Here Today... Gone To Hell!

The things i've read in the jungle section today have left me feeling sick. The jungle always was a curious mixture of insight and insanity but I really feel things have gone too far.

I wouldn't expect to see such far-right views on an Aryan Nation board, I'm not sure such views should be allowed a public airing. It seems a group of far right posters have recently joined the board, and I begin to wonder how many more they will bring with them in the coming weeks.

Are there plans underway to reclaim the board for serious debate?

Yeah, there are a few people who I'm currently "watching". Let's just say their opinions tend to be "conservative".


I don't care about their "we need free speech" posts. Their hate filled posts make me sick. I never intended this board to be a place where only "normal white church going heterosexual" GN'R fans could post.





/jarmo

This shit has to stop indeed, some people here have no business posting on HTGTH.

id be glad to see the back of any of these bigoted posters...

Me too The IQ of MacMau.
Me not frequent in the jungle too noticed it. Why the sudden inflation of those evil servants?
It's not only here.
That kind of "conservative" idea won't conserve anything but destroys.

Many people have strong oppinions. Some people just dont have the decency to keep some nasty things to themselves, which shows there upbringing and respect for others if bad.

Since I'm the only one who's made a recent free speech post (that I'm aware of) exactly which one of my views are filled with hate and should be on an aryan nation board.? My economic views are extremely conservative, but my social views are extremely loose or liberal- ie libertarian.? Maybe you weren't mentioning me, but I'd like to know what I'm being watched for.? Is defending capitalism and some conservative beliefs against board policy?? I'm not trying to be a dickhead, I just seriously want some clarification here.? I haven't noticed any hate posts as Izzy suggests, but if they really do exists I don't want to be associated with them.? However, I don't believe being a traditional Christian (which I am not) and holding traditional beliefs on morality defines someone as hateful or biggoted.? Regardless, it's your board, I'd just like to know who's shit list I'm on and why.

As I read this morning you quit reading the Jungle. I for one couldn't post down there in a real debate for at least two days because things are really too absurd. Racism, acceptance of torture, bigotry ... and it's only 3 or 4 posters that are really disturbing - some of them are newbies that came from nowhere.

But don't you think the best way to try and stop it is to speak up and tell them how unacceptable you feel it is? Otherwise they will get arrogant and continue. Just the way I see it.

Yes ! I've just answered in one of the threads but it's rather because it drives me mad to read such nonsense but again I don't think answering with valid points will improve the whole thing as they will come up with more nonsense and hatred.

That's cos they know they're losing!  : ok:

My theory is that may of them get angry from other debates they lose and come back (fresh and new) to entice and anger people with their comments. It is a way to create anger on the board and in a sense they "win", since they get attention and make people upset. Most of the "newbies" IMO have probably been around for a while before this bombardment of lunacy as of late. Basically it shows the true mind behind the right wing agenda: hate. Plain and simple, once everything is stripped away, and no argument is left, there is nothing but hate and anger behind these posters. Hence the racist, bigot filled threads we see here lately.

Yeah I've noticed that, they're just angry little people I suppose!

Oh and on a side note, I've just come up with an idea, I don't know if it'll work but I don't see why Jarmo couldn't give it a try. Seein as many of the members stay away from the Jungle due to the heated political debate, there could be a little political sub-section in the Jungle, like the VR on Tour section in the VR area; where only politics are allowed to be discussed and political talk is not allowed elsewhere. That way those who want to steer clear of political debate can and those who want to discuss politics have somewhere to do it. Just a thought.

Careful there SLC - u begin to sound like they do 'oh the left/right are (insert daft sterotype)'

Also ur post could be mistaken for bragging - 'oh my political affilitation is better'

What they were saying wasn't a political matter, is was a matter of basic human decency

These peoples views are fascist - such views are neither right or left (as deep down fascism reflects extremes of both), it would be a mistake to claim their views reflect on centre-right politics.

Most left wing and right wing views are honourable. However there are many...'republicans' here who need to think about what they say about homosexuality and various ethnic groups or be forcefully reminded where decency ends and fascism begins

No bragging. There is pond scum on both sides.

The only point I was trying to make was that the same (not all) people that were for the war, once everything was peeled away, also held these beliefs (that is bigotry).

I have never heard of any left wing nut jobs that were anti gay, black, whatever...

Your "people" are in power now, and look at what a mess we have here before us.

