How did Persis Close that Thread?
- Thread starter red
- Start date
My theory is that the persis name was one of a series of multiple handles that an existing board poster created just to stir up sh*t amongst us usual suspects. Either that or it was some clown from that other board getting his jollies by coming here to be an ass.
You cant change history by an animasion , but nice try by holywood:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2006/10/01/bocar24.xml
...
The Persian empire was an extraordinary example of efficient government over a huge area, with a skilled bureaucracy, a common currency and moderate taxation. Persian kings tolerated cultural diversity, were not religious fanatics, and earned the deep gratitude of the Jews for allowing them to return to their homeland. Cartledge keeps up some of the old stereotypes (the Persian forces are 'hordes', and Greek rulers in Asia Minor who accepted Persian rule are 'quislings'); but this just makes it harder to explain why most cities and statelets in mainland Greece were willing to welcome, or at least accept, the Persian invaders.
As for Sparta, this prototype of Western values turns out, in many ways, to resemble the sort of society known to us only from visits to jungles by anthropologists. Infanticide was the rule for inadequate male children; the lucky survivors spent their teens in boarding schools where, as part of the training system, they were assigned older men as lovers; all male citizens were trained only to be warriors; their wives greeted the news of their death in battle with delight; and only the battle-dead qualified for gravestones. Cartledge himself argues that Leonidas and his Three Hundred were a 'suicide squad'; casting around for parallels, he does consider the suicide bombers of today's Middle East, but then plumps for the Japanese kamikaze fighters instead. Not quite the beau idéal, then, of a J. S. Mill-style view of Western civilisation
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2006/10/01/bocar24.xml
...
The Persian empire was an extraordinary example of efficient government over a huge area, with a skilled bureaucracy, a common currency and moderate taxation. Persian kings tolerated cultural diversity, were not religious fanatics, and earned the deep gratitude of the Jews for allowing them to return to their homeland. Cartledge keeps up some of the old stereotypes (the Persian forces are 'hordes', and Greek rulers in Asia Minor who accepted Persian rule are 'quislings'); but this just makes it harder to explain why most cities and statelets in mainland Greece were willing to welcome, or at least accept, the Persian invaders.
As for Sparta, this prototype of Western values turns out, in many ways, to resemble the sort of society known to us only from visits to jungles by anthropologists. Infanticide was the rule for inadequate male children; the lucky survivors spent their teens in boarding schools where, as part of the training system, they were assigned older men as lovers; all male citizens were trained only to be warriors; their wives greeted the news of their death in battle with delight; and only the battle-dead qualified for gravestones. Cartledge himself argues that Leonidas and his Three Hundred were a 'suicide squad'; casting around for parallels, he does consider the suicide bombers of today's Middle East, but then plumps for the Japanese kamikaze fighters instead. Not quite the beau idéal, then, of a J. S. Mill-style view of Western civilisation
Topol, no one was arguing that the movie accurately portrayed history. The point (at least to me) is two fold: 1) in a democracy movie studios have a right to make insulting inaccurate movies*; 2) there was no great overarching conspiracy or plan merely some folks making a movie they hoped would make a profit.Topol-M said:
Lets "put this to bed" I'm pretty sure all the arguments have been made.
*But if libelous have to face being sued.
I have a news for you, stop crying toobasketcase said:
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Quote/heschel1.html
Heschel On The Jewish Connection To Israel
“The land was taken from the Jewish people by violence, and we have never abandoned hope of regaining it. Throughout the ages we said No to all the conquerors of Palestine. We said No before God and man emphatically, daily. We objected to their occupations, we rejected their claims, we deepened our attachment, knowing that the occupation by the conquerors was a passing adventure, while our attachment to the land was an eternal link. The Jewish people has never ceased to assert its right, its title, to the land of Israel. This continuous, uninterrupted insistence, an intimate ingredient of Jewish consciousness, is at the core of Jewish history, a vital element of Jewish faith.”
