Skip to main content
Log In | Register

TR Memescape


Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Greatest Iam

1
You only need to spot-read Reddit's red pill or the return of kings blog or any number of others to see secular western hatred of women, GIA. There's an enormous hornet nest thriving in your back yard while you obsess about other men thousands of kilometres away.

ETA: You could just read a few pages of headlines at this blog, which among other things draws attention to the worst examples of this hatred:

http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/

I know we are not quite walking our talk yet in terms of equality, but the outright slavery and inequality that Islam has institutionalized with their filthy holy books is not comparable to our ways. We have a splinter while they have a log.

If you cannot see the difference then you too have a log in your eye.

Regards
DL 

You obviously haven't read the bible......there is some pretty evil, deluded shit in there too. You can find good stuff in both bible and koran. No surprise really, as it was written by human beings who were ignorant about the power of biological and social evolution's ability to create a [mortal] soul. The best explanation they had was a sky-fairy, which in the Abrahmic traditions, bore remarkable resemblance to a petty, cruel, paranoiac warlord. 

I am well aware that both Christianity and Islam have basically developed into intolerant, homophobic and misogynous religions. Both religions have grown themselves by the sword instead of good deeds.

Jesus said we would know his people by their works and deeds. That means Jesus would not recognize Christians and Muslims as his people, and neither do I.

Regards
DL
2
What I don't get is what the Cowspiracy video has to do with GIA's OP. He's talking about human waste, it's talking about the effects of animal based agriculture. That's not to say human waste is not a huge problem in many locations but in most developed countries, it's being dealt with with greater and greater efficiency. But that effort is not inexpensive, it requires a massive investment in infrastructure, from the collection of those wastes into volumes that can be efficiently processed to the plants to process it into a safe and usable form to the means of distributing it to where it's needed. Which is not in creating new arable land, but in possibly reclaiming lost arable lands and reinforcing existing arable lands. Pretty much what arable land there is, is already where arable land can be, due to climate and water availability. There's also the issue of proximity to transportation hubs, both to get the treated wastes there and, eventually, the end product back to the population centers which are the source of the wastes.

And Cowspiracy is actually a very good video, one Bluffy would do well to watch. Sort of blows his whole concept out of the water. Cattle, at least on the large scale currently practiced in developed countries, are an environmental disaster. Beef is an extraordinary extravagance. As the video makes utterly clear.

All true but I wanted to have those who would view that link to dither all that for themselves. I chose poop as the (hook) to bring it down to the individual level.

Regards
DL
3
Here, GIA - revel in pop. stats., watch birth and death in 'real' time.

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

The population estimates do not bother me. We can sustain them even when we level off to about 9.5 billion.

The quality of life due to environmental damage caused by our agricultural practices and waste of potable water is my focus as well as our polluting one of our primary food sources.

Regards
DL
4
You only need to spot-read Reddit's red pill or the return of kings blog or any number of others to see secular western hatred of women, GIA. There's an enormous hornet nest thriving in your back yard while you obsess about other men thousands of kilometres away.

ETA: You could just read a few pages of headlines at this blog, which among other things draws attention to the worst examples of this hatred:

http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/

I know we are not quite walking our talk yet in terms of equality, but the outright slavery and inequality that Islam has institutionalized with their filthy holy books is not comparable to our ways. We have a splinter while they have a log.

If you cannot see the difference then you too have a log in your eye.

Regards
DL 
5
That is exactly how isis uses it.

Yes, and so does the West towards the bully that has made slaves of their women and female children.

I hope our bully wins as I think the first duty of a free person is to insure that all of us are free and not slaves.

What do you see as your first duty as a free person?

Regards
DL
to enjoy good situations and to try not to make bad situations worse.

IOW. Be centered on the self and not follow the Golden Rule.

For evil to grow, all good people need do is as you do.

Regards
DL
 

We clearly need to support moderate liberal Muslims, in efforts towards feminism and human rights. And we should especially encourage them living here, and going to school, to learn liberal values.

