99% of What? Apparently 99% of all the Morons!

reply to post by Americanist

Nature's Laws and Principles will need to be instituted...

Along with common sense and service to society.

well enlighten us.

Which "Nature's Laws" NEED to be instituted?

Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by Americanist

 

Nature's Laws and Principles will need to be instituted...

Along with common sense and service to society.

well enlighten us.

Which "Nature's Laws" NEED to be instituted?

Indeed. It is beyond arrogant to argue that nature is incapable of instituting its own laws and needs humanity to do for her.

Nature's Laws need to be obeyed! Nature's Laws include unalienable rights, which is something the arrogant could care less about.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Americanist

 

Your individual posts in this site have done far more damage to this so called "OWS" movement than any complaints from millions of people regarding them could do. You are quite clearly enamored with George Bush's assertion that "if you are not with us, then you're against us" mentality, and you have not offered up any solutions what-so-ever, and certainly not any answers, just criticisms of those who have criticism for a movement you feel so connected to.

You entered this thread, and quite ironically so, complaining that I have gone from one OWS thread to the next criticizing the movement, willfully ignoring that I have entered threads attacking any attempts by police to abrogate and derogate the rights of these protestors. You have ignored this, because that FACT doesn't serve your agenda.

You could care less about individual rights, this is not your agenda. Whatever it is, it ain't about freedom, sport.

edit on 24-10-2011 by Jean Paul Zodeaux because: (no reason given)

And I can clearly make the case, you're a hypocrite. Take a look at the title of this thread for starters...

Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by Americanist

 

Nature's Laws and Principles will need to be instituted...

Along with common sense and service to society.

well enlighten us.

Which "Nature's Laws" NEED to be instituted?

Sure.

We should better organize equality for starters.

Originally posted by Americanist

Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by Americanist

 

Nature's Laws and Principles will need to be instituted...

Along with common sense and service to society.

well enlighten us.

Which "Nature's Laws" NEED to be instituted?

Sure.

We should better organize equality for starters.

Now tell me,

How do we do THAT ?

Equality is defined as WHAT ?

and what would be the 2nd thing ?

How does Nature equalize anything ?

Survival of the fittest ?

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by Americanist

 

Nature's Laws and Principles will need to be instituted...

Along with common sense and service to society.

well enlighten us.

Which "Nature's Laws" NEED to be instituted?

Indeed. It is beyond arrogant to argue that nature is incapable of instituting its own laws and needs humanity to do for her.

Nature's Laws need to be obeyed! Nature's Laws include unalienable rights, which is something the arrogant could care less about.

Human civilization being one of the most dominant forces on this planet demands a high level of responsibility. If that's arrogant to you, then you've launched into another realm of hypocrisy.

reply to post by Americanist

And I can clearly make the case, you're a hypocrite. Take a look at the title of this thread for starters...

Transfer much? Would you oppress the right to speak? Do you find me a hypocrite because I have exercised my right to speak? This is certainly one of the genuine concern for many, that you and your silly movement want to run out the current tyrants so you and your cronies can get to be tyrants for a time.

Where I am long on record for the defense of unalienable rights, just what is your record?

Human civilization being one of the most dominant forces on this planet demands a high level of responsibility. If that's arrogant to you, then you've launched into another realm of hypocrisy.

Uh-huh. Your Orwellian newspeak is obvious for what it is. Human "civilization" is a concept. You are clearly a collectivist who places the collective as being superior to the individual, and who speaks for this collective? In this thread, apparently you!

Originally posted by xuenchen

Originally posted by Americanist

Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by Americanist

 

Nature's Laws and Principles will need to be instituted...

Along with common sense and service to society.

well enlighten us.

Which "Nature's Laws" NEED to be instituted?

Sure.

We should better organize equality for starters.

Now tell me,

How do we do THAT ?

Equality is defined as WHAT ?

and what would be the 2nd thing ?

How does Nature equalize anything ?

Survival of the fittest ?

edit on Oct-24-2011 by xuenchen because: (no reason given)

1. Do you consider yourself a thinker?
2. www.merriam-webster.com...
3. Enacting Truth
4. Have you heard of ELE?
5. Surpassed by technology at present

reply to post by Americanist

We should better organize equality for starters.

Ha! More Orwellian doublespeak. You do not mean equality under the law, you mean wealth redistribution by means of force, which under the equality of law would be plunder. This is who you are, a pirate advocating plunder, and disingenuously calling this "justice".

reply to post by Americanist

1. Do you consider yourself a thinker?
2. www.merriam-webster.com...
3. Enacting Truth
4. Have you heard of ELE?
5. Surpassed by technology at present

you first.

then i will try.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Americanist

 

And I can clearly make the case, you're a hypocrite. Take a look at the title of this thread for starters...

Transfer much? Would you oppress the right to speak? Do you find me a hypocrite because I have exercised my right to speak? This is certainly one of the genuine concern for many, that you and your silly movement want to run out the current tyrants so you and your cronies can get to be tyrants for a time.

Where I am long on record for the defense of unalienable rights, just what is your record?

Human civilization being one of the most dominant forces on this planet demands a high level of responsibility. If that's arrogant to you, then you've launched into another realm of hypocrisy.

