*promote

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Wednesday, December 7th, 2011 12:18pm PST - promote requested by original submitter geo321.

*truth

The Holocaust = Problem Reaction Solution.

>> ^Payback:

The Holocaust = Problem Reaction Solution.


the hegelian dialectic.talk about a vile tool but effective.

Watched it in one sitting.
*quality

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by Boise_Lib.

His analysis at the end of his talk seems right on to me.

Like this, though, I still would call blowing up something a violent crime. Haven't really examined if I think violence is something that can only be done against people, not property. Knocking down mailboxes with a bat could be a good counter argument to that, though. Perhaps what I mean by violent is the result not only the actual result, but the potential result, and it is easier to get hit with a bomb incidentally, and it isn't so hard to hit someone you don't mean to with a bat. Or like that Myth-busters cannon that went off, it was violent to be sure, but wasn't done out of animosity. Perhaps what I mean by violence is a word better used as carnage.

wow this guys like a dread-locked Noam Chomsky, 40 minutes of facts in your face + questions. Thanks for posting this geo.

*promote

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Thursday, December 8th, 2011 2:31am PST - promote requested by enoch.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

Like this, though, I still would call blowing up something a violent crime. Haven't really examined if I think violence is something that can only be done against people, not property. Knocking down mailboxes with a bat could be a good counter argument to that, though. Perhaps what I mean by violent is the result not only the actual result, but the potential result, and it is easier to get hit with a bomb incidentally, and it isn't so hard to hit someone you don't mean to with a bat. Or like that Myth-busters cannon that went off, it was violent to be sure, but wasn't done out of animosity. Perhaps what I mean by violence is a word better used as carnage.


QFT. Ask any abused wife if actual damage needs to occur for violence to be perpetrated. Threat of violence is still a violent act. Blowing up a Hummer conveys a threat against the owner by it's very nature.

Ahh, that's a great example too. Violence isn't really a discreet term, it means almost anything aggressive. Which also means using it as a legal term is hazardous; a bully being in the same realm of a terrorist seems a bit much for me to leave up in the air.

So ya, I disagree with him just a bit on that and his animal liberation front. And I credit more to general entropy than to flat out planning of our oppression, but I could be wrong.

>> ^Payback:

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
Like this, though, I still would call blowing up something a violent crime. Haven't really examined if I think violence is something that can only be done against people, not property. Knocking down mailboxes with a bat could be a good counter argument to that, though. Perhaps what I mean by violent is the result not only the actual result, but the potential result, and it is easier to get hit with a bomb incidentally, and it isn't so hard to hit someone you don't mean to with a bat. Or like that Myth-busters cannon that went off, it was violent to be sure, but wasn't done out of animosity. Perhaps what I mean by violence is a word better used as carnage.

QFT. Ask any abused wife if actual damage needs to occur for violence to be perpetrated. Threat of violence is still a violent act. Blowing up a Hummer conveys a threat against the owner by it's very nature.