Not only a mess, but a mess unlike any other, on a worldwide scale costing thousands of lives, and billions of dollars all while accomplishing nothing.

The people who wrote the Constitution are probably rolling in their graves as we speak. Since we've butchered everything USA stands for and turned into in only something Orwell could dream up.

If this rant didn't come from a person who refuses to acknowledge any evidence that contradicts his world view, it might matter.

If I ever saw real evidence I would consider it.....

Yeah, keep deluding yourself about the reality of that "civil war" al qaeda declared in Iraq. I mean, I'm talking to a man who uses al Qaeda as a source of information ::)

Yeah, keep deluding yourself about the reality of that "civil war" al qaeda declared in Iraq. I mean, I'm talking to a man who uses al Qaeda as a source of information ::)

Here is an article saying that it is about to happen soon, dated 2004 from Military Times.

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,FL_civil_122804,00.html

Another explaining a U.S. Intelligence predicting the same thing (2004)

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/853466.cms

Here is another article where both right and left wing warn of Iraq slipping into civil war, from 2004

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3599909.stm

"Undeclared" civil war here as Sunnis and Shiites go at it:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/26/eveningnews/main886305.shtml

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, al Qaeda?s commander in Iraq  declared all out war on the Shiites

http://siteinstitute.org/bin/articles.cgi?ID=publications94205&Category=publications&Subcategory=0

AQ  declaring civil war on the "Shiite and Kurdish dominated Iraqi government and those who back it".:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/09/14/iraq.main/?section=cnn_latest

Next time, use google!

Nothing new here. Yes, everybody knows al Qaeda declared war on the Shiites and Kurds. Problem is: al-Zarqawi/al Qaeda do not speak for the majority of Iraqi Sunnis. The fact that you would take their word for it is very telling!? :yes:

I take it you probably also believe that "the devastating hurricane that hit the United States occurred because people in Iraq or Afghanistan -- maybe a mother who had lost her son or a son whose parents were killed or a woman who was raped -- were praying for God and God accepted their prayers." al-Zarqawi said it.

Deep down inside, I don't think you are right at all.  "Tolerance" is a bad word.  I don't want to tolerate anyone.  But, I will try to understand people for who they and not be so quick to pass judgement.   

can you be more specific what I am not right about?

I'm not even going to answer that in specifics.   We disagree, as do some others here.  That does not make you "right".  You have one opinion.  I have another, as do others here.   

That's what I thought.? A cheap, random drive by attack. I'm just wrong, period. Everything I've ever said must be wrong? ::)

My first post here in this thread was right on the money. That's why it struck a nerve.

See, it does not matter the source(s), articles, anything. You are not dealing with a full deck.

Those articles are from the MILITARY TIMES that predict a civil war would probably happen, then more articles saying basically the same thing.

Then, it happens, it is reported and I show you that. AQ declares civil war in Iraq, and the shiites and sunnis are going ape shit.

AQ also took over 5 towns this week.

And you still can't give it up.

I can't fathom this type of denial.

It's like when the downing street memos came out clearing showing Bush planned to go into Iraq before 9-11, and GNRNIGHTRAIN said that these memos cleared Bush of wrong doing... :hihi: I mean...you guys are nuts!

Good luck in life.

Keep up the spinning.

The Military Times article (which was really taken from United Press International)? was from December 28, 2004? and it "predicts" a civil war. Still hasn't happened (well, unless you ask al Qaeda or SLCPUNK). Nice try though.

That is the point.

There were articles leading up to it that saw it coming.

Now there are articles reporting it happen in front of us.

Why can't you admit there is civil war occuring on two different levels? Why is such a big deal to admit?

The sources have been given, and that is from a quick search....

There is nothing to spin. It's right there!

Or....

bbc

or

cnn

or

India Times

or

CBS

or

AP

What else?

Hey guys, don't you have enough threads in the Jungle to attack each other?

Because the sources are either making "predictions" or quoting al Qaeda, which does not speak for Sunni Iraqis.

They are quoting AQ yes, but also reporting their huge attack in Baghdad and the slaughter going on between the Sunnis and Shiites. They are reporting what is going on, not just a telephone conversation between two AQ members.....

The point of me listing the 04 articles was to show you that people saw this coming. Then the articles to show that it is here.

Man...you deny it to the end.

Anyway...an intelligent person, who is not in some outrageous state of denial, could read these articles, then do a google search of their own and undersand that Iraq is indeed in the middle of a civil war. Or, you could just cover your ears and say "la la la la la" and think happy thoughts.