Absolutely, if we can find the few who qualify. Statistics say that finding the few good ones will be hard as almost all follow an inhumane Sharia law.

Regards
DL
6
That is exactly how isis uses it.

Yes, and so does the West towards the bully that has made slaves of their women and female children.

I hope our bully wins as I think the first duty of a free person is to insure that all of us are free and not slaves.

What do you see as your first duty as a free person?

Regards
DL
to enjoy good situations and to try not to make bad situations worse.

IOW. Be centered on the self and not follow the Golden Rule.

For evil to grow, all good people need do is as you do.

Regards
DL
 

The [so-called] golden rule is not without it's own problems.

People often define good and evil differently, and often personalise it and follow the dictates of religion and culture, rather than looking at the problem using reason, ethics and simple empathy for particular situations.

For example, probably not all religious fanatics torture and murder for kicks. Some genuinely believe they are doing good. So if one believes in immortal souls, then torture or death to save a soul from hell would be following the golden rule. So how the golden rule is actually applied makes a difference, depending on one's beliefs and assumptions.

On one level things like "thou shall not suffer a witch to live" is indeed, fanatic, barbarous, misogyny. On another level, given genuine belief, burning a witch will save her soul, and is therefore an act of love. [And on another level, it was fear of feminine power, as a challenge to clerical power, and therefore had to be stopped].

Hating Islamists is beyond the pale-it is just too stupid for words. Hating Islam makes a bit more sense. But even here, to address the problem, you have to understand the dynamics. How people got to a place that made them burn witches, or behead heretics.

I do not see hating those who are slave holders and promoters of homophobia and misogyny as beyond the pale, when they are killing gays and women with Honor killings.

You go ahead and love them if you like.

Regards
DL
 
7
Another shitpost from GIA.

Only to the really really brain dead and stupid climate change denyers.

Regards
DL
8
Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. The sea, our primary food source, will thank us.

All human waste should be used to make arable land instead of killing our primary food and cooling source. The sea.

Funny as it may sound, the wold has been producing arable land from animal waste forever. We lose that benefit by pumping our human waste into the sea.

A sea that will cost us trillions and impoverish many in the next 25 years, as it rises and forces us to spend trillions on infrastructure.

Add in the trillions that the wars that famines create and you have a depression style of life. All in the next 25 odd years. Happy days?

And all of this happens as the world population increases to its estimated plateau of 10 billion people, who will need to burn even more fossil fuels and add even more to global weather carnage.

I think we all suffer from a case of collective insanity.

A good reversal of that would be a collective protecting of our primary food source and create more arable land to feed the hordes of bodies that we will have to sustain. Human food needs fertilizing and human waste makes a great fertilizer after it becomes arable land.

Let us all poop in the bushes instead of in the water. I mean pump our sewage onto land of course.

This links leads to a longer one that all should view.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSjE8xw_-Dg
 
Regards
DL
9
I try and I try not to hate. Sometimes, though, I hate you.
I gave up hate sometime in the 1980s, having concluded it had a worse effect on me than on the objects of hate. Revulsion, loathing, repugnance, disgust and similar emotional diminutives of hate remain on the menu. GIA can be pretty revolting at times.

He's used Kaa from the 60's Disney film as an avatar for years, and perhaps that's significant, if unconscious. Kaa in the film is a degraded version of the Kipling character. Disney Kaa is a comically evil creature, and a coward. Kipling's Kaa is an ancient and wise, if coldly self-interested, mentor to Mowgli.

Using that specific snake as self-representation, though, hints that he's a long path away from whatever ophitic illumination he might think he is aiming for.

I like being called a heretic.

Such allows me to recognize the level of intelligence in the other. It is a deflection to the definition of a label.

Common my furry little friend, you are way more intelligent than that.

Regards
DL
No u.

Seriously, DL, afaict my post went right over your head. Too bad. You might have initiated a discussion, as opposed to your regularly scheduled loaded insinuations, which go nowhere, because they are annoying.

I do not discuss foolish notions that are that far over heads due to too much hot empty air.

