Posted by andreas from p3EE3C6A9.dip.t-dialin.net (126.96.36.199) on Saturday, December 07, 2002 at 5:25PM :
In Reply to: BOING! posted by pancho from pool0358.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net (188.8.131.52) on Saturday, December 07, 2002 at 3:49PM :
: That's where I started out years ago...believing that we really aren't proud at all of being Assyrian...not at all.
+++ What's this funny talk of "BEING PROUD of being Assyrian"?
Why not simply starting with "decency" and "achievements" on your own so that one day you will have anything at all to be DESERVEDLY proud of - rather than dragging your deads out of their Mesopotamian graves, sucking on their achievements in the ancient times and let them still work for you by feeding your pride?
I'd call that body-stripping, necrophilia and zombie cult.
: And in reality you can't call us Christian either...where's the outrage...where's the committment to life and peace and charity and forgiveness? We're as eager to see our homelands bloodied as any Israeli.
+++ Most Assyrians are no Christians at all.
Furthermore: You can't be Christian as a herdish collective or a "national entity".
To be Christian or not is an issue of INDIVIDUAL decision, dedication and commitment.
: We aren't anything...
+++ Don't exaggerate now and don't turn it into a whiny sopa-opera again.
Of course you are something - better: someone - humans.
Come into reality and take up that role with all rights and obligations.
: neither really Christian nor really Assyrian.
+++ No, you are not Assyrian.
Only by the strechiest stretch of meanings and hand-sleighty ideological re-definition of this historical term.
Thank the British for setting you up and exploiting this term of most limited justification (earlier application of that term in a variety of uses totally different from the modern notion of "nation").
Thank them for re-selling it to you together with the crap of "nationalism" dumped onto you while the whole of Europe meanwhile was a deterrent symbol in flames and devastation of the fact that the idea of nationalism is seducing as murdurous and desastruous.
: We do TALK a lot about both of them...but you know most of us are blowhards...that's why the one who actually works for an Assyrian Heritage is despised
+++ In how far do you really work for what "Assyrian heritage" at all?
What is this empty chlichée "Assyrian heritage"?
You are replacing living concepts with the inflationary use of a buzz word: with the inevitable result of any inflation, i.e. DEVALUTATION & DEGRADING
: We haven't stopped betraying Ashur yet
+++ Ashur is out.
He had steered his people into the desaster of 612 BC.... LONG before Christianity ... and that was it.
Do you want a special social welfare programme for your conceited and arrogated national "God"?
: If it's true that Christ is worth working for and fighting for and living for and dying for and looking into the face of...then how much MORE true are all those things about Ashur?
+++ "Why should all those things ever be so "much MORE true of Ashur" ?
There is no feature in Ashur justifying such a demand.
Do you know of any feature of him at all besides your wild re-projections and loose conceits?
Is it true only because you want so hotly to have your own little self-fabricated national idol?
: I would far rather see Ashur in the face than any jew god who promised to cure me of anything...ESPECIALLY my reverance and gratitude for Ashur.
+++ Ok the: Tell me about your trickster Ashur ...
What meaning did this little demon give to you?
+++ Or is it rather about a vacuum which is a vacuum is a vacuum ... ?
+++ An a short reminder:
+++ Lest the Soap (opera) Subsides: "Ashur" - from the Encyclopedia Britannica
With regard to the short article from the Encyclopedia Britannica on Ashur below:
As is quite predictable - some infuriated Ashur addicts will tell in their powerful retorts that the folowing article is at least:
" Western, esp. British, imperialistic, anti-Assyrian, anti-darkie, anti-Eastern and
above all: "Christian" - whatever some on this forum understand by this term whatsoever and whysoever.
Nonetheless, the simple fact remains that such a portray of "Ashur" is given in
what's deemed to be one of the most respectable encyclopedias - if not
THE most respectable - of the world.
(IMPORTANT CLARIFICATION: To me personnally,
this fact will NOT YET decide anything as to the content of the article, i.e. with regard to its quality or truth or so, but is merely indicative of circulation quantity and publication intensity with - HOWEVER - its ensuing deciding impact on public thinking patterns.
Now, after some tantrums of Ashur worshippers will have been thrown around there will still remain the naked fact that this very "disgusting" article is still in existence and doesn't disappear in their flaming breaths simply by force of their mighty wishful thinking or heroic denial (really a stunning experience to them....).
Thus it could prove wise to face up to this fact and to have a closer look at this strange object of displeasure:
Please note how Ashur is depicted and what notions are attached to him:
- Usurpation of attributes undue and undeserved by him = all a fake up
and lie at all
- lack of genuine substance / character in himself
- a mere projection of worldly power interests of a political entity which exhausted itself in its military, imperialistic and nationalistic design
- all in all even in sharp contrast to e.g. the rich Babylonian culture.
So, now without any further comment of mine, how do you deal with
a) this info and b) the fact that this info has impregnated the minds of
the widest public ???
Ashur Encyclopædia Britannica Article
in Mesopotamian religion, city god of Ashur and national god of Assyria.
In the beginning he was perhaps only a local deity of the city that shared his name. From about 1800 BC onward, however, there appear to have been strong tendencies to identify him with the Sumerian Enlil (Akkadian: Bel),
while under the Assyrian king Sargon II (reigned 721–705 BC), there were tendencies to identify Ashur with Anshar, the father of An (Akkadian: Anu) in the creation myth.
Under Sargon's successor Sennacherib, deliberate and thorough attempts
were made to transfer to Ashur the primeval achievements of Marduk, as well as the whole ritual of the New Year festival of Babylon—attempts that clearly have their background in the political struggle going on at that
time between Babylonia and Assyria.
As a consequence, the image of Ashur seems to lack all real distinctiveness and contains little that is not implied in his position as the city god of a vigorous and warlike city that became the capital of an empire.
The Assyrians believed that he granted rule over Assyria and supported Assyrian arms against enemies; detailed written reports from the Assyrian kings about their campaigns were even submitted to him.
He appears a mere personification of the interests of Assyria as a political
entity, with little character of his own.
-- signature .
Post a Followup