Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Americas neo-Nazi leader killed by his 10 year old son.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
    I live under 15 km away from a high dangerous nuclear power plant.
    high dangerous because its earth quake zone and its a "Fukushima-class" one.
    http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oberrheinische_Tiefebene
    http://www.bund.net/themen_und_proje...hren/erdbeben/
    The Japan reactor wasn't knocked out by an earthquake. It was the TSUNAMI that killed it. The water smashed the pumps, pipes, wires, etc. needed for cooling. They are quite safe against earth shaking.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
      The Japan reactor wasn't knocked out by an earthquake. It was the TSUNAMI that killed it. The water smashed the pumps, pipes, wires, etc. needed for cooling. They are quite safe against earth shaking.
      no they are not save. neckarwestheim is only save up to an earth quake level 4-5.

      but in this zone earthquake level 6 and higher is possible.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by AnonymousCoward View Post
        Yeah, and you are even weirder than this droidhacker guy
        btw. "neckarwestheim" is that german for Springfield Nuclear Power Plant.
        http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernkra...Neckarwestheim

        yes Neckarwestheim=Springfield Nuclear Power Plant

        Comment


        • #64
          I wish Phoronix could add the 'multi-quote' function. Would make it easier.
          EDIT: I think this site is MESSED UP. Having difficulties posting/logging in..... Anyway....... I'll try again......

          Post #47: droidhacker posted:
          "Strangly, you actually make a good point here. You're right. Democracy is a farce. It is rule by the dumbest."

          The farce part is accurate. I'd make a slight variation on the rest of your assertion though if you want it more accurate. Imho, it's "the 'dumbest' are ruled by the manipulative' or to that effect. The electorate is stupid and easily duped so democracy doesn't work. The Elites or Government may or may not be dumb but they were smart enough to manipulate the idiot populace who fell for their deception.

          "It really is an interesting thing. That battle between the left and the right."
          Actually, it's not. There is no 'left and right' or 'left v.s. right.' That's only an illusion. It's mostly on a mico level. There may be some polarization with fringe parties but not the mainstream. There is no polarization with the mainstream parties. That assertion of such a thing is a fallacy.

          AnonymousCoward in post #48:
          "You keep repeating the same lies over and over again. What specific freedoms does Germany lack?"

          The kind in which you are fined or put in jail?

          "Yeah, and guess what? I have never heard of Ron Paul or Nigel Farage either. And frankly, after reading their Wikipedia entries, both of them seem to be ideologically bullheaded lunkheads to me."

          So, you have never heard of them and then you dismiss them immediately after reading a blurb on wikipedia? You're a tool.

          "Yeah right. So, when did you last care about freedom and liberties? Was is when you deliberately made up evidence for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq in order to start a war? Or was it when you decided to open concentration camps in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, the latter persisting to this day?"

          I have no idea where this came from? I never made up evidence for WMD. I assume you are making rash assumptions thinking I'm American and then believing I support the Iraq war or that I'm a Republican?!? LOL! I am not American. I think the Republican and Democrat parties are basically the same thing and I'm against all their wars as well. So, you're wrong all over the place again.

          Q stated in post #45:

          "you just have no clue about the words you are using in your writings."

          I don't have a clue?!? LOL! You don't understand my posts. I already stated the democracies are a 'farce.' Maybe you should look up the defnition.

          It sounds to me that you're a Communist or Socialist and maybe droidhacker as well. You both said that the 'Communists' being a threat in the 30s was 'FUD.' So, the fact that Communists dominated and manipulated Eastern Europe for decades means nothing? I would say to review your history but we all know that history (literature) is written by the 'winners.' I think it is hopeless. People are easily brainwashed and conditioned and you're a perfect example.

          Comment


          • #65
            http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...7MI1ND20111118

            http://www.platts.com/RSSFeedDetaile...d/Coal/8593998

            http://www.newscientist.com/article/...ein-danke.html

            It's about raising taxes via increases in energy prices and enabling these corporations to incur ever increasing profits for the new 'green' companies and milk profits for the fossil fuel companies as well.
            Last edited by Panix; 11-18-2011, 12:55 PM.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Panix View Post
              Q stated in post #45:
              "you just have no clue about the words you are using in your writings."
              I don't have a clue?!? LOL! You don't understand my posts. I already stated the democracies are a 'farce.' Maybe you should look up the defnition.
              It sounds to me that you're a Communist or Socialist and maybe droidhacker as well. You both said that the 'Communists' being a threat in the 30s was 'FUD.' So, the fact that Communists dominated and manipulated Eastern Europe for decades means nothing? I would say to review your history but we all know that history (literature) is written by the 'winners.' I think it is hopeless. People are easily brainwashed and conditioned and you're a perfect example.
              you really don't have a clue about my person I'm not a "Communist" I'm a Anarchist

