A glimpse of life under the Sharia from Iran: the demise of Iran's wine industry. Yes, you read that right: Iran's wine industry. From The Guardian, with thanks to Sir Percy:
The desolate vista resembles an archaeological ruin, or the shattered aftermath of a devastating military bombardment. Once-proud mud-brick homes are uninhabited and partially reduced to rubble. The streets, mere dirt tracks, are potholed and rutted. Identifiable signs of human activity are - for the most part - absent. And even among the dead in the local graveyard, many headstones, bearing elaborate carvings that hint at a long-gone affluence, are damaged or visibly uncared for.But this is not a war zone. And the life that bustled here disappeared, not thousands of years ago, but within the last generation, shrivelled almost out of existence under the stern new order of Iran's Islamic revolution. This is Khollar, an isolated, once-thriving small town set in a valley amid the Zagros mountains. It stands - though only just - as a salutary example of a world disappeared, swept out of existence by an oceanic wave of political and social change.
Despite the aura of abandonment, around 250 people still live here, somehow squeezing an income from sources such as sheep farming. Before the revolution in 1979, there were several thousand. They were sustained by Iran's long-defunct wine industry.
A verdant landscape of grape plants dominating the surrounding hillsides was picked assiduously and its fruit loaded onto trucks to be transported to a refinery in Shiraz, about 40 miles away, where it was turned into wine. The refinery's Jewish owners sold their produce on the domestic market and abroad, where it gained an international reputation.
"Ten to 20 trucks a day would come in seven days a week during the summer months. It was a very busy town," said Ravanbakhsh Vaseghi, 37, whose father and grandfather earned their living selling grapes to the Shiraz wine merchants. "Before the revolution, I remember friends coming back from Dubai with a bottle of wine. The label was marked 'Khollar, Shiraz, Iran.' Red and white wines were produced from here. It was part of life. The change was sudden."
It was wrought by the revolution, with its strict injunctions against alcohol. The Shiraz refinery was closed. Where it once stood, a sports centre is now being built for employees of the local telecommunications company. The lorries that had guaranteed Khollar a basic level of prosperity stopped coming when the refinery shut. Gradually, the population drifted away in search of new livelihoods....
Ever resourceful and independent of mind, Khollar's few remaining denizens have nonetheless found a way to continue their proud tradition. They do so by pouring freshly squeezed grape juice into clay pots, which are then placed in freshly dug ditches before being covered with sheep droppings to aid fermentation and, coincidentally, escape the eyes of any law enforcement authorities who might have occasion to visit. If they ever do, their detection skills might not stretch to unearthing the illicit alcohol. But they may observe that, shorn of its previous inhabitants and cut off from its time-honoured source of income, Khollar lacks something generally deemed essential in contemporary Iran - a proper mosque.
Read it all.
Awake! for Morning in the Bowl of Night
Has flung the Stone that puts the Stars to Flight :
And Lo! the Hunter of the East has caught
The Sultán's Turret in a Noose of Light.
Dreaming when Dawn's Left Hand was in the Sky
I heard a Voice within the Tavern cry,
"Awake, my Little ones, and fill the Cup
Before Life's Liquor in its Cup be dry."
And, as the Cock crew, those who stood before
The Tavern shouted - "Open then the Door!
You know how little while we have to stay,
And, once departed, may return no more."
Now the New Year reviving old Desires,
The thoughtful Soul to Solitude retires,
Where the WHITE HAND OF MOSES on the Bough
Puts out, and Jesus from the Ground suspires.
Iram indeed is gone with all its Rose
And Jamshýd's Sev'n-ring'd Cup where no one knows;
But still the Vine her ancient Ruby yields,
And still a Garden by the Water blows.
And David's Lips are lock't; but in divine
High piping Pehleví, with "Wine! Wine! Wine!
Red Wine!" - the Nightingale cries to the Rose
That yellow Cheek of hers to incarnadine.
Come, fill the Cup, and in the Fire of Spring
The Winter Garment of Repentance fling :
The Bird of Time has but a little way
To fly - and Lo! the Bird is on the Wing.
And look a thousand Blossoms with the day
Woke - and a thousand scatter'd into clay :
And this first Summer Month that brings the Rose
Shall take Jamshýd and Kaikobád away.
But come with old Khayyám, and leave the Lot
Of Kaikobád and Kaikhosrú forgot :
Let Rustum lay about him as he will,
Or Hátim Tai cry Supper - heed them not.
With me along some Strip of Herbage strown
That just divides the desert from the sown,
Where name of Slave and Sultán scarce is known,
And pity Sultán Mahmud on his Throne.
Here with a Loaf of Bread beneath the Bough,
A Flask of Wine, a Book of Verse - and Thou
Beside me singing in the Wilderness -
And Wilderness is Paradise enow.
The product of the best kind of East-West "dialogue of civilisations" above -- that which resulted from the collaboration of Omar Khayyam and Edward FitzGerald -- shows to Western readers how little infused with the spirit, how contrary to the dour spirit, of Islamic ideology was Omar Khayyam, Persian poet and astronomer. Not just the wine, though that is the matter under discussion, but the women and song, and everything.
