No Laws Broken, Too Bad Losers Jesus Wins Again

[Michael Tee]

<<Do we have any evidence that he exacted revenge upon his persecutors?>>

Obviously if he HAD fucked up his persecutors, he would at least have boasted of it to his family.

<<But your argument kid of does make sense in that he knew that the institution was not at fault but that some of his fellow corp members were.>>

Makes a whole lot MORE sense that he knew the institution didn't give a shit, would despise him as a fucking rat and would make sure that he washed out of his career right before it could even begin if he opened up his mouth about it.

<<Which is what i have been arguing all along, that it is not the institution that established the beat downs nor the sights, yet that is who Weinstein goes after, and usually gets the case thrown out of court.>>

It isn't what the institution "establishes" but what it tolerates, winks at, and looks away from, that is what is rankling Weinstein's ass.

However, I just realized a possible big difference between the beat-downs and the gunsights.  I heard once that the Red Army used to tolerate ferocious hazing of recruits, particularly minority (non-Russian) recruits, on the theory that it makes men out of them.  Red Army soldiers needed to be the toughest of the tough, and the weaklings, or at least the non-Russian weaklings, would be weeded out by a kind of Darwinian selection in which something like 250 recruits a year would be killed in various "hazing" rituals.  Whether this is the policy of the U.S.  military, I have no real idea.  They sure as hell have had their asses sued off over various recruit deaths over the years, but they might consider that part of the cost of doing business.  OTOH, there is no conceivable military advantage to having scriptural gunsights.

<<So unless he is a slow learner, winning the case is not what his crusade is all about, it's the self promotion and publicity which in turn increases donations, that he is after.>>

You're ignoring the obvious - - he succeeded in getting the gunsights de-Christianized and without even having to go to court.  Wouldn't be the first time a Crusader lost a few before winning big .  I commend Weinstein for his persistence, which has apparently paid off.

[sirs]

<<But your argument kid of does make sense in that he knew that the institution was not at fault but that some of his fellow corp members were.>>

Makes a whole lot MORE sense that he knew the institution didn't give a shit, would despise him as a fucking rat and would make sure that he washed out of his career right before it could even begin if he opened up his mouth about it.

In other words, they didn't know about it.  Glad we got that cleared up     

[BT]

You're ignoring the obvious - - he succeeded in getting the gunsights de-Christianized and without even having to go to court.

Pyrrhic victory at best. The father is the one who used the alphanumeric sequence, the son continued the practice in lieu of retooling. Now that retooling might have been necessary, he went ahead and did it. The govt didn't tell him he had too. The son probably wasn't as invested in the idea as his father was. And his father succeeded with the sequencing up to his dying day.

Meanwhile Weinstein lives with the memory of his ass kicking and his utter lack of courage in exacting revenge against the cadets who did it to him.

[Michael Tee]

BT, I'm sorry, but I'm just not following this.

<<Pyrrhic victory at best. >>

I don't get it.  The army isn't getting any more gunsights with the Christian bible quotes any more.  The manufacturer provided at its own expense the kits to erase the Christian messages that are on the weapons already in the army's hands.  To me that is a victory.  In what sense is it Pyrrhhic?

<<The father is the one who used the alphanumeric sequence, the son continued the practice in lieu of retooling. >>

I think you mean here that the father and son both had to use the defaced weapons as part of their military duties.  But I don't see the relevance of that observation.  The equipment wasn't toxic.  It didn't damage or besmirch either Weinstein.  We both agree that the proselytizing argument is bulllshit.  But if the wrong is in the "establishment" of a religion by lending it some degree of legitimacy, that wrong has been righted.  By the very act of committing itself not to accept such "tainted" merchandise in the future, the Army has said that it does not recognize any one religion over any other as having the right to be represented on its weaponry.  To me, that's a victory, and considering the opposition to Weinstein's campaign, it is a significant victory for a secular America.

<<Now that retooling might have been necessary, he went ahead and did it. The govt didn't tell him he had too. >>

A total victory would have been the Army cleaning up every last weapon, preferably at the manufacturer's expense if the courts would so rule, otherwise at its own expense.  This was a near-total victory, in that the principle was accepted by the army that sectarian religious sloganeering on government-issue equipment is not acceptable.  There won't be any more of it.

<<The son probably wasn't as invested in the idea as his father was. >>

So what?  It wasn't the son's crusade, it was the father's.

<<And his father succeeded with the sequencing up to his dying day.>>

Sorry, I just don't get it.  Could you please elaborate on that?

