PNWI Community Thread version 3.0 (KEEP REFRIGERATED AT ALL TIMES)

[Iscariot]

how the hell can you people afford to drive

[dei]

Jared, I am so mad at you right now that I am going to punch the next person I meet with an accent like yours.

[Iscariot]

dei you won't punch them you're mexican so you'll get 8 of your friends to punch them for you

[ashman]

how the hell can you people afford to drive

Communism.

[Dr Hooch]

how the hell can you people afford to drive

on account of you can drive from any point on the english border to any other quite comfortably in a day

[Iscariot]

well there is that

i forget sometimes how much bigger america is

it takes like 8 hours just to drive from the northern border of oregon to the northern border of california in good traffic

[Hababi]

well there is that

i forget sometimes how much bigger america is

it takes like 8 hours just to drive from the northern border of oregon to the northern border of california in good traffic

Wtf is good traffic? One of my cousins drove from Florida to PA in roughly that time.

[Dr Hooch]

8-10AM, 5-7PM it's an easy rule that all our motorways (Freeway? limit 70mph +10% = 77mph) may as well be shut

[Iscariot]

Wtf is good traffic? One of my cousins drove from Florida to PA in roughly that time.

good traffic is being able to do 85mph for more than 2 miles before the traffic slows down to 30 in the middle of the freeway

if you want less traffic you have to take the back roads and then you have to be careful how much you speed because there are cops hiding in the woods off the sides of the road

[ashman]

8-10AM, 5-7PM it's an easy rule that all our motorways (Freeway? limit 70mph +10% = 77mph) may as well be shut

I think the same could be said about any intercity motorway network.

A funny side note about my city, there's this vital road that leads into the city centre and they've been doing roadworks to apparently ease congestion...They've increased the size of the road by 3 feet for Bike lanes, 6 months of nightmarish roadworks, just so some hippy who thinks they're doing their bit for the environment. I ain't happy :angry:

[Dr Hooch]

i think america keeps flowing on account of more than 50% of their actual surface area is roads

[Iscariot]

lol i love how vf got barred from yet another debate

is it just me or is it always the same two or three people in every debate no wonder these things died

i think it would at least be entertaining to let vf have a shot

[ashman]

Wasn't VF the person who found that 12 year old attractive? It'd be funny to see what he'd have to say in a debate :thumb:

[guitrguy]

This is my first debate actually.

[Dr Hooch]

Wasn't VF the person who found that 12 year old attractive? It'd be funny to see what he'd have to say in a debate :thumb:

:lol: now you say that

yes

it was

[Iscariot]

lol i remember that

[guitrguy]

to be quite honest with you it's a fantastic place to live but i'd start toning down the yank accept asap

Ah ****, I've never been great at doing an English accent. I can use your vernacular though. For example, I sound like a tit when I try to sound English.

[Dr Hooch]

Ah ****, I've never been great at doing an English accent. I can use your vernacular though. For example, I sound like a tit when I try to sound English.

fake english is so much worse than mild american

[Iscariot]

i can imitate accents pretty well but regardless of how good i am at impersonating people i would be way too self-conscious to try to fake an english accent in front of an english person

[guitrguy]

Well, my dad is in the Air Force, so I have lived in multiple states. As a result I have developed the general plain sounding accent.

[Iscariot]

i was amazed at how quickly i picked up a southern accent when i lived in kentucky

i was there for maybe a month and then i heard my voice in a sound bit and i was like "wtf that's not me"

[ashman]

i can imitate accents pretty well but regardless of how good i am at impersonating people i would be way too self-conscious to try to fake an english accent in front of an english person

Which English accent? We've got more them America in all fairness.


(Try the brummie accent, it's the funniest accent in the world)

[Iscariot]

Which English accent? We've got more them America in all fairness.


(Try the brummie accent, it's the funniest accent in the world)

i guess it would be a typical london accent

i can't do a cockney accent to save my life and i'm not accustomed enough to the regional variances to imitate anything else either

[guitrguy]

i was amazed at how quickly i picked up a southern accent when i lived in kentucky

i was there for maybe a month and then i heard my voice in a sound bit and i was like "wtf that's not me"

I live in Mississippi, and I somehow haven't picked it up. I still say "you guys" and I say "I am going to" instead of "I'm fixin' to."

[Iscariot]

I live in Mississippi, and I somehow haven't picked it up. I still say "you guys" and I say "I am going to" instead of "I'm fixin' to."

ugh lucky bastard

i've been out of the army and living back in oregon for like three years now and i still have a drawl i think i'm going to be stuck with it forever

[dei]

I want to pick up a Scottish accent. I'm not familiar with the different accents in Scotland but most of the ones I've heard are pretty great.

[Dr Hooch]

I want to pick up a Scottish accent. I'm not familiar with the different accents in Scotland but most of the ones I've heard are pretty great.

Desmond from Lost is as wonderful as they get... There are bad ones, but anything you're likely to pick up would probably be pretty cool.

[ashman]

Why would anyone want to learn such a savage accent?

[BridgeToSolace]

Why would anyone want to learn such a manly accent?

Fix'd, and self explanatory.

I'd like to get a British accent when I'm older. I'll have to figure out how to manage it somehow.

I <3 Desmond, I but I don't wanna say "Brotha!" all the time. Seems like they kind of dropped it from his dialog since they only needed it for that one plot point.

[dei]

There's nothing savage about Scottish accents.

[Futue te Ipsum]

what?

WHAT?

shh you, you know nothing!

[guitarded_chuck]

America's health care system is such ****

It's like the people haven't heard of democracy because there is never any change

[ashman]

Fix'd, and self explanatory.

Pfft...

I think this says it all about Scots

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/7406351.stm

[guitrguy]

Just letting to you guys know, I am writing my opening statement to the debate right now. I didn't forget, I just got busy.

[Hababi]

Oh btw since Jude is unbanned now I can elaborate on why he's a monumental bigot:

1) He bragged of devoting an obsessively long time trying to disprove the author of Hitler's Willing Executioners. Now, doesn't it strike anyone odd that someone should be so obsessed with defending Nazi society?

2) "The Jewish state is incompatable with peace." That's right, the German state isn't. The English state isn't. But those Jews? Yeah they can't have peace!

3) He advocates the destruction of the state of Israel and a state in which Jews are subjugated to Palestinians.

4) He accuses Israel of being an apartheid government

5) He appears to devote an obscene amount of time campaigning to destroy a free and democratic society

6) He's German American, so he probably has relatives that were Nazis or at least Nazi collaborators.

So yeah, Jude is a bigot. A big, blatant bigot.

[Volumnius Flush]

What was Dei's original name, anybody?

[Dave de Sylvia]

6) He's German American, so he probably has relatives that were Nazis or at least Nazi collaborators.
Honestly, Steve...

[Hababi]

Honestly, Steve...

:lol: That was an afterthought and not entirely serious. But the other ones are very much serious.

[guitrguy]

No offense, but that reads more like butthurtness from him not being pro-Israeli. You did make thread name "Palestinian Murderers are at it Again." That could easily be taken as you being bigoted towards Palestinians. Just because he is vocal for the Palestinians does not make him necessarily bigoted towards Israelis.

[dei]

Oh btw since Jude is unbanned now I can elaborate on why he's a monumental bigot:

1) He bragged of devoting an obsessively long time trying to disprove the author of Hitler's Willing Executioners. Now, doesn't it strike anyone odd that someone should be so obsessed with defending Nazi society?

2) "The Jewish state is incompatable with peace." That's right, the German state isn't. The English state isn't. But those Jews? Yeah they can't have peace!

