Is this a terrorist website?

reply to post by Zeitsuss


While Bush & the US Government are "no angels" & freedom seems only to be an illusion in many ppls eyes.

Unlike Sadam, or any other 3rd world dictator or Muslim Leader, Bush has never ordered the extermination of an entire Faction on US soil.

Yes freedom is an illusion, but thank your lukcky stars that your not living ubder the rule of a total monster..!!

I have a question about this website too. Ok the idea of finding tangible females is seemingly impossible. But is this is a community forum? Then were are the girls who are into cool stuff. To answer you question I doubt it is a militant forum because it would not have banners and stuff if it did and they also apparently have strick legal and policy and procedures on the forum. I'm also sure that the government expecially with these gargin with google and stuff about pulling peoples information who search for stuff online that if this was a militant website then it would surely be investigated.

Originally posted by Ironclad
reply to post by Zeitsuss

 

While Bush & the US Government are "no angels" & freedom seems only to be an illusion in many ppls eyes.

Unlike Sadam, or any other 3rd world dictator or Muslim Leader, Bush has never ordered the extermination of an entire Faction on US soil.

Yes freedom is an illusion, but thank your lukcky stars that your not living ubder the rule of a total monster..!!

I think the president is a good president, we probably would not have as much criminal activity in the world or economic troubles if have the military forces were not overseas. but all this crazy stuff about changing the dollar bill and stuff is beyond insane, that is not the way it works at all. this is a website to share stories of the occult and whatever weird stuff and not a tool of radicalization.

Since you ask

Originally posted by C0le
Do you have something against freedom?

On the contrary: I defend it proudly against those who would try to pervert its meaning and turn it into a licence to throw their weight around. I also loathe falsehood, delusion and error, especially when they are presented - as in the present case - in a tone of bullying, almost fanatical self-righteousness.

Your ideas about constitutional freedom are essentially religious, not political or rational in their nature, and they are supported by statements and ideas of very dubious provenance.

For example:

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."

Benjamin Franklin never said that. If you can submit solid documentary evidence to prove that he did, I will take back everything I have said so far and bow to your superior knowledge and judgement.

Oh, and Leonidas didn't make that remark at Thermopylae either. Its first occurrence is in Plutarch, five hundred years after the battle took place. Herodotus, our primary source of information on Therompylae, never mentions it.

reply to post by Astyanax

religious how so?


Oh because i believe that men are born free in control of their own lives ruled by no man, no majority, and no government, and until you violate another mans rights you should be left alone?

Thats such a terrible belief.....

so who is the god of this religion?



I'm siting here trying to figure out exactly what your problem is, you constantly attack my views as if yours are superior and act high and mighty because I have such a crazy view of the world and that view is freedom...

I have never heard of ANYONE in my life to try and argue against freedom, your the first.

My beliefs aren't the status quo, which is what you apparently base all of yours on.


I don't care where the quote in my avatar originated, it means what it means, but again you point such things out just to be a smart one, why?

I'm done with you as you cant conduct yourself in a respectful manner without being a sarcastic know it all..


you burn bridges when bridges need not be burned, there are ways of getting your point across in a respectful manner, resorting to veiled attacks isn't one of them.

[edit on 29-11-2007 by C0le]

reply to post by C0le


I actually like your Avatar...

It is soo american & Iconic...hehehe

Is that a Bud he's drinking?

[edit on 11/30/2007 by Ironclad]

reply to post by C0le

I'm siting here trying to figure out exactly what your problem is, you constantly attack my views as if yours are superior and act high and mighty because I have such a crazy view of the world and that view is freedom...

Fair enough. You're angry and confused and you can't for the life of you see why I'm taking you to task like this. You want an explanation. And you deserve one.

A good place to start would be here:

religious how so?

Well, I'm sure you remember posting

All men ARE created equal and are entitled to certain unalienable rights.

Okay. Answer the question: who endowed them with these rights? Rights have to come from somewhere. They are not inborn; it is impossible even to conceive of an inborn human right. That is because human rights are an aspect of morality and cannot exist without the presence of an overarching moral code.

Such a code of morals, and the rights that it implies, can come from only two possible sources.

1. God

2. Man

As you know, humanity has formulated any number of moral codes, most of which are in serious disagreement with one another. Would you, for instance, regard the 'rights' of men as implied in Sura 4:31 of the Quran as genuine and inalienable? I doubt it, unless you're into beating up your old lady.

So if there are self-evidently true, inalienable rights, they can come from only one source: God.

Thus your stance is exactly the same as the religious terrorists whose acts and beliefs you oppose: your understanding of human society and the rules by which we must live are profoundly religious, and to that degree both irrational and fundamentally unsound.

I, on the other hand, believe that human morality is codified biology. I say 'I believe', but I think there's enough evidence around nowadays to state it as a fact (if you wish to disagree, kindly read up on the subject before responding, so that we don't waste each other's time). Thus a worthy and true human morality can be derived by applying the imperatives of instinct to humanity as a whole, as though we were all members of a single tribe or social group. In fact, this is what human beings do, and whatever social progress humanity has enjoyed since the Pleistocene is the result of it. Moreover, it is perfectly right and proper - in scientific terms - to do so, since we are, in spite of our massive numbers and global distribution, one of the most genetically uniform species known to science.

This is mankind's only hope for the future, and people who hold absolutist views like yours are as much a threat to it as the equally absolutist Osama bin Laden. Your heart is in the right place, C0le, but your head is in the Middle Ages.

Thus my opposition. As for the tone I have taken with you, well, I apologize. But in self-mitigation, let me just say that I find statements like these

Um let me give you a little lesson here

You are either with us, or with the terrorists.

quite offensive, especially when delivered from a position of (as far as I am concerned) extreme ignorance and prejudice. So I claim prior provocation. And if that were not enough,

Come to my door and tell me different and this free man will demonstrate what free men are capable of.

this would certainly have done it all on its own.

I hope we now understand each other a tiny bit better.

Originally posted by Astyanax


quite offensive, especially when delivered from a position of (as far as I am concerned) extreme ignorance and prejudice. So I claim prior provocation. And if that were not enough,

You've taken this out of context, it was sarcasm directed towards King Georges little speech.

I by no means support that claim.

this would certainly have done it all on its own.

I hope we now understand each other a tiny bit better.

That wasn't directed at you it was directed to anyone, who opposes my freedom and liberty, or anyones.


Ill comment on the rest of your reply at another time.



[edit on 30-11-2007 by C0le]

[edit on 30-11-2007 by C0le]

Originally posted by C0le
Ill comment on the rest of your reply at another time.

I certainly hope you will, C0le. It's been a couple of days now.

Even if you don't: if I have given you reason to think in a slightly different way about the origins and derivation of your beliefs, that would be enough for me.