Regards
DL
10
I try and I try not to hate. Sometimes, though, I hate you.
I gave up hate sometime in the 1980s, having concluded it had a worse effect on me than on the objects of hate. Revulsion, loathing, repugnance, disgust and similar emotional diminutives of hate remain on the menu. GIA can be pretty revolting at times.

He's used Kaa from the 60's Disney film as an avatar for years, and perhaps that's significant, if unconscious. Kaa in the film is a degraded version of the Kipling character. Disney Kaa is a comically evil creature, and a coward. Kipling's Kaa is an ancient and wise, if coldly self-interested, mentor to Mowgli.

Using that specific snake as self-representation, though, hints that he's a long path away from whatever ophitic illumination he might think he is aiming for.

I like being called a heretic.

Such allows me to recognize the level of intelligence in the other. It is a deflection to the definition of a label.

Common my furry little friend, you are way more intelligent than that.

Regards
DL
11
I was talking to my pastor just the other day about this very subject.

The key thing he told me is, "Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. Have anger in you, do you?"

I rarely ask a pastie for an opinion. I prefer Pi

You can never know where you might find a bit of wisdom.

"First they came for the Jews, but I did nothing because I'm not a Jew. Then they came for the socialists, but I did nothing because I'm not a socialist. Then they came for the Catholics, but I did nothing because I'm not a Catholic. Finally, they came for me, but by then there was no one left to help me." - Pastor Father Niemoller (1946)"

Wasn't DNA cracked by some clergy as well?

Regards
DL
12
Things to know.....

All cognac is brandy.
But not all brandy is cognac.

Not all insecure people are haters.
But all haters are insecure people.

Or far sighted enough to want to leave better for those who will come after us than leave a mess.

If you define insecure as to include those like me who would seek greater security for my children and grand children, then I am all in to your description and proudly stand as guilty as charged. If you are not letting your love make you insecure, something is wrong with you.

Regards
DL
13
I was talking to my pastor just the other day about this very subject.

The key thing he told me is, "Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. Have anger in you, do you?"

Indeed.

He and I would read one of the Jesus archetypes that said, "pick up your cross and follow me", the same way.

Regards
DL
14
That is exactly how isis uses it.

Yes, and so does the West towards the bully that has made slaves of their women and female children.

I hope our bully wins as I think the first duty of a free person is to insure that all of us are free and not slaves.

What do you see as your first duty as a free person?

Regards
DL
to enjoy good situations and to try not to make bad situations worse.

IOW. Be centered on the self and not follow the Golden Rule.

For evil to grow, all good people need do is as you do.

Regards
DL
 
15
That is exactly how isis uses it.

Yes, and so does the West towards the bully that has made slaves of their women and female children.

I hope our bully wins as I think the first duty of a free person is to insure that all of us are free and not slaves.

What do you see as your first duty as a free person?

Regards
DL
16

I sniped your eloquent post for brevity.

Because hate takes something away from you. Hate can eat you up, so if I do hate, I hate sparingly [if at all]. Second, I only try to hate the act or the thing, not the person.

I see hate also adding to us.

Let me ask you, if someone rapes your child, do you end in hating the sin and loving the rapist?

Can you really separate the perpetrator from the act?
If you can, then why would you seek to punish the person and not the act?
I can appreciate that the rapist was not born that way and is a product of all who interacted with him, but that does not forgive him or cause me to love him while hating only what he did.
Regards
DL

My instinct on confronting a rapist, especially of a child, would indeed be hateful and revengeful. And of course, the outrage visited on one's own children would make that urge greater still.

But ask yourself why we have division of powers in the law?

1. We have parliaments that make statute law.
2. We have police that enforce the law.
3. We have courts which decide the law based on the facts of the case.
4. Sentencing on a guilty verdict is a separate process?
5 We have prisons separate independent of the above.

Why bother with any of it?

But suppose I, a father blind with rage, murders the person I suspect as the rapist of my child?

It does not take a genius to work out how such a society would end up. In barbarism. And very quickly.

