NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/000625.html

CHAVEZ MAKES ANTI-SEMITIC CHRISTMAS SPEECH

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez announced in a Christmas speech that “the descendants of those who crucified Christ” have appropriated the riches of the world.

Speaking at a rehabilitation center on December 24, the controversial left-wing president said “the descendants of those who crucified Christ... have taken ownership of the riches of the world, a minority has taken ownership of the gold of the world, the silver, the minerals, water, the good lands, petrol, well, the riches, and they have concentrated the riches in a small number of hands.”

For Spanish speakers on this list, the full speech can be found at
www.gobiernoenlinea.gob.ve/docMgr/sharedfiles/Chavez_visita_Centro_Manantial_de_los_suenos24122005.pdf (The remarks about Jews are on page 18.)

If ever there was a time for a CIA-aided overthrow of a tinpot Marxist in South America, it is now.

If ever there was a time for a CIA-aided overthrow of a tinpot Marxist in South America, it is now.

How do you figure?

If ever there was a time for a CIA-aided overthrow of a tinpot Marxist in South America, it is now.

As long as the people want him to be their leader I don't think you have a case.. besides.. He's funny!

The romans are in charge of the world?

If ever there was a time for a CIA-aided overthrow of a tinpot Marxist in South America, it is now.Dictators are more fun. Who cares if they slaughter thousands of their own people as a result of American intervention, right?

Yes we could always use a dictator, and give the natural riches of venezuela to united fruit so that they starve:)

Anyway the CIA tried that, but it didn't work..

And i don't understand what some people have against the south-americans governing them selfs..

I mean besides Cuba and Venezuela latin america is a hell hole...

I say socialisam and democracy :)

CIA just ends up with death squads:mad:

I mean besides Cuba and Venezuela latin america is a hell hole...

Right. Chile is just a terrible hellhole. And Uruguay. And Belize. And...oh wait. No, actually, that's a load of shit.

The romans are in charge of the world?
The Pope has a shitload of influence.

The Pope has a shitload of influence.
You don't know the half of it....
http://xirdal.lmu.de/xirdalium/xpix/ratzinger.jpg

The romans are in charge of the world?

Not just the Romans: white Europeans.

"The world is for all of us, then, but it so happens that a minority, the descendents of the same ones that crucified Christ, the descendents of the same ones that kicked Bolivar out of here and also crucified him in their own way over there in Santa Marta, in Colombia. A minority has taken possesion all of the wealth of the world, a minority has taken ownership of all of the gold of the planet, of the silver, of the minerals, the waters, the good lands, oil, of the wealth then and have concentrated the wealth in a few hands: less than 10% of the population of the world owns more than half of the wealth of the world and ...more than the population of the planet is poor and each day there are more poor people in the whole world. We are decided, decided to change history and each day we are accompanied and will be accompanied by more Chiefs of state..."

The whole 'anti-semitic' thing seems to be just a deliberate right-wing media misinterpretation.

well when we think of the avrege dudes stanadrd of living besides the two mentioned the rest are more or less hell holes, cuba and venezuela have free health care, whilst in the rest of latin america, if ain't got enought cash, then you just ought to skip the drip to the hospital and go right to your local cemetery...

Im just saying the avrege dude in these two places has it a lot better then the avrege dude in the other places...


And regarding the speach, is can't be anti-semit, i mean jews are not the only semites, the arabs also are. And he didn't say anything against the jews, bu the STATE of Isreal, keep in mind that Jesus was a jew, with a big nose and mideastern dark skin, and platina black hair..

So to say that this was anti semite is like to say that saying something against Hitler is ant germanic, get my point anyone?

Why am I surprised at this false translation?

Here is what he actually said, in Spanish, translation to follow:

“El mundo tiene para todos, pues, pero resulta que unas minorías, los descendientes de los mismos que crucificaron a Cristo, los descendientes de los mismos que echaron a Bolívar de aquí y también lo crucificaron a su manera en Santa Marta, allá en Colombia. Una minoría se adueñó de las riquezas del mundo, una minoría se adueñó del oro del planeta, de la plata, de los minerales, de las agues, de las tierras buenas, del petróleo, de las riquezas, pues, y han concentrado las riquezas en pocas manos: menos del diez por ciento de la población del mundo es dueña de más de la mitad de la riqueza de todo el mundo…..”

The world has enough for everyone, but what happens is that a few minorities, the descendants of those who crucified Christ, the descendants of those who removed Bolivar from here and also crucified him in their way in Santa Marta, over there in Colombia. A minority has taken control of the riches of the earth, a minority has taken control of the gold of the planet, of the silver, of the minerals, of the waters, of the good lands, of the petroleum, of all the riches, and they have concentrated them these riches in few hands. Less than ten percent of the population of the world is in control of more than half of the riches of the entire world…

He mentions slightly, in passing, the descendants of those who crucified Christ, along with others who now hold power. Hardly an anti-semitic rant. If you read the rest of his speech, you realise that Chavez uses many allusions to highlight his points, and has a rather poetic turn of phrase. He is not claiming that Jews kicked Simon Bolivar out, or that Jews control the world.

Edit: Bodies without organs beat me to it:)

But yes, this cry of anti-semitism is a crock of total shit, based on one phrase, pulled out of context. God...you people will find any reason to hate him, and justify your desire to get rid of him, won't you?

And he didn't say anything against the jews, bu the STATE of Isreal, keep in mind that Jesus was a jew, with a big nose and mideastern dark skin, and platina black hair..

So to say that this was anti semite is like to say that saying something against Hitler is ant germanic, get my point anyone?


Point out to me where he even mentions the state of Israel, would you?

Aha! More bullshit about Chavez.

Edit: Bodies without organs beat me to it:)

Sort of... what I probably reckon is that he actually meant those authoritarian figures who take by the sword and hold by corruption and brutality (the fact that these people in the world today are primarily of white European lineage is just a side issue). If we look at what else Chavez has recently said about Jesus, we find this: "One of the greatest rebels, whom I really admire: Christ. He was a rebel. He ended up being crucified. He was a great rebel. He rebelled against the established power that subjugated."

Why am I surprised at this false translation?

Here is what he actually said, in Spanish, translation to follow:

“El mundo tiene para todos, pues, pero resulta que unas minorías, los descendientes de los mismos que crucificaron a Cristo, los descendientes de los mismos que echaron a Bolívar de aquí y también lo crucificaron a su manera en Santa Marta, allá en Colombia. Una minoría se adueñó de las riquezas del mundo, una minoría se adueñó del oro del planeta, de la plata, de los minerales, de las agues, de las tierras buenas, del petróleo, de las riquezas, pues, y han concentrado las riquezas en pocas manos: menos del diez por ciento de la población del mundo es dueña de más de la mitad de la riqueza de todo el mundo…..”

The world has enough for everyone, but what happens is that a few minorities, the descendants of those who crucified Christ, the descendants of those who removed Bolivar from here and also crucified him in their way in Santa Marta, over there in Colombia. A minority has taken control of the riches of the earth, a minority has taken control of the gold of the planet, of the silver, of the minerals, of the waters, of the good lands, of the petroleum, of all the riches, and they have concentrated them these riches in few hands. Less than ten percent of the population of the world is in control of more than half of the riches of the entire world…

He mentions slightly, in passing, the descendants of those who crucified Christ, along with others who now hold power. Hardly an anti-semitic rant. If you read the rest of his speech, you realise that Chavez uses many allusions to highlight his points, and has a rather poetic turn of phrase. He is not claiming that Jews kicked Simon Bolivar out, or that Jews control the world.

Edit: Bodies without organs beat me to it:)

But yes, this cry of anti-semitism is a crock of total shit, based on one phrase, pulled out of context. God...you people will find any reason to hate him, and justify your desire to get rid of him, won't you?
So, let's summarize the findings. He did blame the Jews (referring to them as Christ killers, which of course is perfectly neutral and unoffensive) for grabbing all the riches of the world, but he blamed another group (white Europeans) as well and that absolves him from the charges of anti-Semitism?

Yes. That sure makes a whole lot of sense.:rolleyes:

The funny thing is, look who's talking. Venezuela is plenty rich with nationalized oil, while the population is dirt poor. Doesn't it make Chavez himself a member of a "minority that has taken control of the petroleum and have concentrated these riches in few hands"?

well when we think of the avrege dudes stanadrd of living besides the two mentioned the rest are more or less hell holes, cuba and venezuela have free health care, whilst in the rest of latin america, if ain't got enought cash, then you just ought to skip the drip to the hospital and go right to your local cemetery... Try talking less out of your ass, please. Yes, there is a great disparity between rich and poor throughout Latin America…but there is also a very large middle class in most Latin American countries. Chile has a much higher standard of living than most South American countries…yet you’ve listed it as a hellhole. Belize as well has a good standard of living. As do other nations that you’ve slandered.

Im just saying the avrege dude in these two places has it a lot better then the avrege dude in the other places... Really? And you’re basing that on what information exactly? Have you actually been to these places you are so freely speaking as an authority on?


semites, the arabs also are. And he didn't say anything against the jews, bu the STATE of Isreal, keep in mind that Jesus was a jew, with a big nose and mideastern dark skin, and platina black hair.. You didn’t bother to actually read the speech, did you. He never mentioned Israel, or Jews.

Hey, why don’t we take some other things out of context and make wild claims about them? Here’s a great one!!!

HUGO CHAVEZ DOESN’T LIKE BLACKS!

Hugo Chavez, during a recent informal ‘talk’ with people on the streets of Caracas, was overheard saying:

“You. Where are you from, negro?”

His comments have deeply offended people of African descent, and his overthrow is demanded.

*behind the scenes*

“Um, boss…Chavez actually said, “¿Tú, de dónde eres, negro?” And ‘negro’ doesn’t mean ‘negro’…it means ‘black’…and often doesn’t refer to a person’s skin, but their hair or eyes. It doesn’t have the same negative connotation in Spanish as it does in English.”

“Oh who cares! Negro gets headlines!”

It seems that people are forgetting that it wasn't just the Hebrews who had a hand in the death of Jesus, the Romans under Pontius Pilate had no problem with granting the Hebrews the permission to carry out justice as they see fit.

After all, the Romans did nothing to protect Jesus, and if anyone remembers their ancient history, they'd remember the signficance of Pilate washing his hands...

So, let's summarize the findings. He did blame the Jews (referring to them as Christ killers, which of course is perfectly neutral and unoffensive) for grabbing all the riches of the world, but he blamed another group (white Europeans) as well and that absolves him from the charges of anti-Semitism?

Yes. That sure makes a whole lot of sense.:rolleyes: Funny that you are saying that Jews are Christ killers. I was taught it was the Romans. He did not once use the word Jew. And if you people can't get the fact that he is quite rightly saying that a minority of people...mostly of European descent, control the majority of the resources, then you better hunt down all the people in your own nations saying the same damn things, and accuse them of anti-semitism. Because that would be nearly as ridiculous.

