Click to expand
Latest users (4): akkere, cabbagemayhem, Shiny, thekame, anonymous(17).
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#67285 - pebar (08/06/2014) [-]
This pic started a shitstorm.
#67293 to #67285 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/06/2014) [-]
The whole idea of sexual liberation and raising kids without fathers is outrageous.
User avatar #67317 to #67293 - byposted (08/07/2014) [-]
Sexual liberation is a reality of our time, however. To destroy the decadence is to take it to its end-logic, whereupon it will implode.

When men acquire a more equal footing in issues of child disputes and whatnot, women will perhaps realize that the feminist movement has brought them nothing but an unfulfilling job and loneliness at old age.
User avatar #67334 to #67317 - oxan (08/07/2014) [-]
>the feminist movement has brought them nothing but an unfulfilling job and loneliness at old age.

rekt deep.
#67282 - anonexplains (08/06/2014) [-]
#67290 to #67282 - alimais (08/06/2014) [-]
Nah, only if the Ukrainians are crazy and shoot into Russia again and more.    
Russia already had some soldiers of them killed on border patrols and civilians in Russian border cities but nothing really happened because of that.   
  Putin isn't stupid and knows that because fully invading Ukraine would justify many things hurting Russia and all of the German mainstream media is rock-hard war mongering.
Nah, only if the Ukrainians are crazy and shoot into Russia again and more.

Russia already had some soldiers of them killed on border patrols and civilians in Russian border cities but nothing really happened because of that.

Putin isn't stupid and knows that because fully invading Ukraine would justify many things hurting Russia and all of the German mainstream media is rock-hard war mongering.
#67308 to #67290 - anonexplains (08/06/2014) [-]
So what is Putin then hoping to achieve in Ukraine, given that he is supplying the rebels and is behind the rebellion.
#67310 to #67308 - alimaisbanned (08/06/2014) [-]
What's the West hoping to achieve in Ukraine, given that they supplied and paid protesters in Maidan behind the coup.

What's the US hoping to achieve in Ukraine, given that they ukr. soldiers in Ukraine.

also the current Ukraine president is in old US-documents referred as "our Ukrainian insider Petro Poroschenko"

Also no one has proven that Russia is supplying them even the news never mentions it because it isn't proven that's why they are called "Separatists" and not Russian insurgents or else.

Crimea is the only Ukraine thing valuable to Russia.
#67311 to #67310 - alimaisbanned (08/06/2014) [-]
*train Ukraine soldiers

Also Israel
#67312 to #67311 - alimaisbanned (08/06/2014) [-]
Also everything that happened made Russia deepen its ties with other nations a.e. BRICS

Recently :

Meanwhile economic Europe is now hurt duo sanctions and Germans are very very angry at their mainstream news for war mongering and false reporting, my favorite part was when one news magazine literally said "Germans would gladly give up their workplace to sanction Russia" bad thing is that Germans like work and politicians in power for being incompetent puppets who don't listen to other members of the parliament
#67309 to #67308 - alimaisbanned has deleted their comment [-]
#67283 to #67282 - anonexplains (08/06/2014) [-]
They tasted blood, now they want more. I'd be willing to bet money on it.
User avatar #67322 to #67274 - byposted (08/07/2014) [-]
They launched them right before the ceasefire? The Zionists are clearly mad that this loophole prevented them from shelling the area.

Hopefully this ceasefire, in all seriousness, will conclude the fighting. The IDF will leave Gaza, dozens killed, without really having achieved anything.

Gaza is, of course, back at the stone age, but associated hardship will only embolden another generation of mujaheddin to continue the struggle. Just as planned, perhaps.
#67320 to #67274 - byposted has deleted their comment [-]
#67279 to #67274 - alimais (08/06/2014) [-]
I never get tired of this video
I never get tired of this video
#67280 to #67279 - anonexplains (08/06/2014) [-]
How mature.
#67281 to #67280 - alimais (08/06/2014) [-]
Well, it's a marvelous parody of those Kosher internet brigades    
Well, it's a marvelous parody of those Kosher internet brigades

