Bush’s newest made up word: “Hezbollian.”

Was watching the news this morning before heading into work and they had a clip of Bush talking about the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon. I wasn’t paying it all that much attention because I was busy trying to wake up at the time, but I could’ve sworn that at one point Bush used the phrase “Hezbollian attacks.” It sounded like such a stupid turn of phrase that I wrote it off as me still being half asleep, but it turns out that’s exactly what he said. You know, as though the fighters were from Hezbollastan.

I swear the only reason the rest of the world takes anything Bush has to say seriously is because he’s got his finger on the big red button. Otherwise they’d probably be laughing their asses off at him.

28 thoughts on “Bush’s newest made up word: “Hezbollian.”

  1. You know, as though the fighters were from Hezbollastan.

    Nah. Then he woulda called them Hezbollastanis. LOL

  2. Mutually assured destruction is the safety blanket under which we all giggle as that moronic fuck-tard. grin

  3. Les: the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon

    AHHH … FUCK!!! It’s all so fucking pointless.
    Doesn’t matter to me who wins or loses – I get lotsa sadness and tears about the children on both sides.
    As a result of all the current happenings they’ll be automatically programmed to ‘carry on the fight’.  downer
    Peace – so elusive – even in yours or my democracy.
    I wonder what has to happen.
    Will Smith’s and Hollywood’s Independence Day with a common enemy?
    How much of this bullshit can be laid at the feet of Religion?

  4. How much of this bullshit can be laid at the feet of Religion?

    I’d argue that most of it can be laid at the feet of religion. The land they are fighting over is believed to be where the mythological events that started their religions supposedly took place. It’s somewhat ironic that, much like Christianity, Islam’s foundation is Judaism.

    The Qur’an is believed by Muslims to be the final revelation of God to mankind and Muhammad was the last of a line of prophets. A line that included Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and even Jesus. Because it’s an Abrahamic religion its followers feel they have a claim to the very same Holy lands as the Christians and Jews.

    If religious belief were reasonable then the members of the three different belief systems would recognize the aspects of their faiths that are shared amongst them and use that as a basis for co-existing together, but religious belief is rarely reasonable. Indeed all three religious traditions teach that they are The One True Religion and that all others who make similar claims are worthy of little more than being slaughtered like animals. Unfortunately too many adherents to each of these belief systems still think that approach is the right one to take as opposed to co-existing as peacefully as possible.

    One only has to listen to the people involved in the conflicts to see that it’s a religious conflict through and through. The religions involved are entirely at fault for the fighting and the death taking place in the Middle East.

  5. I’d argue that most of it can be laid at the feet of religion.

    I’d argue that most of it can be laid at the feet of human nature, aided and abetted by religion.

    Having said that, if religion were eradicated today, I’m not sure if we could invent another weapon as potent…

  6. JQP, you mean I said something worth quoting? Now my head’s going to get all big.

    Elwed – I’d argue that most of it can be laid at the feet of human nature, aided and abetted by religion.

    Certainly human nature plays a part, but to get as insane as the situation in the Middle East it takes more than just a tendency to quarrel. It takes unshakable religious belief.

  7. Am eternally frustrated with the situation in the Middle East.

    As to this: 

    ….but to get as insane as the situation in the Middle East it takes more than just a tendency to quarrel. It takes unshakable religious belief.

      The Khmer Rhouge had no religious involvement.  Over a million dead in Southeast Asia seems pretty insane to me, but that’s just me.

  8. Certainly human nature plays a part, but to get as insane as the situation in the Middle East it takes more than just a tendency to quarrel. It takes unshakable religious belief.

    We’ll have to beg to differ here; I think you give religion too much credit for what is ultimately – alas – the human condition. Which isn’t to say that religion isn’t a powerful enabler that can turn a bad situation into a calamity.