              and yes Anarchism is not "anormalism" but the brainwashed people think anarhism=chaos=anormalism=zivilwar
              And yes Anarchism can be Social.
              because there is no rule of being asocial/antisocial. only stupid people think that.

              " I already stated the democracies are a 'farce.'"

              You don't get the key-point you are wrong because there is no democracy! No were in the world. there are only Republics in the world with rule sets to force the "Stupid-Democracy" into a better/good way.

              but you always talk like Republics=Democracy=Stupid.

              and this is stupid!

              Germany only do have a stronger rule set to force the stupid democracy to be less dump.
              but yes you can do it even better and more intelligent.

              "So, the fact that Communists dominated and manipulated Eastern Europe for decades means nothing? "

              there was no "Communism" in the Eastern Europe and Russia in the last 200 years because there was only multiple "Dictatorships"

              BRD Germany right now is a Socialism market nation for example and there is no manipulating anywhere.

              Karl Marks never say communism must be a Dictatorship.

              UDSSR was never ever a communism nation it was a Dictatorship up to 100%

              you can drive a Republic with Communism ideas.

              but yes i know you will never understand this because you are brainwashed by capitalism fools.

              an egocentric viewpoint is not freedom and capitalism is not anarchy.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Panix View Post
                It sounds to me that you're a Communist or Socialist and maybe droidhacker as well. You both said that the 'Communists' being a threat in the 30s was 'FUD.' So, the fact that Communists dominated and manipulated Eastern Europe for decades means nothing? I would say to review your history but we all know that history (literature) is written by the 'winners.' I think it is hopeless. People are easily brainwashed and conditioned and you're a perfect example.
                I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you misunderstood what we were talking about.

                I am NOT a communist of socialist. FAR FAR FAR from it. This discussion has a lot to do with HISTORICAL context, and isn't based on personal political leanings. As a matter of personal political leanings, I will state for the record that I lean FAR RIGHT and support a moderate degree of anarchy. You may note several quips I made regarding the radical and noisy left.

                More to the point, the discussion regarding the communist threat being FUD didn't imply that communism wasn't actually a problem to be dealt with, but that Hitler's CLAIMS that communists were directly responsible for the attack on the German parliament, the Reichstag fire, was FUD. It may have been a highlight of a legitimate problem, but done so through corrupt/immoral practices.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                  "So, the fact that Communists dominated and manipulated Eastern Europe for decades means nothing? "

                  there was no "Communism" in the Eastern Europe and Russia in the last 200 years because there was only multiple "Dictatorships"

                  BRD Germany right now is a Socialism market nation for example and there is no manipulating anywhere.

                  Karl Marks never say communism must be a Dictatorship.

                  UDSSR was never ever a communism nation it was a Dictatorship up to 100%

                  you can drive a Republic with Communism ideas.

                  but yes i know you will never understand this because you are brainwashed by capitalism fools.

                  an egocentric viewpoint is not freedom and capitalism is not anarchy.
                  "BRD Germany right now is a Socialism market nation for example and there is no manipulating anywhere." Excuse me? There's manipulation every day.

                  I think I know what you mean with your assertion that there wasn't 'communism' in EE and Russia. But, that's a debate/discussion that can go on and on indefinitely. I don't think it matters all that much exactly how you want to define it or label it. For all intents and purposes, it had what we call 'communism' so whether it was administered by a dictatorship, it still had elements controlled by the state. So, I won't go on about it further.

                  I doubt you really understand what anarchy is although many people claim there's different varieties of anarchy.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Qaridarium View Post
                    you really don't have a clue about my person I'm not a "Communist" I'm a Anarchist

                    and yes Anarchism is not "anormalism" but the brainwashed people think anarhism=chaos=anormalism=zivilwar
                    And yes Anarchism can be Social.
                    because there is no rule of being asocial/antisocial. only stupid people think that.

                    " I already stated the democracies are a 'farce.'"

