We live in an ultra-sensative society where one false word can lead to law suits or Al Sharpton and friends piketing at your doorstep.  The Pres. of Harvard was nearly tarred & feathered for mentioning the scientific fact that men and woman have different cognitive strengths and weaknesses.

But don't fear my fellow bigots!  We've still got anti-Semetism.  Israel is often compared to Nazi Germany (Please note the outragous irony and insensativity to that).  European leaders wear Palestinian clothes in solidarity.  Every European leader and all the media cries over Lebanon but never seems to mention the missles entering Israeli cities.  Where is the film an interviews in the destroyed Israeli cities?  "Civil Rights Leader" Jesse Jackson refers to NYC as "Himytown". Nobody cares. The guy that came in 2nd to Jaques Chirac for PM of France was a Holocaust denier.

I just read Jack011653 call the Jews "devious" in a post below and nobody even replies.  NOSC (a few weeks back) actually complained how the Jews got too much publicity for the Holocaust. I guess no publicity is bad publicity, even if it's 6 million dead Jews.  

Truly disgusting.  All of it!

without them, the Republicans wouldn't have a party, and the 2 party system would collapse.

Well, at least for a half hour, until the Democrats split into 13 parties.

the 25 others who read it (I know you had to read it twice) were all smart enough to get it.

That puts you in the FOURTH (4th) percentile of intelligence on this board.   That's probably about the mid to high 60s in IQ.

Maybe you should shutup until you can find more brains than the bots that spam me.

1. Please link to who has compared Israel to Nazi Germany. (I hope it is not just a commenter on some blog.)

2. Exactly which Israeli cities were "destroyed"? I saw plenty of coverage from within Israel on Fox, CNN and MSNBC so I am not sure what you are talking about.

3. Jesse Jackson has been getting shit for his "Hymeytown" comment for over 20 years. Where have you been?

4. I am not French and therefore did not vote in the French election. You are digging deep for stuff to complain about.

5. If you are really so outraged about "anti-Semetism" (sic) you should probably first learn how to SPELL IT!

Don't brew them together and come up with bullshit. And save us the sanctimony.  

By comparison to what Israel did in Lebanon, the Israel took minor damage.  There were 30 people killed.  (And that was, by any estimation, a war crime.)  Lebanon lost more than 500 people-- that's the collateral damage.  (A bigger war crime, BTW, so creating 15 times the clamour.)  Almost none of it hurt Hizbollah.  Meanwhile, our UN Ambassador John Bolton then explained how Lebanese lives don't count in the same way, which is what a  Nazi would say about Jews.  Did your sanctimony meter register that?  

Hizbollah has been handed the best recruiting tool it could have hoped for.  You could bet it's now going to generate "franchises" which will copy it surrounding Israel, which has no effective way of countering it.  

You're examples are peculiar.  You pull Jesse Jackson out of, where?  Twenty years ago?  As I remember, it sank whatever was left of his presidential campaign.  His career has never recovered.  He's been working with the pieces of it ever since.  The runner up to Chirac was never welcomed as a good development.  Meanwhile, the best example that you've left out is recent and fresh: Mel Gibson.  Did you merely forget? Or was it because his outbursts weren't too welcomed?  But I guess for good social conservatives should be allowed their eccentric, harmless antisemitism.

Meanwhile, the behavior of Israel in relations to the US has been devious.  It's not anti-semitism to point that out.  

Take away your hyperbole and your sanctimoniousness, and your other points are a waste of space. The president of Harvard was nearly tarred and feathered?  Tarred and feathered?  Keep your grip on reality!  There was a time that people really did that.  Is there a comparison between that and what really happened?  No.  It was much more civil, Neutron.  

It's not that liberals have gotten more intolerant, it's that conservatives like yourself have gotten more sensitive and sanctimonious.            

About NOSC: she's right that Israel **the state** has benefited from the holocaust.  For one thing, it was created because of it.  It is also able to turn back opposition to its actions because of deference shown it because of the holocaust, and because anti-semitism is considered worse than most bigotries.  

I'm not saying Israel is worse because of this.  A country in Israel's position has better bring every advantage it has to bear.  

