REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

My daddy always told me......

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Friday, January 30, 2009 10:37
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3435
PAGE 2 of 3

Thursday, January 29, 2009 10:09 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!


Stop breeding! The Future is clones, chimyras and robots, with brainchips for everyone else. Get over it.








Cyborg monkey with robot arm


Brain cell on a chip


Future of the GMO human race


"Lay down G.I. Lay down G.I..."
-Tokyo Rose (U.S. citizen)
www.earthstation1.com/The_Zero_Hour.html
www.earthstation1.com/Tokyo_Rose.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_Rose

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 10:12 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
"... I do think DT has some point about how the rampant inflation and credit problems in our economy have forced a lot of people to work."

Yes, but that is a problem of capitalism, not of equality between the sexes or between groups.

BTW - to reframe this in another context - how would you respond if DT had posted this: The reason people have to work ilke dogs is b/c we no longer have slaves.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.



I also believe the issue with the workforce today working so hard has a financial cause. But I'm trying to wrap my head around what DT is saying, understand his perspective, because he has said things about the state of our country, capitalism, and our workforce being enslaved that I agree with. I'm trying to determine how much feminism plays a part in the working habits of the low and middle-waged female working class.

I think female high wage workers do all tend to be feminists, pursuing their careers. I don't pass judgement on whether this is bad for society or not... Though we aren't having as many children, that's true. Just don't know whether that's BAD. So long as it's our choice, I have to support it, but if we're being manipulated into making that choice, that's a whole different story.

I, um, don't follow your analogy. I don't like slavery! I'm arguing against it here, with people pretty much forced to work in our country and the disrespect/social pressure for people who can't or won't. And what happened with African Americans is very wrong, and attitudes and practices towards them even since they were freed has impacted their livelyhood in modern times (slums, inner city schools, success stories being exceptions and not the rule, etc.).

But I don't think I understand what you were trying to say there. Could you explain?

SignyM: That is a good point.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 10:12 AM

DREAMTROVE


I said I wasn't going to argue with feminists, but they kept begging for it.

Ah, some choice moments to reflect on:

Quote:

I'll pit my well educated, productive, healthy and well educated young against your starving AIDS-ridden hordes any day.


My hordes will crush you. Oh, and they won't have AIDS, because they are having children, not 300 gay partners. They're religious, remember, and oh yeah, AIDS, that's a creation of who? Oh, yeah, right. WHO. Ah, liberal do gooders "helping" poor helpless Africans out of this thing called life. And damning the rest of us.

Oh, and one more thing, when AIDS came to the USA, who said "Test everyone and quarantine the positives." Oh, that was William F. Buckley. Trying to save liberal gay lives, which were the only ones thought to be in danger at the time. Liberals sure blocked that with their "That's a violation of human rights!" Well, the human rights of those positives, who are all dead now, would have been fine SOMEPLACE ELSE. Like on an island, with a hospital. Well, another 100 million corpses later...

Quote:

1.3 BILLION people,


Oh, this one's extra special. It's not genocide if you do it to a whole lot of people.

I'll have to remember that from now on.

Quote:

BTW, I think you're making the same mistake Wulf is... you assume that ideas are transmitted only by blood relatives and that intelligence is genetic.


Islam is inherited. I don't think it's genetic. You might be confusing it with Judaism [/snark]

BYTEMITE,

I said at the beginning that what I found when I dug was very disturbing, and it would take an extensive research to make an argument. Yes, I think feminism, the one child policy, and PC, a lot of other political ideas are part of the overarching globalism. World population control is a longstanding position of the one worlders. The target has always been 1 billion, which used to be like a 60% reduction, not it's like and 85% reduction. Its natural for people in this mind set and an ethnic group to, say, start with China, Africa or India, because that's not who they are. But there are sinister things in the shadows.

But this wasn't a serious argument, I was simply snarking the feminists just to watch them blow up. The self destruct if you poke them. I wasn't going to do it but I kept asking not to have this argument. Objectively, I think they have a fascist streak, not much different from that found in neocons, but the same in both cases: They learned it by trusting a bogus information source. They cling to it because it strokes their egos. There's really nothing more to it. They like that superior feeling of supremacy. Women were plenty equal before this whole thing started.

Making the case that these people are really sinister would require a real research project, and not my with a fever lying in bed getting sick of feminists.

Quote:


Ok, Dream, my mistake. It sort of threw me, with the whole chick pic and name of "dream"..

A manly handshake then?



ROFL. sure. I've been here for years, I only chose that avatar a few weeks ago when someone said "choose an avatar."

There are pre-programmed women out there who have not yet been swallowed by the demon feminism.

As for the name, it was randomly generated by AOL on one of those free disks they sent out back in the mid 90s. It was printed on the disk. So I signed up, and it stuck. I sometimes make up stories about how I got the name, but that's the true one ;)

Oh yeah, right, this is me, in an alternate universe, where I have sex with Inara just for the chance to be narcissistic :)


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 10:22 AM

DREAMTROVE


PN, I thought GMO humans looked more like this :)




I found this group of cosplay replicants



Pris is more convincing that the others. Another cosplayer.



Sorry, I have a Pris fetish. I hope males of the board will understand :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 10:28 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"My hordes will crush you. Oh, and they won't have AIDS, because they are having children, not 300 gay partners. They're religious, remember, and oh yeah, AIDS, that's a creation of who? Oh, yeah, right. WHO. Ah, liberal do gooders "helping" poor helpless Africans out of this thing called life. And damning the rest of us."

I have no idea where to begin on this one. DT, you are in PN land here.

The AFRICAN hordes who transmit AIDS through - guess what - heterosexual sex ? The INDIAN hordes who transmit AIDS through - guess what - heterosexual sex ? The MUSLIM hordes who transmit AIDS through - guess what - heterosexual sex ? The SOUTH AND CENTRAL AMERICAN CATHOLIC hordes who transmit AIDS through - guess what - heterosexual sex ?

Yep - that's right. The very act of procreating spreads AIDS. Who knew ? (That was sarcasm.)

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/aids/atlas/world.html


As for AIDS being a creation of WHO - I could go into all the data showing that the virus exists naturally in apes, that there are human tissue samples from the 1950s that have HIV RNA, that in Africa, the type and incidence of AIDS correlates with the presence of various African armies ... but I'm sure you won't credit mere facts --- or trivial reality. Just like PN.



"Oh, this one's extra special. It's not genocide if you do it to a whole lot of people."

No, it's not genocide if you don't have the INTENT of destroying a group - and if not - guess what - it's not genocide ! How about that ! (And, it is rather hard to show genocidal INTENT - that word you missed - when you got so many people to go through it could literally never happen.)

***************************************************************

Also, maybe you should change your name to Margaret Sanger. Ya' think ?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 10:40 AM

DREAMTROVE


Oh Kathy, it's not remotely possibe that I've done my research now, is it?

AIDS was created in a particular experiment in 1955 in Kinshasa by Dr. Hilary Koprowski, who was working on a polio vaccine using imported primates from cameroon. The conclusive evidence was that patient zero was his patient. I've said this before: I don't blame Koprowski for creating aids. I blame him for spending his whole life trying to clear his name, rather than spending it trying to cure aids.

As for PN, you should listen to him once in a while, he's a smart guy, and knows a lot more than any of us here care to admit.

As for the gay, I was refering to the fact that it was *thought* to be a gay disease at the time.

But all venereal diseases are more radically through the gay community, there's nothing unique about AIDS in that regard. The slumming casual sex doesn't help either. Check out the HIV rate in the muslim world. Pretty low.

Where it's highest, you actually find blood transfusion programs, set up by the WHO. It's enough to make anyone a conspiracy theorist. No need for it to be a genetically engineered virus, but what's up with these transfusion programs? All across africa at in the 1960s. Millions, unprecedented. Known to have caused the spread of AIDS in africa by the 1980s. Then the same thing happens in the former USSR, after the fall of communism.