3) He advocates the destruction of the state of Israel and a state in which Jews are subjugated to Palestinians.

4) He accuses Israel of being an apartheid government

5) He appears to devote an obscene amount of time campaigning to destroy a free and democratic society

6) He's German American, so he probably has relatives that were Nazis or at least Nazi collaborators.

So yeah, Jude is a bigot. A big, blatant bigot.

1) K.

2) It isn't compatible with peace.

3) There's nothing wrong with that.

4) It is.

5) Democracy is overrated.

6) No.

[Hababi]

No offense, but that reads more like butthurtness from him not being pro-Israeli. You did make thread name "Palestinian Murderers are at it Again." That could easily be taken as you being bigoted towards Palestinians.
I don't think that a Palestinian state is inherently incompatable with peace. He believes that about Israel. I get accused of bigotry for saying far less about Palestinians, specifically and in general, than he does against Israelis.

[dei]

Didn't you once tell Surgicalgod that you hoped his parents' house was bombed while they're talking on the phone with him so he could hear them scream?

[Hababi]

Didn't you once tell Surgicalgod that you hoped his parents' house was bombed while they're talking on the phone with him so he could hear them scream?

That was trolling. If Jude's just a gimmick troll then that's a different matter...

[dei]

No, I'm pretty sure you meant it.

[Der Übermensch]

2) "The Jewish state is incompatable with peace." That's right, the German state isn't. The English state isn't. But those Jews? Yeah they can't have peace!
It isn't as long as it holds the occupied territories.

4) He accuses Israel of being an apartheid government
To harsh, but not completely off base. It does offer some involvement to the Palestinians/Arabs, but on terms unacceptable to them, which means the end result is somewhat similar.

6) He's German American, so he probably has relatives that were Nazis or at least Nazi collaborators.
Wow... Thats just ****ing racist man. Not cool.

[Volumnius Flush]

Wow... Thats just ****ing racist man. Not cool.

More like a nationalist form of discrimination it seems to me.

[Hababi]

It isn't as long as it holds the occupied territories.

No see that's not what he said. That would've been, "continued occupation of territories is incompatible with peace. He said The Jewish state is incompatible. Big difference.


To harsh, but not completely off base. It does offer some involvement to the Palestinians/Arabs, but on terms unacceptable to them, which means the end result is somewhat similar.

Arab citizens in Israel have full rights in Israel, and a ton of affirmative action programs. If Palestinians stopped fighting, the conditions they face would be much better. The suggestion that Israel is "apartheid", along with being utterly off base and insulting to South African blacks, is a bigoted recycling of Protocols of the Elders of Zion propaganda.


Wow... Thats just ****ing racist man. Not cool.

I wasn't being serious, no offense intended.

[Dave de Sylvia]

I dunno, I think both you and Jude approach the issue in way over-simplistic terms.

[Hababi]

I dunno, I think both you and Jude approach the issue in way over-simplistic terms.

Jude's problem goes beyond his bigoted approach to the Israeli/Palestine issue. It goes to his Holocaust revisionism and general bigotry.

[Dave de Sylvia]

Holocaust revisionism?

[Hababi]

Holocaust revisionism?

Yes, his obsession with attacking Hitler's Willing Executioners, thereby defending Nazi society.

[Dave de Sylvia]

But that book is trash.

[guitrguy]

Steve, I think you are the only who thinks he is a Holocaust Revisionist.

[Volumnius Flush]

I think he is a revisionist.

[Hababi]

Steve, I think you are the only who thinks he is a Holocaust Revisionist.

You should pay more attention to his posts.


But that book is trash.


Even if you disagree with it, obsessively devoting yourself to attacking it hints at a rather disturbing bias.

[Dave de Sylvia]

I don't know, it's a really shitty book. I'm surprised more Jewish people aren't offended by its crass trivialisation of the Holocaust.

[dei]

I think he is a revisionist.

You're a Steve clone. You don't count.

[guitrguy]

You should pay more attention to his posts.

I do. Its not there. Sorry.

[Hababi]

I do. Its not there. Sorry.

It really is.

Oh I forgot another thing:

6) Justifying terrorist attacks on Jewish civilians.

7) Accusing the US media of being controlled by Jews and thus hiding the 'truth'.

[Dr Hooch]

Oh btw since Jude is unbanned now I can elaborate on why he's a monumental bigot:

1) He bragged of devoting an obsessively long time trying to disprove the author of Hitler's Willing Executioners. Now, doesn't it strike anyone odd that someone should be so obsessed with defending Nazi society?

Look, man, seriously, godwin.


2) "The Jewish state is incompatable with peace." That's right, the German state isn't. The English state isn't. But those Jews? Yeah they can't have peace!

Are we noticing something special about the fact that all those countries are run by all the people that live there

3) He advocates the destruction of the state of Israel and a state in which Jews are subjugated to Palestinians.

dissolution =/= destruction. Czeckoslovakia wasn't "destroyed"

4) He accuses Israel of being an apartheid government


and?

5) He appears to devote an obscene amount of time campaigning to destroy a free and democratic society

No more than you spend defending israelis against universally accepted things like human rights abuses

6) He's German American, so he probably has relatives that were Nazis or at least Nazi collaborators.

This comment is pretty much banworthy

So yeah, Jude is a bigot. A big, blatant bigot.

and you're blatantly a tool?

[guitrguy]

It really is.

Oh I forgot another thing:

6) Justifying terrorist attacks on Jewish civilians.

7) Accusing the US media of being controlled by Jews and thus hiding the 'truth'.

Care to quote it? and those new assertions as well.

[Hababi]

No more than you spend defending israelis against universally accepted things like human rights abuses


No see it goes beyond internet posting (though he devotes the vast majority of his time in PNWI to spreading hate of Israel, whereas I devote much more time to other threads). He devotes a lot of time in real life to hating Israel.


and?

The accusation is inherently bigoted.


dissolution =/= destruction. Czeckoslovakia wasn't "destroyed"


It was when the Nazis took over. That's what Jude wants to see happen. He wants to see Jews put under the control of the Palestinians, whose power players are disproportionately hugely anti-Jewish, like the power players in most other middle eastern countries.



Look, man, seriously, godwin.


No. I'm sorry but obsessively researching against and attacking a Jewish author on the Holocaust is basically something done by anti-Jewish bigots...Like Jude.



Are we noticing something special about the fact that all those countries are run by all the people that live there


Yeah and umm so is Israel. Learn something.

[Mr. Ron]

ahhh.....VenomfangX never lets me down. lmao

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ljVYyul1n6M

[Dr Hooch]

Yeah and umm so is Israel. Learn something.

I think what we're maybe implying is maybe the palestinian territories are occupied?

[Mr. Ron]

Yeah, occupied by blood lust.



:0



jk'in

[Hababi]

I think what we're maybe implying is maybe the palestinian territories are occupied?

Hmmm then maybe you should say that instead of "Israel is an apartheid state"

[Dr Hooch]

that's not what i was responding to. **** off with your strawmanning, please.

ahhh.....VenomfangX never lets me down. lmao

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ljVYyul1n6M

paraphrase for me? it hurts when he speaks.

[Smokey D]

So basically Steve is saying that he wants shoddy history to be perpetuated simply because it was written by a Jewish writer and non-Jews who criticise any of the claims by any Jewish writer regarding the Holocaust, or pretty much anything else, is an anti-Holocaust revisionist.

[Hababi]

So basically Steve is saying that he wants shoddy history to be perpetuated simply because it was written by a Jewish writer and non-Jews who criticise any of the claims by any Jewish writer regarding the Holocaust, or pretty much anything else, is an anti-Holocaust revisionist.

