40 times larger in area than the UK. However, only 9,161,923 square kilometers of the US is land, and the area of Alaska is 1,717,855 square kilometers [mainly uninhabited wilderness], so the lower 48 states really have a land area of about 7,400,000 square kilometers, or about 30 times the size of the United Kingdom. This is far different than a factor of 50, but in any case the area of the country is irrelevant in this context; after all, Canada has an even larger area [9,984,670 square kilometers] and this does not mean that Canada should be expected to have a larger military than the US.
The military budgets of the countries are probably far more relevant. The US has a yearly military budget of about 553 billion dollars, and the UK has the world's second largest yearly military budget, spending about 69.8 billion dollars. The European Union spends about 300 billion dollars per year on its military:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_federations_by_military_expenditures
By this measure, the Scottish man looks like he is just plain full of nonsense. The UK has a substantial military, which is not burdened and diluted by international commitments as the US military is.
Also another problem is that if the US acts unilaterally, people complain that the US is acting alone internationally. And if the US acts in concert with other countries, then people like this Scottish man complain. It seems like people complain no matter what. Some in the room also complained that the US should have worked through the UN, but I and others pointed out that the UN is not a panacea and not always the best solution. After all, where was the UN in Kampuchea? In Rwanda? In the former Yugoslavia ? What is the UN doing right now in Darfur? What did the UN do to stop Hizbollah in Lebanon? )
Well this does show exactly what sort of reasoning exists out there in the general populace I guess...
Not unless we have to
One great thing about Skypeland is that you can talk to others from other cultures and try to understand their perspectives a bit more. I had a chat with someone from Saudi Arabia who comes from an extremely wealthy family:
[4:49:45 PM] L says: hi there
[4:49:49 PM] L says: long time no see
[4:58:17 PM] A says: hi there
[4:58:18 PM] A says: how are you
[4:58:55 PM] L says: fine thanx , but i wonder do u remember me ?
[4:59:00 PM] A says: yes
[4:59:02 PM] A says: of course
[4:59:13 PM] A says: I have been exploring more of skype off and on
[4:59:14 PM] A says: how are you
[4:59:19 PM] A says: and your business plans?
[4:59:58 PM] L says: i have been so busy latly
[5:00:08 PM] A says: ah good stuff I hope
[5:00:15 PM] L says: we have opend our first aqurim hotel
[5:00:22 PM] A says: great
[5:00:31 PM] L says: "the splling is missed up "
[5:00:46 PM] A says: I understand
[5:01:06 PM] L says: ppl frome vinzula japan hengary
[5:01:09 PM] L says: humm
[5:01:27 PM] L says: iran indonisa koria and china
[5:01:30 PM] A says: great
[5:01:34 PM] L says: are coming ^^
[5:01:47 PM] L says: no amircans or brits yet
[5:01:57 PM] L says: i think they r too afrade to come to ksa ^^
[5:01:59 PM] L says: lol
[5:02:08 PM] A says: well yes
[5:02:09 PM] A says: of course
[5:02:19 PM] A says: it is pretty dangerous
[5:02:28 PM] L says: we wont kill you
[5:02:32 PM] A says: Our governments warn us not to go
[5:02:34 PM] L says: only of we hade to
[5:02:37 PM] L says: :P
[5:02:47 PM] A says: I have had maybe 100 or 150 KSA people on Skype threaten to kill me
[5:02:49 PM] A says: so....
[5:02:52 PM] A says: even some women
[5:02:59 PM] L says: hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
[5:03:05 PM] L says: u did blev them
[5:03:24 PM] A says: Some I believe. Some maybe not
[5:03:34 PM] L says: here its so safe and frindly , unles there a reson not to
[5:03:37 PM] A says: They seem very very angry
[5:03:41 PM] A says: VERY angry
[5:03:45 PM] A says: and confused
[5:04:08 PM] L says: i dont know there is some thing about u i dont under stand
[5:04:27 PM] L says: : \ i may have a lake of exprising
[5:04:47 PM] L says: but ur carcter seems to be so pastic
[5:04:56 PM] L says: "not real "
[5:05:04 PM] L says: if u know wht i mean
[5:05:06 PM] L says: what *
[5:05:10 PM] A says: My character is so plastic?
[5:05:27 PM] L says: " lol like thate was the only wrong splled word "
[5:05:43 PM] L says: its an exprtion
[5:06:12 PM] L says: refaring to plastic flawors insted of real ones
[5:06:20 PM] A says: exprtion?
[5:06:23 PM] A says: plastic flavors?
[5:06:25 PM] A says: I see
[5:06:36 PM] L says: flowrs not flavers
[5:06:53 PM] A says: plastic flowers
[5:07:03 PM] A says: So I seem like I have a character like plastic flowers?