F^&k this argument has wasted my time and I missed an important opportunity about which I'm going to be angry for a very long time. Screw this.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 10:49 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/319612

CHAT Oral Polio Vaccine Was Not the Source of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Group M for Humans
Stanley A. Plotkin

University of Pennsylvania, Doylestown, Pennsylvania

A book published in 1999 hypothesized that the scientists who worked with the CHAT type 1 attenuated poliomyelitis strain, tested in the former Belgian Congo in the late 1950s, had covertly prepared the vaccine in chimpanzee kidney cells contaminated with a simian immunodeficiency virus, which evolved into human immunodeficiency virus type 1 group M. This article summarizes the results of the investigation conducted by the author to determine the legitimacy of the accusation. Testimony by eyewitnesses, historical documents of the time, epidemiological analysis, and analysis of ancillary phylogenetic, virological, and polymerase chain reaction data all indicate that this hypothesis is false.



***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:06 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Oh.... where to even begin.

DT, just because some fascist said population control is a good thing doesn't mean population control is a fascist idea. Even a monkey pounding on a keyboard will eventually write something readable. Our population WILL be controlled... either by nature, or by government, or by individual choice.

In the case of wome choosing to have fewer children, women are simply responding in a very natural way to their changing environment.

So, how has the environment changed?

Well, for one thing, we no longer depend on our children for retirement. Children are an economic drain, not a boon. For another, home is no longer the center of production. In order to work, people usually have to work away from home. Also, in developed nations, not as many children die young... its not necessary to have eight children so that three will survive. There are more things to do the wealthier you get, and people start moving up Maslow's hierarchy of needs, from food and water to self-actualization. And finally, effective birth control is available. Women have ALWAYS practiced some form of birth control, including infanticide, but now it's REALLY effective.

As far as the ills of society... has nothing to do with feminism, but more with capitalism. People slaving away while others are looking for work and starving, has all to do with the politics of profit and nothing at all to do with feminism. The differences between the sexes? It's like the differences between races or religions... a convenient tool for the powerful to drive wedges between everyone else.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:13 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


Ok, Sig,

Don't have kids. Its cool. I respect your choice.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:14 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Too late, Wulf! I already do!

ETA: I have a special needs child, who I love dearly. I have learned a lot from being a special needs mom. But the lessons that I learned can be learned by anyone, outside of family as well as within.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:16 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


Then infanticide is you only choice...as they are such a drain on you.

I'll look for you in the news. (SNARK!)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:16 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"Where it's highest, you actually find blood transfusion programs, set up by the WHO."

You mean India ? South Africa ? In India it's spread by sex workers and truck drivers who then spread it to their wives. In S. Africa it's spread by heterosexual sex compounded by social chaos, drug use, desperation and false belief (if a man has sex with a virgin he will be cured of AIDS), mother to child transmission, and government denial. "The most vulnerable population group is young women between 15 and 24 years of age, as they account for more than 90% of new infections in South Africa." Maybe you mean Swaziland (38.8%) or Botswana (37.3%) ?

No. What you say just isn't so.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:18 AM

KIRKULES


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
...that's right, withhold sex until we stop fighting!



What would really change the dynamics between males and females is if we(males) withheld semen. If males controlled all reproductive activity, we could only breed with super models and quickly change women to have genetic traits we value most. Why don't we just use this power to shape the World as we see fit. All we need to do is ban cloning and learn how to regulate teenage male hormones. We could create a male utopia is all.





NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:18 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Hate much, Wulf ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:20 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


For the love of God Rue...

Lose your sense of humor much?


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:23 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Wulf, given that I have a special needs child who will never be able to support herself or become fully independent... I find your comment repugnant.


ETA: I have done much soul-searching since becoming a mom. I'm not the motherly type. I'm impatient, "brainy", have ALWAYS been independent-minded (when I was taught as a 6-year-old many years ago... long before feminism was a gleam in anyones' eye... that in case of unknown or mixed gender one always refers to "he" I thought HEY! That's not FAIR!). I should not have had a child. I do my best, but my motivation for having a child was not because I "love children" but because of tradition.

I love my child. I would never wish her gone. But having a child for the wrong reason is wrong.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:25 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!


Quote:

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
PN, I thought GMO humans looked more like this :)



Sorry, I have a Pris fetish. I hope males of the board will understand :)



Pris was supposed to be married to JFK Jr and pregnant with his kid when Billary Rockefeller
assassinated his plane on final approach to Martha's Vinyard. To break the chain you must
kill the entire family.

THE PHONY MUST DIE SAYS THE CATCHER IN THE RYE ! THE DUCK IS IN THE NOOSE MOTHER GOOSE !

Quote:

DISCOURSES Upon The First Ten Books of Titus Livy

by Machiavelli

Thus a free state that has newly sprung up comes to have enemy partisans and not friendly
partisans. And wanting to remedy this inconvenience and these disorders which the above
mentioned difficulties bring with them, there is no remedy more powerful, nor more valid, healthy,
and necessary than the killing of the sons of Brutus, who, as history shows, together with
other Roman youths were induced to conspire against their country for no other reason than
because they could not obtain extraordinary advantages for themselves under the Consuls as
under the Kings; so that the liberty of that people appeared to have become their servitude.

The reference is not to Marcus Junius Brutus, the famous assassin of Cæsar, but to the much
earlier Lucius Junius Brutus, who led the overthrow of the tyrannical rule of the Tarquin
monarchs, and established the Roman Republic. When his own sons plotted to betray the fledgling
Republic and restore the old order, Brutus sat in judgment on them and sentenced them to death.


www.constitution.org/mac/disclivy_.htm
www.constitution.org/mac/prince00.htm
http://semi-vegan-in-dystopia.blogspot.com/2008/04/is-catcher-in-rye-m
ind-control-trigger.html


The NWO considers ALL of us to be sons and daughters of Brutus.

55-million genocided in USA since 1973...

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:27 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


And I find that you added that fact (birthing out a special needs kid) AFTER I wrote what I did (in response to your earlier statements, which Im sure you will/have changed) SLIMEY.

Classic case of covering your tracks Sig.. Im surprised you would do such a thing.

Edit: I mean, is that your thing? You make a statement, then when getting a response that totally negates you beliefs, you change it from earlier to garner "sympathy'?

Talk about manipulation.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:34 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


No. We simply cross-posted. It came out badly, and if apologies are due- I apologize.

But I've never made a secret of the fact that I have a special needs child. Peeps here who've been following my posts have known this for a long time. Please read my ETA further up.



---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:35 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Wulf - hate much ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:39 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"Classic case of covering your tracks Sig.. Im surprised you would do such a thing.

Edit: I mean, is that your thing? You make a statement, then when getting a response that totally negates you beliefs, you change it from earlier to garner "sympathy'?

Talk about manipulation."

Oh, and for the record Wulf - there are many, many things you've been blatantly - and hysterically - wrong about. Things that, if you had actually read people's posts you would have known about.

About DT being a guy, about SignyM and I being female, about both of us having families, about SignyM having a special needs child ...

... and I have a great sense of humor, too. For example, you're a riot in my book. It's too much fun laughing at you. So, keep posting, OK ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:42 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


Rue,

If I hate, which I TRY not to, its only against peeps who would destroy the world because they feel "wronged". Such as in your case, where you feel that you were denied the opportunities of life because you were a woman.

Instead of working around said obstructions for the betterment of all.

And again, hate is the wrong word, Rue.

Rage is better.

Edit: Also, please....YOU keep posting. It helps my life to learn to boondoggle folks like you.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:48 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"If I hate, which I TRY not to, its only against peeps who would destroy the world because they feel "wronged". Such as in your case, where you feel that you were denied the opportunities of life because you were a woman."