Good luck in life.

It seems like they don't.  :no:

Stalin was planning to exterminate Jews in 1953...he died before he could do anything about it.

Lenin and Stalin persecuted the orthodox church and all Soviet leaders tried to suppress Islam

Communist leader Pol Pot killed anyone that wore glasses......because they wore glasses

Just off the top of my head.... :hihi:

I guess he was talking about an American context but I may be wrong !  :yes:

You were not wrong.... :P

anyone who thinks that if someone is part of a group of people then they wont have a specific attitude is just deluding themselves...left wing right wing, who cares..if youre a bigot your a bigot and it doesnt matter what group you belong to (other than bigots/non bigots of course)

Ever hear of Senator Robert Byrd from West Virginia?  He was a former leader in the Ku Klux Klan.  ::)

The exception, not the rule.

Like I said, I have never met a liberal, that was a bigot.

All of these tits are useless anyway, so what's the big deal (aside from an administrative position, that is)?

It keeps on going...................


"And can you imagine the improvements that we would see if we forced sterilization of certain groups?  If we sterilized drug addicts, the hopelessly impoverished and all liberals...wouldn't this country improve almost over night?"

Charity Case

But you know, it was a "joke". As usual.

Don't be so foolish by... ::)

Some "jokes" aren't funny though....

But I digress.....

(http://tinypic.com/ei0fbm.jpg)

I read that, and would have posted but the thread was locked.

I'm sorry...that's just going too far.? It's tantamount to the Nazi procedure of forced sterilization of the mentally ill and handicapped.

There is absolutely no call for that kind of bullshit.? You're right about some "jokes" just not being very funny.

For the record...I'm offended.

... :rofl:...

You little antithetical jewels... :no:

Straight up now:

SLC,

You're a politicized one-man whirlwind, cutting a wide swath through the notions you visit but refusing to deal with what's left in your wake.

Jesus man, if you're going to be playing the role that you currently play here then it's time to start dealing with people on your own instead of running home to mommy.

Granted there are a bunch of 'em and they're a bunch of mostly Grade A cretins. But they will get dealt with in a timely manner if and when the time is right. And to think or display otherwise simply shows a naivete that's unbecoming of the character you espouse.

You're at the fore. Act accordingly.

pilfuck,

I'm offended.

I must have missed your memo on this earlier......

Normally, I understand about 1/2 what you post.

This time, not even that.....

Color me confused.

For the record, the fact it was Charity Case (a conservative) who said this has not one iota of meaning.  My MOTHER could have said the same damn thing and I'd be offended.

Espousing forced sterilization, even as a joke, is sort of disgusting.

This is HTGTH. Hardly a politically correct arena.

You're an established and intelligent member.

Charity Case is one of "them".

At HTGTH "we" point and laugh at "them".

The HTGTH administration will take care of "them" if and when need be.

Still with me?

Now, here are a few things to ponder:

First off if you get offended by such remarks then perhaps you should rethink your participation here, 'cause it ain't the first or last time we're going to get 'em.

Secondly, who in their right mind would actively endorse forced sterilization of particular groups? Especially here! This is a predominantly liberal forum in case you haven't noticed, replete with middle class netizens (neither "we" nor "them") who would vehemently renounce such notions for a myriad of different reasons; not the least of which is the aforementioned tilt toward one particular side of the political axis.

Moreover, by going against the prevailing wind on an Internet forum you stand to stand alone. You know, a good luck establishing a power base kind of thing? So what's the point, eh?

But of course all things are circumstantial and we have here SLCPUNK (an established and intelligent member) being as I put it - a politicized one-man whirlwind. This guy breathes American domestic politics. He even goes so far as to try and score cheap political points at every available opportunity; often alienating some of the conservative folk along the way.

Naturally these folk want to be heard and throw in on a discussion. As a result they are oftentimes condescendingly flouted by Mr. SLC and feel quite powerless at the time as their views were never truly accepted here and hence they have very little sympathy from those around them. Whereas SLC is one of the more prominent members of this site, easily pulling in support from the periphery.

So who wins?

...

And what happens then? They start banding together and we have what we have here today (no pun intended) - a highly personal ideological war. And it's being fought on both sides. Incidentally though the conservative rat pack happens to made up of mostly "them".

Starting to get the picture?

