monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

@snood,

snood wrote:

Your "free people" and "serfs" classifications are goofy.

Not "my" classifications. Our society has considered carrying arms to be one of the rights of a free person for the past 2600 years.

The left's view that civil liberties are goofy is no reflection on me.

snood wrote:

But no, you’re very easy to understand. You cling to firearms and concoct a fantasy world that requires you to constantly defend your clinginess.

No such fantasies. Note your inability to point out anything untrue in my posts.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Means strictly nothing close to what you think it means. Assuming you speak of your second link, it's just some "how to guide" to help governments

It comes from the same bodies that pushed this treaty, and quite clearly states their goals.

They also only started pushing to have these bans implemented locally after John Bolton made it clear to the UN that the US was not about to participate in any treaty that imposed such a ban globally.

Olivier5 wrote:

who have the good sense of wanting to regulate gun ownership.

People who oppose civil liberties always claim some sort of common sense. It's like some sort of constant in the laws of physics or something.

Olivier5 wrote:

Paranoid you are.

To oppose people who actively try to violate my civil liberties for fun?

That's not paranoia. That's just defending my freedom.

1 Reply

@blatham,

blatham wrote:

I see New Zealand is about to ban semi-automatic weapons. It will be interesting to watch that process. Do we have any members from NZ?

Will their people try to resist this tyranny at the polls?

At any rate, this is why centralized gun registration is not acceptable. From time to time some whiny leftist asks why we won't let them have a central registry of guns.

If there is a centralized registration list, the government knows where all the guns are when it decides to seize them.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

You just proved how paranoid you are. And stupid. And as I said some days back, mentally incapable of grasping the degree to which you are wrong, even when it is shown to you.

So you will now repeat ad naseum that you are right, precisely because you're wrong.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Our society has considered carrying arms to be one of the rights of a free person for the past 2600 years.

What do you mean with "our society"?
What do you consider to be a "free person" 2600 years ago?
Do you have any sources for your opinion? (Historical writing in Rome did not begin until the late 3rd century BC, so I can't give you any source for "our" European society.)

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Quote:

2600 years.

Curiously specific, that date. If the fellow provides some "thoughts" on what happened 2600 years ago, do let me know.

2 Replies

“Terrorist attacks are one thing where white people REALLY do most of the work and get none of the credit.”

-Mehdi Hasan, columnist for The Intercept

3 Replies

@blatham,

Quote:

Curiously specific, that date.

The date you said you were through with this "useless thread" was not that long ago. You have yet to keep your word. It looks like it is not going to happen, why?

Can't bring yourself to tell or face the truth? Totally expected.

1 Reply

@snood,

Quote:

Terrorist attacks are one thing where white people REALLY do most of the work and get none of the credit.”

How convenient a Muslim says that. It shows some Muslims are liars, like the one you quoted. Did you see my post?

Quote:

Since the start of 2019, there have been about 355 terror attacks in 31 countries resulting in deaths. Of these 355 terror attacks, one was carried out by a right-wing extremist and the other 354 were carried out by faithful members of the religion of harmony and happiness.

That is the truth, give it a try.

0 Replies

@coldjoint,

So you, coldjoint, can give some more details, 1000 years before arma sumere, arma portare, arma deponere, ius militare were mentioned the first time? (These expressions, however, only described certain aspects of the term "weapon law". And that term didn't exist 1600 years [or earlier] ago nor was there any distinction between free, semi-free and non-free [male] persons carrying arms. [But where and when.])

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Quote:

So you, coldjoint, can give some more details,

Did I say that? Nope, I did not. Anything else?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

You just proved how paranoid you are.

When someone says that they want to violate my civil liberties, it is not paranoia to treat them as someone who wishes to violate my civil liberties.

Olivier5 wrote:

And stupid.

My IQ's 170. Are you still too embarrassed to state yours for comparison?

Olivier5 wrote:

And as I said some days back, mentally incapable of grasping the degree to which you are wrong, even when it is shown to you.

I addressed all of your points, and I established quite clearly that your claim that I am wrong does not actually show that I am wrong.

Olivier5 wrote:

So you will now repeat ad naseum that you are right, precisely because you're wrong.

No. Because I successfully challenged all of your points.

If you choose to not pay attention to the points that I raised, that does not change the reality that I successfully defended against your inept challenge to the facts that I raised.

1 Reply

@snood,

Quote:

What do you think about journalist Mehdi Hasan?

