Posts by Psychic Dice

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Prof wrong about right to bear arms

    12/07/2007 6:05:58 PM PST · 3 of 96
    Psychic Dice to neverdem

    If the founders intended to disarm Americans, would they have left that chore to descendants one or two centuries later?

  • Some push for hunts as grizzlies surge

    12/04/2007 11:50:51 AM PST · 15 of 48
    Psychic Dice to 300magnum

    >>”We’ve got grizzly bears eating people who come here to hunt,”

    Reminds me of what Avery (Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1,500 Years) said about polar bears while confronting the contention that they can’t survive if the North Pole ice melts.

    (Paraphrase) They are second cousins to grizzlys. Do you really think that polar bears they can’t live on land?

  • Bill Clinton: Wife's record not covered

    12/04/2007 11:42:34 AM PST · 39 of 82
    Psychic Dice to SilvieWaldorfMD

    >>“I would pick her and be here if we weren’t married,” Clinton said.

    >Doubtful, Bill. I think you’d be hiding in the hills of Bolivia with a few Hooters girls before you endorsed the candidacy of someone like Hillary.

    Hey, you never know. If Bill was having a really slow bedroom week, and he happened to be in the vicinity, and the hotel was close, and if he couldn’t find another hottie in the crowd, and if she had to promise him something to get him there, and (especially) if they weren’t married to each other, then why not?

    One man, one woman, one night.

    Kind of like what Hugo Chavez wants: one man, one vote, one time.

  • Look in their eyes- seems to be vacant. A discussion of Alzheimer disease amongst Freepers.

    12/02/2007 8:52:06 PM PST · 33 of 73
    Psychic Dice to mojo114

    Six years ago, I began driving a taxi in SF. One of my first fares was a neuropsychologist. I asked her what the most interesting thing happening in her field was. She said that within six to eight years – ten tops – there would be a cure for Alzheimer’s.

    A couple of months later a venture capitalist who specializes in biotech got in my cab. I told him what she said. He scoffed that the neuropsychologist was delusional, that it would take the Food & Drug Administration at least ten years to approve any drug. In other words, he had no intention of investing in an Alzheimer’s cure.

    A couple weeks after that I had a lawyer in my taxi who specialized in legal issues dealing with AIDS cures. I spoke to her about the disagreement between the neuropsychologist and the VC. She pointed out that Alzheimer’s has two potential cures. One will be for folks who are identified at a young age - possibly in their teens. That one could take a couple lifetimes to test.

    However, cures are also being developed for people who are suffering right now. For them, she said that the FDA would fast-track a treatment, like they now do for AIDS, and it would take only a year.

    A few months later, an Alzheimer’s researcher told me that his company had cured the disease in mice, but that when it went to human trials it caused encephalitis, which could be lethal. They had to quit.

    Months later I drove an MD to the airport. I told him the story. He claimed to have been up for Surgeon General in the Clinton Administration and that the researcher was really not offering any hope. His reasoning was that scientists have no idea what Alzheimer’s even is. When they claim to cure it in rodents, they are guessing that they have even produced it in the mice to begin with.

    Then another VC – after several more months – got into my taxi. He agreed with the MD. His comment was that half of all cancer researchers can cure it in mice, but fail with humans.

    A few more months went by. I happened to get the researcher back in the taxi and told him what the MD and VC said. His answer was that one of the test subjects had died – not from their experiment. When they did an autopsy, her Alzheimer’s had been cured.

    A few months after that, I drove a lawyer who works with bio-tech and venture capitalists. I told her what I had found out. She said that it was true that a successful drug had been developed but that the encephalitis problem caused cash for further enquiry to dry up.

    Well, last Christmas, two women got in my cab. As I drove them to the airport, I asked them what they do for a living. They said that they were both brain researchers. I began telling them the above story. They interrupted me and said that they both worked for Elan, the company that had cured Alzheimer’s in mice. According to them, more than one autopsy had been done on humans to confirm that the drug works. Better yet, Elan believes that it has solved the encephalitis problem and that they were - as we spoke - in human trials.