The funny thing is, look who's talking. Venezuela is plenty rich with nationalized oil, while the population is dirt poor. Doesn't it make Chavez himself a member of a "minority that has taken control of the petroleum and have concentrated these riches in few hands"?Actually, Chavez is one of the minorities (re: not white) that has finally got a position of power, and works from a platform that aims at bridging the gap between rich and poor in his country. The exact opposite of the claim you just made.

He means whites from what i see in the text.
The Romes where\are white.
So i guess if anything this speach is against the european style skinned people. Like my self, well i'm a white dude from europe. So this had more against me then the jews, who are in fact mideastern. And jesus was killed by the romans, not the jews. INRJ
Isu Nasret Rex Jews
Jesus the king of jews

He was killed for trying to get the jews to turn on roman power..
White power cind of..

So how the hell some rabbi got this to be anti semite, i don't know..

It was not a anti anyone speach, it just said the world was not fair..
I am white, and didn't consider it racist to me, and I am in some way geneticly lincked to the romens as I am white...

So how the jews get every thing to be anti semite i don't know, they have peranoia:rolleyes:

Ok, so he said the Jews killed Jesus Christ. Exactly how is this anti-semitic?

Also lets look into the bible. Pontius Palatius "wiped his hands clean". So with the Romans out of the game, only one guilty party remains. The JOOS.

Also looking into it. Even if you can make the assertion that the Romans really killed Jesus Christ. Also remember that the Rabbi's threatened a rebellion if nothing was done against Christ. And not to forget the Rabbi's riling up the crowd, to release Barabas instead of Christ. Yeah the jews had almost nothing to do with his death :rolleyes:

That in no way means that the Jews of today are responsible for Christs death. Yet somehow I don't think killing/or puerusing actions leading to the death of THE LORD AND SAVIOR of the CHRISTIANS, was the most diplomatic thing to get involved in. There role in Christs death has been a constant propaganda tool to rile christians against Jews.


BTW : before the flaming starts I could hardly be anti-jewish. One of my Jewish in-laws even said the above himself. To quote his words "getting involved in Christ's life and death has caused the Jews nothing but problems for the last 2000 years".


(((But he does make the point. "why are christians so upset even if we may have killed Jesus, he was alive again 3 days later, no lasting harm was done" )))



Ohhh and back on topic. BOOOOOOO CHAVEZ

Why am I surprised at this false translation?

Here is what he actually said, in Spanish, translation to follow:

“El mundo tiene para todos, pues, pero resulta que unas minorías, los descendientes de los mismos que crucificaron a Cristo, los descendientes de los mismos que echaron a Bolívar de aquí y también lo crucificaron a su manera en Santa Marta, allá en Colombia. Una minoría se adueñó de las riquezas del mundo, una minoría se adueñó del oro del planeta, de la plata, de los minerales, de las agues, de las tierras buenas, del petróleo, de las riquezas, pues, y han concentrado las riquezas en pocas manos: menos del diez por ciento de la población del mundo es dueña de más de la mitad de la riqueza de todo el mundo…..”

The world has enough for everyone, but what happens is that a few minorities, the descendants of those who crucified Christ, the descendants of those who removed Bolivar from here and also crucified him in their way in Santa Marta, over there in Colombia. A minority has taken control of the riches of the earth, a minority has taken control of the gold of the planet, of the silver, of the minerals, of the waters, of the good lands, of the petroleum, of all the riches, and they have concentrated them these riches in few hands. Less than ten percent of the population of the world is in control of more than half of the riches of the entire world…

He mentions slightly, in passing, the descendants of those who crucified Christ, along with others who now hold power. Hardly an anti-semitic rant. If you read the rest of his speech, you realise that Chavez uses many allusions to highlight his points, and has a rather poetic turn of phrase. He is not claiming that Jews kicked Simon Bolivar out, or that Jews control the world.

Edit: Bodies without organs beat me to it:)

But yes, this cry of anti-semitism is a crock of total shit, based on one phrase, pulled out of context. God...you people will find any reason to hate him, and justify your desire to get rid of him, won't you?
Don't pretend you wouldn't flip a wig if anyone ever mentioned anything bad about Native Americans or First Nations.

It's the point that he's singling people out as evil. Even if it's only in passing.

Bodies without Organs and Sinuhue seem to make the most sense - an anti-imperial speech, pitting the little guy against the big bully and using metaphor and analogy. I don't say I agree with the thrust of his speech, but I don't think it was intended to be at all anti-semitic/racist.

It seems that people are forgetting that it wasn't just the Hebrews who had a hand in the death of Jesus, the Romans under Pontius Pilate had no problem with granting the Hebrews the permission to carry out justice as they see fit.

After all, the Romans did nothing to protect Jesus, and if anyone remembers their ancient history, they'd remember the signficance of Pilate washing his hands...

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but the Jews sentenced Jesus to death, whilst the Romans were the ones who executed him (using a Roman method of execution rather than a Jewish one, just to hammer the point home concerning their power).

See, it's times like this that I'm glad that I'm perfectly happy sitting here eating Hostess Ding Dongs and watching you all go berzerk for my enjoyment. :)

Carry on. :)

Cybach']Ok, so he said the Jews killed Jesus Christ. Exactly how is this anti-semitic?

Point out to me where he mentions the Jews, would you?

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but the Jews sentenced Jesus to death, whilst the Romans were the ones who executed him (using a Roman method of execution rather than a Jewish one, just to hammer the point home concerning their power).
I'm not saying your wrong. I'm just going by what I know and remember from history (and a VERY asinine argument I had with an ex-boyfriend...)...

And please, get a me a link so I can see who's right here. ^__^

And to make the farce greater.

Jesus Christ was executed in being the King of the Jews, last of the line of David. And therefore in direct opposition to Rome's claim of Judea.

Yes the last king of the Jews was Jesus Christ, written officially on his death warrant, and all Jews that took him as there King, later became christians. And these christians are now fighting the left over Jews who did not accept Christ as King nor savior.

So what does this tell us? We Christians worship the last King of the Jews, but often have grudges against the unwilling Jews who did not accept Christ.

Cybach']Ok, so he said the Jews killed Jesus Christ. Exactly how is this anti-semitic?
Actually, he did not once mention Jews. Nor were these few sentences the focus of his speech. His attempt, around Christmas, which is still a deeply religious holdiay focused on Jesus in Latin America, was to highlight what everyone knows...that the vast majority of wealth and resources in this world is concentrated in the hands of few. He speaks of injustices to evoke an emotional response...the crucifixition of Christ, and the defeat of Simon Bolivar.

But go ahead folks...make shit up if it makes you feel better. (not directed at you Cybach)

Funny that you are saying that Jews are Christ killers. I was taught it was the Romans.
Sure you were. In theory. In practice, though, you KNOW whom he meant, and it sure wasn't the Romans. It's pretty damn rare for someone to say "descendants of Christ killers" about Italians (in fact, it ONLY happens as the "last straw" argument in the context of defending someone from charges of anti-Semitism), while this libel has been (and continues to be) widely used against Jews.


And if you people can't get the fact that he is quite rightly saying that a minority of people...mostly of European descent, control the majority of the resources, then you better hunt down all the people in your own nations saying the same damn things, and accuse them of anti-semitism. Because that would be nearly as ridiculous.
Nope, that would be way more ridiculous. Even more ridiculous, in fact, than trying to sanitize Chavez's words. "Mostly" of European descent?


Actually, Chavez is one of the minorities (re: not white) that has finally got a position of power, and works from a platform that aims at bridging the gap between rich and poor in his country. The exact opposite of the claim you just made.
Ah yes. One of the few minorities in a position of power. The rest of the Third World is ruled by the oppressive white people such as Robert Mugabe, the Saudi royal family and the Communist party of China.

Don't pretend you wouldn't flip a wig if anyone ever mentioned anything bad about Native Americans or First Nations. Uh-huh. I'd totally flip if he completely did not mention First Nations people, but others interpreted it as an attack on us.

It's the point that he's singling people out as evil. Even if it's only in passing.
Please. You people need to learn how to read for yourselves. The word evil was not used either. Christ was crucified, yes? And people did it? Yes? Whether you believe that Jews or Romans did it, the act happened, and was a crime. Can Hugo Chavez not dare mention a fact central to the Christian religion for fear of some idiot calling him anti-semitic? Apparently not. Oh no...where are all the people crying about the bum rap they got in terms of kicking Simon Bolivar out?

I'm not saying your wrong. I'm just going by what I know and remember from history (and a VERY asinine argument I had with an ex-boyfriend...)...

And please, get a me a link so I can see who's right here. ^__^


You need a link to the New Testament? Is Google blocked on your machine or something?

http://www.biblegateway.com/

. Christ was crucified, yes? And people did it? Yes? Whether you believe that Jews or Romans did it, the act happened, and was a crime.
And how about "no" to all of the above?

Ah yes. One of the few minorities in a position of power. The rest of the Third World is ruled by the oppressive white people such as Robert Mugabe, the Saudi royal family and the Communist party of China.

Since when have Venezuela, China or Saudi Arabia been in the third world?

And how about "no" to all of the above?

Are you claiming that Jesus wasn't crucified?

Cybach'] Also lets look into the bible. Pontius Palatius "wiped his hands clean". So with the Romans out of the game, only one guilty party remains. The JOOS.

Also looking into it. Even if you can make the assertion that the Romans really killed Jesus Christ. Also remember that the Rabbi's threatened a rebellion if nothing was done against Christ. And not to forget the Rabbi's riling up the crowd, to release Barabas instead of Christ. Yeah the jews had almost nothing to do with his death :rolleyes:
You're too naive. :rolleyes:

Since when have Venezuela, China or Saudi Arabia been in the third world?
And where have they been, pray tell? The West? The Communist block?

Sure you were. In theory. In practice, though, you KNOW whom he meant, and it sure wasn't the Romans. It's pretty damn rare for someone to say "descendants of Christ killers" about Italians (in fact, it ONLY happens as the "last straw" argument in the context of defending someone from charges of anti-Semitism), while this libel has been (and continues to be) widely used against Jews. Your persecution complex is beyond ridiculous.


Nope, that would be way more ridiculous. Even more ridiculous, in fact, than trying to sanitize Chavez's words. "Mostly" of European descent? You are seriously denying that the majority of the wealth in this world is concentrated in the hands of those of European descent? Unbelievable. Well. Enjoy living in your fantasy land.


Ah yes. One of the few minorities in a position of power. The rest of the Third World is ruled by the oppressive white people such as Robert Mugabe, the Saudi royal family and the Communist party of China.Bolivia has never had a indigenous...or even half-indigenous leader until now...despite having a majority indigenous population. Look at all of the leaders of Latin America up until now, and you will find people who are a much whiter than the majority of their populations. But go ahead an ignore that and prattle on about Chavez as being a rich man...one of the first leaders of Venezuela whose direct descendents aren't from Spain.

Are you claiming that Jesus wasn't crucified?
Are you claiming that it is a proven historical fact that he was?

And how about "no" to all of the above?
Speaking from a religious (story) perspective of course. According to Christian tradition, the answers are yes.

