Recent posts by Jantonaitis on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Shooting/Riots in Ferguson, USA.

He said MJ. If it was laced with something else, that would also show up in the system.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The Bombing Of Gaza

The rhetoric is antisemitic, the facts on the ground are not. The mufti of Jerusalem is the one and only example of direct nazi influence in the area. Hamas is supplied primarily by Iran who is power-playing Israel. Ahmadinejad has been replaced. I know of very few mujahideen in the OT because they are mostly sunni and hamas is shi’a. Zionists have killed plenty of civilians with increasingly indiscriminate means – like artillery fire. Also, read that link in my last post. Finally the 2005 unilateral withdrawal was not a peace deal, and there were several problems with Oslo and Camp David, the major one being lack of guaranteed borders. That still doesn’t make them nazis.

but SURE! I’m the one glossing over history! I’m the one smearing an entire cultural region with a label that is unarguably shallow and one-sided!

Originally posted by Ungeziefer:

The Islamofascist argument [which usually begins with the mufti of Jerusalem and then skips like 50 years of pan-Arabism] is just as much anti-semitism as labelling the Israelis Nazis.

Wait, what’s anti semitic about suggesting a cultural transfer from Euro Anti-Semitic rhetoric to the Middle East? I mean, I do that. And are we using the definition of Semitic that includes arabs? It’s kind of a weasely word. And is the Fascism here referring to Fascism, or The Nazi’s specifically? I think there’s a good case for equating Islamic political thought with Fascism, especially Italian style.

Feel free to make that case with reference to actual islamists. Unless you’ve boned up on this subject since the last time we discussed it, I’ll save us both some time and say you aint got shit.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Communism Vs. Capitalism

I guess I haven’t said it in caps yet: I’M NOT SOCIALIST. Also NOT AMERICAN. But as a disinterested observer I have to wonder how you think r-libertarianism would work with a large population if socialism doesn’t work.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Shooting/Riots in Ferguson, USA.

He got shot in the head and the arm according to the autopsy.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The Bombing Of Gaza

Did you read the part where I EXPLICITLY condemned nazi comparisons for Israel? It would only be the third time i’ve said it, so I can see why you’d miss it.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Communism Vs. Capitalism

Personal attacks? Well, I’ve quickly discovered that I have to comb through your posts to pick out the few sentences that aren’t just flab or outright misleading, which is reminiscent of Ayn Rand’s approach to political theory. Also I’m not a socialist revolutionary, but right-libertarian blather does upset me.

Let’s review: You threw socialists in with neo-nazis and communists, which would be comparable to me discussing capitalism using examples like Edwardian England, apartheid South Africa and the migrant worker’s hell that is the UAE. Then Karma pointed out Scandinavia, which is obviously not failing, but your response is they’re not ‘really’ socialist, they’re social democrats which is true in the same sense that a liberal democracy isn’t ‘really’ liberal in the classical definition. Apparently economic freedom has been trademarked by capitalism or something, so socialist countries that aren’t ideologically pure aren’t socialist. Then you concluded by rambling about why big gov’t is evil because reasons.

Hey, funny thing. I hear this

I know, you think all those socialists aren’t really socialists and that we just need to try it another way. That’s what all socialists say. Either we didn’t really try Marxism or we need to do Marxism except with some stuff one of my leaders told me might work. That’s the cash value of what socialist revolutionaries tell me today.

a lot from Randheads, who don’t seem to realize that if they substituted Hayek and Rothbard for Marx, and libertarianism for socialism, it would be just as accurate. And the US flirtation with libertarianism with Coolidge, Tyler, Van Buren, Harding and Ford works out just as well as comparison to failed socialist states.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The Bombing Of Gaza

Originally posted by Beegum:

Look, I know that there’s a lot of Nazi rhetoric sympathizers out there, such as people who blame Israel for the success of a particular banking family or blame Israelis for the suffering in the world. This is Nazi propaganda and it’s also racist. And, if I see some Muslim clerics read Mein Kampf and the watch them on video saying stuff like, “We will kill all the Jews” and “Where the Jews are there is suffering.”

Which is 100 % rhetoric. Many gulf states teach kids the Protocols…but what does that amount to in military action? Nothing. Is Hamas supposed to be the new Nazi party? You could just as easily argue that Israel is a Nazi state because their nationalism is based on blood purity literally and mythological land ties. Hell, it’s a better case than the Arabs because it extends past ideology; thijser compared Gaza to a concentration camp.