And that goes for the rest of Persian poetry as well. Firdowsi's Shahnameh, which sang of pre-Islamic rulers, helped to preserve, so it is believed in Iran, the Persian language from the insidious arabization that always accompanies islamization. Hafiz, Sa'adi -- the poets favored by Vartan Gregorian, who continues to resist seeing Islam clearly, the way his friend Vahakh Dadrian attepts to make him. For if he did, it would not only not fit his carefully-woven willing-to-please let's-look-on-the-bright-side and-what-is-best-in-every-land view, which might be spoiled, might even backdatedly embitter, childhood memories of Tabriz that he prefers to see through rose-petalled glasses with the lenses ground in Gulistan.
We know what Khayyam thought about those who "sigh for the Prophet's Paradise to come," and how he adamantly refused to "heed the rumble of a distant Drum." Iranians true to the spirit of Khayyam rather than that of Khomeini should throw off, as best they can, the Arab-inflicted shackles, manacles, Rules and Total Regulations of Dour, Dim, Grim, Simply Unpleasant, and Unpleasant-In-All-Respects Islam.
Score another one for the Religion of Poverty.
Are the Europeans taking note? It'll be sad to see all those involved in the beer/wine industry lose their jobs and the states lose those tax revenues when Europe is islamized. A pity.
Just don't come begging for foreign aid from the U.S., Japan or Australia when it happens.
Score another one for the Religion of Poverty.
Are the Europeans taking note? It'll be sad to see all those jobs lost in the beer/wine industry once Europe is islamized. All the tax revenues, imports, all gone. Sigh.
Just don't come begging for foreign aid.
"They do so by pouring freshly squeezed grape juice into clay pots, which are then placed in freshly dug ditches before being covered with sheep droppings to aid fermentation"
Sheep droppings?! Thanks, but no thanks.
"Sheep droppings"? That wasn't in the wine-making skit on "I Love Lucy" that I saw.
Sheep droppings is a good Yorkshire Ale, from the Olde Ramme Brewerie. A bit like Old Pequlier, but with added hallucinogens.
Yeah, sheep droppings.
More intellectual honesty of a developing trend in the US.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1195568,00.html
so, KT,
whaddya think about the demise of the Iranian wine industry? A good thing? A bad thing? Ambivalent? Indifferent?... Why?
del: "whaddya think about the demise of the Iranian wine industry? A good thing? A bad thing? Ambivalent? Indifferent?... Why?"
King: I think its terrible. I do not nor ever did support radical fundamentalism of any sort. I also recognize that no matter what sort of radicalism is in charge the outcome is he same: oppression. I point out Christian fundamentalism to show that it is also a problem and many Christians in my own state work dialy to reduce or even remove alcohol consumption through legislation and other means.
The fact that there was a thriving wine industry in Iran is testimony that moderation is possible and we must all work together to change the swamp from which radical Islam comes. And no, its not the religion as a whole....
KT, I would rather have some them as neighbors than someone who believes in martyrdom and that great whorehouse in the sky.
jay
Hugh:
Re: "That wasn't in the wine-making skit on "I Love Lucy" that I saw. "
That's good. Geez - even I remember that episode - time flys by! Weren't they on a trip through Italy and didn't it invlove grape stomping - very much grape stomping?
Ironic isn't it that the wine that most identifies Australian producers (at least to those outside Australia) is Shiraz. Let's see, Australia and sheep. Hmmm.
Granny's posted the Rubaiyat of Omar Kayyam, I've got a loaf of bread; anyone got a bottle of 1978 Khollar Shiraz?
I point out Christian fundamentalism to show that it is also a problem and many Christians in my own state work dialy to reduce or even remove alcohol consumption through legislation and other means.
OMG! And beheadings are just "boys will be boys", yea, those terrible Christians are just as bad as jihadis
/do I really need it?
a sad tale from iran, but, glad to say, the murree brewery company, rawalpindi, rocks on! producing excellent beer, and a nice line in malts. zindabad, i say.
Just as bad?
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Announcement/510060835.htm
Hmmmmm,
http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/VernonRichards51012.htm
A bit like Old Peculier, but with added hallucinogens.
Cheers!
What a coincidence. I've just been out for a delicious supper accompanied by a bottle of (Australian) Shiraz. But I didn't think the grape came from Iran - I thought it was from France, where it's called Syrah. At least I thought they were the same grape.
Either way, wine, well alchohol really, is one of the many 'avenues of pleasure' as Basil Fawlty would say, which Islam would close off. In fact I can't think of many things that make my life enjoyable that Islam would allow.
What if Lebanon gets more and more Islamized? I had some excellent food and wine there. Could this be the end of Chateau Musar?
"I point out Christian fundamentalism to show that it is also a problem and many Christians in my own state work dialy to reduce or even remove alcohol consumption through legislation and other means."
KT, PLEASE...
Have you read the U.S. Constitution? We tried that pointless endeavor--banning alcohol (they called it Prohibition)--by amending the Constitution. Only to have to reverse the stupidness with another amendment.
Besides, "many Christians in my own state" does not equal the "Mullahs running the Iran." They only adequate analogy would be the judicial, executive and legislative branches of the U.S. government dismantling the wine industry.
What is it called, Hugh? When they shoot back in their whiny little way "You do it, tooooo! Boo hoo!" Tu quoque, I think?
Carolyn2: "yea, those terrible Christians are just as bad as jihadis"
King: Once again you've managed to only capture a zephyr of what I'm trying to say. Allow me to frame this human rights stuff for you in a different way, without all of your anti Islamic bombast.