Uh-huh. I'd totally flip if he completely did not mention First Nations people, but others interpreted it as an attack on us.


Please. You people need to learn how to read for yourselves. The word evil was not used either. Christ was crucified, yes? And people did it? Yes? Whether you believe that Jews or Romans did it, the act happened, and was a crime. Can Hugo Chavez not dare mention a fact central to the Christian religion for fear of some idiot calling him anti-semitic? Apparently not. Oh no...where are all the people crying about the bum rap they got in terms of kicking Simon Bolivar out?
I just love it how well you can sense intent, yet when others sense the intent in this speech, which is obvious, you say were making it all up.

Since when have Venezuela, China or Saudi Arabia been in the third world?

Venezuela and Saudi Arabia been considered third world for a long time; they both have very high poverty rates, high unemployment, and low standards of living.

China was part of the so-called "second world" during the Cold War, but its living standards pretty much lump it in to the Third World.

The Romans didn't care who they executed, so long as there wasn't a rebellion. It was the Jewish Rabbi's who specifically demanded the death of Jesus. It was the Jewish crowd that took responsibility for his death.

Pilate even went so far as to beg the people to reconsider, but they would have no part of that.

Are you claiming that it is a proven historical fact that he was?
Don't change the bloody subject. None of this was discussed by Chavez...and you have no idea if he meant to blame Jews, or simply those in power who killed him. Do you see Jew-haters behind every single reference to Christ, I wonder?

And where have they been, pray tell? The West? The Communist block?

China was not part of the Communist block?

I just love it how well you can sense intent, yet when others sense the intent in this speech, which is obvious, you say were making it all up.
I love it how you can draw conclusions from a speech you haven't read.

I also love that out of a 29 page long speech, that pathetic example of how evil Hugo Chavez is, is the best that anyone could come up with.

Are you claiming that it is a proven historical fact that he was?

I'm claiming that there is sufficient evidence for us to credibly believe that a figure whom we now label as Jesus did in fact live in roughly the time and place that the New Testament describe, and that he was crucified by Romans as he was seen as a political threat to their dominance in the region.

I'm claiming that there is sufficient evidence for us to credibly believe that a figure whom we now label as Jesus did in fact live in roughly the time and place that the New Testament describe, and that he was crucified by Romans as he was seen as a political threat to their dominance in the region.
Which really has no bearing on the topic at hand.

I'm claiming that there is sufficient evidence for us to credibly believe that a figure whom we now label as Jesus did in fact live in roughly the time and place that the New Testament describe, and that he was crucified by Romans as he was seen as a political threat to their dominance in the region.
For one thing, if Jesus did exist, he would probably have been crucified for causing a ruckus in the temple. They crucified people for less. Especially Pilate, he was pulled out of Jerusalem for preforming way too many executions.

Which really has no bearing on the topic at hand.

The part about him being executed by Romans for political reasons (rather than the Jews for religious reasons) seems pretty central to me.

Your persecution complex is beyond ridiculous.
I am humbled by the power of your fact rich, logically sound argument.


You are seriously denying that the majority of the wealth in this world is concentrated in the hands of those of European descent? Unbelievable. Well. Enjoy living in your fantasy land.
I was referring to you planting the "mostly" part into Chavez's ramblings. He wasn't blaming "mostly", he was blaming the groups he hinted on. Period.


Bolivia has never had a indigenous...or even half-indigenous leader until now...despite having a majority indigenous population. Look at all of the leaders of Latin America up until now, and you will find people who are a much whiter than the majority of their populations. But go ahead an ignore that and prattle on about Chavez as being a rich man.
Bolivia? Well, if we are going to pick and choose now, how about Peru? Their former president was so white he was Japanese.

Chavez having some indigenous blood in his veins (he isn't even a half-blood indigenous, if we are to take that route) does not change the fact that he and his cronies are rich while the population is poor.

The part about him being executed by Romans for political reasons (rather than the Jews for religious reasons) seems pretty central to me.
But we don't actually know what Chavez believes. Either he thinks the Jews did it, or he doesn't...but we can't know that. This debate therefore, is not going to prove or disprove anything.

What I find interesting is though. THat Pontius Palate tried to save Jesus Christ 3 times, in various manuevers. After all failed due to the stubborness of the Jewish Rabbi's to see him die, he said his famous words "I wash my hands clean of this". Seeing that if he persisted and refused to execute Jesus. Judea might turn into a civil war ground full of rebellion and what not. Which would mean his own death, plus that of thousands of other innocents

Also for someone who has been threatened to be executed himsself should Judea rebel, trying to save Christ 3 times, is very brave and risky. He failed and gave up though.

He is celebrated as a Saint by Coptic Christians for his efforts to keep Christ alive.

Pontius = 1

Jewish Rabbi's = 0

For one thing, if Jesus did exist, he would probably have been crucified for causing a ruckus in the temple. They crucified people for less. Especially Pilate, he was pulled out of Jerusalem for preforming way too many executions.

Now, 2000 years later, there's an aerobic exercise program named after him. Nice. :)

I'm claiming that there is sufficient evidence for us to credibly believe that a figure whom we now label as Jesus did in fact live in roughly the time and place that the New Testament describe, and that he was crucified by Romans as he was seen as a political threat to their dominance in the region.
Give me a call the moment such consensus is established among historians.

China was not part of the Communist block?
:eek: Now THAT is news.

And part of what, precisely, were they then?

Cybach']What I find interesting is though. THat Pontius Palate tried to save Jesus Christ 3 times, in various manuevers. After all failed due to the stubborness of the Jewish Rabbi's to see him die, he said his famous words "I wash my hands clean of this". Seeing that if he persisted and refused to execute Jesus. Judea might turn into a civil war ground full of rebellion and what not. Which would mean his own death, plus that of thousands of other innocents

Also for someone who has been threatened to be executed himsself should Judea rebel, trying to save Christ 3 times, is very brave and risky. He failed and gave up though.

He is celebrated as a Saint by Coptic Christians for his efforts to keep Christ alive.

Pontius = 1

Jewish Rabbi's = 0
:rolleyes:

Again, you're too naive.

okay, I know this is pointless to bother saying but....

please PLEASE PLEASE read the damn thread before you post. Or better yet, look up the speech yourself and read what the man actually said. Proving the same thing 20 times gets old fast.

sorry. Had to say it. We can now go back to your regularly scheduled proving of the same points 20 times. (Have no fear, I think we're at about 10 times. Half way done before someone brings up a new valid point)

I also love that out of a 29 page long speech, that pathetic example of how evil Hugo Chavez is, is the best that anyone could come up with.
It's called "taking things in context"

You see, some of us are looking at this small, seemingly insignificant (to you) remark, and combining it with all of the other remarks he makes, and how he goes about furthering his goals, and seeing the big picture.

You seem to be looking at someone decided anti-American, and jumping on the bandwagon to defend him because you both hate the same thing, ignoring (or agreeing with) all of the other venomous rhetoric that's come out of his mouth..

But we don't actually know what Chavez believes. Either he thinks the Jews did it, or he doesn't...but we can't know that. This debate therefore, is not going to prove or disprove anything.

I think that the only thing Chavez believes is that the more riled up he keeps the Western world, the more support he will get from Anti-american Anti-european interests. I don't think he gives a rat's ass who crucified Christ. And the only thing that upsets him about the upper 1% of people owning 95% of the resources is that he's not quite in that club.

He's just a politician. Nothing more, nothing less.

Chavez having some indigenous blood in his veins (he isn't even a half-blood indigenous, if we are to take that route) does not change the fact that he and his cronies are rich while the population is poor.
Yes, he's also part black. And none of that changes the fact that he is a leader of a country...not wallowing in obscene wealth, but rather living in the standard expected of world leaders. His policies have been directed at improving the lives of the poorest of the poor in Venezuela...which has not been the focus of previous Venezuelan leaders.

Chavez has the chance, because his is power, to decentralise wealth. Whether he succeeds or not, we can't really predict. But he at least has been making the attempt...which is something rather unusual in Latin America.

Now, 2000 years later, there's an aerobic exercise program named after him. Nice. :)
*rimshot*

thank you, lg, for that moment of clarity;)

*rimshot*

thank you, lg, for that moment of clarity;)

Just making use of my God-given talents. :)

It's called "taking things in context"

You see, some of us are looking at this small, seemingly insignificant (to you) remark, and combining it with all of the other remarks he makes, and how he goes about furthering his goals, and seeing the big picture.

You seem to be looking at someone decided anti-American, and jumping on the bandwagon to defend him because you both hate the same thing, ignoring (or agreeing with) all of the other venomous rhetoric that's come out of his mouth..
Venomous rhetoric comes out of every politicians' mouth. You are one of those who complains that Bush's remarks are taken out of context, no? Well, that happens a lot. To many leaders. Taking things in context, eh? Show me all the other examples of Chavez' 'anti-semitism'.

Cybach']What I find interesting is though. THat Pontius Palate tried to save Jesus Christ 3 times, in various manuevers. After all failed due to the stubborness of the Jewish Rabbi's to see him die, he said his famous words "I wash my hands clean of this". Seeing that if he persisted and refused to execute Jesus. Judea might turn into a civil war ground full of rebellion and what not. Which would mean his own death, plus that of thousands of other innocents

Do you know that Pilate massacred a group of Samaritans at Mount Gerizim and was recalled to Rome because of his brutality?

Now, 2000 years later, there's an aerobic exercise program named after him. Nice. :)
I always thought that was a rather unfortunate name:)

Does everyone who works out to that get called anti-semitic I wonder?

:eek: Now THAT is news.

And part of what, precisely, were they then?

they were the china block, they had some issues with the soviets.
The fucked thing is that a psycho ass like Maos china is stil okey, while soviet uniom with high living standards and high tech shit is gone.
i think it is becouse that the soviet union had commie comunizam that was about making the world better and uniting all workers and bringing happynes

And china comunizam is more like, kill the white people whit the round eyes, we ought to rule the world we invented gun powder. we number one, other suck assThey are only comunizt couse having an emperor would look retarded, cind of like the saudies;)

Do you know that Pilate massacred a group of Samaritans at Mount Gerizim and was recalled to Rome because of his brutality?

That makes his keen interest in keeping Christ alive even more interesting. Wonder why such a brutal man would find pity and try to save him 3 times?

My point is...Chavez says enough crazy shit without having to take one comment and go so totally overboard as to claim he made an anti-semitic speech.

I always thought that was a rather unfortunate name:)

Does everyone who works out to that get called anti-semitic I wonder?

That's just a happy coincidence. :)

I think that the only thing Chavez believes is that the more riled up he keeps the Western world, the more support he will get from Anti-american Anti-european interests. I don't think he gives a rat's ass who crucified Christ. And the only thing that upsets him about the upper 1% of people owning 95% of the resources is that he's not quite in that club.

He's just a politician. Nothing more, nothing less.
He's a populist. The poor are his base of support. Whether he believesor it truly is wrong that so few control so much (which it is...wrong I mean), or not, you are correct. It's less important as a truth than as a political tool.