Except they aren’t Nazis, they’re just ultra-nationalist with a dash of religious fanaticism. Which is also an apt description for hamas. So yeah, it’s Godwin.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Iraq Round Three

Originally posted by Beegum:

The Iraqis will need to suffer under the IS until they want to fight back. No one will help them until they’re ready to pick up arms and defend their own stuff… then, we might be able to help them. It seems odd to me that the peshmerga aren’t better equipped, since they’re our oldest ally there. The Iraqi military seems to have been equipped but the Kurds left wanting. Odd. While I tend toward libertarianism, the whole Nazi party across the Middle East is troubling, and doesn’t seem like the kind of thing we should or can afford to ignore.

Lol

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Shooting/Riots in Ferguson, USA.

I think the cop is the victim here. I think the community has been lied to and is perpetuating that lie, and we had very strong evidence of that come out today.

My assumptions are based on what I see and I assume many people see, as probability. What probably happened? I, in fact, gave the lying version the benefit of the doubt many times, and it seems there’s a real possibility that I was wrong to do so. The officer may have, in fact, chosen not to shoot Mike Brown on multiple occasions before he ultimately did. One wonders if that could explain the odd behavior in the officers ?unofficial? testimony, in addition to drugs. Anyway…


You know what would be awesome? Linking sources. What testimony? What probability? What are you talking about? In what fantasy universe do you live in is it EVER justified for a cop to shoot an unarmed man 6 times? And he’s supposed to be the victim?

I lol’d at the drugs innuendo. Because marijauna is like pcp, right?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Shooting/Riots in Ferguson, USA.

My first impression is that anytime I said, “black” you quoted those parts, which, lol, okay, let’s have a chat. Like over whether cops are targeting old black men. If you’re black, I’ll tease your dad if he thinks he’s getting profiled.

Not quite. I quoted the parts where you explicitly formed arguments based on assumptions, especially those that reflect the worldview that if a white cop shoots a black guy, the priority of guilt is 1) the black guy for getting in the way of his gun 2) the media for pointing out that the black guy did nothing to deserve getting shot 3) the white cop for poor decision-making.

Did I say they should have waited to release the video until later, did you remove that? YOU DID, how did you assert then not to have taken that out of context???!!!

I don’t think you understand what ‘in context’ means. I didn’t glue your sentences together to make you say things you never said. That’s as far as my obligation to fair-play need go. Contextually accurate doesn’t mean I have to be neutral. I said at the top of my last post that I was showing key examples of rightist propaganda which you seem to believe is an antidote for the ideological inverse.

But since you bring it up, let’s talk about this

Then the matter of this video tape. It seemed like it would inflict a lot of pain on the community, and it did, of course. The cops should probably have just held it, seeing as how things seemed to be just calming down, and released it a bit later. The guy looks like a thug, although the media likes to play down images that show him shoving some much smaller man around. In my estimation if the cashier had killed him right there we’d be watching that on fail/win compilations and self defense porn on youtube rather than having it go down like this. Also, if he didn’t die we wouldn’t hear much about it at all.

As you point out later on, it’s ‘inflammatory’. But not because “it wasn’t the right time” or “more suited for the courtroom”, but because the images are disturbing and no matter how you try to cast the black guy in a bad light, it makes the police look really really bad. Which certainly isn’t good news for someone trying to pad them with justifications.

Normally, I would share personal stories with you in order to help you understand anything you’re having trouble with here.


No? I’ve got one. There’s a radio station my folks listen to at home. They’re both journalists and it’s the only decent morning local news station [the only other one is very leftist, run by uni students] . When the news portion ends, my folks would forget to turn it off and the editorials come on, and there’s one pundit in particular that drove my folks nuts. If the local tory politician got caught stealing from gov’t funds, or an oilsands corporation got accused of giving the downstream towns cancer, this guy would always be taking a stand for the victims: that is, the politician and the corporation. And even though the pundit himself worked in the media, he’d be the first one to denounce them for ‘bias and sensationalism’. My folks nicknamed him “the champion of the overdog”.
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Shooting/Riots in Ferguson, USA.

They had some girl on TV just now describing Mike Brown as a ‘young boy’. In reality he was 6’4", 300lbs, and 19 years old. That short enough?

And? Your counter-argument isn’t to peel off the whitewashing, it’s combating leftist propaganda with rightist propaganda, conspiracy theories and victim blaming. Some examples?

it’s easier for me to believe interested party or racist black person made up a story or the officer couldn’t see, than to believe he was so stupid he executed someone in the street during the day with people watching.

