[ubermik]

That list pretty much covers most religions too really which I think is why cults get such a negative press, established religion doesnt want and cant handle the competition

If you talk to many “by the book” muslims, christians and kosher jews you will see people who talk as tho they have been brain washed and are incapable of any degree of free thought, reasoning or balance. We’re just so used to THOSE kinds of “cults” we dont stop to notice how similar religion, cults and if you want to really expand the picture some followers of a political group, pop group or football club could be seen as pretty convincing “cult members” too

[ubermik]

Well on the bright side at least its in Londonistan, as long as it doesnt have a single penny of public funding, doesnt have people like Abu Hamza preaching there and has the full approval of all local residents I cant really see the harm so I dont see why “blame” is even relvant

And the americans will try to link absolutely anything to terrorists right from DVD copying all the way upto flying planes into the twin towers so I dont really put any credence on the claim considering where it came from, they probably have a file claiming Old Mother Hubbard was a Madam who specialised in grooming kids for the sex industry and had a hankering for beastiality and gave half her earnings to her pimp who was running Al Quieda at the time knowing them

[ubermik]

Actually Emma, rotting leaves is the third biggest producer of CO2, several thousand percent of the amount all of humanity as a collective produces infact

So the trees idea is actually going to increase the amount of CO2 rather than decrease it

[ubermik]

re the racists being anti racist thing

I think the reason for that much of the time is people are nowadays defined as a racist by left wing minority hugging definitions from the academic proffession who live in a very detached from real life kind of enviroment

As such many of the people called racists arent, they just dislike things about either individual non white british people or specific groups and sub groups of people from other countries or cultures, but as a tosser is a tosser no matter what colour their skin and as most of them would dislike the exact same things if done by a white person they arent actually racist, also a lot of people who do get called racists by the media are actually nationalists who think our culture and way of life has as much right to exist without being swamped or diluted by other cultures as those others cultures themselves are given

The only people who WOULDNT converse in any way shape or form are simple minded bigots and paranoid xenophobes actually, nationalists have a different name to both of those because they arent the same thing, although the media would have the spoonfed mindless majority believe otherwise

We live on the planet with people of other countries, we trade with them and now more than ever rely on some degree of interaction with them at least on an economic level so conversing is pretty much unnavoidable, but theres a very broad spectrum between never ever conversing with anyone of another culture or race and the other extreme as pushed by new labour of bending over and taking it with a smile from anyone of any other culture whilst showing no level of equality towards our own culture

Nationalists and even racists sit at niether extreme but somewhere between the two so I wouldnt see then talking to other “nationalists” as being anything to write home about really

[ubermik]

Well I cant avoid my share of the blame for that really, but I log into sites like this to debate and discuss “whatever”

As such I respond to anything that catches my eye or things that are or look directed at me so as much as many if not most of my posts werent on topic as per the thread, they WERE on topic with respects the post they were in response to. So were it not the case that people pop up making unrelated snidey comments I’d be quite unlikely to post any equally unrelated snidey responses really, or in other words without a cause you dont have an effect

As for you disliking the humour, well that was actually part of the diversion, thing is thats you. Just because you dont like something doesnt really make it wrong as its just a personal preference so unless everyone in the world is planning to completely desist from everything and anything that any other person doesnt like its at best just a personal preference and at worst a bit of a moot point

As an aside, what youre describing isnt “heartless”, its just detached

The girl going missing is a shame. But being honest here she is a stranger, someone I dont know, have never met and is just another headline as far as I’m concerned, Whilst this has been going on I will bet several other kids have befallen equally abhorrent occurences all going by without notice because they HAVENT been turned into a media circus to illicit a trained social response, so I make no excuses or apologies for not falling into a sobbing mass over a complete stranger merely because the media decides its time to have an emotive public interest story as most of the time such occurences get a very passing report and vanish into the ether shortlyn afterwards. I keep my concern and emotions for the people I actually know and value and dont feel the need to put on some knee jerk pavlovian response to curry social bonding and nor do I feel any need to put on an overreactive response to seem “caring”

Maybe people should pay as much attention to all the similar occurences that get miniscule reporting as most of the time they take second place to breaking political stories and people read them without the amount of reaction we get over stories the media decides to highlight, so who is really being genuine? People who show selective concern?

Anyway, that aside a hell of a lot of the thread in question wasnt about the girl as such nor paedophillia but was actually about the parents neglect and the possibility that they are complicit in someway to what has happened to her

[ubermik]

Well maybe, in the same way youre trying to justify not finding it humourous. Although I am sure you actually class yourself as not “justifying” but simply stating same as I do

I’d say its clear enough that I have as little acceptance of such a blinkered judgemental outlook as yours as you hold for mine, so niether of us is likely to feel the other warrants any form of justification. But its a cute word to use because of its implied meaning

Ostensively tho anyone who ever expresses any opinion or view on any topic could be classed as justifying it the moment they expand on it and why its held so its hardly a bad thing

I can seperate humour from serious topics, you obviously cant. The only difference here is you are labouring under the delusion your mindset is the ONLY acceptable one, I just see mine as mine and couldnt care less if you share it or not. I do however object to not having the same courtesy in return

So I dont need to justify anything to you, I just cant see the point of sitting by silently when a trait or perspective is denigrated

But as it IS a discussion board I dont have a problem with discussing it lol, its kind of the point afterall, but you can call it a “justification board” if you wish, its ostensively the same thing from your perspective

[ubermik]

Well I class it as being the epitome of not being an anal, narrow minded, self absorbed, self righteous bigotted outlook personally but each to their own eh?