[5:07:51 PM] L says: i meen they miss life they r only they way they have been made
[5:07:54 PM] L says: :S
[5:08:09 PM] A says: I see
[5:08:14 PM] A says: well I prefer not to die
[5:08:26 PM] L says: lack of expritions , i cant explane what i meen
[5:08:44 PM] A says: If 100 people say they hate me and want to kill me...I have to pay some attention to them
[5:09:16 PM] L says: ukh ..
[5:09:30 PM] L says: voice chate ?
[5:09:41 PM] A says: If you had 200 or 300 Americans tell you that they hated all Saudis and all Saudis should be killed...would you visit the USA?
[5:09:41 PM] L says: my splling is all mised up
I never got a response from him...
[4:49:45 PM] L says: hi there
[4:49:49 PM] L says: long time no see
[4:58:17 PM] A says: hi there
[4:58:18 PM] A says: how are you
[4:58:55 PM] L says: fine thanx , but i wonder do u remember me ?
[4:59:00 PM] A says: yes
[4:59:02 PM] A says: of course
[4:59:13 PM] A says: I have been exploring more of skype off and on
[4:59:14 PM] A says: how are you
[4:59:19 PM] A says: and your business plans?
[4:59:58 PM] L says: i have been so busy latly
[5:00:08 PM] A says: ah good stuff I hope
[5:00:15 PM] L says: we have opend our first aqurim hotel
[5:00:22 PM] A says: great
[5:00:31 PM] L says: "the splling is missed up "
[5:00:46 PM] A says: I understand
[5:01:06 PM] L says: ppl frome vinzula japan hengary
[5:01:09 PM] L says: humm
[5:01:27 PM] L says: iran indonisa koria and china
[5:01:30 PM] A says: great
[5:01:34 PM] L says: are coming ^^
[5:01:47 PM] L says: no amircans or brits yet
[5:01:57 PM] L says: i think they r too afrade to come to ksa ^^
[5:01:59 PM] L says: lol
[5:02:08 PM] A says: well yes
[5:02:09 PM] A says: of course
[5:02:19 PM] A says: it is pretty dangerous
[5:02:28 PM] L says: we wont kill you
[5:02:32 PM] A says: Our governments warn us not to go
[5:02:34 PM] L says: only of we hade to
[5:02:37 PM] L says: :P
[5:02:47 PM] A says: I have had maybe 100 or 150 KSA people on Skype threaten to kill me
[5:02:49 PM] A says: so....
[5:02:52 PM] A says: even some women
[5:02:59 PM] L says: hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
[5:03:05 PM] L says: u did blev them
[5:03:24 PM] A says: Some I believe. Some maybe not
[5:03:34 PM] L says: here its so safe and frindly , unles there a reson not to
[5:03:37 PM] A says: They seem very very angry
[5:03:41 PM] A says: VERY angry
[5:03:45 PM] A says: and confused
[5:04:08 PM] L says: i dont know there is some thing about u i dont under stand
[5:04:27 PM] L says: : \ i may have a lake of exprising
[5:04:47 PM] L says: but ur carcter seems to be so pastic
[5:04:56 PM] L says: "not real "
[5:05:04 PM] L says: if u know wht i mean
[5:05:06 PM] L says: what *
[5:05:10 PM] A says: My character is so plastic?
[5:05:27 PM] L says: " lol like thate was the only wrong splled word "
[5:05:43 PM] L says: its an exprtion
[5:06:12 PM] L says: refaring to plastic flawors insted of real ones
[5:06:20 PM] A says: exprtion?
[5:06:23 PM] A says: plastic flavors?
[5:06:25 PM] A says: I see
[5:06:36 PM] L says: flowrs not flavers
[5:06:53 PM] A says: plastic flowers
[5:07:03 PM] A says: So I seem like I have a character like plastic flowers?
[5:07:51 PM] L says: i meen they miss life they r only they way they have been made
[5:07:54 PM] L says: :S
[5:08:09 PM] A says: I see
[5:08:14 PM] A says: well I prefer not to die
[5:08:26 PM] L says: lack of expritions , i cant explane what i meen
[5:08:44 PM] A says: If 100 people say they hate me and want to kill me...I have to pay some attention to them
[5:09:16 PM] L says: ukh ..
[5:09:30 PM] L says: voice chate ?
[5:09:41 PM] A says: If you had 200 or 300 Americans tell you that they hated all Saudis and all Saudis should be killed...would you visit the USA?
[5:09:41 PM] L says: my splling is all mised up
I never got a response from him...
He drinks children's blood
In a conversation with two Palestinians in Skypeland, we talked about our hopes for a successful upcoming meeting in Annapolis Maryland between Abbas and Omert. I remarked that Abbas looked quite fit and trim, especially compared to Ariel Sharon. The lady from Palestine told us that "Sharon is so fat from drinking the blood of so many children". I tried to get her to admit that she meant this just figuratively and not literally, but I was unable to. She then said it was late and she had to go to bed. Ah....