Cybach']That makes his keen interest in keeping Christ alive even more interesting. Wonder why such a brutal man would find pity and try to save him 3 times?

Probably because he was already coming under fire for his actions during the occupation of Jerusalem; the Roman legate in the city was recieving more and more complaints about his actions, especially involving the Temple in the city. Judea was still fully conscious of the Roman conquest only two decades before.

Probably because he was already coming under fire for his actions during the occupation of Jerusalem; the Roman legate in the city was recieving more and more complaints about his actions, especially involving the Temple in the city. Judea was still fully conscious of the Roman conquest only two decades before.


Ahhh so your saying he was caught in a stinch. If he killed the King of the Jews, his followers might revolt. If he didn't the Rabbi's threatened to rise a rebellion. Ouch.

Well he tried to save Christ 3 times, which no one else did. Guess that makes him a Saint in the Coptic view.

Alright. I'll finally admit that Chavez is a nut.

Cybach']Ahhh so your saying he was caught in a stinch. If he killed the King of the Jews, his followers might revolt. If he didn't the Rabbi's threatened to rise a rebellion. Ouch.

Well he tried to save Christ 3 times, which no one else did. Guess that makes him a Saint in the Coptic view.

His wife is also a saint, since according to the Coptics she persuaded him to convert to Christianity and for attempting to prevent the death of Jesus. In the Eastern Orthodox, Procula (his wife) is a saint but Pilate is not.

Ok to get this straight. In Coptic Pilate is a saint. In orthodox his wife is a sainst but he is not? Also which orthodox, greek or russian or both?

So, let's summarize the findings. He did blame the Jews (referring to them as Christ killers,

No, thats not what he said, he referred to "those who killed Christ", the powers that be, in other words. Hugo Chavez has the subtlety of a well flung brick with groups he doesnt like. If meant "Jews" he would have said "Jews".

In theory. In practice, though, you KNOW whom he meant,

Yep. Wasnt the Jews, a jew, or anything thereby related.

"Mostly" of European descent?,

Yep, IMF and World Bank are mostly run by those of European descent, as far as I'm aware. And the richest country in the world is most certainly run by in the main "Europeans", with one or two exceptions. South America has only recently seen its native population beginning to be represented and is thus even further behind in that sense.

The rest of the Third World is ruled by the oppressive white people such as Robert Mugabe, the Saudi royal family and the Communist party of China.?,

The important resources of the world are largely dominated, directly or indirectly, by the "West". Who has the wealth to have nuclear carriers running about the place, or to buy governments?

I am humbled by the power of your fact rich, logically sound argument..

You should be, as you are the one who saw "Christ killers" where no "Christ killers" were.

Their former president was so white he was Japanese...

Which should illustrate something to you - the fact they're prepared to take on a Japanese person rather than a native of peru. There is an incredible racism amongst Peruvians of hispanic/european descent against the natives of their country.

Cybach']Ok to get this straight. In Coptic Pilate is a saint. In orthodox his wife is a sainst but he is not? Also which orthodox, greek or russian or both?

I believe it's in both Greek and Russian that Pilate's wife is a saint but Pilate is not.

Cybach']Ahhh so your saying he was caught in a stinch. If he killed the King of the Jews, his followers might revolt. If he didn't the Rabbi's threatened to rise a rebellion. Ouch.

Well he tried to save Christ 3 times, which no one else did. Guess that makes him a Saint in the Coptic view.
That is of course, if you believe the account of the jews being responsable for the cricifixion is accurate. As time moved on and the romans became the more likely target for christian conversion, the blame shifted from Pilate to the jews. The romans don't want to hear they killed their own godman so they changed the story.

Not that it's a real story anyways.

It's called "taking things in context"

You see, some of us are looking at this small, seemingly insignificant (to you) remark, and combining it with all of the other remarks he makes, and how he goes about furthering his goals, and seeing the big picture. So you are taking an out of context quote, and putting ittogether with other out of context quotes, and using that to create a conspiracy theory.

You seem to be looking at someone decided anti-American, and jumping on the bandwagon to defend him because you both hate the same thing, ignoring (or agreeing with) all of the other venomous rhetoric that's come out of his mouth..
And you are looking at someone who is anti-American, and deciding that you will disagree with everything coming out of his mouth. But you won't actually listen to what comes out of his mouth. You will do as stated above, and create a version of Chavez that is easier to hate.

I love how America's idiot left will support any tinpot dictator that pushes Bush's buttons. If Saddam were still in charge, Moveon.org and Pislosi will be supporting him.

I love how America's idiot left will support any tinpot dictator that pushes Bush's buttons. If Saddam were still in charge, Moveon.org and Pislosi will be supporting him.
Why would you make assumptions about the nationality of the people posting here? And if asking people not to jump to stupid conclusions is support, then I must support a lot of idiots. Including Bush.

Saying that the left supports anyone who pushes Bush's buttons is a stupid as saying that the right hates anyone who pushes Bush's buttons. It is never that cut and dry.

I love how America's idiot left will support any tinpot dictator that pushes Bush's buttons. If Saddam were still in charge, Moveon.org and Pislosi will be supporting him.

Who said anything about supporting Chavez? I don't support GWB, but if someone were to clearly start taking his quotes out of context in order to accuse him of anti-semitism, I'd defend the chimp on that at least.

In this, I'm on the side of the angels.


(Not American, thank God, by the way).

It seems that people are forgetting that it wasn't just the Hebrews who had a hand in the death of Jesus, the Romans under Pontius Pilate had no problem with granting the Hebrews the permission to carry out justice as they see fit.
After all, the Romans did nothing to protect Jesus, and if anyone remembers their ancient history, they'd remember the signficance of Pilate washing his hands...Correct me if I'm wrong here, but the Jews sentenced Jesus to death, whilst the Romans were the ones who executed him (using a Roman method of execution rather than a Jewish one, just to hammer the point home concerning their power).The historic version being told to Christians is that: Pilatos washed his hands and that he wanted to spare Jesus life.. but failed..

What is the history being told to Jews? (I wanna hear both sides of the story)
isnt all this in the Bible writings? -new testament-

and while we are at it.. what is the Muslims historical version?

BTW what was the Jewish method of execution???

what is the history being told to Jews? (I wanna hear both sides of the story)

The irony here is that a lot of avowedly Jewish news-sources have picked up on this same wire story and run it: thus condoning the idea that it was they who crucified the chap.

If ever there was a time for a CIA-aided overthrow of a tinpot Marxist in South America, it is now.

So now the CIA are the Political Correctness police?

Your lack of respect for democracy is shocking.

So now the CIA are the Political Correctness police?

Only when Democrats are in office. When Republicans are in office, they are the "get it wrong" and "get caught with your pants down" and "leak everything to the NYT" guys.

It's called "taking things in context"


You don't really expect us to believe you read all 29 pages of Chavez' speech before you got your knickers in a twist, do you?

http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/000625.html



If ever there was a time for a CIA-aided overthrow of a tinpot Marxist in South America, it is now.

Once again, I find myself in complete agreement with you.

Christ was crucified, yes? And people did it? Yes? Whether you believe that Jews or Romans did it, the act happened, and was a crime.And how about "no" to all of the above?Jesus Crucification was not a Crime?

Once again, I find myself in complete agreement with you.

What gives the intelligence agency of one country the right to overthrow the government of another country?


EDIT: I will never understand the nature of the shattered American psyche: British people writing letters to their press requesting that they vote in a particular way causes an outrage, yet it is perfectly acceptable for Americans to advocate that their intelligence agencies carry out the undemocratic overthrowing of foreign sovereign powers.

Jesus Crucification was not a Crime?

If it was carried out in accordance with Roman law of the time, then no it wasn't... nevermind the fact that if you argue that it was a crime and that it was willed by God, then God becomes a criminal.

Jesus Crucification was not a Crime?
It's hard to execute a man who didn't exist.

If he did exist, then the ruckus at the temple would have been more than enough to warrant an execution in those times. They executed people for less. So no, it wouldn't have been a crime. According to the laws of the time, it was proper punishment for his crime.

The historic version being told to Christians is that: Pilatos washed his hands and that he wanted to spare Jesus life.. but failed..

What is the history being told to Jews? (I wanna hear both sides of the story)
isn't all this in the Bible writings? -new testament-

and while we are at it.. what is the Muslims historical version?

BTW what was the Jewish method of execution??? I would like to know from Jews or Muslims... or any other Non Christians.. cos I know the Christian Historical version...

BTW what was the Jewish method of execution???

Stoning was the primary one.

I would like to know from Jews or Muslims... or any other Non Christians.. cos I know the Christian Historical version...
I would hardly call that a historical version. The romans were in power, the jews were not. The jews did not have the ability to say who is executed and who is not.
As for the muslims, if I'm not mistaken they don't think Jesus was executed at all, they think he went off to India or something after some time.

If it was carried out in accordance with Roman law of the time, then no it wasn't... nevermind the fact that if you argue that it was a crime and that it was willed by God, then God becomes a criminal.Executing an Innocent man is a Crime.. regardless of your Religion .. or even if you don't have one.

BTW What is your religion?

If ever there was a time for a CIA-aided overthrow of a tinpot Marxist in South America, it is now.
If ever there was a time for the people to overthrow their oppressors it's now. The agents of the CIA are more than welcome to free themselves while we're at our business, brothers and sisters.

I would like to know from Jews or Muslims... or any other Non Christians.. cos I know the Christian Historical version...
Is the red letter thing purposefully ironic or accidentally?


Is there a policy or practice or act that Chavez did that makes him so despised? Because all I ever see is this kind of thing, which always pans out to be exageratted, out of context, or overblown.

I would hardly call that a historical version. The romans were in power, the jews were not. The jews did not have the ability to say who is executed and who is not.
As for the muslims, if I'm not mistaken they don't think Jesus was executed at all, they think he went off to India or something after some time.From your answer I deduct you are neither a Jew.. nor a Muslim..

I am still waiting tho those to share their version.

Executing an Innocent man is a Crime.. regardless of your Religion .. or even if you don't have one.

BTW What is your religion?
He wasn't innocent. He commited a crime under roman law.

Why would you make assumptions about the nationality of the people posting here?
I made no assumption about the nationality of those posting here. I was refering to those foolish idiots like moron.org and Nancy pelosi who will step all over each other in order to be first to support an america hater. You really shouldn't read so much into a fairly simple statement.

From your answer I deduct you are neither a Jew.. nor a Muslim..

I am still waiting tho those to share their version.
I'm an agnostic, I pointed out the real historical reason why the jews did not kill Jesus. If you're going to be stupid/naive and buy into the propaganda spread later on, then that's your business.
Also, given the low number of jewish or muslim people on these boards, good luck getting one of them to come here in what outwardly appears to be a thread that could contain a lot of anti-semetic bullshit.

He wasn't innocent. He commited a crime under roman law.
well, following that logic, the Jewish population commited crimes under Nazi laws...