I don't feel hate. Or rage. Or wronged.

You don't see me blaming the ills of my life on others like you do. You don't see me contantly moaning about my past and how I was wronged like you do. You don't see me espousing the right to hate like you do. You don't see me trolling people who have the nerve to disagree with me like you do.

We ALL know you have problems. Even Frem knows.

So, get over your problems, or keep hitting yourself on the head with the same hammer till the day you die. It's all the same to me. Though, personally, I take some pleasure in thinking you will never get over yourself.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:50 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Wanna ask something: If it's so important to have children in order to spread your ideas, how did the very wealthiest...those with the least children and numerically the smallest... manage to convince ALL of the rest of us to buy into a system that works best.. for them??

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:55 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


Lol

Im sorry Rue. I really am. I know your life and the trials you've faced. I've seen the hurt and the anger and the beliefs it has driven you to. It was wrong to malign you for that.

As for me.... well... I will keep holding the line. Keep meeting stupidity with truth, fighting for the day when we can all be free.

Yeah, I have problems. We all do. I make no bones about that.

But I'll be damned before I let folks KEEP doing the things that have made the world the hell that it is.

"Those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

Some peeps think that is the end of the story

Fuck that.

I will put my boot in your ass, to make you learn, so that history is NEVER repeated, and we can all move forward.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 11:58 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"But I'll be damned before I let folks KEEP doing the things that have made the world the hell that it is."

Yes massah.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 12:02 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Mmm... Wulf... fascist much?

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 12:12 PM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


Rue,

Slave much?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 12:15 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Dictator much ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 12:20 PM

DREAMTROVE


Rue,

read that one, and several others. It's still a fact, as are the transfusions. What you are seeing is Koprowski's life work, clearing his name, and getting people to help him. I researched this a lot. I'm convinced, he did it, he should own up to it.

Sig,

Population control is a fascist idea. End of story. If you believe in it, we should avoid this topic.

Quote:

has nothing to do with feminism, but more with capitalism


You're missing a very large part of the puzzle. No movement ever succeeds without power backing. Feminism is an idea, but cannot win, and neither can civil rights, or anything else, without the backing of govt. or capital. This is because there is no power to the people. The people have no power. Watch the protests marching against every war there's ever been. 99% of the population can oppose a policy, and policy marches on. It only changes when the people in power want it to.

Were there well meaning people in the women's lib movemen? Of course there were. Did they effect the change. No, they couldn't, they didn't have the power. The only powers here are the gun and the buck. The gun belongs to the govt, and the buck belongs to the federal reserve.

Kathy,

Quote:

No. What you say just isn't so.


Oh, just keep telling yourself that. It makes all the nightmares go away. Peace and bunnyrabbits. The world is made of popcorn.

Quote:

THE PHONY MUST DIE SAYS THE CATCHER IN THE RYE ! THE DUCK IS IN THE NOOSE MOTHER GOOSE !


Ah, He's bringing the crazy, I challenged him...
Last Time I saw her she was chained to a walnut tree. That, of course, is a fangirl pris at a convention.

Quote:

55-million genocided in USA since 1973...


Ah, an inconvenient truth :)

[edit]
I was answering these stupid posts, which cost me a thousand, so I learned my lesson, don't talk to feminists. I thought that agreeing to disagree would work, I said I wouldn't argue, and they brought the crazy and baited me in, and I fell for it, and blew a deal. Once bitten, twice shy.

Now, for reality check,

Wulf

You should know that Rue and Signy are a tag team. They know each other off site and attack in unison. They can be reasonable on other topics.

It's just like I don't discuss the merits of Islam with Auraptor. Same thing. Just atm, I'm going with the "just avoid altogether" list. I'm really quite ticked, about the money, not about the argument, I think you guys are just either uninformed or incredibly naive in a pollyanna way.

But I blame myself for defending myself, I should have just given up at the first angry response, as I should have with citizen, and just said "you're right, we're inferior, thank you for pointing that out."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 1:24 PM

AGENTROUKA


Thank you for clarifying your position, DT.


I do not agree with you, but I'm not going to make an argument about it because I neither have the time nor do I think you would much like that. But again, thanks for clarifying.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 1:29 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


DT

"I thought that agreeing to disagree would work ..."

As I get it, you want to be able to rant at length and make shit up, and can't stand when other people express their opinions if they are not in line with yours. You want this to be your personal forum and are looking for other people to just shut up and go along with whatever you post.

In other words, you just want people to agree with you. And then when they don't, you blame them for your response.

***************************************************************

Smooth move.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 1:59 PM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


Rue,

As I get it, you want to be able to rant at length and make shit up, and can't stand when other people express their opinions if they are not in line with yours. You want this to be your personal forum and are looking for other people to just shut up and go along with whatever you post.

In other words, you just want people to agree with you. And then when they don't, you blame them for your response.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 2:25 PM

DREAMTROVE


Based on that lovely mad rant?
That's hardly sporting. I was initially just trying to tick off Kathy because she said some very insulting things.

When one side of an argument crawls into its shell and clings to its stubborn beliefs, the other side must do the same, or risk an absurd compromise.

Follow this logic, say you and I disagree, your position is 100, mine is 0, and the truth is somewhere in the middle, we don't know where. If you say 90, and I say 10, etc. until you've said 60 and I've said 40, then you suddenly say 100, you're inviting me to compromise, and say 70. That road lead to me saying 99, and eventually 100.

Consider the Regnery argumentative structure:

Regnery says that his model is to start with an accepted truth, say, white people killed indians and took their land. Then he creates an absurd counterpoint, he argues that no, actually, whites moved into empty land after indians killed each other in wars. Then, he could spark a debate, and create proponents of both sides, and have them land in the middle. He has now compromised truth with falsehood, and a new accept version is created.

The point being, compromise is not always the best tactical move. If She and her friend take the position of "If you don't completely agree with us you're a pig" the only sensible countermove is to be a pig. If it continued, I had some great slavegirl pics to post. The only alterative is to appease unlimited arrogance until it becomes dictator of truth.

The fact of the matter is my position is that there's nothing offensive about female empowerment, but that early feminists were fascists, which, go ahead, read them and see, and that there was a push to get this new ideology in, which swept in a lot of good people. Tying yourself to this older movement is like tying yourself to any other atrocious ideas. George Allen thought institutional racism was probably a good idea, John Kerry thought nuking Japan was a good move. These things sink campaigns. If the new feminists are going to be this hostile, then by all means, let them fail. But if they want to succeed, they should be a little more careful, and less starry eyed followers.

Essentially, the basis is real: The ism of you is the flattery sell, it appeals to the ego, and a sense of superiority. That doesn't mean there aren't equality issues, etc. But, come to me with the approach of: "I'm going to ram my world view down your throat, and eat it buster" then I'm going to not look at those issues. I'll say, oh, it's the same old guard in new clothing.


Reality: there's a lot of scary stuff that goes on. I'm not a random follower of conspiracy theories. I know far more about this stuff as I would ever post. I may be crazy, but I'm not wrong.

Here's a harsh cold reality:

HIV (however it was derived) was not genetically engineered to target black people, since genetic engineering hadn't been invented yet. But, the science of how to spread a plague is very simple, and was know in Europe during the black death, and in the ancient Mediterranean civilizations, where it was used. If you look at the evidence, the WHO swept in and did massive blood transfusions which spread the disease across Africa. Why? I don't know. I don't have a motive. If I were to guess, I would say someone was testing a bioweapon plan, and Africans were disposable.

The proof of that conspiracy theory is the massive transfusion plan that infected 10 million people in the former soviet union, after the collapse of communism. There's my "Aha!" The target was probably the USSR all along, and they needed a window of opportunity. Now I have a motive. Also, means, and opportunity. Mystery solved.