Friday, November 9, 2007
Both
Sometimes the mental abilities of people in Skypeland just boggle the mind. I was in a cast and someone kept picking on me because of my accent, saying I was from the US or Canada. I was asked several times where I was from. At first I said it didn't matter, but they continued. I said I was from both Canada and the US, and they continued to ask where I was from. I said it again and somehow it did not sink in. I am a dual citizen and I am from both. This is such a ridiculous minor point, and was not at all relevant to the discussion, but they persisted in badgering me. And so the discussion descended into chaos. However, in this instance I will admit to having encouraged this descent. I just get tired of pointless badgering...Who wouldn't?
In everyday life one has to put up with it, because one cannot really respond. In Skypeland, however, one is free to respond, and tell someone who is displaying a particularly astonishing lack of reason, and is a bully in addition, exactly what one thinks of them. It does create a certain ambience...
However, what is valuable is that this environment reveals some of the true underlying feelings. This milieu has a way of tapping into certain undercurrents, and exposing more honest exchanges. I have had maybe 200 or more people tell me I should be killed because I live in the US. I have heard dozens of Sunni tell me that all Shia should be killed, and a few Shia tell me the same about the Sunni. I have heard almost all Sunni and Shia tell me that all Sufis should be killed. Almost everyone in the Middle East says that Israel should be destroyed and all Jews killed. Many Muslims in Europe tell me at great length how they hate their adopted countries and want to kill all the people who gave them refuge there. People tell me they want to hunt Mexicans and Blacks in the US with guns and kill them. Some of the nastiest things about the US are said by people from the UK. I have had many Serbs tell me how evil the US is for stopping the killing, since it is their right to slaughter their neighbors in Bosnia and Croatia and Kosovo. I have had several Russians tell me that it is their right to kill people from Chechnya since they hate the Chechnyans. I have had people tell me that they are sure that they know more than anyone with an education and they hate educated people (shades of the Khymer Rouge I guess). And on and on, in an endless parade of ignorance and hate for their fellow man (and woman).
Few if any of these sentiments would be normally expressed in normal discourse. However, in Skypeland, one gets to hear them all; crude, unvarnished, angry, petulant, aggressive, arrogant and resentful. When I hear people optimistically saying that "all people want the same thing; they just want to get along and it is all the fault of the media or Jews or politicians or Bilderbergs or bankers etc." that people do not get along and hate each other or go to war with each other, I wonder. I also am optimistic that people can live together in peace, but there are deep streams of visceral hatred flowing, and they need to be addressed. To do otherwise is really naive...
In everyday life one has to put up with it, because one cannot really respond. In Skypeland, however, one is free to respond, and tell someone who is displaying a particularly astonishing lack of reason, and is a bully in addition, exactly what one thinks of them. It does create a certain ambience...
However, what is valuable is that this environment reveals some of the true underlying feelings. This milieu has a way of tapping into certain undercurrents, and exposing more honest exchanges. I have had maybe 200 or more people tell me I should be killed because I live in the US. I have heard dozens of Sunni tell me that all Shia should be killed, and a few Shia tell me the same about the Sunni. I have heard almost all Sunni and Shia tell me that all Sufis should be killed. Almost everyone in the Middle East says that Israel should be destroyed and all Jews killed. Many Muslims in Europe tell me at great length how they hate their adopted countries and want to kill all the people who gave them refuge there. People tell me they want to hunt Mexicans and Blacks in the US with guns and kill them. Some of the nastiest things about the US are said by people from the UK. I have had many Serbs tell me how evil the US is for stopping the killing, since it is their right to slaughter their neighbors in Bosnia and Croatia and Kosovo. I have had several Russians tell me that it is their right to kill people from Chechnya since they hate the Chechnyans. I have had people tell me that they are sure that they know more than anyone with an education and they hate educated people (shades of the Khymer Rouge I guess). And on and on, in an endless parade of ignorance and hate for their fellow man (and woman).
Few if any of these sentiments would be normally expressed in normal discourse. However, in Skypeland, one gets to hear them all; crude, unvarnished, angry, petulant, aggressive, arrogant and resentful. When I hear people optimistically saying that "all people want the same thing; they just want to get along and it is all the fault of the media or Jews or politicians or Bilderbergs or bankers etc." that people do not get along and hate each other or go to war with each other, I wonder. I also am optimistic that people can live together in peace, but there are deep streams of visceral hatred flowing, and they need to be addressed. To do otherwise is really naive...
I am disgusting
In a Skypeland room about female Islamic dress, two or three Muslim men held forth telling everyone else to "fuck off and mind your own business, it is up to us to decide about what our women will wear. Do not stick your nose in our business. We can do to our women what we want." The man making these statements was met with jeers, and tried to state that "I am discussing..." but instead said over and over "I am disgusting..." I heartily agreed with his mistaken statement, however unintentional.
