[demonrail666]

Personally, I question the faculty for understanding reality of any white American that posts a message made up solely of the words, "So them say." But maybe that's just me.

[Glice]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

sorry for trying to expand yr world, but this is the 21st century, and that is the whole damned point of human communication to begin with. as it has been said, if you are not interested in the news I spread or the opinions I express, why are you keen to through in yr

 

all the time? maybe it is because you are more interested then you thought?

My thinking is that you (specifically) wouldn't react positively, if at all, to my throwing a series of articles at you. Yes, you're right, I needn't throw in my ten pence every time - but I'm trying to communicate something to you. It's a double-edge sword, you see? You engage in espousing political positions to a group of strangers, then those strangers are entitled to criticise, or at least attempt to modify/ explore your position. I'm interested in the human behind your copy+pasting, and he's constantly hiding behind other people's writings. The problem is that you seem very bright, but far too keen to impress, rather than to engage in reasonable debate.

I could cobble together a metaphysic from articles on the internet - This one, or this one, or this one or this one or this one

I'd be surprised if you read through the whole of one of those, so what is the point in my telling you about their existence?

[Rob Instigator]

this is the only one you need

Principia Discordia

[Glice]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

this is the only one you need

Principia Discordia

Reminded me of Eliot, but not as good. Which reminds me, must read more Eliot. T.S., you understand.

[Glice]

I love this

[tesla69]

ok, this I would consider a Political writing, not a current event piece, though it discusses current events.

COVERED FACES OF TERRORISTS
Why is it that whenever terrorists are shown in the media their faces are always covered? The government and media constantly tell us these men are proud to die for their religion. If so, then why would these men cover their faces with black ski masks? Can anyone even BUY a black ski mask in a DESERT country? Why don't they use a cooler material in the 120 degree heat they can see through?
Yet these proud men who supposedly will kill themselves for Allah never give their full names. They make blurry videos in the age of DVDs (with auto-focus cameras?) when standing over some innocent man who supposedly is about to be killed. Experts examining the videos stated the man in the chair was already dead. Since these killers are completely anonymous, how could any government from any country retaliate against their families if these men are unknown individuals? It makes no sense and defies logic.
Could it actually be that their faces are hidden because the world would find out they are really American or allied intelligence agents, and not Arabs? If one looks closely at the build of these men in these videos, they don't appear to be of Arab origin. Many have tree-trunk necks and jar heads like those of Navy Seals.

PROOF OF DESTROYING AMERICA BY DESIGN
Could the government stop terrorists from invading America? Uncle has constantly insured that America's borders remain leakier than a rotted Three Stooges row-boat. Uncle is virtually playing the part of Curly by drilling holes in the bottom to let the water out. Uncle also made sure that Mexican Border agents had their automatic weapons taken away, and these firearms were replaced by semi-automatics. Now word has been circulating that now these weapons may be taken away. Why disarm or under-arm border agents charged to protect America?

The answer is a simple one: It greatly reduces their ability to both defend themselves and be able to disable or kill those shooting at them that cross the border illegally. How can they properly defend the border from those shooting at them from Mexico, which has already happened and taken the lives of border agents? Yet Mexican drug smugglers already have used automatic weapons against border agents. So why was this madness ordered and to what end?

The president WANTS illegal aliens in America no matter what he says to the contrary. It's clearly part of the bigger plan to destroy America from within. Illegal aliens bring sickness, crime and a large burden on the health care and financial systems. Emergency rooms within 100 miles of the border have been closed because of the financial drain. How many hard working, honest American farmers and ranchers along the border have died because emergency help was too far away, thanks to the closed emergency rooms? We may never know that answer. There can be no other reason for encouraging illegal aliens to come into America other than to destroy it. The sick message is clear that border agents, farmers and ranchers are expendable, but illegal aliens and drug smugglers are not. http://www.rense.com/general82/should.htm

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by demonrail666

What I DON'T need is some rastafarian with issues about his own skin colour, getting all creative with his cut and paste in a bid to convince me that babylon's about to fall.

the only one who seems to have issues with my skin color is you my friend.

Originally Posted by demonrail666

Personally, I question the faculty for understanding reality of any white American that posts a message made up solely of the words, "So them say." But maybe that's just me.

who the fuck are you? Das Umgangssprachegestapo?

Originally Posted by Glice

My thinking is that you (specifically) wouldn't react positively, if at all, to my throwing a series of articles at you. Yes, you're right, I needn't throw in my ten pence every time - but I'm trying to communicate something to you. It's a double-edge sword, you see? You engage in espousing political positions to a group of strangers, then those strangers are entitled to criticise, or at least attempt to modify/ explore your position.

I could cobble together a metaphysic from articles on the internet - This one, or this one, or this one or this one or this one

I'd be surprised if you read through the whole of one of those, so what is the point in my telling you about their existence?

Glice, I dont throw any articles at you, I post articles, ideas, discussions, rants, complaints, sermons, etc for the public at large, they are not addressed to you personally, they are not sent to yr private box. I have no problem with dissent, but you do not criticize the material or give any analysis, you just criticize my character and personality, which has nothing to do with shit! You posted six threads discussing me personally, but not one about the fucking outbreak of violence in South Africa! what the fuck is that? what kind of contribution to the discussion is that? two-edged sword my ass y'all pack poison and vexation!

The articles you posted looked very interesting, but a bit lengthy for the time, if you would post them as a thread of their own, perhaps people who have the time will read them, just as peole who have the time and interest to read the things i post do. Jesus man its not that difficult!

SFAD, I agree totally with what you've written yesterday when you repped me, it's just that as far as I'm concerned political propaganda is more effective when it is introduced into work enviroments, schools, unions etc etc. People are more likely to take what you're saying seriously there than on the internet because they are places where pitoval human activity takes place.

