"I'll shut my yap for now and just hope he comes down with cancer."

Ah you're such a well-behaved little psycho. I almost miss those violent rape scenarios you used to leave on my profile page. Wishing me cancer is almost like offering me a bowl of ice-cream when compared to those little private love notes. :-)

@BoneyD No need for him to fix anything. I've fixed those that weren't dead and the rest are properly dead. I'll shut my yap for now and just hope he comes down with cancer.

>> ^gwiz665:

The vagina simulator is used for other stuff too.. mostly yapping.

And mouth pumping. Ahem.

The vagina simulator is used for other stuff too.. mostly yapping.

He's always trying to keep republicans happy even though they hate him.

Bush had to keep Democrats happy even though they hated him too. There is a word for a politician who does whatever he wants over the objections of everyone else. Dictator.

As far as Stewart is concerned? M'eh - nice to see him finally taking a few shots, but he's late to the party. Plus he isn't alarmed at Obama's radicalism or incompetence. No. Like many leftists, Stewart is more upset over 'hypocrisy'. He isn't mad that Obama has death camps or violates the law. He's mad that he's a hypocrite about it. Nice to see Stewart catching up to my analysis, even if it takes him 20 months.

Obama doesn't care about America, or its people. He's a leftist radical from academia who is trying to actualize all the bullcrap theories he and his other college buddies argued about between bong hits. His reaction to the oil spill is a great example. He doesn't care about the oil, or the environment, or business, or people. He just sees this as an excuse to cram Cap & Trade down everyone's throat and so realize another leftist academic pipe-dream (alternative energy).

You can see it every time he opens his flapping yap. He can't stand it when people disagree with him. He doesn't like trying to GOVERN and actually make things work or help people. All he wants to do is hold seminars, give speeches, and run workshops like a good little Alinskyite. He's a small, petty, incompetent, lightweight dilettante. He's out of his league and he knows it. Too bad Stewart - unlike myself - didn't realize this 20 months ago.

There is no establishment priority too banal for you to defend like a yapping poodle.

Solar panels are not more toxic than nuclear power, and their production would not cause ecologic disasters the likes of which we're seeing in the gulf. Yet another artless dodge on your part.

Every year we learn how to do more with less. The problem with solar energy now is that we really haven't spent that much time perfecting the science and production, but we are getting better.

And you're a lying sack of shit regarding nuclear going ten years without change. One nuclear plant creates thirty to forty tons of waste per year. That waste is deadly for tens of thousands of years. They have no where to put the stuff other than store it away and hope that nothing happens to it in the mean time. If something adverse does happen, then it's "Whoopsie! Not our problem any more!" and the taxpayers get stuck with the bill and the radioactivity.

Solar energy doesn't have to be "grid oriented." Every house has a refrigerator. Every house has a television, a computer, an HVAC unit, etc. Each house could have its own solar cells and supply its own energy.

You're as dense as QM. Your solution to any problem is no solution at all, just criticize anyone for offering an alternative.

>> ^bcglorf:

>> ^rougy:
You're still a fucking idiot.
The solar industry isn't going to spill millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.
The solar industry isn't going to leave radioactive waste piling up all over the place for generations to have to deal with in the future.
Why don't you go kick a Palestinian; you know it makes you feel better.
>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^rougy:
The nuclear industry simply cannot be trusted.
That's the bottom line.
They'll be just like the petroleum industry and constantly demand less regulation, and where they can't do that, they'll infiltrate the regulating agencies with their own people, often former employees, and water down the oversight from that angle.
It's not that nuclear power doesn't have a use or doesn't have a place.
But I think, for the ubiquitous public-power perspective, there are cleaner alternatives well worth exploring and developing.

The solar power industry simply cannot be trusted.
That's the bottom line.
They'll be just like the petroleum industry and constantly demand less regulation, and where they can't do that, they'll infiltrate the regulating agencies with their own people, often former employees, and water down the oversight from that angle.
It's not that solar power doesn't have a use or doesn't have a place.
But I think... I question if you thought this post through. Unless you were trolling, in which case well done and you caught me, again.


Solar panels have more toxic materials in them than batteries, and generally include a large quantity of actual batteries as part of any installation as well. If you replace our entire grid with solar your going to have an enormous load of toxic waste to dispose of on a more regular basis than any nuclear plant(they can go decades between fuel loads depending on how you build them). Or do you somehow expect a solar mega-corp to be more responsible for some reason?

WOHOAOA!! folcats...not my cup o' tee tee-blankfist on the other hand, well,....... Crisco™/wristwatch



In reply to this comment by blankfist:
Oooooh! CLICK MINE NEXT! CLICK MINE!

In reply to this comment by residue:
whoa! so clicking your avatar picture brings up the yapping dog?? I didn't know that was possible. It's like finding an easter egg...