Let's for a second consdier Burma, aka Myanmar. There has been internal strife there since the UK pulled out in 1948, destablizing yet another country and another region allowing a vacuum for civil war. (The UK has a rather nasty history of screwing up and destablizing its former occupied nations, eh?) Yet, in your parochial and often bigoted posts, you never, ever, never bring up or discuss the strife and brutality felt in other parts of the world, presumably beacause there are no Muslims there for you to bitch about!
"Read it all"
http://www.cfob.org/HistoryofBurma/historyOfBurma.shtml
http://www.uusc.org/pdf/4pBurma2004.pdf
Sheep droppings,
Now THAT'S what I call bouquet.
KT,
"...since the UK pulled out in 1948..."
um, not even close.
3812Michelle: "They only adequate analogy would be the judicial, executive and legislative branches of the U.S. government dismantling the wine industry."
King: It is illegal for me to have wine shipped to me, in my state, for my consumption, from California since my state does not allow it. Close enough.
3812Michelle: "Have you read the U.S. Constitution? We tried that pointless endeavor--banning alcohol..."
King: Uh, yeah. It failed since it was an oppressive, back-handed appeasement to the Christians who saw alcohol as the root of all civil and social evils. This is no different in Iran or any other state ruled under an extreme Islamic agenda where alcohol is outlawed. My point is, once again, fundamentalist Christians would love nothing more than to have the booze dry up for everyone, all of the gay's keisters sewn up and all people in church in Sunday at 10:00 AM sharp....or else. Deny this and you are being completely dishonest. We, in America, keep this at bay and the fight is often difficult. I only wish that the Arab world can rid itself once and for all of the tyrranical extremists that rule some of them so they can all live as peaceful Muslims.
KingTolerance,
I really don't understand your reasoning in picking a fight with Christians on every thread. When the Christians actually propose something in legislative form, or kill someone, then it becomes relevant. Trying to equate a global jihad with a position paper from a single state's Republican Party isn't like apples and oranges, it's like apples and black holes.
Fundamentalist Christians are contained by democracy, the U.S. Constitution, an independent secular judiciary, and separation of powers in the United States. Your obsession seems to prevent you from making simple distinctions.
Let's for a second consdier Burma, aka Myanmar
you never, ever, never bring up or discuss the strife and brutality felt in other parts of the world, presumably beacause there are no Muslims there for you to bitch about!
I assume that there are roving bands of Baptists raping and pillaging Burma....maybe Methodists?
/And yes, I am being sarcastic
There just are not any equal atrocities being committed by Christians, in present day.( and don't go all the way back to the Crusades to name one)
"My point is, once again, fundamentalist Christians would love nothing more than to have the booze dry up for everyone, all of the gay's keisters sewn up and all people in church in Sunday at 10:00 AM sharp....or else. Deny this and you are being completely dishonest. "
I live in a blue state so where exactly are fundamentalist Christians lobbying for legislation to ban alcohol? Considering that Christ's first miracle was turning water into wine at the wedding feast in Cana, that he passed a cup of wine around at the Last Supper, that Paul encourages to have wine with dinner, the "fundamentalists" who should know their own Bible, don't have a Biblical leg to stand on.
On the other hand, they do have a legitimate beef with and Biblical commands to avoid "drunkenness." I don't particularly care for drunks, especially the ones who get behind the wheel of a car or try to operate heavy equipment? Do you?
As far as sewing up keisters, yikes. I do think that some Christians unrealistically believe that you can teach someone to become straight. A shame but their own mantra is "love the sinner, hate the sin."
And why would Christians think that Christ would be happy with a church full of hypocrites at 10:00 a.m. Sunday morning? First of all, Christ doesn't expect most of the people in this world to follow him. And "the church" that Christ is returning for is "the body of believers" (even those ones who silently believer that Christ is Savior and Son of God and still have to go a mosque) not a building full of bodies.
The only thing these "fundamental Christians" that you claim are about to interfere with your right to hoist one is to be
hit over the head with a Bible, after they get hit over the head with a bottle of Shiraz.
" I only wish that the Arab world can rid itself once and for all of the tyrranical extremists that rule some of them so they can all live as peaceful Muslims."
Ah. So the imams of islam, then, are not preaching peace at present.
Thanks.
Prophet Geoff
BBUH
What a sad story. Another bit of history & human spirit and creativity crushed by Islam. I will have to remember to thank the Persians every time I enjoy a glass of Shiraz.
Shiraz/Syrah - same grape. The Shiraz was brought to France by a returning Crusader, if I'm not mistaken. It was renamed Syrah. And Oz got its Shiraz vines from France. Not sure why we went with the original name versus the French one, but I'm glad we did. Fabulous wine. I've got a few bottles of 1998, 2001 and 2002 Barossa Valley & McLaren Vale Shiraz tucked away. They've rated very well and should be amazing in a few years time.
Re the fermentation process using sheep droppings - makes sense. Ever get a load of sheep manure for the garden? It stays warm forever.
Beagle: "I really don't understand your reasoning in picking a fight with Christians on every thread."
King: I know you don't and that's part of the issue here. I do not 'pick fights' with Christians, rather, I simply point out that Christianity is certainly able to be applied in an extreme fashion and I site one example after the other. Christianity, in particular, has one bloody history which seems to be hypocritically glossed over around here.
Beagle: "Fundamentalist Christians are contained by democracy, the U.S. Constitution, an independent secular judiciary, and separation of powers in the United States."