    I do not yet know if the trials have been completed. To be honest those women were strangers in a cab, but they seemed like the real deal.

    You might check out this web site, especially the pics of mice brains before and after their drug:

    Further, my advice is to spend as much time as you need to (possibly a couple hundred hours) to get as deeply into the who, what, when, where and why of what researchers are thinking and working on.

    The National Institute of Health (NIH) would be a good place to begin.

    Good luck.

  • Who Owns Israel? The Jews or the Arabs?

    11/28/2007 1:11:59 PM PST · 137 of 140
    Psychic Dice to x

    >>I don’t think Porath was saying that Arab Jews were exiled because of an Israeli fifth column. Apparently he does believe that such efforts were made by Israel,

    Porath didn’t call the Jewish recruiting efforts a “Fifth Column.” I did because given the 1,200 years of dhimmitude imposed by Arabs, come-to-Israel recruiting efforts could not have been viewed any other way – especially since those countries were devoted to destroying Israel before it ever got started. Peters details rampant confiscation of Jewish property, incarceration of Jews, refusal in many instances of Arab countries to let Jews out, and many barely escaping with their lives.

    >> but I take his point as simply that the kind of symmetry that some people see between the Arab flight from Israel and the expulsions of Jews from Arab countries is a distortion.

    >>Israelis could argue that there was an element of flight from actual war in the Palestinian case that wasn’t true of the expulsions from Arab countries. But it’s certainly true that from the point of view of Israel an ingathering of Middle Eastern Jews in Israel was something to be desired, while Palestinians and Arabs in no way desired exile. So in that regard, at least, he’s right in arguing that from the point of view of the states concerned — rather than of the refugees themeselves — there wasn’t a symmetry. It wasn’t as though the effects of the two expulsions balanced out for both sides.

    Peters argues that symmetry existed in the numbers of Jews and Arabs that each expelled, but not the reasons. She says just the opposite. Jews wanted out from under 1,200 years or Arab dhimmitude that the 1948 war brought to a head. Israeli Arabs who fought against Jews in the 1948 war were not allowed back into Israel.

    She also points out that many of the expelled Arabs had not lived there for hundreds and hundreds of years as Arab propaganda would have the world believe. A huge proportion of Arabs had been there for decades at best and only because Jews created an economy that required workers. Arabs terrorized Jews and Brits over a number of years to keep Jews out. Hence impoverished Muslims from all countries in the Middle East made their way there to take the jobs.

    Porath strikes me as disingenuous because he cloaks his argument as a refutation of Peters assertions of symmetry, when he is in fact introducing separate arguments.

    >>It would be interesting to know what Pipes thinks about the book now. In the article you cite he’s trying to cover himself for having reviewed the book positively, so he calls for further investigation. Okay, has that further investigation occured and has it been convincing?

    Good questions.

    >>As for the British, Germany tried to destroy them, so they took German colonies as trusteeships and gave some to South Africa and New Zealand. But the trusteeships were understood as temporary. They couldn’t simply give the land to South Africa or New Zealand permanently to do as they wished.

    My understanding is that England wanted the Ottoman Empire to fight on their side in WWI. When they didn’t, after the war, the Brits disbanded the Caliphate and changed their government to a democracy. As part of the arrangement, Palestine which had been ruled by the Ottomans became England’s responsibility.

    >>I’m not interested in hashing this out or making a career out of arguing about it either. I posted the links so that people could make up their own minds.

    I would like to, but I don’t have the time. I intend to make this question of whether Muslims were made to grab their ankles when it comes to Israel a research project that I will work on when I can.

  • Hugo Chavez's Most Dangerous Enemy? It's Chavez Himself

    11/26/2007 9:03:50 PM PST · 14 of 14
    Psychic Dice to WoofDog123

    >>The really sad part is, sound bites on FR aside, the really poor people in most countries have very little to lose, from what i can tell, by electing a megalomaniac like this. I think some Freepers don’t get what ‘poor’ means in the third world. Political philosophy is NOT at the top of that group’s thinking.

