Messages

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

1

General / Re: Ron Paul won the GOP Primary in the Motor City!

« on: March 03, 2012, 02:46:55 PM »

I'll back Shaw up on this. I'm about 45 min. from 'ol D, and let me tell you-he's not exaggerating. You don't need to worry about the cops-they won't come(though if they did for some strange reason, your odds of survival probably go down), and neither will an ambulance....few of them even run. 

On a somewhat different note, I watch Detroit news from time to time, and there is a group known as the Detroit 300-who appear to be something akin to Guardian Angels on steroids...without the pretense of not being vigilantes. I remember thinking 'good for them', and also that since that city is a virtual kleptocracy anyway, the whole place would be better off if the police and the entire government were disbanded. I tend to think that about everywhere, but in the case of Detroit I'm not sure it's a radical notion.

That said I DID see quite a few RP signs and so forth in the sticks-particularly Lenawee county. Nice to see, but honestly, this mess is not going to be fixed at the ballot box. I've lived in this area all my life-NW Ohio and SE MI-and I've gotten to know several militia folks as well as an ex-panther organizer, it's frankly amazing to me how much they have in common, but they will never have a common political goal. As others said, RP may have gotten the most of the small fraction of GOP voters in Detroit, but he certainly has no real support in that city.

2

General / Re: Iran's suicide fast craft, the Navy and the free trade

« on: February 16, 2012, 08:06:42 PM »

Raytheon's Phalanx system tears missiles apart.  Not that effective against boats as it has no logic to decide hostile/non-hostile.

Worked well for the USS Stark.

3

General / Re: How should I deal with threatening hate mail?

« on: September 28, 2010, 07:16:49 PM »

The idiots who sent it to him printed the letter on the back of a program from their church group. The officiant of the groups meetings is the same as whoever signed the letter. And with a little googling I was able to find the facebook and myspace pages of all the officers in the program, a few of their personal blogs, and able to connect the officiant's name back to the PO Box the letter was sent from.

I would call that person and see if it's legit. Sounds like a setup by an agent provocateur

"I think all ya'll should DIAF, sincerely, someone who is definitely me for real see here's my church group and my contact info."

Shaw's right. Firebombing over phone-lines is not possible as yet. I'm certain whoever you call is going to be reallllly surprised. Of course, you never know who is going to be on the other end of the line, so you might want to come up with a plausible reason for doubting the veracity, and say so-since no doubt the feds can come back at you for not reporting a 'legitimate' threat....or well anything they want really.

After that though, if by some bizarre stretch the threat is confirmed...then you must make a decision. I'd go public with the threat, I think, if its a threat agianst a public place or group, call a press conference. Publicity is likely to give you as much(almost certainly more)protection as going direct to the feds would.

And hire a lawyer. A good one.  Actually, if the threat was to a place like a Mosque, that might be the best first move-even if you intend to go to the fuzz, its awful easy to fuck up.

4

General / Re: Nazis died to defend their country too.

« on: September 26, 2010, 11:51:56 AM »

The actual Nazi soldiers (those in the Waffen-SS) chose to join because of racial reasons.

The rest in the Wehrmacht were mostly there because of the draft.

The Waffen-SS used large numbers of conscripts-many of them from conquered territories, just like the Wehrmacht. You're thinking of the regular SS, like Totenkaufverbande or Einsatzgroupen. The Waffen-SS during the war years was really just a part of the Heer(land army), and under command of Wehrmacht generals, though officially under political control. Early on they did indeed have "racial" standards for admittance, but these went away quite quickly once bullets started flying, then they took all comers and started using conscripts.

Waffen-SS units got better supplies and equipment, and were (perception wise, if not factually) less likely to be battlefield sacrifices. If you were male and German in 1940-44(or French or Czech for that matter), you were going to be in the military, the question is where-would you not try to volunteer for a unit that had a better chance of you living through the whole thing?  Remember, few in the population ever knew of the death camps-and that includes most in the Nazi party itself, and they were not running the gas chambers until well into the war. I would suspect strongly that the Wehrmacht high-command knew all about the "final-solution", to pretend otherwise is to grant pardon where it is not due-but the average German, or German soldier no matter the unit certainly had no inkling. 