User avatar #67242 - bitchpleaseshutup (08/06/2014) [-]
Why do you guys hate Jews so much?
User avatar #67257 to #67242 - oxan (08/06/2014) [-]
I don't, I just accuse people of being JIDF shills for fun.
#67256 to #67242 - syrianassassin (08/06/2014) [-]
alimais take a look at this
alimais take a look at this
#67258 to #67256 - alimais (08/06/2014) [-]
Oh noes now it is 7 GAZZIILLLIONS
Oh noes now it is 7 GAZZIILLLIONS
#67245 to #67242 - alimais (08/06/2014) [-]
Not really how that economic guy said here,

we hate them for the same reason people hated them in the last 2000 thousand years
#67248 to #67245 - economicfreedom (08/06/2014) [-]
Kick Jews out of every country because they've been kicked out of every country.
Kick Jews out of every country because they've been kicked out of every country.
#67250 to #67248 - alimais (08/06/2014) [-]
They weren't all kicked out,
#67251 to #67250 - economicfreedom (08/06/2014) [-]
Like I said, your Jew hate is just a fad.
"Hurr durr duh Natzees were kool"
#67275 to #67261 - anonexplains (08/06/2014) [-]
You might like this picture.
#67276 to #67263 - anonexplains (08/06/2014) [-]
#67306 to #67276 - alimaisbanned (08/06/2014) [-]
And Z happens :3


Children get fetishized and there are actually parties in Europe wanting to legalize pedophilia and those parties happen to have a Jewish leadership
#67262 to #67261 - alimais (08/06/2014) [-]
Because every of those nations were Natzees the last 2000 years
#67277 to #67262 - anonexplains (08/06/2014) [-]
#67278 to #67277 - alimais (08/06/2014) [-]
Nice strawman/ad hominem picture :^)
#67246 to #67245 - pebar (08/06/2014) [-]
That bit about coin clipping isn't unique to jews though. A lot of forensic accounting deals with things like that. For example, bartenders started stealing alcohol from bottles. To stop this, bottles are often place on weights. Then bartenders started watering down the alcohol. In retail stores, clerks often don't scan items then take the surplus money. The vast majority of theft from companies come from their own employees.
Even the Romans themselves added impurities to their gold coins to dilute them which inflated their money supply.

Just because the Jews did it, that doesn't mean everyone else wasn't doing the same thing.
#67247 to #67246 - alimais (08/06/2014) [-]
But it's in the Jews fundamentalist culture like it's in the gypsies culture to be a parasite.

Also if you didn't know goyim, goy or gentile means non-Jew in the Talmud

Why I Left Judaism

#67252 to #67247 - pebar (08/06/2014) [-]
Your're complaining because a religious text has some extremes?
Your're complaining because a religious text has some extremes?
#67253 to #67252 - alimais (08/06/2014) [-]
"some" is relatively mild,

I have a problem with those who enforce these ideals.

One extreme Akbar can't do anything without help from the outside but a bunch of rich Jews and Jewish politicians can.
#67284 to #67253 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/06/2014) [-]
1. You list their exodus from Germany in 1945 as one of their expulsions. I believe that was voluntary and agreed by the U.N. If I go through that list, how many others will I find?
2. You said it is in the Jews fundamental culture to be a parasite. That's hogwash. Jews are usually made fun of for being merchants and enjoying making money, but those are only negatives to people ignorant of economics and socialists. Realistically, they seem to have a positive effect on the economy of the countries that take them, and are expelled when a country falls to racism, religious intolerance, or ignorance. It sounds like those countries just didn't deserve them at that time.
3. If the Jews were doing anything immoral, I would wag my finger at them too, but I see no rational accusation against them. Only blind hatred.
4. Yes, one extreme "Akbar" can commit atrocities without money. Al-Qaeda does it, the Taliban does it, and now even ISIS does it. For all the money and extremism you say the Jews have, I don't see any of that. I say wake up to your colored glasses and look around.
User avatar #67287 to #67284 - alimais (08/06/2014) [-]
Do you agree with me that Jews are the smallest minority there is in the world ?
#67288 to #67287 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/06/2014) [-]
I don't know what your point is, but according to this, I cannot:

Though, as a single united group of one culture, they are relatively small, not accounting for all those who've dispersed into other cultures. They're definitely not so small that they aren't relevant. I can't see a valid argument stemming from that, especially considering how they've been persecuted and executed en masse.