    In the short term you are right, they have nothing to lose.

    Anthony Bordain is a chef who travels the world, tasting food from culture after culture after culture in his TV show. He was in Peru where the Andes are nearly vertical. The folks there scratched out a very hard scrabble existence - an extremely tough life just to eat. As he looked across the valley to the next mountain over, Bordain remarked to one of them how beautiful the setting was - and it was magnificent. They guy answered, “You can have it.”

    In the long run, that guy has nothing to look forward to but back breaking work. What he doesn’t realize that a Hugo C. not only won’t really help him but will change the nature of his back breaking work so that he, Hugo C., controls all the money, power and whores.

    If I talk to socialist peasants, I try to explain that they are forcing the issue to the wrong end. The peons south of the Rio Grande either learn to understand what is at stake or it is going to cost all of us as we go to war with them.

  • Who Owns Israel? The Jews or the Arabs?

    11/26/2007 8:39:26 PM PST · 135 of 140
    Psychic Dice to x

    >>Did Peters or anyone else answer Porath or Blair?

    >Peters did revise the book, and has spoken about it on various occasions, so it stands to reason she made some sort of defense of her findings. I don’t know how successful she was. A lot of people who come across her book now don’t know about the earlier controversy.

    I’m working from the original 1984 printing that is currently available from Amazon. It would be interesting to see her revisions.

    I haven’t had time to go through all the info on the sites you named, to reread Peters and to search for criticism of both. From Time Immemorial is long and dense, as are the criticisms. I intend to repost when finished. It will probably take a couple months.

    For now, I have a few thoughts.

    I suspect Yehoshua Porath of being either an Israeli Leftist Jew or an Israeli Arab, whose criticism might very well have been aimed at the 1986 right wing Israeli Jews. I have no evidence of this yet, but it seems quite possible that he is as tendentious as he accuses Peters of being.

    Porath says:

    “Mrs. Peters puts great emphasis on the claim that during and after the 1948 war an “exchange of populations” took place. Against the Arabs who left Palestine one had to put, in her view, about the same number of Jews, most of them driven by the Arab rulers from their traditional homes in the Arab world. And indeed there is a superficial similarity between the two movements of population. But their ideological and historical significance is entirely different. From a Jewish-Zionist point of view the immigration of the Jews of the Arab countries to Israel, expelled or not, was the fulfillment of a national dream—the “ingathering of the exiles.” Since the 1930s the Jewish Agency had sent agents, teachers, and instructors to the various Arab countries in order to propagate Zionism. They organized Zionist youth movements there and illegal immigration to Palestine. Israel then made great efforts to absorb these immigrants into its national, political, social, and economic life.”

    Porath implies that the reason that the Jews were thrown out of the Arab countries in 1948 is that Zionists in Israel were forming a Fifth Columns in each of the Arab countries. What he leaves out are all the citations of persecution under dhimmitude that those Jews lived under for 1,200 years that Peters documents. In other words, it is quite likely that those Jews wanted out and to live in a land run by Jews. So what if the. “… ideological and historical significance” of the movement of Jews is entirely different from that of the Muslims? Lastly, which country could the back to Israel movement be organized in? Iran? Iraq? Syria? Yemen? Of course it was centered in Israel by folks who were passionate.

    There is also possibly a problem with Peters who admitted to being a liberal when she started the book. I think that she still is. With a quick search, I found out that she works for CBS and was involved in the Jimmy Carter administration. Since her book undercuts the ideologies of the people who now pay her, I am not at all sure that would defend what she wrote 20 years ago.

    My overall problem is somewhat exacerbated because I am not an historian. Hence I will never know when I am making a mistake of correctly historically contextualizing my conclusions like the one that Blair points out.

    Peters says that much of the land was barren. Porath counters that Jewish writers themselves clearly asserted that there were plenty of Arabs who owned land but would not sell to Jews. Blair contextualizes that with this:

    “In Palestine under Ottoman rule, land left uncultivated reverted to the state.5 But Ottoman restrictions prevented Jews from purchasing state lands, which made up a significant proportion of the available land.6 Thus Jews would have been allowed to purchase only land already under cultivation, even if large areas of the country were deserted.”