King: You are being rather parochial. Fundamentalist Christians are contained by the diligence of a secular movement who must challenge each and every fundamentalist move to change or impose legislation to suit their radical agenda. Many Americans do not realize that their freedoms come perilously close to being eroded by these nuts. I am active in this cause and ironically enough, I fight side by side with many other religious folks who wish to keep religion out of politics.
Carolyn2: "There just are not any equal atrocities being committed by Christians, in present day.( and don't go all the way back to the Crusades to name one)"
King: OK! Radical Southern Christians used the Bible to 'support' their use of slaves in the U.S. KKK members burned the cross to terrorize blacks and then lynch them, often while singing hymnals. Of course, these racist freaks were not speaking for Christianity as a whole, but they did behave under the guise of their religion, exactly like radical Muslims do today.
Re:
"The UK has a rather nasty history of screwing up and destablizing its former occupied nations, eh?"
Yeah - like Singapore, Hong Kong, India, various Caribbean nations (Jamaica and Guyana excepted). Of course it was the UK that screwed up Zimbabwe - not Mugabe.
3812Michelle: "I live in a blue state so where exactly are fundamentalist Christians lobbying for legislation to ban alcohol?"
King: I live in PA. While an outright 'ban' on alcohol will never happen, the Christian groups are managing to make obtaining a liquor license difficult and lavishly expensive ($250,000 for a bar to buy a license). This is a statewide joke here and attempts to modernize our liquor laws have been met with and funded by a strong Christian fundemantalist opposition.
3812Michelle: "On the other hand, they do have a legitimate beef with and Biblical commands to avoid "drunkenness."
King: Great - they shouldn't drink and keep their Biblical commands to themselves. Same goes for the Muslims with the same issues.
3812Michelle: "I don't particularly care for drunks, especially the ones who get behind the wheel of a car or try to operate heavy equipment? Do you?"
King: Nope.
3812Michelle: "And why would Christians think that Christ would be happy with a church full of hypocrites at 10:00 a.m. Sunday morning?"
King: Dunno. You tell me.
Goeff: "Ah. So the imams of islam, then, are not preaching peace at present."
King: You are 100% right, all knowing and master of reading into the most subtle crevice of any post. Why, oh, why can't we all be like you O Imam/Prophet and person who treats all Muslims good in general??
KT:
The issue--before you digressed--was the disappearance of an industry. You have admitted it yourself: "an outright 'ban' on alcohol will never happen." You have argued a tangent, not the main point. That something is more expensive does not make it endangered.
You didn't mention where the legislation to get everyone to church on Sundays at 10 a.m. is being proposed. Evidence, please. Otherwise, more hot air from you.
You're right about not drinking if you can't keep yourself from becoming drunk. It is a command for Christians. But when you write:
"King: Great - they shouldn't drink and keep their Biblical commands to themselves. Same goes for the Muslims with the same issues," are you saying it's okay for all others to be drunks in public? (And no, I don't give a rat's ass hot riproaring drunk any adult gets in his home.)
Well, King Tolerance, you have given us a link to the Guardian, which purports to analyze local politics in Harris County (Houston), Texas.
I happen to know something about that, having served as a city councilman thereabouts some years ago, starting the practice of law in that vicinity, and knowing a few of the players.
The Guardian article is about 15 percent truth, and about 60 percent innuendo posing as analysis. The rest is just sheep droppings.
Yes, there are a lot of Christians in that area of Texas, and, in fact, throughout the region. Texas is recognized as the western end of the "Bible Belt" of the American South. Texas is a large state, bringing together elements of the Great Plains of the MidWest, elements of the Southwest desert country, the Gulf Coast prairies and marshes, the Mexican bordelands, and the East Texas piney woodlands. All of these areas have their own cultural identities. The major cities of Dallas, Houston, and Austin are very cosmopolitan. Some of the smaller cities are more cosmopolitan than you would at first believe, and the wealthier citizens in those small towns are as likely to shop in New York as in Dallas.
There are lots of Christians in Texas. Lots of Baptists of various hues. Methodists and other Protestants. I suppose you could even classify most of the wetback Mexicans as Christians, coming as they do from an area dominated by the Catholic Church for so long. But a few of them practice a religion called Santaria, a witchcraft type of thing with blood and chicken bones and, well, I guess elements of Mayan sacrifice. But we tolerate that as long as they don't butcher a college student or two, as happens from time to time.
We also, now, apparently, will get a few more voo-doo practitioners from Louisiana. These are colorful, descended from black africa through the Carribean islands, mostly Haiti and Jamaica and Dominica. We tolerate them, too. In small towns, high school football seems to be the major religion. It is taken very seriously.
The Harris County area mentioned in the Guardian article IS largely Republican. It's not a matter of religious fundamentalism, so much as a maturing of the electorate, as the religious fundamentalism has ALWAYS been here. In fact, the argument could be made that religion has been generally on the decline over the last fifty years, as public sales of "liquor-by-the-drink" was not legal until around 1970.
More importantly, however, Harris County doesn't have an entrenched welfare state, like the one that has been exposed by the hurricane in the perpetually corrupt State of Louisiana. The Democratic Party, which used to be everyone in Harris County, ran out of intellectual and political power beginning when Reagan was elected in 1980, having spent its last ounce of strength supporting Jimmy Carter (he of the Iranian hostage mess). The liberals have nothing to say and nothing to offer. There are no Democratic elected judges left in the County, except for a couple of Justices of the Peace, who are elected in non-county-wide precincts, largely by minority constituents (i.e., the blacks).