Its a concept i know you will never grasp, but theres a huge difference between making light of something and actually seeing it as a trivial light hearted matter. The two can quite happily sit side by side without one negating the presence of the other. But thats the 3 dimensional world where people are a bit more complex and have a bit more depth than a zealous puddle

As for letting anything be said, thats called freedom of speech, something many people the world over have died to protect. So yeah, anyone is as far as I am concerned entitled to say pretty much anything they like. If I do or dont agree with it then that exact same freedom of speech allows me to express that too

But I dont expect them to alter their view or what they say as a result and am unlikely to myself either. Multiple perspectives, views, outlooks, idealogies, and perceptions are totally allowable and able to co-exist

The days are gladly gone where self important outlooks like yours that think theirs is the ONLY acceptable way to think and that every different outlook to theirs is a mass of negative implications. That was a workable outlook when people were thick, uneducated and spoonfed on religion. But society has evolved since then and most manage to have a more rounded understanding of things than the fire and brimstone one of yesteryear

[ubermik]

Aww bless

So in Rotts prozac equalised world things really are THAT black and white then, THAT simplistic?

So applying the same level of drooling moron simplicity then youre on here too arent ya, ergo in your extremely dumbed down, simplistic view of the ROTTiverse youre ALSO a bedroom box rebel without a clue about anything too seeing as such minimal trivial peripheral superficial observations in your world make for such sweeping and totalitarian generalisations lol

A hell of a lot of people ARE quite capable of seperating humour from non humour ROTT, they dont see the world in such an unrealistic two dimensional one, so what youre criticising isnt tantamount to anything except the thing it ACTUALLY is, which is joking about a topic and/or its irony. Something that even the likes of shakespeare have done

Infact the one thing that DOES help things like paedophilia to carry on more easily is silence, a total void of discussion as it used to be many moons ago, but without such topics being kept to some extent light hearted many people cant or wont enter into a discussion about them because they rapidly become too aggressive or emotive and never get discussed anyway as a result which is then counterproductive

Most people DONT need to state or hear vitriolic rhetorics about such topics to “prove” their non acceptance of them, thats usually clear enough from what they actually say and personally I would be a bit suspicious of someone who COULD only talk about such a topic in an excessive and acidic way as that often takes on the appearance of them seeming to try too hard to either convince the audience of their non complicity or themselves along the lines of “protesteth too much” really

All I can say is you really dont seem to know “people” very well at all as you seem to have absolutely no comprehension of anything or anyone who isnt you and therefore assume that everyone MUST think the exact same way about everything as you or they are “wrong”. Well sufficive to say people just arent that simplistic or identical, they are complex and diverse so youre arrogant assumtive supposition isnt really particularly insightful, acurate or valid anywhere outside of your own head really as has been clearly shown in almost every single one of your ridiculously arrogant assumptions and blinkered closed minded judgemental comments, you come across like some bible bashing narrow minded witch hunter from days gone by and exhibit an equal degree of comprehension and understanding of people in general

No offence like

:lol:

[ubermik]

Sorry slayer, but did you just try to use the “it was ages ago” excuse to claim that the white homeless WERENT slaves? But that would then also apply to the blacks wouldnt it?

So THEY would also not have been slaves as that would ALSO have just been “how things were back then”

Its a thing called consistency and equality, if the process and end result is the same for two people then the name its called and what it actually is will be the same

But I do understand that consistency and actuality can be a hiccup when applying modern left wing self contradictory spoonfed mindsets

Basically anyone, of any colour, taken unwillingly from anywhere to be forced to work for no money or infact even if they DID get some recompense but were still forced under duress into the arrangement ARE slaves no matter what age, colour, country of origin they are from or even whether they were homeless or not to begin with

Apply a get out clause to one person and that also then applies EQUALLY to everyone else irrespective of age, colour or country of origin

Actual convicts, real convicts who has committed an actual crime are different as that would be a work gang in effect so long as they still only had to serve a sentence and were then released assuming it wasnt only lifers that were sent there

if a sentence was ignored and they were also kept their for the duration of their lives (that duration being longer than their sentence) then they too would also be slaves

Theres a huge difference between hard labour for a convict and trying to claim that being homeless is in someway a crime deserving of life on a labour gang, applying such convenient adaptation means that we could also say that blacks werent enslaved either, they were just found guilty of not running fast enough and getting caught and were probably all homeless anyway, but it wasnt OUR fault we didnt know if they were homeless or not because they couldnt even be bothered enough abotu their own freedom to learn english in advance

Just because it was the “done thing” doesnt stop it being slavery

[ubermik]

Well my point was simply that being a “slave” means being removed unwillingly and without legal precedence to a place and made to work or do whatever is asked for no pay and without rights

As such you arent NOT a slave just because you did or didnt have a home, are white/non white, are a criminal/innocent

Slavery has a definition that is totally seperate to any other social factors that were in place, if a homeless, a housed, a white, black and asian person were all taken from their country of origin under duress and where forced to work in servitude elsewhere they are ALL slaves irrespective of anything that went on before

As for the black slave trading initially mentioned, before the slave trade the african tribal leaders were sacrificing most of the people captured from other villages or areas, so the slave trade meant they could live rather than die, a choice I am sure they would have chosen anyway had it been a choice

And where is the criticism of the other black africans and asians who were the ones actually collecting these people to sell them to the slave traders?

Oh, silly me, it would be racist to point out anything bad a none white has ever done in the history of mankind wouldnt it lol

[Author]

Posts