                    You don't get the key-point you are wrong because there is no democracy! No were in the world. there are only Republics in the world with rule sets to force the "Stupid-Democracy" into a better/good way.

                    but you always talk like Republics=Democracy=Stupid.

                    and this is stupid!

                    Germany only do have a stronger rule set to force the stupid democracy to be less dump.
                    but yes you can do it even better and more intelligent.

                    "So, the fact that Communists dominated and manipulated Eastern Europe for decades means nothing? "

                    there was no "Communism" in the Eastern Europe and Russia in the last 200 years because there was only multiple "Dictatorships"

                    BRD Germany right now is a Socialism market nation for example and there is no manipulating anywhere.

                    Karl Marks never say communism must be a Dictatorship.

                    UDSSR was never ever a communism nation it was a Dictatorship up to 100%

                    you can drive a Republic with Communism ideas.

                    but yes i know you will never understand this because you are brainwashed by capitalism fools.

                    an egocentric viewpoint is not freedom and capitalism is not anarchy.
                    Wow, I can't believe it, but I actually understand you.....
                    USSR wasn't just a dictatorship. It was a SOCIALIST dictatorship, and done in this manner because pure socialism will naturally become anarchy without controls over it -- which is a very funny thing when you think about it, because socialism and anarchy are typically thought of as being at totally opposite ends of the political spectrum. In any case, people are naturally greedy -- its genetic. You can overcome some of this through rational thought, but when it comes down to it, nobody *naturally* wants to share what they have with everybody else. Simple fact. So in an experiment of pure socialism, very quickly, it will revert to the natural state of anarchy.

                    It is *BECAUSE* the natural state is anarchy, that you need to create controls in order to enforce any degree of socialism. And there are varying degrees of it, the USSR was an extreme example, North Korea, Cuba, etc.

                    Now the OBJECTIVE of the USSR was to achieve communism. Socialism is the transitional state on the road towards communism, or so it is said. It didn't work though, because socialism falls apart before communism is reached. In theory, communism *might* work, just not with humans.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Panix View Post
                      "BRD Germany right now is a Socialism market nation for example and there is no manipulating anywhere." Excuse me? There's manipulation every day.

                      I think I know what you mean with your assertion that there wasn't 'communism' in EE and Russia. But, that's a debate/discussion that can go on and on indefinitely. I don't think it matters all that much exactly how you want to define it or label it. For all intents and purposes, it had what we call 'communism' so whether it was administered by a dictatorship, it still had elements controlled by the state. So, I won't go on about it further.

                      I doubt you really understand what anarchy is although many people claim there's different varieties of anarchy.
                      If you want to get into the definitions... communism is socialism without dictatorship, i.e., self-sustaining natural system. USSR didn't come close to it.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                        I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you misunderstood what we were talking about.

                        I am NOT a communist of socialist. FAR FAR FAR from it. This discussion has a lot to do with HISTORICAL context, and isn't based on personal political leanings. As a matter of personal political leanings, I will state for the record that I lean FAR RIGHT and support a moderate degree of anarchy. You may note several quips I made regarding the radical and noisy left.

                        More to the point, the discussion regarding the communist threat being FUD didn't imply that communism wasn't actually a problem to be dealt with, but that Hitler's CLAIMS that communists were directly responsible for the attack on the German parliament, the Reichstag fire, was FUD. It may have been a highlight of a legitimate problem, but done so through corrupt/immoral practices.
                        Oh ok, I apologize for my inaccurate perception. I was merely speculating at that point.

                        You're right.... "This discussion has a lot to do with HISTORICAL context, and isn't based on personal political leanings." I didn't mean to steer it away from that.

                        For the record, I don't think I lean anywhere in particular. I try to go by individual issues and I think the lines are so blurry for mainstream politics, for e.g., imho, that I think people should be highly skeptical and cynical with analysis and evaluation of any assertions with regards to leanings.

                        Btw, are you in Germany? I think they need more reasonable ppl there.

                        I guess if I have to choose something, it probably seems libertarian in outlook on many situations but I think each case requires careful analysis and caution. I guess, most of all, Government can't be trusted to deal with issues, especially not in the current state.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                          If you want to get into the definitions... communism is socialism without dictatorship, i.e., self-sustaining natural system. USSR didn't come close to it.
                          http://www.marxists.org/reference/ar...6/mswv6_06.htm

                          One person explained it as such:
                          http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_communism_a_dictatorship

                          http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...7122034AA1PuGk

                          We just describe it as 'communism' even if the system was synonymous with dictatorship despite the contradiction in terms?