In any case there’s little argument about how the first shots were justified, as they almost assuredly were. Whatever was happening in the cop car the teen was almost assuredly seen resisting it and then fleeing on foot…we can infer that the cop may have attempted to control the situation by drawing his firearm. And then the common mistake people make instinctively is to block the firearm, at which point, it’s said “he went for my gun”. That’s probably how that part played out.

The guy looks like a thug, although the media likes to play down images that show him shoving some much smaller man around…Also, if he didn’t die we wouldn’t hear much about it at all.

It’s brought up other stuff, like how white people don’t have to talk to their kids about cops, which I think is obviously untrue….So, maybe, I guess the kind of insular liberals that work in media are also too stupid to think talking to their kids about cops is a good idea or necessary, or maybe they’re just interested in protecting their precious victim demographic is what’s important, which is absolutely despicable and likely partly true… not to mention it seems like actual racism.

And then the idea that only black men worry about intimidating people and how they are perceived, that comes up. Hey, maybe it’s more common for black guys, but, if you have balls, chances are you’ve worried about the same thing.

At least we moved past old black dudes claiming the same type of trouble with the cops that never made sense.

None of that is out of context; I’ve simply reduced your post to a size people would actually read, and voilà.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Communism Vs. Capitalism

Alternatively some conservative reactionaries spin socialism as

Originally posted by Beegum:however, it should be noted that a lot of the failures in Europe are attached to some continued belief in socialized economies, occasionally neo-nazis, and communists as well… we could also add in progressive cities in the US here as well, where they generally seek cover in assuming people won’t notice they inexplicably suffer from problems similar to those states dealing with lots of poor immigrants… without the poor immigrants.

which is one of the most absurd anti-socialism arguments i’ve heard in a long time. Did you just finish reading Atlas Shrugged or something?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Shooting/Riots in Ferguson, USA.

Originally posted by Beegum:
Originally posted by skiller78:

I have a friend who lives in St. Louis. There is alot of shit out there regarding if the officer shooting 19 year old Michael Brown was justified. That lead to riots and looting of stores. ITT: Standpoint on this?

It seems unlikely to me that the officer was as stupid as he’d need to be to have done the deed as the media allows it to be portrayed. Maybe if he was partially blinded he would have killed someone who looked like they had surrendered. That’s the bottom line of this for me, it’s easier for me to believe interested party or racist black person made up a story or the officer couldn’t see, than to believe he was so stupid he executed someone in the street during the day with people watching.

In any case there’s little argument about how the first shots were justified, as they almost assuredly were. Whatever was happening in the cop car the teen was almost assuredly seen resisting it and then fleeing on foot. With a little understanding… we can infer that the cop may have attempted to control the situation by drawing his firearm. And then the common mistake people make instinctively is to block the firearm, at which point, it’s said “he went for my gun”. That’s probably how that part played out. Then he decided to run. At some point he supposedly stopped running, put his hands up and pleaded for his life according to some witnesses. According to the police the officer’s face was injured. It doesn’t take much to partially blind someone so that could make the likelihood that the teen was actually surrendering somewhat higher. Begging doesn’t do much as the officer had just fired a weapon from inside his car and probably couldn’t hear much.

Then the matter of this video tape. It seemed like it would inflict a lot of pain on the community, and it did, of course. The cops should probably have just held it, seeing as how things seemed to be just calming down, and released it a bit later. The guy looks like a thug, although the media likes to play down images that show him shoving some much smaller man around. In my estimation if the cashier had killed him right there we’d be watching that on fail/win compilations and self defense porn on youtube rather than having it go down like this. Also, if he didn’t die we wouldn’t hear much about it at all.

We hear the pundits saying that this is about race, how black people don’t get justice, but, I doubt if he was white the story would had any traction at all. The people would assume he got caught doing something and wait for the investigation, so I’m pretty critical of that assertion.

It’s brought up other stuff, like how white people don’t have to talk to their kids about cops, which I think is obviously untrue. My parents and drivers ed teacher talked to me about cops and there’s a multitude of youtube videos regarding your rights and how to act when pulled over on and then cops are one of the most popular topics on Facebook. So, maybe, I guess the kind of insular liberals that work in media are also too stupid to think talking to their kids about cops is a good idea or necessary, or maybe they’re just interested in protecting their precious victim demographic is what’s important, which is absolutely despicable and likely partly true… not to mention it seems like actual racism.

And then the idea that only black men worry about intimidating people and how they are perceived, that comes up. Hey, maybe it’s more common for black guys, but, if you have balls, chances are you’ve worried about the same thing.

At least we moved past old black dudes claiming the same type of trouble with the cops that never made sense.