Executing an Innocent man is a Crime.. regardless of your Religion .. or even if you don't have one.

And what is the source of this morality that allows you claim something to be a crime? (Sorry, 'A Crime') What other acts are classified as Crimes?

BTW What is your religion?

No religion. Born into a nominally Christian family and educated at a Protestant school though.

well, following that logic, the Jewish population commited crimes under Nazi laws...
What crime was that? Being jewish?

Jesus started some civil unrest in a temple. Romans executed thieves, they'd sure as hell execute people causing civil unrest.

Is the red letter thing purposefully ironic or accidentally?not accidental .. and not Ironic...

I always sek to know all sides to a historic event..

Like I said I already know the historic version told by my side (in this case the Christian version).. I want to know if there is a different version out there.
is there?

is there any Muslims or Jews in the House?
please stand-up and be counted.

This thread reminds me intensely of Philip K Dick's novel Radio Free Albemuth (actually an early draft of VALIS) where the central character starts having visions that the Roman Empire still goes on and that California in the 1960s is contemporaneous with Galilee circa 70AD. He seemed to be drawing the same kind of parallels as Chavez here: in the novel Nixon was the embodiment of the corrupt self-serving mechanisms of power that the Romans allegorically brought into existence.

Anyhoo...

"THE ROMAN EMPIRE NEVER ENDED"

not accidental .. and not Ironic...

I always sek to know all sides to a historic event..

Like I said I already know the historic version told by my side (in this case the Christian version).. I want to know if there is a different version out there.
is there?

is there any Muslims or Jews in the House?
please stand-up and be counted.
I dont' believe I interacted with you much before, but is this trolly/flaimbaity/vaguely racist behaviour what got you banned the last two times?

well, following that logic, the Jewish population commited crimes under Nazi laws...

Yes. I would consider illegally blowing up trains to be crimes. Your point being?

not accidental .. and not Ironic...


You don't think it's at least a little ironic to ask for a non-Christian view of the story in red letters, reflecting 'red letter' editions of the bible where Jesus' words where printed in red?

not accidental .. and not Ironic...

I always sek to know all sides to a historic event..

Like I said I already know the historic version told by my side (in this case the Christian version).. I want to know if there is a different version out there.
is there?

Depending upon the exact reading of the Koran that you go for Jesus was either never crucified, or survived the crucifixion and subsequently ascended to Heaven as Elijah had done previously, IIRC.

I made no assumption about the nationality of those posting here. I was refering to those foolish idiots like moron.org and Nancy pelosi who will step all over each other in order to be first to support an america hater. You really shouldn't read so much into a fairly simple statement.

Your rather simple statement is rather simple-minded.

The true "america haters" are those that would jettison our values in the name of war or security.

I dont' believe I interacted with you much before, but is this trolly/flaimbaity/vaguely racist behaviour what got you banned the last two times?as far as I know I was never banned.

BTW using the words "Racist".. "Nazi".. "Holocaust".. etc has never worked against me.
Had you "interacted" with me before.. You would Know that.

Now you know.

You don't think it's at least a little ironic to ask for a non-Christian view of the story in red letters, reflecting 'red letter' editions of the bible where Jesus' words where printed in red?Really?
I had no idea... I learn a lot of new things @ NationStates.

The romans are in charge of the world?That was my first thought, and since Christianity became the state religion of the Roman empire, and then branched out to dominate the western hemisphere, I guess you could say that not only is Chavez right, but that Christians crucified Christ, but only if you torture logic like an Iraqi at Abu Ghraib.

as far as I know I was never banned.

BTW using the words "Racist".. "Nazi".. "Holocaust".. etc has never worked against me.
Had you "interacted" with me before.. You would Know that.

Now you know.
Then why is this your third incarnation if you haven't been banned?
You are acting racist and seem to enjoy accusing the jewish people of killing Jesus, either that or you're incredibly naive and stupid. Your poor spelling doesn't help you on the last bit either.

That was my first thought, and since Christianity became the state religion of the Roman empire, and then branched out to dominate the western hemisphere, I guess you could say that not only is Chavez right, but that Christians crucified Christ, but only if you torture logic like an Iraqi at Abu Ghraib.
It makes more sense than saying that the jews killed Jesus and that they're running the show.

It makes more sense than saying that the jews killed Jesus and that they're running the show.That's also true, but hey, in discussions like this, sense generally takes a runner into the wall and lays dazed on the ground.

I guess you could say that not only is Chavez right, but that Christians crucified Christ, but only if you torture logic like an Iraqi at Abu Ghraib.

Hey, if we follow the Bible we can see that at least one of the followers of Christ had a pretty damn direct role in getting the chap nailed.

You are acting racist ....Blah-Blah-Blah-blah :gundge:

Your poor spelling doesn't help you on the last bit either.Lake I said ..you can call me Nazi/racist/holocaust all you want... But don't you dare mention my spelling.. It drives me nuts
:D :D :p :D
Then why is this your third incarnation if you haven't been banned?Good question... when you find out.. Let me know :D

Your poor spelling doesn't help you on the last bit either.

I would fix the spelling in your sig before you pass that kind of comment again.

"Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their appar*e*nt disinclination to do so. -Douglas Adams"

No religion. Born into a nominally Christian family and educated at a Protestant school though.I am impressed.. (and it does not happen very often)

you seem know more about Jewish, Muslim and Christian religions than most in this forum... or at least in this tread

I would fix the spelling in your sig before you pass that kind of comment again.
What's wrong with my sig exactly?
Should I mention the grammar errors too?

What's wrong with my sig exactly?appar*e*nt ..

But do not take my word for it.. my spelling skills are sub-par

appar*e*nt ..

But do not take my word for it.. my spelling skills are sub-par
....That's what's in my sig. If you're going to pick on spelling errors, at least do something like try to force american spelling on a canadian instead of inventing mistakes.

What's wrong with my sig exactly?

Always glad to help.

Always glad to help.
huh?

I'm confused. :?

huh?

I'm confused. :?
Seems to be a chronic condition. :D

Dictators are more fun. Who cares if they slaughter thousands of their own people as a result of American intervention, right?

Chavez isn't a dictator. He was democartically elected first in 1998, and then re-elected in 2000. This anti-semitism is a little disquieting, but America could learn a thing or two from his socialist policies. Andhe WTFpwned America by offering cheap gas to American citizens that American companies wouldn't.

Seems to be a chronic condition. :D
Was that really neccisary? You weren't even involved in that, seems like a completely uncalled for personal insult. Kinda childish, don't you think?

Blah-Blah-Blah-blah :gundge:
You're singling people out on the basis of race (although I don't really consider jewish a race, it's a religion) and putting the blood of your saviour on them. Something that does not jive with the historical facts of the situation.

Lake I said ..you can call me Nazi/racist/holocaust all you want... But don't you dare mention my spelling.. It drives me nuts
Then go back to your homework and read some more books. Reading books has been shown to improve spelling abilities.

Good question... when you find out.. Let me know :D
I'm still going with banned.

Was that really neccisary? You weren't even involved in that, seems like a completely uncalled for personal insult. Kinda childish, don't you think?
Don't worry about it, I took it as a joke. The smiley face seemed to support that.

I made no assumption about the nationality of those posting here. I was refering to those foolish idiots like moron.org and Nancy pelosi who will step all over each other in order to be first to support an america hater. You really shouldn't read so much into a fairly simple statement.
Actually, you shouldn't jump into the middle of a thread, make a broad generalization, and expect everyone to understand the partcular narrow context you were speaking within. Thank you oh so much for covering up your tracks after the fact though.

You don't think it's at least a little ironic to ask for a non-Christian view of the story in red letters, reflecting 'red letter' editions of the bible where Jesus' words where printed in red?
What are you talking about? Do you seriously expect non-Chrisitians or even all Christians to have any idea what you are referring to?

What are you talking about? Do you seriously expect non-Chrisitians or even all Christians to have any idea what you are referring to?

I've never encountered one (in the UK), they seem to be peculiarly American things. Of course I fail to see the rationale in emphasising the words of Jesus over the rest of the text for those Christians who believe the whole thing to be divinely inspired anyhow...

Something that does not jive with the historical facts of the situation.I have one version of History.. I am open to hear their version... I welcome them to post their version... I am a man who prefers to have all sides to tell their version of history.

I is not my fault if they wont show up.
Then go back to your homework and read some more books. Reading books has been shown to improve spelling abilities. the spelling bit was Uber sarcasm *hint the smilies* either way I am aware my spelling is bad.. sue me:D
I'm still going with banned.You can Go with whatever you want... as long as you Go. :D :D :p :D

What are you talking about? Do you seriously expect non-Chrisitians or even all Christians to have any idea what you are referring to?
Easy there, champ. If you had read the whole thread you'd realise that I asked him if it was accidental, meaning I accepted the possiblilty that he didn't know about it. Second, he was asking for a non-christian view, so I had good odds that he was more familiar with Christian and therefore a fair chance of knowing about red letter editions.

Further, there is no more to know about the editions than what I explained in the post you quoted, so now you all know about it without having to get your panties in a bunch about it. Regardless of whether you or anyone else knew about it, it still has a touch of irony to ask for a non-Christian view of the Christ story in red letters.

Unclench, dude.

I have one version of History.. I am open to hear their version... I welcome them to post their version... I am a man who prefers to have all sides to tell their version of history.
The biblical stories are inconsistent with each other, I don't know how you can count that as valid historical evidence.

the spelling bit was Uber sarcasm *hint the smilies* either way I am aware my spelling is bad.. sue me:D
You can Go with whatever you want... as long as you Go. :D :D :p :D
Oh, how clever and mature. :rolleyes:

it still has a touch of irony to ask for a non-Christian view of the Christ story in red letters.

Unclench, dude.
I'm still not seeing the irony. And if no one knows what you are talking about with the red letter edition and so on how could that possibly be irony?

What are you talking about? Do you seriously expect non-Chrisitians or even all Christians to have any idea what you are referring to?That was also my reaction...

I never heard of the "Red Letters" Thing..
Red letters have no special meaning to me... I could use any other color.. If anyone gives me a good reason...

Don't worry about it, I took it as a joke. The smiley face seemed to support that.
He thinks that smilies are invalid as indicators of anything. Thanks. :)

Was that really neccisary? You weren't even involved in that, seems like a completely uncalled for personal insult. Kinda childish, don't you think?
No. You just have a problem with me and that's all there is to it. Perhaps you should take your own advice and grow up?

The biblical stories are inconsistent with each other, I don't know how you can count that as valid historical evidence.You mean to say that there is a Bible out there that says that Pilatos did not "wash his hands"...

Interesting.. who is the publisher?

You mean to say that there is a Bible out there that says that Pilatos did not "wash his hands"...

Interesting.. who is the publisher?
The crucifixion is described in more than one book in the bible, is it not?

He thinks that smilies are invalid as indicators of anything. Thanks. :)
You do tend to overuse them, Eut. And you often try to negate the effect of some rather not-nice comments by putting a smiley after them. Oh Christ, now I'm involved in this brawl?