So, nefarious doctrines in feminism? As I said, it's not unique. There's a powerful group out there with the stated goal of reducing the world's population to 1 billion. That's not theory. It's not theory that population control is the major means they chose to do this. It's not theory that the early feminists were involved in population control, and part of that agenda.

What bothers me, is now it's just baggage. Sort of like the democratic party was founded on two platform points: First, extermination of the indians. Second, to get more support, slavery. They were in favor of both. That's not who they are today, but it's an awful lot of baggage. Every time a NY democrat like Eliot Spitzer takes a harsh anti-indian stance, it brings up that ugly past.

Now, if people drag up that baggage, you signal that yes, you are that old baggage, and nothing has changed.

Myself, I'm not a christian. I'm also not dumb. I know the point of population control, and the reason it's on the UN genocide charter: selective population control. It happens here, but that's nothing compared to how it will be used in the third world.

When I detailed the evolution of English genocide against the Irish, that was where I was coming from. Not from a wacko perspective. This is very real. Look at Ireland today: It's being colonized by Brits. The Irish are now a minority in Ireland. Soon, there will be no Ireland, just more of England. Part of a 1500 year plan. More than that, the Romans and Germans had to wipe the celts out of Europe first.

When I hear someone come out in support of population control, that's scary, because of the purpose of population control, which is ultimately, genocide. Selectively remove the target population, whether they're Irish or Zulus or Hmong, whatever, that rings to me the same as when people support or defend nuking Japan, or something like it.

There are some other issues like this today, old dead issues returned:

The prison labor program. What happens when a prison labor program needs more labor? Time to go arrest more black folk. Maybe not on Obama's watch, it was happening under Bush's. Police planting drugs, etc. to generate labor. Black labor, manual labor, for sale by the state to private companies. Someone cleverly reinvented slavery. And there are a couple more ways that it's been tried and done recently.

These are scary ideas. These are not ideas that have any connection to the advancement of the position of women in society. But if any women concerned about those issues, take that line...

Buffy the Vampire Slayer is not about genocide, okay, maybe it is, against vampires. But Planned Parenthood is. Good people may follow it, work for it, but it's right there in the founding. That's why this group exists.

Suppose you were concerned about poverty in the South. You thought that the Civil War robbed the South, and created a permanent economic imbalance. I'm sure Historians would agree. So, now you have a cause. Restore the N-S economic balance. This mission used to belong to the KKK. Before it just became about racism, it was about regionalism, and the effects of the aftermath of the civil war. Don't believe it's still there? Take a long drive. It's there because our system is capitalist, it revolves around capital, which is inherited. The North inherits the spoils of the civil war just as whites inherit the spoils of slavery, which is why reparations are a good idea, restore that white-black imbalance.

But let's say you're from a southern state, and this is an issue you want to take on. You form a group, you want members. Here's an easy way to get a starter group with members, sympathizers and an extant organization, and even some cash... Call your new group the KKK!

You see the problem with that? You really want to inherit the KKK's baggage? Of course not, you would only want to correct an actual economic inequality.

So, is feminism hated? You betchya. Is it hated for a good reason? Absolutely. Is a new feminism going to be able to shake that? Maybe, but:

good idea: come up with a new name, a new concept, and not anchor yourself to that baggage in the first place.

bad idea: not only tie yourself to it, but hail the early heroes of the movement, and defend their positions.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 3:09 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


So DT

What exactly did I post that was insulting ? Find it. Post it. Or shut up.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 3:20 PM

DREAMTROVE


Kathy,

1. Where do I start? Where you compared me to Margaret Sanger? I think it was before that. You can be a can of venom sometimes.
2. Stop tag teaming, everyone hates it.
3. Do you guys have any idea how you sound? I mean, move over Rush Limbaugh.

I'm angry at you at the moment, but it will pass, if you stop posting. I'm not going to godwin this one, I have plenty of parallels to draw.

On this board, there are a few things that people that post stuff that's truly objectionable. I think Auraptor's posted some things about muslims that I found reprehensible. So has FMF, and a couple of other people.

I may be mistaken, but I don't make stuff up. We're on subjects I've researched fairly well. I don't think anything I've posted here is inaccurate. Oh, I might have made a snark or two, they're usually identified as such, either in the post, or the following one where I say "that was a snark" but the facts are real: You're pet political movement has a dark side to its history. So does the UN, WHO, IMF, World Bank, hell, even the United States of America, as a whole, has a serious dark side to its history, and some of it isn't that old.

If it were me, I'd be concerned, introspective, and examine that history.

I'm still not clear on one thing. You know who I am, everyone does, Im a former lunatic, with a fifth grade education, and I grow tomatoes. Anyone who is afraid of me as a force has issues. I wield the power of the rotten tomato.

You, on the other hand, are a govt. scientist, if I have this right, you work on atmospheric issues, which I'm guessing is pollution control.

You wield the power of the co2 count. Give me a co2 count and carbon monoxide, and pollution analysis, a little local greenhouse effect analysis in Los Angeles, I'm likely to believe you.

In the information age, we all have access to the same information, suddenly, we're all equal. I mentioned before I watched a group of researchers at Princeton get taken down and pwned on their own subject by a group of African villagers in a remote region of Kenya. Why? Because the guys in Kenya were right, and the guys at Princeton eventually caved. Because everyone has a brain, and everyone has access to the same information.

We are each entitled to out own opinions, but as politicians are fond of saying... [i think you can complete this]

So, sure, I agree with Pirate News on Roe v. Wade. It's a religious point of view. It doesn't affect my feeling towards feminism, or female empowerment, which I don't view to be the same thing, or even related, except by the academic connection, which is an opinion. The women of my family went to arch liberal colleges became ardent feminists, chased away the men of their life, and are childless. That's another nail.

But if you scan through, I've already posted the really creepy story about one of my sisters, and the visit that it prompted from planned parenthood: She was a problem birth, due to a chemical exposure to a teratogenic. You're a scientist, but you might want to check the etymology of that word if you don't know it offhand. They tried to convince my mother to not have any more children. Their assumption, it was a genetic defect. The fact that it wasn't isn't an issue, the issue is that had they been successful, I wouldn't have been born. And, they had an issue with my sister being born. Selective abortion, there's a scary issue. Different people being deleted, based on scans, genetic scans. This is an opinion from a mind foreign probably to your own: The moral equivalent would be to, instead of trying to cure the sick, we could simply kill them, and maintain a healthy population.

So yes, I have opinions, and issues. There are also facts. And I was driven to uncover some of those facts.

I suspect you and signy have issues, you're arguing to beat down a random rural uneducated unemployed farmer with a history of problems. What? Do my ideas represent a threat to your ideology?

A lot of people here have issues. Some have religious beliefs. Some have ideals, and things they care about. Female empowerment is not a threat to me. I have serious issues with population control: Here's another. I have a close friend in China who is breaking up with his wife. He can't leave, because he won't leave without his son. She doesn't care about the son, she hires someone to take care of him, never sees him. But, because of the one child rule, she cannot have another, and so will not let him go. So there they are, stalemated. They don't even talk.

Another issue, this tag team thing pushed someone off this board, someone we all know. You pushed, and you broke her. We all know this. You're not about to break me. All the damage you can do is what you already did, which is I lost a thousand dollar deal because I was busy with this hate exchange, which is what I'm angry about. It's a lot of money here. Maybe not in LA.

But if you can, lets just move on. Tell me about the air in LA. I'm genuinely interested. I know that its a unique air current that traps CO and CO2, and could be a model for extreme greenhouse effect. I've read something about it, but I'm currently talking to a chemist who works this. I'm not wrong, right? What about california wildfires? Is there a connection between that and the pollution, and can I call this "local warming?"