Oooooh! CLICK MINE NEXT! CLICK MINE!

In reply to this comment by residue:
whoa! so clicking your avatar picture brings up the yapping dog?? I didn't know that was possible. It's like finding an easter egg...

whoa! so clicking your avatar picture brings up the yapping dog?? I didn't know that was possible. It's like finding an easter egg...

The best part is that the kid only falls off when the dad says to look back. If he had kept his yap shut, they would just have kept running.

I do find the feeding frenzy of commentary here fascinating.

Here's my own angle, and why I opened my yap to begin with. I could immediately tell that this would be one of those videos that would sort people into two camps, one that says "this is awesome, more people should do this", and the other that says "this is horrible, what kind of asshole does something like that?"

I fall into the latter category. I think people in the other camp are broken human beings in some way I have yet to really understand.

To me, premeditated plans to hurt other human beings are not something moral people should do without a really good reason. "Because they stole from me" just isn't enough in my book, especially if you were intentionally trying to get someone to steal from you just to give yourself a justification for inflicting harm on another human being.

I keep throwing out examples where the items stolen are essentially worthless (pens, trudging on the grass in my backyard), and where the danger I'm secretly presenting to the "criminal" is high (explosions, both times), to see whether people defend that (as GeeSussFreeK did), or if someone who supports the filmmaker's actions will clearly take a stand against landmines and exploding pens as being immoral.

The closest I've gotten is Psychologic telling me that those situations differ from what's in the video in a special way (i.e. bikes are inherently dangerous in ways that pens & grass aren't), which at least implies that he thinks landmines aren't okay.

Most are pointedly ignoring those examples, and just tossing insults at the people who think the filmmaker did something wrong.

My point is really this: you libertarians and property rights aficionados have misunderstood your own credo. What's the first axiom of libertarian philosophy? Self ownership. A person's body is their property. Whatever else you might say about the thief, his body is his property, and the filmmaker knowingly and intentionally made an effort to damage it.

It's true that the thief could have avoided the danger. But you guys always tell me that we don't need safety regulations, because if someone gets hurt by the actions of another person, that other person owes their victim restitution (imstellar in particular gets credit for explaining that one to me a year or more ago). This is why the filmmaker should be free to endanger people without hassles from the state in the first place.

So, let me restate what I said in my first comment here: they both owe each other restitution. The thief stole from the filmmaker, and should make him whole. The filmmaker also intentionally sabotaged the bike, which may have damaged the thief's property (his body), so he owes the thief restitution to make him whole.

If you walk away from that, you are not defenders of equal, individual rights, you are just a bunch of fair-weather libertarians. You want your rights respected when it means you get to skip on having to pay taxes, but when it comes to having to defend people you don't really like, you're ready to toss them to the wolves (and film the carnage and sell it to people).

Yap, they changed the message now. It's simply *blocked.

Yap, KIT was officially opened on October 1, though it's just an organizational entity formed of two preexisting institutes, similar to our NTH in Lower-Saxony. *commercial might be appropriate.

>> ^lucky760:
Correct me if I'm wrong, German friends, but they seem to be drawing some kind of a comparison between MIT and KIT (Karlsruher Institute for Technology), which had something going on Oktober 1, 2009.

Well if that ain't the pot calling the kettle black. The Mormon cult vs the Excatholics for Christ cult. All of them wasted an hour of their lives that they'll never get back. All I can say is bravo. The more time they spend yapping at each other the less chance they'll come knocking on my door.

I think this has been a fully fledged character assassination attempt and I am disgusted by it. I am not afraid of what you'll think of me, because the truth is on my side.

This thread, or rather all the rumblings behind this thread, is filled with vicious lies which I can only assume stems from peggedbea. I am deeply troubled by this.

Rasch, this will be my last message directed to you, because I really don't like you and I haven't for a long time. I will make this as delicate and level-headed as I can. You have been misinformed. My messages to both AC and bea after my texas trip have been different ways of asking "What happened?" because none of them would tell me what they were upset about.

I don't know what you and the rest have been told about the trip to Texas, but I am very much not in denial. I do know what happened when I was there, and it was what I wrote in my message above.

Furthermore, where else have you read about my trip to Texas? If it's anything I've written then please present it. I know I talked to AC about it before I went over there, but I've never talked to you about anything? How can you know anything that doesn't stem from peggedbea? Is it not possible that she's the one that's either in denial or just lying for the hell of it.

I have heard a few rumors about what I allegedly did over there and elsewhere. Here's what has been relayed to me

1. You flew to Texas to visit Bea, out of the blue and without an invite.
This is false. We discussed it in the lounge and later on messenger and she invited me. I don't know anyone that currently live in Texas, why in the hell would I book a (very expensive, I might add) trip to texas out of the blue? How could I ever even expect to be allowed to stay with her then? It just doesn't make sense.