People are incarcerated for all sorts of reasons:-

1. Protection of the community
2. Reforming the prisoners behaviour.
3. Punishment/revenge.

One's attitude to hating the act or the person committing the act is relevant to the attitude you might take for the reasons of imprisonment.

We see this most clearly with the death penalty. Clearly, an advocate of the DP is not interested in community safety, because incarceration provides that, not are they interested in rehabilitation of the prisoner, because death makes rehab pointless. No, they are only interested in punishment and revenge.

If that were not enough, the DP is irreversable. With wrongful imprisonment one can say "oops!" sorry buddy, off you go you are free, and better yet compensate the person for imprisoning them for a crime they did not commit. There was a recent case near where I live, the DNA test was fucked up.

Look anecdotes never prove an argument, but I will tell you a story. I was bullied for over a year by a big ape. I lost all self-esteem. it made me hate going to school. Then one day I snapped. I saw him ride by on a bike past my parent's garage. I was working on a car [it was the weekend]. I had a large wench in my hand and just charged at his jeering stupid face and knocked him off the bike. I was going to kill him. He knew it, and I knew it. Then I realised he was a coward, pleading for his life. Who knows, the world might be better off without him. I was not afraid of jail or consequences like that. I had sunk pretty low, but did not want to be a murderer. I did not kill him for ME. Not for him, not for society but for me. It seemed to me to be the right choice, because he never bullied me or anyone else again [as far as I know], I went to senior high school in another town about three months later.

Thanks for this.

I was not advocating for chaos, revenge seeking, vigilantism or anarchy in the minds of those who recognize that hate has a place within us.

I would recommend using it as motivation to end whatever evil is being hated in whatever way seems worthy to the one who hates a particular evil.

Your hate of your bully motivated you to be brave enough to teach him a lesson and who knows how many of your friends or neighbors you might have saved from that prick.

That is how hate should be used.

Regards
DL

17

I sniped your eloquent post for brevity.

Because hate takes something away from you. Hate can eat you up, so if I do hate, I hate sparingly [if at all]. Second, I only try to hate the act or the thing, not the person.

I see hate also adding to us.

Let me ask you, if someone rapes your child, do you end in hating the sin and loving the rapist?

Can you really separate the perpetrator from the act?

If you can, then why would you seek to punish the person and not the act?

I can appreciate that the rapist was not born that way and is a product of all who interacted with him, but that does not forgive him or cause me to love him while hating only what he did.

Regards
DL




18
Guys. GIA is a white supremacist.

"The white DNA is the most advance and I just think it would be a shame to lose the best that the human race has produced to date." -Greatest Iam

He's really not worth acknowledging or responding to.

My native wife would disagree ass hole.

Regards
DL
19
Read the OP replacing every instance of "muslim" or "islam" with "xian". Nothing changes, all charges are just as valid, excepting of course than some bigotted nutter can't feel as smugly superior that way*.

*next they'll turn up claiming "I'm not a xian, I'm this other vaguely defined loosely affiliated thing based on the same novel that hardly anyone is, that makes my bigoted discharges even more superiorer and betterer!!1!1"

I agree to a point. Please read the post just above.

Regards
DL
20
I sit on the fence. I'm sure there are loads of Muslims, who are OK, peaceful people. But I think for them to be OK, (from my point of view), they'd have to be ignorant of, or cherry pick or re-interpret parts of their scriptural source, the Qur'an. On the other hand there are also loads of Muslims whose ideas, philosophies, theologies, practices would scare the poop out of me. And those latter ones probably get justification from their religious book.

But if you take the Bible literally, you have the same problem. To be an OK religious person of the Muslim or Christian faith, you have to  be ignorant of, or cherry pick or re-interpret parts of the scriptural sources.

So if Islam is what's in the book, and what it permits, then yes, I'm an Islamophobe.  But if Christianity is what's in their book, and what it permits, then, I'm an Christophobe too.

Nice. Thanks for this.

Christianity, if the West had not forced it to reform, or if it had not self-reformed, would have been outlawed just like I hope Islam get's outlawed in the West. The West should not be seen as harboring a slave holding religion.