Neither of us is about to change population control policies of the US govt. or anyone else.



Oh, rouka, read back, the last post was to you, I almost PMed it, but decided it was too long.

I'm still in bed with a high fever and I feel like hell. I'm considering giving Jericho a try. I tried Fringe last night, I thought it was weak.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 3:40 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Here is the sum of my posts, in order, up to the point of your self-described rant.

Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 10:38
"Working in the home is STILL work. Despite what others would tell you. And its a damn important job, too."
But it's a job that can be done by men as well as women.
By rough numbers: most people had mothers who were less nurturing than their fathers.


Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 10:56
"Despite the hype about alpha males, it's all about the kids."
Since you didn't mention this, I thought I'd put it in for others: it doesn't matter how 'fit' you are - in terms of evolution, sterility negates virility. But even more, it isn't even about how many you spawn - in terms of evolution, dead young ones won't carry your family tradition, or you genes.
It's about how many of your young SURVIVE LONG ENOUGH TO HAVE YOUNG OF THEIR OWN.
Otherwise --- game over.


Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 10:58
"Lets not go there, and lets play nice, shall we Rue?"
I AM playing nice. It's the truest and most helpful thing you'll ever get from anyone.
Or, in a more extended version: as long as you define who you are by the things that were done to you, you will never get over them - and you will never grow up to be a free adult.


Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 12:59
"... seriously, pressure!"
Oh great. Now I have the song going through my head ...
PRESSURE !
Under pressure ...
Um ba ba be
Um ba ba be
De day da
Ee day da - that's o.k.


And here is the timestamp on your self-described rant.
Thursday, January 29, 2009 - 01:02

Here is your rationale for your rant.

"1. Where do I start? Where you compared me to Margaret Sanger? I think it was before that. You can be a can of venom sometimes."

So, where is it ? Where is the horrible insult ? Where is the venom ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 3:59 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


As a separate post, regarding what you perceive as tag-teaming ---

Apparently you haven't noticed that there are many days each week when I don't come to the board at all, and that there are many other days each week when I barely post. You also haven't noticed that SignyM is genuinely interested in making-nice, and I am not. We also have different opinions. Do you REALLY think we get together to figure out how to 'get you' ? That neither of us has our own opinion, or agenda ? Do you really think we spend our time focusing on you, or Wulf, or others on the board ?

How logical is that ?

I understand that many people get us confused, just as I sometime confuse Rap with Zit. But if you take the time, you will see that we are not the same, and not even close to being the same.

And, to turn this around - and what are you and Wulf doing, exactly ? It sure seems to me like you two are tag-teaming. In fact, I KNOW it is ! So there !


***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 4:00 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


DT, I think you see venom where there is none and I have absolutely no idea what you're reacting to. Call it tag-teaming if you want- altho I usually don't step in to defend Rue- but I think you'd have a hard time demonstrating where this horrible insult is.



---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 4:24 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


But, to the issues at-hand:
Quote:

The fact of the matter is my position is that there's nothing offensive about female empowerment, but that early feminists were fascists
You quote ONE early feminist and label all of them fascists? Somewhere between Sanger and now, there wer whole host of feminists without the eugenics baggage. Apparently you've never read "Witches Midwives and Nurses". But the exception seems to fascinate you.
Quote:

Tying yourself to this older movement is like tying yourself to any other atrocious ideas.
I'm not espousing Sanger eugenics program, and the only one who is "tying" me to her is you, apparently.
Quote:

If the new feminists are going to be this hostile, then by all means, let them fail.
New? Do you mean new as in Gloria Steinem? Or newer than that? Which "new" feminism are you talking about? The one that is all about female empoerment but is silent on birth control?
Quote:

Essentially, the basis is real: The ism of you is the flattery sell, it appeals to the ego, and a sense of superiority. That doesn't mean there aren't equality issues, etc. But, come to me with the approach of: "I'm going to ram my world view down your throat, and eat it buster" then I'm going to not look at those issues.
Prolly the same reason I don't take Wulf too seriously on the issues either.
Quote:

Reality: there's a lot of scary stuff that goes on. ... Here's a harsh cold reality: So, nefarious doctrines in feminism? As I said, it's not unique. There's a powerful group out there with the stated goal of reducing the world's population to 1 billion.
LIke I asked before: if a large populaton is esential for spreading an idea, how is it that the very wealthiest... the least reproductive and numerically the smallest... have convinced everyone else to go along with capitalism?
Quote:

Now, if people drag up that baggage, you signal that yes, you are that old baggage, and nothing has changed.
A woman being able to limit her number of pregancies is not "population control". But if you think there is something inherently wrong with that, then you should focus on changing the CIRCUMSTANCES which make fewer children the ideal option. Either make women poor, ignorant, disenfranchised... barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen again... or come up with a system that makes child-bearing and child-rearing not so onerous to one gender.
Quote:

When I detailed the evolution of English genocide against the Irish, that was where I was coming from. Not from a wacko perspective. This is very real. Look at Ireland today: It's being colonized by Brits. The Irish are now a minority in Ireland. Soon, there will be no Ireland, just more of England. Part of a 1500 year plan. More than that, the Romans and Germans had to wipe the celts out of Europe first.
Peeps simply aren't organized enough for 1500-year plans.
Quote:

When I hear someone come out in support of population control, that's scary, because of the purpose of population control, which is ultimately, genocide.
You hop, skip and jump from birth control to selective population control to wipe out a group. Slippery slope. But you havent' made your case that they are the same.
Quote:

So, is feminism hated? You betchya.
By who?
---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 5:19 PM

DREAMTROVE


Rue, Sig

medication time? [<--snark]

Okay, the Sanger thing might have come before you called me a liar and said that I was just making sh*t up and bullying people into taking it or something like that.

On tag teaming, it's tag teaming when the two of you, and are not the same person, but who do know each other, take a position, you back each other up, and become an argumentative unit. It's been commented on several times, like the way Citizen doesn't know when to let go, Whozit is immature, and my posts are way too long.


Me and Wulf are so much not a unit that he didn't know I was a guy. We were not forming one argument, we were just two people who happened to disagree.


Venom, you just don't know you're doing it. You spew venom on a level that the boards neocons used to. Maybe this comes from having a president in power? I don't know, I've never voted for a winner.


Okay,

Quote:

DT

"I thought that agreeing to disagree would work ..."

As I get it, you want to be able to rant at length and make shit up, and can't stand when other people express their opinions if they are not in line with yours. You want this to be your personal forum and are looking for other people to just shut up and go along with whatever you post.




That's a can of venom, in response to this fairly reasonable post:

Quote:


Rue,

read that one, and several others. It's still a fact, as are the transfusions. What you are seeing is Koprowski's life work, clearing his name, and getting people to help him. I researched this a lot. I'm convinced, he did it, he should own up to it.

Sig,

Population control is a fascist idea. End of story. If you believe in it, we should avoid this topic.

Quote:
has nothing to do with feminism, but more with capitalism



You're missing a very large part of the puzzle. No movement ever succeeds without power backing. Feminism is an idea, but cannot win, and neither can civil rights, or anything else, without the backing of govt. or capital. This is because there is no power to the people. The people have no power. Watch the protests marching against every war there's ever been. 99% of the population can oppose a policy, and policy marches on. It only changes when the people in power want it to.

Were there well meaning people in the women's lib movemen? Of course there were. Did they effect the change. No, they couldn't, they didn't have the power. The only powers here are the gun and the buck. The gun belongs to the govt, and the buck belongs to the federal reserve.

Kathy,

Quote:
No. What you say just isn't so.



Oh, just keep telling yourself that. It makes all the nightmares go away. Peace and bunnyrabbits. The world is made of popcorn.