What I am saying is that it's bizarre for someone to devote a gross amount of time to attacking a Jewish historian, while spending plenty more time attacking Israel, while saying garbage like "The Jewish state is incompatable with peace" and justifying suicide bombings, etc.

Jude is a bigot who should be on stormfront...maybe he is, actually.

[Dave de Sylvia]

You need to consider that people may have other motivations for criticising Israel. Such as sympathy for Palestinians or inadequate information. God knows you have plenty of experience with the latter.

[Iskandar]

How about maybe that Israel is occupying land that is supposed to be used for someone else's state.

[Against Miik!]

And it is, in the most technical sense, an illegal occupation.

[Hababi]

How about maybe that Israel is occupying land that is supposed to be used for someone else's state.

Why is Israel occupying the land?

[Iskandar]

Why is Israel occupying the land?Because it gained it in the 1967 war and never returned it.

Now you're going to say: They won't return it because of Palestinian violence. To which I could just as easily respond: That violence is because of the occupation. And the occupation is because of the war, which was started by the Arab nations, who attacked because Israel was established, which was because of Zionism and the British....

See how stupid the blame game is?

[Against Miik!]

http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/2411.htm

October 2002

ISRAEL'S ILLEGAL OCCUPATION

The following article on Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian land was written in response to an opinion piece that appeared in The New York Times on 21 March 2002. That piece, entitled 'Annan's Careless Language' and written by Mr George P Fletcher, contended that the Israeli occupation is not illegal, as was stated by UN Secretary-General [Kofi] Annan. This article, which was submitted to The New York Times for publication but regrettably declined, confronts this contention with a concise explanation regarding the undeniably illegal nature of the Israeli occupation.

By Nasser Al-Kidwa

Bringing an end to the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land is as much a prerequisite for peace in the Middle East as is the Palestinian recognition of Israel. The Israeli occupation is not only inhuman and the cause of extreme suffering for the 3.5 million Palestinians living under its subjugation, but it is also illegal under international law. Attempts to claim otherwise have no legal validity and are morally bankrupt and politically dangerous since they basically preclude the achievement of peace.

While it is true that victorious powers can legally occupy hostile territories seized in the course of conflict - an example of which is the Allies' occupation of the territory of Nazi Germany during World War II, foreign occupation should nevertheless be a temporary situation, pending a political settlement or solution. During the interim, the occupying Power must comply with relevant instruments of international humanitarian law with regard to its conduct in the territory it has occupied.

International law is very clear on two basic principles: the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the prohibition of the transfer of civilians of the occupying Power to the occupied territory. Both are intended to prevent expansionism and the colonisation of occupied territories. Both complement another explicit principle of international law, namely the right of peoples to self-determination, a right that a colonial or occupying Power is obliged to respect.

The Israeli occupation has clearly violated all three of these principles of international law. In fact, throughout its prolonged occupation, Israel has persistently and aggressively breached international law.

Thus, what makes the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land illegal is not the fact that it occurred during the war of 1967 (regardless of the narrative concerning the causes of the war). What makes the Israeli occupation illegal is that it has existed for 35 years, during which time it transformed into a form of colonialism and suppressed and oppressed an entire people for decades, preventing them from the exercise of their right to self-determination and the establishment of their State, Palestine.

Israel, as an occupying Power, has undertaken countless measures attempting to change the legal status, demographic composition and character of the territory by confiscating land, exploiting natural resources, building more than 250 settlements, transferring more than 400,000 Israelis to the occupied territories, establishing a dual system of law and even annexing part of the territory.

These actions have been carried out in direct contravention of the Fourt Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, which, among other things, defines the rules of conduct and the obligations of the occupying Power. Clearly then, the active intent of the Israeli occupation has been to negate Palestinian rights, to create new facts on the ground and to illegally expand Israel's borders.

Security Council resolution 242 (1967), which is the bedrock of the peace process and of any future peace settlement, is anchored in the principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war. The old and deceptive argument that the resolution calls for withdrawal from 'territories' and not 'the territories' not withstanding (in fact, the French text of the resolution does contain the article 'the'). The call in the resolution for the withdrawal of Israel can only be read within the context of the above-mentioned principle.

Since the onset of the Israeli occupation in 1967, and in response to established, illegal policies and practices of the occupying Power, the Security Council has adopted 26 resolutions that affirmed the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention to the territories occupied by Israel. Of those resolutions, several deal directly with the issue of Israeli settlements and several also specifically deal with Israeli violations in Occupied East Jerusalem.

The resolutions clearly address the illegality of Israel's policies and practices with regard to both issues. For example, some of the resolutions affirm that the Israeli settlements 'have no legal validity'; call upon the government and people of Israel 'to dismantle the existing settlements'; and call upon 'all States not to provide Israel with any assistance to be used specifically in connection with settlements in the occupied territories'.

As for Occupied East Jerusalem, which the Israeli government illegally annexed in 1980, the Security Council, in resolution 478 (1980), determined 'that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which have altered or purport to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, and, in particular, the recent "basic law" on Jerusalem are null and void and must be rescinded forthwith'.

Similar affirmations were made by the Council in several other resolutions. Moreover, the General Assembly and other UN organs have adopted scores of resolutions on the illegal policies and practices of the Israeli occupation and on the legitimacy of, and the necessity for, the exercise of the right to self-determination by the Palestinian people.

There has therefore been absolutely no impropriety on the part of the UN Secretary-General concerning his recent statements with regard to the Israeli occupation. Kofi Annan's call for an end to 'the illegal occupation' was not only legally correct but was also not a concept invented by the Secretary-General, as reflected in the numerous resolutions of the United Nations. It was, however, important for Mr Annan to add his moral authority to the urgent need for an end to that illegal occupation, particularly during this late stage in the perilous deterioration of the situation.

In that statement on 12 March 2002, the Secretary-General addressed both the Palestinian and Israeli sides. The Palestinian side probably did not like everything it heard. But, taken in its entirety, the statement was widely viewed as a necessary and responsible call that intended to, and should, help the parties to move forward towards a peaceful settlement. For this to happen, the Israeli people and the Israeli government must indeed come to terms, for once and for all, with the illegality of their occupation and the need for its termination. - Third World Network Features

About the writer: Dr Nasser Al-Kidwa is Ambassador and Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations.

The above article first appeared in Palestine & the UN (Vol. 7 Issue 8, mid-September 2002).

When reproducing this feature, please credit Third World Network Features and (if applicable) the cooperating magazine or agency involved in the article, and give the byline. Please send us cuttings.

Please actually read Steve.

[Volumnius Flush]

I was under the impression that Israel was the land of the Jews prior to the Diaspora of AD 70.

[Against Miik!]

That is the lamest excuse ever. If we use that as a justification for giving the land to Israel, why not reapportion the entire globe as it was in 70 ad?

[Hababi]

Because it gained it in the 1967 war and never returned it.

1) Land regularly is transferred as a result of war. That's how the US got the southwest, in case you forgot. It's how France regained some territory from Germany. It's how Britain incorporated Boer territory into what later became known as South Africa. I could go on and on.

2) Israel offered to return 99% of it and Arafat turned them down.


Now you're going to say: They won't return it because of Palestinian violence. To which I could just as easily respond: That violence is because of the occupation.

Except that you're incorrect. The violence isn't because of land occupation, as the violence predated the land occupation. The violence is a result of the existence of the state of Israel. When the peaceful Palestinians have power and are able to control the non-peaceful ones, there will be order. Until then, only the non-peaceful Palestinians are to blame.