    In another context Blair quotes Pipes:

    “Most early reviewers, including myself, focused on the substance of Miss Peters’s central thesis; the later reviewers, in contrast, emphasized the faults—technical, historical, and literary—in Miss Peters’s book. “

    “I would not dispute the existence of those faults. From Time Immemorial quotes carelessly, uses statistics sloppily, and ignores inconvenient facts. Much of the book is irrelevant to Miss Peters’s central thesis. The author’s linguistic and scholarly abilities are open to question. Excessive use of quotation marks, eccentric footnotes, and a polemical, somewhat hysterical undertone mar the book. In short, From Time Immemorial stands out as an appallingly crafted book. “

    However, later in his piece, Pipe’s says (

    “Granting all this, the fact remains that the book presents a thesis that neither Professor Porath nor any other reviewer has so far succeeded in refuting. Miss Peters’s central thesis is that a substantial immigration of Arabs to Palestine took place during the first half of the twentieth century. She supports this argument with an array of demographic statistics and contemporary accounts, the bulk of which have not been questioned by any reviewer, including Professor Porath.”

    “Nonetheless, Professor Porath dismisses her argument as “fanciful.” He says that “the main reason” for Arab population growth is that Arab births remained steady while infant mortality decreased. He concludes that the movement of population was not significant in comparison with natural increase.”

    “Now, there can be no question that improvements in medical conditions contributed to the increase in Arab population. But it is not immediately clear that declining infant mortality was more important than immigration. Professor Porath asserts this but he does not provide the evidence necessary to convince a reader.”

    “The disproof of Miss Peters’s thesis requires a detailed inquiry into birth and death records, immigration and emigration registers, employment rolls, nomadic settlement patterns, and so forth. She may be wrong; but this will be proven only when another researcher goes through the evidence and shows that immigration was unimportant. The existence or absence of large-scale Arab immigration to Palestine has nothing to do, of course, with Miss Peters’s motives or the obvious short-comings of her book. The facts about population change will not be established by heaping scorn on Miss Peters, only by going back to the archives.”

    “Faulty presentation notwithstanding, Miss Peters’s hypothesis is on the table; it is incumbent on her critics to cease the name-calling and make a serious effort to show her wrong by demonstrating that many thousands of Arabs did not emigrate to Palestine in the period under question.”

    “Until such happens, what is one to think? Is there reason to accept Miss Peters’s version of events? I believe so: even though From Time Immemorial does not place Arab immigration to Palestine in a historical context, it is not hard to find a rationale for their movement. The Arabs who went to Palestine sought economic opportunity created by the Zionists. As Europeans, the Zionists brought with them to Palestine resources and skills far in advance of anything possessed by the local population. Jews initiated advanced economic activities that created jobs and wealth and drew Arabs. Zionists resembled the British, Germans, and other Europeans of modern times who settled in sparsely populated areas—Australia, southern Africa, or the American West—and then attracted the indigenous people to themselves.”

    “There is really nothing surprising in all this; and because it makes such good sense, I put credence in the argument that substantial numbers of Arabs moved to Palestine. I will adjust my views, of course, should compelling evidence be found to show otherwise. But this will require that Miss Peters’s critics go beyond polemics and actually prove her thesis wrong.”

    My simple question, “Who owns Israel? The Arabs or Jews?” is really asking were the Arabs significantly cheated? Although it is possible that I might change my mind, I don’t expect to. From Time Immemorial details and suggests so many inquiries from which to argue, ultimately it is going to be hard to make the case for the Muslims.

    However, all this reading is taking so much of my time that I am probably going to have to elevate it to the status of a hobby.

    Now then, to really push a few buttons. How about this argument? In WWI, the Ottoman Muslims tried to kill England. Since the Brits were on the winning side of that war and the Ottomans were on the losing side, why wasn’t the answer to the question of ownership of Isreal the Brits call? If they thought that the best thing to do for both the Arabs and Jews was to create Israel, is it possibly they are wrong only because they weren’t powerful enough to make it happen?