"The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand
User avatar #67289 to #67288 - alimais (08/06/2014) [-]
I'm sorry, I expressed myself wrong :

Would you agree with me that Jews are one of the smallest minorities compared to Asian, Africans, Muslims etc in other countries ?

Saying there are mostly very few Jews in most countries.
#67291 to #67289 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/06/2014) [-]
Asian and African are races, Islam is a religion. Did you mean Arab? I said the Jewish population is relatively small these days. Do you plan on making a point in this thread?
#67297 to #67291 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/06/2014) [-]
I don't know why alimais was banned, but part of his last was:

Well, okay I will make my point then :

If you look behind forced immigration you'll see it's a bunch of Jews
If you look behind radical feminist groups you'll see it's a bunch of Jews
If you look behind gun control it'...

I'm just going to say that's bullshit.
A. I don't know which forced immigration you're referring to, but there have been quite a few in history and it usually involves secular competition for resources.
B. Radical feminist groups are started by any number of crazy scorned women who have it out for men that have nothing to do with the Jews.
C. Gun control, like other good sounding liberal ideas, is supported by your every day person who is ignorant of guns and the dangers of government, but is still able to incorrectly infer that since guns kill people, less guns means less dead people. Also, dictators all around the world love it for their own obvious reasons, including Hitler who was definitely not a Jew or a Jew supporter.
User avatar #67313 to #67297 - byposted (08/07/2014) [-]
The one thing that alimais' pictures did not seem to touch on is the common, but unfounded, association between NSDAP Germany and gun control. Hitler may have been a dictator, but he did not fear his people so as to centralize the possession of weaponry. That was a Bolshevik phenomenon which aimed to placate the Russian peasantry, something there was not an equivalent of in Germany.

In so far as Hitler dealt with personal firearms, he liberalized the laws which were enacted during the Weimar Republic. Even the Jews were not barred from licensing weapons in theory, so were his decrees - hardly representative of a ruthless "gun grabber."
#67323 to #67313 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/07/2014) [-]
German Jews and companies that were partly Jewish owned were barred from obtaining firearm permits or working in the firearms industry in 1938. German Jews were then ordered to surrender all their weapons. The police had the records on all who had registered them, and even those who gave up their weapons voluntarily were turned over to the Gestapo.[1][2] Regardless of Hitler's views on firearm regulation for everyone else, he signed the papers to revoke them from the Jews. It's a necessary act for an oppressive regime.
1. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_legislation_in_Germany
2. www.nationalreview.com/article/365103/how-nazis-used-gun-control-stephen-p-halbrook
User avatar #67328 to #67323 - byposted (08/07/2014) [-]
Reexamine my wording: "Even the Jews were not barred from licensing weapons in theory." This was an interesting technicality, not the basis of my argument.

Hitler's 1938 gun law did indeed prevent Jews from working in the firearms industry, but it did not explicitly place restrictions on their ability to own weapons.

Your second source does not claim otherwise, only commenting that .22 caliber hollow-point ammunition was banned. The article hilariously deems it a "gun control law," as such, even though this ammunition type, universally considered "inhumane," was one of the only items to be "controlled."

The Wikipedia article doesn't, either.

The only ethnic group which was banned from owning firearms were gypsies, in an extension of Chancellor Marx's 1928 terms, and this was because of their nomadic nature.

Of course, all this does not negate the fact that Jews had their weapons taken. The piece that Wikipedia cites references the example of a governor who sanctioned the raids of Jewish residences, confiscating their firearms under the arbitrary statute, in the law, of one having to be "politically reliable" to own a gun. But even the author admits that such language was in the 1928 gun law, as well. One would suppose that the governor, moreover, would have used the supposed "Jews banned from owning guns" statute if it existed...hmmm