Comments such as those made by Charity Case are in reality little more than personal digs. Personal digs that are only brought into the all-encompassing light because SLC refuses to deal directly with the monsters he creates. Much more preferable to him appears to be crying foul from the angle of generic morality 101 and appealing to the powers that be for removal of the perpetrator, or, to follow a current line of thought here on the forum, whining incessantly about entire groups of people under the guise of giving the admin and indeed the entire forum a helping hand.

But you see what some people fail to realize is that the administration always has and always will adequately take care of problem users. And the last thing needed is members pushing for removal of those who adhere to a particular ideology, which is fundamentally what this all boils down to.

And you, pilfuck are showing support for this harebrained cause simply by adding your one cent worth of offense into the mix.

You're also highlighting a narrowminded worldview. For I know of no one from my politically CORRECT meandering who would brand Charity's comments as other than an angle to be explored. But of course that's not the case here and I'm not bothering to get abstract on one little pile of shit.

Oh, and you didn't get my antithetical bit? Shame, it's funny. Because you see some people in their right mind actually would push for forced sterilization of particular groups... :yes:...

...apparently.

well that was certainly an excellent example of phraseology :confused:

I am not sure how you think I refuse to deal with these posters. I do on a daily basis. If I feel something they say is out of hand (see above) I call it out (this thread). I do it more because I don't want it to get buried quickly under more posts and not seen. I think statements like those show the person behind the keyboard and want them to be seen as such. That is a pretty honest statement.

 I'm sure you can see it as "running back to Momma", but I disagree. It's not like I point fingers every time one of these people say something along those lines (I'd be pointing fingers all day, now wouldn't I?) This is crossing the line IMO, and I didn't not start this thread now did I? But it is a good place to clip and paste the offending remarks.

Hey, I'm human, I get out of line, I do things I should not. And when I do, I apologize to Jarmo for it. Simple as that. The monsters "I create" I deal with on a daily basis ignoring their absurd accusations (traitor, I hate America etc) as mindless banter. It does not bother me at all, and most days I get a good laugh out of it. But when it crosses the line, then I will call it out as such.

 I don't know why you seem to have such a problem with pilferk. Is calling him pilfuck any less of a personal dig?

Blah, blah, blah.

Every fucking time I come here, it's the same thing.

You know if Bush never existed, if there was no other races, if we all looked, wore, thinked the same, you guys would still be here blabbering about rubbish.

Y'know, whatever has been said Jarmo is aware of it. Let's not make this another MCT vs SLC vs the republicans vs the world thread #2929292756355256345.

Fuck sake!

Q,

I'm just communicating, my man.

J,

I don't have any problem with pilfuck and calling him that isn't a dig.

Your reply I'll buy. But let me just say that you don't come off as a guy who has a good laugh at it all.

Chrissy,

Who the fuck is blabbering about rubbish? Me?

Either way don't go throwing me in with the likes that do blabber about rubbish... : ok:

And MCT and SLC are on friendly terms now. So that's stoopid too... :yes:

Now go get a shower... >:(

EDIT - Question for ya there Jason - does the cause exist?

I'm not defending Charity Case, mostly  because I think he meant what he said.  And he's more than capable of defending himself.  But in all fairness, he did make the comment like a joke, he even put a little smiley next to it. 

Was it offensive?  Sure, to some.  But some people are too easily offended, in my opinion.  In the end, this is Jarmo's board and he gets to decide how politically correct he wants it to be.  But political correctness irritates me personally.  Its ridiculous to have to worry about using the wrong words, or never telling a questionable joke, because someone, somewhere, might get offended.  I say laugh if you think its funny.  If its not, ignore it and move on.  Don't take it so personally. 

I don't freak out everytime someone says the term "retard" and a huge part of my life is spent advocating for the developmentally disabled.  Its a word.  Who cares. At best its funny, at worst it shows the ignorance of the person saying it. 

Bloody true. It's telling when a thread like 'Asia Earthquake' (in which 33000 died) gets like 10 posts, while the 'Tape...' and 'Anti war...' threads are still going strong.

P.S: Love ur pics, SLC.  ;)

U puzzle me no end

When ur house is robbed you report it to the police so the crooks can be (hopefully) arrested - u don't keep silent justifying ur lack of action with:


Perhaps a belief the almighty will take care of things at judgement day? :hihi:

When the time is right - exactly what time will that be? - and how will u know its arrived? Exactly why do we have to wait and what are we waiting for?