Uh-huh. Your Orwellian newspeak is obvious for what it is. Human "civilization" is a concept. You are clearly a collectivist who places the collective as being superior to the individual, and who speaks for this collective? In this thread, apparently you!

You personally demonstrate a mental block. You resort to tangents, divert blame, label others (as if the title of this thread wasn't a true indicator), and project your own warped mentality as nothing but a blinder to others.

I could go one step further... "Civilization" is a definition. Nothing more, nothing less.

Does only one man stand on Earth? Is only one individual in existence? Even Tom Hanks didn't float his own boat without some additional help. Truth speaks for the collective. Our job as the collective is to unveil the whole of Truth.



I AM... One part of the whole.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Americanist

 

We should better organize equality for starters.

Ha! More Orwellian doublespeak. You do not mean equality under the law, you mean wealth redistribution by means of force, which under the equality of law would be plunder. This is who you are, a pirate advocating plunder, and disingenuously calling this "justice".

Just as I've predicted in the past... A labeling fanatic.

Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by Americanist

 

1. Do you consider yourself a thinker?
2. www.merriam-webster.com...
3. Enacting Truth
4. Have you heard of ELE?
5. Surpassed by technology at present

you first.

then i will try.

If you would kindly lay off the cheeseball emoticons, I'll have a word with you. Otherwise, grab a newspaper... They're written at a 6th grade comprehension level.

Well if we are talking about nature's law there is no equality in nature nor is their government intervention the strong survive the weak perish believe they also called that survival of the fittest but nope enter man interfering with natural law where everyone is a winner!.

reply to post by Americanist

Just as I've predicted in the past... A labeling fanatic.

This is nothing but empty rhetoric that hardly addresses your advocacy of plunder. Why the empty rhetoric? Because you have no valid argument against my accusation! You have no regards for individual rights and it becomes clearer and clearer with each post.

reply to post by Americanist

Does only one man stand on Earth? Is only one individual in existence? Even Tom Hanks didn't float his own boat without some additional help. Truth speaks for the collective. Our job as the collective is to unveil the whole of Truth.

Individuals do not need collectives, or societies, or civilizations, in order to survive. They do not require the existence of these collectives in order to exist themselves. Conversely, collectives, societies, and civilizations could not possibly exist without individuals.

People certainly have the right to collectively come together to form organizations, and indeed, an organization formed correctly can actually enhance the individuals within that collective survival. Tragically, collectives can also, and demonstrably so, greatly diminish individuals chances of survival.

As long as you are speaking for this collective, count me out! I want nothing to do with your tyrannical pablum.

reply to post by Americanist


This is from the post of yours above this one:

Just as I've predicted in the past... A labeling fanatic.

Now, here is the post of yours that follows:

If you would kindly lay off the cheeseball emoticons, I'll have a word with you. Otherwise, grab a newspaper... They're written at a 6th grade comprehension level.

Now, scrolling up a bit, and from a different post of yours we get this:

And I can clearly make the case, you're a hypocrite.

And finally, this post of yours:

You personally demonstrate a mental block. You resort to tangents, divert blame, label others (as if the title of this thread wasn't a true indicator), and project your own warped mentality as nothing but a blinder to others.

What are you doing, standing in front of mirror as you make these wild posts?

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Americanist

 

Just as I've predicted in the past... A labeling fanatic.

This is nothing but empty rhetoric that hardly addresses your advocacy of plunder. Why the empty rhetoric? Because you have no valid argument against my accusation! You have no regards for individual rights and it becomes clearer and clearer with each post.

You're the embodiment of trashtalker. I finally reach a point where I have to call you on your hypocrisy (inside day two), and you roll off your rocker. The challenge is empty and lacks merit. You preach individual rights while batting your cane in the direction of others.

Perhaps your friend will want to look up definitions too...

www.merriam-webster.com...

a rule of ethical conduct referring to Matthew 7:12 and Luke 6:31: do to others as you would have them do to you

www.merriam-webster.com...

a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

What say you "OWS"? Does this so called "Americanist" speak for you? Is this what your movement is all about? Will you "trashtalk" those you don't agree with by calling them "trashtalkers" or will you consider engaging in meaningful conversation. Last night, some of you at the very beginning were there and ready for that meaningful conversation, but so far today, your movement has deferred to "Americanist" allowing this person to do your talking for you. Should your silence be construed as approval of his rhetoric? Is that what you stand for?

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Americanist

 

Does only one man stand on Earth? Is only one individual in existence? Even Tom Hanks didn't float his own boat without some additional help. Truth speaks for the collective. Our job as the collective is to unveil the whole of Truth.

Individuals do not need collectives, or societies, or civilizations, in order to survive. They do not require the existence of these collectives in order to exist themselves. Conversely, collectives, societies, and civilizations could not possibly exist without individuals.

People certainly have the right to collectively come together to form organizations, and indeed, an organization formed correctly can actually enhance the individuals within that collective survival. Tragically, collectives can also, and demonstrably so, greatly diminish individuals chances of survival.

As long as you are speaking for this collective, count me out! I want nothing to do with your tyrannical pablum.

You had parents, you had friends, you had mentors, and for the sake of argument let's add siblings to the mix.

Without this support you'd be very fortunate to stay alive. Case and point.
I speak on behalf of common sense... Tragically, what you've lacked.