-- Modified on 8/30/2006 5:26:42 PM

1) I stayed away from war "tactics" and addressed the media's coverage of it.  Nobody seemed to mention the Hezbollah missles much.  Nobody in the media ever considered that a lot of the dead in Lebanon were Hezbollah.  Every one of them were listed as "civillians".  Nice photoshop doctoring as well.  Way to go Reuters!

2) That remark did not kill Jesse Jackson's career.  He was never going to be Pres.  He became extremely rich and powerful and the self-appointed representative to all black people.  It was having a child out of wedlock that knocked him down.  I didn't mention Mel Gibson because we don't yet know what will come of this.  If he said the same thing about blacks or Latinos his career would be finished.  He'll probably bounce back from this no problem.  After all, it was just Jews and what he said was sorta correct.  Right?

3) The point about France was to show how pervasive anti-Semetism is in Europe.

4) The Harvard Dean was almost fired!  They held protests. He had to kiss everyone's ass and apologize over and over.  he had to attend sensativity courses and other shit.  All because he cited scientific data that wasn't politically correct.  BTW, try not to take everything so literal.  You must be a  real hoot at parties.

5) Sanctimonious???  I'm sorry you liberals don't have that market cornered anymore.  You guys are more than free to piss your diapers everytime a "perceived" slight occurs against any group.  But the devious Jews are fair game?

6 This opposition to Israel is not anti-Semetism argument is growing tired.  "I'm not anti-Semetic. I just think the Jews need to hunker down and take what's coming to them like the good Kikes they are. How dare they fight back in a non-proportional way.  What's a few kidnappings and suicide bombs anyway?"   I know the "Schindler's List Jews" were a lot more likable.  But they've got a country and an Army now so no more Spielberg movies.  They're only the good guys when they get slaughtered.  

They got it???  Got what?  How "devious" the Jews are.  They got that?  They agreed with you.

Please stop trying to act as if you have any intelligence.  You're a cartoon character.

So, when you say liberals don't have the market cornered on sanctimony, that's an admission, right?  So, you want your turn to piss your diapers, is that what this thread is then--  your taking your turn at pissing your diapers?  I'm glad I don't have the market cornered on that, but I really thought you'd have more regard for your free speech rights.

A lot of the dead were Hizbollah.  I believe that number is about 70-- confirmed.  So the Israel bombs in *Beruit* where the bombing was very heavy, just happened to fall on Hizbollah fighters?  If so, they hit them by accident, because that wasn't the intent of those bombs.  

About Jesse Jackson, you're dead wrong, he had much more of a career till that presidential bid.  He spoke at the democratic convention before that, they never invited him back to do that again.  Conservatives like to dig at him because he has become an easy target.  The press pays no attention to his defending himself.

Agreed about the pervasiveness of antisemitism, but believe me, there's a pervasive anti-Arab sentiment there as well.  Did you forget to mention it, or was this bigotry okay?  Bigotry is bigotry, there's nothing worse about anti-semitism than any other.  

About the Harvard Dean who was almost "fired."  Losing your job is the modern day equivalent of being "tarred and feathered" I take it?  Right, just barbaric.  I'll drop that though.  It was a rhetorical flourish.  One of those double-speak cliches.

There are other ridiculas things about this.  If he had sited any of the Nazi research on Jews, he would have faced something similar, if not worse.  So, do you object that people are that alert to spot bigotry?  If it had been somewhat antisemitic, just on the borderline, like saying that research proved that Jews had higher IQ's but were physically weaker, would you be defending him now?  I think your position is actually all other bigotry except anti-semitism is acceptible.

People could site studies selectively, and a dean isn't a researcher.  If he actually believed what he said had any weight, if he had read any studies directly on this, he would have fought more about it, or should have.  I think it's more of a matter of someone who didn't know what he was talking about, who wouldn't back up his words so had to apologize and retract-- and the conservative nutcases who loved him as an intellectual brother.      

Now, about your last stubbornly stupid point, answer this question: were there Jews before Israel existed?  Yes or no.

Has Israel done anything to help the lives of the vast majority of Jews?  Yes or no.

Will the Jews still live without Israel?  Yes or no.

In the three or more recorded times Israel has been overrun and the people put into exile, were the Jews eliminated then?  Yes or no.  

Do you think the holocaust would have been stopped or slowed down if Israel had existed then?  Yes or no.  