There are two types of problem that don't get fixed - the first is a problem that people have decided not to fix

The second is problems those responsible for fixing don't know about

This incident could well be the second - i think its somewhat unfair to expect jarmo to see all thats posted (hell, i doubt he wastes time reading thru those godawful poltical threads anyway). Giving the powers at be a heads up is surely the right thing to do?

Ur philosophy appears to be to keep quiet about problems rather curiously believing silence solved anything....silence didn't remove ''Holy War''.

Why have a go at people who are simply trying to help?

Izzy, all you're good for is propagating the needless drama that the established members should strive to avoid.

Go to fuck. And take your dead end analogies with ya.

EDIT - I've said this before and I'll say it again - go right ahead and give Jarmo and co. a helping hand. Do your bit for Admin and Forum! But do it privately. There's absolutely NO point in creating or supporting a public fuss.

And if you're one of the few who are at the fore on this forum then there's no reason why you can't deal with certain situations on your own; keeping in mind your place among the written and unwritten rules, that is...

Now, think of this edit as an amendment to my previously stated ideas. I think it's easier that way.

How long before this thread is locked?? Please.

You don't think we're aware of "your houses being robbed"??


The time's right when /J says it's right. Not sooner, not later. His board. It works both ways. What are we waiting for? When people go out of line, I usually don't tell him to wait for banning, I usually give them a warning via a PM. Then I monitor his posting for a while, and if he/she changes his/her attitude, I won't even talk to Jarmo about it.. If he/she continues to violate the board rules, I turn to him. With these type of topics, people will go over the line in a heated debate, they will test the limits. But the truth be told I'm more irritated by people with over 2000 posts doing it than the ones who just came to the boards. Both should obey the rules, but the ones who've been here should know better...

You really think Holy War would've been allowed to continue if you hadn't said anything?

It's nice that people report posts that are out of line, and it's nice to get some help since we might not have the time _every_ day to read every post. But what I hate is when people start demanding that somebody or a group of people has to be banned. That call really isn't theirs to make.

You omitted the last thing in that post.  I included a smiley face in that post to indicate that it was a joke.  I think you could tell it was a joke by my inclusion of liberals in the group, howver I included the smiley face to make sure everyone knew it was a joke.

Is this how you fight your battles pilferl?  Do you go to the most obscure section of the board and cray about how offended you are and misrepresent what I had typed?  Please, how fucking sensitive are you that you have to cry to the admins ont he board about a statement that was clearly a joke.  You guys must be so much fun in real life.   ::)

OK, I got at least 1/2 that time.

1) I don't want Charity banned.  I didn't ask for him to be banned.  I simply said his comment offended me.  It did.

2) I would think most reasonable people would find the insinuation of forced sterilization offensive....and not very funny.

3) I'm quite sure other people will make remarks, in the future, that offend me.  Since it IS a discussion forum, I think pointing out when something is particularly offensive is part of the whole "gist" of things, ain't it?  Isn't the whole point of a forum to communitcate and express one's opinions?

4) I have no desire to ever form any sort of "power base".

I think that about covers it.

First off, I didn't omit anything.? The original quote is SLC's.? I simply replied to it with the quote feature.

Charity, no matter what you might think, I hardly feel I'm at "war" with you.? I don't feel you're a "battle" to be fought.? I was perusing SLC's posts, saw HIS post on the subject, remembered reading YOUR post in the thread....but the thread was locked before I could comment on it.? So I placed the comment here, since SLC had brought the subject up.?I didn't "go to the most obscure part of the board" intentionally to hide my comments (if I'd wanted to do that, I would have simply PM'd jarmo about it)...I did it because the original thread where the comment was made was locked...and the subject was reintroduced here.  Your paranoia speaks VOLUMES...

And perhaps you need to read what I wrote, again.? I know it was a joke.? That's why I said some jokes just aren't funny.? This one wasn't.? It was offensive, and in poor taste.? Perhaps you'd like me to provide you some info on the atrocities of forced sterilization over history.....It's not a funny subject.

I am just now realizing (after reading this thread and others in this part of the forum) what goes on here with the liberals. ?This is so typically liberal that it makes me laugh to no end. ?So let me summarize it:

1. Someone starts a thread in the Jungle (usually a liberal), and discussion ensues. ?It is a discussion mostly between two set groups. ?Meaning, that the same people usually take the opposing sides of the arguement and battle it out. ?It has been fairly clean in my opinion, but both sides have gone over board from time to time.