[ZEROpumpkins]

It's ironic that the gangs are described as xenophobic, given that white people in Africa are immigrants in the first place.

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

the only one who seems to have issues with my skin color is you my friend.

OK, I've just read back the post that came from and I apologise. It was a cheap slight that served no purpose other than to antagonise. Something I tend to find irritating in others but which I was clearly guilty of there.

If I'm entirely honest, part of why I tend to post on your threads more than those started by a number of others here is that I do find points you raise in them interesting. And certainly, in spite of some of my posts here yesterday, take them seriously. However I do maintain that the way in which you present those points could be more accessible than they often are, in so far as they tend to shut down, rather than open up, possibilities for debate.

Again, I apologise for certain rather cheap comments I made yesterday.

[racehorse]

Originally Posted by Glice

I could cobble together a metaphysic from articles on the internet - This one, or this one, or this one or this one or this one

A question:

Is Derrida anything more than white noise?

I can't work it out.

[racehorse]

Originally Posted by ZEROpumpkins

It's ironic that the gangs are described as xenophobic, given that white people in Africa are immigrants in the first place.

Yes, except in this situation it is black people attacking black people.

[racehorse]

I enjoy what SFAD posts, his posts are miles more interesting than some threads at the moment. I don't see why this guy should get all the stick compared to, say, the anal alien.

[ALIEN ANAL]

all the stick? what u on about tori?

[tesla69]

1/3 of South Africa's Army has AIDS.

[Glice]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

You posted six threads discussing me personally, but not one about the fucking outbreak of violence in South Africa! what the fuck is that? what kind of contribution to the discussion is that? two-edged sword my ass y'all pack poison and vexation!

The articles you posted looked very interesting, but a bit lengthy for the time, if you would post them as a thread of their own, perhaps people who have the time will read them, just as peole who have the time and interest to read the things i post do. Jesus man its not that difficult!

Ok, I'll make it entirely transparent - what can I say to the threads you've posted? What can you but despair at the current activities in [insert wartorn/ fucked-up country]. As Porky pointed out - you don't offer anything to discuss. People come here because they're bored. Offer them a discussion.

"I think war and racism is bad"
"Well, I think war and racism is really bad"
"Nonsense. I think war and racisim is really, really bad"

Hardly insightful, is it? Yeah, I'm being a prick, I'm entirely aware of it. You can either listen to me or not, and I'll do the same, and everyone else can do likewise. Whatever, I'm off to masturbate and listen to some emo.

[Glice]

Originally Posted by racehorse

A question:

Is Derrida anything more than white noise?

I can't work it out.

Yeah, totally - avoid 'On grammatology'; I absolutely adore glas for its rendering of sense transparent.

The one that always gets me is how he destabalises the narrative of 'madness' as being rejected by the sane, the neg-heroicism of 'outsider' worship. In contemporary terms, in a century marked by 'alienation culture' he offers a leftist politics that isn't asking for white apologism or 'other culture's' patronisation.

I can't find the talk he gave on SA, sadly.

Incidentally, there's been electricity blackouts all over SA and South Africa for months now.

[Tokolosh]

Those blackouts you speak of are being carried out by the South African government and energy suppliers.
Not surprising. Most of the country's main power stations haven't been properly surviced in the last 15 years, and the results are showing.

This is not good for business. Many companies are closing down on a daily basis.
IT taking the hardest hit.

[racehorse]

Originally Posted by Glice

Yeah, totally - avoid 'On grammatology'; I absolutely adore glas for its rendering of sense transparent.

The one that always gets me is how he destabalises the narrative of 'madness' as being rejected by the sane, the neg-heroicism of 'outsider' worship. In contemporary terms, in a century marked by 'alienation culture' he offers a leftist politics that isn't asking for white apologism or 'other culture's' patronisation.

I can't find the talk he gave on SA, sadly.

Incidentally, there's been electricity blackouts all over SA and South Africa for months now.

To be honest, I've tried to read a couple of things of his, and the things I can't understand I feel that I will never understand no matter what, either because of his largely incomprehensible writing style, or because it is actually only Derrida who understands it, and he is, in fact, a charlatan. That which I do understand (or feel I understand) seems to me to be complete trusim, and just not worth saying (i.e. his ideas about binary oppositions in meta-physics just seems so obvious, and not worth anybody's time). What also frustrates me about the whole post-modern cult is the way they laden really simple truisms in masses of complex verbiage, that you actually have to decipher, before realising it is in fact a relatively simple idea.

[Glice]

Yeah, a lot of people get that. I get slightly frustrated by the nay-sayers who tend to say that underneath the massively complicated arguments it's bunkum. I'm not sure if you're using the 'p' word in the sense of the era following modernism (in which case, no problem) but Derrida was by no means part of the 'p' word horror.

This notion of the 'simple idea' isn't really exclusive to Derrida. All the way back to Socrates (and further, given we could include your Confuciouses and the like in the canon) this has been apparent. I find Kant is the best exponent of proceeding from the general to the particular, which is (very roughly) similar to the idea of exploring a simple idea to arrive at a massively dense (if not complicated) epistemic. I haven't much time for anything other than the 3rd critique mind you.

I don't think his style is any more incomprehensible than Kant, Hegel, Liebiniz or whoever. Certainly no-where near as difficult (to me) as early Wittgenstein. It takes a while to get into the swing of it, but it's well worth it. It depends on whether his arguments click with you. Try the gift of death, that's pretty perspicuous.

It's all horses for courses. I know a fair few people who never had a problem with the British analytical school, but it entirely baffles me personally.