  9. Consi: Over a million dead in Southeast Asia seems pretty insane to me, but that’s just me.

    No. It’s true. It happened.
    And Stalin and Mao …
    I know. There’ve been more that a coupla anti-theists working the game.
    Hitler was in a different mode though – backed by the Holy Roman Catholic Church and all.
    But, Marcos, Batista, Pinochet were empowered by your government.
    And, let’s not forget your government’s involvement in replacing the leadership in Vietnam during the 60s.
    November 1, 1963 – Military officers launch a coup d’etat against Diem, with the tacit approval of the Kennedy administration. Diem leaves the presidential residence.
    We can all pull a rabbit when we want.
    I won’t go back to the Crusades, Dark Ages, early South America, or the Inquisition – too much like taking ‘cheap shots’.  LOL

  10. too much like taking ‘cheap shots’

    Err LJ… suppression of the aboriginis…

    If religious belief were reasonable then the members of the three different belief systems would recognize the aspects of their faiths that are shared amongst them and use that as a basis for co-existing together

    Lets ask a Baptist what he thinks of the Pope. Or mebbe a Shi’ite if he would pray in a Sunni mosque.  These fuckheads can’t even agree amongst themeselves, let alone with each other.

    One thing I can’t find is was Islam and Judaism like this before 1948, or is a lot of this down to the Palestinians being removed from Palestine.

    I can’t help but remember the episode of the West Wing where Jeb is told he can’t put up an antique map of the Middle East as it doesn’t show Israel (in the 17th Century) and would offend Jewish visitors.

  11. LH: Err LJ… suppression of the aborigines…

    Yep. The poor bastards weren’t counted in the census and didn’t get the vote till 1967.
    It was one of about 5 referendums that got up in the last 100 years, by a majority of something like 80% and I couldn’t vote till I was 21 (the next year).
    I still recall an interview I saw with Malcolm Fraser who recalled as a child on the family property, a coupla riders arriving on horseback and when asked by his grandfather where they’d been: Huntin’. Didn’t get many.
    Yes, as an Australian I have a cross to bear.
    I still remember Cathy Freeman winning the 400 at the Sydney Olympics. My Protest-ant mate said: So what. What’s all the carry on? She was gonna win anyway. She was never under pressure.
    I went into arsehole mode: I called him various *&^$##^^**&%$!!**^%$** things and asked: Picture this, mate. You’re black. You are carrying your people on your back. You have been called every black shit name that can be thought of. There are some in the white community that want you to fail. Pressure? I’d never want that type of pressure.
    Oh, he said. What are you drinking?
    I think I got my point across.  wink

  12. Keep in mind that Islam isn’t all that old; just about 400 years.  Think of all the crap Christianity was pulling when it was only 400 years old and it wasn’t even in a position of power in Europe for 300 years.  Islam caught and was de-facto the only religion in the Mid-East practically right away.  It’s easy to get pompus and inflexible when you’re king of the hill for so long, but you haven’t matured very much in only a few centuries.  Give them another five hundred years and they might even let women have a say in politics smile

    It’s not that Islam is bad, but it seems to have an inherent intractability that can be easily exploited, and everything tends to be black and white with regard to the extremists in the faith.  Pat Robertson is a stupid fundie and all, but he doesn’t get suicide bombers signing up and probably doesn’t want any, even though it would be really easy to sell Christianity that way.  Our suicidal extremists have to get that way all on their own.  Islam seems to breed them, although it helps when poor families are promised money if one of them dies in the service of Allah, kind of like what the Christians did during the crusades.  On the other hand, the Christians weren’t in danger of getting nukes at the time….

  13. Keep in mind that Islam isn’t all that old; just about 400 years.

    I proudly annoit swordsbane as the de facto historian for atheists. 

    Islam was actually founded in 610 A.D., although its members will say it originated at the same time that Judaism did. You were close.  Just off by a mere millenium, give or take a few decades.

    …is a lot of this down to the Palestinians being removed from Palestine.

    The Palestinians were not removed from Palestine.  They lived in Jordan.  There was not a country called Palestine. 

    It boils down to a long standing family feud that involved a husband, his wife, a concubine, and two sons, one from the wife and one from the concubine, if one goes back to the texts that each group relies upon.

  14. I proudly annoit swordsbane as the de facto historian for atheists.

    Fine, if we get to anoint Bush as the de facto linguist and scholar for Christians.

  15. Mutually assured destruction is the safety blanket under which we all giggle

    That’s the thing—mutually assured destruction is all well and good when the people with their fingers on the button see the end of the world as a bad thing rather than the fulfillment of prophesy. That’s where all this goes off the rails. and becomes more than a little worrisome.

  16. Consi: The Palestinians were not removed from Palestine.  They lived in Jordan.  There was not a country called Palestine.