  • Hugo Chavez's Most Dangerous Enemy? It's Chavez Himself

    11/26/2007 5:58:20 PM PST · 12 of 14
    Psychic Dice to WoofDog123

    >>“In socialism the rich stay filthy rich and the poor stay filthy poor.”

    >Actually this is the rule almost everywhere, whether it be monarchy, ordinary despot, fascism or socialism.

    As a resident of San Francisco, until a couple months ago I was dealing with Mexicans on a nearly a daily basis.

    They are mostly Mayan peasants. One of my fears is that like most peasants they will want to apply familial sense of sharing to macro economic problems and that leads to communism.

    That’s why Hugo Chavez can succeed. The poor folks he’s appealing to have no idea that in the long run by choosing socialist solutions they are ultimately enslaving themselves.

    So I tried to reduce my arguments to answers that might eventually seem obvious to them - almost sound bites - that they wouldn’t forget.

    I agree all that all the systems you named fail. Free enterprise generates the most prosperity.

  • Who Owns Israel? The Jews or the Arabs?

    11/25/2007 11:31:35 AM PST · 133 of 140
    Psychic Dice to x

    >>That is one of the most controversial and disputed history books of the last generation.

    >>If you want to find out more, go here and here.

    Many thanks.

    Did Peters or anyone else answer Porath or Blair?

  • Who Owns Israel? The Jews or the Arabs?

    11/23/2007 12:25:10 PM PST · 116 of 140
    Psychic Dice to carton253

    >>>>What’s your documentation?

    >>>Well newbie, since you asked so nicely, I will provide it. Thomas Baylis, How Israel was Won, page 22.

    I hadn’t asked nicely or nastily. There was intentionally no emotion in my question. You had disagreed with me with a statement of fact as you see it and I wanted to hear why. My thinking: get in quick; get out quick; see what he’s got.

    Further, in a lot of years of Internet action, I don’t recall “newbee” ever being used affectionately. Sometimes it is a statement of fact, but usually has slightly diminutive connotations.

    So what was I to make of your inaccurate representation of my four word question? The most negative possibility was sarcasm, at precisely what I had no idea.

    More importantly, you were deigning to provide me your info so long as my behavior fits your sense of propriety? But there was no attitude one way or another when you came out with your bargain.

    I have no intention of tiptoeing through your tulips. I call ‘em as I see ‘em and sometimes that is passionately. Obviously you are the one setting up the demand as to the behavior you are going to require of me in future posts.

    In other words, if you want to have the conversation, have it. If you want to start bargaining over how I express myself, forgetaboutit.

    >>I usually am very protective of newbies

    Thanks, but I don’t require protection,

    >>but I find your attitude and your demands very offputting.

    Likewise. By now you won’t be enjoying my attitude, but you are still inaccurate. I have made no demand on you, except to make none on me.

    >>So, if you want to find the date and perimeter of the territory for my assertion, read the Baylis book when it comes.

    I no longer do. I am cancelling the order for the Baylis book.

    >>Or learn to ask and not demand.

    One more time with the lesson in manners?

  • Who Owns Israel? The Jews or the Arabs?

    11/23/2007 10:01:20 AM PST · 109 of 140
    Psychic Dice to dervish

    >>Have you of this barrier?


    >>Arabs are free to kill, rape, beat, deprive of human rights, and fence their own.

    Here in the USA, our southern border needs a fence. Fortunately, we are dealing mostly with Mexican peasants, whom the Catholic Church, it seems to me, did a pretty good job of Christianizing.

    However, Muslim prayer books and other Islamic paraphernalia have been found along the invasion trails, so that border has to come under control.

    I point out to our illegal aliens that if a nuke goes off in LA that it is going to kill a lot of Mexicans on both sides of the border as the winds blow its fallout east.

  • Who Owns Israel? The Jews or the Arabs?