At the same time, if the Jews everywhere else were aniliated through a worldwide Nazi campaign, is Israel really going to be secure?  Yes or no.

Now I'll ask you the one open question.  Except for pride and religious fundamentalism, what the hell is Israel doing for anybody including most Jews?    


-- Modified on 8/30/2006 7:09:17 PM

because my sense of caring for what he says has fallen to 0%.

So you hate Israel but love the Jews?  It's crystal clear now.

I'll answer your last question with a question.  Let's see if you can get the point:
What happened to the Jews in Europe before they had a homeland?  (Hint- Think 1939-1945)

1) Yea, you never see images like these all over Europe.  Open your eyes you nitwit!

2) Hezbollah launched over 13,000 rockets into Israel.  I guess they all missed.

3) Jesse Jackson has been propped up by the media for over 20 years.  He has had the power and influence to shakedown the most powerful corporations and get rich.  Yea, that "Hymetown" remark really hurt him.

4) I'm "digging deep" by mentioning anti-Semitism in Europe??  I'm aware you don't vote in France.  Are you aware that there is this whole other world out there other than the little corner you fester in?   Europe's anti-Semitism is a real problem.  Your anti-Semitism means nothing.  Something tells me you don't have much influence in this world.  You reek of failure.

5) Thanks again for another thoughtful, enlightening post that made us all think.  Why don't you take up checkers or something and leave the exchange of ideas to people that actually have them?  Good talking to you again Bender.

The Jewish people had no homeland for 2000 years and the culmination of that unhappy state of affairs was to have become the victim of genocide.

Partly in response to that, by hook and by crook and by means both faair and foul [but mostly fair], the Jewish people were able to [re]create a state of Israel.  Where, presumably, they would be free from the grosser threats to their collective physical survival.

But NOW they're "ingathered" and present a wonderfully concentrated target for various and sundry actors with less-than-benevolent feelings toward the Jewish people. [BTW, "wonderfully" is being used in a sense akin to Jack's use of "devious"].

So, work this out -- the Jewish people might be destroyed because they are stateless.  But the Jewish people might also be destroyed because they're camped out in the vulnerable state of Israel.

I think they have exhausted the obvious logical poossibilities for insuring their collective safety.

What's left?  Migration to other planets?

Perhaps the whole zionist thing needs to be reconsidered?  Herzel is NOT the last word.

You were feeding off comments by Mr. Misanthropist who was complaining about the Jews constantly bringing up the Holocaust. "Enough with the violins and never agains".  You made a comment off of that stating how the Jews weren't the only ones that died there.  Your comment was titled "Let their spokespeople be heard as well".  Were you implying that the Jews were hogging all of the glorious Holocaust PR?  Your comment in the context of that thread came off(to me) that you were also annoyed by the Jews bringing up the Holocaust.  

-- Modified on 8/30/2006 8:36:00 PM

Boo on this post, Mr. Neutron, for forcing me out of my newly-acquired mellower ways :

1.  Jack being sarcastic [or ironic] ;

2. you misunderstood the post from NOSC ;

3. chunky Lawrence Summers, former Harvard Prez, got a taste of his own medicine.  For several years Summers stumped the land giving a speech in which he constructed a syllogism in which he effectively condemned all critics of Israel as being anti-Semetic.  [About 5 weeks ago I linked this speech to  to a post, Mr. Neutron, go back and do your homework and read it].  Summers deliberately, in the most McCarthy-like fashion,  twisted the words of his oppopnents in an attempt to discredit them.  BUT lo and behold, Summers' very bland and probably extemporaneous comments about the differential career paths of male scientists, engineers, and mathemeticians versus females in those careers were deliberately twisted by his opponents in an attempt, successful as heck, to discredit Summers.

Payback is a bitch, and turnabout is such fair play.  It was real schandfreude heroin to see Summers hoist on his own petard in such a manner.

But really, could it have happened to a nicer guy?  and a more deserving one?

As soon as Israel lifts the media blackout on the West Bank the Pallys can enjoy this too!  [Just kidding -- no Israeli West Bank media blackout, I know].


Here's Summers' reasoning :


1. Israel is the Jewish state;

2. Israel is the collective/corporate "expression" of the Jewish people in our time;

3. to be anti-Israel is to oppose the Jewsih people;

4. opposition to the Jewish people is anti-Semitism;

5. opposition to Israel is anti-Semitism.