    According to this you’re wrong.
    Here‘s a map from 1759 referred to as: Terra Sancta sive Palæstina.
    From the section The British Mandate period, comes – the Balfour Declaration in 1917 [was] to “favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”

  17. I proudly annoit swordsbane as the de facto historian for atheists.

    Woops.  I really was thinking 600 AD.  Honest.  Forgot the one.. I just forgot the one.. For the love of God!!!

    It was morning… I gotta learn not to post until I have coffee… wink

    I can’t be historian for Athiests.. cuz I aren’t one…  I live in my own little world… don’t need anyone elses….

  18. Don’t feel bad, swordsbane. Consi’s post contained far more ‘mistakes.’

  19. LJ:

    If you want to take issue with something I said, that is fine.  Don’t go posting half-assed links that aren’t directly on point.  I’ve neither the time nor the desire to skewer you for the attempt.

  20. What’s the matter Consi, don’t like it when people (like LJ) point out that you are full of shit!?

  21. Consi: Don’t go posting half-assed links that aren’t directly on point.

    I’ve posted about 6 comments on this thread.
    Which of them upset you, mate. smile
    Would ‘half-assed’ and ‘directly on point’ also refer to your

    I proudly anoint swordsbane as the de facto historian for atheists.

    where you got your little dig in at atheists at the expense of a pre-coffee mistake.
    This reminds me of the saying: he can dish it out but, he just can’t take it.
    Mate, I am usually pretty quick to admit making a mistake when I’ve made one.
    I’m too fucking old and tired to let my ego totally control me anymore as ego’s mostly bullshit.
    How about you? LOL

  22. Mate, I am usually pretty quick to admit making a mistake when I’ve made one.

    Then read through your link, or any other material for that matter and quote me anything even anything remotely close that directly contradicts the point I made: There is no COUNTRY of Palestine.  There never has been a nation-state known as Palestine.

    Miner:

    You a cheerleader pard?

  23. Consi: There is no COUNTRY of Palestine.

    And that’s what I googled. Consi is RIGHT; I am WRONG. I shoulda known better. smile
    I found maps of the AREA known as Palestine.
    I found info explaining what AREA means.
    I found – The History and Meaning of “Palestine” and “Palestinians”, some Ancient History of Palestine and a blog about the situation as it is today.
    Consi, thanks for the prod.
    I had heard something similar sometime ago but let it go as a bit a furphy.
    I now know more than I did. smile
    Now, having said all that, it could be an interesting exercise to look at the agenda of the writers who wrote all that stuff.
    Were they Jewish/Zionist sympathisers or not?
    And, NO, I am not squirming in any way but, we all know that history is little more than the recorded writings of the victorious over the vanquished.

  24. There wasn’t a Jordan until it was carved out of eastern Mandate Palestine so Consi’s statement that “The Palestinians were not removed from Palestine.  They lived in Jordan.” Is far more untrue than anything LuckyJohn posted. But I’ve lurked here long enough to not expect Consi’s ‘facts’ to be real facts. Of course, according to Consi, zionist historian Benny Morris (and everyone else that is a legitimate historian) is probably the one lying, not Consi.

  25. There wasn’t a Jordan until it was carved out of eastern Mandate Palestine

    Miner, would you please tell the readers who governed eastern Mandate Palestine from its “inception” to its division? Also, please identify for them the time period that it was a nation-state, would you please?  You might do that by including that in a timeline.  The timeline might be helpful for the readers and could go from the time of recorded history until the present day, might you construct one for us?

    Your answers will settle the accusations that you levied here.  I take offense at the accusations.  I have never intentionally misrepresented facts..  Not here, not anywhere.  You may take issue with my conclusions and the inferences I draw from the facts, which are my opinions, but you can go to the bank with the facts I state.

    LJ:  There have been a litany of wrongs suffered by those on both sides.  As a result, compelling sympathetic arguments can be made for either side. As a result, there will be “historians” advocating a point of view.  My sole point was there was never a country of Palestine from which the Palestinians were expelled from in 1967 or 1948.

  26. My sole point was there was never a country of Palestine from which the Palestinians were expelled from in 1967 or 1948.

    No, but I’m sure they had another name for it back then. Something like “home”, I imagine. Regardless, as you say, wrongs have been done and suffered from both sides. Closure of the matter will not be an issue of who cedes blame, as finger-pointing seems to be the prime activity on the issue, and has had little success so far. The second most popular activity of “I am my people” – projection onto previous generations – has arguably made things worse.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.