<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: One who is underhanded and sows dissent</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.isegoria.net/2025/06/one-who-is-underhanded-and-sows-dissent/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2025/06/one-who-is-underhanded-and-sows-dissent/</link>
	<description>From the ancient Greek for equality in freedom of speech; an eclectic mix of thoughts, large and small</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2026 12:34:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.6.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: T. Beholder</title>
		<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2025/06/one-who-is-underhanded-and-sows-dissent/comment-page-1/#comment-3758602</link>
		<dc:creator>T. Beholder</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Jun 2025 10:21:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.isegoria.net/?p=52911#comment-3758602</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Or, &lt;i&gt;witness the power of this fully armed and operational thimble rig&lt;/i&gt;.

&lt;blockquote&gt;More important, it rhymes with negative words such as fahish—“ sinner”—and best of all, for those who despise the organization’s particular brand of Islam, is that it rhymes with and sounds a bit like jahesh—“stupid ass.”
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

We are &lt;i&gt;almost&lt;/i&gt; cooking with gas here!

It turns out ISIS/DAESH/whatever is firmly associated with a “particular brand of Islam”. And their neighbors like to insinuate they are &lt;i&gt;stupid heretics&lt;/i&gt;. So, what exactly brand? Who these people are beside being members of a political/military faction? Does this sect have an actual &lt;i&gt;name&lt;/i&gt;?

Let’s wait for some crickets to answer, since Tim Marshall moves on.

&lt;blockquote&gt;The British looked favorably on the creation of a “Jewish homeland” in Palestine and allowed Jews to move there and buy land from the Arabs.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I guess this should raise some alarm. Beware the Greeks bringing gifts… and beware the Brits benevolently encouraging a third party to throw money at you. Especially if you are their former ally. Hmm. Scratch this, it’s better to beware them all the time.

&lt;blockquote&gt; After the Second World War and the Holocaust, Jews tried to get to Palestine in even greater numbers.
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Just like that. The Jews did not have an old problem anymore, so they spontaneously have tried to find a new one. Does it not always happen like this?
&lt;blockquote&gt;Tensions between Jews and non-Jews reached the boiling point, and an exhausted Britain handed over the problem to the United Nations
&lt;/blockquote&gt; That is, USA and USSR during the big divorce. But still cooperating.
&lt;blockquote&gt;However, by 1948 Arab Muslims and Christians had been a clear majority in the land for more than a thousand years. […] Tensions between Jews and non-Jews reached the boiling point, […] The Jews agreed, the Arabs said no.&lt;/blockquote&gt; There’s some piece that just gone missing in the second half of this puzzle.
&lt;blockquote&gt; The outcome was war, which created the first wave of Palestinian refugees fleeing the area and Jewish refugees coming in from across the Middle East.
&lt;/blockquote&gt; The first wave of refugees! But this suggests an odd question: did the people pulling the stings consider this outcome:

A. desirable?.. or 
B. undesirable?

Likewise: we know The Prohibition in USA led to massive growth of organized crime, corruption and all sorts of unhealthy things. Was this deemed by those who mattered, i.e. with the power to decide whether this happens again:

A. desirable, something to refine and repeat?.. or 
B. undesirable, something to abhor and avoid, “never again”?

&lt;blockquote&gt; and the scene was set for the continuation of the bitter Sunni/ Shia civil war.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

The scene, indeed. And those people in black are stagehands. Because there are no ninjas in this picture.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Or, <i>witness the power of this fully armed and operational thimble rig</i>.</p>
<blockquote><p>More important, it rhymes with negative words such as fahish—“ sinner”—and best of all, for those who despise the organization’s particular brand of Islam, is that it rhymes with and sounds a bit like jahesh—“stupid ass.”
</p></blockquote>
<p>We are <i>almost</i> cooking with gas here!</p>
<p>It turns out ISIS/DAESH/whatever is firmly associated with a “particular brand of Islam”. And their neighbors like to insinuate they are <i>stupid heretics</i>. So, what exactly brand? Who these people are beside being members of a political/military faction? Does this sect have an actual <i>name</i>?</p>
<p>Let’s wait for some crickets to answer, since Tim Marshall moves on.</p>
<blockquote><p>The British looked favorably on the creation of a “Jewish homeland” in Palestine and allowed Jews to move there and buy land from the Arabs.</p></blockquote>
<p>I guess this should raise some alarm. Beware the Greeks bringing gifts… and beware the Brits benevolently encouraging a third party to throw money at you. Especially if you are their former ally. Hmm. Scratch this, it’s better to beware them all the time.</p>
<blockquote><p> After the Second World War and the Holocaust, Jews tried to get to Palestine in even greater numbers.
</p></blockquote>
<p>Just like that. The Jews did not have an old problem anymore, so they spontaneously have tried to find a new one. Does it not always happen like this?</p>
<blockquote><p>Tensions between Jews and non-Jews reached the boiling point, and an exhausted Britain handed over the problem to the United Nations
</p></blockquote>
<p> That is, USA and USSR during the big divorce. But still cooperating.</p>
<blockquote><p>However, by 1948 Arab Muslims and Christians had been a clear majority in the land for more than a thousand years. […] Tensions between Jews and non-Jews reached the boiling point, […] The Jews agreed, the Arabs said no.</p></blockquote>
<p> There’s some piece that just gone missing in the second half of this puzzle.</p>
<blockquote><p> The outcome was war, which created the first wave of Palestinian refugees fleeing the area and Jewish refugees coming in from across the Middle East.
</p></blockquote>
<p> The first wave of refugees! But this suggests an odd question: did the people pulling the stings consider this outcome:</p>
<p>A. desirable?.. or<br />
B. undesirable?</p>
<p>Likewise: we know The Prohibition in USA led to massive growth of organized crime, corruption and all sorts of unhealthy things. Was this deemed by those who mattered, i.e. with the power to decide whether this happens again:</p>
<p>A. desirable, something to refine and repeat?.. or<br />
B. undesirable, something to abhor and avoid, “never again”?</p>
<blockquote><p> and the scene was set for the continuation of the bitter Sunni/ Shia civil war.</p></blockquote>
<p>The scene, indeed. And those people in black are stagehands. Because there are no ninjas in this picture.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
