I see we are having a gun-control debate on DOTS today, your discussion with ancientmoney seems okay, except for one statement you made, which I vehemently disagree with.
You said "There are good points to be made on both sides”. (Don't nitpick, I'm paraphrasing.)
Could you please enlighten me, and inform me what you think is a good point from the gun grabbing morons?
I have yet to hear a valid argument from any of them, and I disagree with a few of your points regarding teachers with guns.
Rule number one, under natural law, self defense is an inalienable right.
And, if you're even remotely interested in the Constitution, "The right to bear arms should not be infringed” seems pretty straightforward to me.
The way I read it, ALL gun laws are unconstitutional.
In a world with guns, it is the right of every human being to own one, and know how to defend oneself.
And, since this right should not be infringed upon, it should be each and everyone's right to own as many guns as they want, and the biggest and powerful guns they can afford, and operate safely.
Personally, I'd like to have my own tank.
My Eldorado is in need of a turret.
My Mustang would look great with rocket launchers mounted on it. I'll bet the pigs would get a kick out of that!
This whole thing went horribly wrong, when they announced the hideously evil concept of "gun free zones”. To a government evildoer, it's like shooting fish in a bowl, with no opposition. Exactly as intended.
To add to the level of evil, the government then mandates attendance. The children in these indoctrination camps on how to be a good slave, do not have the option of opting out.
So by legal mandate, they must sit there with bulls eyes painted on their backs, and hope they don't get executed that day.
Abolishing "gun free zones” solves the problem all by itself.
People who cherish their right to self-defense, and would come to the aid of innocence, and would put an end to mass murder immediately. The only thing that stops a madman with a gun, is a good man with a gun.
At least, the government couldn't pretend to be a teenage lone shooter anymore, and would have to expose themselves as the demonic piece of shit megalomaniacal, psychopathic genocidal scum bags they really are.
I agree with you that personal gun ownership isn't going to topple the Satanic empire of lies that we live under, but the ruse they use as a weapon of terror, would quickly be exposed for what it is. At that point, a lot of idiotic order followers would quickly realize they are on the side of pure evil.
In this country, up until the 1960s gun safety was taught as early as second grade. It was not uncommon for children to bring guns to school, so they could go hunting with their friends after school.
And nobody was worried about guns.
Laws have fucked this up all by themselves, and they will continue to do so, until people learn to break them.
It is not the criminals that threaten civil society, is the "Law abiding" fucking idiots who can’t or won't stand up for themselves.
If humanity were truly evil, as in the way it is taught in scripture, politicians would be dropping like flies by now.
Ironically, if they were truly moral, the same would be true. What we have now, is a range that goes from terrorized, to apathetic.
Clearly, it is only the politicians, who never get killed, who want gun free zones, while they sit in their ivory towers with armed guards.
This brings us back to what I was arguing months ago,
If you want to know the true source of evil, look at your politicians.
They are nothing more than the devils henchmen.
Their really not worth listening to. Anytime you do, it only makes everything worse.
By the way, guns ARE designed to stop criminals. But they only work if you use them. Under natural law, ALL politicians are criminals.
We don't have a gun issue, we have a morality issue here.
Once upon a time...
Politicians used to be content to just fuck children, but in their quest for power, they are now just killing them too.
These "drills", are simply put in place, so that the government agents with the guns killing the children know exactly what to expect, where the children will be going, and exactly what to do with any possible witnesses.
These drills were practiced over and over again, for the benefit of the shooters, not the children.
Oh, and by the way,
There's a politician somewhere giggling his balls off about all the phone calls he got today.
They don't give a flying fuck what we think anymore.
This guy seems to have a problem with modern Catholics.
He's supposed to be a historian?
How did he miss that Catholicism destroyed Christianity 1700 years ago?
And sometimes, I just can't stop laughing.
That one was priceless.
Turd Ferguson wrote: JAMES GIBSON 3:28 PM (1 hour ago) So, IMO, it must be a slow day for the media in the west. My family and friends are completely relaxed, and there is nothing out of the ordinary happening locally in Cyprus.
