quote:

Originally posted by sobek:

quote:

Originally posted by Jeebus:

And you wouldn't be where you are (read: a go-nowhere air force pawn who has reached his terminal rank by age 30) if you had half a brain.

I've read some distasteful things over the years, but this is about as low as it gets.

Gimme a break. If this is "as low as it gets" then what would you call Presley's totally ignorant, racist and bigoted remarks about my country/heritage/religion, etc...

quote:

Originally posted by LuckyBreak:
Gimme a break. If this is "as low as it gets" then what would you call Presley's totally ignorant, racist and bigoted remarks about my country/heritage/religion, etc...

Sure, but it's fine for you to threadjack every topic with your anti-semitic/american vitriol. You get back what you dish out, Lucky. Don't come here playing the innocent crybaby.

I never played the innocent cry baby Sobek, as a matter of fact I like taking Presely's ignorant remarks, shows who he is.

And lol at you calling my criticism of Israel "anti-semitism". Was it you who called the UN anti-semite for issuing resolutions that Israel didn't like (and didn't follow) or was it KKL?? Both of you guys are carbon copies of each other.

Now the press is reporting that he has a malignant brain tumor!

quote:

Originally posted by LuckyBreak:
And lol at you calling my criticism of Israel "anti-semitism". Was it you who called the UN anti-semite for issuing resolutions that Israel didn't like (and didn't follow) or was it KKL?? Both of you guys are carbon copies of each other.

Nope, that wasn't me.

Sure you are not anti-semitic. Yes, you hate Israel...but only the govt, right? Oh wait, but you will also "never shake the hand of an Israeli or be friends with one or ever acknowledge them" or anything of that nature, correct?

Well I guess I was wrong...and here I thought you hated the people too....when in fact it only seems like you do. Since you so conveniently deny it now, whatever comes from your mouth last must be the real truth, right?

Funny how David Duke can think the same exact way about non-whites, yet he is a racist and you are not.

He's diagnosed with glioma.
My sympathies with him and his family in these hard moments. Like him or not, it's just immoral to wish someone death or feel happy for someone's illness, whoever he was.

quote:

Sure you are not anti-semitic. Yes, you hate Israel...but only the govt, right? Oh wait, but you will also "never shake the hand of an Israeli or be friends with one or ever acknowledge them" or anything of that nature, correct?

Yes, I said that and I stand by what I said, no denying.
Yes, I will never acknowledge the state of Israel or ever shake hands with an Israeli. These are two of my fundamental basics which I will never change whatever happens. Why should I acknowledge a state that I see as illegal, a state that I see was created on the bodies of thousands of Palestinians??

They can talk peace all they want and reach it if they can, but for me, on personal basis, I will never accept Israel. Me, the person, the human called Hussein Roshdy, will never accept or acknowledge the state of Israel. This is my belief and I will stick to it whatever happens. I am not forced to believe in Israel and my non-believing in it doesn't affect anyone but myself. It's a personal choice.

And this belief is derived from strictly historical and political reasons, nothing else.

quote:

Originally posted by SubChop:
Now the press is reporting that he has a malignant brain tumor!

Many of us could not wait to get rid of Ted Kennedy, but not this way. I said a prayer for he and his family as I drove back to the office and heard the news.
Obviously, I hold an opposite political view, however, I do not wish death or illness on anyone. Ted Kennedy has been the old lion of his party for quite some time and I respect that tremendously. It is quite admirable that someone dedicated their life to something that they believed in. I know I've made cracks about Senator Kennedy and his girlfriend at the bottom of a lake, however, it was mostly jesting. However this may play out, may God bring him peace.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Presley,

Without agreeing with him, certainly, I can accept that Lucky disavows the legitimacy of Israel on historical and political grounds, and not for any religious intolerance.

Judaism and Zionism are different things. If Israel had been founded as a homeland for Eastern European Orthodox Christians or any other ethnic/religious group at the expense of the Palestinians, I think he'd feel the same way.

P.S. I apologize to all for contributing to this threadjacking. I wasn't paying attention to the thread subject, and I should have been before posting.

Presley, thanks for writing that about Sen. Kennedy.

quote:

I am not forced to believe in Israel and my non-believing in it doesn't affect anyone but myself.

Unless everyone else in your country or region feels the same way you do.

quote:

Originally posted by Jack White:
Judaism and Zionism are different things. If Israel had been founded as a homeland for Eastern European Orthodox Christians or any other ethnic/religious group at the expense of the Palestinians, I think he'd feel the same way.

Sure, and white supremacists have long stated that they are not racist, but merely want to restore America to how it was. But underneath the surface, you will find a very real and sincere hatred for the people and not the larger political group or entity they represent.

Lucky has repeatedly said he will never befriend an Israeli or even shake their hand. His hatred is NOT limited to the govt or zionism.

quote:

Sure, and white supremacists have long stated that they are not racist, but merely want to restore America to how it was. But underneath the surface, you will find a very real and sincere hatred for the people and not the larger political group or entity they represent.

Yes, I think that's certainly true of the KKK and other white supremacists. I also think it's true of a significant number of those who want to round up all undocumented workers and drop them off in the Sonoran desert.

But I don't think it's true of Lucky, though obviously I have no way of knowing with certainty. Just my perception.

quote:

Judaism and Zionism are different things. If Israel had been founded as a homeland for Eastern European Orthodox Christians or any other ethnic/religious group at the expense of the Palestinians, I think he'd feel the same way.