Texas does not have a state or local income tax, and relatively few local taxing authorities. What is the situation in Pennsylvania? You will find a state income tax, some city income taxes, and dozens of taxing authorities, with very little efficiency in collection. Every two-bit politician has a hand out, and the unions are there to get their cut. Hand in glove.
Your complaint about not being able to import California wines by mail is not going to be the fault of the Christians, however much you may like to think so. Control over the liquor industry and distribution is always a hotly fought contest between competing interests, with the government being a primary player due to its tax revenues. If you can get the government out of the liquor business, you will see prices fall and the market open up. Regulated businesses (although they may squawk) develop a cozy relationship with the regulators, and don't want to give it up.
Your ability to import wine would deny the state its taxes from the local retail level, which I would hazard to guess are not negligible. The wholesalers and bonded distributors have a vested interest, too.) And the fact that licenses for bars are so expensive is going to be due to the fact that existing bars don't want to open themselves up to more competition. (This was exactly the same situation with Taxicab medallions in New York and some other major cities). If the existing bars allign themselves with some christians to vote "no" then what's the problem? Big business? Christianity or Democracy? Or voting? Or, is it the ability to tolerate a pluralism, or an outcome, with which you don't happen to agree?
The Guardian is off the mark. Yes, there are Christian fundamentalists in Harris County and throughout Texas. Waco is the home of Baylor University, a Baptist School. Dallas has Southern Methodist University. But, there are also thriving jewish communities, especially in Houston and Dallas. The retailing industries were practically built by them. Neiman's, Sakowitz, Battlestein's, Weingarten. But to attribute Republican success at the polls to the Guardian's innuendo-based characterization of the population there as a bunch of rapture-ready, end-of-the-worlder's is just a lot of crap. And even if it were true, so what? Texas can't start a war 'cause it doesn't have an army. (Well, we do, but they wear coonskin caps and shoot muzzle-loading muskets on Texas Independence Day, and everyone has the rank of Colonel.)
On the other hand, we do have the Texas Rangers. When Mexicans were crossing the border to steal cattle around the turn of the century, the Rangers chased and killed a bunch of them, took the bodies back to Mexico and dumped them in the public square with a sign to tell 'em who did this. That stopped the rustling for a while. By World War II the Rangers had such a reputation that it did get Hitler's personal attention when the Rangers all volunteered to "Go to Germany" and kill that boot-lickin' little corporal. But I digress.
Why does the Guardian get bent out of shape if a Texan expresses solidarity with Israel? Why does the Guardian find it necessary to ridicule a person or a party or a religion that sees a problem developing which the Guardian would rather ignore? Hypocrisy, pure and simple.
Anybody who has ever been quoted by a newspaper, or been interviewed by a reporter about events they have witnessed, will understand that a newspaper ALMOST NEVER gets it right, even when they seem to be trying. And the Guardian has such an axe to grind, and a political position to maintain, that nobody should even think for a minute that he or she will be getting an objective view in that paper.
So, please, KT, spare us the references to the Guardian stuff about Texas. They don't know squat. Texas is a different place, but not like the Guardian would have it. We chill our beer and put ice in our whiskey and clean our guns on Sunday after church.
So, spare us the stuff about Christians, too. Christianity's transgressions are just that, transgressions. The faults are not the orthodoxy. Never were. Not like islam. And understand that Christianity, in spite of all the faults of all its sinners and fallen humanity, still ASPIRES and STRIVES to do better. So, just be tolerant if you can. If you can.
Back to the original thread - "End of the Vine." What a shame - a demonstration of how Islam kills everything in its path.
Texan: "So, please, KT, spare us..."
King: After reading your self-discrediting racist diatribe I think its safe to wave you on through:
Texan: "I suppose you could even classify most of the wetback Mexicans as Christians"
Texan: "We also, now, apparently, will get a few more voo-doo practitioners from Louisiana. These are colorful, descended from black africa through the Carribean islands, mostly Haiti and Jamaica and Dominica. We tolerate them, too"
Texan: "The retailing industries were practically built by them. [Jews] Neiman's, Sakowitz, Battlestein's, Weingarten."
Texan: "When Mexicans were crossing the border to steal cattle around the turn of the century..."
Texan through and through. I think the Guardian got it about right.
del: "whaddya think about the demise of the Iranian wine industry? A good thing? A bad thing? Ambivalent? Indifferent?... Why?"
King: "I think its terrible. I do not nor ever did support radical fundamentalism of any sort."
That must be why you dragged the thread off target into something unrelated. Rightie-o. You get on with your "dialy" internet activities.
I loved this admission by the troll:
King: "You are 100% right, all knowing and master of reading into the most subtle crevice of any post. Why, oh, why can't we all be like you O Imam/Prophet who treats all Muslims good in general??"
You can. You just have to plug in the round thing between your ears. Accept the call of my faith, KingIntolerance! and 72 hours of unharassed postings shall be yours.
The "general" misquote is funny. Kind of last resort of a troll, I think. What comes after denial? (Hint: it's not misspelling) First, I didn't write that, second, you mistook the meaning of the person who actually did. (LOL on both counts!)
It's ok. I hear that mistaken meaning is really very popular among moderates who suddenly turn into radicals. Perhaps you're merely as susceptible as they?
And somehow - it's not the religion as a whole? Ok. That must be why Christian liquor stores get burned down in Iraq and other islamic countries, and why the most the evil Christians ever amounted to here was a legal ban. Total coincidence. Peas in a pod. Sure.