I pointed out that if the Muslim world wanted to be left alone, they should not "stick their noses" in the business of the rest of the world, as in the riots over the Danish Cartoons, or the fatwah against Salman Rushdie, or threatening to kill all Jews or Christians or Westerners or Americans, or engaging in terrorist actions against the west. Once that line has been crossed, Muslims have no right to complain about others "sticking their noses" in the business of the Muslims. (The North Koreans and the Burmese are pretty much cut off from the rest of the world. Also, Democratic Kampuchea and the People's Republic of China between 1948 and 1980 or so were pretty much cut off from the rest of the world. In all of these situations, these countries were essentially free from examination by the rest of the world. Once a country or group starts to interact with the rest of the world, then it is a bit difficult to keep its behavior from being examined and potentially criticized.)
This entire situation is severely compounded by the complaints of Muslim women about their treatment in various Islamic societies and cultures; honor killings, lack of suffrage, lack of educational opportunities, beatings for smiling or laughing in public (under the Taliban) , unequal child custody and divorce laws, female circumcision, etc. However, given that the world is getting smaller and smaller, and Muslims are demanding that the rest of the world pay attention to them, it is as I said in response, a "two way street". That is, the Islamic world cannot demand that everyone else show them respect, or honor their demands, or pay attention to their threats, without expecting that their culture and customs will be examined by others. If they want to "stick their noses" in the business of the west (free speech, freedom of religion, democracy, death threats made and executed, etc), then there will be blowback. And that is how it is in a world that is ever smaller, with greater spread of computing and communications and transportation technology.
I pointed out that if the Muslim world wanted to be left alone, they should not "stick their noses" in the business of the rest of the world, as in the riots over the Danish Cartoons, or the fatwah against Salman Rushdie, or threatening to kill all Jews or Christians or Westerners or Americans, or engaging in terrorist actions against the west. Once that line has been crossed, Muslims have no right to complain about others "sticking their noses" in the business of the Muslims. (The North Koreans and the Burmese are pretty much cut off from the rest of the world. Also, Democratic Kampuchea and the People's Republic of China between 1948 and 1980 or so were pretty much cut off from the rest of the world. In all of these situations, these countries were essentially free from examination by the rest of the world. Once a country or group starts to interact with the rest of the world, then it is a bit difficult to keep its behavior from being examined and potentially criticized.)
This entire situation is severely compounded by the complaints of Muslim women about their treatment in various Islamic societies and cultures; honor killings, lack of suffrage, lack of educational opportunities, beatings for smiling or laughing in public (under the Taliban) , unequal child custody and divorce laws, female circumcision, etc. However, given that the world is getting smaller and smaller, and Muslims are demanding that the rest of the world pay attention to them, it is as I said in response, a "two way street". That is, the Islamic world cannot demand that everyone else show them respect, or honor their demands, or pay attention to their threats, without expecting that their culture and customs will be examined by others. If they want to "stick their noses" in the business of the west (free speech, freedom of religion, democracy, death threats made and executed, etc), then there will be blowback. And that is how it is in a world that is ever smaller, with greater spread of computing and communications and transportation technology.
Entertaining the room
A common event in Skypeland is when a Skypeland visitor decides to play music to an entire captive room. Often, someone from the Middle East will try to disrupt a conversation by playing the Islamic call to prayer. Someone from the US will play anti-Al Qaeda parody songs or patriotic songs to a room full of foreigners. Often the goal is to shut down a discussion that the person finds objectionable, or to irritate others in Skypeland. Ah....
Oh you are that jerkoff!
Another feature of Skypeland are conference calls. Every so often, someone I barely know, or do not know, will add me to a conference call. Someone who had expressed very negative sentiments towards me added me to a conference call. I joined, and heard a stream of invective and racial slurs. I asked if he could add a Japanese friend to the conference call so he could also enjoy the festivities. The host checked to see who I was, and said "our producers write that you are gay, and live in New York, and your partner is C". I said I did not care what it said, but asked if it was possible to add my friend from Japan. He checked further, and said, "Oh you are that jerkoff who writes Skypeland Adventures". I confirmed that I was, and asked again if he could add my friend from Japan. At this point, the host ejected me from the room...
Go fuck your mother!
One can hear all kinds of things in Skypeland. A friend and I called a man from Tunisia who previously said that all Americans are "monkeys". I asked him how he was, and told him I was in the US. He said he hated the United States. I asked him why he hated the United States. He had no answer. I asked him if Al Jazeera told him to hate the United States. He had no answer. I asked him if he just repeated what Al Jazeera said, like a monkey. He had no answer. I asked him if his Imam told him to hate the United States and he just followed whatever the Imam told him to think like a robot. He said "Go fuck your mother, you mother fucker..." Ah...such insight and perspicacity! It is breathtaking...
Skype alternatives
A topic of conversation that often arises in Skypeland is, "What are the alternatives to Skype?" Skype is a VOIP program that can connect to the regular phone system, and that also features an online voice forum, the Skypecast.