We have a widespread misconception about profiling which is generally not used as it’s been replaced with knowing the description of suspects in your area. While this works out the same as far as who draws their initial attention it’s definitely better and yields better prepared officers.

tl;dr? “the dead negro was guilty and liberals made the rest up to make white people look bad.”

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / I have a religious obligation to wear a colander on my head!

Originally posted by vikaTae:

I’d say if the item isn’t worn when driving all the time every time, then it has no business being on the driving ID.

how would they check that? Put gov’t cameras in all cars? People [not just hat-wearing religions] would be lining up to burn in effigy whichever gov’t signed off on that.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The Bombing Of Gaza

Originally posted by Beegum:

Throughout the Middle East we have groups which are essentially Nazis, Islamic Nazis disowned by Islam proper basically results in them being Nazis… to understand them more completely one needs to also take into account that they are fundamentalist Muslims. Now, hardcore Zionists are involved as well, but this is really just a small bit player in what we see play out in the Middle East, hardly worth the discussion, especially since the Israeli people attempted to buy peace with Gaza by moving them out of their settlement there. It didn’t turn out as they had hoped… I know what you’re thinking, but it’s even been pointed out recently that one can actually trace many of these groups directly back to Nazi support, and, not only that, but they still use Nazi propaganda and other arguments to support their causes. We have this sort of unavoidable obstacle in a sizable minority across the region, resulting in significant military technology and manpower support for continuous warfare against Israel, which we see in something likely weekly year round rocket attacks on Israel, generally un or underreported in main stream media, at least until Israel ultimately responds, which any country, especially democratic countries are essentially ensured of doing. So, the real question is, how do we position things so that Israelis feel comfortable gambling by lifting the blockade of Gaza again, as previous attempts have been unsuccessful or completely backfired.

The Islamofascist argument [which usually begins with the mufti of Jerusalem and then skips like 50 years of pan-Arabism] is just as much anti-semitism as labelling the Israelis Nazis.

Also, did a paragraph bite you as a small child and now you’ve got a phobia for them?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / IF god was real why dosnt he fix the world we live in now

Originally posted by somebody613:

Atheists (or rather make it ‘religion-bashers’) are always up to blaming God for everything, but never to look deeper into OUR behavior.
In other words, God is to be blamed for all and every problem in the world, yet WE are so pure and blamelessly perfect…
So typical, so futile to argue with…

So not worth my time and energy.

You painted yourself into a corner. Don’t blame other people for your lousy arguments.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / IF god was real why dosnt he fix the world we live in now

Checkmate

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Why Do You Need Feminism?

Here’s a game called Hey Baby which you could define as a rape culture simulator. With automatic rifles. And graphics that look worse than NWN. And guys who scream like elephants when they die. It’s still better than any of kong’s user-created games though.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / IF god was real why dosnt he fix the world we live in now

Originally posted by vikaTae:
There’s only eternal REWARD.
Eternal punishment either doesn’t exist, or it means simply being destroyed.

Still doesn’t explain why giving a being an eternal reward for finite actions would make any sense, from the perspective of the deity overseeing things. I can see how the ‘reward’ might be that ‘this soul is usable and shows promise to be used in other creations’, but I cannot see the point of just leaving a being to languish for an eternity after it has met all your expectations.

That just does not compute.

I like the answer you gave when this came up before – fuel.

Originally posted by somebody613:

thi
You obviously forget that YOU were raised in the “Judeo-Christian” CULTURE to begin with, where these values are ALREADY the BASIS of the SOCIETY.

that’s why in Hindu and Buddhist countries it’s a serial killers paradise. Oh wait.

Btw the ‘there is no hell’ in Judaism is a little more complicated than that.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The Bombing Of Gaza

Originally posted by RollerCROWster:

How can u ppl support Israel???

lol remember when israel was secretly giving infertility drugs to black jewish immigrants???

.


wow. I thought you were just trolling. link

AND they were aware of it three years before that article, Israel just hadn’t admitted to it before then.

oh, and in 1996 there was this

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / An open question.

Do you really think that this is a reasonable thing to do, given the OP specifically asking the repliers to read the article?

Raise your hand if you have personal experience with the subject matter.

Originally posted by Kasic:

How accurate do you think it is? Can the information be called reliable? What implications does this have? How might this information, if true, change how you look at the issue? Are there parts that you disagree with? Are there parts you agree with? Those sorts of things.

i’m going to approach this in a roundabout way: violence against men may be suppressed by radfems because it diverts attention away from women, but I find it curious the numbers are so high. We already know many women don’t report, which means the stats may be much larger in both cases than either feminists or MRA’s are willing to admit.

