[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Well, I won't argue with your characterisation of Braveheart! An American friend of mine and I watched Braveheart together. I had already seen it once. So had he. But this time, as the film proceeded, I paused the DVD periodically to fill him in on the ACTUAL history of what we were watching. The film is itself about 3 hours long. It took an extra hour and a bit more to watch it, because I had to correct, add to, and otherwise inform him of how messed up the film was. And for Hollywood, it was actually not bad, that is the scary part!

I remember when the film about Elizabeth came out years ago at the end of the '90s, I went to see it with my then girlfriend. I forget the title of it. But by the time we left the theatre house, the only thing I could do was try not to scream. It was SO inaccurate it was atrocious. I mean damn, it made me want to have a heart attack.

And most Americans would describe Shakespeare as turgid. In high school, we read Julius Caesar, Romeo and Juliet, and MacBeth, at least, sometimes more, depending on the school and the state. In college you generally get a few more. I also got Hamlet in high school. On my own, I've read the histories and the tragedies. I haven't read much in the comedies. A few of them, but not a lot. I don't find them that interesting.

I've also seen a few of the plays on stage, including one that was particularly interesting, Ricardo III, in Costa Rica, put on by the National Theatre Troupe of the Republic of Costa Rica. In other words, Richard III, translated into Spanish, and put on by the National Theatre Troupe. In Costa Rica, the Republic is rather small, so things are done on a national basis. There is a National Orchestra, and a National Theatre Troupe, whereas here you would have city orchestras, and things like that. But their National Orchestra and the National Theatre Troupe are both FUCKING BRILLIANT.

When my ex first told me we were going to see Shakespeare translated into Spanish, I thought she was nuts. But, it was one of the best plays I've ever seen performed in any language. The translation was as perfect as it can be, and the performance was incredible. I mean, wow.

I'll admit, the video was funny. But I actually liked the four hour version of Hamlet, thank you.

[Saddam Hussein]

Well, I won't argue with your characterisation of Braveheart! An American friend of mine and I watched Braveheart together. I had already seen it once. So had he. But this time, as the film proceeded, I paused the DVD periodically to fill him in on the ACTUAL history of what we were watching. The film is itself about 3 hours long. It took an extra hour and a bit more to watch it, because I had to correct, add to, and otherwise inform him of how messed up the film was.

Wow.  You are literally the worst person in the world.

[Rushy]

Wow.  You are literally the worst person in the world.

Really, Saddam? After all of his talk of genocide, this is what makes him the "literally the worst"?

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Not really. He had asked me to do that. Grow up. Your ASSumptions are making you look like, well, an ASS. And I have said nothing about genocide. All I have spoken about is putting Muslims back in the Muslim World where they belong.

[Thork]

And I have said nothing about genocide.

No, but interestingly Jewish Holocaust survivors have come out and condemned Israel accusing them of genocide. So even the Jewish community can't defend Israel.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-28916761

So why do you?

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Get four Jews in a room, and you have FIVE opinions. Trust me, for every Jew who disagrees with Israel, there are about ten that don't. And if Israel were committing genocide, they would have killed off the "Palestinians". After all, they've had 47 years to do it. Instead, the population of so-called "Palestinians" has quadupled. Hitler killed 2/3 of Jews in Europe in 12 years. You're truly going to tell me that Jews in Israel couldn't have completely wiped out "Palestinians" in 47? Cut the crap. If that's what they wanted, they could starve them out, or just carpet bomb them into a parking lot, and build a very large fucking Wal-mart there to go along with it. Don't be a schmuck.

And if you read the article closely, you'll notice that it is a very small group, representing a tiny number of anti-Zionist Jews, who certainly make up a TINY minority among our population. Hardly, "The Jewish Community". Most Holocaust survivors are very proud of Israel's accomplishments.

[Thork]

Israel can't do any of the things you suggest because they would lose US support and funding and the surrounding Arab nations would descend to give Israel the kicking it so sorely needs.

[Particle Person]

Get four Jews in a room, and you have FIVE opinions.

Did the Jews summon a ghost or something?