Regards
DL
21
I am a religionophobe, but I don't hate religious people.

People who use fairy tales as justification for hate, cruelty or death upon others, are pretty crazy and morally bankrupt IMHO, no matter what brand of religious crap they subscribe to.

Any social animal from bumble bees to humans, has the problem of trying to reconcile two perceived realities: the perceived reality that they from sensing and processing natural phenomena, and the perceived social reality of their group, tribe or hive.

What we can infer is that all religions are potentially addictive agents. Like all addictive agents [such as psycho-active drugs], individual response is variable. But basically, any addictive agent can mess with the pleasure/goal/reward centres of the brain, causing changes which can compromise morality and cognition. The brain is a heuristic computer after all. Addiction tends to substitute long term goals with sort term goals, ie, getting the next 'fix". For an alcoholic, one drink is never enough. But not everyone who has a beer or a glass of wine will turn into an alcoholic.

Of course, one can get religious apologists claiming that "Islamic terrorists" [same-same for all religions] are not "True Muslims", thus making a "No True Scotsman" fallacy. Partly because there is no reliable link between religion-ism and violent radicalism. Indeed, a dose of more moderate religious teaching can sometimes moderate radicalism, but that isn't a reliable solution either. Perhaps because it is a little more successful than giving an alcoholic a drink, people think it is an effective way to combat "religious" terrorism.

Probably more effective is more education, giving people a much more diverse intellectual base to work from. Knowledge of all religions, scientific literacy and so on, would seem to be a better way of promoting tolerance and understanding between peoples.

Religion is a type of self-medication, and like all attempts to self-medicate, has the potential for side effects to occur, not least the possibility of addiction. Most religions appeal by selling the false idea that humans are imperfect [true], but guilty and responsible for their imperfections, and only through salvation via a deity, or via some special way of living [Buddhists], can they achieve peace and harmony.
HTH. 

You show a lot of negatives within religions. I see a lot of dislike for them in what you put so eloquently above. I have to wonder why you have not let your justified dislike move to hate.

I do see a correlation between religions and violence.

Pleas view this link and wonder about all the wars that religions have started in the last 5,000 years. And yes, I recognize that some were secular, so here I am speaking more of Inquisitions, holy wars and Jihads.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oR02ciandvg&feature=BFa&list=PLCBF574D

Regards
DL

22
Jesus seems to hate some things. Do you? Is hate good?

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

Jesus seems to be saying that he is promoting division and war with a number of his sayings that pit father against son and brother against brother.

Jesus advocated division, war and hate; even as some think he preached to love our enemies.

Did Jesus hate and is hate thus a good character trait?

Regards
DL
23
I am an Islamophobe. If you are not, you might not be a moral person.

Some Muslims follow an ideology, as written in their religious writing, which allows slavery of Muslim women. This sect of Islam allows the sale of child brides to others within their cult. These people want a Caliphate that promotes and uses slavery. 

The Muslim men in this slave holding cult have submitted to Allah and are eager slaves to him thanks to the pleasant heavenly gifts he promises. They believe themselves to be favored by God and hate all those who are not.    

History of religion, especially Christianity, shows that when a belief is strong, even if miss-guided, ends all compromise within the believer. Thus is born Inquisitions, Jihads, Honor killing and murder of non-believers and apostates.
 
The assumptions that these people make of God, without any proof and based on the supernatural and the writings of imperfect men, become so arrogant, that they act as slave traders based on their beliefs without regard for moral and ethical standards. They in fact break their own reciprocity rules.

These Muslims allow this theological certainty to create a tyrannical cult of slaved men who then make second class slaves out of their female children. Naming these Muslim women and girl's chattel would be an understatement. They are truly slaves, as Allah demands.
 
These Muslims imitate their slave holding master, Allah, and like all tyrants, hate all others not of their ilk. They allow their hate to push them to violence against the free people in the free world.

Islamophobia is a fear of Islam. Those who do not fear and hate this slave holding cult of Islam, along with the other inhuman and immoral policies that Islam and Sharia allow, are not moral people. Moral people will fight against slavery.