Again - I'm laughing at you.
Prophet Geoff
BBUH
Imam/Propeht/Geoff/BBUH: "Again - I'm laughing at you."
King: Great! Enjoy finding those spelling errors while you "LOL" and feel misquoted! Maybe you'll come up with another sign off that's kinder, "in general" to Muslims.
Taunt as you will, my good man, and add another acronym to your posts.
Texan through and through.
That is a compliment.
Radical Southern Christians used the Bible to 'support' their use of slaves in the U.S. KKK members burned the cross to terrorize blacks and then lynch them, often while singing hymnals. Of course, these racist freaks were not speaking for Christianity as a whole, but they did behave under the guise of their religion, exactly like radical Muslims do today.
That is just horsefeathers...I have knownsome of these racists and not one of them is a Christian. They may identify themselves as some vague sort of small *c* Christian, but they do not follow Jesus, nor are they "led by the Spirit of Jesus". Just because someone says they are Christian doesn't make it so. The proof is in the "pudding".
Carolyn2: "I have known some of these racists and not one of them is a Christian. They may identify themselves as some vague sort of small *c* Christian, but they do not follow Jesus, nor are they "led by the Spirit of Jesus". Just because someone says they are Christian doesn't make it so. The proof is in the "pudding"."
King: Finally, you arrive at my point in all of this. Let me bring it home to you "Puddin'".
You slander Islam and all of its followers based on people who behave in the most unreligious, ruthless, criminal fashion, just as the racist "christians" did in the 1950's and 1960's. Terrorists and other jihadists who purport to be devout Muslims but are criminals and thugs first and they support their politically motiviated behaviors with their scripture, just like the racists who burned crosses and lynched Blacks while they sang hymns. Of course those people were not true Christians, that's my point! Of course terrorists and other criminals are not true representitives of Muslims, that's my point!
Insisting that its the reliiong and nuttin' but the religion, as you do, solves nothing and exposes you as parochial.
KT: "Great! Enjoy finding those spelling errors"
I do. It either marks you as much less educated than you infer, or as someone with a more passing association with the English language, which is suggestive.
KT: "while you "LOL" and feel misquoted!"
Ah, almost right. WAS misquoted. Feel no reprimand for it, however - I expect no better.
KT: "Maybe you'll come up with another sign off that's kinder, "in general" to Muslims."
Or you, "in general", to non-muslims. Or maybe you could answer any one of my questions. Sometime. Not on Fridays; I know you're busy then.
KT: "Taunt as you will, my good man, and add another acronym to your posts."
Will do.
Geoff
Literary Regicist
Imam/Prophet/Geoff/BBUDH/LR: "Or maybe you could answer any one of my questions."
King: I've played with your psychotic questions at your expense in another thread. Perhaps you'll see it as you forage for spelling errors.
Imam/Prophet/Geoff/BBUDH/LR: "It either marks you as much less educated than you infer, or as someone with a more passing association with the English language, which is suggestive."
King: Naw. Its just that I am a sloppy, fast typer and I really do not care if my spelling impresses you or not. Never did. Besides, if this is what you choose to perseverate on, that means you're really, really hard up and just looking for a quarrelsome game of slap and tickle.
2 entries found for regicide.
reg·i·cide ( P ) Pronunciation Key (rj-sd)
n.
The killing of a king.
One who kills a king
Ha Ha Very good, Geoff.
Carolyn,
I have always wondered what the cross had to do with the KKK.
I mean cross-burning it is not something that christians would do, but I've heard this one often, among many other weird "arguments" from the Mohammedans.
Another, rather astonishing Tu Coque 'argument' is that Nazi-Germany, even Hitler, was somehow rooted in Christianity.
One would have to be totally clueless about the Nihilism of the Nazis, of Hitler himself, who, much more than Stalin, vehemently hated Christianity, and Nazi-ism with the Swastika was in fact a new cult, a pseudo-religion, somewhere rooted in Wotans Walhalla.
Unfortunately the soldiers of Allah, the likes of KT and other trolls who post here, they wouldn't know how to make this distinction.
King [in]tolerant:
You are a typical anti-Christian bigot. Some Christians are opposed to alcohol but most are not. The orgins of the prohibition movement were in the confluence of the feminist and social responsibility movements and not biblically base per se. During the 19th Century, drunkeness was a serious social problem, much more then it is today although drugs and alcohol are a still a major social problem. The vast majority of Christians, including good old Southern Baptists drink. The Bzyantines drink vodka and slivowitz, the Romans drink whiskey,the Episcopalians are into wine and cheese and of course we Lutherans honor Pastor Martin, a beer brewery himself, by consuming large quantities of malt beverage when ever we have the chance. So why don't you just sit down and shut up.
jerry: "So why don't you just sit down and shut up."
King: Nice to meet you too!
sheik: "I have always wondered what the cross had to do with the KKK."
King: You should! Aferall, your moniker is dripping with racism & bigotry. "Mami" was commonly used by whites to insult the accent of Blacks. Sheik is obvioulsy you being obnoxious towards Muslims. Put the two together and you have irrelevance.
For your edification, racist bigot:
http://www.ferris.edu/htmls/news/jimcrow/mammies/
King [in]Tolerant:
In my experience the primary characteristic of the left is the deire to be "High School cool." You really don't believe half the stuff you spout nor are you all that comfortable around abborent sexuality or minorities. To you practicing Christians are the height of uncoolishness. Why they don't drink (says you) are racist, and probably only "do it" in the missionary positon. But the reality is quite different. While the tolerant cool people like did nothing but run your mouth about how Bush screwed up in New Orleans those teetotaling, racist white Texans took in those poor blacks from New Orleans and gave them food, clothing and shelter. So these Christians may not be cool but they are adults.