3:28 PM (1 hour ago)
So, IMO, it must be a slow day for the media in the west.
My family and friends are completely relaxed, and there is nothing out of the ordinary happening locally in Cyprus.
Reply to Mr. James Gibson. From these two nice smiling fellows.
FROM: On the left, former Wall Street banking advisor to Richard M. Nixon, Father in Law to Army US special forces major and international affairs fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. No names for this exercise. Can't have you overloading google. But the guy that rebuild Iraq the way we wanted it, that's his family. He was able to walk into the Presidents office without secret service, and high level intelligence clearance. Greek.
On the right, former high level employee and captain for Aristotle Socrates Onassis, Greek shipping magnate who amassed the world's largest privately owned shipping fleet.
Do they look like the type of guys that tell jokes? That's their best smiles.
To the right, Green Lantern's morning iced Green Tea in February.
Reply from Thukydides and Aegeus having been debriefed on James Gibsons note. (Green Lantern scribe)
Dear Mr. Gibson, Yassou
We are aware of the long standing presence of NATO vessels in the region.
Please note: that the graphic posted here represents recent amassment of NATO and Turkish vessels around Cyprus published by Greek Media over the last 4 days with ongoing commentary as events unfold. No such commentary is available in western media.
The deployment of British Air and Naval reinforcement was announced publicly by British authorities less than 13 hours ago. A response to increased Turkish presence in the region and the recent threat upon an Italian ship.
the Turkish Navy is threatening military action with the ongoing situation.
It seems it's a slow news day in Cyprus too.
Your family might want to invest in a stronger pair of binoculars.
They mumbled a couple of other things in Greek. They are always doing that to me when they don't want me to understand.
If anybody wants to know the real story of the Deep State, watergate and Nixon, the dirt on JFK and who he and Einstein were bangin' come around for tea sometime. The guy on the left was a mathematician on conspiracy technologies long before Snowed In. Back in the day. You'll need to jack him up to get him to talk.
Ruffian wrote: i always thought beware of Greeks bearing gifts was from the Trojan horse.
i always thought beware of Greeks bearing gifts was from the Trojan horse.
You know me, I'm not one for stereotypes but in this case.....
I too have been taught to beware of Greeks bearing gifts. You'd vomit if you heard some of the stories especially in the Greek Orthodox Church.
These two men are tough bastards, comes from their line of work. Well informed and fiercely loyal. They wouldn't share with me if they didn't trust me. DOTS is their fulltime occupation. Not a hobby.
When they have a disagreement, everybody in the coffee shop runs out. Greeks can be loud, REAL LOUD over political disagreements. I've asked the owner to hide the silverware. The only way I stay safe is not to take sides. They like me beause I'm soft and cuddly;) I'm the easy going one.
Dr Marcus Papadopoulos
Publisher/Editor of Politics First; Expert on Russia/USSR and Former Yugoslavia; Commentator on Syria and British politics;
As you read this tweet, Turkey has surrounded, with its navy, a large part of the Republic of #Cyprus and is threatening to launch another military invasion of the island. Despite that, there is silence from the world. Idiocy over Turkey has cost lives - and thousands of them.
To borrow a recently used phrase "Forum is Open for Business"
So what do you all think? Sharing is good for your health.
Maybe you have thoughts on Cyprus. Maybe you want to share your favorite brand of Ouzo?
Feta salad anybody?
Mr. Fix wrote: I see we are having a gun-control debate on DOTS today, your discussion with ancientmoney seems okay, except for one statement you made, which I vehemently disagree with.
You see wrong. I'm not debating AncientMoney on policy. I know his arguement before he writes it. I made two points. Both sides practice sophistry and their arguments don't have any validity under logic. I wrote in detail how asserting that guns prevent a rogue government from deteriorating is a fallacy. It sounds good. It feels good. It seems to embrace our founders logic, but based on US history, it hasn't prevented anything, and as a forward looking statement it is speculative. He then reiterated. I supported my initial premise, we have an irreconcilable argument and both sides practice sophistry.