Back to the original question, I doubt many people actually die "defending their country", instead they die desperately trying to find a way not to die after their reaction to a series of events outside of their control  places them in a situation where they are very likely to be killed.  War is hideous that way. It's also quite profitable, indeed I would suspect that it is the most profitable creation of humans.  You'd be better off addressing war itself than making comparisons that are certain to be inflammatory(and, frankly, a bit off-base historically-the situation is so different that it defies a meaningful comparison), I think anyway.

5

General / Re: First Book

« on: September 04, 2010, 11:18:21 PM »

How about the Hobbit? It might be a challenge, but not too bad I think and would be a great confidence builder-the story and the writing are much simpler than TLOTR, but still a great message.


What's the kid into? It needs to catch his attention obviously.

6

General / Re: Here's why the Flotilla didn't submit to inspection.

« on: June 04, 2010, 05:58:47 PM »

Isn't it ironic that the Jews have gone and created their own kind of Warsaw Ghetto?

Concur, but to be frank, I don't remember hearing a lot of stories about an armed resistance...not that it would necessarily have changed much else in history.

Note: I originally completely agreed, but I added the caveat.

Then you must not hear very well-the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto put up a ferocious resistance(granted after they were locked in-but it took the Germans almost six months to take them all to Treblinka, with heavy casualties-considering they were fighting skeletons ).

There was also widespread-and sporadically effective-partisan resistance in Eastern Europe, with most of those people either being killed by Stalin, or deported to...Israel.

Why those in the Israeli government would choose to create an operational flattery of such inhumanity is incomprehensible, tragic, and totally beyond excuse.

7

General / Re: Underemployed with MBA's

« on: March 09, 2010, 11:27:20 PM »

There is no such thing as "underemployed" if all you have is a piece of paper hanging on the wall.

How about a condensation-There is no such thing as "underemployment". It is a silly fascist myth. Or an insult.

I myself have an MBA, I actually found it invaluable in understanding economics(since I questioned what I was presented), and am even pursuing a MA in History. The MBA is little more than a badge though, if that, in the business world, whereas my History MA will be in essence a teaching degree(and I'm on a long term Doctoral track). Here though I know the system is utterly flooded with government booty, I have the sense I might do some good-after all, everyone must take a entry level history course. I'm a voluntaryist, so my History class might be a bit...unique. (actually, I'm hoping to get my thesis, The Propaganda of Knighthood as it Relates to the Growth of the State in the Hundred Years War, published academically with the help of my Prof.-quite a coup, and a virtual guarantee of teaching jobs...even before the doctorate).

I sell toilet paper wholesale, and enjoy my gig, and am not "underemployed". What an insulting term for anyone who works for a living...seriously, take that odorous, statist, terminology and go get fucked.  Now.

How about there is such a thing as underemployment.  Unemployed is defined as people who cannot find jobs - they were laid off, are between jobs, or have an excuse (albeit it often is a shitty excuse).  Underemployment is people who were employed, became unemployed, then managed to find employment below the compensation standards of their previous employment or in hours, or they are employed in a capacity under that of their trade.  For example an experienced welder who cannot find a welding job, working as warehouse labor. 

Underemployment is usually a temporary phase in the job cycle of the individual, where the local economy is not in a boom phase and the job seeker has to "settle".  People with experience really don't like to do the settling, because they have to learn a new job and it drastically impedes the job hunt in their field - everyone knows its pretty hard to get to the interview when you have a job-related commitment. 

Similarly there is underemployment in the white collar world as well, there is competition in the job market between graduates and the experienced for a limited number of professional positions.  Their degree may have been ill-chosen, and there are no positions.  And just as likely, there are a limited number of positions in a saturated market, and the new graduate has to deal with the catch-22 situation of need experience to get the job. 

The experienced manager is all-too aware of these difficulties in the job market, and has reasons for not wanting to hire the inexperienced graduate.  Mostly because its more economical to hire an experienced person over an inexperienced one, because of the learning curve parallels.  A new employee with experience will still have a learning curve within the job, until they become proficient with the localized specifics.  But they know the inexperienced graduate may be using them to gain entry-level experience, and is prone to flight when a better employment source takes them on, which wastes the valuable job training and high turn-over is extremely expensive. 

Where the term of underemployment does not fit the definition is when the inexperienced graduate wrongly assigns it to himself.  They are not underemployed until they have a skillset which includes experience.  If they are employed in a job that does not correspond to their degree, they are simply employed and seeking a career in their field of study. 