So King, sit down, shut up and grow up.
Kingky, you got it wrong again:
Its Sheik Yer'mami with one 'm'. Think about it!
"Racism" coming from you (!) is nothing other than the "accuse the accuser..." game.
Try to be creative, or am I asking too much?
Jerry: "You really don't believe half the stuff you spout nor are you all that comfortable around abborent sexuality or minorities. "
King: Whah?
Jerry: "Why they don't drink (says you) are racist, and probably only "do it" in the missionary positon."
King: I'm lost.
Jerry: "While the tolerant cool people like did nothing but run your mouth about how Bush screwed up in New Orleans those teetotaling, racist white Texans took in those poor blacks from New Orleans and gave them food, clothing and shelter. So these Christians may not be cool but they are adults."
King: A Bush apologist. What a surprise. Aren't we getting a bit presumptuous assuming everyone who helped in Texas is a "cool" Christian? I think there were many other "cool" persuations who chipped in, including Muslims, Jews, Hindus, etc.
jerry: "So King, sit down, shut up and grow up."
King: If you are going to step up to the plate, Jerry, please at least try to stay on the same planet. Abborent sexuality? Missionary position? High school cool? I think somebody is stuck in their Junior year at Orange County High .
"Its Sheik Yer'mami with one 'm'. Think about it!"
King: I have. You're racist. Creativity not needed. Anything else or shall we continue with the usual invective?
King [in]Tolerant:
You are so stupid you don't even know when some one is jerking your chain.
3812Michelle: "They only adequate analogy would be the judicial, executive and legislative branches of the U.S. government dismantling the wine industry."
King: It is illegal for me to have wine shipped to me, in my state, for my consumption, from California since my state does not allow it. Close enough.
However, it *IS* within your power to agitate politically to have that law changed or to challenge in the courts. A world of difference.
3812Michelle: "Have you read the U.S. Constitution? We tried that pointless endeavor--banning alcohol..."
King: Uh, yeah. It failed since it was an oppressive, back-handed appeasement to the Christians who saw alcohol as the root of all civil and social evils.
No, KT, it was an Amendment to the US Constitution. Before you dismiss it, I would suggest you refresh you memory as to what it takes to pass such an Amendment. It has to pass the legislature, the President and then be ratified by I belief three quarters of the states. This was not some "sop" simply tossed off as being of no import. It took a great deal of agreement to pass, then revoke, said Amendment. You mischaracterization of both situations is intellectually dishonest, as a minimum.
King,
This thread and the proverbial horse is probably dead by now, but I just had to address your complete ignorance on the wine shipment issue. Only you could find some fundamentalist Christian conspiracy behing your not being able to order and have shipped to you wine directly from California (or any other state or country). You can freely purchase wine from a retail store in your state, the sale of alcohol in your state is not per se prohibited. The reason is not religion, it is strictly a commerce and taxation issue.
Section 2 of the 21st Amendment, ratified 1933, repealing the prohibition (the 18th Amenedment) states: "The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited." This section gave the powers to the states to regulate the commerce and taxation of alcohol within their own borders.
Some states took advantage of this section to enact strict distributorship rules to maximize their states tax revenues from the sale of alcohol, such as Pennsylvania. Other states used this section to protect their own wine industry, such as New York.
The law of some states made it illegal for a resident of that state to purchase alcohol outside of such state and transport it back into the state even for personal consumption. To do so would diminish the ability of the state of the consumer's residence to tax the sale, especially if the resident would be notivated to travel to a neighboring state with a lower tax rate.
Generally state laws solely affecting intrastate commerce are not the subject of federal judicial review. However, if a state commere law law unduley burdens interstate commerce, that is commerce between states, then the state law can be challenged in the federal courts as being unconstitutional since only Congress has the right under the Constitution to regulate interstate commerce. Remember your basic civics class on this one, federal powers under the constitution was granted and ceded by the states. Thus, federal law made under rights granted by the states supercedes and pre-empts state law that impacts the federal realm.
You want a case of "Two Buck Chuck." Your local discount liquor store sells it for $3 per bottle, but you can order it from out of state at $2 per bottle and save yourself local sales tax but pay for shipping, saving you pennies per bottle. Your state has lost tax revenue, that may have been paid in another state from the distributor fulfilling your transaction. But, if your state prohibits this transaction to maximize it tax revenue, has your state unduley burdened interstate commerce?
Or this, you really want a bottle of 1992 Opus 1. There is none to be found within your state, if you could you would buy it. You cfind that you can order it from a wine distributor in California or directly from the winery's library collection. However, your state prohibits direct importation. Is that an undue burden on interstate commerce?
You are driving back home after a vacation in California with your car loaded with purchases made at various wineries. You are stopped at the border of your state as you enter, and your wine confiscated for illegal importation. Your state has strict laws regulating the private importation of alcohol. If you were able to bring all that wine in to your house for personal consumption, you would not have to purchase a same amount of wine in your state thereby depriving state licensed wine distributors and retailers in your state of sales revenue and your state of its sales tax. Is that an undue burden on interstate commerce?
