It was invented by Jews

[Cobie]

 

4 hours ago, doc benway said:

… I think the current team is doing a great job and appreciate them very much!

 

I second that. 
 

 

Edited Sunday at 07:15 PM by Cobie

[Nungali]

6 hours ago, doc benway said:

@Nungali

As a partial answer to your question, when I was moderating I found it was not always easy, or even possible, to be certain that someone suspected of being previously banned was, in fact, that person.

 

No ?  On the other forums I use they seem to have a way of detecting that ,  banned  returners get found in  a matter of days , so I was going off that .  I assumed (being an area I don't know much about ) they where using 'standard' forum ID detection tools'   (see, I even had to make that term up I know so little about this ) .

 

In this case , the person virtually declared who they where .... and some didn't  even seem to notice that  or be aware of it .

 

 

6 hours ago, doc benway said:

While it’s easy to be sure as a participating member, it feels different when you are the one issuing a permanent ban. There are tools that can help but without sophisticated IT knowledge and skills, the tools are limited. These uncertain cases were monitored closely and when there was enough certainty they were once again banned.

 

The other factor of importance is the severity of offenses leading to the initial ban. If it was very serious (racism, misogyny, homophobia, threats of violence, etc…) there was no second chance given. If it was milder (posting too many GIFs, relatively harmless misinformation, getting caught up in the moment with an otherwise benign history,… ) then we sometimes gave people a second chance.

 

Yeah but .... none of that relates to what I actually started bitching about in the first place , if you recall .

 

It was a an old moderator statement that said  if someone is already banned and sneaked back in under a new identity they would be more closely watched .  That means they already knew it was that person , not that anyone could not be sure .  And my original query would have been cleared up a long time ago if I had got a  clear response to my questions back then , instead of a closed ranks diversion  Mod game  and not answering the question and not giving reasons .   

 

No, I have never been a Mod but I have been a 'people manager' often ,  been a  Chairman on 3 different boards  and ran many meetings and a helped in a few organisations  and I know if  one tries to run things that way  it creates bigger problems and it isn't up front and diversion creates division ..... unless you are  running things for a group of morons that are easily manipulated .  You either slam your palm on that table and say 'Thats they way it is ."  OR if you invite dialogue and consultation be honest and clear about that .

 

Surely you   can understand this is a wacky policy  :     to ban people , allow them to sneak back, as long as they are then  behaved , yet to ban others and if they do not sneak back in they are permanently gone .... its encouraging and rewarding those that  sneak back  and punishes those that do not .   To me , that's  inconsistent  and obviously skew-if  (and the thing is I am pretty sure it was just off the top of one Mods head  as, again, when I asked is this was an official policy  I was given the diversive run around ... it pissed me off ! 

 

6 hours ago, doc benway said:

 

The rules are useful but not definitive as there are many variables and shades of gray, and the mods do the best they can. I think some have erred on the side of permitting more wide ranging discussion, these are criticized for permitting racism, conspiracy theories, and the like. Others erred on the side of shutting down borderline discussion and these were criticized for censorship. Sometimes it feels like you just can’t win. Moderating is not as black and white as some assume, it requires quite a bit of nuance, and it’s mostly thankless. I think the current team is doing a great job and appreciate them very much!

 

So do I , they dealt with this issue  well, I thought.   What I was bitchin about was an old team tears back .    But it has been bought up again .... after a couple of months since last comment  ????    (or maybe you didn't read it before it got bumped ? )

 

 

 

6 hours ago, doc benway said:

 

PS - I think this very thread is problematic in the context of racism. What is extolling the virtues of one “race,” to the exclusion of others, if not racism? 

 

Race doesn't exist . Regarding Judaism it is a religion and a culture .  If you want to get 'Old School' about it    Jews are 'racially' 'Semetic' but so are Arabs , a point I made above  and a question I asked  about, which itself seems to be interpreted as racism . 

