-Caveat Lector-
< >
>Gavin Phillips wrote:
>>
>> -Caveat Lector-
>>
>> Caveat Lector-
>>
>> Gavin Phillips wrote:
>> >
>> > -Caveat Lector-
>> >
>> > Very good. I have been very busy lately and haven't had much time to
read
>> the
>> > hundreds of posts building in my mailbox. Interesting that nurev turns
out
>> to
>> > be a statist.
>>
>> I'm done with this subject for now in light of a REALLY dangerous
>> situation in
>> Europe. But I will reply briefly. I am far less concerned with what
>> your
>> Libertarian fears are about the state and guns, than you are.
>>
>> > The government will take care of us, right Nurev? Let the
>> > government murderers and cowards of the FBI and ATF have the guns. They
did
>> > such a great job at Ruby Ridge, Waco, the World Trade Bombing, and the
OKC
>> > bombing plus the tens of thousands of other illegal activities these
90's
>> > gestapo have perpetrated in the last few years (civil asset
forfeiture). Yes
>> > that's right nurev, we will feel so much safer when they are the only
ones
>> to
>> > have guns. We will then only have government orchestrated mass murder
and
>> > subjugation.
>>
>> I am NOT required to take your paranoid foolishness seriously.
>>
>> Gavin;
>> When the government tortures, gases, shoots and incinerates some 80 kids,
>> woman and men for absolutely no reason. Paranoid foolishness?
>
>Yes.
>
>>
>> Law enforcement shoots a 14 year old in the back and his nursing mother
in
>> the face, killing them both. Paranoid foolishess?
>
>Yes.
>
>>
>> FBI instruct their undecover agent, Elam A. Salem in the New York World
Trade
>> Center Bombing, not to switch a harmless powder for the bomb and it blows
up.
>> They then pay him (bribe?) a million dollars for his testimony against
the
>> supposed bombers. Paranoid foolishness?
>
>Yes.
>
>>
>> An ATF agent at the scene in the OKC bombing told Bruce Shaw that there
were
>> no ATF in the building at the time of the explosions, they were paged and
>> told not to go to work that day. Shaws employer overheard this
conversation.
>> The government is lieing about every aspect of this incident-period.
Paranoid
>> foolishness?
>
>Yes.
>
>>
>> Nurev, you are either incurably ignorant as to the facts in the above
cases,
>> or worse, you do not care, or the mountain of evidence proving massive
>> government malfeasence is inconvenient to your argument so you ignore it.
>
>I'm not doubting government malfeasance. I'm doubting your judgment.
>Not all these pet paranoias are facts either. The reason I answered yes to
all
>your your examples of paranoid foolishness is because they have nothing to
>do with YOU.
>
Yes they are facts. You can deny them till you're blue in the face.Ask
Charles Key about OKC, if you can be bothered. Bu then again, if what he says
doesn't fit your dogma you'll dismiss it just like everything else that is
contrary to your mindset. You are so simple minded that you think that those
incidents do not
effect me or others? Are you that stupid? Do you think Waco hasn't greatly
exacerbated people's fears about the government? They have everything to do
with me when the government kills people because maybe I am next. That is
not paranoid delusions, that is facing facts.
>> > But then that is alright with you, isn't it? You have the gall
>> > to advocate taking guns away from American citizens and only giving
>> > government agancies the right to have guns. A government completely
>> corrupted
>> > from the top down. Your hero, rapist, murderer and one of the most
thorough
>> > going bastards to ever desecrate the White House, Bill Clinton is to be
>> > trustes with this power. You believe it is better to have Bill in
charge of
>> > government agencies who are armed against an unarmed populace?
>>
>> I think that my position on Government and Clinton is quite clear by
>> now. But I don't trust you armed even more than I don't trust the
>> Government armed. That's because
>> you are a " true believer " with a gun and seemingly nuts to boot. I,
>> and apparently
>> very many of your fellow citizens don't trust you with weapons. How
>> about that?
>>
>> Gavin;
>>
>> I am not a "true believer" in anything except religious matters.
>
>I hoped this was a joke but it's not. The term " true believer," is
>rooted
>in religion. It means that you are blinded by your belief system.
Gavin;
Au contrair, what about your Darwinian evolution religious belief system?
>
>> Stop making
>> assumptions. I have never shot or owned a gun in my life.
>
>Well I have, and still do.
>
>(except an air gun
>> when I was 12. Really powerful, you could see the pellet coming out of
the
>> barrel). Do us all a favor, and cut down on the purile name calling, it
>> doesn't strengthen your argument. ("and seemingly nuts to boot")
>
>It's not to strengthen my argument, it's to express my feelings.
>
>> It seems that you Nurev are starting to become a "true believer" in the
>> government's/mainstream media's propaganda swill about why Americans
should
>> be disarmed.