    11/23/2007 9:09:26 AM PST · 108 of 140
    Psychic Dice to carton253

    >>Well newbie, since you asked so nicely, I will provide it.
    Thomas Baylis, How Israel was Won, page 22.

    I don’t know what “newbie” is supposed to mean. Am I sitting at the feet of a wise old master?

    How Israel Was Won will arrive next week.

    In the meantime, can you provide a date and the perimeter of the territory for your assertion: “The Zionists purchased only 7% of Palestine?”

  • Who Owns Israel? The Jews or the Arabs?

    11/23/2007 8:53:34 AM PST · 107 of 140
    Psychic Dice to Zionist Conspirator

    >>At the risk of sounding like the “name it and claim it” people, I must truthfully state that if all Israel returned to HaShem with a full heart there would be no need to rely on human instrumentalities at all.

    >>I suggest you read some of the recent articles by David Klinghoffer I’ve been posting the past few weeks.

    To be honest, praise the lord and pass the ammunition is in my opinion the necessary point of view.

    However, you might be right. I will try to make the time to find the articles you reference.

  • Who Owns Israel? The Jews or the Arabs?

    11/22/2007 6:38:45 PM PST · 101 of 140
    Psychic Dice to Grizzled Bear

    >>Here’s another thing that get’s ignored; the Egyptians built a wall to prevent the Palestinians from entering Egypt. About a year ago a group of Palestinians broke through and entered Egypt. They were driven back by the Egyptian soldiers.

    After the Palestinian excursions into Jordan and Lebanon, Egypt might have had it right. :)

    >>Why won’t Roger Waters, Sean Penn and the rest of the delusional wonders protest that?

    The Left wants to destroy everything they don’t control: our government, our military, our corporations, our religions, our families.

    The enemy of their enemy is their friend. That includes Chavez, drugees, thugs, Islamofascists.

  • Who Owns Israel? The Jews or the Arabs?

    11/22/2007 6:32:32 PM PST · 100 of 140
    Psychic Dice to Grizzled Bear

    >>Did you see the “Crap” they left in the Church of the Nativity? Literally! They crapped in the sacred places in sanctuary!

    Peters documents in their own words (letters to home) how during the conquest of Spain they killed the priests and raped/killed the nuns, which they stopped during prayer times and went back to as soon as they were finished.

    That barbarity was business as usual for the time, but Islam has never reformed.

  • Mexico's frustration with U.S. immigration policy builds

    11/22/2007 5:14:21 PM PST · 112 of 114
    Psychic Dice to stephenjohnbanker

    >>Bullshit! I lived in California from 76 to 06. They are thieves!

    Where were you and what are you talking about?

  • Who Owns Israel? The Jews or the Arabs?

    11/22/2007 5:07:32 PM PST · 96 of 140
    Psychic Dice to Beckwith

    >>If you have to explain what it is you meant, then I am not the one who needs to learn English.

    >>My manners are impeccable - - like my English.

    Didn’t have to explain the obvious to anybody but you.

    You are a waste of time, so I won’t bother with further posts from you.

  • Who Owns Israel? The Jews or the Arabs?

    11/22/2007 5:01:06 PM PST · 95 of 140
    Psychic Dice to RobbyS

    >>But the LEFT, that is to say the Enlightment crowd, have bought into a rosy view of Islam. His monotheism was acceptable to the deists and even to the atheists among them because it denied the notion of incarnation that was so hated by the Enlightenment. The fallacy of this approach is that they “misunderestimated” the power of his religion to resist their own doctrines.

    I have no idea what this is a reference to. I think that you are trying to answer someone else.

  • Who Owns Israel? The Jews or the Arabs?

    11/22/2007 4:55:53 PM PST · 94 of 140
    Psychic Dice to carton253

    >>The Zionists purchased only 7% of Palestine.

    What’s your documentation?

  • Who Owns Israel? The Jews or the Arabs?

    11/22/2007 4:54:41 PM PST · 93 of 140
    Psychic Dice to ßuddaßudd

    >>American Infidel

    Isn’t that redundant? :)