 

Of course it was a silly thread conspet and my reaction was to make a joke of it by posting great Aussie inventions .... like the meat pie and  Aussie rules  ( which is, I hope obviously, a joke ) and some other things .  ... ( 'Aussie; is not race either    ) 

 

 < sits back and waits for the misinterpretation and accusations >   .....  not from you Doc , I give you more credit than that and think you can understand my meaning is found in the actual words I wrote .

 

 

[Nungali]

3 hours ago, Cobie said:

 

 

I second that. 
 

 

 

I  third it . 

[Lairg]

There is an account that there was a previous version of this solar system - as the body of incarnation for a profound spirit.

 

In that previous incarnation the over-lighting spirit was said to be learning about intelligence and energy.   That focus meant that the human souls formed at that stage had their spiritual practices focused on intelligent energy.

 

In this second version of the solar system the over-lighting spirit is learning right relationship.  That spirit is now often referred to by humans as a god of love.

 

Most of the human souls formed in the first solar system were brought over to continue their development.  Those souls are often reborn in Jewish and Han bloodlines - and have a head start in science and performing arts.

 

The group of human souls formed in this version of the solar system are learning right relationship - and finding it hard work.  Still, there is increasing recognition of human responsibilities for the planetary ecosystems.   Hopefully that recognition will extend to include other humans as well

 

Most of the human souls from the first version of the solar system have moved on to the new lessons.   A few even try learning what is required for the third solar system:  right intent

 

 

Who can test such propositions?    Easier to take vote!

 

 

 

Edited Sunday at 11:31 PM by Lairg

[Nungali]

2 hours ago, Lairg said:

There is an account that there was a previous version of this solar system - as the body of incarnation for a profound spirit.

 

In that previous incarnation the over-lighting spirit was said to be learning about intelligence and energy.   That focus meant that the human souls formed at that stage had their spiritual practices focused on intelligent energy.

 

In this second version of the solar system the over-lighting spirit is learning right relationship.  That spirit is now often referred to by humans as a god of love.

 

Most of the human souls formed in the first solar system were brought over to continue their development.  Those souls are often reborn in Jewish and Han bloodlines - and have a head start in science and performing arts.

 

The group of human souls formed in this version of the solar system are learning right relationship - and finding it hard work.  Still, there is increasing recognition of human responsibilities for the planetary ecosystems.   Hopefully that recognition will extend to include other humans as well

 

Most of the human souls from the first version of the solar system have moved on to the new lessons.   A few even try learning what is required for the third solar system:  right intent

 

 

Who can test such propositions?    Easier to take vote!

 

 

 

 

I for one am not interested in testing a proposition  that more advanced souls are born into Judaism .  Nor t asking a vote on it . 

 

Ridiculous !  and   'there was an account'  and  'said to be '  etc etc .   We know what those phrases indicate !  

 

I mean  ... fer  goodness sakes !    

 

We are trying to get away from that sort of claim here ... aren't   we ? 

 

Imagine if I claimed the opposite , or claimed the same for some other religion  !  

[doc benway]

3 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

No ? 

 

No, my IT skills suck

 

3 hours ago, Nungali said:

Surely you   can understand this is a wacky policy  :     to ban people , allow them to sneak back, as long as they are then  behaved , yet to ban others and if they do not sneak back in they are permanently gone .... its encouraging and rewarding those that  sneak back  and punishes those that do not .   To me , that's  inconsistent  and obviously skew-if  (and the thing is I am pretty sure it was just off the top of one Mods head  as, again, when I asked is this was an official policy  I was given the diversive run around ... it pissed me off ! 

 

I can see why

 

3 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

 

So do I , they dealt with this issue  well, I thought.   What I was bitchin about was an old team tears back .    But it has been bought up again .... after a couple of months since last comment  ????    (or maybe you didn't read it before it got bumped ? )

 

I haven’t read much lately

 

3 hours ago, Nungali said:

Race doesn't exist . Regarding Judaism it is a religion and a culture .  If you want to get 'Old School' about it    Jews are 'racially' 'Semetic' but so are Arabs 

 

Agreed

 

3 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

a point I made above  and a question I asked  about, which itself seems to be interpreted as racism . 