>
>I'll say it again. It's not that the government's propaganda has
>fooled silly
>me into thinking that Americans should be disarmed. I HAVE COME TO
>THAT CONCLUSION ON MY VERY OWN. I don't think Americans are sane, mature,
>or responsible enough to own guns. So if the government thinks that way
>too for whatever nefarious reason, I DON'T CARE! At this point in time
armed
>Americans are more of a threat to all of us stuck with each other, than the
>government.In your paranoid world ,it's the government that's the biggest
threat.
>In my world, its way too many guns in the hands of way too many people that
>is the threat. I DON'T have to buy in to your paranoia.
Gavin;
But "silly you" is using the governments rhetoric and demogoguery after
tragedies such as Colombine to help ban guns. Does "silly you" think that
some of these events could have been staged by our "friends" in government so
as to have further
excuses to ban guns.
>> Nothing, nothing Billl Clinton does or attempts to do is for the
>> good of Americans. He marches to a different tune, his agenda is given to
him
>> by the people who put him there and who have been covering his backside
for
>> the last 7 years, and some 60 convenient deaths. The string pullers
behind
>> the curtain pulling Clintons and many other politicians strings know they
>> have to get the guns in order to subjugate us even further. You cannot
have a
>> dictatorship without first getting the guns. If you are naive enough to
>> believe that the whores in Washington are after the guns for our benefit
you
>> reallly need to hit the books. You really think Clinton, Reno and the
many
>> other politicopaths give a damn about us.
>
>The reason this is paranoid lunacy, is because, it's a sexy and
>dramatic story,
>IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU.
>
Gavin;
Once again you wade in with total drivel and your favorite word, "paranoia."
It has everything to do with me. Does anything effect you Nurev, except
trying to make a credible argument and having to work with frazzled brain
cells?
>> As for your statement;
>> "and apparently very many of your fellow citizens don't trust you with
>> weapons. How about that?" As you know, very many of our fellow citizens
>> change their opinion more often than their underwear. Their opinion
changes
>> according to the latest manipulated media poll and what ever is
politically
>> correct at the time.
>
>And they are changing their minds in my direction. Every shooting and
>massacre
>will be another nail in the coffin of the NRA.
Gavin
My point is, wow it's really dense in here,(read it s-l-o-w-l-y) people will
rapidly change their opinion if the body count gets to high.
>
>> If the time ever came when the government passed a law
>> to ban all weapons and there were hundreds of Wacos going on, you might
find
>> their opinion rapidly changing. Don't count on support from sheep. They
go
>> wherever public opinion and emotion herds them.
>
>They go wherever they see safety for their children. And that's OK
>because
>that's their job. They are coming to the conclusion that there is easy
>access to
>guns, and it's now scaring them.
>
Gavin;
The government is scaring them, along with the mainstream media whores.
Whipping them up into a tizzy, and it's okay by you because the end
justifies the means, right?
>> > You so quickly forget history's many lessons of dictators disarming the
>> > citizenry only to be followed by genocide. What about the Warsaw
uprising in
>> > which a handful of Jews took on and held their own for quite some time
>> > against the Nazis' s after they had managed to obtain some firearms.
Preach
>> > your statism in Beijing where I'm certain they will also secretly hold
you
>> in
>> > contempt. Your views on inalienable human rights are particularly
revealing;
>
>The Jews died. But what does this have to do with YOU?
>I am not a Statist. If I were I would say so. I don't consider it an
>insult. I
>consider Libertarianism to be an insult. And I'm not against human
>rights. In
>fact, I spend much of my time as an activist for human rights. But
>there is no
>such thing as " inalienable " rights, just as there is no such thing
>as virgin
>births, and coming back to life after you die. These are all beliefs
>of a true
>believer and just because they are your beliefs, that doesn't mean
>they are one
>whit real. What is real is the astronomical number of gunshot
>tragedies every
>single day.
"just as there is no such thing as virgin births, and coming back to life
after you die. These are all beliefs
>of a true believer and just because they are your beliefs,"
Once agan making false assumptions. At first I thought that these were just
brain farts on your part, now I see them for what they are. Purposely trying
to pigeon hole me as some religious zealot. Pretty cheap, but that's par for
the course with you though. Let me clear are the fog in your brain somewhat.
I believe that there is some kind
of spernatural being which you can call God. I do not practice any type of
religion. I do not beleive in the bible chapter and verse, the earth was made
in 6 days etc. I know through reading several books on evolution that it is
complete nonsense with only a few bones as "proof" that it happened. Not
only books by Christian scientists, but books by scientists such as Michael
Denton's, Evolution : A Theory in Crisis and the recent Darwin's Black Box :
The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution by Michael J. Behe Assoc. Prof. of
Biochemistry at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania in which Behe mounts an
insurmountable challenge to gradualistic evolution with his irreducibly
complex molecular
machines (tens of thousands in nature)which are so complicated ( thousands of
trillions against)it is impossible for Darwnian gradualistic evolution to
ecompass it. Also Darwin on Trial by Philip Johnson and The Bone Peddlars by
Fry are also good critiques of Darwinian evolution.
If you had read anything on the subject you would know that there is no
unequivocal proof that we evolved from apes or that reptiles turn into birds
etc. One christian
scientist named Dr. Duane Guish debated ecolutionary biologists,
anthropologists and other scientitsts at university's and he kept winning.