[Aaron]

I know it won't happen, but I'd like to see a prohibition on civilian possession of firearms within the area [in conjuction with a gun buyback scheme administered by a third-party] and as a conselation to the palestinians an agreement for settlements to stop. Seems daft, but if this were successful it'd make negotiation much easier.

[guitrguy]

I was under the impression that Israel was the land of the Jews prior to the Diaspora of AD 70.

AS steve said land changes had regularly as a result of war. I see no reason have given them the land. Why can't we gave country to the Kurds? Thats right, we'll have a quagmire similar to that of Israel/Palestine.

Except that you're incorrect. The violence isn't because of land occupation, as the violence predated the land occupation. The violence is a result of the existence of the state of Israel. When the peaceful Palestinians have power and are able to control the non-peaceful ones, there will be order. Until then, only the non-peaceful Palestinians are to blame.

Yes some of the violence is the fault of Palestinians, but having the view Israel has done no wrong impedes a real peace process.

[Smokey D]

What I am saying is that it's bizarre for someone to devote a gross amount of time to attacking a Jewish historian, while spending plenty more time attacking Israel, while saying garbage like "The Jewish state is incompatable with peace" and justifying suicide bombings, etc.

What I'm saying is it is bizarre and obscene for someone who purports to be a straight A history student who "would basically be accepted into any grad programme he applied to" would so spuriously dismiss someone who provides criticism of a book widely recognised as subpar and then to draw inferences about his character from it.

I was under the impression that Israel was the land of the Jews prior to the Diaspora of AD 70.

Find me a Jew alive in 70CE and I'll concede the point.

Land regularly is transferred as a result of war. That's how the US got the southwest, in case you forgot. It's how France regained some territory from Germany. It's how Britain incorporated Boer territory into what later became known as South Africa. I could go on and on.

Yeah but it's illegal according to Israel itself. And peace can't happen without Israel returning the land. So you have a choice 1) either you continue to hold the land and suffer the violence and perpetuate the cycle or 2) you concede that the land should be given back for the interests of peace.

[Volumnius Flush]

Let's say I have a nice cd player in my car. Bob breaks in and steals it and sells it to Steve. I meet Steve one day and see my cd player in his car. Now whose is it? Mine or Steve's? Steve bought it fair and square but Bob stole it from me and it is rightfully mine.

The onus is on Steve due to the fact he bought a hot cd player.

It's like saying you've never stole anything in your life. Did you pick that penny up off the ground? Well you stole. That wasn't your penny.

[Smokey D]

What does that have to do with anything?

Claim to title ends after a few generations anyway.

[Volumnius Flush]

What does that have to do with anything?

Claim to title ends after a few generations anyway.

The fact is the land was theirs and it was ultimately taken by the Palestinians. It is only fair they should give it back.

[Smokey D]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equity_%28law%29

[Volumnius Flush]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equity_%28law%29

What does this mean?

[Smokey D]

It means that mechanical operation of the law, where unduly harsh, can be set aside in favour of a conscionable response.

Not that it really matters since neither law nor equity applies to state formation only power.

[totah]

1) Land regularly is transferred as a result of war. That's how the US got the southwest, in case you forgot. It's how France regained some territory from Germany. It's how Britain incorporated Boer territory into what later became known as South Africa. I could go on and on.

All of those examples are before any of the Geneva Conventions.

And France regained land (I assume you're talking about Alsace-Lorraine) that was occupied and annexed by Germany, much like the Palestinian Occupied Territories (except not much like, but similar).

2) Israel offered to return 99% of it and Arafat turned them down.

You're using extremely misleading rhetoric from the Israeli propaganda machine. What happened was that Barak and Arafat drew out a deal which they both willingly accepted, and on the last day of the conference Barak withdrew the offer and changed it to something else, something which did not include the Right of Return (which no Palestinian leader can give up, for fear of repercussions from those he claims to represent), so Arafat refused and the conference fell apart, with the Palestinians getting the blame.

Except that you're incorrect. The violence isn't because of land occupation, as the violence predated the land occupation. The violence is a result of the existence of the state of Israel. When the peaceful Palestinians have power and are able to control the non-peaceful ones, there will be order. Until then, only the non-peaceful Palestinians are to blame.

Considering that before 1948 it was all Palestinian land under one rule of another, it's fair to say that when the Israeli state was established it occupied stolen land. Millions of Palestinians were made refugees in a matter of months, and their ancestral land was settled by all these European folks.

Besides which, who are you - someone who's never been to Palestine let alone talked to a Palestinian living here - to say why the violence and anger exist? You know nothing of non-Western elements in the Middle-East beyond what Western media and research tells you.

The fact is the land was theirs and it was ultimately taken by the Palestinians. It is only fair they should give it back.

We're talking two milleniums ago, right? We're talking approximately 400 generations (assuming every generation is 50 years). What happened then is completely irrelevant to today.


http://www.xkcd.com/425/

[Iskandar]

What happened was that Barak and Arafat drew out a deal which they both willingly accepted, and on the last day of the conference Barak withdrew the offer and changed it to something else, something which did not include the Right of Return (which no Palestinian leader can give up, for fear of repercussions from those he claims to represent), so Arafat refused and the conference fell apart, with the Palestinians getting the blame.If there is ever to be peace, the Palestinian leadership is likely going to have to give up the right of return, at least to Israeli territory. The last thing Israel wants is two million Arab refugees threatening the very essence of the Jewish state.
The fact is the land was theirs and it was ultimately taken by the Palestinians. It is only fair they should give it back.Nice try. It's not the fault of the Arabs that the Jews were expelled from Palestine.

[Hababi]

Yeah but it's illegal according to Israel itself. And peace can't happen without Israel returning the land. So you have a choice 1) either you continue to hold the land and suffer the violence and perpetuate the cycle or 2) you concede that the land should be given back for the interests of peace.


Israel has already done the latter. Remember the evacuation of the Gaza strip? And do you remember what happened? Palestinian radicals marched, destroyed everything Israel had left for them, and declared that they would destroy Israel and have the entire region for a Palestine.

Withdrawing from much of the Occupied Territories is inevitable. But that can not happen so long as there is a major active terrorist threat, so long as close to half of the Palestinian population embraces terrorism and eschews compromise. You can not ask Israel to commit suicide. Well unless you're Jude.

[totah]

Israel uses the same essential tactics as Palestinian militants. When you're bombing from planes it's morallist warfare but if the only thing you have to attach a bomb to is your own body it's evil terrorism.

There is more threat to Palestinian civilians than there is to Israelis. Israelis die a couple dozen a year; Palestinians die by the hundreds. So if you want to pull out statistics, keep that in mind.

The Gaza evacuation was followed by a deadly siege that killed hundreds and left 1.4 million to starve. It left them with a modern infastructure but no oil to run the power plants, so no electricity, hence no sewers, no hospitals, no residential power, no phones, no nothing. There was food in the fields but no way to harvest it properly and get it to the city markets.

And meanwhile in the West Bank, Sharon enacted a policy of rapid settlement expansion, the closure of roads to the Palestinians, building a huge separation wall and fence that cuts towns in half and steals agricultural land from villages, putting in place even more checkpoints which - among other injustices - disrupt and disallow the movement of agricultural and industrial produce from place to place, making the development of an economy impossible.

Gaza: Siege from the outside
West Bank: Siege from the inside

In plain terms this is part of the same on-going Zionist policy:

Maximum Jews on maximum land
Minimum Arabs on minimum land

[Reaganista]

meh!