You concluded that Hitler's "views on firearm regulation for everyone else" was irrelevant, which does not make any sense. Jews were not considered full citizens of Germany under Hitler's rule, so, if anything, Hitler's view of firearm regulation for Jews was the irrelevancy.
#67338 to #67328 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/07/2014) [-]
1. I did notice your wording, but I had to clarify.
2. I believe it did. In my second source, paragraph six says it, although ambiguously. It's clearly stated in this section of my first source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_legislation_in_Germany#Disarming_Jews_in_Nazi_
Here is the Regulations Against Jews' Possession of Weapons law it mentions that was decreed directly against Jews by Wilhelm Frick: jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/NaziLawEnglish.htm (also, proof Jews aren't against firearms).
And, of course, as you pointed out, some police forces used the "trustworthiness" clause to disarm Jews.
3. Whether or not Hitler himself disarmed the Jews and other minorities doesn't matter so much. The point is, someone did. It has to be done before anyone can be oppressed like that. My original argument was essentially: The authorities that did it were definitely not Jew supporters.
#67327 to #67323 - byposted has deleted their comment [-]
#67325 to #67323 - byposted has deleted their comment [-]
#67298 to #67297 - alimaisbanned (08/06/2014) [-]
I l posted a picture where FEMEN tits weren't covered by accident forgetting the rules
>pic related it's which got me banned before

A) Stuff like this :
B) Pic related but they lost their funding from Soros duo wanting to start their actions in Israel
C) Feinstein , Weinstein I could go on
#67299 to #67298 - alimaisbanned (08/06/2014) [-]
I can go all day
#67301 to #67300 - alimaisbanned (08/06/2014) [-]
Then there are their obnoxious webbrigades called JIDF which operate even on Funnyjunk but I'm not as paranoid and prefer to talk to them for shits n giggles.

#67302 to #67301 - alimaisbanned (08/06/2014) [-]
Then there is the game "Spot the Jew"
#67303 to #67302 - alimaisbanned (08/06/2014) [-]

Carl Marx came from a rich rabbi family and was related to the Rothschilds or was Lenin the one related to Rothschilds ? But he was Jewish too
#67304 to #67303 - alimaisbanned (08/06/2014) [-]
Shock surprise :3


My father even works for on of those in the list and has his close-up experience with them

pic 2 big for FJ
#67318 to #67304 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/07/2014) [-]
1. Those women were protesting an oppressive Islamic state. One of the only things feminism is even useful for anymore. Hardly what I would consider radical feminism.
2. As usual, the first quote I saw and checked was a lie [1], probably concocted by age-old Jew hatred from early Christianity.
3. Assuming those are all Jews, they didn't create the Fed, and they wouldn't be bad people for running it anymore than the other guys, the Jews didn't invent fiat money other nations have been using it for thousands of years, and there are plenty of Libertarian Jews that are against fiat money. So there's no argument there.
4. There's nothing wrong with PR, everyone does it.
5. She just wrote an article about something that other people do, and quoted the opinion of professionals, not her own. That doesn't even implicate her, and if it did, one or even several anecdotal examples of sadomasochism says nothing for an entire race. The same can be sampled in other cultures.
6. There's nothing new about socialist ideology. People have been chasing the pie in the sky since ancient times. Judaism and Christianity are and have always been capitalistic ideologies. Jews are made fun of for being merchants and liking money, not living off of welfare.
7. I have to go, but I'll come back and address this one if you think it's that important.