I came back into this thread expecting blood...but not weird smiley and/or religious debates.:(

I'm still not seeing the irony. And if no one knows what you are talking about with the red letter edition and so on how could that possibly be irony?
You don't see the irony. Really? Asking for a non-christian view in the red text that would, in a red letter version, be the words of Christ. You don't see a touch of irony in that? Nothing?

And just because you or some others don't know about it doesn't mean no-one knows about it. You didn't get a reference, it's not a big deal. I didn't make it a slight in bringing it up, I didn't imply that everyone need to know about it or that people who didn't know about it where stupid. What the hell are you so riled up about?

Seriously. Take some deep breaths, maybe a brisk walk, open a window. You're going to hurt yourself.

You don't see the irony. Really? Asking for a non-christian view in the red text that would, in a red letter version, be the words of Christ. You don't see a touch of irony in that? Nothing? You're losing me on this one too. I guess I just don't 'get it'. You also seem to be making some rather wild assumptions about this person's emotional state. I haven't even seen a head-banging, eye rolling or sniper smiley used yet...

No. You just have a problem with me and that's all there is to it. Perhaps you should take your own advice and grow up?
Jeez, dude. Get over yourself. Not everything is about you. You cut in and insulted someone, don't try and lay it on me.

I came back into this thread expecting blood...

You want blood? You got it.

Some chap, who may or may not be Jesus, is still being crucified, but we are yet to determine by whom. First its the Jews, then its the Romans, then its the Jews again, then its some other wider interpretation. This means we have had to take the nails in and out several times and its all getting rather messy by now.

On the topic of crucifixtion, I know who can settle this for us! CALL MEL GIBSON!:eek:

The crucifixion is described in more than one book in the bible, is it not?and some "book-in-the-Bible" negates the "washing hands" part ???

...this is getting more and more interesting...

You don't see the irony. Really? Asking for a non-christian view in the red text that would, in a red letter version, be the words of Christ. You don't see a touch of irony in that? Nothing?

And just because you or some others don't know about it doesn't mean no-one knows about it. You didn't get a reference, it's not a big deal. I didn't make it a slight in bringing it up, I didn't imply that everyone need to know about it or that people who didn't know about it where stupid. What the hell are you so riled up about?

Seriously. Take some deep breaths, maybe a brisk walk, open a window. You're going to hurt yourself.
Funny. You seem to be getting more riled up than I. I'm sorry I don't find your little conspiracy theory about using red letters to be very convincing. Just odd.

You mean to say that there is a Bible out there that says that Pilatos did not "wash his hands"...

Interesting.. who is the publisher?

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but in only one out of the four central Gospels are we told that Pilate washes his hands, yes? Does that mean it is 100% true or just 25% likely to be so? - less facetiously, how are we to interprete the fact that only one of the Gospels considers it to be important enough to mention?

You're losing me on this one too. I guess I just don't 'get it'. You also seem to be making some rather wild assumptions about this person's emotional state. I haven't even seen a head-banging, eye rolling or sniper smiley used yet...
It's not as big a deal as the other dude is making it out to be. It just seemed a little ironic to use red letter text, which in a red letter edition would be the words of christ, to ask for a non-christian view-as if Christ was asking for someone else to tell his story. Not really a big deal, I just wanted to know if the dude was doing it on purpose or on accident. No real value judgement or major statement, just noticed the connection-that's all.

Then someone got all in a flurry...

Funny. You seem to be getting more riled up than I. I'm sorry I don't find your little conspiracy theory about using red letters to be very convincing. Just odd.
Wow, just wow. It's a conspiracy, is it? I don't know that you know what the meaning of the word 'irony.' It's just a connection you spaze. Relax.

and some "book-in-the-Bible" negates the "washing hands" part ???

...this is getting more and more interesting...

you have read the gospels, yes?

First its the Jews, then its the Romans, then its the Jews again, then its some other wider interpretation. So far we only have the Christian version.. Pretty much visualized in the Passion DVD (obviously its a Movie.. so it cannot be 100% accurate)

But I have yet to hear history versions that negate the parts about Pilate trying to spare Jesus Life.

and some "book-in-the-Bible" negates the "washing hands" part ???

...this is getting more and more interesting...
The earlier the book was written the less it implicates the jews and the more it implicates the romans. Try reading your own holy book. There are many christian versions.


Furthermore, if you get right down to it, outside the bible, there's no evidence that this Jesus even existed, let alone was crucified under Pilate.

So far we only have the Christian version.. Pretty much visualized in the Passion DVD (obviously its a Movie.. so it cannot be 100% accurate)

I was talking about within the thread.

But I have yet to hear history versions that negate the parts about Pilate trying to spare Jesus Life.

So you are asking for a historical document which clearly states he did not wash his hands? Is the fact that the authors of the other three Gospels didn't see fit to mention it worthy of no consideration?

how are we to interprete the fact that only one of the Gospels considers it to be important enough to mention?because that writer considered it less important to mention ??

You could have a case if you find us a Bible witting -One..just one Bible witting- saying that The Jews did not want to kill Jesus... that it was Pilatos who wanted to kill him..

Wow, just wow. It's a conspiracy, is it? I don't know that you know what the meaning of the word 'irony.' It's just a connection you spaze. Relax.
I'd love to drop this but it seems that you are intent on freaking out about it a bit more. Go on. Get it out of your system. I can create a connection to. Maybe his use of English is linked somehow to the English translation of the Bible which means

go ahead and finishe that sentence for me. I'm sure it will be ironic.

So you are asking for a historical document which clearly states he did not wash his hands? Is the fact that the authors of the other three Gospels didn't see fit to mention it worthy of no consideration?answered in post #163

I'd love to drop this but it seems that you are intent on freaking out about it a bit more. Go on. Get it out of your system. I can create a connection to. Maybe his use of English is linked somehow to the English translation of the Bible which means

go ahead and finishe that sentence for me. I'm sure it will be ironic.
Okedy dokey pokey. You think it's a conspiracy, that's all you. You don't see the connection, you're simply not that bright. You think it's a big deal, you think more of it than I implied. Simple observation taken too far because someone got all weepy because they didn't get the reference. Sorry man, can't help you.

Furthermore, if you get right down to it, outside the bible, there's no evidence that this Jesus even existed, let alone was crucified under Pilate.some in Israel also say that there is no evidence Palestine ever existed...

The Palestinians refugees must all be undercover Egyptian agents :rolleyes:

You could have a case if you find us a Bible witting -One..just one Bible witting- saying that The Jews did not want to kill Jesus... that it was Pilatos who wanted to kill him..

Irrelevant to the matter at hand. Chavez's other quote shows us that his primary view of Jesus is as a rebel against entrenched and corrupt political power - and that was to be found within both the Roman Administration and the Jewish Priesthood. Is Chavez claiming that the Romans still rule the world? Nope. Instead those same grasping, self-serving and callous tendencies which were highlighted in the Biblical story of the trial and execution of Jesus are still the tendencies which lead to an inequitable division of power, resources and application of justice in the world today.

some in Israel also say that there is no evidence Palestine ever existed...

The Palestinians refugees must all be undercover Egyptian agents :rolleyes:
:rolleyes: give me a fucking break. Quit with the emotional arguments and treating other posters like idiots.
There is no historical evidence that Jesus existed outside the bible and given the similarities in the life of the man described in the bible and older pagan gods, it seems a likely fabrication. That's all there is to it. And really, there's no point in arguing.

Irrelevant to the matter at hand. Chavez's other quote shows us that his primary view of Jesus is as a rebel against entrenched and corrupt political power - and that was to be found within both the Roman Administration and the Jewish Priesthood. Is Chavez claiming that the Romans still rule the world? Nope. Instead those same grasping, self-serving and callous tendencies which were highlighted in the Biblical story of the trial and execution of Jesus are still the tendencies which lead to an inequitable division of power, resources and application of justice in the world today.
Oh, that's a nice analogy.

Oh, that's a nice analogy.

I don't believe it is an analogy: I do seriously believe that is what Chavez meant. What other agent can we point to that is responsible for both Bolivar and Jesus?

Oh, that's a nice analogy.
It is pretty elequent, isn't it? He's just not experienced enough to realise that such a well constructed analogy like that will be ignored as long as something can be taken out of context to make him look like a monster. Or he is and just doesn't give a rats ass because someone's going to do it no matter what he says so why should he nuter his speeches?

Interestingly enough, I had asked earlier in the thread about what it is that makes Chavez so despised by way of policy or act (instead of single lines of 29 page speeches taken out of context) and instead all I got was a spazz out because someone hadn't heard of red-letter editions...

I don't believe it is an analogy: I do seriously believe that is what Chavez meant. What other agent can we point to that is responsible for both Bolivar and Jesus?
Well, it's a nice analogy on his part then. It seems to make more sense than the anti-semetic/racist crap.

Interestingly enough, I had asked earlier in the thread about what it is that makes Chavez so despised by way of policy or act (instead of single lines of 29 page speeches taken out of context) and instead all I got was a spazz out because someone hadn't heard of red-letter editions...
To be honest, I don't know what kind of christian has never seen a red letter edition, my first two bibles had red letters when either god or jesus spoke.

:rolleyes: give me a fucking break. Quit with the emotional arguments and treating other posters like idiots.by reading your post one would guess that you are the one getting "emotional"

There is no historical evidence that Jesus existed outside the bible and given the similarities in the life of the man described in the bible and older pagan gods, it seems a likely fabrication. That's all there is to it. my Jewish friends also keep saying that Jesus is a fabrication.. but they do not seem very sure of themselves..

IMO there is more evidence for Jesus existence than for most other historical "personalities" of that time .. And really, there's no point in arguing.I agree.. and like i said.. I was looking for the Muslim and Jewish points of view..

you tried.. but you are not it.. see ya.

Actually, Chavez is one of the minorities (re: not white) that has finally got a position of power, and works from a platform that aims at bridging the gap between rich and poor in his country. The exact opposite of the claim you just made.
Not that this actually involves elevating the poor to any great extent, rather it means dragging the rich down to the poor's level and leaving the power in the hands of the government.

by reading your post one would guess you are the one getting "emotional"
I'm not and you're the one who is using arguments designed to solicit an emotional response.

my Jewish friend also keep saying that Jesus is a fabrication.. but they do not seem very sure of themselves..
There is no historical evidence for the biblical Jesus outside the bible.

IMO there is more evidence for Jesus than for most other historical "personalities" of that time ..I agree.. and like i said.. I was looking for the Muslim and Jewish points of view..
Not really, many other historical figures left behind writings, they were written about by others during their lifetimes. These things do not apply to Jesus.

you tried.. but you are not it.. see ya.
I can really see why they banned you twice.

It seems to make more sense than the anti-semetic/racist crap.

Maybe my post here:

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10197313&postcount=110

...will make more sense than it did at the time.

Maybe my post here:

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10197313&postcount=110

...will make more sense than it did at the time.
Ah. I see.