Okay, that last line, was a snark. I thought that was obvious. Now the rest of my response was quoting and directed to Pirate News and Wulf, really on different tangents, not on what we were talking about. I was not "tag teaming" but showing a little solidarity fellow conservatives, and to point out, through that, not a joint attack, but the sort of value that you are up against when you post. I thought that it was good for perspective.

Meaning, I was reminding you that basically, the commonly held belief on this side of the aisle is that Roe v Wade killed over 50 million people. That's an opinion, based on ones perception of the nature of life.

My point of the maple seed post was to point out that the US, a major food producer, easily had space for those 50 million, in resources. That's not always the case. If it's not the case, then the issue becomes more complex. What to do with excess Chinese or Indians, move them to America? Maybe. But that's a whole other discussion.

The thing is that you need to know that position, when you are debating someone.

Sorry Wulf, I'm just using this as an example:

We all know that Wulf has an inter-racial marriage because he posted the picks. Someone came on and accused him of racism. That seems absurd. Wulf has childhood trauma of what we would call reverse discrimination, and so he believes it exists, believes it's an issue. Anyone talking to Wulf, if they're on this board, knows those things, or should.

Likewise, you should know when you're talking to someone who had one side of their family wiped out because in the holocaust, and the other side just grew up, succumbed to "population control" and thus has become a dead end, I become close to an island. Also, I have a personal history issue with Planned Parenthood vis a vis my sister. I read her book objectively, I was curious where she was coming from, assuming it was somewhere better than it was, the more I looked, the more this is what I saw, a structure of population control.

To me, Roe v. Wade is population control, population control is genocide, which is logically consistent.

I think more than most: I oppose war, the death penalty, lethal weapons, capital punishment, environmental destruction, and I'm a vegetarian.
I'm very consistently pro-life. The comments of solidarity were to remind you of this fact, which is that you were not just insulting me, but also offending me on several levels: A personal level, with family history, which I have posted, a strong moral level, in which you were supporting or arguing on the side of something I find abhorrent, and tying it to something I support, female empowerment, and finally, on a philosophical religious level, which is an assault on RTL as a valid position. Add to this that I have a high fever, I'm miserable in bed, I have no medicine, I'm snowed in coughing like mad in a lot of pain and lost 1000 dollars while having this argument which I said many many times I did not want to have, precisely because of the divisive and personal issues involved. Also, because I had only read enough to see a fascist hand and a govt. hand, something to be very skeptical of, I said the matter required further study.


Sig, the second post

1. Sanger and this other Sophie someone, famous Scot, Steinem and co are also very damaging, I'm not sure what their game is yet, but it maybe be a combination of things. People can surpise you. I never pegged Walter Cronkite a neocon-globalist, but turns out he was

2. It's not populations which have influence, it's capital itself. Gold, or the equiv, and the very few people who hold it.

3. Not debating Roe v Wade. I don't think we ever should. It's a waste of my time and a waste of yours. Neither of us is going to move.

4. there are lots of plans older than 1500 years, but for the English-Irish dispute, just read some history. You will see how the English went from a small minority to the overwhelming majority through tremendous levels of trickery deceit and sometimes out and out extermination. Currently, it's population control. It's an evolution, the next step in genocide: Kill em, persecute them, persecute something that will tag them, but doesn't look like it's directed against them, move them, starve them out, rule them, keep them poor, and finally, try to influence or enforce population control on them. This is what the british have done, and they're not alone by a long stretch. There may be other more advanced, more discreet forms of genocide, they just haven't evolved yet, or haven't been recognized.

5. By most men, and many women, those who ended up childless, and those who simply don't like being told "because you are female, you must believe this." If someone handed you a set of beliefs based race, and said that all, I'll guess white, could be wrong, people should believe? You might react against it and say "I'm an individual, and I have my own ideas." So yes, I don't know a man who would marry a feminist, and I know a lot of men. They might sleep with one, but with no intention of staying. Men do think long and hard about the difference of what they might want, biologically, and what they could socially tolerate. My experience is that it's loved only in one place: academia, and mostly by women. There are a few male feminists, I was one, until a women talked me out of it, from the individualist angle. I oppose collectivism, so the argument made sense to me. Most male feminists are fakers, or pro a part of it.

Joss likes femme fatales, most men do, he also has a hang-up for girl on girl, most men do. I think he likes being a male feminist icon, I don't think he's really either a liberal or a feminist in the classic sense. I think steven colbert is a feminist an a liberal.

This is pretty obvious from the fanbase.

Feminist per se don't scare me, they annoy me. (as they have been doing today <-- snark) Hillary Clinton, no kind of feminist at all, scares me, but more in a psycho-some-day-I'll-be-played-by-Glenn-Close sort of way.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 7:34 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


DT, I see that you're positions are passionately held and deeply personal, but they puzzle me.

For instance, is is just abortion you're against or ALL forms of contraception? Because from a "eugenics" standpoint either mechanism will get you to the same end. (So will starvation by appropriation of goods or economic isolation. Did you know that during the potato famine, Ireland was exporting wheat, beef, milk, butter, and cheese?)

So what is the basis for your reaction? Deliberate manipulations of populations, or specifically against killing embryos? Or, perhaps, something else? Perhaps the concept of limiting the number of births as being reflective of a culture of death? Maybe you think cultures should celebrate life, and "nature" should deal death? That would be in-tune with the rest of your positions.
Quote:

Steinem and co are also very damaging
They are? How?
Not a big follower of Steinem, just trying to figure out what YOU mean by the "new" feminism, which I feel you really haven't explained.
Quote:

It's not populations which have influence, it's capital itself. Gold, or the equiv, and the very few people who hold it.
I guess this is where the nascent Marxist in me says... it's production that counts.
Quote:

. Not debating Roe v Wade. I don't think we ever should. It's a waste of my time and a waste of yours. Neither of us is going to move
That goes back to my question of... are you against contraception or just abortion?
Quote:

there are lots of plans older than 1500 years, but for the English-Irish dispute, just read some history.
There are lots of disputes that have existed for centuries, but not so many "plans". I think what survives are memes, not plans.
Quote:

Currently, it's population control. It's an evolution, the next step in genocide: Kill em, persecute them, persecute something that will tag them, but doesn't look like it's directed against them, move them, starve them out, rule them, keep them poor, and finally, try to influence or enforce population control on them. This is what the british have done, and they're not alone by a long stretch. There may be other more advanced, more discreet forms of genocide, they just haven't evolved yet, or haven't been recognized.
You can point to one example of genocide, but that doesn't mean that all forms of birth control are genocide. I just means that genocide is genocide.
Quote:

By most men, and many women, those who ended up childless, and those who simply don't like being told "because you are female, you must believe this."
I don't know ANYONE who says "you must not have children" altho I know plenty who say "you must". The way I see it, if you have the responsibility you have the authority. If you're the person who winds up raising children then YOU get to say whether or not you'll have children in the first place. It's the exact opposite of this demonic world-wide 100-year-old eugenics plan that you think is in place: it's putting the decision at the lowest level, where it belongs.
Quote:

So yes, I don't know a man who would marry a feminist, and I know a lot of men.
Am I a feminist? I'm married. My hubby is not a feminist btw.
Quote:

it's loved only in one place: academia, and mostly by women.
Amazing, a womens' movement loved by women! Did you ever here about the Benguine communities?


---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 8:03 PM

BYTEMITE


I'm sorry if this is an unwelcome interruption, but I just read/skimmed The Case for Birth Control by Margaret Sanger, and I thought maybe I could contribute to this conversation by talking about it.

I think this might be a long post, sorry again. I try not to get carried away and keep things short out of consideration of all your time, but sometimes I can't help it.

So, she starts out pretty innocently. In fact, I'd say that most of her book is actually just a compilation of numerical stats (the parts I skimmed) and statements from doctors. And I think birth control, as the choice of the woman in the case of being unable to support any more children is not itself wrong.