 

Unfortunate, 

…it’s a sensitive subject for sure, for so many on both sides now (one of my favorite songs btw)

 

3 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

Of course it was a silly thread conspet and my reaction was to make a joke of it by posting great Aussie inventions .... like the meat pie and  Aussie rules  ( which is, I hope obviously, a joke ) and some other things .  ... ( 'Aussie; is not race either    ) 

 

I enjoyed those, 

 

3 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

 < sits back and waits for the misinterpretation and accusations

 

pass the pepitas

 

3 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

>   .....  not from you Doc , I give you more credit than that and think you can understand my meaning is found in the actual words I wrote .

 

 

 

Cheers

[Lairg]

4 hours ago, Nungali said:

I for one am not interested in testing a proposition  that more advanced souls are born into Judaism .

 

You may have misread my post.  I was referring to older souls, some of which are reborn in particular bloodlines. 

 

If you read between the lines you may have detected that the older souls are not necessarily adapting easily to the current objectives of this solar system.  Look around.

 

And I see that voting is the way to deal with cosmic realities.

 

 Such is life!

 

 

 

[-ꦥꦏ꧀ ꦱꦠꦿꦶꦪꦺꦴ-]

I’m gonna get my popcorn again

[silent thunder]

5 hours ago, Lairg said:

You may have misread my post.

Seems more likly that you've misread the board for the last 3 years and a month...

[Sherman Krebbs]

6 hours ago, Lairg said:

And I see that voting is the way to deal with cosmic realities.

 

I for one vote to close this thread.

[-ꦥꦏ꧀ ꦱꦠꦿꦶꦪꦺꦴ-]

2 hours ago, Sherman Krebbs said:

 

I for one vote to close this thread.

Good idea

[Apech]

On 23/03/2025 at 1:30 PM, rocala said:

James Clerk Maxwell was Jewish?????????????????????????

Scottish Christian.

[stirling]

10 hours ago, Lairg said:

You may have misread my post.  I was referring to older souls, some of which are reborn in particular bloodlines. 

 

If you read between the lines you may have detected that the older souls are not necessarily adapting easily to the current objectives of this solar system.  Look around.

 

And I see that voting is the way to deal with cosmic realities.

 

 Such is life!

 

In our discussion elsewhere about how one would prove such ideas - how would you know if any of that was true?

[Taomeow]

19 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

Race doesn't exist .

 

Interestingly, racism does.

 

19 hours ago, Nungali said:

Regarding Judaism it is a religion and a culture .  If you want to get 'Old School' about it    Jews are 'racially' 'Semetic' but so are Arabs , a point I made above  and a question I asked  about, which itself seems to be interpreted as racism . 

 

Historically, the term "Antisemitic" came to refer to the hatred and persecutions of Jews, Jewish culture, and Jewish religion -- not Arabs, Muslim culture, or Islam.  That's because there was no Arab diaspora until the late 19th century and the only semites Europeans ever had a chance to persecute were Jews, not Arabs.  Most Europeans hadn't ever seen an Arab since Spain gained back its independence from the Ottoman empire (edit: that was a blooper, I meant the Caliphate), and many hadn't seen one till the late 20th century.  Consequently antisemites are Jew haters, not Jews+Arabs haters.  (And "anti-Zionists" are rebranded antisemites.) 

 

  

Edited Monday at 05:54 PM by Taomeow

[Apech]

32 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

 

Interestingly, racism does.

 

 

Historically, the term "Antisemitic" came to refer to the hatred and persecutions of Jews, Jewish culture, and Jewish religion -- not Arabs, Muslim culture, or Islam.  That's because there was no Arab diaspora until the late 19th century and the only semites Europeans ever had a chance to persecute were Jews, not Arabs.  Most Europeans hadn't ever seen an Arab since Spain gained back its independence from the Ottoman empire, and many hadn't seen one till the late 20th century.  Consequently antisemites are Jew haters, not Jews+Arabs haters.  (And "anti-Zionists" are rebranded antisemites.) 