He had a good run with this while it lasted, but the free ride had to end eventually.

The thread you're referring to was started by DoctorGonzo on 073006 and entitled [?],  "Associated Press: Hizbullah Used UN Post..."  

NOSC did reply to a post within that thread, BUT THE ORIGINAL "Let their spokespeople be heard as well" was also contributed By Doc.  I know, I'm in that thread several times as well.

I'll note that you didn't answer my survey, so you evaded the very question you've asked me: I'll quote one of the questions, very similar to yours:
"Do you think the holocaust would have been stopped or slowed down if Israel had existed then?  Yes or no."  Apparently, you do, even if you didn't answer.    

How would a besieged Jewish state in an unstable area have stopped it?  No, I don't think Israel protects most of the Jews in any way.  No, I don't think the Jews before the war were more likely to pick and go to Israel if it had existed.  They could have emigrated there.  The state didn't exist, but the land was still there.  There wasn't this animosity between Arabs and Jews then.  Not anything close to the antipathy between Europeans and the Jews at that time.      

Many Jews could have fled to the US, too.  It was a matter of not suspecting how hell-bent and how powerful Germany was going to become against them.  **Nobody** could have predicted that.  You'll argue against that.  You'll declare that it was obvious, and that I'm blaming the victim; I'm doing no such thing.  Retroactively, it looks obvious.  I know, just like conservatives predicted the fall of the Soviet Union.  Obvious.

Leaving everything and becoming an expatriate is difficult for anyone.  It would hardly have been easy for an Israel at that time to absorb 8 million Jewish refugees-- ethnic heritage aside.  Greece did that shortly after it's ill-fated war with Turkey in 1921.  The results?  Greece was in a civil war by 1927, the refugees being a faction.    

   

1. There are millions of images in America like this. What is your point?

2. Very interesting number. Too bad you cannot name one Israeli city that was "destroyed."

3. I'm sure that in your ideal system, Jesse Jackson and everyone you disagree with would be locked up. I guess that flag you posted is your wet dream.

4. This is a big world. My priority is the country I was born in and live in. Thanks, though, for acknowledging your allegiance to a foriegn power. I'm sure you were loud and proud criticizing immigrants waving Mexican flags a few months ago yet you would tie the fate of the United States to Israel.

5. Funny that the only ideas you consider valid are war and death. I'm sure your god would be proud.

-- Modified on 8/31/2006 3:14:14 PM

Are you going to "tar and feather" her for making a completely good point?  You're that much a hypocrital asshole?  

Look back: a few posts ago, I said you'd feel different if that dean would have said something that sounds like it could be not anti-semitic, but might give an antisemitic some quarter.  You've demonstrated that point, totally.  So, if a dean said this, would you have demanded his resignation then?

Unlike what the dean said, she's saying something factually true.  

There is nothing anti-semitic about making the point that other ethnicities suffered too.  It's not denying the holocaust.  She didn't say the Jews weren't the first target.  Why be this sensitive on this point?  Are you really going to equate saying Gypsies were almost wiped out as anti-semitic?  

It's you who seem to think the *glorious PR* shouldn't be shared.  Though I don't know what use the Gypsies, the Poles, the Czechs, or the  handicapped could make of this.  It's probably why we haven't heard a lot about them.

Now, when you write about "hogging the glorious holocaust PR" as far as I know, Israel isn't known to have given any homage to to others who suffered with them.

Now, is it fair to point that out?  Or should the person who does that be "tarred and feathered."  I'm talking about in the whining, conservative, hypocritical sense of the term: something you are quite familiar with, Nut-ron.

Ah, how black is that kettle?

Mel, if you don't mind, I'd like to take the liberty of responding to your questions posed.
and please... don't let my reputation blind you.

Q "were there Jews before Israel existed?"
A Obviously, this was a rhetorical question.

Q: Has Israel done anything to help the lives of the vast majority of Jews?
A Yes actually, it has. (see below)

Q Will the Jews still live without Israel?
A We will survive regardless of what happens to the geographical location of the Sovereign State of Israel. What kind of emotional and psychological condition we, as a demographic will have, remains to be seen. I would like to believe we will persevere, regardless of the hurdles.