Other VOIP programs such as Gizmo, Sunrocket, Speakeasy, Viatalk, Verizon VoiceWing, Lingo, Packet8, Zap!, Jajah, SJPhone, AT&T Callvantage, Vonage, Google talk, and those included in MSN and Yahoo! messengers do not yet have online voice forums like Skypecasts, as far as I know. There are other programs like Paltalk, oovoo, Mebeam and TalkShoe feature online voice forums, but do not yet have the same VOIP features that allow connection to the PSTN telephones (regular phone network), as far as I know. Each of these has their own advantages and disadvantages. Mebeam and oovoo allow up to 8 people to join in a video cast, but there are no lists of casts that I have found or ways to join casts that are not listed. Paltalk allows large discussion rooms, but a participant has to "raise their hand" to ask to speak and the host has to allow them to speak.
Someone in Skypeland told me that Skype would always be the best and no other program would ever beat it. I asked him why, and he had no answer. One only has to remember Quotron and Napster for previous companies that had a huge lead on the competition, but now have faded into obscurity. I heard similar things about Quotron and Napster in the past when they were dominant, and where are they now?
There are a huge number of new companies and emerging technologies that integrate telephones and the internet. For example, here is a blog entry that discusses some of these:
http://andyabramson.blogs.com/voipwatch/2007/06/why-voip-im-sky.html
Other VOIP programs such as Gizmo, Sunrocket, Speakeasy, Viatalk, Verizon VoiceWing, Lingo, Packet8, Zap!, Jajah, SJPhone, AT&T Callvantage, Vonage, Google talk, and those included in MSN and Yahoo! messengers do not yet have online voice forums like Skypecasts, as far as I know. There are other programs like Paltalk, oovoo, Mebeam and TalkShoe feature online voice forums, but do not yet have the same VOIP features that allow connection to the PSTN telephones (regular phone network), as far as I know. Each of these has their own advantages and disadvantages. Mebeam and oovoo allow up to 8 people to join in a video cast, but there are no lists of casts that I have found or ways to join casts that are not listed. Paltalk allows large discussion rooms, but a participant has to "raise their hand" to ask to speak and the host has to allow them to speak.
Someone in Skypeland told me that Skype would always be the best and no other program would ever beat it. I asked him why, and he had no answer. One only has to remember Quotron and Napster for previous companies that had a huge lead on the competition, but now have faded into obscurity. I heard similar things about Quotron and Napster in the past when they were dominant, and where are they now?
There are a huge number of new companies and emerging technologies that integrate telephones and the internet. For example, here is a blog entry that discusses some of these:
http://andyabramson.blogs.com/voipwatch/2007/06/why-voip-im-sky.html
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Illuminati symbols
In Skypeland you can find all kinds of conspiracy theorists. I heard someone hold forth that the red coats and the blue coats during the American Civil War were both funded by the Rothschilds. He claimed that the statue of liberty is an Illuminati symbol, as is the phrase "new world order" and the all-seeing eye. The history of the Rothchilds meddling apparently goes back 250 years and maybe even farther than that.
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Rashomon Effect
Skypeland is a perfect enviroment in which to witness the Rashomon Effect, named for the famous film of Kurosawa of that name in 1950. This film explores how different people can view the same event in different ways.
Many people complain that the news media in other cultures or countries are biased. Some in the West particularly will also complain about the media in their own countries. However, I will note that the only reason we even know what other media report is because of modern technology and communications.
Interestingly, many people do not realize that the media they consume regularly or the media soures in their own culture are potentially biased, or even inevitably biased. Some even refuse to acknowledge that different viewpoints exist, and that they do not all agree. It is sort of an extreme version of the Rashomon Effect; an inability or unwillingness to realize that differences even exist. However, I am optimistic that with more exposure to information from around the world, slowly people will come to grasp these concepts a bit better.
One cannot complain that the Western media do not show all the killing of the Palestinians daily by the Israelis and neglect the evidence of bias in the Arabic media, without looking very narrow minded. All the media sources are biased; we have to look at multiple sources and compare them to get a clearer picture of what is going on.
Many people complain that the news media in other cultures or countries are biased. Some in the West particularly will also complain about the media in their own countries. However, I will note that the only reason we even know what other media report is because of modern technology and communications.
Interestingly, many people do not realize that the media they consume regularly or the media soures in their own culture are potentially biased, or even inevitably biased. Some even refuse to acknowledge that different viewpoints exist, and that they do not all agree. It is sort of an extreme version of the Rashomon Effect; an inability or unwillingness to realize that differences even exist. However, I am optimistic that with more exposure to information from around the world, slowly people will come to grasp these concepts a bit better.
One cannot complain that the Western media do not show all the killing of the Palestinians daily by the Israelis and neglect the evidence of bias in the Arabic media, without looking very narrow minded. All the media sources are biased; we have to look at multiple sources and compare them to get a clearer picture of what is going on.