<<Meanwhile Weinstein lives with the memory of his ass kicking and his utter lack of courage in exacting revenge against the cadets who did it to him.>>

That is sad, but nobody is guaranteed a life of victory after victory after victory.  There are plenty of unavenged victims of violence all over the world.  Look at the fucking Jews for christ sake - - we gotta live with a score of six million to zip, sitting on a stash of nuclear weapons we'll probably never get to use on our real enemies.  Weinstein's living the life of a real human being, not a TV series where the bad guys always get theirs in the end.  Weinstein has to make what he can out of his defeats, just like everyone else.  Ya win some, ya lose some, if he can't adjust to that, then he has a problem, but he won't be the only guy with that problem. 

Why are you so focused on Weinstein, when it's the issue he raised that I thought we were discussing?  You were critical of me for trying to psychoanalyze you when I didn't (according to you) know anything about you, yet here you are doing the same fucking thing to Weinstein.

[BT]

The army isn't getting any more gunsights with the Christian bible quotes any more.

No but they are still getting the gun sights from the same company. So what did the company lose? A couple PR bucks on a million dollar contract?

Big deal. The founder of the company had the code on the sights for as long as he ran it. The son just decided to spend a little to keep the contract, though i don't think they were in danger of losing it anyway.

All that Weinstein got was an increase in donations and wide spread knowledge that he was a coward who didn't honor the honor code when asked who kicked his ass. And we know he didn't get payback because he didn't tell his family about his shame and the resulting revenge.

All he is a professional shit stirrer paid by the click. Any idealism he is fighting for seems to be an afterthought.

[Michael Tee]

<<No but they are still getting the gun sights from the same company. So what did the company lose? A couple PR bucks on a million dollar contract?>>

You obviously missed the whole point of the controversy.  Weinstein didn't give a shit who supplied the gunsights, he just wanted the sights to come without religious bullshit on them.  Clearly he won his battle.  Not only will the gunsights be arriving in future without the religious advertising, but it's unlikely that ANYTHING will be purchased by the army with Christian religious symbols or quotations.  Another few bricks were just added to the wall that separates church and state.

<<Big deal. The founder of the company had the code on the sights for as long as he ran it. The son just decided to spend a little to keep the contract, though i don't think they were in danger of losing it anyway.>>

The issue has nothing to do with the founder of the company, it has everything to do with religious crap on government-issue equipment.  Get over it, man, Weinstein WON that battle.

<<All that Weinstein got was an increase in donations . . . >>

That was a BONUS.  On top of the real victory.

<< . . . and wide spread knowledge that he was a coward who didn't honor the honor code when asked who kicked his ass. And we know he didn't get payback because he didn't tell his family about his shame and the resulting revenge.>>

LMFAO.  You sure got some hard-on for that Weinstein.  It's hilarious.  What is your problem anyway?  Weinstein got his ass whipped by a gang of anti-Semitic cowards who obviously lacked the balls to take him on man-to-man.  That the honour code is a crock of shit is proven definitively by the fact that all the cowardly weasels who participated in the gang attack on Weinstein probably graduated as officers and gentlemen, whence they went on to demonstrate their cowardice in a vastly unequal battle against the VC, which they proceeded to lose despite overwhelming advantages in weaponry, air power, technology, etc.  There they demonstrated the skills they had honed on poor Weinstein by further assaults, gang rapes, torture of prisoners and attacks on defenceless villagers.  Hopefully, the karmic wheel turned in a way that permitted some kind of payback on their miserable carcasses by the people of Viet Nam, but we can only hope and dream that it happened.  I think we have to accept the fact that most of them returned safe and sound and are living smug little lives marred only by alcoholism, drug addiction and horrendous domestic violence.  That's just the way the world is.

Weinstein had his own honour code, which is that you don't rat out people who fuck you over, you either suck it up or take your own revenge.  He was true to his own code, not the code of the faggot academy that graduated the losers of Viet Nam.

<<All he is a professional shit stirrer paid by the click. >>

Well, if he strengthened the wall of separation between the church and the state, then he's a shit stirrer who stirred up some worthwhile shit.

<<Any idealism he is fighting for seems to be an afterthought.>>

The only afterthought I can see is yours, when you realized you had no valid argument against anything that Weinstein stood for, except that he was a fucking Jew, and so you decided that he had to be in it for the money, despite a total absence of any evidence supporting that conclusion.

[BT]

You do remember that my sister is Jewish. So you can shove the anti-Semite cop out where the sun don't shine.

Perhaps trijicon should sue Weinstein for religious harassment. I mean it is obvious the company was targeted because of the founders faith.