2. ?When the liberals get offended (and lets be honest they get offended rather easily), they come running to this section to cry that certain members are out of line or should be banned. ?This is fucking hysterical to me. ?I would never think of doing this regardless of what anyone posted. ?This is beyond funny. ?It is such a completely different mind set from mine. ?I am prepared to fight my own battles. ?I guess that speaks to the fundamental differences between liberals and conservatives.

For the record, and its all in black an white, someone asked in a joking manner if we conservatives were so extreme that we would even condone sterlizations (this is paraphrasing). ?I replied in a like manner as indicated above followed by a smiley face to make sure everyone knew it was a joke. ?Do I think we should sterlize group of people...no. ?Well, with the exception of rapists and child molestors and people who committ incest, no. ?

I just think this is so 'liberal' to come crying about being offended by an obvious joke. ?Do you run out of the room when someone in real life tells an off color joke? ?Do you cry to the boss when a co-worker tells an off color joke? ?I cannot fathom doing what you guys do...basically crying to your momma about a joke.

I turn to my wife, or friends, and say "Hey, well, that was inappropriate", yes.

As for getting offended easily, I guess that's true if you think racism, biggotry, forced sterilization, accusing someone of being a Nazi, etc aren't offensive.? But, if you do, I don't rightly care if you think I get offended easily.

And how is posting here not "fighting our own battles"?  Explain that to me, please....in light of the fact the original thread was locked and no further discussion could ensue there.   Right......

I am so paranoid that I didn't even realize this section existed until someone pointed it out in The Jungle. ?I am the least paranoid person you know.


I think including liberals in there made it pretty funny. ?But regardless, just because your sense of humor or your sensivitities don't match mine isn't a reason to go crying to the admins. ?Ignore it if you don't think it is funny.


For the record, I'll be going back to The Jungle for these discussion...this section of the board is for other purposes.

As I said, some jokes aren't funny...and the fact you think it is, no matter who the inclusive groups are, speaks directly to your character.

I didn't go "crying to the admins".? What part of "the original thread was locked" is being lost on you, eh?? I didn't report the post to moderator (the link at the bottom of your post).? Hell, I didn't even comment on it til SLC brought it back up again.

Edit: Oh, and just where is anyone asking you to be banned??

Man, rewriting history must be such a fun job....

Right, let's all do the happy dance.

pilferk,

You know the first end of a writer is to be understood and to create a context in which other people can think*. But it becomes the reader's problem when every little nuance must be carefully laid out before them in order to assist in brandishing their boxed-in pretension.

At their best, your four points go together with my post about as good as a cat and mouse would go together in an old school cartoon.

* Something that I admittedly don't achieve here on a regular basis... :D

MCT, it's not the points you make, it's the language you use.? I'm as verbose as the next guy...and sometimes, the words you use don't make a whole lot of sense in the context you use them in....so readers are left to infer what the fuck you're talking about.? Sometimes we win, sometimes we lose (keep in mind, I'm not talking specifically about the posts in question).

And Tom and Jerry got along perfectly well in those later versions. :)?

The points I made were not meant as much as a response to your post, but as a clarification to mine, and, in turn, a clarification for you on my reasoning for posting.? If my post was taken for some sort of support for ANYONE's "agenda", that was not it's intent.? I was simply expressing my opinion, and my opinion alone.? I'm not trying to "help out the mods" or call for Charity's banning, or wage some closet, secret battle against the conservs.? Again, my MOTHER could have walked up to me and said the same thing and I would have expressed the same opinion.

Just my opinion, and mine alone.

I disagree. They usually make perfect sense in collusion with the internally consistent construct I present. It's simply a matter of following that.

Am I gratuitously verbose? Yes. But I'll cover that in a sec.


True. But only on this forum.

You see I normally write in a much more condensed style than I normally employ here. But to do so requires investment of emotion and I'm normally emotionally distant 99% of the time when I decide to write up a post here. So what results is, as you hinted, loose verbosity.

But to be perfectly honest I'm more than comfortable with it. Gives me a good laugh.


pilferk, I KNOW what you meant, I KNEW your motives. But that doesn't change the fact that you directly invoked my post which led me to choose the angle of attack that I did (the easy angle/remember my "emotional investment" bit?/I could go on all day talking about a fucking thumbtack!), and which makes me fundamentally right and you fundamentally wrong.