1. Page 14-16, They Never Said It : A Book of Fake Quotes, Misquotes, and Misleading, books.google.com/books?id=NCOEYJ0q-DUC&lpg=PA14&ots=hCKAREz0KB&pg=PA14#v=onepage&q
#67243 to #67242 - economicfreedom (08/06/2014) [-]
It's just a fad.   
Nazis hated jews. Some people here love nazis. Therefore some people here hate jews too.
It's just a fad.
Nazis hated jews. Some people here love nazis. Therefore some people here hate jews too.
#67237 - bitchpleaseshutup has deleted their comment [-]
#67234 - anonexplains (08/06/2014) [-]
#67217 - anonexplains (08/05/2014) [-]
What's your opinion on nuclear power?
User avatar #67231 to #67217 - Shiny ONLINE (08/06/2014) [-]
A hilarious exercise in how people with radically different fringe beliefs can come to the same exact conclusion for different, contradictory reasons.
User avatar #67314 to #67231 - undeadwill (08/07/2014) [-]
Or maybe they aren't so different?
#67233 to #67231 - anonexplains (08/06/2014) [-]
Horseshoe theory?
User avatar #67235 to #67233 - Shiny ONLINE (08/06/2014) [-]
#67229 to #67217 - anonexplains (08/06/2014) [-]
It's fantastic.
User avatar #67227 to #67217 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Its great.
User avatar #67225 to #67217 - ablueguy (08/05/2014) [-]
Its good, but needs better regulation.
Outdated factories should be shut down and replaced with newer, safer, and more efficient ones.
And they sure as hell shouldn't be built in places that often have earthquakes.
#67286 to #67225 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/06/2014) [-]
That regulation should come in the form of taxes and fees proportional to the likelihood it will cause damage and endanger human life. That is the most efficient and economical way to upgrade antiquated and environmentally controversial technology.
User avatar #67324 to #67286 - ablueguy (08/07/2014) [-]
Yeah, of course.
User avatar #67221 to #67217 - newvein (08/05/2014) [-]
Shit's dope
User avatar #67218 to #67217 - pebar (08/05/2014) [-]
it's good
#67216 - anonexplains (08/05/2014) [-]
Should someone be allowed to sell their organs?
User avatar #67220 to #67216 - newvein (08/05/2014) [-]
In respect to sexual organs (prostitution) or actual body parts? Cause I say yes to both. But both should be regulated for mostly the same reasons: trafficking, black market, disease, etc.
User avatar #67219 to #67216 - pebar (08/05/2014) [-]
User avatar #67193 - schnizel (08/05/2014) [-]
>Your god must be very angry with you for he send me to your land and I am the scourge of gods.
Guess who said that.
User avatar #67228 to #67193 - ablueguy (08/05/2014) [-]
"Under Hulagu's leadership, the Mongols destroyed the greatest center of Islamic power, Baghdad,"
I like this guy already.
User avatar #67222 to #67193 - Shiny ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
blah blah magic sky monster I'm gonna kill you now because I can
#67194 to #67193 - anonexplains (08/05/2014) [-]
some jewish guy.

#67196 to #67195 - anonexplains (08/05/2014) [-]
A Roman
#67198 to #67197 - anonexplains (08/05/2014) [-]
#67202 to #67199 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
Hulagu Han
#67204 to #67203 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
Research skillz, ftw
#67205 to #67204 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
+ knowledge of 4chan
#67191 - smallwood (08/05/2014) [-]
Hypocrisy over Gaza

What does this board feel about Pat Condell?
#67244 to #67191 - byposted (08/06/2014) [-]
>denounce people with opposing views for being "hypocritical"
>proceed with a talking point which contradicts one of his others

In the last video of Condell's which was posted on here, I recall the argument was made, multiple times, that Israel is a beacon of civilization in a barbaric wasteland. One must be siding with Islamic fundamentalists to sympathize with Palestine, a rather unappealing charge to the Redditors who flock to atheist personalities on Youtube. Hell, such was bound to come up again, as is done at the 1:50 mark.

This is nothing short of holding one side to a higher standard, a double-edged sword to be certain. For while Pat may invoke sympathy for the Zionist state by pointing to its secular leanings, as such, he cannot deflect its crimes by crying "selective criticism," and pointing to the conflicts in Nigeria and Syria (as in the first minute of the video). Which, by the way, are not ignored in humanitarian circles. Pat's assertion that Assad has "butchered thousands in Syria," for instance, could well have been the words of one of those progressive journalists. With the label of "civilized" comes not only prestige, but responsibility; to be highly regarded is to be highly criticized.
#67241 to #67191 - byposted has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #67215 to #67191 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
I am subscribed to him.
#67162 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
Just decided to browse the Facebook page of the Australia Republican Movement. Their only argument is an 'Australian' should be our head of state.

>mfw the Queen is the personification of Australian citizenship
>mfw the Governor-General is head of state
>mfw all Governor-Generals of Australia since 1965 have been Australian
>mfw Governor-Generals must be citizens by convention
>mfw Republicans have no argument
>mfw Republicanism in this country is built on falsehoods and half truths
User avatar #67146 - drastronomy (08/05/2014) [-]
Why are people letting israel buttfuck palestine?
User avatar #67189 to #67146 - lulzfornigeriagirl (08/05/2014) [-]
Why are people like you ignoring the fact that
-Hamas wants the death of its own civilians and hides rockets in mosques/schools
-Israel warns the people of Gaza when/where it will strike a lot of the time while Hamas tells them to stay
-Humanitarian aid given to Gaza in the past several years have been spent building tunnels and not actually helping the people of Gaza
-Gaza is a very dense area and Israel tries its best not to kill civilians because they obviously don't want international butthurt/anger
- Hamas has demanded random seize fires to acquire anti-tank rockets from Iran against Merkava tanks
- Israel wants to kill off militants, Hamas wants and openly preaches the deaths of civilians
-the only reason Hamas looks so innocent is because they fail to kill civilians because iron dome and shitty rockets
-Hamas is the Palestinians worst enemy

Need I go on?
User avatar #67190 to #67189 - drastronomy (08/05/2014) [-]
-hamas is a terrorist organisation, and that does not justify that israel is taking extremely objective action and attacking civilian areas, and often even taking over the homes of normal people

- does not seem like that, and besides, considering most people may starve/be forced to leave their families if they evacuate, they should treat hamas as a terrorist organisation, not as a representative of the people

- that is not relevant

-well considering around 80% of their kills are civilians, i doubt that

-again, terrorist organisation, and why is that bad? They need a seize fire so they, a group of ragtag sand niggers, can TRY to fight the fucking tanks filled with american taxmoney and death.

I will sum it up for you: israel is attacking PALESTINE, not hamas. They are often using "counter terrorism" as an excuse for forcing palestinians out of their homes (see: map of israel from 1946-present - expanding, as a result of warmongering and conquering)
#67208 to #67190 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
1. Hamas builds their military bases in civilian areas. If you don't like Israel operating in civilian areas, then that makes two of you. Tell Hamas to stop using them as human shields.
2. Well, it is like that. Israel does treat Hamas differently, but Hamas leaves them no choice.
3. N/A
4. Now, that they have to actually invade Gaza instead of just defending, it is harder to avoid civilian casualties, but I still blame Hamas for using them as shields.
5. There have been several cease fires, each one was broken by Hamas within hours. This is consistent with all of their agreements in the past.
6. See map of Israel from 3000 B.C. to present. Before the Muslim conquest, the population of Palestine was overwhelmingly Christian, albeit with a sizeable Jewish community. Palestine forced the Israelites out first.
User avatar #67210 to #67208 - drastronomy (08/05/2014) [-]

thats a long ass time ago - this is not a question of right, but a question but who has lived there in THEIR lifetime
#67212 to #67210 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
So, if I take something from you, and keep it for a while, it becomes mine?
User avatar #67213 to #67212 - drastronomy (08/05/2014) [-]
well if i died, and my great great great great great grandchild comes back screaming he wants it, yes, it should.

A better analogy would be the following:

a beaver (mudslimes) builds a dam in the middle of a river, where fish(jews) once had their mating grounds(holy place). The fish eventually die out. The beavers have children in their new dam, and their children have more children. They make a small society of beavers.

Soon, an eel comes along, although he does not belong. He tells the beavers that his ancestors once owned the place, and that therefore he has the right to live there. The beavers say no. Suddenly, some humans decide to hunt eels. They nearly die out, and eventually they start hunting beavers too.

The beavers, feeling compassion for the few eels that are left, gives them a bit of their land and remove a bit of their dam.

Then the eels fucking nuke the dam and say HAHA DIRTY GOYS
#67267 to #67213 - dehumanizer (08/06/2014) [-]
dont even bother replying to him,hes an official JIDF getting paid to do this
#67214 to #67213 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
Discrepancies with that analogy include the beavers never felt sorry for the eels, and it ignores that killing eels is more important to beavers than their own lives.

A better analogy would be the introduction of fire ants to North America. With no natural predators, they spread and kill or consume everything in their path. They disrupt the natural wildlife and cause certain species to go extinct. They are recognized as bad for the environment, but accepted as a fact of reality, though black ants and bees are supported in certain areas. The fire ants claim oppression over a few areas they no longer control, and vow to destroy every specie in their way.