Q In the three or more recorded times Israel has been overrun and the people put into exile, were the Jews eliminated then?
A No, of course not. What's your point?

Q Do you think the holocaust would have been stopped or slowed down if Israel had existed then?
A If there had been a State of Israel in 1933, the year Shicklegruber rose to power, I do not believe the Holocaust would have happened, and oil today would cost $0.85 a gallon.

Q At the same time, if the Jews everywhere else were aniliated through a worldwide Nazi campaign, is Israel really going to be secure?
A Don't be a goyishe kop... if your scenario were to unfold, there would be no israel to be secured, ergo this question is rendered irrelevant. Sorry about that, Mel, and btw, its spelled "annihilated".


Q Now I'll ask you the one open question.  Except for pride and religious fundamentalism, what the hell is Israel doing for anybody including most Jews?
A This is almost the same question as above, so i'm going to combine the answer.

Israel has pioneered farming and animal husbandry techniques that are copied and used throughout the world. The Kibbutz system in Israel has been hailed the world over for their extraordinary accomplishments in developing land, maximizing use of resources, and the world has long marveled at how Israel turned worthless desert into fertile farmland. The current technology used in raising chickens, turkeys, ducks, and other fowl, was developed in Israel. With yields in excess of 99% (99 out of 100 eggs incubated fully mature into chickens), you can thank, or curse Israel for the proliferation of chicken fast food.

Israel also developed the current preferred technology in culling methane from manure.

Medical breakthroughs from Israel are too numerous to mention.

The Technion in Haifa is a world class science incubator, rivaling and sometimes even exceeding such American schools as CalTech and MIT.

The first online messengering system, ICQ, was developed by an Israeli software company.

Militarily... The Patriot missile incorporates software and explosive technology developed in Israel by IDF research, and some of the best avionics systems in use today were originally developed by ISRAELI, not US teams. Technology freely shared, (to my knowledge) with the Pentagon & Langley.

Desalinization - the process of turning salt water into drinkable, arable fresh water. The standard in state of the art in this technology is always Israel. Its partly how they irrigated the desert.

Israel gave the world Uri Geller... hmmm... ok, you got me there.

I CAN go on for quite a long while. But I think I make my point. Hopefully to your satisfaction.

It so happened I was in agreement with you when i said let their spokespeople be heard as well.
you are correct, the voices of the gypsies, homosexuals, communists, and millions of others were not heard either.
They should have been. Instead, today, we have Darfur, a Holocaust no less horrifying, if not so large in scope as WW2.

And look. Once again, the United States does little beyond lip service.

You may not believe this of me, but it appalls me no end. america is too fat and lazy and self-absorbed to be bothered with the fates of people who don't have something Americans want. that is the Ugly America we are contending with today.

we have enough of our own, and we have no business risking the lives of our neighbors' sons to mediate between 2 groups of assholes on the other side of the world who are determined to kill each other over some point of theology, instead of putting their efforts into feeding & schooling their kids.

If they want us to do something, they will ask us.     Meanwhile, I'll go with Ma Nature's plan for natural selection.  

I never cease to be amazed at how the Republicans salivate at the thought of any war that might be profitable, and the Democrats salivate at the thought of any war that might be unprofitable; and yet somehow, the salivators are always the people who make sure they are never the ones in the thick of it.  

Getting excited or ideological about killing people does not in any way change it.  My personal preference is to avoid it whenever possible, and when it's not, get it over with as quickly as possible.   I much prefer lolling in bed - or almost anything - to night patrols.

Doc, ya wanna go to Darfur, here's your link  http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htun/articles/20060331.aspx

I'll be in Cabo, thank you very much http://www.loscabosguide.com/fishing/fishrep1.htm

Dumb maybe, dumb enough to elect a Bush - but if you hadn't noticed, we're in a 2 front war that is hardly controllable, and we also have other more intractable problems like WTF we're gonna do about our environment, and our kids' heads.

Americans are NOT responsible for Darfur, and goddamned stupid to stick our noses into another problem when we can't control the ones we're already in.

If that's so, then "forgetting" is NOT an issue, as we'll be constantly "reminded."

