Things everybody knows that are actually wrong

[GMantis]

The oldest continuously inhabited city is Jericho.

[GMantis]

The oldest continuously inhabited city is Jericho.

That, at least, is the received wisdom. I've no idea how much truth there is to the claim... was Jericho really inhabited continuously? And as a city?

The same doubts exist pretty much for all other candidates.

[GMantis]

The myth of the noble savage and white european aggression

Yes, the myth of the noble savage is untrue. However, how would you qualify the conquest and oftrn destruction of most native cultures? As a defensive reaction?

[GMantis]

They were savages intent on mass murder of white settlers so we defended ourselves.

Bullshit.  They weren't savages, first of all.  Second of all, we came in and took their land; they were the ones defending themselves.  Finally, we're the ones who committed mass murder, not the Indians.

Another product of a government education. Great. 

First, it is true some bad things were done to the indians on ocassion. The worst had to be what the Spanish explorers allowed to happen but they were just so shocked by the human sacrifice and mass butchery of the Aztecs and Incas they over reactions.

 But second, countless times the indians murdered white women and children.  I am talking about in north america like the Pilgrim times and the French and Indian war.  We had every right to settle here and yes, some times land was wrongly stolen.  But lots of these indians were nomads who left their land for long periods.  Others were just stagnating and not developing.  Progress is a good thing not a bad thing.  Liberals want you to believe it is bad but white Europeans brougth progress to America.

And now the indians are on the welfare dole AND raking in the bucks with their casino gambling.  Favored minority status...hmmm...who really came out on top?

Who exactly gave you a right to settle on other people's lands? And am I to understand that you support murder and expulsion in the name of progress?
And the final sentence is so obscene that I'm not certain you meant it seriously. Do you know the general living standarts of Indians or how they were driven out of the best terrirory and driven in reservations?
Liberal education is bad, but no education is even worse.

[GMantis]

Non-Russian languages were banned in the Soviet Union.

[GMantis]

Non-Russian languages were banned in the Soviet Union.

Ummm... who believes that?

Most of the English-speaking world, for example. Even reference books state this often.

[GMantis]

John Paul II was a progressive pope

Once again:

LEARN THE PURPOSE OF THIS THREAD OR SHUT THE FUCK UP.

How doesn't this fit the purpose of the threat?

[GMantis]

John Paul II was a progressive pope

Once again:

LEARN THE PURPOSE OF THIS THREAD OR SHUT THE FUCK UP.

How doesn't this fit the purpose of the threat?

Because it is not what is commonly believed.  I loved the man but he was no progressive- on moral matters or politics.  He literally shouted down the leftists and liberation theologists.  His Nicaragua homily was a fascinating exchange.  "Silencio."  At the same time he spoke out against some of the tinpot quasi fascist dictators in C. America   

On the other hand, he greatly improved relations with other religions. This is certainly progressive.

[GMantis]

It's 'liberal' to regulate and spend vast amounts of taxpayer money on the economy.

Read again the title of the thread.

[GMantis]

It's 'liberal' to regulate and spend vast amounts of taxpayer money on the economy.

Read again the title of the thread.

I did.

You think that everybody knows this?

[GMantis]

NO POLITICS IN THIS THREAD

But then it would lose most of its entertainment value

[GMantis]

John Paul II was a progressive pope

Once again:

LEARN THE PURPOSE OF THIS THREAD OR SHUT THE FUCK UP.

How doesn't this fit the purpose of the threat?

Because it is not what is commonly believed.  I loved the man but he was no progressive- on moral matters or politics.  He literally shouted down the leftists and liberation theologists.  His Nicaragua homily was a fascinating exchange.  "Silencio."  At the same time he spoke out against some of the tinpot quasi fascist dictators in C. America   

On the other hand, he greatly improved relations with other religions. This is certainly progressive.

I would call it more strategic.  In a world with increasing godlessness you try to find some fellow travellers. 

No. I don't think that was his motivation.

What was his motivation?