I've mentioned that I live in Salt Lake City, and my extended family... Well, they're mormon. My immediate family isn't. But one of my aunts has had seven children already, and the number of pregnancies she's had has damaged her bladder. She can't have any more children without serious risk to her health, and I know my uncle wants more (but thankfully will not pursue the matter). And they can support their children, so while I think it's awful that she's basically SPENT herself, health-wise, I suppose I can't judge.

In high school, someone I knew had ten siblings. They lived in a tiny house, several people to one bedroom. The CLUTTER. The RESTROOMS AND SEWAGE. The parents could no longer raise all of their children, the older siblings had begun to take on that role. They were incredibly happy, it was all very emotionally supportive, but I really felt sorry for them, because it was a genuinely unhealthful environment, and they were all of them underfed.

And if the person is going to get one anyway, birth control is really a better alternative I believe to... You know. Not so explosively controversial. Don't think I have the stamina for an argument on that topic, so moving RIGHT along...

Back to Sanger. She founded Family Planning, supported birth control, and was trying to discourage all that. So I don't really understand why people here are calling her a murderer... Anyone want to elaborate? Is it the family planning thing, do they do the whatsits?

However, I will say, that some of the arguments Dreamtrove mentioned ARE here, and they are a bit chilling.

She talks about unfit and/or feebleminded parents begetting similarly "inferior" children. She further suggests as part of her recommended birth control program that doctors specifically target so called "inferior" parents and try to convince them to try birth control.

Nations that she also talks about being particularly advanced in the area of birth control... Well... *cough* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization

She does mention population control for society as a positive benefit or her recommended program. Better work force, labor markets, quality of life, all direct results, she claims.

She advocates the government's intervention between unfit parents and their children. Now I'm not sure how far her argument extends, she didn't elaborate much, so I don't know if that's for clear-cut cases of abuse or... I don't know. Something sinister, I guess.

And she talks about the working class women in America in those times not having access to birth control, when the wealthy women do. I seriously doubt that was the case, what with the obscenity acts preventing people from circulating any sort of literature about conception. If wealthy women weren't having more children, it's because they were wealthier women, and their husbands probably didn't pay much attention to them. Really stuffy times back then.

Anyhoo. The weird thing about that is, she's advocating birth control for the working class. She's a socialist. That doesn't make much sense to me, that would seem to interfere with her desired uprising of the working class. Was she trying to incense the working class by giving them the feeling of being denied? Or was that all part of her master socialist plan?

Second to last comment: I think, because birth control nowadays is based off of female human hormones, that all those pills may be causing women to develop breast cancer. Rates are up, and I don't think it's parallel to the rate of population growth. Of course, there's also probably the hormones that are in cow's milk too, but I'm not about to dismiss a potential source.

Last comment: Margaret Sanger is only one feminist out of many. I'll have to read more works to find out if the theme of eugenics is more pervasive.

DT, I'm sorry to hear that this debate cost you so much. :( I hope that you feel better soon, and that opportunity will come by again.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 29, 2009 8:46 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

And she talks about the working class women in America in those times not having access to birth control, when the wealthy women do. I seriously doubt that was the case
Wealthy women had access to abortions performed out of country, or by well-paid physicans within the USA. Abortions have been known since... time immemorial. That's why the Hippocratic oath injunctions it. (Babies are the property of the male. A women did not have the right to steal her husband's property. The culture at the time: May your wife be as the fuitful vine in the recesses of your home.)
Quote:

If wealthy women weren't having more children, it's because they were wealthier women, and their husbands probably didn't pay much attention to them. Really stuffy times back then.
And then there was always prostitution. Everything they do today, they did back then. And even more so. Did you hear about the latrine pits outside of the whorehouses of ancient Greece and Rome? Filled with the skeletons of newborns.
Quote:

Anyhoo. The weird thing about that is, she's advocating birth control for the working class. She's a socialist. That doesn't make much sense to me, that would seem to interfere with her desired uprising of the working class.
I can't speak for Sanger. To me she's a historical figure w/o much relevance. But my interpretation would be this: Whether thought of as workers or mothers, women who are cranking out an endless supply of babies simply don't have the time or energy to become involved in larger issues of justice, fairness etc.

Dont' mean to sound snarky, just out of time!

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 30, 2009 5:25 AM

DREAMTROVE


Sig,

I'm way to sick to carry on this discussion, I'll try to read your post and make some comments, but I'm really not up for it, so this is like the 5 min warning I'm abandoning the thread, not because of the topic, though I think these can be pointless.

Quote:


For instance, is is just abortion you're against or ALL forms of contraception? Because from a "eugenics" standpoint either mechanism will get you to the same end. (So will starvation by appropriation of goods or economic isolation. Did you know that during the potato famine, Ireland was exporting wheat, beef, milk, butter, and cheese?)



1. Not discussing RTL. I'm against killing things, so, a) killing anything, b) a larger scheme that has the goal of killing, so, no, if a population has decided to limit itself because of lack of resources or whatever, then fine. But if one population is manipulating another...

2. On Ireland, a lot of people on my mom's side were in that famine. I think you'll find some others here... You're point being?

Did you know that the govt. in Dublin was, and possibly still is, an English puppet settlement? The term beyond the pale refered to "beyond the fence, outside of dublin where the irish were."

Look at African famines, they are often exporting food. The govt, or some powerbroker, is making money, and letting the locals starve, or encouraging it. In fact, this is how famines happen, in general. It's not a natural disaster, it's a man made one, and a form of genocide. I cannot think of an exception.

Quote:

So what is the basis for your reaction? Deliberate manipulations of populations


Yes. It's a prominent force in the world. What would have happened to China without the policy? China would have exported a lot of humans, probably here. Someone didn't want a lot of Chinese people roaming about. I strongly suspect that the deal was cut for "most favored nation status." We can't allow this because it's an effective way to destroy a population. This I would consider bad in itself, but consider this:

If there is a tool to remove an opposing population, then people would use it. Eugenicists and supremacists. The former would want to weed out the undesireables, like Sanger, the later might try to weed out "threats" and target educated populations, dissenting populations, while breeding a slave population. This is not about genetics, but a prime example at the moment is Israel: They would love to limit palestinian population growth. At the moment, they're using brute force, but they've hit the limit of what the world will stand for on that. Next, they might try to starve them out, and then they might just manipulate the govt. of Palestine to put in place population control, and do what the English have done.

Here's where it gets worse: Suppose the victim/target population figures it out. It won't be in a position to do the same to the dominant population controlling them, because it won't hold the keys to power. but it will have the more primitive means. So figure that this hypothetical takes place, because it will, maybe in Palestine, maybe not, but somewhere. The logical next step for a Palestinian resistance movement would be to nuke Tel Aviv.

This whole situation is really what this war is about, the one we are in. Globalists want to change the middle east to put in new govts. to a) put them a proto world world govt supranational union like EU or NAFTA, (It already exists, it's called MEFTA) and b) to control the population. It's not an overpopulated area, but it has high population growth, and it's getting to the point where it's already impossible for Israel to take on Iran, and soon it might be impossible for the US. So, if they can't genocide the population in some way, and maintain technological supremacy, they will never win, and if they don't win, they're one world dream, which I would call global domination, would fail.

Quote:

Perhaps the concept of limiting the number of births as being reflective of a culture of death? Maybe you think cultures should celebrate life, and "nature" should deal death? That would be in-tune with the rest of your positions.


Yes, this would be correct. I just wanted to deal out some political real world rationale so you could see where this sort of thing might lead.

Quote:

Steinem and co are also very damaging

They are? How?
Not a big follower of Steinem, just trying to figure out what YOU mean by the "new" feminism, which I feel you really haven't explained.



By "hating men" and then by backing off of "hating men" to "hating characteristics, which happen to belong to all men" they're driving a wedge between genders. I think the point of this is population control.