[Hababi]

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf22.html#rrr

[PerpetualBurn]

Serenity, just hire a Jewish prostitute or something. Get it out of your system.

[Iskandar]

The Palestinian Authority (PA) now has full control over the population in Gaza. No one there is “under occupation.” When the disengagement is completed, Gaza Palestinians will be able to move freely, live and work where they choose, and pursue normal lives, subject only to the restrictions imposed by their leaders.Lol.

[totah]

General Cosgrove was interviewed on the radio recently.
You'll love his reply to the lady who interviewed him concerning guns and children. Regardless of how you feel about gun laws you gotta love this! This is one of the best comeback lines of all time. It is a portion of an ABC interview between a female broadcaster and General Cosgrove who was about to sponsor a Boy Scout Troop visiting his military headquarters.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
So, General Cosgrove, what things are you going to teach these young boys when they visit your base?

GENERAL COSGROVE:
We're going to teach them climbing, canoeing, archery and shooting.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
Shooting! That's a bit irresponsible, isn't it?

GENERAL COSGROVE:
I don't see why, they'll be properly supervised on the rifle range.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
Don't you admit that this is a terribly dangerous activity to be teaching children?

GENERAL COSGROVE:
I don't see how. We will be teaching them proper rifle discipline before they even touch a firearm.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
But you're equipping them to become violent killers.
GENERAL COSGROVE:
Well, Ma'am, you're equipped to be a prostitute, but you're not one, are you?

[Der Übermensch]

Countries which happy proper youth instruction in respect and usage of firearms have better civic usage of them.

[Volumnius Flush]

General Cosgrove was interviewed on the radio recently.
You'll love his reply to the lady who interviewed him concerning guns and children. Regardless of how you feel about gun laws you gotta love this! This is one of the best comeback lines of all time. It is a portion of an ABC interview between a female broadcaster and General Cosgrove who was about to sponsor a Boy Scout Troop visiting his military headquarters.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
So, General Cosgrove, what things are you going to teach these young boys when they visit your base?

GENERAL COSGROVE:
We're going to teach them climbing, canoeing, archery and shooting.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
Shooting! That's a bit irresponsible, isn't it?

GENERAL COSGROVE:
I don't see why, they'll be properly supervised on the rifle range.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
Don't you admit that this is a terribly dangerous activity to be teaching children?

GENERAL COSGROVE:
I don't see how. We will be teaching them proper rifle discipline before they even touch a firearm.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER:
But you're equipping them to become violent killers.
GENERAL COSGROVE:
Well, Ma'am, you're equipped to be a prostitute, but you're not one, are you?

HAhaha :lol:

That's pretty hilarious but I am so sick without my cigarettes right now I can barely laugh.

[beso negro]

who banned VF

gay

[guitrguy]

Word is Wish, but I can't say whether its true or not.

[Smokey D]

It wasn't Wish.

VF was being an idiot. It was good someone banned him.

[guitrguy]

As big of idiot as he was being last night, it still amused me.

[Smokey D]

It's only a temp ban.

[guitrguy]

I figured. I didn't think he did anything perm worthy.

[Wish]

Word is Wish, but I can't say whether its true or not.
I could never bring myself around to ban Volumnius Flush.

[guitrguy]

You're a spineless wimp of a supermod! :)

[dei]

I figured. I didn't think he did anything perm worthy.

He was born.

[totah]

Surely that's his parents' fault? We can't expect a fetus to have enough self-awareness to commit suicide in the womb (if that's even possible).

[guitrguy]

Surely that's his parents' fault? We can't expect a fetus to have enough self-awareness to commit suicide in the womb (if that's even possible).

According to the alternate ending of The Butterfly Effect it is.

[ringworm]

Smokey
http://www.dailymail.com/Opinion/Editorials/200805160327

heres what i was talking about the other day, sorry its biased

http://news.yahoo.com/s/weeklystandard/20080519/cm_weeklystandard/letsdrill



personally, being more environmental, you would think i oppose it, but if we could reduce the impact on the eco-system, and i know we can, surely, then lets drill or at least build the technology to do it

[Der Übermensch]

I just exercised my Second Amendment Right to buy a Mosin-Nagant, 1934 model. Got it for under 100 bucks, works fine. Just need to buy a charger for it :)

[dei]

I just exercised my first amendment right and I killed someone in protest against having lamb for dinner tonight.

[Iskandar]

So Hunter, are you pretty much a right-wing libertarian now? Or still an anarchist of sorts?

[Der Übermensch]

Lol. I'm a socially permissive mutualist. Which is to say I still consider myself an anarchist to some degree, although few people, if any, think of mutualism when they think of Anarchism. Poor Proudhon doesn't get the kudos he deserves :(

I don't see why being pro-gun makes someone right wing.

[Iskandar]

No, just that I've noticed you seem to have moved away from your old collectivist positions. That and not everyone who is pro-gun is right-wing, but a loot of libertarian-types are.

Mutualism is a cool, if obscure, idea.

[Der Übermensch]

I found that I couldn't stand the normal sort of person who held that view :p
I am solidly middle class, and happy with it. I also came to terms with what my being a middle class american means, and that I wouldn't be willing to sacrifice that standing to achieve better world equality (ironically, that was my conclusion after reading Singer...). All those "anarchists" smashing starbucks windows in Seattle to protest the WTO... would they be willing to do that? No, but they won't admit that. They like being middle class just as much as I do.
I see mutualism to be middle class anarchism. Something that is consistent, over all, with the views I have held for a very long time, but with out the blatant hypocrisy of the situation in which I in fact live.

[Dave de Sylvia]

ugh Singer

[Reaganista]

I found that I couldn't stand the normal sort of person who held that view :p
I am solidly middle class, and happy with it. I also came to terms with what my being a middle class american means, and that I wouldn't be willing to sacrifice that standing to achieve better world equality (ironically, that was my conclusion after reading Singer...). All those "anarchists" smashing starbucks windows in Seattle to protest the WTO... would they be willing to do that? No, but they won't admit that. They like being middle class just as much as I do.
I see mutualism to be middle class anarchism. Something that is consistent, over all, with the views I have held for a very long time, but with out the blatant hypocrisy of the situation in which I in fact live.

wat

[Der Übermensch]

Don't worry about it tway. If you did get it, you'd just rip into it :p

[guitrguy]

I found that I couldn't stand the normal sort of person who held that view :p
I am solidly middle class, and happy with it. I also came to terms with what my being a middle class american means, and that I wouldn't be willing to sacrifice that standing to achieve better world equality (ironically, that was my conclusion after reading Singer...). All those "anarchists" smashing starbucks windows in Seattle to protest the WTO... would they be willing to do that? No, but they won't admit that. They like being middle class just as much as I do.
I see mutualism to be middle class anarchism. Something that is consistent, over all, with the views I have held for a very long time, but with out the blatant hypocrisy of the situation in which I in fact live.

Being middles class is pretty cool; I'm not gonna lie.

[totah]

According to the alternate ending of The Butterfly Effect it is.

The only good thing about that film was the title. God I hate Ashton Kutcher. His only real skill in actoring is comedy, and he's only good at that when he's making a fool of himself.

I found that I couldn't stand the normal sort of person who held that view :p
I am solidly middle class, and happy with it. I also came to terms with what my being a middle class american means, and that I wouldn't be willing to sacrifice that standing to achieve better world equality (ironically, that was my conclusion after reading Singer...). All those "anarchists" smashing starbucks windows in Seattle to protest the WTO... would they be willing to do that? No, but they won't admit that. They like being middle class just as much as I do.
I see mutualism to be middle class anarchism. Something that is consistent, over all, with the views I have held for a very long time, but with out the blatant hypocrisy of the situation in which I in fact live.