Even more laughable is when the inexperienced assigns himself the presumptuous title of "overqualified", which should be reserved for the experienced professional who is getting squeezed out of entry-level positions by new grads for similar reasons, mainly the risk of short-term expectations based on an outstanding resume' which includes experience, and not a simple accumulation of certifications.  The overqualified will be a saturation effect as a boom cycle begins to contract, but since salary commensurates with experience it may be a more economically viable option to choose the less experienced candidate, put him in an entry-level position and raise the workforce from within.  The existence of overqualified applicants seeking underemployment will give a more positive light to the graduate, as it is a signal that upward flight is less likely due to the saturation from above which is necessitating the overqualified to seek underemployment. 

Personally, I don't care what the degree or field is, because the applicant isn't worth much without experience - which is doubly proven by a employers willingness to take them over the overqualified - that experience is a valid argument for a higher wage. 

If you have an MBA you should know that. 

How about, silly me, I read past the propaganda, and wonder just what the fuck we are talking about here? It's nothing more than the medieval "just price" theory. You are worth not a fucking cent more than anyone is willing to pay you, nor is anyone if we are to be free, Drifter, and I even think you know it.

 What you bring to the table is wonderful, but if my shop likes chert over diamonds, you're fucked. If there is no market for welders....learn Toyota mechanics(though my MBA does make me wonder if you've considered why US welders are unable to find employment agianst the non, or less, -state protected Indian welders out there< I'm a handy guy, I can weld-not professional level, but it's not brain surgery)  or something with a market that needs your skills. Crying foul asks for a protector of your wage, which is, of course, thuggery.

How can "underemployment" be anything but a political term designed to garner state largess?

Answer: It cannot. Not if wages are an element of a free market-hence the term "under-employment" is nonsense at best, and a fascist  endeavor at worst.

Oh, I do know that I'm expected to extol the State as part of my being an MBA, but I refuse. I"ll leave that to you, Bill, you seem to be doing a good job-though it be based more on ego than principle.

Please, join us who believe in true free exchange. Underemployed is no fucking different than under-served, just the tears are slightly more masked, and in different colored eyes...still it results in state theft.

8

General / Re: Underemployed with MBA's

« on: March 07, 2010, 04:30:27 AM »

There is no such thing as "underemployed" if all you have is a piece of paper hanging on the wall.

How about a condensation-There is no such thing as "underemployment". It is a silly fascist myth. Or an insult.

I myself have an MBA, I actually found it invaluable in understanding economics(since I questioned what I was presented), and am even pursuing a MA in History. The MBA is little more than a badge though, if that, in the business world, whereas my History MA will be in essence a teaching degree(and I'm on a long term Doctoral track). Here though I know the system is utterly flooded with government booty, I have the sense I might do some good-after all, everyone must take a entry level history course. I'm a voluntaryist, so my History class might be a bit...unique. (actually, I'm hoping to get my thesis, The Propaganda of Knighthood as it Relates to the Growth of the State in the Hundred Years War, published academically with the help of my Prof.-quite a coup, and a virtual guarantee of teaching jobs...even before the doctorate).

I sell toilet paper wholesale, and enjoy my gig, and am not "underemployed". What an insulting term for anyone who works for a living...seriously, take that odorous, statist, terminology and go get fucked.  Now.

9

General / Re: What if we are wrong?

« on: March 02, 2010, 07:28:14 PM »

Liberty, both civil and economic, instigates progress. Examples are all over the map and history.  Statism stifles progress. Plenty of proof for that too.
We are right.
So was Socrates, so was Galileo.

Read Plato's Republic and get back to me(hint-Socrates may or may not have been Plato's sock, but, he, in any event, had seemingly no interest in either personal freedom as we know it, or, most definitively not,  that odd modern perversity known as "progress").

By the way-list a bit of that "progress" that does not have its roots in a violation of personal freedom(but first, look up the term respondeat superior and let me know how that fits into a libertarian moral position-fair warning, according to both Block and Rothbard, offhand- at least, it does not.) 

(And, yes, Blackie, according to the unabomber, and more importantly Zerzan as well I do believe)

Or keep name dropping people who are diametrically opposed to your point of view-I could give a shit, but it might be an interesting challenge for you. If you honor Socrates(or Galileo for that matter-though his faults were less vicious) for drinking hemlock alone, you should also honor Trotsky for putting his head in the path of an ice ax. I actually do honor Trotsky for that....since he favored a less draconian form of government than was extant-the same cannot be said of Socrates, at least from my understanding of The Republic.

Sorry, but to me, freedom does not need an excuse, especially not such a puerile one as "progress". Marx liked "progress" as well, you recall.

10

General / Re: Libertarian Quiz: What kind of libertarian are you?

« on: February 28, 2010, 12:09:39 AM »

You Scored as Anarcho-capitalist

Anarcho-capitalists are libertarians who oppose the state entirely and propose to have a free market in the provision of security and arbitration. The term anarcho-capitalism derives from Murray Rothbard to describe a stateless society based on the principles of laissez-faire or the philosophy in support of such a proposition. Anarcho-capitalists may tend to still associate more with the political right and make use of the political process, unless they are agorists or left-libertarians at the same time.

Anarcho-capitalist    
   92%
Left-libertarian    
   83%
Agorist    
   67%
"Small L" libertarian    
   50%
Geo-libertarian    
   42%
Libertarian socialist    
   25%
Paleo-libertarian    
   17%
Neo-libertarian    
   8%
Minarchist    
   0%


Really kind of poorly set up quiz-too many questions that simply can't be answered yes or no. And, to be honest not enough categories(as if they are needed anyway as someone else mentioned.) I am, for instance, most certainly not an anarcho-capitalist. Ah well.

11

General / Re: Philsophy Inquiry: The Veil of Ignorance Theory by John Rawls

« on: December 28, 2009, 02:14:36 AM »

You're assuming alot. Do you "own" yourself? If so, sell yourself-I don't mean contract to agree to do this or that for a fee, I mean literally transfer your free will. Guess what? You can't do that. You don't own yourself, but rather you are yourself, simply because the "self" cannot be truly owned-certainly not in the sense that a stick can be. Ideas die hard, and the notion of "self-ownership" came about in a time when physical ownership of people existed and needed to be defended to support the establishment of the time. Writing this here is not destined to garner roses....

I'm not familiar with the Rawls piece, but from my experience most writers who actually get attention tend to advocate, or at least justify, some sort of coercion-in this Karl Marx and John Locke are mirror images. Sad as that is.

I would expect that your professor had no knowledge of "UPB" to ignore. I have a suggestion, why not dig up his e-mail and explain the concept and ask his thoughts? I've had several  rewarding conversations with former/current professors over the years-some of the best with professed Marxists and socialists who appreciated a challenge and an intelligent question. It's worth a try.   

12

General / Re: Bobby Fischer RIP

« on: December 26, 2009, 11:19:28 PM »

Einstein was an over-hyped commie, and most likely a front for other people's ideas... 

I know he was a socialist(though also a pacifist, so perhaps he was simply confused-he admits no expertise in your link), but I never heard of him being a front for other people's ideas-any source here? And why would that be, anyway?

13

General / Re: what religion do you think THIS is?

« on: December 26, 2009, 10:03:36 PM »

Not to speak for the Lord, but what I think he is saying is that there are about 5.5 million sane people who are not at risk to go berserk for Allah.

Fwiu, this guy had a connection to Yemen-was trained there according to some who-ji-bob in D.C., who then went on to crow about a US/Saudi airstrike that killed some "terrorist" rebels(and 120 some other folks) recently. I don't condone violence at any time-but I'm not going to pretend that "blowback" doesn't occur. And if becoming a smithereen thanks to a cruise missile or a laser guided bomb isn't oppression, fuck if I know what is. "Allah" has nothing to do with it.

First denied by BB:

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/2009/12/16/US-denies-military-role-in-Yemen/UPI-19791261000675/

Then bragged about by BB:

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cruise-missiles-strike-yemen/story?id=9375236

We've always been at war with the Yemenis, you know.

14

General / Re: DC cop whips out a gun after being threatened by snowballs, threatens crowd

« on: December 20, 2009, 02:35:26 PM »

Something remarkably similar happened in Boston some time ago-with vastly different results. At least no one was killed this time.

If I brandished a firearm in public in response to such a "threat" I'd be in jail, if not executed on the spot. I assume that there will be no consequence in this case though.

15

General / Re: Cheap Idea for your Woman's Christmas Present

« on: December 19, 2009, 05:08:06 AM »

You will be sure to get a sexual thank-you if you clean up the mess after you make the meal.  That means doing all the dishes and leaving a spotless kitchen. 

It starts clean, ends clean. Kitchen's my area...bathroom-I don know what the fuck y'all do in there, and I don't wanna clean it either...lol.

Honestly, I'm glad to have someone this year, last year was kinda lonely.