                          That's all I meant. The ideals are likely not implementable especially right now.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Panix View Post
                            Oh ok, I apologize for my inaccurate perception. I was merely speculating at that point.

                            You're right.... "This discussion has a lot to do with HISTORICAL context, and isn't based on personal political leanings." I didn't mean to steer it away from that.

                            For the record, I don't think I lean anywhere in particular. I try to go by individual issues and I think the lines are so blurry for mainstream politics, for e.g., imho, that I think people should be highly skeptical and cynical with analysis and evaluation of any assertions with regards to leanings.
                            Oh, I definitely agree with that. But I think that it says more to the fact that the mainstream politics are all trending towards a supposedly "center" position, in order to appeal to the most people. Nobody is willing to take a radical stance for fear of alienating too many people. My interpretation of "right" is low taxation, high competition, and pay for things that you actually use.

                            Btw, are you in Germany? I think they need more reasonable ppl there.
                            Canada. We need more reasonable people here too...

                            I guess if I have to choose something, it probably seems libertarian in outlook on many situations but I think each case requires careful analysis and caution. I guess, most of all, Government can't be trusted to deal with issues, especially not in the current state.
                            I try to vote for whoever I think will raise taxes and restrictions on human rights the least, and am prepared to bear arms against the Government if they go too far. So far this approach has reduced my phone bill from $200/month to $40.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Panix View Post
                              http://www.marxists.org/reference/ar...6/mswv6_06.htm

                              One person explained it as such:
                              http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_communism_a_dictatorship

                              http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...7122034AA1PuGk

                              We just describe it as 'communism' even if the system was synonymous with dictatorship despite the contradiction in terms?

                              That's all I meant. The ideals are likely not implementable especially right now.
                              China is a really weird place. They have this big claim of being communist, but they have really moved away from socialism and right into capitalism. Everybody in China is a huckster, in it to make his share. It is quite inspiring, actually.

                              Here's a cool definition from one of your links;
                              "Stalinism.
                              Basically a rotten form of captialism, where the leaders are the private owners of the country and the people are still opressed by the bourgeoisie."

                              I think that the basic necessity of communism is that the leaders can't be dictators, but must rather be benevolent directors working for the purpose of organization rather than control.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Panix View Post
                                "BRD Germany right now is a Socialism market nation for example and there is no manipulating anywhere." Excuse me? There's manipulation every day.
                                you don't understand me and we use the words in a different way.
                                obvious manipulation that everyone sees that there is a manipulation is not a manipulation.
                                a real secret manipulation is against the law in Germany.
                                a deception is against the law.

                                in fact there is no official manipulation.

                                Originally posted by Panix View Post
                                I think I know what you mean with your assertion that there wasn't 'communism' in EE and Russia. But, that's a debate/discussion that can go on and on indefinitely. I don't think it matters all that much exactly how you want to define it or label it. For all intents and purposes, it had what we call 'communism' so whether it was administered by a dictatorship, it still had elements controlled by the state. So, I won't go on about it further.
                                OK,,, communism in theories is like Paradise
                                but here on earth there is no communism everywhere.
                                china for example is turbo-capitalism.

                                many call there own dictatorship communism because it sounds better.


                                Originally posted by Panix View Post
                                I doubt you really understand what anarchy is although many people claim there's different varieties of anarchy.
                                Most of the people don't talk about anarchy they only talk about Anomaly.
                                If some people in black clothes start a civil war on the street against the Police its Anomaly not Anarchy.
                                But the TV always point out in this situation that the black clothes fighting people are anarchists.

                                Its always the same.


                                other people like you panix do another misstate they think if you force people do save the nature and do not dangerous stuff like nuclear power plants then these stupid people think its not anarchy because its only Anarchy if you can destroy the world and nature and its only anarchy if you can hurt everyone in your freedom.
                                this is wrong.
                                Its only a valid Anarchy if you don't hurt other people with your stuff this means nuclear power can not be a valid Anarchist solution.
                                Only Green power are a Anarchists solution! because you drain other peoples freedom if you destroy his health and land and his air and his water and weather and so one.

                                and sure its Anarchy if you force unwilling people in the right way.

                                because there is no alternative if you don't go this way it end in a war.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X