So, assuming this is accurate and assuming it’s not one-of-a-kind, the r-feminist blame for men on would make most men even more reluctant than women to speak out. That at least is one theory.

I know you think modern feminism is bullshit, but do you suppose men would be more open about this if feminism had stopped at 1st wave, without all the culture / gender / class stuff thrown in? I doubt it. I doubt MRA would even exist to be promoting this [as they no doubt will]. I also would point out that the article has a hard time discussing exactly what’s involved for male rape outside prison. Doesn’t mean it’s bullshit, but it does mean our understanding of sexual assault has been significantly widened from the old [gender-specific] police definition. And who started that societal conversation, and who’s still pushing for it?

Yes. Modern feminists. The fact that many of them blame men for everything is irrelevant. The awareness & sensitivity movement they began and contribute to, most particularly the conceptualization of rape culture [did you notice the implication that MILFs could be #1 suspects? Most men who laugh off rape culture think they’d love to be schooled by a mature lady], reaches beyond their limited goals.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / I have a religious obligation to wear a colander on my head!

You do realize Janto is calling you dumb not your religion? Not a nice thing to do and fairly add hominem but not an attack at your beliefs.


ad hominem only applies in relation to an argument. He has no argument, he just pulls irrational claims out of his ass. I love that you were right there with me in the Gaza thread and still haven’t figured this out. It’s pointless writing a textwall response to his nonsense. He won’t read it, and it wouldn’t alter the quality of his posts if he did.

Perhaps a better question is “how many people are required to gain ‘cult’ status?” and “how many people are required to be considered a full blown religion?”

I don’t think it has anything to do with numbers.

I think the common-sense difference is cults are scams; the beliefs are predicated on indoctrinating peple to give the cult leader their money, whereas for religions, getting rich is more of a byproduct. It’s an iffy distinction though.

If we take ‘cult’ as neutral, all religions started out as cults, but became religions either through gov’t sanction [ie. Christianity was a cult before Constantine approved it] or the passage of time [ie. Sufism used to be considered a cult in Islam but have since come into their own]. Mormonism is already at that transitional stage where they could be accepted as a religion rather than a Christian cult.

Or there are reasons cults don’t make it into religions, including secrecy, lack of theological padding, and exclusivity. Take the cult of Mithras and the cult of Isis. Mithras was a persian god adopted by Romans and their colonies, it had a little story about how Mithras came to be but it was mainly about getting drunk. Isis was an Egyptian export and had something to do with king-making. They were both secret, and focused in one direction; they weren’t a total guide to life and afterlife. Lastly, only certain groups could join: soldiers for Mithras, women for Isis. Religions can only be exclusivist if there’s a shared cultural group, like Yazids. Otherwise they can’t survive the long haul.

As far as FSM goes, it’s not even a decade old and doesn’t have much of any theology. On the other hand, it’s universal, in the public eye, and getting permission to wear colanders for ID pics confers gov’t legitimacy on it.

Lastly, a word from the prophet himself:

Q: In 1000 years will FSM be a mainstream religion?
A: This is something I think about constantly and it keeps me up at night. I sometimes wonder what the Church of Scientology — or lets say the Mormon Church looked like 5 years after Joseph Smith transcribed the scriptures out of the hat with the seer stones. What worries me is that right now I can be pretty sure there aren’t a lot of dogmatic nutty FSM people around, but what about in 20 years? What about in 50 years? What about when someone figures out a way to make money out of this and turns it into some new age spiritual enlightenment thing. There are billions of Christians who are crazy serious about their religion who don’t necessarily believe the things in the Bible actually happened. So .. yes, I do worry where FSM will go. My hope is it continues to be a positive force in the world. We will need to keep an eye on it for sure.
- http://www.venganza.org/about/

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The Bombing Of Gaza

Originally posted by somebody613:

Just a note.
This topic is STILL called:
“The evil occupant Jews are bombing the poor innocent Palestinians.”
No polite comments to add…

I sent off a pm to Rolby asking for a more balanced title. Dry your eyes.

 

Topic: Serious Discussion / An interpretation of God

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / I have a religious obligation to wear a colander on my head!

No, you misunderstand. I’m not doubting the intelligence of your religion. I’m doubting your intelligence. And I can be quite sure of that simply by reading your posts.

Now piss off. We’re not talking about how much you hate pagans/science/atheists.

Unless you have any good pasta recipes to share. that would be in the spirit of this thread.