Quote:

Shourjomoy Ghosh
Shourjomoy Ghosh, Amateur poet, avid reader.
Answered Mar 12 2017 · Author has 442 answers and 441.1k answer views

There are two kinds of hypocrites in this world when it comes to Islam.

The first kind is the Islam apologist, who thinks the world is waging war against Islam and Muslims, who are all innocent helpless children.

The second kind is the Islamophobe, who thinks all Muslims are terrorists and rapists and uncivilised brutes.

Mehdi Hasan falls into the first category. He believes that the world, i.e., the Western world, because he's a British citizen, is waging war on Muslims, that everyone in the UK or the US is an Islamophobe, and cleverly avoids ever properly addressing or denouncing the regressive practices within Islam. He's the epitome of the moderate Muslim today, the kind of person who is more worried about how the West views them than about the people suffering in Muslim-majority countries from the regressive Islamic laws. They are far keener in their attempts to convince the world that the ISIS does not represent all Muslims or true Islam than trying to address the issue of domestic regression prevelant in normal Muslim society.

To add to this hypocrisy, he has the habit of endorsing regressive ideas in Islam, as well as having made wild accusations against atheists and nonbelievers. He also says that he believes every word of the Qur'an, which goes to show how deluded he really is, since the Qur'an itself is a great source of the regressive practices carried out today in the name of Islam.

All in all, he is nothing but a man looking for some publicity for his Islam apologist propaganda while spreading Islamist ideas in the background.

Another opinion of the author of your quote.

Quote:

A dangerous man who claims to be a moderate intellectual but 'behind our backs' says things like 'non-Muslims live their lives like animals', as seen in this Youtube video:

And another.

Quote:

Islamic terrorist. He is a stealth jihadi

Your source sucks.
https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-think-about-journalist-Mehdi-Hasan

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

What do you mean with "our society"?

Any place with Germanic history -- including the UK and the former British empire, who got their concept of freedom from the Anglo Saxons.

Walter Hinteler wrote:

What do you consider to be a "free person" 2600 years ago?

Someone who is not a serf or a slave.

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Do you have any sources for your opinion?

Facts are not opinions.

Once the Germanic tribes started writing down their laws, they all recognized the social class of free peasants (often called Churls or Karls, depending on the local dialect).

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churl

Although they did not start writing down their laws until somewhere around AD600, it is clear from the fact that they all had a similar class of free peasant that it had its origins in the time when they were one unified society. And that points to the Pre-Roman Iron Age.

1 Reply

@coldjoint,

coldjoint wrote:

Quote:
So you, coldjoint, can give some more details,

Did I say that? Nope, I did not.

Walter Hinteler wrote:

So you, coldjoint, can give some more details, ... ..?

The question mark [ ? ] (also known as interrogation point, query, or eroteme in journalism)is a punctuation mark that indicates an interrogative clause.

1 Reply

@blatham,

blatham wrote:

If the fellow provides some "thoughts"

I'm not the one here who never thinks for himself and always says "Look everyone! I think what that person over there thinks!"

blatham wrote:

on what happened 2600 years ago, do let me know.

Already explained long ago. Try to keep up.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Quote:

The question mark

I do not care, what you think you said is not necessarily the way I see it. Life's a bitch and then you die.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

So you, coldjoint, can give some more details, 1000 years before arma sumere, arma portare, arma deponere, ius militare were mentioned the first time? (These expressions, however, only described certain aspects of the term "weapon law". And that term didn't exist 1600 years [or earlier] ago nor was there any distinction between free, semi-free and non-free [male] persons carrying arms. [But where and when.])

Do you notice how when the Germanic tribes started writing down their laws, they all had the same basic class of free peasant?

That's an indication that the class originated from the period when they were one unified society. If the class had originated after Germanic civilization had split into independent tribes, it would only exist in the specific tribe that had developed it.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

The term Anglo-Saxon was used to differ the "English Saxons" from the Saxons on the continent.

But since you mention "Churls" and that laws were written "somewhere around AD600", you are obviously not referring to the European continent but to the British Isles. (We didn't have churls here, and the first written law was the Sachsenspiegel, originating between 1220 and 1235 as a record of existing customary law.

On the European continent and especially in Medieval times, the term serf has different meanings to how you use it.
Within the Germanic tribes - to which you refer - the reasons for serfdom were war captivity or oppression, which was then passed on by birth and marriage, and the voluntary surrender, which is already mentioned in Tacitus.

1 Reply

@snood,

That's brilliant.

1 Reply

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know