Yet somehow you find some evangelical fundamentalist Christian conspiracy in all of this. To even had made such a ridiculous assertion renders your credibility on these threads "sur lee" worthless.
jerry: "You are so stupid you don't even know when some one is jerking your chain"
King: High school cool, I guess. (eyes rolling) If you want to "jerk some chain" and talk about missionary positions and other nonesense go to a site that deals with pop culture and what music is the hottest these days.
Lisa: "I just had to address your complete ignorance on the wine shipment issue. Only you could find some fundamentalist Christian conspiracy behing your not being able to order and have shipped to you wine directly from California"
King: You don't live in my state, therefore, you haven't the slightest idea about the religious politics involved in EtOH sales. Pennsylvanians, particularly restauranteurs, are routinely found having discussion about the religious right wing's influence in PA liquor sales.
The state has a limited number of liquor licenses available. The licenses can be bought on a market, and owned, often fetching upwards of $100,000 due to their finite number. The license allows the sale of booze on a premise and then permits/requires the purveyor to collect state taxes on the drinks. Without this license, you may not sell booze. It is a common practice for religious groups (Mennonites, Bretherens, Baptist and other fringe churches who frown upon alcohol)to pool money and buy liquor licenses as they come up for sale. They then keep the license, out of circulation, driving up the price of licenses as a whole due to their finite number. Efforts to change this have been met with resistance from these groups who have money and political clout in certain parts of the state.
This is the REAL story rest of your Opus 1992 wine-buying tips are rather irrelevant.
King: "I've played with your psychotic questions at your expense in another thread. Perhaps you'll see it as you forage for spelling errors."
No, you refused to answer any of them. Explain how they're psychotic. Go on. Coward.
As for your spelling and grammatical errors, they almost leap off the page at me. It takes about a second or two to find them. No thanks needed, I enjoy pointing out your ignorance - and specifically NOT carelessness - quite a bit. It marks you as a person who picks opinions without much thought. You might think it's all right to make up words as you go, but I rather think you ought to, ah "perseverate" on. Incidentally, while I'm not familiar with the field of psychology (though, as one "knows what he likes", I know I don't like deviant psychologies), the choice of invented words appears from the limited sample to be utterly execrable. Moreover, as the initial stimulus (your grammatical ineptitude) continually reappears, it can hardly be said to have been withdrawn, which is what "perseverate" amounts to. If you are indeed a psychologist, you might appreciate that my concentration on this weak area of yours indicates my (admittedly minor) interest in provoking you on your poor education.
Good god. "Perseverate". Can we all just run around making up our own words now? "Persevere" not good enough? LMFAO.
Prophet Geoff
BBUH
BTB, how does Mennonites buying up liquor licenses compare to Iraqi muslims killing Christians who run liquor stores and/or burning them down or running them out of business?
/sarc
I mean, do they have any connection to the Mennonite Independent Liberation Front? Those evil MILFs! They do sin in the eyes of Allah.
/sarc off
Later, Oberst Muller.
Prophet Geoff
BBUH
Lisa,
You get an A-plus in Federal Jurisdiction.
Your analysis of the Commerce Clause is right on. However (and unfortunately), King Tolerance is not very tolerant of divergent views, even when backed by facts and legal analysis.
He is so prejudiced that he has missed the applicability of your analysis to his exact situation.
Let us take as a given that liquor licenses are being bought up and "sandbagged" or withheld from commercial activity by churches or some members of churches (as he claims). He should see that there may be some issues regarding Restraint of Trade, and, perhaps, conspiracy to restrain trade, which he could exploit to satisfy (1) his view of how the world should be run, and (2) how he can get some cheap wine.
As we have both pointed out to him, the liquor industry is a competitive one driven by money, and that one of the major players is the state with its interest in the tax revenue stream. Mr. Tolerance fails to grasp that even the retailers who "complain" to him benefit by the sandbagging because it raises the value of the liquor license that they already own.
The state benefits because it does not have to police an inactive licensee. We are not informed as to whether or not licensees are burdened by recurring fees.
However, Mr. Tolerance has not thoroughly examined his own conscience to determine the extent to which the purchase and "sandbagging" of liquor licenses is a freedom to be enjoyed by those who wish to engage in it. We are not told, for example, if the sandbagging of liquor licenses would be more tolerable to him if it were done by (1) Native Americans, (2) athiests, (3) Democrats, (4) Neo-NAZIs, or (5) Muslims. Perhaps the muslims could be found to have legitimate cause to sandbag liquor licenses, in which case thier freedom of religion would be at odds with Mr. Tolerance's freedom to drink.
This latter view could be the legal trump card in a game of which religion gets to interfere with Mr. Tolerance's wine supply.
Pending the resolution of that analysis, it appears to be more important to Mr. Tolerance to preserve the objects of his scorn as objects of scorn, than to find a solution to his drinking problem.
"Fundamentalist Christians are contained by democracy, the U.S. Constitution, an independent secular judiciary, and separation of powers in the United States."
You missed a giant other thing that Fundamentalist Christians are contained by: modern secular culture. This is a massive force, for good and ill. (From the ill, we get things like PC multi-culturalism and the minions of King Tolerances)
What a nutty Mohammedan he is, the King of coffee-filters!
For one who is not allowed to drink alcohol he comes on this website raving about "Christians" making it expensive and difficult for him to get his poison, how ridiculous!
Tell ya a secret, mate. But don't tell anyone, KT:
It's not the Christians, its the Jooooooozzzzz....