I think "never forget" ought to be understood as "never allow this to happen again"  or as Doc likes to sign off "never again."

which drive the Chinese commies to suchs fits of envy.

In fact, if it's all just a way to trick Congress into putting money into scientific research, I'm all for it.  

Perhaps we should try creating other "homelands" for clever people, and put them in hostile, unstable areas.  Warfare is known to stimulate research, isn't it?  Let's take the Japanese people off that isolated island and put them right  in the middle of mainland China.  We could put the British in the Punjab.  We could keep on doing this.  The benefits to humanity would be limitless, even at the cost of world stability and safety.  

You're claim about the holocaust is something I could reconsider, but it is a matter of one alternate history against the other.  I'll point out that the vast majority of Jews at the time were not Zionists at the time.  It was sold as a means to combat another holocaust and anti-semitism after the war.  It's at least untested, but I guess the Jews needed to try anything.  That much I can understand.  However, as the Jews will point out, the Arabs are beginning to sound like Nazis.  On one of its objectives, then, it seems to be counter-productive.    

The main part I can't believe about your message is that gas would be 0.85 a gallon now.  Do you really believe Israel could "colonize" the Arab states the way the British tried to?  Do you really think it would ever be able to quell the Arab people?  Or would the strategy be to cleanse them?  

Now, how many times has Israel been formed and destroyed in the past?  Everyone was angry at the Jews there each time.  In fact, by the scriptures, even God was angry at them when they were there.  The story reminds me of "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" in the bit about that lord determined to build a castle in a swamp.  

I don't want Israel destroyed, I think it would be a disaster.  I just want there to be no further aid, no further lobbying power in our government.  If Israel were a success, despite all its innovations, it wouldn't need this aid to survive.  I want it's lobbying influence reduced.

Two other things: I think the dehumanizing of the Arabs to be disgusting.  The statement: "There will be peace when the Arabs love their own children more than they hate ours" is simply misleading.  The same could be said of the Vietnamese about the French.

Lastly, if the posture of the Jews toward other holocaust victims were really "Let their spokesmen point it out," the Jews wouldn't consider it anti-semitism when it is pointed out.  I could see clearly that the Jews would never want to mention the suffering of the Poles; it does have a ring of justice there.  But the Gypsies?  

No, there's a different sort of holocaust denial going on there.  It's less flagrant, but the Jews really don't want it to be remembered that others suffered.  Why?  For a country struggling to survive, it does a psychological advantage of creating guilt about anti-semitism above all bigotries.  I think it's rational that they try to use this.  They'll take every advantage they can get.  

-- Modified on 9/1/2006 7:35:15 AM

do you really think there would have been an artifical increase in the price of oil in 1973 if not for the Arab boycott of Israel? THAT'S when gas went from $0.29 a gallon to $1.10 in a matter of days, as longer and longer lines formed at the pumps.
Remember, the reason the Arabs (OPEC) increased production as well as prices was to attempt to force America to kowtow to barbarian nomads who pitched their tents on top of oil fields and force the Israeli's out of conquored land. Wasn't called occupied territory for another 10 years. not until AFTER Israel gave the Sinai to Egypt in a land for peace deal that has never been broken.
If there HAD been an Israel before the Holocaust
If the Jews had turned right instead of left after crossing the Red Sea....
IF... If... if...

But we can't deal in what if's except for intellectual exercise... an activity I believe is STILL possible even on this most partisan of of Poosey boards. Where else can you discuss poosey & politics without getting arrested or elected? Don't answer that, I'm on a roll.
So let's deal with reality instead of what if. This goes for you too, Xiaoming, i hope your ears are on.

No matter how much screaming I do about the anti-semitic tendencies of the Arabs, this board, the rest of the world, it wont change a God Damned Thing.

No matter how many times Xiaoming intones "Death to AIPAC", they are not going to die off. And I doubt X-man will stop his AIPAC tirades any time soon. His right, his choice.

No matter how many times anyone here, whether they use their "real" name, or not blasts on about the dastardliness of the other guys (or gals) it won't change a thing.

Not as long as there is no one willing to compromise.

that, is the price we are now paying for the polarization of the country. A great work that really started with the rise of the conservative right wing of the Republican party...embryonic and juvenile during Nixon, emboldened with Reagan, and now finally, come to its full fruition under Bush/Cheney. Welcome to the New Civil War. Civil only in its current incarnation of incendiary words. Uncivilized in any fashion.