Remember, back to Ireland. After they English stopped just killing celts, they moved to burning witches, and then to killing catholics, all of which was really about targeting celts, under disguise. Feminism targets men, under disguise.

Female empowerment doesn't. That's why men react to Steinem and co. but not to Buffy. Buffy's not a threat. If women had superpowers, we'd be okay with that. Just as long as we can be guys, and not have any part of that nature labelled as 'evil.'

Quote:


Quote:
It's not populations which have influence, it's capital itself. Gold, or the equiv, and the very few people who hold it.

I guess this is where the nascent Marxist in me says... it's production that counts.



And I would be mixed. Under capitalism, capital buys production. The is creating the national debt. The purpose of that is leverage. If they create an insane value for that debt, it can be traded off at pennies for the dollar to the debtor, us, and still be enough to buy everything. This has happened many times in history, and particularly since 1640 or so.

Quote:

That goes back to my question of... are you against contraception or just abortion?


I answered this one.I'm against two things: 1) Killing people, 2) genocidal tactics. If you have a birth control measure that doesn't do that, then fine. I'm pro-stem cell because I think that's pro-life. An embryonic stem cell isn't a human, it's a part of a human. It's destiny is not to become a personality, but probably to become a spleen. If it becomes a spleen, it's still alive, and it may help an existing human survive, who might not. The Christians with their God's will stuff make me something go Argh! because often the issue is that there's a need for a new spleen or whatever because of a toxic chemical from some factory. But, sure, if you want to use it to thwart nature, then I'm for that too, because everyone already is. Better to take an antibiotic than just let nature take its course right?

I'd favor the rtl of those alive over the lives of those not yet, but not over the convenience of people. I think that science will make that convenience issue a non issue in short order. But my larger objection to abortion is that it's part of a greater population control strategy. Sure, the populations should control themselves, as many animals do, but based on their own resources, etc. Not based on manipulation, even that in our education system. There's lots of food in American. There's lots of food in Africa. More than is need to feed the Africans.

And yes, I think the us govt. and globalists have a genocidal position against Africa. It seems so strong that to me it defies logic. I still haven't accepted a reason, other than that of a testing ground for this sort of thing, because my mind hasn't wrapped around the more sinister alternatives yet, like this one:

What if the point of keeping HIV alive in Africa is to perpetually sell those nations HIV drugs to keep them in perpetual debt, to enslave the entire continent?

Unthinkable, right? But if you look at the numbers, that's rapidly becoming the result. The idea that this was the plan, or became the plan at some point, is mind boggling. I meanI like not to believe in good and evil. I can see Israel/Palestine as a battle of wills, and ultimately, the Palestinians could do what my Irish ancestors did, and flee. (though not from Gaza apparently.) But the level of evil required to accept our Africa policy at face value would be staggering.

Quote:

There are lots of disputes that have existed for centuries, but not so many "plans". I think what survives are memes, not plans.


Semantics. The revelation of St. John the Divine is an updated transcription of an earlier prophecy of the end of the world battle. Most people thing that on judgment day, the world ends. Anyone who has read it knows this is not true. But the origin of the prophecy may trace back to ancient egypt. It's a very old prophecy. But it contains a detailed explanation of how the "victor" wins. Revelations, written around 160 AD, describes tanks, planes, bombers, nukes, and biowarfare, in detail. It's not a coincidence. These things could easily have been proposed by the scientists at the time. They would have no idea how to build them, but would have no trouble concieving them. IMHO, the prophecy is an order form, saying "Build us this, when you can." I call that a plan, and a very old one. In the ancient world, people had construction projects that took 200 years, sometimes by design. We're individualist to the point where we don't think in terms of "passed our lifetimes" but other people have, particularly this would make sense if you believed in reincarnation, or some other divine immortality, or some group consciousness. The belief in the conscious soul of a race is an old one.

Quote:


You can point to one example of genocide, but that doesn't mean that all forms of birth control are genocide. I just means that genocide is genocide.



I can point to many. Yes, it doesn't, but it's a dangerous weapon.

Quote:

I don't know ANYONE who says "you must not have children"


not must, but shouldn't. Happened to my mom, after having a deformed child. But usually this sort of thing is far more subtle than that.

Quote:

The way I see it, if you have the responsibility you have the authority. If you're the person who winds up raising children then YOU get to say whether or not you'll have children in the first place. It's the exact opposite of this demonic world-wide 100-year-old eugenics plan that you think is in place: it's putting the decision at the lowest level, where it belongs.


Ah, 'twere only that the way of the world, but individuals are manipulated by massive long lasting institutions.

Quote:

Am I a feminist? I'm married. My hubby is not a feminist btw.


I was just saying, as a choice, if checking options, it's not one that men of today would select. Lots of islamic radicals are married, even though it's not something most muslim women would check as an option.

Quote:

Amazing, a womens' movement loved by women!


That would be "supremacy" in its simplest form. You support such a notion?

Quote:

Did you ever here about the Benguine communities?


No. A quick search returned 14th centuries nuns or something. I'm not up for this, so link

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 30, 2009 5:32 AM

DREAMTROVE


BM

sorry, I ran out of steam. Sanger gets more toned down as time goes on, and she was one of many who felt similarly at the time. "The New Race" which precedes that is more chilling, but is still an attempt to sell the idea to the general public. I imagine that among friends, this brand would have talked the way neocons and globalists talk. Hillary Clinton, Brezinsky, on the left, Perle, Kristol, in the middle, Cheney, Rummy on the right, any one of them might make a book and call it "the case for globalism" but it would be a sell, and would not include lines like "Dissolution of american sovereignty and subjugation of the american people is essential for our one world govt. to have absolute power. I think drugging children and fearmongering voters might be the way to go." But any one of them might have said it to any other of them, and probably have, and they would get a "Yep, you're probably right," or "Maybe, let me think about that." They would not get the response that they would get here to posting that

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 30, 2009 5:48 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


"Sorry Wulf, I'm just using this as an example:"

N/p, I don't mind.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 30, 2009 6:45 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


DT- hope you'll feel better soon.

I don't consider these discussions hopeless, rather thought-provoking. I'd like to continue when you're feeling better and I hope you'll feel the same.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 30, 2009 6:50 AM

BLUESUNCOMPANYMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Stop tag teaming, everyone hates it.


I feel your pain dude. It's hard being an objective thinker in a soup of posters mired in their ideologies.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 30, 2009 6:52 AM

DREAMTROVE


Sig,

Thanks.

The parts which bother me about this sort of discussion are twofold:

1. I don't like the level of animosity they bring, it's not long before this topic can turn into "Oppressor!" "Baby killer!" etc. Which doesn't help anyone.

2. They're philosophical debates about things we have no power over, which is okay, except that they have been elevated out of place. They belong on a level with "what killed the dinosaurs" or "why do wars happen." Worth discussing, but not urgent, since we're not about to deal with them.

Otoh, addiction is something that I regularly do deal with, so I'm going over to that thread, and then get some rest.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, November 28, 2024 17:10 - 4778 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Thu, November 28, 2024 14:32 - 1163 posts
Trump, convicted of 34 felonies
Thu, November 28, 2024 14:10 - 45 posts
Salon: How to gather with grace after that election
Thu, November 28, 2024 14:04 - 1 posts
End of the world Peter Zeihan
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:59 - 215 posts
Another Putin Disaster
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:58 - 1540 posts
Kamala Harris for President
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:46 - 650 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:41 - 4847 posts
Dubai goes bankrupt, kosher Rothschilds win the spoils
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:31 - 5 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:29 - 7515 posts
Jean-Luc Brunel, fashion mogul Peter Nygard linked to Epstein
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:27 - 14 posts
All things Space
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:17 - 270 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL