Trump: Elect me as dictator

[Pack Rat]

Stop Trump.

[Pack Rat]

Republican Party without the swastika, but replaced with Trump signs.

[lokisgal]

Republican Party without the swastika, but replaced with Trump signs.

exactly “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” also those who can't understand the past and how it aligns with their own potential future

[Votanic]

Republican Party without the swastika, but replaced with Trump signs.

exactly “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” also those who can't understand the past and how it aligns with their own potential future

Actually, there is a quite valid alternate theory that suggests that Those who remember the past are doomed to repeat it.
For example, the Israelis determination to return to the Middle East because some old books and scrolls tell them they once had a fabled kingdom in that land.

[lokisgal]

Republican Party without the swastika, but replaced with Trump signs.

exactly “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” also those who can't understand the past and how it aligns with their own potential future

Actually, there is a quite valid alternate theory that suggests that Those who remember the past are doomed to repeat it.
For example, the Israelis determination to return to the Middle East because some old books and scrolls tell them they once had a fabled kingdom in that land.

your statement that there is a valid alternate theory is based on ?? Do you even understand the quote those who can not remember... do you know who said it , where it came from. Your post sure sounds a lot like antisemitism

[Votanic]

Republican Party without the swastika, but replaced with Trump signs.

exactly “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” also those who can't understand the past and how it aligns with their own potential future

Actually, there is a quite valid alternate theory that suggests that Those who remember the past are doomed to repeat it.
For example, the Israelis determination to return to the Middle East because some old books and scrolls tell them they once had a fabled kingdom in that land.

your statement that there is a valid alternate theory is based on ?? Do you even understand the quote those who can not remember... do you know who said it , where it came from. Your post sure sounds a lot like antisemitism

Not going to directly engage with lolgal. Always worthless to do so.
However, I will give a general address to the phenomenon of people so mindlessly indoctrinated in the hegemonic propaganda of mass-mendia that they can no longer generate any independent reasoning. Instead, blinded by their own virtue-signalling, they just spout the most tired and unoriginal of rehashed sound-bites.

I've already brought up several time that the modern concept of Antisemitism is an intentionally manipulated misnomer.
However Judeaism as both a religious (and geo-political) concept is the original founding form of Abrahamism. Therefore one can instead debate the value of that with all people positively and negatively affected by such ideologies. Anyone could supply a long list of potential debaters, but why not start with the people of Gaza, as they are currently experiencing with Zionisti Judaeism's most direct negative effects.
I might add that Abrahmic though is the main pillar of currently hegemonic, Moral-Absolutist Western Philosophy...
...and in many ways, Moral Absolutism is virtually a synonym of Fascism.

[lokisgal]

Republican Party without the swastika, but replaced with Trump signs.

exactly “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” also those who can't understand the past and how it aligns with their own potential future

Actually, there is a quite valid alternate theory that suggests that Those who remember the past are doomed to repeat it.
For example, the Israelis determination to return to the Middle East because some old books and scrolls tell them they once had a fabled kingdom in that land.

your statement that there is a valid alternate theory is based on ?? Do you even understand the quote those who can not remember... do you know who said it , where it came from. Your post sure sounds a lot like antisemitism

Not going to directly engage with lolgal. Always worthless to do so.
However, I will give a general address to the phenomenon of people so mindlessly indoctrinated in the hegemonic propaganda of mass-mendia that they can no longer generate any independent reasoning. Instead, blinded by their own virtue-signalling, they just spout the most tired and unoriginal of rehashed sound-bites.

I've already brought up several time that the modern concept of Antisemitism is an intentionally manipulated misnomer.
However Judeaism as both a religious (and geo-political) concept is the original founding form of Abrahamism. Therefore one can instead debate the value of that with all people positively and negatively affected by such ideologies. Anyone could supply a long list of potential debaters, but why not start with the people of Gaza, as they are currently experiencing with Zionisti Judaeism's most direct negative effects.
I might add that Abrahmic though is the main pillar of currently hegemonic, Moral-Absolutist Western Philosophy...
...and in many ways, Moral Absolutism is virtually a synonym of Fascism.

so now you are equating all Jews with Israelis? Limited thinking on your part at best, hate speech is more like it. The fact that you seem to think all Jews are zionists is a tribute to a very limited reference point and or merely repeating what some person with limited understanding of the complexity of the world has told you is truth.

[Votanic]

Actually, there is a quite valid alternate theory that suggests that Those who remember the past are doomed to repeat it.
For example, the Israelis determination to return to the Middle East because some old books and scrolls tell them they once had a fabled kingdom in that land.

your statement that there is a valid alternate theory is based on ?? Do you even understand the quote those who can not remember... do you know who said it , where it came from. Your post sure sounds a lot like antisemitism

No, you stupid hypocrite. You are the one equated Israelis with Antisemitism. YOU.

And don't even go crybabying off to the mods about how Votanic personally attacked you, because what you wrote is the epitome of both stupidity and hypocrisy. and that makes you a stupid hypocrite.

If you don't have brain cells capable of remembering what you posted the day before, then you need to stop posting entirely.
Just stop acting like your shit doesn't stink because it's actually rancid as hell.

[Pack Rat]

Put the gun down and walk away from the weapon...

Votanic, you need to calm down. We are having a debate/discussion. Nobody here called your mother a whore or told you your kids carry an extra chromosome.

[Votanic]

Put the gun down and walk away from the weapon...

Votanic, you need to calm down. We are having a debate/discussion. Nobody here called your mother a whore or told you your kids carry an extra chromosome.

Sure whatever, rat.

But the 'lol' needs to decide whether she is for or against equating Israelis and Judeaism. She has currently posted two entirely conflicting statements on the matter.
First, she does it herself and then she turns right around and berates somebody else (me) for supposedly doing the same.

Maybe even you can see why I've come to think of any debate with her as being the equivalent of plunging into an abysmal, mindless vaccuum. There is no there, there.

[Pack Rat]

Put the gun down and walk away from the weapon...

Votanic, you need to calm down. We are having a debate/discussion. Nobody here called your mother a whore or told you your kids carry an extra chromosome.

Sure whatever, rat.

But the 'lol' needs to decide whether she is for or against equating Israelis and Judeaism. She has currently posted two entirely conflicting statements on the matter.
First, she does it herself and then she turns right around and berates somebody else (me) for supposedly doing the same.

Maybe even you can see why I've come to think of any debate with her as being the equivalent of plunging into an abysmal, mindless vaccuum. There is no there, there.

We all get angry and pissed off with certain remarks made...including myself...but we can think before hitting that SEND button. Look at how Saxitoxin handles the attacks on him, he will use humor, perhaps with sarcasm.

I like you Votanic (does not mean we are getting engaged) and nothing is wrong with a different view. We all like to point to the other guy/gal as the bad guy. Part of the fun, that's why we post our intellectual, silly, fake or outright lies (depending on one's viewpoint, lol).

Or, you can do the Jusplay4fun method - foe the bastards-ha-ha-ha!

[Dukasaur]

I've already brought up several time that the modern concept of Antisemitism is an intentionally manipulated misnomer.

Yes, you have, but just because you say something over and over again doesn't make it right.

English is a living language. There's a French Academy that rules what is and isn't proper French. There is no corresponding English Academy. English flows with the currents of popular discourse, and words change their meaning over time.

"Awe" is an synonym of "wonder", and "Awful" therefore was originally a synonym of "Wonderful". Over time, it has drifted to mean pretty much the opposite. I'm sure you could come up with twenty other examples if you tried.

"Antisemitic" has similarly drifted over time. It doesn't mean what it used to mean. Get over it. There's no "intentional manipulation" there, just ordinary linguistic drift.

No, you stupid hypocrite. You are the one equated Israelis with Antisemitism. YOU.

And don't even go crybabying off to the mods about how Votanic personally attacked you, because what you wrote is the epitome of both stupidity and hypocrisy. and that makes you a stupid hypocrite.

If you don't have brain cells capable of remembering what you posted the day before, then you need to stop posting entirely.
Just stop acting like your shit doesn't stink because it's actually rancid as hell.

For the record, she hasn't gone 'crybabying'[sic] off to the mods. This particular mod was trying to enjoy a peaceful after-dinner coffee when this particularly offensive comment pretty much jumped off the screen and hit him in the face. Take a short break.

[2dimes]

Dag gummit Duke. How's he supposed to answer my bicycle questions in other topics if you ban him?

[KoolBak]

Lol. Love you DoD....our new self-appointed king of the forums needed a little wakey-uppy

[Votanic]

First @ Koolbak: I never appointed myelf King of the Forums... so that must just be some obsessive fantasy rolling around in your own head.
As if I would even deign to lower myself to become sovereign of such a pathetic Kingdom. Ha!

Enough of him, onto...
@Dukasaur... So you unilaterally decide that there is no element of conscious manipulation (or Orwellian Doublespeak) in the shift in usage of a term, originally coined to describe a Language Group (not even a race or ethnicity) that includes Arabic, Amharic, Aramaic, Hebrew, Soqotri, Syriac, etc.; but is now used (with the tacked-on prefix 'Anti-') to describe discrimination against only one group (variously described as a race, ethnicity, religion, or international economic cabal) that is associated (in part) with one of the Semitic languages. (Not) coincidentally, this group has the most wealth and media control in the 'West' (Another admittedly vague and innaccurate term. especially in this Age of Global War(s), both cold and hot). Subsequently, now that the word has been seized upon and reappropriated for its new purpose, it becomes inaccurate to apply it to people who speak any of the other Semitic languages?? (So as with words and languages, then so also with land and lives?) You then go on to further describe this word usage shift as an inmately organic process free of all conscious manipulation,
Nonsense, Duk, people choose words for a reason.

You should know this better than many, after all you choose to call Israel a 'Nation-State', and Hamas a 'Terrorist Group'... but regardless of your own biases iof support and censure, untimately they both just entities. Entities that kill and attack to get their own way... Wecome to Planet Earth.

So some groups (and individuals ) get special words, special attention, and special concern when something unpleasant happens to them (or conversely, when they are accused of being the cause of such unpleasantness), while other such groups are given no such support, sympathy... or vocabulary.

And so, the biased supporters of racial equality (what an arch-irony) call the racial discrimination they don't like racism, but the racial discrimination that they do like, affirmative action.

Likewise, the biased supporters of free speech, call the limits of expression they don't like censorship, but the limits of expression they do like, hate speech, slander, or other such terms.

I could go on with innumerable other examples, but the point is made clear.

So then, where does true freedom, true equality, and (dare we even bring it up) true morality lie in this morass of bias and double standards?

Most likely, Nowhere.

The true state of affairs is Amorality.
Nothing but the forces and effects of matter and energy, through space and time, in the pointless and random science experiment we call the Universe. Nothing more.

So then, what is the sum total of all the self-serving attempts by 'sentient life' to impose morality on this amoral existence? Moral Relativism

And then, what is each such separate attempt in isolation (and perhaps, the more powerful and hegemonic one in competition): Moral Absolutism

So don't act so virtuous or impressive/impressed... and, to parapharase Crowley: 'Do what one will, shall be the whole of the law'.

I guess picking up the chesspoard and braining your opponent with it is just another way to win the game. Viva 'outside the box' thinking

And as a final note: concerning she who is hardly worth mentioning. I know my history with her regarding her trolling, stalking, and crybabying, far better than you. True. much of it took place on the other side of Conquer Club where records are less completely (and more subjectively) kept... but even here, in the Forums, a careful observer (evidently not you) has plenty of evidence to observe hypocrisy, bias, and double standards in action.









ou think this

[Dukasaur]

@Dukasaur... So you unilaterally decide that there is no element of conscious manipulation (or Orwellian Doublespeak) in the shift in usage of a term, originally coined to describe a Language Group (not even a race or ethnicity) that includes Arabic, Amharic, Aramaic, Hebrew, Soqotri, Syriac, etc.; but is now used (with the tacked-on prefix 'Anti-') to describe discrimination against only one group (variously described as a race, ethnicity, religion, or international economic cabal) that is associated (in part) with one of the Semitic languages. (Not) coincidentally, this group has the most wealth and media control in the 'West' (Another admittedly vague and innaccurate term. especially in this Age of Global War(s), both cold and hot). Subsequently, now that the word has been seized upon and reappropriated for its new purpose, it becomes inaccurate to apply it to people who speak any of the other Semitic languages?? (So as with words and languages, then so also with land and lives?) You then go on to further describe this word usage shift as an inmately organic process free of all conscious manipulation,
Nonsense, Duk, people choose words for a reason.

Did a bit of research into this.

Turns out it was not, as I thought, a case of linguistic drift.

"Antisemitism" meant "Jew-hating" right from the start. And it was given that definition, not by its opponents, but by its proponents.

The term anti-Semitism was coined in 1879 by the German agitator Wilhelm Marr to designate the anti-Jewish campaigns underway in central Europe at that time.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/anti-Semitism

Not etymologically restricted to anti-Jewish theories, actions, or policies, but almost always used in this sense. Those who object to the inaccuracy of the term might try Hermann Adler's Judaeophobia (1881). Anti-Semitic (also antisemitic) and anti-Semite (also antisemite) also are from 1881, like anti-Semitism they appear first in English in an article in The Athenaeum of Sept. 31, in reference to German literature. Jew-hatred is attested from 1881. As an adjective, anti-Jewish is from 1817.

https://www.etymonline.com/word/anti-Semitism

So yes, I was wrong in my assumption that "Anti-semite" is a word that has linguistically drifted away from a purported original meaning of opposition to all Semitic peoples.

But you were far more wrong in your assumption that this is a word that the Jews have somehow absconded with to win favour for their side. In fact, the Anti-semites knew right from Day 1 exactly what they meant by the word, and it meant "Jew-hater" from the start.

You should know this better than many, after all you choose to call Israel a 'Nation-State', and Hamas a 'Terrorist Group'... but regardless of your own biases iof support and censure, untimately they both just entities. Entities that kill and attack to get their own way... Welcome to Planet Earth.

So some groups (and individuals ) get special words, special attention, and special concern when something unpleasant happens to them (or conversely, when they are accused of being the cause of such unpleasantness), while other such groups are given no such support, sympathy... or vocabulary.

And so, the biased supporters of racial equality (what an arch-irony) call the racial discrimination they don't like racism, but the racial discrimination that they do like, affirmative action.

Likewise, the biased supporters of free speech, call the limits of expression they don't like censorship, but the limits of expression they do like, hate speech, slander, or other such terms.

I could go on with innumerable other examples, but the point is made clear.

So then, where does true freedom, true equality, and (dare we even bring it up) true morality lie in this morass of bias and double standards?

Most likely, Nowhere.

The true state of affairs is Amorality.
Nothing but the forces and effects of matter and energy, through space and time, in the pointless and random science experiment we call the Universe. Nothing more.

So then, what is the sum total of all the self-serving attempts by 'sentient life' to impose morality on this amoral existence? Moral Relativism

And then, what is each such separate attempt in isolation (and perhaps, the more powerful and hegemonic one in competition): Moral Absolutism

So don't act so virtuous or impressive/impressed... and, to parapharase Crowley: 'Do what one will, shall be the whole of the law'.

I guess picking up the chesspoard and braining your opponent with it is just another way to win the game. Viva 'outside the box' thinking

Some points there that I wouldn't mind debating with you, but if I go into a line-by-line thing, this conversation will become hugely unwieldy.

If you really want to, start a new thread and I'll tackle it on the weekend.

And as a final note: concerning she who is hardly worth mentioning. I know my history with her regarding her trolling, stalking, and crybabying, far better than you. True. much of it took place on the other side of Conquer Club where records are less completely (and more subjectively) kept... but even here, in the Forums, a careful observer (evidently not you) has plenty of evidence to observe hypocrisy, bias, and double standards in action.

You may have more vivid and detailed memories of your interactions. Yes, I have only a vague idea. It doesn't really matter. I don't want you to love each other, just to keep a civil tone when you argue.

Bottom line is, in this forum we argue about some weighty subjects, and the occasional angry outburst is understandable. Just don't let it happen too often or let it get too vicious.

At least once a year I have to foe saxi for a couple months because he pisses me off to the point that I start saying some foul shit. So, I hit the foe button, and eventually I don't care any more, and I can go back to reading his shit again for another few months. I suggest if someone burns your blood to that degree, you adopt that strategy.









ou think this[/quote]

[Votanic]

The word Semitic far predates Anti-Semitic, and is based on the word, Sem, the Greek form of Shem, one of Noah's sons.
Various mythological/folkloric tales credit Shem as being the postdiluvian father of various Asiatic peoples including Arabs, Jews, Assyrians, etc.
The original usage of Anti-Semitic may have been relatively correct, if was intended to refer to all Semitic-speakers, though probably in Europe it did apply mostly to Jews... In any case, It can hardly be used accurately now, in relation to the Palestine/Israel conflict between Arabs and Jews.

Of course, the real linguistic biases are often ones of omission. For example the terms Anti-Japhetic (discrimination against Europeans) and Anti-Hametic (discrimination agains Africans), both also based on mythical sons of Noah, do exist but are exceedingly rare in usage... This ties into one of the inherently racist beliefs common among many so-called progressives, namely that racism should only be defined as operating in one direction in a conflict.

For example, a far less biased term (though still mythically inaccurate) for the long struggle betwen Jews and Christians in Europe would be Japhetic-Semitic, rather than Anti-Semitic, as the latter term creates a biased notion that one group is innocent of aggression... while the other one is solely at fault.
Of course this same biased narrative is now also at play between Hamas/Gaza and Israel.

[lokisgal]

The word Semitic far predates Anti-Semitic, and is based on the word, Sem, the Greek form of Shem, one of Noah's sons.
Various mythological/folkloric tales credit Shem as being the postdiluvian father of various Asiatic peoples including Arabs, Jews, Assyrians, etc.
The original usage of Anti-Semitic may have been relatively correct, if was intended to refer to all Semitic-speakers, though probably in Europe it did apply mostly to Jews... In any case, It can hardly be used accurately now, in relation to the Palestine/Israel conflict between Arabs and Jews.

Of course, the real linguistic biases are often ones of omission. For example the terms Anti-Japhetic (discrimination against Europeans) and Anti-Hametic (discrimination agains Africans), both also based on mythical sons of Noah, do exist but are exceedingly rare in usage... This ties into one of the inherently racist beliefs common among many so-called progressives, namely that racism should only be defined as operating in one direction in a conflict.

For example, a far less biased term (though still mythically inaccurate) for the long struggle betwen Jews and Christians in Europe would be Japhetic-Semitic, rather than Anti-Semitic, as the latter term creates a biased notion that one group is innocent of aggression... while the other one is solely at fault.
Of course this same biased narrative is now also at play between Hamas/Gaza and Israel.

You can never be wrong or accept or really listen any ideas outside of your own can you. As for your comments about me. Its to bad youre so hateful -me personally I have nothing against you (Dont like your politics , that could be construed as personal I suppose) Not sure why you have such hate and vitriol directed at me. I certainly dont stalk you nor troll you. If you think thats the case then thats your own personal paranoia. Nothing else to say except maybe take a deep breath and chillax

[mookiemcgee]

[lokisgal]

Back on topic

Stop Trump


https://action.lincolnproject.us/transl ... 3XLPP1pDn0

[Votanic]

The word Semitic far predates Anti-Semitic, and is based on the word, Sem, the Greek form of Shem, one of Noah's sons.
Various mythological/folkloric tales credit Shem as being the postdiluvian father of various Asiatic peoples including Arabs, Jews, Assyrians, etc.
The original usage of Anti-Semitic may have been relatively correct, if was intended to refer to all Semitic-speakers, though probably in Europe it did apply mostly to Jews... In any case, It can hardly be used accurately now, in relation to the Palestine/Israel conflict between Arabs and Jews.

Of course, the real linguistic biases are often ones of omission. For example the terms Anti-Japhetic (discrimination against Europeans) and Anti-Hametic (discrimination agains Africans), both also based on mythical sons of Noah, do exist but are exceedingly rare in usage... This ties into one of the inherently racist beliefs common among many so-called progressives, namely that racism should only be defined as operating in one direction in a conflict.

For example, a far less biased term (though still mythically inaccurate) for the long struggle betwen Jews and Christians in Europe would be Japhetic-Semitic, rather than Anti-Semitic, as the latter term creates a biased notion that one group is innocent of aggression... while the other one is solely at fault.
Of course this same biased narrative is now also at play between Hamas/Gaza and Israel.

You can never be wrong or accept or really listen any ideas outside of your own can you. As for your comments about me. Its to bad youre so hateful -me personally I have nothing against you (Dont like your politics , that could be construed as personal I suppose) Not sure why you have such hate and vitriol directed at me. I certainly dont stalk you nor troll you. If you think thats the case then thats your own personal paranoia. Nothing else to say except maybe take a deep breath and chillax

Actually, what you just wrote is best applied to yourself. Go read it again, this time while looking in the mirror.

You can never be wrong or accept or really listen any ideas outside of your own can you. As for your comments about me. Its to bad youre so hateful -me personally I have nothing against you (Dont like your politics , that could be construed as personal I suppose) Not sure why you have such hate and vitriol directed at me. I certainly dont stalk you nor troll you. If you think thats the case then thats your own personal paranoia. Nothing else to say except maybe take a deep breath and chillax.

[2dimes]

That person's premise would potentially be good advise for the topic combatants in this case but...

I shall address the two potential errors in the video, since Votanic is fixated thus Mook's attempt to give him the hint contained, and Duke could be busy.

1. Grass was most certainly a word used more often than weed for the first image in the seventies. Main example of remaining evidence you might be able to find easily, would be an old sticker or T-shirt that displays the popular slogan, "Ass, gas or grass. Nobody rides for free." Possibly some George Carlin or Bob Neuhart audio recorded comedy clips. Though the you tuber is correct in explaining, the grass referred to in the phrase is the much more common ground covering type.

2. The gamer guy does not seem to be telling that kid to go outside and physically find some grass. I suspect he was taunting him after attempting to grease him in their game. If successful the kid's charicter would soon fall over ded, thus about to involuntarily, "touch grass" with any exposed fleshy bits such as their face.

Having wrote that... Turning off the computer, then going outdoors to "Touch grass." Is good advise here.