2. From the beginning you engaged in a lot of sexual talk with her, some of it around her kids- to the point of telling her 5 year old that she could legally have sex when she's 15.
The latter part is a bold-faced lie. I never, ever talked to her kids about ANYTHING sexual. I talked to bea about it, but that was certainly as much her as it was me. We talked a bit more subdued, but like we've talked in the lounge. Anyone who has ever been in the lounge knows that she talks way more shit than I do, and people who know me in real life know I'm not nearly as sordid when I'm talking face-to-face. And I would fucking never talk about sex to a child. Fucking hell, that's pure evil spreading a lie like that.

3. You grabbed InflateableVagina's ass and boobs while staying with Bea, and generally freaked everyone out.
No and yes. I didn't grab her ass, I think I smacked it. The boob thing was just an immature prank that turned out to be way out of line. I acknowledged that above, and I have apologized to ivy about that. I can't say that I generally freaked everyone out, but I suppose I could have freaked the three out that were there, bea, ivy and their friend rick. The kids were long gone to be by that time, and they certainly liked me both.

A little context as well, this was the second day I was there (tuesday). I was there from monday till thursday morning. I do remember that after it happened ivy or bea said that it was inappropriate, but ivy seemed to laugh it off and I did the same. I shrugged it off as an immature prank gone a little overboard. We were all a bit drunk and I acted like a high-schooler, that was it. I've apologized for this on many occasions now to ivy.

The next whole day, we went to Six Flags and not a word was mentioned about it, so I thought, that I stepped over the line, but it looked like they forgave me, so let's just move on. We were still having fun and bea and I were still talking fine together, so I assumed everything was alright.

The next morning at 4 or 5 in the morning, she knocked on my door and woke me up and explained that someone in her family had died and she had to go away to another part of the state to deal with it. She was very distraught and I've not brought it up before because I don't think it's nice to share such things here, but that's what it's come to. I'm sorry in advance to bea for this, but she's made it abundantly clear that she has no trouble lying to people about what happened, so I have lost all esteem for her and can't be concerned with it anymore.

We drove to the airport in the morning with the kids half-awake on the backseat, she dropped me off and drove on to what she had to deal with.

I wrote Ivy a text message later in the morning asking if she had heard anything from bea and if she was alright, so she can attest to that as well. After that bea blocked me on facebook and ignored all PMs on videosift (and promptly deleted them) and AC wrote me that she didn't want to speak anymore out of the blue. What am I to believe here? I mean, can't you see a possible connection? If bea spread a lie to AC about me that was a terrible as the one above, I could understand that AC reacted the way she did. If only she had told me that, if that's the case.

4. You have been communicating with Alien Concept - planning a visit, and claim to have pictures of her that you found somewhere.

I have indeed been communicating with alien_concept. We've been communicating a great deal since the lounge started, I think. We had a good talk in the lounge, and I'm pretty sure there were other people in there as well. I can't remember which of us asked for a messenger address, but in any case we started talking on messenger as well, because I thought she was fun and I can only assume she did the same to me (well, she said as much at least). I've never been planning any visit to her. I've talked to her about it; that it could be cool to meet up at some point; but she's always wanted her boyfriend to come over before any other sifters. And I can respect that. I did some friendly jabs at her about how cheap it was to go to London, but there were never any plans to go anywhere. We had talked about me coming by after new years, or maybe make the siftup then, when her boyfriend was there as well, but it never panned out to anything concrete. I certainly don't have any pictures of her that I've "found somewhere". She has sent me exactly 5 pictures over messenger herself, nothing sordid or anything. At some point, I think during this winter, I sent her some videos of myself playing guitar like the blog posts, which she at the time thought was fun.

When she all of a sudden wrote her "I don't want to talk anymore" I was completely baffled and saddened. Mostly because I didn't understand why she did it. She said that I "didn't respect her and her boyfriend's relationship", but I never saw it as me trying to horn in on her, we were just talking and having fun. We were both in our talks, I didn't just yap at her leg all the time at all. So I pestered her a bit after she wrote it, because I wanted her to reconsider and at least explain to me why the sudden change of heart and because I considered us friends, and friends do have at least a little lee-way to deserve an answer.

I still very much like the rae that I've talked to and I like ivy still too. I'm completely disillusioned about peggedbea. I liked her, but I don't anymore - this is just vicious and she should be stopped. Rasch, you and some others in here are so quick to judge me and deem me guilty, when it's just not true. This is not denial talking, this is reason talking. If you have heard any other rumors about me, bring them out! We're already doing the laundry in public, we might as well do it proper.

I'm am still not the crook in this and by now I've laid myself bare and exposed more about people I liked that I would have wanted to. This disturbs me, it really does.

I am glad that there are some sifters who still have my back and support me, because the truth is still on my side.