[Michael Tee]

<<You do remember that my sister is Jewish. So you can shove the anti-Semite cop out where the sun don't shine.>>

Actually I forgot.  But no matter - - it's certainly a meaningless factoid that is no predictor of anti-Semitic attitude.  I was far more impressed by the obvious glee you seemed to enjoy at the thought of poor, cowardly, dishonourable Weinstein getting his ass kicked by a gang of cowardly cadets, none of whom had the balls to take him on man to man.  I've almost never seen such a vicious contempt for the victim of a gang assault; the reaction of almost any normal human being would be a shocked sympathy for Weinstein and revulsion at the animals who perpetrated the gang assault and refused to own up to it.  All your scorn was reserved for the victim.  That was really remarkable.  You gave yourself away, BT.  That "my sister is Jewish" crap is barely one step removed from "some of my best friends . . . "  Really cuts no ice.

<<Perhaps trijicon should sue Weinstein for religious harassment. I mean it is obvious the company was targeted because of the founders faith.>>

Well, unless the owners have now converted to Judaism, the only thing that's obvious is that Weinstein stopped going after them as soon as they stopped putting their religious crap on Army equipment.  If Weinstein had really been targeting the company because of the owner's religion, he'd still be going after their ass whether they stopped or not.  He'd keep up the attacks until either the company folded or the owners embraced his (Weinstein's) religion.

You know your problem, BT?  Lotsa theories and theorizing, no facts that support.

[Plane]

I don't think-

- that antisemitism is required for Jesus Loving.

-Or that hiding scripture references in subtle hard to find places has gone entirely out of style,

-Or that  Trijicon has lost any sales from this free publicity.


http://mikesmasterpiece.wordpress.com/2009/11/19/tim-tebow/



What did they used to say about publicity? Just spell the name right?

[BT]

LMFAO.  You sure got some hard-on for that Weinstein.  It's hilarious.  What is your problem anyway?  Weinstein got his ass whipped by a gang of anti-Semitic cowards who obviously lacked the balls to take him on man-to-man.  That the honour code is a crock of shit is proven definitively by the fact that all the cowardly weasels who participated in the gang attack on Weinstein probably graduated as officers and gentlemen, whence they went on to demonstrate their cowardice in a vastly unequal battle against the VC, which they proceeded to lose despite overwhelming advantages in weaponry, air power, technology, etc.  There they demonstrated the skills they had honed on poor Weinstein by further assaults, gang rapes, torture of prisoners and attacks on defenceless villagers.  Hopefully, the karmic wheel turned in a way that permitted some kind of payback on their miserable carcasses by the people of Viet Nam, but we can only hope and dream that it happened.  I think we have to accept the fact that most of them returned safe and sound and are living smug little lives marred only by alcoholism, drug addiction and horrendous domestic violence.  That's just the way the world is.

Weinstein had his own honour code, which is that you don't rat out people who fuck you over, you either suck it up or take your own revenge.  He was true to his own code, not the code of the faggot academy that graduated the losers of Viet Nam.

However, I just realized a possible big difference between the beat-downs and the gunsights.  I heard once that the Red Army used to tolerate ferocious hazing of recruits, particularly minority (non-Russian) recruits, on the theory that it makes men out of them.  Red Army soldiers needed to be the toughest of the tough, and the weaklings, or at least the non-Russian weaklings, would be weeded out by a kind of Darwinian selection in which something like 250 recruits a year would be killed in various "hazing" rituals.  Whether this is the policy of the U.S.  military, I have no real idea.  They sure as hell have had their asses sued off over various recruit deaths over the years, but they might consider that part of the cost of doing business.  OTOH, there is no conceivable military advantage to having scriptural gunsights.

Consistency.

[BT]

One other point.

If Weinstein was doing this because of idealism and principle he would have filed suit about the sights and let the case make it's way through the courts.

He didn't.

This was a media driven event. And what media events do is publicize an issue and draw attention to the advocacy group pushing the story. It was a membership drive and members pay dues.

Follow the money.

[BT]

If you get mugged by a black man are you entitled to become a racist, and justified in exacting you revenge upon the black race instead of the man who actually mugged you?

How would that scenario differ from what Weinstein is doing?

[Michael Tee]

Well, BT, I see from your "consistency" comment that you completely missed the point of my Red Army comments.  I was merely attempting to show that from a military POV, there may be some dubious advantages to be gained from a policy that winks at hazing or looks the other way, whereas there is no conceivable military advantage to having Christian scripture engraved on gunsights.  If the Neanderthals who run the military training efforts in the U.S. subscribe to the old-school Red Army view of hazing, then what better way of encouraging it than the Gott-Mit-Uns cultivation of a sectarian Army that still  has enough minorities within its ranks to furnish the expendable victims of the hazing process?  Weinstein , obviously not a proponent of the virtues of hazing, sees a good reason to link it to the promotion of a religiously sectarian military.