And yes, I DO care about such things as outmaneuvering other people. But in this case it's just a coincidence.

So I'm sorry but your above comment (while most likely being an earnest one) is really only a backpedal because that's just the way it unfolded.

Now if your going to be dealing with me in the future (and indeed this is an arrogant piece of advice) it wouldn't hurt to take my posts for what they are (internally consistent constructs) and to ask yourself - where's he REALLY taking me?

Go along for the ride! And keep your hands off the wheel 'till it's your turn, you know?

Edit:
No, it makes you fundametally wrong.? Wrong because if you knew the real intent of my post, and posted as you did, you misrepresented my intentions KNOWINGLY, and thus, are fundamentally wrong.?

As for your "ride"...well...I have another option:

Like, when visiting Disneyland, I'll just stay away from Space Mountain.? It's the oldest ride in park...and it's kinda boring (even with the recent update).

Sorry.

Note edits.

I do it for you but you won't do it for me?

 :no:

You just shit out one faux pas after another, don't ya?

Case in point.

Faux Pas? No.

Cliche? Maybe.

I'm off to Big Thunder Mountain.....and then maybe Indiana Jones.

Every one of your silly little notions has already been covered. So you can fuck right off with your silly little games. You're not good enough.

What, are you mad at me for being me? Do you want me to want to suck you off or something? Huh? Wha? Are ya? Do ya?

As I've said, repeatedly, I don't play games.? Nor do I aspire to be whatever you think is "good enough". 

You can play solitaire if you'd like.

I'm hardly mad at you for anything, least of all, you being you.

I just find your "rides" boring and sorta pointless.

I, said...

...Do the fucking happy dance.

Both of you.

Damn it Jim...I'm a poster, not a miracle worker!!

Do it or we'll set AG on your children.

Fuck off. I stopped dating children since I was 12. :P

OK, but it ain't gonna be pretty:

http://www.computerpranks.com/download/programs/fun/swf/dancing_hippo.swf

You make statements that can only implicitly mean one thing, and then when I call you on 'em you back right off and pretend that the underlying idea never existed in the first place!

And this is being nice, this saying that I don't believe you! Because imagine if I did! Why, I'd have to call you right out and say that you can't write worth a fuckin' fuck because what you mean takes four or five spins to actually come through!

Jesus by! At least my meanings are clear, present and accounted for. But yours, yours are as murky as a disturbed mud puddle and apparently lost somewhere in the mix half the time!

But of course I don't believe you, so...

...go get a clue. Seriously.

EDIT - Now, make a good "verbose" joke and we'll all do the fucking happy dance. And after that we'll go tie ourselves to a nice big tree and protest against Deforestation... :)

Believe, or don't believe, whatever you like.

I care not one whit.

I said what I meant, and then clarified it because you decided to "read into" it, rather than read it.

I've got a clue.? You, on the other hand, seem to need a dose of that 99% emotional disconnect you talked about.

And if you think your meanings are clear...well, I think we covered that one already, didn't we?

What happened to that happy dance, eh?

You missed my edit. Now fuck off.

Pilferk if you weren't trying to associate Charity with fascism and the earlier post of this thread, why did you post that information here?  Jarmo posted just 3 posts under Charity's "offensive" post that SLC posted out of context to to have Charity banned (remember that SLC has advocated at least on one occasion for all conservatives to be banned from this board).  The reality is that you wanted to stir the pot like someone else but rather than admit to it, you want to play the part of an objective, psuedo intellect.  Charity case made a joke - an obvious joke to anyone who read the original post.  It was a "poke in the ribs" to the more vocal, liberal members of this board,; nothing more, nothing less.  I at least respect SLC for being open about his determination to ban anyone who disagrees with him [read partial sarcasm here]. 

You sure like putting words in people's mouths don't ya?

Please show where I asked (seriously) for ALL conservatives to be banned?

I was open about one thing: showing what kind of person Charity Case is. Jokes like that are in poor taste and reflect on the poster-period. Just like saying "towelheads" is tasteless. All people will back pedal and claim to be "joking" as soon as the heat is turned up. Or just frame it as a "joke" to start....it's still tasteless.