 

  

 

The Reconquista in Spain (and Portugal) was from the Arab Muslim Caliphate (not the Ottomans) which had ruled much of Iberia for centuries.  Also after this Barbary pirates raided the coast of northern Europe (and Italy) from 1500 onwards taking white slaves to the Ottoman Empire.  So there was plenty of contact with Islam in Europe throughout this period and then later of course in WWI when the Ottoman Empire was defeated.  Before that wars between the Eastern European states like Austria and Poland and the Ottomans were a regular occurrence.  

 

However the term antisemite was coined as you suggest as a euphemism for Jew hatred ... which was common and widespread in Christian Europe up until the present (for various spurious pretexts) it was the Holocaust which finally made it unacceptable. 

[Taomeow]

3 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

The Reconquista in Spain (and Portugal) was from the Arab Muslim Caliphate (not the Ottomans) which had ruled much of Iberia for centuries.  Also after this Barbary pirates raided the coast of northern Europe (and Italy) from 1500 onwards taking white slaves to the Ottoman Empire.  So there was plenty of contact with Islam in Europe throughout this period and then later of course in WWI when the Ottoman Empire was defeated.  Before that wars between the Eastern European states like Austria and Poland and the Ottomans were a regular occurrence.  

 

 

Right, I did mean the Caliphate -- I know what both are, just a momentary lapse of attention.  The persistent bringing up the point I've seen many times (most often amidst veiled -- or not -- antisemitic rants) that, what do you know, Arabs are also semites ergo there's no such thing as antisemitism-means-Jew-hatred may of course stem from some academic purism... 

[liminal_luke]

Fortunately for me, one need not know too much about the science or pseudoscience of race and culture, the migrations of large groups in 19th century Europe, or the karmic mechanics of reincarnation (which soul goes where) to express the fervent hope that we all get along.  It´s probably a rosy oversimplication, but I like to believe that people from all backgrounds are equal, that we´re all capable of doing everything, although it might be true (Steve´s brother notwithstanding) that white guys can´t dance.

[Apech]

6 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

Fortunately for me, one need not know too much about the science or pseudoscience of race and culture, the migrations of large groups in 19th century Europe, or the karmic mechanics of reincarnation (which soul goes where) to express the fervent hope that we all get along.  It´s probably a rosy oversimplication, but I like to believe that people from all backgrounds are equal, that we´re all capable of doing everything, although it might be true (Steve´s brother notwithstanding) that white guys can´t dance.

 
Fred Astaire??? Can’t dance???

[liminal_luke]

1 hour ago, Apech said:

 
Fred Astaire??? Can’t dance???

 

Of course, of course.  As a fan of the show So You Think You Can Dance?, I could research many more examples of white guys who can most definitely dance.  But "white guys can´t dance" is a phrase from popular culture (or at least I think it is), and I thought it would be funny.  Back to the comedic drawing board!

[silent thunder]

1 hour ago, Apech said:

 
Fred Astaire??? Can’t dance???

Not since he died...

[Lairg]

5 hours ago, stirling said:

In our discussion elsewhere about how one would prove such ideas - how would you know if any of that was true?

 

A good question.  

 

Experiments can be positive, negative or indeterminate.   A succession of positive experiments, particularly done with a witness, may encourage the view that a new conceptual framework would be more useful than the previous framework

 

The first issue is developing perceptual skills.  In the West we are taught that we have 5 senses, but obviously there are many more - for example sense of hope, sense of justice, sense of balance, common sense, sense of joy, sense of time, etc.

 

Indeed on every plane of existence it is possible to develop a wide range of senses, depending upon the quantity, quality and organization of the light-body substances of the human

 

So as those senses are developed it is possible to do experiments on those planes.

 

Here is a simple experiment:

 

- Speak out loud a statement you know to be true

- Speak out loud a statement you know to be false

 

Can you detect a difference in the sense of solidity?

 

There is a subtlety in that experiment.  The term "true" requires a reference.  A wall is true to a plumbline - but if gravity is disturbed in the locality, another reference is required.

 

So now the testing is really about what is true to what.

 

 

Edited Monday at 10:01 PM by Lairg

[Nungali]

15 hours ago, Lairg said:

 

You may have misread my post. 

 

Really? What I read was this ;  " Most of the human souls formed in the first solar system were brought over to continue their development.  Those souls are often reborn in Jewish and Han bloodlines - and have a head start in science and performing arts.

 

 

15 hours ago, Lairg said:

 

 

 

I was referring to older souls, some of which are reborn in particular bloodlines. 

 

AND  that they are often born in Jewish and Han bloodlines  ! 

 

I didn't ;misread' anything .    YOU claim a 'misread' by only explaining HALF of your sentence .  

 

really?  That's how you deal with things like this ? 

 

15 hours ago, Lairg said:

 

If you read between the lines you may have detected that the older souls are not necessarily adapting easily to the current objectives of this solar system.  Look around.

 

You claim a 'misread' on my part  from what IS written and then encourage me to 'read' what isn't written ? 

 

Yo getting deeper in the poo the more you try to wiggle out ! 

 

 

 

15 hours ago, Lairg said:

 

And I see that voting is the way to deal with cosmic realities.

 

 Such is life!

 

 

 

 

Such is your life .   

[Nungali]

5 hours ago, Taomeow said:

 

Interestingly, racism does.

 

Indeed, I already went through that on p, 3  (  its a social political construct )  in answer to rails saying race does not exist .  

 

 

5 hours ago, Taomeow said:

 

 

Historically, the term "Antisemitic" came to refer to the hatred and persecutions of Jews, Jewish culture, and Jewish religion -- not Arabs, Muslim culture, or Islam.  That's because there was no Arab diaspora until the late 19th century and the only semites Europeans ever had a chance to persecute were Jews, not Arabs.  Most Europeans hadn't ever seen an Arab since Spain gained back its independence from the Ottoman empire (edit: that was a blooper, I meant the Caliphate), and many hadn't seen one till the late 20th century.  Consequently antisemites are Jew haters, not Jews+Arabs haters.  (And "anti-Zionists" are rebranded antisemites.) 

 

  

 

Its even more complicated . I  ventured towards this earlier in the thread but decided  to leave it out ( and I mentioned that ) as it seemed  fraught  with  nasty current affairs potentials  : 

 

" 

 I was questioning why other Semites are now left out of the definition    ( I have since researched and found out though ..... 'interesting' ! ) .

 

Regarding this modern 'censored' and politically motivated new definition of the term leads into the current situation,  The only thing I will comment on that , from an historical point of view,  there have been decisions made by bodies that where not entitled to make them,  movements and migrations 'outside of contract' ,   a whole lot of 'might is right' , decisions made with entitlement ... that where not followed or breached ... to go further I would have to take it from 'history'   to   'current events'    . " 

[Nungali]

4 hours ago, Taomeow said:

 

Right, I did mean the Caliphate -- I know what both are, just a momentary lapse of attention.  The persistent bringing up the point I've seen many times (most often amidst veiled -- or not -- antisemitic rants) that, what do you know, Arabs are also semites ergo there's no such thing as antisemitism-means-Jew-hatred may of course stem from some academic purism... 

 

EH ????   

 

Ergo  ( to me )  it (anti-Semitism)  means   any one that shows anti  ..... anything ..... to all of them .  When a Jew is persecuting an Arab, that is anti-Semitism .   And I certainly  see there is such a thing as that - on both sides  ... which is weird as   as far as human relationships go , both groups are virtually siblings ! 

 

 ( yeah, I know, I am weird )  

[Nungali]

2 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

 

Of course, of course.  As a fan of the show So You Think You Can Dance?, I could research many more examples of white guys who can most definitely dance.  But "white guys can´t dance" is a phrase from popular culture (or at least I think it is), and I thought it would be funny.  Back to the comedic drawing board!

 

Now now ......   don't be racist Luke ! 

 

 

 

we know some white guys can dance very well ...