<<If Weinstein was doing this because of idealism and principle he would have filed suit about the sights and let the case make it's way through the courts.>>

More incompetent logic.  You might as well argue that if the U.S. were interested in pursuing its wars of unprovoked aggression because of principle and idealism, it would have done so through the courts of international law.  If Gandhi were truly interested in Indian independence, rather than being in it purely for the money, he would have litigated it all the way through the courts.  If the history of the U.S. civil rights movement teaches us anything, it teaches us that there is a place and a time for litigation and there is a place and a time to take the fight to the streets and/or the media.  Weinstein is a fucking lawyer, for christ sake.  He is thoroughly aware of the advantages and disadvantages of the courts in promoting his cause, and he chose for reasons best known to him to proceed in the way he felt would be most efficacious for him in his struggle.  Since he won what he was after, I am not going to second-guess him now and tell him or anyone else that the court was the proper arena for his struggle.



<<This was a media driven event. And what media events do is publicize an issue and draw attention to the advocacy group pushing the story. >>

You're right, up to a point, but your emphasis is all fucked up and your vision is severely constricted.  Here is what media events do:
1.  Bring the issue to the attention of the general public, which gets more people drawn into active roles in it (hopefully but not necessarily  on the side of the guy seeking the publicity;)
2.  Bring the issue to the attention of the guys who should have been watching the store and make them aware that not only is there an issue, but that there is a potential shit-storm of public and/or Federal government outrage hovering over them if they fail to resolve the issue in a way that is perceived to be fair and constitutional.
3.  Recruit people to advocacy groups on both sides of the controversy.

For your own very peculiar reasons, you choose to ignore the policy-influencing reasons that most media events are staged for, and treat them mainly as attention-getters for the persons or groups staging them.  That is a kind of one-size-fits-all judgment that conservatives are famous for, ("The 'terrorists' hate us for our freedoms.")   It's particularly foolish of you where the chosen tactic, (regardless of any other beneficial effects it may have had for Weinstein) resulted in a victory for him, bringing that particular struggle to a successful conclusion that completely by-passed the court system.

<<It was a membership drive and members pay dues.>>

LOL.  Like Gandhi's March to the Sea?  Like the March on Selma?   Get over it, man. Weinstein won.  The way he chose to fight was the way that won the battle.  If he also happened to pick up more members and more financial support along the way, that is what happens, BT.  To the victors belong the spoils.  Weinstein's the winner - - should his victory have caused him to lose sponsors and to bleed money?   In what crazy world does that happen?

<<Follow the money. >>

LMFAO.  What money?  You are the one who is bitching in every post about how much money that Jew Weinstein is making out of all this.  Time to put up or shut up.  How much money IS Weinstein making from all this and how much of it is going to him personally?  Where is the Crystal Cathedral of Tomorrow that he built with his ill-gotten gains?  Where is the institutional jet?  Don't keep us waiting too long, I've gotta see all the money that the Evil Jew Weinstein amassed from his satanic endeavours to separate church and state.

[Michael Tee]

<<I don't think-

<<- that antisemitism is required for Jesus Loving.>>

I don't think so either.  One of the nicest things that an Italian Catholic friend of mine said to me was that anti-Semitism really rankled his ass, because his Lord and Saviour was Jewish.  In fact, out of respect for my friend, who just came into my thoughts right now, I am going to take back the parts of this thread where I referred to the Biblical quotations as "crap" or "bullshit."  And out of respect for you too, plane.  That was really intemperate rhetoric, and I'm sorry I said it.

<<Or that hiding scripture references in subtle hard to find places has gone entirely out of style>>

Whether it's in style or not, it doesn't belong on government-issued equipment.

<<Or that  Trijicon has lost any sales from this free publicity.>>

I never thought that this battle was personal to Trijicon or its owners.  I personally find it offensive that inscriptions from any religion are inscribed on instruments that are used for hunting humans, but that's only a matter of taste.  Trijicon as far as I know is no better or worse than any other merchant of death.  They all promote war by supporting politicians who love war and hate peace, and the fault is equally divided between the politicians themselves and their supporters inside and outside of the arms business.

[BT]

I was merely attempting to show that from a military POV, there may be some dubious advantages to be gained from a policy that winks at hazing or looks the other way, whereas there is no conceivable military advantage to having Christian scripture engraved on gunsights.

This isn't about the gun sights. This is about the ass kicking Weinstein and his son got at the Academy. What triggered Weinsteins advocacy is when his son was taunted. It's all in his book.

Before that he was content to earn a living working for the very anti-Semetic govt he now denounces. Now he is on a crusade against Evangelicals.

And who says you have to be Jewish to profit from advocacy. Cindy Sheehan did OK and she was Catholic.