Monday, November 5, 2007
Alien abduction
In a room in Skypeland about UFOs, someone told me that UFOs commonly take up water on their visits to earth, and use the water for fuel, or possibly as part of their stealth technology. UFOs use light refraction to make themselves invisible to the naked eye and also disguise themselves as clouds. The authority said about 3% of the population has been abducted by aliens, and this is true in all countries around the world, including China.
Someone said that surely China must have more than 3% abductees since it has a larger population. Ah..a real number cruncher here. Can you follow his deep reasoning?
Someone said that surely China must have more than 3% abductees since it has a larger population. Ah..a real number cruncher here. Can you follow his deep reasoning?
Friday, November 2, 2007
Religious conversation
In Skypeland people were supposedly talking about religions, and an American came in, with a pugnacious attitude. He started challenging others and getting angry. He asked why everyone was attacking the US, and slurring his words. I tried to get him to be quiet and get the conversation back on topics, but he started threatening others, and saying according to the US constitution he could shoot whoever he wanted.
A friend in the room then messaged me:
[11:26:51 PM] JS says: PO'B was lewd and disgusting. He was in a host-less Christian room a while back and was asking 18 year old Christians what sex acts they had done. Ick.
[11:27:06 PM] P says: haha
[11:27:11 PM] P says: i will put that in the blog
[11:32:35 PM] JS says: It was R's room. At the end he brought everyone up - including this young Christian couple. But he left me in listening. I couldn't even help them out at the end.
[11:44:16 PM] JS says: Here's what the young lady sent me the next day:
[11:44:35 PM] JS says:
[10/20/2007 2:31:22 AM] J <><> says: member the drunk dude the other night?
[10/20/2007 2:31:24 AM] J <><> says:
[10/18/2007 12:37:10 AM] PO'B says: di not mean to hurt you
[10/18/2007 12:37:17 AM] PO'B says: not at all
[10/18/2007 12:37:35 AM] PO'B says: a test
[10/18/2007 12:39:04 AM] PO'B says: r u still there
[10/18/2007 12:40:14 AM] PO'B says: i want to talk about god
[10/18/2007 12:40:34 AM] PO'B says: and get in ur pants
[10/18/2007 12:40:37 AM] PO'B says: hehe
[10/18/2007 12:40:54 AM] PO'B says: u there
[10/18/2007 12:41:12 AM] PO'B says: (rofl)
A friend in the room then messaged me:
[11:26:51 PM] JS says: PO'B was lewd and disgusting. He was in a host-less Christian room a while back and was asking 18 year old Christians what sex acts they had done. Ick.
[11:27:06 PM] P says: haha
[11:27:11 PM] P says: i will put that in the blog
[11:32:35 PM] JS says: It was R's room. At the end he brought everyone up - including this young Christian couple. But he left me in listening. I couldn't even help them out at the end.
[11:44:16 PM] JS says: Here's what the young lady sent me the next day:
[11:44:35 PM] JS says:
[10/20/2007 2:31:22 AM] J <>
[10/20/2007 2:31:24 AM] J <>
[10/18/2007 12:37:10 AM] PO'B says: di not mean to hurt you
[10/18/2007 12:37:17 AM] PO'B says: not at all
[10/18/2007 12:37:35 AM] PO'B says: a test
[10/18/2007 12:39:04 AM] PO'B says: r u still there
[10/18/2007 12:40:14 AM] PO'B says: i want to talk about god
[10/18/2007 12:40:34 AM] PO'B says: and get in ur pants
[10/18/2007 12:40:37 AM] PO'B says: hehe
[10/18/2007 12:40:54 AM] PO'B says: u there
[10/18/2007 12:41:12 AM] PO'B says: (rofl)
In Scotland I feel like an immigrant
A lady from Scotland came into Skypeland and told us that, "You alls are intellectual and bring the truth to the table, but do not know the truth". I asked her what that meant, and she said I should know. I said I do not know what it means to know the truth and not know the truth. I asked her what it meant, and she said she did not know. Then she started to tell us how awful Scotland was becoming with all the immigrants from Poland and immigrants with dark skin coming to Scotland. She said no Scottish people can get jobs in Scotland any more because of this problem. Ah...I see...
I checked the Demographics of Scotland and I found that Scotland consists of:
White Scottish: 4,459,071 - 88.09%
Other White British: 373,685 - 7.38%
Any other White background: 78,150 - 1.54%
White Irish: 49,428 - 0.98%
Pakistani: 31,793 - 0.63%
Chinese: 16,310 - 0.32%
Indian: 15,037 - 0.30%
Mixed: 12,764 - 0.25%
Other: 9,571 - 0.19%
Other South Asian: 6,196 - 0.12%
African: 5,118 - 0.10%
Bangladeshi: 1,981 - 0.04%
Caribbean: 1,778 - 0.04%
Black Scottish or any other black background: 1,129 - 0.02%
So I guess all these "Polish invaders" that are over running Scotland are in that 1.54%.