To be honest, I don't know what kind of christian has never seen a red letter edition, my first two bibles had red letters when either god or jesus spoke.my kind ???

Your rather simple statement is rather simple-minded.

Deep.

Not that this actually involves elevating the poor to any great extent, rather it means dragging the rich down to the poor's level and leaving the power in the hands of the government.
Right. It could never possibly mean that he is going to try to stop the hemorrage of money leaving the country and filling the pockets of foreigners, in favour of funding education and social programs. It must of course be about beggaring the rich. Oh, the poor, poor rich. They have so much to lose. The poor don't, so that makes this all terribly unfair. How dare someone try to consider the majority of the population instead of just the rich minority?

My Jewish friends also keep saying that Jesus is a fabrication..
IMO there is more evidence for Jesus existence than for most other historical "personalities" of that time.Not really, many other historical figures left behind writings, they were written about by others during their lifetimes. These things do not apply to Jesus.many other historical figures?? ... Care to name a few?

To be honest, I don't know what kind of christian has never seen a red letter edition, my first two bibles had red letters when either god or jesus spoke.

As has been said before: they seem to be a solely American phenomenon (and a relatively recent one at that, dating back a little over a century). I have heard of them, but never encountered one here in the UK.

To be honest, I don't know what kind of christian has never seen a red letter edition, my first two bibles had red letters when either god or jesus spoke.
Meh, it can escape peoples notice, it's not a big deal. I don't know what got that dude all torqued up, I just made an observation and wanted to know of OD3 was doing it on purpose or on accident. I didn't imply that everyone should know or draw any implications other than the connection about him doing it. I honestly don't know what the dude's issue is, accept maybe being all wounded animal because they didn't get a reference...

Right. It could never possibly mean that he is going to try to stop the hemorrage of money leaving the country and filling the pockets of foreigners, in favour of funding education and social programs. It must of course be about beggaring the rich. Oh, the poor, poor rich. They have so much to lose. The poor don't, so that makes this all terribly unfair. How dare someone try to consider the majority of the population instead of just the rich minority?

them poor ol' rich are the real needy ones

them poor ol' rich are the real needy ones

Definitely: if you want to improve the lot of a rich man noticeably you need to give him hundreds of thousands of dollars, whereas it is possible to noticeably improve the lot of a poor man by giving him tens of dollars. Ergo the rich are more needy. My case, if I have one, is rested.

many other historical figures?? ... Care to name a few?
Of his time? Caesar, Pliny, Cleopatra I'm not much of a historian so I can't name too many names, but these people had people writing about them during their lifetime, rather than generations afterwards, there were people making busts of them. Hell, Plato, Aristotle, Erostenes et c were around much earlier and they managed to leave behind great works. Even Hypatia left behind more historical evidence and I bet you don't even know who she was, not to mention the fact that many christians at the time tried to destroy all her works.

Definitely: if you want to improve the lot of a rich man noticeably you need to give him hundreds of thousands of dollars, whereas it is possible to noticeably improve the lot of a poor man by giving him tens of dollars. Ergo the rich are more needy. My case, if I have one, is rested.
Excellent statement.

Speaking at a rehabilitation center on December 24, the controversial left-wing president said “the descendants of those who crucified Christ... have taken ownership of the riches of the world, a minority has taken ownership of the gold of the world, the silver, the minerals, water, the good lands, petrol, well, the riches, and they have concentrated the riches in a small number of hands.”




Well tell you what. I agree with what point he is trying to make. Yes he is correct in saying the riches of the world are held by a minority. He is obviously referring to the jews as descendants. It is a anti-Semetic remark that gives me the problem. He is clearly parrotting what his buddy in Iran is saying. This guy as I have said before is an attention whore. He want's everyone to look at him. This is why he needs to compete with his pals in Iran and Cuba. They are one in the same.

Of his time? Caesar, Pliny, Cleopatra I'm not much of a historian so I can't name too many names, but these people had people writing about them during their lifetime, rather than generations afterwards, there were people making busts of them. Hell, Plato, Aristotle, Erostenes et c were around much earlier and they managed to leave behind great works. Even Hypatia left behind more historical evidence and I bet you don't even know who she was, not to mention the fact that many christians at the time tried to destroy all her works. there is More evidence that Jesus existed than: Hypatia, Plato, Aristotle, Erostenes, Cleopatra, Plyni? , etc...

there is More evidence that Jesus existed than: Hypatia, Plato, Aristotle, Erostenes, Cleopatra, Plyni? , etc...
No there isn't. As I said, there is no independant contemporary evidence that this Jesus character ever existed. Not even an execution order.

Speaking at a rehabilitation center on December 24, the controversial left-wing president said “the descendants of those who crucified Christ... have taken ownership of the riches of the world, a minority has taken ownership of the gold of the world, the silver, the minerals, water, the good lands, petrol, well, the riches, and they have concentrated the riches in a small number of hands.”

Well tell you what. I agree with what point he is trying to make. Yes he is correct in saying the riches of the world are held by a minority. He is obviously referring to the jews as descendants. It is a anti-Semetic remark that gives me the problem.

Shall we try reading it again without that ellipsis which was (oh, so helpfully) added to the text by those wishing to cast it in a certain light:

"The world is for all of us, then, but it so happens that a minority, the descendents of the same ones that crucified Christ, the descendents of the same ones that kicked Bolivar out of here and also crucified him in their own way over there in Santa Marta, in Colombia. A minority has taken possesion all of the wealth of the world, a minority has taken ownership of all of the gold of the planet, of the silver, of the minerals, the waters, the good lands, oil, of the wealth then and have concentrated the wealth in a few hands"

Teh Jewzors crucified Bolivar?

Teh Jewzors crucified Bolivar?

Duh! Of course they did! Don't you know anything about Latin American History?

Wow. This thread has shown me how much people are content to live with (rather narrow) blinders on. It's pretty scary, in fact.

ANYONE who interprets that statement from Chavez as being anti-semitic needs to read the following:

1. Your ability to read and understand a complex sentence, including understanding context, are quite lacking. In words you can understand: Maybe you no read so good. Maybe you just slow. I don't know, but go back to school (Try from grade 1, give the entire thing a whole go. Just to be safe.) and try again.

2. You obviously know very little about Latin American society or politics. What Chavez said mirrors more the thoughts of Haya de la Torre and the Aprista movement than it does anti-semitism, even remotely.

And for those of you who think that the US of A in its all-knowing splendour should interfere in the management of Venezuela, maybe you should see what grand achievements their meddlings have given to the people of the country in the past. I would suggest starting with the saga of Romulo Betancourt.

Honestly, if people were a little less zealous and a bit more reasonable, this world could actually be somewhat enjoyable.:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

And I apologise for ending a sentence with a preposition. Good education begins at home.

Wow. This thread has shown me how much people are content to live with (rather narrow) blinders on. It's pretty scary, in fact.

ANYONE who interprets that statement from Chavez as being anti-semitic needs to read the following:

1. Your ability to read and understand a complex sentence, including understanding context, are quite lacking. In words you can understand: Maybe you no read so good. Maybe you just slow. I don't know, but go back to school (Try from grade 1, give the entire thing a whole go. Just to be safe.) and try again.

To be fair though, the speech as presented in the media by those wishing to cast it as anti-semitic does have that sentence concerning Bolivar snipped out, and so it is only by actually hunting out the unedited text that one can even begin to start to understand the context.

Far be it from me to suggest that people are operating a smear campaign against Chavez...

No there isn't. As I said, there is no independant contemporary evidence that this Jesus character ever existed. Not even an execution order.and I assume you are keeping a copy of an execution order for Hypatia, Plato, Aristotle, Erostenes and Cleopatra. :rolleyes:

there is plenty of evidence for all of them and there is even more evidence for Jesus. Get over it.

Far be it from me to suggest that people are operating a smear campaign against Chavez...

I have actually been looking for places to find non-bias information on him, but it seems next to impossible. Are there any trustworthy sources that you know of?

Teh Jewzors crucified Bolivar?no it was Boca.. :headbang:

To be fair though, the speech as presented in the media by those wishing to cast it as anti-semitic does have that sentence concerning Bolivar snipped out, and so it is only by actually hunting out the unedited text that one can even begin to start to understand the context.


Granted. But what worries me is that people are quite content to take something, out of context, and happily form an (often vehement) opinion on the subjects without having all the facts.

Well tell you what. I agree with what point he is trying to make. Yes he is correct in saying the riches of the world are held by a minority. He is obviously referring to the jews as descendants. It is a anti-Semetic remark that gives me the problem. He is clearly parrotting what his buddy in Iran is saying. This guy as I have said before is an attention whore. He want's everyone to look at him. This is why he needs to compete with his pals in Iran and Cuba. They are one in the same.
And you propose to what...counter propoganda with...propaganda? Now he's buddies with Iran? Wow.

Wait a minute? The OP see's what the media is telling him is an anti-semetic remark and that is a good reason to take him out?

LOL!!!!!!

I have actually been looking for places to find non-bias information on him, but it seems next to impossible. Are there any trustworthy sources that you know of?non Bias information on Chavez..

Try this one
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Ch%C3%A1vez

or you can always try BBC, AFP, EFE, asian newspapers, etc.

and I assume you are keeping a copy of an execution order for Hypatia, Plato, Aristotle, Erostenes and Cleopatra. :rolleyes:

there is plenty of evidence for all of them and there is even more evidence for Jesus. Get over it.
Hypatia didn't have an execution order, her gruesome death was however, documented by a number of people, including the man who incited a mob to rise against her, rape her and cut her to death with shards of broken pottery because he was jelous of the political power she had. Letters she wrote to other scholars have been found. Meanwhile, any writings of Jesus were written generations after his death, the earliest being 70 CE, he left no writings of his own, no direct quotations, no historians noticed him at all, he seemed to drift through the world without a trace.
Plato wasn't executed either, his teacher's death was well documented though (everyone knows Socrates ended his life with hemlock) Erostenes calculated the circumference of the earth within a reasonable degree of accuracy and left behind his own writings. Cleopatra wasn't executed, but her death and much of her life is well documented by a number of sources.

Cite some sources mentioning Jesus during his lifetime, please.

I have actually been looking for places to find non-bias information on him, but it seems next to impossible. Are there any trustworthy sources that you know of?
Good luck. No matter what source is mentioned, a certain bias is unavoidable. I'd suggest, especially to those who are taking this particular slant at face value, that you not have your words digested and then regurgitated for you. Read his actual speeches. If you don't speak Spanish, you can most likely find translations for all of his speeches.

Wait a minute? The OP see's what the media is telling him is an anti-semetic remark and that is a good reason to take him out?

LOL!!!!!!
What's even funnier is that people are accepting the statement 'Chavez makes anti-semitic speech' at complete face value, without actually reading the speech themselves, or dicovering the context. And heaven forbid you ever contest the cry of anti-semitism...

And you propose to what...counter propoganda with...propaganda? Now he's buddies with Iran? Wow.

Sure Sinner, didn't you hear? Chavez regurlarly visits Iran where they drink the blood of aborted babies and makes plans for world domination thru the use of socialism and WMD's.

I have actually been looking for places to find non-bias information on him, but it seems next to impossible. Are there any trustworthy sources that you know of?
NOT FOX....

Granted. But what worries me is... people...having all the facts.
Snip a little here...omit a little there...you can make anyone say anything you like. And people will believe it, because that is much easier than actually thinking for yourself.

PS: Gylesovia clearly supports censorship, as evidenced by the above quote.:D

Hypatia didn't have an execution order, her gruesome execution was well documented by a number of people...Jesus didn't comit a crame.. yet was executed, his gruesome death was however, documented by a number of peoplePlato..his teacher's death was well documented though... everyone knows Socrates ended his life with hemlock
so what?.. everyone knows Jesus ended his life with 2 thieves next to him...Cleopatra wasn't executed, but her death and much of her life is well documented by a number of sources.Jesus was executed, and his death and much of his life is well documented by a number of sources.

What else have you got?

What's even funnier is that people are accepting the statement 'Chavez makes anti-semitic speech' at complete face value, without actually reading the speech themselves, or dicovering the context. And heaven forbid you ever contest the cry of anti-semitism...

Well what do you expect really? People hear what they want to hear. Despite repeated translations on this thread where it was actually put in context and the 'I-hate-socialism' blinders just don't allow them to see it. It's some humourous shat i tellz ya!

PS: Gylesovia clearly supports censorship, as evidenced by the above quote.:D

Sinuhue wins the internet. Where do you want it, love?

Snip ... little ... people [,] because that is much easier [...].


SINHUE wishes that midgets be cut up.

Snip a little here...omit a little there...you can make anyone say anything you like. And people will believe it, because that is much easier than actually thinking for yourself.

PS: Gylesovia clearly supports censorship, as evidenced by the above quote.:D


LMFAO!

SINHUE wishes that midgets be cut up.

Suddenly everybody sounds like James T. Kirk.

Jesus didn't have an execution order, his gruesome death was however, documented by a number of people
It was writen about two generations after it was supposed to have happened. It wasn't recorded by eyewitnesses and bears suspicious resemblance to deaths of other pagan god men who were supposed to have existed some time ago.

so what?.. everyone knows Jesus ended his life with 2 thieves next to him...
Funny, so did Mithras. You don't call him a saviour despite the fact that he had that title 500 years before Jesus was ever dreamt up.

Jesus was executed, and his death and much of his life is well documented by a number of sources.
Not by any eyewitnesses.

What else have you got?
You still haven't provided me with a single source during Jesus' lifetime. You want to know what I have got? Well, I can tell you, I've got a hell of a lot more than you do.

SINHUE wishes that midgets be cut up.
Oh now that is just delightful:)

...everyone knows Jesus ended his life with 2 thieves next to him...

Yeah, but which one of the thieves was saved?

Suddenly everybody sounds like James T. Kirk.
Actually, it is those little pauses...hmmm, I want to eat shrimp that... is farmed in 'protected' mangroves soget me some thinking... impaired immigrants willing to peel them and feed them to methat things are being omitted...so when the OP offered the entire Spanish transcript, I read it. No really...I wasted how many minutes of my life reading that damn speech, only to find that his statement is so BORING with all the parts left in.

BTW

Hypatia didn't have an execution order, her gruesome execution was well documented by a number of people...Jesus didn't comit a crime.. yet was executed, his gruesome death was however, documented by a number of people... at least Ten times more eyewitnesses than that Hypatia guy..(whoever or whatever that is)

Not by any eyewitnesses.




You'd think that if they strung up someone to bleed and bake in the sun for a while, on top of the hill overlooking the city, chances would be that someone saw him. Just a hunch. Chances are also that they were:
a)illiterate; or
b)literate, and wrote something, but the powers that be destroyed that something. It's funny how when someone tries to strike down a regime, and that regime takes the blow, strikes back, and then tries to erase all memory of the trouble maker that nothing really survives except stories, which evntually get written down. I wonder how that works.:confused:

Yeah, but which one of the thieves was saved?I have a feeling you are going to tell us :D

Sure Sinner, didn't you hear? Chavez regurlarly visits Iran where they drink the blood of aborted babies and makes plans for world domination thru the use of socialism and WMD's.

No, that's Tuesday night at my house.

at least Ten times more eyewitnesses than that Hypatia guy..(whoever or whatever that is)

Will you tell him, or shall I?

I have a feeling you are going to tell us :D

No, an honest question.

BTW

Jesus didn't comit a crime.. yet was executed, his gruesome death was however, documented by a number of people... at least Ten times more eyewitnesses than that Hypatia guy..(whoever or whatever that is)
Why only Ten? I'd say at least Thirty-seven.

BTW

Jesus didn't comit a crime.. yet was executed, his gruesome death was however, documented by a number of people... at least Ten times more eyewitnesses than that Hypatia guy..(whoever or whatever that is)
BTW

According to the bible, Jesus did commit a crime. He overturned tables in the temple, this would be causing a disturbance and destruction of property. It's much more severe than stealing.

Hypatia commited no crime other than being an influential pagan scientist who happened to be a woman in a city with a jelous christian bishop who manipulated a crowd to believe she was posessed by the devil because she had more influence on the population than she did. And no, there were more people living in Alexandria at the time who witnessed the attack. They dragged her throughout the city during this attack. The bishop (now a saint) couldn't even get her legally executed as she had not commited a crime, he had to resort to illegal means to rid himself of her.

Will you tell him, or shall I? Since Dakini keeps talking about "eyewitnesses"... tell me the "eyewitnesses" names

Since Dakini keeps talking about "eyewitnesses"... tell me the eyewitness names
Stop with the red font! I keep thinking Jesus is talking to me!

Why only Ten? I'd say at least Thirty-seven.
I know, as long as he's pulling numbers out of his ass, he might as well make it worthwhile.

By chance, was this guy banned for trolling? I'm really seeing how that would happen too.

Stop with the red font! I keep thinking Jesus is talking to me!LOL ... no te gustan mis colores?
I si yo te pido a ti que cambies de color... lo arias por mi? ;)

I know, as long as he's pulling numbers out of his ass, he might as well make it worthwhile.

By chance, was this guy banned for trolling? I'm really seeing how that would happen too.
Says the person who says Jesus did not exist. Did you expect an asinine statement like that to not bring out bad feelings toward you? The very definintion of trolling.

No, that's Tuesday night at my house.


I'll bring the snacks. ;)

I have some good ideas on how we can crush the worlds govt's by providing jobs, healthcare and education to the poor.

LOL ... no te gustan mis colores?
I si yo te pido a ti que cambies de color... lo arias por mi? ;)
Por supuesto que si lo haria por ti!

Soy poeta, no?

Stop with the red font! I keep thinking Jesus is talking to me!


I am, but you just keep thinking it's the voices in your head.

BTW

According to the bible, Jesus did commit a crime. He overturned tables in the temple, this would be causing a disturbance and destruction of property. It's much more severe than stealing.

Hypatia commited no crime other than being an influential pagan scientist who happened to be a woman in a city with a jelous christian bishop who manipulated a crowd to believe she was posessed by the devil because she had more influence on the population than she did. And no, there were more people living in Alexandria at the time who witnessed the attack. They dragged her throughout the city during this attack. The bishop (now a saint) couldn't even get her legally executed as she had not commited a crime, he had to resort to illegal means to rid himself of her.

So at what point does Chavez come into the story? Was he the judge in both cases?

Tonight, on Judge Hugo. The plaintiff accuses the defendant of damaging his property. The Defendant claims he is the son of God. Who will win? Find out tonight on FOX45, your source for credible information!

Says the person who says Jesus did not exist. Did you expect an asinine statement like that to not bring out bad feelings toward you? The very definintion of trolling.
Oh wow. You mean that there is solid, unbiased scientific proof that Jesus existed? I missed that Discovery program. Where's he buried? That'd be a neat place to visit.

Teh Jewzors crucified Bolivar?

you know, now that you mention it i could totally see a hardcore jew-hater thinking something like that if they found it convenient. like the one guy i got in an argument with once who was convinced that chomsky's critiques of israeli policy was part of a secret jewish plot that somehow involved making jfk look bad.

Por supuesto que si lo haria por ti!

Soy poeta, no?quiero transparente... puedes ser transparente?
quiero verte por dentro... sin mascaras.. quiero ver tu espirtu.. depeshe toi je pas toute la journee :fluffle:

So at what point does Chavez come into the story? Was he the judge in both cases?

Tonight, on Judge Hugo. The plaintiff accuses the defendant of damaging his property. The Defendant claims he is the son of God. Who will win? Find out tonight on FOX45, your source for credible information!
Yeah, I'm not sure...that whole conversation is a bit...confusing. I've been skimming it, or just not reading parts of it.

Since Dakini keeps talking about "eyewitnesses"... tell me the "eyewitnesses" names
Well, for Hypatia, the ones who wrote about her included Damascius, Socrates Scholasticus, John, Bishop of Nikiu, other eyewitnesses to her existence would have been her father, Theon, who was also a prominant mathematician, her husband Isidorus, a prominant philosopher, Cyril, the bishop of Alexandria (he wrote a little about her as well if I'm not mistaken), not to mention the fact that she left several of her own writings for future generations.

LOL ... no te gustan mis colores?
I si yo te pido a ti que cambies de color... lo arias por mi? ;)
Para ti, podria cambiar hasta el color del cielo.

Quien es el poeta ya?

quiero transparente... puedes ser transparente?
Aceptas blanca?

Says the person who says Jesus did not exist. Did you expect an asinine statement like that to not bring out bad feelings toward you? The very definintion of trolling.
I said there's no evidence Jesus existed because there isn't. Is it trolling to speak the truth now? Furthermore, it's not an asinine statement, it's a growing sentiment among historians who previously never thought to question the existence of this particular Jesus.

Para ti, podria cambiar hasta el color del cielo.

Quien es el poeta ya?
At least mine rhymed. *sticks out tongue*

Oh wow. You mean that there is solid, unbiased scientific proof that Jesus existed? I missed that Discovery program. Where's he buried? That'd be a neat place to visit.
The whole ascension to heaven would make it quite difficult... although Bush is quite adamant about more money on lunar missions... hmmmm..... could it be?

Para ti, podria cambiar hasta el color del cielo.

Quien es el poeta ya?bueno estoy avierto par un "triangle erotico".. todavia me queda champagna del anho nuevo :D

At least mine rhymed. *sticks out tongue*
Jess. But mhyne Mayka the hhhheart flutter, jess?

So at what point does Chavez come into the story? Was he the judge in both cases?

Tonight, on Judge Hugo. The plaintiff accuses the defendant of damaging his property. The Defendant claims he is the son of God. Who will win? Find out tonight on FOX45, your source for credible information!
OceanDrive insisted that the jews killed Jesus.
Eventually it got to the point where I mentioned it was as pointless as arguing about which of the seven dwarves put the hot lead shoes on Snow White's evil stepmother and we got to this point.