All Roads Lead to Rome

reply to post by Dock9


well i was, technically speaking, a danger to society when i had gulf war syndrome and the nerves in my brain began to malfunction. i didn't become violent but my libido went threw the roof in a way that almost destroyed my marriage and put me in a full blown coma in the hospital, on total life support. some people, when they have similar malfunctions of the brain get violent and so forth and they just need a doctor. this is an example of what i mean. capital punishment of the sick and injured is inhumane.

i know a guy who married a woman who already had a teenage daughter. the teenager decided one day, that she wanted a car. she was 18 years old. she insisted that he buy it for her but he had just finished rennovating their house and didn't have the money. she became belligerent about it, and when it erupted into an argument, she vowed she would ruin his life as an act of revenge. and she did. she accused him of inappropriately touching her which was a lie.

he was sent to jail. where he was told, that if he plead guilty, they'd put him in rehab and after that house arrest, and of course, he'd go on the list of sex offenders for the rest of his life. he can no longer go to a park, live near a school, watch disney movies, interact with people on facebook or public forums, get a job in a corporation, and so on and so on, for the rest of his life.

moral of the story is, compassion is not outdated.

as far as video games go, i don't view it as real. i can tell the difference.

[edit on 29-4-2010 by undo]

Originally posted by glitchinmymatrix
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

 

Koen Stroobant has posted this to a blog, word for word.

So who wrote it?

wemustknow.net...

On that site the date of the posting is April 28th. It went down here on April 25th. I was online on ATS as it was being posted. You will notice I was the first to respond to this thread.

What I've said proves nothing. That said it appears to have been here first and perhaps you've uncovered another guise of ProtoplasmicTraveler. I don't know for sure. Or gadzooks, the real identity of the "man of steel"!!!

Great Caesar's ghost Olsen!!!

reply to post by Hemisphere


This is nothing new for me, my Skull and Bones 322 Thread got plagerized by so many sites it wasn't funny.

The thing that really irks me, is I tell anyone they can republish if they cite ATS and me.

Of course you and many other people know I was promising I would publish this Thread on the 25th of April, and it sure wasn't stolen from someone who published it 3 days later to another site.

I wrote the person an email and alerted ATS, they will get on it and him.

I actually get a kick out of it, one of the people who plagerized my Skull and Bones 322 thread and claimed to have written it, after I wrote it and published it first, was a PHD!

I really should think about writing for a living huh?

reply to post by Hemisphere


If you want to be the best, you've got to steal from the best!

Sorry PT. I see you've jumped on the question. By the way, you are Superman, right? Come on, I know those thick glasses and the tie come off in a phone booth. Man am I ever dating myself. Then again if I could date myself I'd never leave the house.

“Miami Beach audiences are the greatest in the world!”

Thank you and goodnight everybody!

[edit on 29-4-2010 by Hemisphere]

reply to post by Hemisphere


I really wanted this thread to travel, a lot of my stuff does, but I just don't understand why they don't cite ATS and me, when these other sites pick it up.

A couple people asked me on Sunday and Monday if they could republish, and I said yes, as long as they make sure to cite ATS, and me, but especially ATS.

I honestly don't have time to post on other sites, and keep up with what I post on ATS.

Which is why, making sure at least ATS gets cited is so important to me.

I could care less if they cite me, but they have to cite ATS.

It's down right agravating to be accused of stealing your own work!

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by Hemisphere

 

Of course you and many other people know I was promising I would publish this Thread on the 25th of April, and it sure wasn't stolen from someone who published it 3 days later to another site.



I really should think about writing for a living huh?

That's the gawds honest truth. I U2U'd you two nights earlier and you gave me the heads up on when you would be posting the thread. That's why I was the first to respond on Sunday AM. I was waiting for it. I didn't have time to read it all then but I was on when you were posting the various segments with "place holder" posts for segments that were not yet up.

Enough said. Most people here know your rep and if not they've got some catching up to do. Some might have different opinions but that's not about your integrity.

Oh and yes, you should be writing for a living!

[edit on 29-4-2010 by Hemisphere]

They now have the technology to read your thoughts remotely and clandestinely Im afraid the future of intellectual property on this planet is not looking good.

reply to post by Hemisphere


They even stole my original artwork and everything. What a creep, must have taken him a while, it took me over an hour to post the whole thing! His rinky dink site isn't as cool as ATS he had to break it into 4 pages, and his comments section doesn't even work!

Pretty sad!

I sure do appreciate you being the first to post. Thanks my friend.

reply to post by Dock9


yeah i think part of the original intent of the creation chapters of genesis, has been lost in the translation.

check this out:

this is the first creation of "Adam"

Gen 1:27 So God 430 created 1254 man 120 in his [own] image 6754, in the image 6754 of God 430 created 1254 he him; male 2145 and female 5347 created 1254 he them.

the words with numbers after them are the only words in the original language. it'd read something like this in the original language:

elohiym created adam in image, in image elohiym created, male female created.

my personal translation of that is: the spirit beings (the gods) created adams in their image, male and female.

that to me, is a whole other creation, in which men and women were collectively called adam, and were created or cloned in the image of the gods AT THE SAME TIME.

later, the second adam is created but separate from the eve. this second adam is created from dirt, and eve is cloned from him.

now seeing as how moses was raised in egypt, i considered that he put aspects of the egyptian creation story in as well and that really adam was atum. this goes off into some heavy duty esoterica, but if you read the atum creation story in the egyptian texts, it says he was self-created (same concept . a clone is a duplicate, a self creation of a sort). i think the data we need to know about the past is in the biblical text, but it has to be regarded in the backdrop of the rest of the ancient world and painstakingly dug up from the words.