Addendum: I have subsequently talked with people from rural England who said the same thing. Checking the demographics of England, there are no more than 2.3% people in England who are from Poland:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_England
This is just incredible to hear, over and over.
I checked the Demographics of Scotland and I found that Scotland consists of:
White Scottish: 4,459,071 - 88.09%
Other White British: 373,685 - 7.38%
Any other White background: 78,150 - 1.54%
White Irish: 49,428 - 0.98%
Pakistani: 31,793 - 0.63%
Chinese: 16,310 - 0.32%
Indian: 15,037 - 0.30%
Mixed: 12,764 - 0.25%
Other: 9,571 - 0.19%
Other South Asian: 6,196 - 0.12%
African: 5,118 - 0.10%
Bangladeshi: 1,981 - 0.04%
Caribbean: 1,778 - 0.04%
Black Scottish or any other black background: 1,129 - 0.02%
So I guess all these "Polish invaders" that are over running Scotland are in that 1.54%.
Addendum: I have subsequently talked with people from rural England who said the same thing. Checking the demographics of England, there are no more than 2.3% people in England who are from Poland:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_England
This is just incredible to hear, over and over.
Americans think they are better
A Finnish lady in Skypeland said she felt that Americans feel they are better than everyone else. I asked why she thought this. She said she watched American movies almost every night, but had almost never met an American. However, the impression she had from the movies was that Americans thought they were superior. Ah...I see...
Learning English
In a room in Skypeland advertised to be "welcome tou my room to devllop you're english" (just serious people descussing and talking .....), I heard an amazing sequence of comments. A bunch of Arabic-people just chattered away in Arabic. One tried to tell a joke in English; "An Arabian man went to the US. In America, the man wants to park. So he asks a police man if he can bark there. And the policeman says yes he can park there." At this, the entire room collapsed in laughter. The host said she had heard that one before from her English teacher. They also loved to refer to Skype as "Skypie", a common mistake I have noticed. Someone drunk from Finland with an atrociously thick accent said that people in Spain speak bad English because their movies are all American movies and dubbed, because they have no culture. Someone from Poland agreed. The Finnish man said that people in Scandanavia are afraid to speak English. The Polish man said he was a big Reggae fan and endeavored to speak English with a Jamaican accent. He talked about how much he liked to smoke ganja. He said that no matter where he went in Europe, people knew one or two Polish words, especially how to say "fuck" in Polish. The Polish man went to bed, and then the Finnish man started to rant and rave, saying "I wanna suck some cock" and other nonsense.
The war has cost 3.5 trillion dollars
A man in Skypeland claimed that the war in Iraq had cost 3.5 trillion dollars. I asked him where he obtained his information, since it had cost 500 billion dollars so far, according to every source I had seen. He said he had read it in the National Post in Toronto, and it was a projected cost over the next 4 years. Ah yes...
A capitalist is a sick individualist
In Skypeland one hears all kinds of nonsense sometimes. A man who appeared to be in his cups said a bunch of negative stuff about capitalism, complaining over and over. He said that capitalists were bad, and sick. He said that a capitalist is a sick individualist. He asked, what is the difference between a communist and a capitalist? I realized it was pointless to discuss anything further with him...
I am not a Liberal
In the middle of Skypecast about free speech, someone from Belgium entered with an amazing sequence of non sequiturs. He said that we need to vote for laws and punish those who do not follow them. He said he would prefer to be in a stone age society. He was accused of being a liberal and he took offense, and said that he was a social person. I think he meant he was a socialist, not something so far right wing as a liberal...
American citizens don't need to speak English
One hears all kinds of incredible claims in Skypeland. A man who delights in spewing racist nonsense claimed that it is not necessary to speak English to become a US citizen. I pointed out that they can be permanent residents, but to get US citizenship, they need to pass a simple English exam. He claimed this was not true since they could claim minority status. I started to argue, but then I gave up. It is just pointless sometimes...
He also went on and on about how great the war in Iraq is, since it killed Muslims. He said that George Bush should get a medal for killing Muslims, and possibly starting a war between the Shia and Sunni to wipe out more Muslims. Oh brother...
He also went on and on about how great the war in Iraq is, since it killed Muslims. He said that George Bush should get a medal for killing Muslims, and possibly starting a war between the Shia and Sunni to wipe out more Muslims. Oh brother...
Scotland does not exist
There are many great stories in Skypeland. A young man tried to argue that Scotland is not a real place and is only fictitious. He had read on a website that the United Kingdom is a country. He said that if the United Kingdom was therefore an island, and if it was an island and a country, that must mean that Scotland does not exist. Ah...sounds like very solid reasoning...
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Christians are stupid
One can hear all kinds of assorted nonsense in Skypeland. One Christian Skypecast I was in was visited by a Muslim. The Muslim claimed that Christians were following some sort of distorted faith since they were supposed to worship Jesus, but stopped doing it and started worshipping someone else instead, called Christ. Ah...