[Rushy]

Israel is a bit more sneaky than Hitler. They have gradually wiped out the populations that lived on their borders and then expanded the border. The politicians of Israel know that outright slaughtering the population in the span of a few years would cause their international relations to go down the toilet. Unlike you, who would gladly warn them to leave, then murder them in the streets if they don't, as if that somehow placates your own twisted morality. At least you're not sneaky about it.

Israel should treads carefully for good reason. The US makes a lot of money off of your military endeavors, but keep in mind that the day it becomes more profitable and morally positive to do it, the US will crush Israel under its boot.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

It really depends, doesn't it? Lets see what our friends the Muslim Neandertals do in the next few years to fuck up the world. Depending on how many innocent people they manage to kill with groups like ISIS, the average American might finally wake up to the danger global Islam represents, and might just be willing to let Israel do what is necessary to protect itself. In fact, maybe America itself will finally wake up and start protecting itself. Unfortunately, the average American is a fucking idiot, so something horrible is going to have to happen, but eventually it will, and then we can get about forcing the filthy bastards back into their own part of the world where they belong.

The last comment is just stupid. It just doesn't fit. If, after all, Jews control the US boot as so many Americans say we do, then that could never happen, now could it? And no, Israel never wiped out populations living on their borders. In fact, At one point, they had about triple the territory they now have, which they gave BACK to Egypt for peace (namely, the Sinai). Get your facts right.

[The Terror]

It's more like ethnic cleansing than genocide, destroy the infrastructure of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank and use blockades to try to force the population away so you can take over the land.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Also, if we wanted, as Jews, or if Israel wanted, as a country, to engage in ethnic cleansing, they would have in 47 years. There are still about 4 & a half million so-called "Palestinians" living there. And none of them have left. The demographics alone prove you to be full of shite, I'm afraid.

[The Terror]

Israel has blasted the crap out of Gaza, shelling hospitals and schools, instituted an unlawful trade embargo, and deprived Gaza of a third of the arable land available and 85% of the fishing areas. It certainly seems possible that Israel could be waging a covert ethnic cleansing campaign.

Besides which you've repeatedly advocated ethnic cleansing policies (send the Arab savages back when they belong, shoot them if they won't go, stop them from mixing with other races).

[Snupes]

Please try to keep this on topic, guys. There's already a thread going on with this stuff in it.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

SNUPES, I won't argue with that.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

I have often wondered what Shakespeare would have done if he'd been given an assignment to actually write biographies of the Kings who were the subjects of his plays, rather than plays. Aside from pooping himself, he would have actually had to do more that just basic research. I mean, his education at the Grammar School that his father was permitted to send him to was excellent by the standards of the time and by our standards (since our education has degraded so badly, at least here, Stateside), but he would actually have needed to cite his claims. For example: Richard killed the Princes? citation, please. He was a hunchback outright, as opposed to having a deformity? Citation, please.

If he were asked to write historical biographies, would he have written good ones? I expect he would have, because he still know how to write well. But would it have been as interesting as his plays? No. And we wouldn't be reading it today. They would be gathering dust, I expect, the province of scholars, rather than the patrimony of the entire English-speaking world.

[Thork]

I have often wondered what Shakespeare would have done if he'd been given an assignment to actually write biographies of the Kings who were the subjects of his plays, rather than plays. Aside from pooping himself, he would have actually had to do more that just basic research. I mean, his education at the Grammar School that his father was permitted to send him to was excellent by the standards of the time and by our standards (since our education has degraded so badly, at least here, Stateside), but he would actually have needed to cite his claims. For example: Richard killed the Princes? citation, please. He was a hunchback outright, as opposed to having a deformity? Citation, please.

If he were asked to write historical biographies, would he have written good ones? I expect he would have, because he still know how to write well. But would it have been as interesting as his plays? No. And we wouldn't be reading it today. They would be gathering dust, I expect, the province of scholars, rather than the patrimony of the entire English-speaking world.

How is it you still don't understand that it is fiction? Not an historical report. Shakespeare is held up as an artesian. Are you going to criticise Michelangelo for painting cherubs for the Vatican? If ever there was a propaganda pamphlet, it is the Sistine chapel. But he created art. He wasn't interested in the politics, just the money. Shakespeare is no different.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

What, are we upholding him as an artesian well or something? Or at least as a source of water?