So now they refuse to debate him. There attitude to open intellectual debate
is to quit when your pet theory is repeatedly shown to be lacking the
neccessary proof to convince people it is correct. The little evidence that
does exist (Lucy) 9 some bones) that may point to a possible evolutionary
link is highly subjective and is argued for and against by scientists who
"believe" in evolution.
Evolution appeals to mainstream scientists and people like you with mighty
ego's who desperately want to be able to explain everything. Man is the
pinnacle, right Nurev. We are so brilliant we can explain all of nature by
the simple means of, enough time and anythings possible, and natural
selection. You are not only extremely arrogant, but you also do not know that
your religion, evolution, is a long long way from established fact. Poor
Nurev. He thought his religion was fact.
>
>> Yes these things happened. But they are only a POSSIBILITY at this
>> point in this country. Why should I take your word for it that you can
see the
>> future? What IS A FACT is that there are far too many gun related deaths
NOW.
>>
>> Gavin;
>>
>> A possibility which is becoming a very realistic reality if you study the
>> dozens of illegal and pernicious activities of our government/depsots in
the
>> last 20 years in particular. I cannot see the future. But I can see many
>> hundreds of thousands more gun related deaths if they try to ban guns
>> completely, and possibly civil war. There are many states which would
refuse
>> to give up guns, with law enforcement lining up alongside the citizens.
>
>Good. Let's see you put your guns where your mouths are.
Gavin;
Can't wait for the massacres, can you? By the way, how long do you think it
will be (in massacres if you like) before there is a total gun ban. 2, 8,
how many massacres and or time before the gun ban?
>> Do you really think banning guns in this country would significantly
reduce
>> gun related deaths
>
>Yes. Very much.
>
>> given the massive black market that would take place of
>> your local gunsmiths? Criminals will still be able to obtain guns, and
>> probably easier than before because they always had to get them through
the
>> black market anyway.
>
>Really? How do you know this is what would happen? Is this another one
>of
>your visions?
> snip>
That's right dear, the millions of guns would just dry up and go away, just
like the drug business has gone away with the heavy sentences being handed
down in the last few years.
Of course it isn't fact but it is a very likely scenario, far more likely
than your fantasy of guns suddenly dissapearing.
>> >
>> > Not only Hitler and Mao, Jim. Also George Bush and Bill and Hilary
Clinton
>> > along with many Congressman and Senators. Conceptual only to a wanton
>> > socialist like yourself, Nurev.
>>
>> I'm not a Socialist. But, I don't mind them either. I much prefer
>> socialists
>> to Libertarians.
>>
>> Gavin;
>>
>> I am not a Libertarian, but I much prefer them to Socialists.
>
>And that's what makes America what it is.
>
>> > Rights only subscribed by the gun toting ATF
>> > murderer at your doorstep and fully endorsed by Nurev. How comforting.
You
>> > talk about our basic human rights being a conceptual legal concept,
what
>> > utter nonsense.
>snip>
>> Don't get me wrong, There is nothing wrong with establishing "
>> rights." It's just that you like to forget that your rights depend on all
of
>> us.
>> Things are changing rapidly with relation to guns. I like how they are
>> changing.
>> You don't. If you are smart, you will make the best of it.
>>
>> Joshua2
>>
>> Gavin;
>> I do not forget that my rights depend upon others recognizing and wanting
the
>> same rights.
>
>Wrong. Your rights depend on not bumping into the desires of the elite
>or the
>desires of the majority.
>
>> You want to give up the right for law abiding citizens to bear
>> arms because you will feel safer when only criminals and government
appointed
>> agencies have guns.
>
>You almost made sense here but then ruined it with your silly paranoid
>crap. I
>will feel safer when NONE of you have guns.
Gavin;
Which reality are you living in? Not planet earth, that's for sure. I lived
in England for many years, a country with some of the strictest gun laws in
the world and criminals had no problem getting guns. Criminals will still be
able to get guns here too, even with your gun ban.
>
>> The whores in Washington and mainstream media schills
>> have done a great job on you.
>
>Not so. Actually I've don quite a good job on them.
>
>>
>> nessie wrote:
>> >
>> > -Caveat Lector-
>> >
>> > >>I wish to avert that violence because I live in this society, and I
>> > don't want to go down with it.
>> >
>> > If you think you can avert violence by not being ready to counter it,
you
>> > are a fool. Violence is part of life; it is NOT going away just because
>> > some people wish it to. Violence has been part of life since the first
>> > aomeba ate the first protazoa; get used to it.
>>
>> I may be more used to it than you. I grew up and worked in the
>> toughest
>> neighborhoods in NYC. I was on the receiving end of a major war.
>>
>> > Violence is not evil.
>> > Violence is not good. Violence just is.
>>
>> Not at all. Violence is failure. The only justification for violence
>> iself defense. Real self defense not your paranoid fantasies of a
>> future that may or may not happen.
>>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