An anti-state revolutionary (at least one who acknowledges reality) should have no problem with guns. In fact any weapon the state wields against revolutionary insurrection should be used against the state in turn. The state has never hesitated to crush opposition, and opposition should not shy away from violent methods of resistance. But that's a long way off, first we need to organise into classless community networks before we even start challenging the state on its own terms.

Be careful, as soon as you start calling people "anarchists" or "so-called revolutionaries" you develop a better-anarchist-than-thou syndrome and then it's hard to organise 'cos everyone seems stupider than you. Your kind of anarchism (middle-class anarchism, let's say) isn't the only kind.

As for being middle-class. There shouldn't be any guilt about being middle-class to have to come to terms with in the first place. Where you were born into, or what colour, or what sex, is out of your control and what's out of your control is out of your responsibility and therefore you have nothing to be ashamed of. However, there is a big difference between recognising you are something, and then making an ideology out of it. Especially a classist ideology; being middle-class and an anarchist is one thing, being anarcho-middle-class is completely another. Think about it: Anarchism is about abolishing class (race and gender) differences for an egalitarian society. Now in this capitalist society we are middle class because that is what they make of us. We reject this not by burning all our money and property (that's very good for you, but it's nothing to do with anarchism), but by organising across the class (race and gender) spectrum in order to abolish that spectrum completely.

It's as hypocritical to be a middle-class anarchist as it is to be an anti-racist white or an anti-sexist male.

[guitrguy]

The only good thing about that film was the title. God I hate Ashton Kutcher. His only real skill in actoring is comedy, and he's only good at that when he's making a fool of himself.

I agree, I just couldn't pass up the chance of confirming fetal suicide.

[PerpetualBurn]

http://www.hoax-slayer.com/cosgrove-female-interviewer.shtml

I call bullshit on the General Cosgrove interview.

It's really not like Totah to not properly check his sources.

[Der Übermensch]

It's as hypocritical to be a middle-class anarchist as it is to be an anti-racist white or an anti-sexist male.
Thats why I'm not an anarchist in the modern usage of the word.
I'm a mutualist.


You know whats ****ing hard.... finding 7.62x54R at your local gun store :(

[J Rad]

do you own an ak?

[Against Miik!]

AKs are really easy to get, if you have the money. Not that they are absurdly expensive, just more than I have right now. I was thinking about getting an AR15, to save some cash, but nawww, gotta get an AK.

[J Rad]

yeah an ak74 and 47 are both on my must get list

i also want to get a pair of colt 1912 service revolvers and quick draw holsters so i can go play cowboys and indians for real

[Against Miik!]

The unfortunate part about the 74 is it would be really hard to find a fully automatic one, unless you knew somebody who could make it fully automatic, but that would just be expensive and silly.

[J Rad]

i could do it myself tbh

[Against Miik!]

o rly? I wouldn't feel confident enough to **** with one, unless I came across a post cold war stock pile or something.

[J Rad]

o rly? I wouldn't feel confident enough to **** with one, unless I came across a post cold war stock pile or something.

all you need to do is remove the bolt assembly and return spring, use a twist tie to tie the second sear to the pin that runs through the assembly and put the rifle back together

when you hold the trigger the second sear won't stop the firing pin from returning to strike the next round

[Against Miik!]

Well, that doesn't sound that hard. But I'd rather have a semi automatic ak than a worthless piece of metal, assuming i'd **** it up.

[Der Übermensch]

do you own an ak?

No. A Finnish made Mosin-Nagent.

Don't really want an AK. My next goal is a K98, and then an M14.

[Against Miik!]

My good friend's grandfather created the M-1 Garand.

[BridgeToSolace]

and then an M14.

Those things are amazing in Call Of Duty 4.

Too powerful, though. Burst fire basically just forces people not to worry so much about recoil and the damage is very high.

[J Rad]

No. A Finnish made Mosin-Nagent.

ohhh very nice very nice

Don't really want an AK. My next goal is a K98, and then an M14.

semi auto m14 or the fully auto?

[Iskandar]

I don't own any guns. My country does not have a constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms. Am I a pussy?

[Der Übermensch]

ohhh very nice very nice
Quite. It's a Tikka, which apparently is one of the hardest makers to find.
Took me all day to find a store with ammo for it, but I did. Gonna take it out and shoot tomorrow :)



semi auto m14 or the fully auto?
Full auto. I don't want no pansy *** Springfield armory fake M14. I want a real mil-surp one. I really have no interest in a gun less then 40-50 years old.

[J Rad]

Quite. It's a Tikka, which apparently is one of the hardest makers to find.
Took me all day to find a store with ammo for it, but I did. Gonna take it out and shoot tomorrow :)

film it plz

Full auto. I don't want no pansy *** Springfield armory fake M14. I want a real mil-surp one. I really have no interest in a gun less then 40-50 years old.

yeah i'm getting more into the idea of spending a little extra money to get an older gun

right now i only have a mossberg bantham 500 20g and i still need to get a slug barrel for it because it comes standard with a goddamn accu-choke barrel

[Der Übermensch]

film it plz
Dunno if I can find the vid camera, but I'll def take pics.



yeah i'm getting more into the idea of spending a little extra money to get an older gun

right now i only have a mossberg bantham 500 20g and i still need to get a slug barrel for it because it comes standard with a goddamn accu-choke barrel

Despite my ardent pro-gun stance, I'm only really interested in collecting, as my real passion is military history. The store I finally found the ammo at had a few K98's on hand. If they hadn't been 300 bucks I gotten one of them too :p

[McP3000]

I don't own any guns. My country does not have a constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms. Am I a pussy?
no, but you own one :smash:

[guitrguy]

Despite my position in the debate, I would really like to shoot a gun.

[Der Übermensch]

Shooting is a truly exhilarating activity.

[guitrguy]

yeah, I don't think I have the money to buy a gun, and I don't think shooting ranges let you rent a gun.

[Der Übermensch]

Some do.

You can get a gun for under 100 bucks easily enough.

Ammo is what kills you.

[BridgeToSolace]

Some do.

You can get a gun for under 100 bucks easily enough.

Ammo is what kills you.

Ha!

I'd rather go paintballing for $60, tbh

[guitrguy]

Some do.

You can get a gun for under 100 bucks easily enough.

Ammo is what kills you.

lol I get it.

[Der Übermensch]

yay! someone appreciated it :)

[Against Miik!]

Wow, for all the anti gun talk around here, we sure do love our guns.

[Der Übermensch]

Anti-gun talk? Me?

[Iskandar]

I'm effectively gun-neutral.

[ringworm]

Despite my position in the debate, I would really like to shoot a gun.

this may sound hickish, but every so often we visit some relatives near SC, it never fails that about 2 hrs before whatever meal we're gonna eat, all the guys go down and blast away with all sorts of weaponry, good stuff

ha ha
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3srID4qT15Q

[J Rad]

guns are very fun as long as they're used responsibly

i really hate people who spoil the actual sport of firing a rifle by being unsafe idiots

like this one party i went to out in the woods, one of my friends nick brought his mossberg 12g pistol grip and he let this drunk girl shoot it and she started swinging it around in circles exclaiming to everyone that it was really easy to shoot while there were still live rounds not only in the mag but in the chamber as well

you've never seen so many tipsy people hit the dirt and cover their heads that fast

[Amit]

i'm pro gun

especially when used on anti-smart people

[J Rad]

lol you should form your own militia amit

[Amit]

we just need to kill all the dumb people

[J Rad]

can i join or am i one of the dumb people

[Mr. Ron]

amit I thought u h8'ed on gats

[Amit]

i did but then i realized all the arguments against them were BS

j rad you will be prince of northwest america

[J Rad]

omg awesome i've always wanted to be royalty

anyone who challenges my leadership will have their penis cut off and they will be forced to eat it in front of all of the nw

[Against Miik!]