 Just like you claiming people should be "shot" for backing Michael Moore is tasteless:"I was speaking somewhat sarcastically with regard to shooting Moore supporters". -Guns N' Rock Music

 Or just like you claiming I condone sexual abuse of children is tasteless :" Afterall, only and 8th grader would condone a 14 year old molesting a 8 year old as "Dcotor." -Guns N' Rock Music

Joking about using Nazi methods on a group of people you don't like, or shooting people you don't agree with, or labeling posters as those who condone the sexual abuse of children, is not only tasteless but fucked up. In real life I could sue you and win for saying that about me (that I condone sexual abuse of children) in a court of law. In fact I could probably could still take a law suit to you for it, if I was that kind of person. I mean, to insinuate something like that is pretty rotten.

So of course you are going to defend Charity Case. You say the same kind of crap!

Page 4 of this thread, 3rd post.

All the answers to your questions are right there.

So it's ok for you not to be serious, but when we use sarcasm it shows our true colors.  The context of me stating Moore supporters should be shot was a joke, I explained that.  Unlike when someone advocated the assination of Bush and hes yet to take it back.  SLC, you did partially condone and excuse a 14 year old girl for molesting an 8 year old boy.  You called it doctor and if I recall, the majority of the posters agreed with me that it was wrong.  I didn't acuse you of anything, and please take me to court - I know I'd win.  You basically said that it was innocent fun for a 14 year old girl to mess around with an 8 year old boy.  In my state of Ohio that would be statuatory rape; similar to child molesting.  Although I'm honored that you're keeping a log of mine from 3 months ago, actually I'm kind of scared.  Now you know why I don't want liberals in office with an expanding government - talk about the Patriot Act!

God forbid! They might help the poor...or worse!

Allow me to quote Sterling:


Oh, and did anyone happen to read the word "liberals" in Charity's comment? That alone made it what it was.

---

I think you should expand on that. Just for the halibut... :yes:

First of all a "majority of the posters" didn't say it was "wrong".

And two you took what I said (twisted it) and then used it in another thread claiming I codone sexual abuse of children. Which I DO NOT, so fuck you asshole.

Reread my post, I never said I wanted to take you to court. But rather saying something about a person like that is slander and you COULD BE sued in real life.

Whatever posts or opinions are causing offence, it would be decent thing for the participants of this thread's topic to bring to an end any threads on this forum that are causing offence

If you want to be dirty, I'm sure there are other forums that are more suitable to your discussions

Who needs TV when you got drama like this...

And no adverts!

I'm not trying to piss anyone off or offend them; that has never been my goal.  My post are always stemmed from a Kantian, individualists and private property concerned point of view.  Certain members of this board have taken a recent habbit of taking posts by members they disagree with and quoting them out of context here in an attempt to draw negative attention from admins.  I'm by no means a fascist and am one of the few members (from a philosophical and realist point of view) that adovcate true freedom.  Because I identify as a libertarian and personally live myself by conservative values I am labeled a racists, biggot and most recently a fascist.  All of these terms are insults thrown by people who wish to attack me rather than the ideas I represent.  I find it amusing that so many on this board label me as such as I am not a "Christian", am against the war in Iraq and support the right of all individuals to conduct their personal lives in a manner they see fit [read: I support abortion, legalization of drugs and the right of homosexual activity].  However, because I don't subscribe to the extreme or moderate leftist agenda (many inclufing myslef would say I support the extreme free market agenda) take any oppurtunity they can to make ad hominem attacks against myself and others who shate my view. 

Sure they have.......everybody is just taking the things your group says out of context. Even if we clip and past the entire paragraph...it's "out of context'. Sure.....

But what if you want to be stupid?

Oh...you....master of great questions.

How you bless this thread......

are you telling me that having a debate with idiots is stupid? surely not :hihi:

Forgive them Father. They know not where they poo...


No, I'm saying that having a debate with stupid people is idiotic. Get a clue!

Hmmm...on second thought, I don't have a jesus clue what I'm saying! :D

Anyway I'm gonna go kill myself now. With a bottle of pepper. Goodbye crool wurled... :'(

You may very well be on to something.

I have pondered this thought, yet some how get sucked back into the vacuum of stoopid.

Yeah but who mourns for Adonis?

And the award for dragging the thread totally off topic and contributing nothing goes to.......MCT

Do you think Malmsteen would be able to play the solo from I Wanna Rock?

Now that was a good one, wasn't it?

(http://tinypic.com/ekryv4.gif)

Ok, I'm gonna be the fascist of this board and lock this damn thread...  :smoking: