The Church of the Negative Christ
"If it's provable we can kill it."
Love, Missiles, and Child Pornography
Or, why there will never be an end to the Israeli war against Palestine
Published on August 21, 2006 By EmperorofIceCream In Politics


So that I'm not accused of misinterpretation (deliberate or otherwise) nor of letting my fondness for underdogs run away with me, here is the link to the article in which I found this image of childhood 'innocence' gone awry (Link).

In an effort to ameliorate the abomination thus exposed the journalist in question writes: "[...] the children would not have seen images of dead Lebanese as these kinds of images are not broadcast in Israel, suggesting the children were probably acting with some ignorance about the devastation the missiles were causing."

But the 'parents' who incited their children to do this were not. No American news media has published this image, nor commented on it, nor will any American news media ever do so. There is no room in their simple-minded, simplifying commentaries on the conflict for such a thing. And besides, it might make the Israelis look bad.

Take a look at what your tax dollars are supporting, America: the corruption of racial hatred and war, handed on to the next generation of Israeli cannon-fodder while doting parents grin in the background.

Enjoy - after all, you paid for the missiles.

Article Tags
politics
Popular Articles in this Category
Let's see your political memes
Popular Articles from EmperorofIceCream
Why I Love my Wife
James River City
Comments (Page 3)
3 Pages1 2 3 
31
stutefish
on Aug 23, 2006
Except for Charles C, who gives up on any article longer than a dozen sentences or so, and has difficulty with "big words."


Since Charles C. has made it clear he is done here, I feel quite comfortable in offering this sentiment to ya in his stead.

Fuck you.
32
EmperorofIceCream
on Aug 23, 2006
To: Charles C

I'm not very smart but I still write a heck of a lot less than he does.


I agree. You're as dumb as a stump. And you do write a lot less than I do. And you use shorter words. That's because you're as dumb as a stump. And your point is?
33
EmperorofIceCream
on Aug 23, 2006
To: all the prima donnas and divas (other than little-whip and the inarticulate Charles C) currently flouncing on this thread -

Stop it. Or I shall spank you.
34
foreverserenity
on Aug 23, 2006
To: foreverserenity

You have a simplicity and directness of language that I cannot approach and which I am learning to appreciate. Thank you for your comment


Simon, thanks. I speak the way I think, that's all.



[whistles at Stute's tongue lashing~~~~~ whew] You asked for it Stute!


You've been tongue lashed by the master!



While some folks can appreciate the creativity of your curses and insults, including myself, the average (and they are oh-so-average, aren't they?) participant on JU would be just as well served with a simple "fuck you."


LOL, that would be too easy, and a lot less enjoyable to read!



Foreverserenity: I think there's a huge difference between telling your children that their father is away on the other side of the world fighting in a war, and telling your children that their big brother is dead because someone fired rockets on his school during recess.

TW, would you feel differently about teaching your children about war, if someone started launching rockets across the Mexican border into your living room at dinner time?



So according to Texas Wahine, because I'm not a parent, I'm not allowed to agree with any parents except parents that agree with her.




STute, you're still talking the same shit. It's what we would say from my homeland, "same difference' meaning it's the same thing, nothing changes, 'six a one half dozen of the other'.



35
stutefish
on Aug 23, 2006
fserenity, I've been developing my arguments in direct response to your counter-arguments.

But like EoIC, the more I dispute your conclusions and explain why I don't agree with them, the more you amuse yourself with trash talk and the less you actually think or discuss the issues.

But don't worry, it's okay, it's all tongue in cheek anyway.

Heck, the bomb-signing children and the dead bodies at Qana are probably all tongue-in-cheek, too, so feel free to stick to trash talk from here on out, if you like.
36
drmiler
on Aug 23, 2006
Stop it. Or I shall spank you.


I "think" NOT!
37
EmperorofIceCream
on Aug 24, 2006
To: All who've so far commented.

Let's see. 1. The post is meaningless because the photo was staged. Whether or not it was staged the image still says something - it offers a different commentary on those who claim to be ultra-moral, meanwhile prostituting their children as images in a propaganda. And it's not the idea of child-prostitutes that bothers me. It is, once again, a demonstration of fundamental hypocrisy.

2. The post is meaningless because either I don't provide a moral equivalence to the actions of Israel/Hezbollah; or because none exists. I didn't provide it because I thought it was obvious. As I've said, it's hard to sink to the level of stupidity necessary in here for me to be at the level of the likes of stute. And calling stute stupid isn't really an insult - more of an apt description.

First, he's going to have a hard time making it stick, since all the documented evidence points to Israel and its allies having a clear policy of not targeting civilians, and their words and deeds whenever it happens have been consistently to apologize, investigate, and punish.


No they don't target civilians. They target people whom they have defined as not being civilians - usually by Gunship in the form of extra-judicial killings. Your argument is disingenuous because you, like the Israelis, have a shifting definition of 'civilians' - such that 'civilian' becomes anyone who is not immediately targeted but likely to be killed in an attack anyway. The other term for civilian in Israeli is 'collateral damage'.

Plus, in order to make the hypocrisy argument really worthwhile, he'd have to draw a moral equivalence between the IDF and Hezb'Allah. This would also be hard to do, since Hezb'Allah really does have an official (and public!) policy of targeting civilians. And far from apologizing, investigating, and punishing, Hezb'Allah celebrates and rewards the targeting of civilians.


Hezbollah has a policy of targeting all those it regards as combatants. That would include, from their point of view, every Israeli citizen - because in a democracy its the citins who are the seat of all poitical authority, legitimacy, and sovereignty. On such a definition there is no one who is not a combatant - except those who did not specifically authorize the Olmert government by voting for it.

The IDF often targets the families and associates of those whom it can't attack directly - frequently by levelling their houses. The equivalence in the types of acts carried out lies in this - they both illegitimately target those not directly involved in formal conflicts. The acts and the scale of them are different. But they are of the same type and work in the same way. And that, to me at least, is enough to establish the Israelis as hypocrites since they do the same things as those they condemn as immoral.

Your list of peoples who have waged horrific wars. The Aztecs, for example. The wars you refer to were described as 'Wars of Flowers'. They were essentially prolonged kidnapping-campaigns since their intent was to seize worthy victims for their religious practices. And they were conducted within frameworks of understanding that were consistent and coherent. In other words, there was no hypocrisy involved, and it's the hypocrisy of the wars of the West, too often characterized as the assumption of the 'White man's burden' - not the numbers killed or the methods used to kill them.

The same is true of the Mongols, who formally declared war on the entire West via their 'letters of submission to the European powers', which called on Europe to submit to the powers of the Mongols. Oce again, the framework of ideas surrounding the warss of the Mongols were coherent, consistent, and without hypocrisy. You concentrate on methods and numbers, I concentrate on frameworks of ideas and whether they succeed or fail to be consistent and coherent. The Israelis fail because they don't live up to the moral paradigm within which they claim, endlessly, to act.
3 Pages1 2 3 
Meta
Views
» 6878
Comments
» 37
Category
» Politics
Comment
Recent Article Comments
Let's start a New Jammin Thr...
Modding Ara: History Untold
LightStar Design Windowblind...
DeskScapes 11: The Dream Mak...
Which A.I. Software Are You ...
ChatGPT 4o vs. o1 vs. o1 Pro...
What's the Last Book You Rea...
A day in the Life of Odditie...
Let's see your political mem...
Safe and free software downl...
Sponsored Links
Terms of Service Privacy Policy About Us Contact Us Stardock.com
© 2024 Stardock Corporation. All rights reserved.
JoeUser v1.0.0.0