Anti-gun talk? Me?

I'd say the general consensus on the forum is that guns kill people because they have minds of their own

[J Rad]

everyone knows that all guns are controlled by skynet

[Der Übermensch]

and skynet is controlled by the Bavarian Illuminati?

[Amit]

and the FBI (futuristic bavarian illuminati) are controlled by JEWS (jewish earth watching soldiers)

[PerpetualBurn]

I'd say the general consensus on the forum is that guns kill people because they have minds of their own

But not really.

[Der Übermensch]

and the FBI (futuristic bavarian illuminati) are controlled by JEWS (jewish earth watching soldiers)

No. Thats just what the Freemasons want you to think. They are totally in cahoots with MAJESTIC-12 to make you believe such idiotic lies.

[Smokey D]

Be careful, as soon as you start calling people "anarchists" or "so-called revolutionaries" you develop a better-anarchist-than-thou syndrome and then it's hard to organise 'cos everyone seems stupider than you. Your kind of anarchism (middle-class anarchism, let's say) isn't the only kind.

I think the problem is that the majority of anarchists, despite their professed beliefs, hold wildly different views or have divergent interests to organise into a cohesive enough unit (or aggregation of units) to sustain themselves let alone overturn the established order.

As for being middle-class. There shouldn't be any guilt about being middle-class to have to come to terms with in the first place. Where you were born into, or what colour, or what sex, is out of your control and what's out of your control is out of your responsibility and therefore you have nothing to be ashamed of.

That's counter-revolutionary talk right there.

However, there is a big difference between recognising you are something, and then making an ideology out of it. Especially a classist ideology; being middle-class and an anarchist is one thing, being anarcho-middle-class is completely another. Think about it: Anarchism is about abolishing class (race and gender) differences for an egalitarian society. Now in this capitalist society we are middle class because that is what they make of us. We reject this not by burning all our money and property (that's very good for you, but it's nothing to do with anarchism), but by organising across the class (race and gender) spectrum in order to abolish that spectrum completely.

The delicious irony of anarchism is that it is a racist (or at least, culturally biased) and classist ideology in itself. It can't help not be.

[Amit]

smokey d have you ever made a joke in your entire life

i love you with all my heart i'm just curious

[Smokey D]

I am not programmed to make jokes, Amit.

[Reaganista]

this may sound hickish, but every so often we visit some relatives near SC, it never fails that about 2 hrs before whatever meal we're gonna eat, all the guys go down and blast away with all sorts of weaponry, good stuff

ha ha
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3srID4qT15Q

everything u post sounds 'hickish' so dont worry

[Amit]

you know smokey

there's this australian computer science/electrical engineering guy on another forum i visit (it's where i post most often these days) who reminds me so much of you

he is far more verbose, but you both make intimations about your personality circuitry and neural software protocol stacks :-P

you want an invite? it's a torrent tracker but there's a great (and extremely active) serious discussion forum that would be ripe for your intellectual harvesting circuitry machines

honestly, i post way more there than i ever download :lol:

[Smokey D]

Rep me it.

[Amit]

sent

[Smokey D]

That places sounds pretty hard out. Invites required and all.

[Amit]

That places sounds pretty hard out. Invites required and all.

yeah but nearly all good trackers are invite-only

and unlike other trackers, it has an *extremely* active community (it's the successor to the most famous music sharing tracker out there, oink)

[Reaganista]

they love amit there

[Amit]

yeah idk why

they would love you too but you got disabled for inactivity :[

[J Rad]

waffles is cool i just don't post on the forums because i don't know anyone there other than like amit and that's it

[Amit]

oh hey woah smokey invites are open rep me email plx

[Smokey D]

Er, "You do not have permission to do this action. Please refresh and try again". Damn MX.

[Amit]

damn it

invites just closed :[

just send me an email and i'll send when they're open again

eggothewaffle@gmail.com

[J Rad]

invites on waffles seem to open and close at a whim

"hey today feels good let's open invites"

"OH GODDAMMIT I STUBBED MY TOE TURN THE DAMN THINGS OFF"

[Amit]

yeah this time it was literally open for like ten minutes

it's to prevent invite selling (which is something oink and other major sites had/have huge problems with)

[J Rad]

well tbf even with the lengths they go to in order to prevent invite selling, everyone who wants an invite still gets on eventually

[Amit]

yeah word

[Dave de Sylvia]

lol at people who pay money to steal things

[guitrguy]

Nah dude, they are totally paying money to liberate the music, man.

/hippy

[dei]

Lol at people who steal things to pay money.

[Amit]

lol at people who pay money to steal things

???

[Iskandar]

I think Steve is posing as a noob with a Hebrew user name

What a dork

[guitrguy]

where?

[Der Übermensch]

film it plzl

http://sharebee.com/6d27cf63

Not to bad. We hit 10 out of 20 at 50 Yds, on a target of 1 ft diameter. Rifling definitely is a bit worn down, which really hurts the accuracy, but seems to work if you compensate by aiming a tad low. I'd like to put it on a stand and really dial it in when I get a chance.

[J Rad]

omg i want one

[Der Übermensch]

Yeah. It's a great gun. Very happy with my purchase :)

[J Rad]

it's always fun too to see how fast you can crank out the rounds on a bolt action

last time i was shooting my friend's 30-30 i got off 5 shots in 10 seconds not great but still pretty good i think

[Der Übermensch]

Yeah. The bolt is a bit sticky. It was really bad when I got it, but I spent a good hour cleaning it off, and now it's ok. Really ought to do a full strip of it.

[Iskandar]

where?User Hababi, joined this month, with like 5 posts.

I know it's him.

[Dave de Sylvia]

You are correct, sir.

[Amit]

hey splat you want an invite to waffles

[Dave de Sylvia]

wtf is waffles

but i'm gonna say yes

[Amit]

email plz

[Amit]

Sent! <3

[Iskandar]

The delicious irony of anarchism is that it is a racist (or at least, culturally biased) and classist ideology in itself. It can't help not be.It's more ironic that anarchists profess to be oppossed to all authority yet the only way to establish their stateless utopia would be through force.

I've said my piece. Carry on.

[dei]

I think I want a gun.

[Der Übermensch]

I think I want a gun.

Mosin is the way to go. Affordable, but very reliable.

[Iskandar]

Where can I get a fully automatic Soviet-made AK-74? That is what I wish to know.

[Der Übermensch]

With a LOT of work. Best chance is the third world. Although then an import license would be pretty damn hard to get too.

[Iscariot]

just get a semi-auto and convert it

[siva_chair]

I just exercised my Second Amendment Right to buy a Mosin-Nagant, 1934 model. Got it for under 100 bucks, works fine. Just need to buy a charger for it :)

Awesome.

The unfortunate part about the 74 is it would be really hard to find a fully automatic one, unless you knew somebody who could make it fully automatic, but that would just be expensive and silly.

Silly: yes

Expensive: not if you know what you are doing....:p

No. A Finnish made Mosin-Nagent.

Don't really want an AK. My next goal is a K98, and then an M14.

M14 ftw!