Originally posted by Dock9
This is the insanity into which we've been propelled for at least 2000 years under the guise of 'Christianty'

Um. No.

Rome does not create all events. It creates false flags yes. It subverts others yes. It does all sorts yes. Rome did not create all the variables at the time, like whatever beliefs various local tribes had. It only aimed to destroy them, or at least control.

Divide and conquer. Using of course sexual, tribal, class, racial and any other lever they could find. (again i have to point to Aristotle's dirty little fingers for this basic idea, Julius would have read him almost certainly).

Along comes some poor guy, who cuts through the divides. All those who were stoning the woman were guilty. He stood outside their position of fear and showed them a better way. Ditto for the money changers, there is only one true response to them. CHASE THEM OUT (with whips ;-D ). Not only the temple, especially though. Rome was merely a continuation of the earthly ruling principles, the guy with the biggest sword wins.

Frankly, look at Rome to see exactly how messed that principle is, when carried to any conclusion. On a human level, isn't it time to step out these old beliefs, dogmas and ways of life and death? Isn't it time to actually embrace that which you fear and loathe in others? WHORES! *shudder* but love them anyway! FORGIVE them, because that is what higher peope can do. Even the roman soldiers found compassion in the man they were executing. IT IS THE BETTER WAY.

Isn't it time? Nope, it WAS time 2000 years ago people. We're so far behind in our understanding and growth as humans, when we compare 2 extreme opposites from 2000 years ago, we still seem to want the same problems we've had for millenia before that.

Historically i cannot deny the fudging fingers of the RC church in everything, especially christianity. But they are NOT all knowing, all creating, all controlling. Their plan to use christianity against us is arguably their greatest mistake, as even within their evil plans are seeds for people to actually discover something bigger than them.

reply to post by Dock9


Bravo, well said.

In support of your case, which at present moment I thoroughly agree with, who says that life is any better than death anyway, for any of us?

We've clearly decided to live in a co-existant society, so under that decision (conscious or not) we have a collective duty to make that work. Removing the sociopaths from 'harms way' would appear to be a part of that.

It may not be 'moral' (based on emotional rules imposed from outside) but it sure is 'ethical' (based on rules generated from within in accordance with a commitment to integrity), IMO.

Sorry, a bit off topic, not sure how to tie that into Rome, but no doubt PT can do that for me

reply to post by RogerT


problem with that is, who is doing the defining of a sociopath. that's dangerous territory, because it is so easy to abuse.

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by RogerT

 

problem with that is, who is doing the defining of a sociopath. that's dangerous territory, because it is so easy to abuse.

No it's not.

There's no confusing a grown adult raping and killing a child. None at all.

As I said, it's not a matter of morals - ie. is it morally right to kill this person so they don't kill others?

It's simply a matter of ethics - we collectively desire to live in a society where children are not under threat of forced sexual activity and death by adults, so we remove that threat, if we can, when it occurs, as compassionately as possible.

If we collectively agree that the above scenario is acceptable, then it's ethically ok to allow said adult to 'continue on'.

Personally, I believe the above scenario is inherently wrong, in so far as our human connection to consciousness, and I believe we all intuitively 'know' that - whether we are present to the knowing is another thing.

(IMO it takes a level of presence to avoid proactive violence that few can muster for long (self included) - just look at all the posts on ATS proclaiming child smacking as a valid and desirable method of education - another very effective application of 'divide and conquer' )

Once again, if life is no better or worse than death, just another chapter of consciousness, more of the moral issue can fall away and allow us to be compassionately ethical in our decisions and actions.

Not so different from your war games

[edit on 29/4/10 by RogerT]

reply to post by RogerT


i view "video games" (i'm playing everquest at the moment), as exercise for my mental faculties and hand eye coordination, similar but much further removed from real violence, as this:



i'm fairly certain they know the difference between actual fighting and sparring. so do i. i also enjoy the artwork, music and creativity of it all. the different environments, created from the imaginations of many people. i really enjoyed star wars galaxies too because i could travel from planet to planet and explore the environments, which were populated by hundreds of different kinds of creatures, many quite unique and otherworldly looking. was fun trying to get around without getting killed by something much higher level than myself.

Could anyone care to explain why underneath the altar in St. Peter's Basillica, right underneath, lies none other than the infamous Tomb of the Julii? Wouldn't this be the prime place for a supposedly more important name, maybe St. Peter?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7a8809bd5333.jpg[/atsimg]
(the altar is the tall black centerpiece)

You'll see why its odd to call it this. Underneath the altar, in the Vatican grotto lies the tomb of the Julii which has THE OLDEST Christian art/depiction anywhere in the Vatican. There lies a mosaic there...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/d4934c0dfa85.jpg[/atsimg]

Whats this? This is depiction of Christ. It is called Christos Helios[/]i, Christ of the Sun or Christ the Sun God.

Why Christ in the tomb of the Julii? What is this tomb...

Digging, digging, digging.