The Muslim then claimed that the Bible is always badly translated, and that one needs a Koran to help interpret the Bible. He said that quite often in the bible the word for "God" is translated as the Devil, or the Devil is mistranslated as God. He said that Elohim is often mistranslated as "Gods" to support the notion of the trinity, when the plural word Elohim should be translated as "God" instead, since it is the majestic plural, not a real plural (Elo is the singular form). He said that the Dead Sea scrolls proved that all of the current Christian bibles are wrong.
The Muslim then claimed that the Bible is always badly translated, and that one needs a Koran to help interpret the Bible. He said that quite often in the bible the word for "God" is translated as the Devil, or the Devil is mistranslated as God. He said that Elohim is often mistranslated as "Gods" to support the notion of the trinity, when the plural word Elohim should be translated as "God" instead, since it is the majestic plural, not a real plural (Elo is the singular form). He said that the Dead Sea scrolls proved that all of the current Christian bibles are wrong.
Qatar has no oil
One can hear some of the most incredible ignorance in Skypeland. I was in a room, and some man claimed that there was no oil at all in Qatar. He said that they had a fantastic economy based on just information and trade, and being at a crossroads of the world. He said it was the new Paris of the world. He said that Americans and Japanese had invested huge amounts of money in Qatar.
Wow, completely different than what the data show:
Wow, completely different than what the data show:
The End of America
One can hear all kinds of theories and opinions in Skypeland. One man came in to a skypecast about Iraq and the USA and said that the reason the US attacked Iraq is that Iraq changed its sale of oil from dollars to Euro.
A man from the Middle East living in the US came in to promote a book called "End of America". He was asked who wrote the book and he said "a Jew...a Jewish". He said that he had no problems with a Jewish since
he was that kind of a person.
He said that the US economy would fail without arms so they had to start a war, and that most of the US economy depended on armament manufacture. He said that the former freedom fighters are now the Axis of Evil. He said that the background of the current administration is in oil, including the President and the vice President of the US, so they had attacked Iraq to steal its oil. He said that this administration has neglected clean energy because Americans are lazy people. He gave as an example, the fantastic technology represented by Joseph Newman's new invention, an electric engine.
He complained about how awful the US is and talked constantly about how much better Saudi Arabia is. He was asked if this was true, why was he not back in Saudi Arabia? He said that there were no poor people in Saudi Arabia. He said that the US is more of a dictatorship than Saudi Arabia. He said the US is a fascist state.
He spoke to an Israeli woman and said she was not Israeli since her father was not born in Israel. He said that everyone should go back to where they were born. I asked why he did not go back where he was from then.
He started to rant and rave about the fence between Israel and Palestine. An Iraqi mentioned the wall being built between Saudi Arabia and Iraq, and he avoided discussing it. He said that people born in Israel were not Israelis. He said that all Jews who used to live in Israel had converted to Christianity. He said that the Jews in Israel had corrupted Christianity.
(I looked and sure enough there are plans to build a 550 mile high tech fence between Saudi Arabia and Iraq: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/01/wirq01.xml)
He said that he is in the US so he can tell people the truth. And when he tells people the truth, they very rapidly convert to Islam and become good people instead.
A man from the Middle East living in the US came in to promote a book called "End of America". He was asked who wrote the book and he said "a Jew...a Jewish". He said that he had no problems with a Jewish since
he was that kind of a person.
He said that the US economy would fail without arms so they had to start a war, and that most of the US economy depended on armament manufacture. He said that the former freedom fighters are now the Axis of Evil. He said that the background of the current administration is in oil, including the President and the vice President of the US, so they had attacked Iraq to steal its oil. He said that this administration has neglected clean energy because Americans are lazy people. He gave as an example, the fantastic technology represented by Joseph Newman's new invention, an electric engine.
He complained about how awful the US is and talked constantly about how much better Saudi Arabia is. He was asked if this was true, why was he not back in Saudi Arabia? He said that there were no poor people in Saudi Arabia. He said that the US is more of a dictatorship than Saudi Arabia. He said the US is a fascist state.
He spoke to an Israeli woman and said she was not Israeli since her father was not born in Israel. He said that everyone should go back to where they were born. I asked why he did not go back where he was from then.
He started to rant and rave about the fence between Israel and Palestine. An Iraqi mentioned the wall being built between Saudi Arabia and Iraq, and he avoided discussing it. He said that people born in Israel were not Israelis. He said that all Jews who used to live in Israel had converted to Christianity. He said that the Jews in Israel had corrupted Christianity.
(I looked and sure enough there are plans to build a 550 mile high tech fence between Saudi Arabia and Iraq: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/01/wirq01.xml)
He said that he is in the US so he can tell people the truth. And when he tells people the truth, they very rapidly convert to Islam and become good people instead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