I fear that free people will not be Islamophobic enough, because of their fear of being labelled racist or Islamophobe, to rise up and give secours to the unwilling female slave of Islam.

I am proudly an Islamophobe. If you are not you might not be a moral person.

Are you a moral person?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nri300CcCuE

Regards
DL
24
Three perspectives on why man is God's master.

Perspective 1.
Has man forgotten his rightful place as God's master?

A theology makes you a slave to your God while the Jesus that Gnostic Christians follow has man take his rightful place as God's master. After all, all the Gods are man-made. That is why Gnostic Christianity has always put man ahead of God. The Karaite Jews have that view as well as their oral tradition can overrule the written Torah and God himself, showing how old this tradition or ideology is.

It seems that without the lie of a supernatural God, people are not willing to have a man be God the way the ancients used to do. Emperors used to name themselves God and their sons, sons of God.
   
One of the Jesus' that the church did not silence, tells us that that is the right way to think when he said, instead of stoning people on the Sabbath, that the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath. I extrapolate from that, that Jesus would also say that religions and gods were made for man and not man for religions. Jesus answered them, is it not written in your law, I said, Yee are gods?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alRNbesfXXw&feature=player_embedded

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oR02ciandvg&feature=BFa&list=PLCBF574D

-----------------------------------------

Perspective 2.
Does the Bible show that our next God is a Man?

The Bible states that when Jesus returns, his elect will make themselves known and elect him to rule over them. The Bible states that our new Jesus will not be recognizable and he will be elected by his Words. Remember that the story tellers, in one of the sequels, have named Jesus. --- The Word.

The Abrahamic Karaite oral tradition is that Rabbis, men generally, can overrule the written Word of God. In real language, this means that the interpretation of words and terms is to always be governed by men of the Divine Council and their elected God.

The voice of a man, to the Bible, --- is supreme and above God's written words. That is as it should be as nature makes the ideal of all species to be one of their own. If a God cannot be or is not in our true image, then God is not worthy of us. This is the logic and reason why the rule of man over written tradition must be supreme. Anything else would be humankind giving up our natures for the nature of an alien form. God forbid.  

More directly to the question. The Bible states that we are to kill witches. This, at that time, meant that men were not to let themselves be fooled by magicians or alchemists and other tricksters who might deceive them. This meant that nothing magical or supernatural, no magician doing illusions, etc., should be put above the spoken word.

The policy of the Divine Council was to rule by the tenet called the Golden Rule. The Rabbi class thus had the final say in all religious and political matters. The Divine Council would choose whom to anoint and follow as their Prophet/God/King.

Does this ultimately show that God was a man to the Jews who wrote the Bible? Is that why they were so unafraid to change Gods name so often?

Where Jews the first atheists? Closely followed by the Gnostic that had used Jewry as a springboard to their better Universalist creed? Is that why Rome hated Jews and Gnostic Christian?

If the Jews interpreted the word God as a man, the way the old Roman emperors did, then was placing a supernatural God up in heaven a poor theological position for us today.

----------------------------------------

Perspective 3.
Does as above so below mean that God must abide by man's laws?

Jesus said to give to Caesar what is Caesars. Caesar makes the laws we live by and no religion is true to the laws set out by their Gods. Thank God as those laws are quite barbaric. For example, both Yahweh and Allah, through the mouths of men, promote stoning for adultery and sundry other sins. This of course ignores that both Gods show justice as being close to an eye for an eye which is what secular laws try to gauge punishment by.

There is a military term that says that the pace to be set by the troops is as fast as the slowest man. This is so that no man is left behind.

Since we have collectively decided that secular law is superior to the laws of heaven and God, does that mean that when Jesus return, he will validate secular law and ask us to follow Caesar?

Regards
DL
25
If you have a relationship with G-d, then He's not exactly invisible.

What is your God's hair color?

Regards
DL

Anything I want it to be.

I thought that was the point  :dunno:

Only if you do not recognize that the only God you can ever really know is you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alRNbesfXXw&feature=player_embedded

Regards
DL

Regards
DL