I don't own any guns. My country does not have a constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms. Am I a pussy?

No but your government is because it is afraid of the people.

guns are very fun as long as they're used responsibly

i really hate people who spoil the actual sport of firing a rifle by being unsafe idiots

like this one party i went to out in the woods, one of my friends nick brought his mossberg 12g pistol grip and he let this drunk girl shoot it and she started swinging it around in circles exclaiming to everyone that it was really easy to shoot while there were still live rounds not only in the mag but in the chamber as well

you've never seen so many tipsy people hit the dirt and cover their heads that fast

That is why bringing guns to booze parties is usually a very bad idea.

i did but then i realized all the arguments against them were BS

j rad you will be prince of northwest america

Can I have the midwest?

wtf is waffles

Delicious thats what they is.

[Amit]

yeah sure the mid-west is all yours but there will have to be a separate duke for chicago which you can take instead

your choice

[Iscariot]

you should take chicago siva it's better than the whole midwest combined

[Amit]

some people might enjoy the challenge of charlemagnizing the rest of the midwest

[siva_chair]

yeah sure the mid-west is all yours but there will have to be a separate duke for chicago which you can take instead

your choice

I'm cool with that.

I'll take the midwest minus Chicago as long as I still get to visit Chicago.

[Smokey D]

No but your government is because it is afraid of the people.

Isn't half the point of the right to bear arms , especially as established by the 2nd Amendment to make the government afraid of its citizens?

[Amit]

I'm cool with that.

I'll take the midwest minus Chicago as long as I still get to visit Chicago.

of course of course

[siva_chair]

you should take chicago siva it's better than the whole midwest combined

It's not my element, though. I'm really great with vast tracks of wild land.

some people might enjoy the challenge of charlemagnizing the rest of the midwest

I was wanting to turn most of it into the wild west like it once was to be honest.

Plus it will be a good place to let the Red man run free.

[Amit]

well as long as your part of the republic prospers, it's all good

[siva_chair]

Isn't half the point of the right to bear arms , especially as established by the 2nd Amendment to make the government afraid of its citizens?

Yes this is true. I was trying to allude to the fact that his government is a pussy because it doesn't trust the people. It is afraid of them owning guns. That is what I meant by that.

[siva_chair]

well as long as your part of the republic prospers, it's all good

Of course of course.

[monkeysonmars.]

can anyone help me with good examples of where a nation has gone through a process of liberation (a popular uprising rather than foreign intervention) to later come under authoritarian rule??

[Amit]

china?

[Smokey D]

Er, Russia.
Iraq (pre-Baathist)
Maybe Iran.
Most of Africa.
Fiji.
Most of South America at varying times (not so much now though).
Mexico before 2000.

I don't think China was ever very liberal. It was emperors, then warlords, then pseudo fascism under Chiang-Kai then the CCP.

[monkeysonmars.]

super, that's fanon destroyed.

[Smokey D]

Who's Fanon?

[monkeysonmars.]

this nutter that wrote in the sixties about anti-colonialism, geurrilla warfare etc. absolutely obsessed with violence, apparently "When the people have taken violent part in the national liberation...they take care not to place their future in the hands of a living god...demagogues and opportunists have a difficult task."

[Smokey D]

Ahahahahaha. That's hilarious.

That can't be all he said because that's frankly impossible to believe.

Just mention the transition from Imperial to Bolshevik Russia and you've already destroyed the argument. He was probably writing before the European ex-colonies destroyed themselves, but still such a statement is preposterous.

[monkeysonmars.]

I'm praying I get a question on him (exam next week) so I can have super fun pulling his work to pieces.

EDIT: to give him credit he was a pretty popular author on colonisation and he was heavily politicised (he was in the FLN) so you can see where he was coming from with the hardcore violent views but still much of his work is just impossible to relate to.

[Smokey D]

Apparently, most of his work has not been translated into English which somewhat misrepresents him, apparently.

[siva_chair]

Apparently, most of his work has not been translated into English which somewhat misrepresents him, apparently.

Apparently, this wasn't apparent enough so it's apparentness needed to be emphasized, apparently.

:p Sorry Smokey I couldn't help myself.

[peeted]

In all fairness Fannons argument was a bit deeper than that. He argued that it was through the personal demolition of the old structures of authority which people became free and realise their freedom (In much the same way people like Sartre thought individuals could realise their freedom, Fannon was pretty heavily influenced by Sartre). In most of those revolutions the peasents wont have changed rolls much through the revolutionary proccess, there will have still been the same structure and so they wont have experienced the destructive realisation of freedom Fannon thought people must experience to be properley liberated.

Not saying Fannons right, but just coming up with some revolutions which have ended up in authoritarian rule isnt really enough to beat him.

[monkeysonmars.]

cool, I only read the bit about violence in The Wretched of the Earth.

[guitrguy]

User Hababi, joined this month, with like 5 posts.

I know it's him.

:lol:

Good eye

[ashman]

Whoo...just found out that the company I work for, has a fairly large chance of making the UK ID cards...

Moral Dilemma? I think so... :upset:

[Dr Hooch]

The dilemma is if you blow up the entire building v for vendetta style then should you wear a guy fawkes mask or get your own signature thing?

[ashman]

The dilemma is if you blow up the entire building v for vendetta style then should you wear a guy fawkes mask or get your own signature thing?

Precisely, I'm thinking about a "Hello Kitty" mask and bright pink spandex unitard...That'll show those oppressive bastards :smash:

[Iscariot]

Yes this is true. I was trying to allude to the fact that his government is a pussy because it doesn't trust the people. It is afraid of them owning guns. That is what I meant by that.

a government that doesn't permit it's citizens to own firearms is a government that is not confident in it's own ability to rule

[PerpetualBurn]

That doesn't even begin to make sense.

[Iscariot]

sure it does unless you're a moron

nvm i forgot who i was talking to

[Dr Hooch]

"The only purpose of guns is to bring about revolution"

"the only reason the british government doesn't suddenly want thousands of guns legally in the hands of idiots is that people would use them to get rid of it and replace them with something equally mediocre"

[Dave de Sylvia]

a government that doesn't permit it's citizens to own firearms is a government that is not confident in it's own ability to rule
or a government filled with people who don't think civilians having guns is a good idea

[Iscariot]

why because if they had guns they would get rid of their crappy government

[guitrguy]

why because if they had guns they would get rid of their crappy government

Yeah thats the only reason people are anti-gun. Not that civies could take on the army, anyways.

[Dr Hooch]

well to be honest were we to want to do that guns would not be required

in fact asking nicely would probably work

[Dave de Sylvia]

why because if they had guns they would get rid of their crappy government
no because they have different opinions than you

in the democratic world we tend to get rid of crappy governments using democracy

[Dr Hooch]

Well, we in fact tend to not even try to get rid of crappy governments but anyone so stupid that they vote for said crappy governments certaintly can't be trusted with a gun

[Mr. Ron]

http://i28.tinypic.com/2j1q72d.jpg

[Dr Hooch]

http://i28.tinypic.com/2j1q72d.jpg

Guns don't kill puppies, marines do.

[Iskandar]

Yes this is true. I was trying to allude to the fact that his government is a slightly confuzzled sea lion because it doesn't trust the people. It is afraid of them owning guns. That is what I meant by that.That makes absolutely no sense because our government does in fact allow us to own guns. They just aren't a constitutional right.

[dei]

it should be a constitutional right, though, right?

isquandre

[1338 h4x0r]

http://i28.tinypic.com/2j1q72d.jpg

If I were in Iraq wearing a fur coat like that, I'd want to die, too.