Exactly.
I have nothing against Jews. If I had to deal with an Israeli for any reason I will deal with him with all respect until the reason I am dealing with him for is over and that's it. I will not harass an Israeli or badmouth him, I will just chose not to have to deal with anything that has to do with Israel if I am not forced to. It is strictly on a political and a historical ground.

As for Jews, I have no problem in being friends with them what so ever. Actually I have a very good Jewish friend from another forum (who very much reminds me of Jack White) whom we always trash each other for jokes. (Nose jokes from me and sand jokes from him)

There were 2 fellers standing on a bridge,
One feller said the water was too cold,
the other feller said the water was too deep,
i reckon one feller was from Arkansas.......
get it?

(Karl's, from the movie SLINGBLADE, version of the 2 boys pissin off a bridge joke)

Ted Kennedy's Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act was not one of his shining moments. It will give the FDA the power to regulate the tobacco industry, including the premium cigar sector. I've read the entire proposition a few times and it is quite alarming what the FDA can do to an OPusX should it feel the need to do so. Even the FDA doesn't want this responsibility. Granted, the bill was drafted to primarily go after big tobacco and the cigarette business (and they will have their hands full for sure) but the fact that the FDA will have unbridled jurisdiction to alter premium cigars in order to fit certain (likely arbitrary) standards should they wish is very alarming. This was a Kennedy/Waxman initiative.

quote:

I've read the entire proposition a few times and it is quite alarming what the FDA can do to an OPusX should it feel the need to do so.

I've read thru it, too, Greg, though admittedly not thoroughly, and while the FDA will have authority to identify and reduce toxic and addictive components of tobacco products, a jihad against handmade cigars by the FDA seems unlikely in the extreme, no? In my opinion, the Act is good public health policy, especially the way it seeks to eliminate the lying claims made by Big Tobacco about "safe cigarettes", the deceitful way tobacco is marketed and identifying toxic additives.

I'm all for allowing the manufacture and sale of cigarettes to any adult who chooses to smoke. But since tobacco companies put components into cigarettes that wouldn't be allowed in any other consumable product, I'm also for making sure consumers have accurate information about what's in the product so they can make an informed decision whether or not to use it. And it doesn't take a genius to understand why the cigarette makers don't want the FDA to have the authority to "go wherever the scientific evidence takes it and make decisions based on the evidence", as Matthew Myers put it.

Sure, in a perfect world, legislators would differentiate between cigarettes and fine cigars, but that's not going to happen. Given that, even though I'm an enthusiastic cigar smoker, I'll personally support whatever would result in the greater good. And clearly, the greater good is supported by reducing cigarette smoking.

-------------------------------------------------

quote:

Originally posted by Jack White:
Given that, even though I'm an enthusiastic cigar smoker, I'll personally support whatever would result in the greater good. And clearly, the greater good is supported by reducing cigarette smoking.

My feelings exactly. Thank you, Jack.

Jack,
To address some of your comments and questions. In the beginnging of your responose, you state that it is unlikely that there will be a jihad against handmade cigars, but in the end you concede that a differentiation between cigars and cigarettes is not going to happen. So my response to you is this: so long as there is vehement anti-tobacco legislation, and, as you said yourself, legislation that refuses to make realization for the premium cigar market, the cigars will always be in danger.
But on another note, you stated:
"And it doesn't take a genius to understand why the cigarette makers don't want the FDA to have the authority to 'go wherever the scientific evidence takes it and make decisions based on the evidence', as Matthew Myers put it."
It might, however, take a genius to figure out why they DO want the FDA there. Big tobacco, for the most part, Jack, is NOT fighting this. Did you know that the bill has Phillip Morris's public blessing? (Not RJ Reynolds' though) Phillip Morris is not contending this issue at all. They're condoning it. Do you know who IS fighting it? Not Big Tobacco...it's the FDA themselves. The FDA doesn't want this responsibility. They know that they are already overextended and would be unable to do the job effectively. Plus, they argue, that an FDA seal of approval on cigarettes is also contradictory to the mission of the FDA, which states that products are safe for usage and consumption. An FDA seal of approval on tobacco could automatically lead people to believe that this product is now safe. Why? Because FDA approval has ALWAYS been the paragon of consumable safety. Mixed messages.
You also mentioned the fallacy of the safe cigarette in your response, but an FDA approval would further perpetuate this fallacy, only in a different form, which is probably why Phillip Morris condones the FDA regulation. You have a massive campaign against cigarettes and now cigarettes will have the FDA seal of approval? If I were Phillip Morris, I'd be supporting it too. Phillip Morris will end up hanging the legislation by their own logic and not lifting a finger to do it. Unintended consequences.
Jack, I would LOVE for every last toxin to be listed on cigarette packs. It would actually help the cigar industry and bring light to the inherent differences between cigars and cigarettes, but the way the the act is written right now, cigars would be in danger of having a nicotine maximum. Could you imagine the FDA telling Carlos Fuente Jr. that his OPusX cigars have too much nicotine to pass FDA regulation? The FDA has enough problems as it is approving treatment drugs that end up causing heart attacks. If this law gets passed, The FDA's duties will be further removed from the pharmaceutical sector(which is already a disaster) and submerged in a business they can't wield. Plus, with an FDA seal of approval on cigaretts, you may just see sales go up, and who ends up laughing? It's a well-intentioned bill, Jack, just poorly penned and nearsighted.
Greg

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Gregory Mottola,

quote:

you state that it is unlikely that there will be a jihad against handmade cigars

LOL!
I like how the term "jihad" is being used more and more in daily life, in non-Islam related issues. Jihad against smoking...now that's a title

PS: Jihad in Arabic literally means struggle.

Is i