My discussion is independent of the truth based on natural law which I embrace.. His reponses to me were on the rationale for holding guns. My responses were on the lack of effectiveness of the arguments (true or not). Do you both see the difference? And can you separate the two discussions? Because now you want to debate me on policy.
I won't nitpick on small things, spelling, grammar, different ways of expressing the same thought. My initial statement was that we are dealing with an issue that can't be reconciled by two sides with two different believes about guns while other agenda's are being ignored, because this is more of an emotional issue.
Guns make me feel safer
Guns make me feel more vulnerable in a dangerous world.
Neither is a policy. It's group realities that can't be reconciled. That was my point. Do you see my point?
Both can be true and false at the same time depending on the person and the situation.
"Natural Law says you have the right to defend yourself against a violent attack" YES
"Natural Law allows me to walk down the street, go to school and church without being shot" YES
Natural Law determines how people will behave? YES and NO There are natural principles that influence how a person will behave, but natural law can't defend against either incursions on your rights or incursions on a school childs rights not to be shot. That's why man created laws. Because people do not understand natural law.
Have I made any illogical or incorrect statements at this point? I could keep tweaking those statements because I don't think either one is a perfect reflection of how natural law behaves. But I'm not writing a constitution here.
You have natural born rights, but those can be taken away or usurped. So natural law doesn't protect you from incursion or stop you from encroaching. It is the dynamic of cause and effect on an action, there are no becauses.... The founders only approximated how natural law works by writing laws.
This is going to get complicated very quickly and I shouldn't go here but WTF.
I think (big conditional) that we all understand that there is a connection between your health and emotions and thoughts. Citing Bruce Lipton. Citing Candice Pert, Citing Louis Hayes, Citing all Emoto's work on the effect of water based on thoughts on emotions. If you are familiar with their work and have been reading along, you realize that your thoughts effect reality and specifically your health.
This law of cause and effects goes like this, good thoughts promote well being. Bad thoughts disease.
Now consider the 1st amendment.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Let me paraphrase it in my own words. You're free to say anything you would like without redress. (LIE, LIE, LIE). Do you and your wife practice free speech? Go ahead call her a whore. I'll wait?
Nothing stopped you from saying it, but there was repercussions. Yes? Do you have absolute freedom? Natural law more accurately would be, if you say good things, you will have an easier passage in life. If you say bad things, you could seriously encumber your freedom.
REality is, you are allowed to defend yourself, because there is somebody that will always violate natural law. If we didn't expect anybody to violate our space, we wouldn't need a law what you can or can't do in return.
So everything depends on situation and circumstances. Tell somebody with thick skin to go screw off. not so bad. Tell a sensitive person to go screw off. What happens? How dare you. I'm coming after you or running away.
So you are free to think bad thoughts, but you'll pay the price with your body. If you say it out loud, are the consequences different? Freedom only occurs if you act in the positive. Freedom is not covered if you call someone an asshole. You were only free to say it, but not free from the repercussions. Therefore freedom and responsibly are the twin fold aspects of nature law.
Does your wife have the right not be called a slut? Does she? I say yes. Of course, if she is a slut and her behavior is effecting you, then it's appropriate. Maybe even necessary. True and necessary. If it's just acting out of anger, she has the right not to be verbally abused. She might exercisee that right with a kitchen knife.
Freedom to bear arms is no different than freedom of speech. It's not absolute. Both freedom and responsibility. You're responsible. So no problem.
Now society is struggling with two rights. You assert. Guns make me safer. Sounds good to me. Some people assert guns make them less safe. That can be true.
If you want me to write all the bad logic on both sides, I could. But I'm not. But certainly, if you look, you can find lucid, highly logical statements on both sides.
Thus my INITIAL Statement. Irreconcible differences. A conversation that's going on for years, and will go on for more years or until USA devolves into a facism where the overload can just create an edict.
Let's wait 6 months for now. When the heat is off, emotions are down and look careful what the repercussions are. I have no doubt that there will be stiffer gun laws and more restrictions. But I think Farrell was on to something when he said other engineering is taking place.