What does this have to do with 85 cents a gallon?

1 barrel of oil = 42 US gallons
According to Exxon/Mobil's own records, their actual cost to manufacture a gallon of gasoline today from the crude oil to finished gas at the pump, is approximately 25 cents.(25.7 cents in 2000, the last year these records were made available).
At 70 dollars a barrel of oil, consisting of 42 gallons measured by american measurement standards, the cost per gallon is 60 cents. Do the math. that's where my 85 cents a gallon came from. Shoot me for my inaccuracies. As of yesterday, you'd be doing me a favor if you did.

-- Modified on 9/1/2006 10:24:18 AM

is anybody going to do about it?

To begin with, who are we, and what is "it" (ie., define your loyalties, and the problem)?

Guess what, boys & girls:  life and loyalties change, and it's really a matter of values, which can also come back to simple competition for resources.   What you have to avoid most is people who actually intend to fuck you while representing the opposite, eg Dick "Other Priorities" Cheney.  That and hedge your bets, understanding there's an even money chance that today's spouse is gonna be tomorrow's ex.

It's probably difficult for a large democratic country like the USA to avoid the obvious blunders, like facilitating sand dwelling wife beating extortionist fanatics by buying their oil at ripoff prices.  It's not so much them, as the competition among others who COULD be a real thorn to us, like the Euros & Orientals, etc.  Somebody has to be the straight man, I suppose.

And it's probably safer to stay engaged than withdraw.   If we're gonna do that, we could at least get better at it.   All these fucking ankle-biting rodents that we deal with should be squashed instead of playing with them.  "Squashed" meaning dealing with them professionally and decisively, instead of this endless diddling, as we have been doing.   Most of that comes from failing to understand what can be done decisively and professionally - instead we DICK with things ENDLESSLY, and it becomes a social hemorrhage.

Doc, in your haste to...you make part of one of my central points -- that US support of Israel is not good for the US.

You readily concede that the Arabs in OPEC raised oil prices to punish the US for it's support of Israel, but you don't draw the obvious conclusion.  I don't wonder why.  Or are you trying to say that you believe that high oil prices is a good thing for the US?

And do you really think if Moses had turned right at the Red Sea, and the Jewish people had inherited the petrolands of the Middle East, that Israel WOULD NOT charge exactly every penny that the market would bear for a scarce and precious resource essential to civilized life in the industrial world?  Oh, come on.  Do you really believe that anyone is going to believe THAT incredble nonsense on stilts?

Instead, you run to the comparrative safety of good ole' [or is it bad old] mulltinationl oil to find your "explanation."
Apparently the Seven Sisters [that's a somewhat dated reference to multinational oil penned by anthony Sampsom] know how to price gouge, but the Twelve Tribes never would?

Yep, sure learned a lot from that post!  

Two other things: I think the dehumanizing of the Arabs to be disgusting.  The statement: "There will be peace when the Arabs love their own children more than they hate ours" is simply misleading.  The same could be said of the Vietnamese about the French.

Problem is, you don't see the VN or French strapping bombs to their kids and sending them out for detonation drills....see?

Golda had it right.

Though oil companies are plainly gouging us.  

There's a lot of undetermined premises in what you say.

1) Could Israel have extended it's boundaries as far as Saudi Arabia?  I find that to be impossible by any stretch.

2) If it could have, could it stop the oil companies from making record profits?

3) In charge of such an essential resource, could it abstain from greed itself?  In such a situation, would it have any dependence on the US?

http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/oil.html

Canada has the reserves.

A year ago I wrote a speculative post re how the US should have invaded Saudi Arabia, not Iraq, if our goal was only oil.

Some scoffed at this notion, but it was not entirely tongue-in-cheek.  

We could, if it came to that, "encourage" Quebec to seek "independence" and thereby break up the Canadian federation.  I've read many time that the western provinces of Canada would trip over themselves in their haste to petition the US for statehood. Hence...Iaq, without the loss of life, and on the incredibly cheap.

But I hate to be so cavalier toward the national itegrity of our great neighbor to the north.

But, if we could get all of them in, including Quebec...