The Israelites owned the area for far longer than the Arabs, and it's not a matter of them just finding another place. That is their place, or they have no place.
User avatar #67266 to #67214 - drastronomy (08/06/2014) [-]
again, just because their ancestors owned it does not mean they do.
#67268 to #67266 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/06/2014) [-]
Then, the Arabs definitely don't. They have no special claim to the territory [1]. They don't even have ancestry in the region. Just because they were the last to steal it when the 20th century rolled around doesn't necessarily mean it should ultimately belong to them. The Arabs have many places to go. This is the only home of the Jews, and it should belong to those who don't perform suicide bombings, sacrifice their civilians, and teach their children hate and violence before they're even old enough to read. I'm sorry, but that argument gets weaker and weaker that it should belong to the Palestinians and the Israelites should roam the Earth.

1. Situated at a strategic location between Egypt, Syria and Arabia, and the birthplace of Judaism and Christianity, the region has a long and tumultuous history as a crossroads for religion, culture, commerce, and politics. The region has been controlled by numerous different peoples, including Ancient Egyptians, Canaanites, Israelites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Ancient Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, the Sunni Arab Caliphates, the Shia Fatimid Caliphate, Crusaders, Ayyubids, Mameluks, Ottomans, the British and modern Israelis and Palestinians.
User avatar #67272 to #67268 - drastronomy (08/06/2014) [-]
Civlians live there, you idiot. And the jews are no better than the Muslims. At least hamas does not fucking target civilians, but rather prioritize their country's well being.

Israel are the true terrorists, here. They are the ones killing people for something they have never done. They have killed children who had never even heard of the fact that their ANCESTORS owned the country several thousand years ago. The muslims have lived in palestine ever since the crusades, too, although that is IN NO WAY relevant to who deserves it. Those who live there now deserve it, just as israel owns the land they were given in the 1940s
#67273 to #67272 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/06/2014) [-]
Actually Hamas does target their own civilians. They have blown up their own people to blame it on Israel. And, there are no credible sources of Israeli's killing Palestinian children on any significant scale, I've only seen one isolated events that was still just hearsay. Nothing like what Hamas would do if they had the opportunity. You are misinformed. Israelis are not the true terrorists at all, and if you can even think that, then your perspective is very distorted.

If you're just saying Israel should keep what they have, and Gaza keep what they have, I can understand that, but this isn't about Israel conquering Gaza for land and deporting the Palestinians further. This is about Hamas' continued and increases threats and attacks into Israel. The tunnels dug into Israel for the purpose of capturing civilians, including children, was spooky as fuck, and no doubt was a major factor in the decision to invade Gaza.
User avatar #67192 to #67190 - lulzfornigeriagirl (08/05/2014) [-]
I will reply to this when I get back home from work.
User avatar #67147 to #67146 - schnizel (08/05/2014) [-]
Because they can't do anything about it.
User avatar #67151 to #67147 - drastronomy (08/05/2014) [-]
except :

- embargo/boycott
- refuse diplomacy and give less power in different international organisations
- go to war with them
User avatar #67160 to #67151 - schnizel (08/05/2014) [-]
A dog won't bite the hand that feeds him.
User avatar #67161 to #67160 - drastronomy (08/05/2014) [-]
>Implying israel exports anything
the only thing they can "feed" with is money - money thats been GIVEN to them by the very same countries that supposedly support them for monetary reasons
User avatar #67163 to #67161 - schnizel (08/05/2014) [-]
Actually Israel has a lot of technology to export and it's a world power.
User avatar #67164 to #67163 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
>World power

User avatar #67165 to #67164 - schnizel (08/05/2014) [-]
He is like that little goy controling the big guy in Mad Max.
User avatar #67166 to #67165 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
Israel's a regional power.
User avatar #67167 to #67166 - schnizel (08/05/2014) [-]
Little guy on the big guy.
User avatar #67168 to #67167 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
Whatever, but she's not a world power.
User avatar #67169 to #67168 - schnizel (08/05/2014) [-]
User avatar #67170 to #67169 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
I refer to countries with feminine pronouns. Like ships.
User avatar #67344 to #67307 - schnizel (08/07/2014) [-]
Why the banhammer?
User avatar #67351 to #67344 - alimaisbanned (08/07/2014) [-]
posted picture with FEMEN and forgot the tits
#67141 - anonexplains (08/05/2014) [-]
What's Left-Libertarianism?
User avatar #67153 to #67141 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
A fantasy of those ignorant of economics.
User avatar #67223 to #67153 - Shiny ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
Explain? Even Marx was fluent in capitalism.
User avatar #67224 to #67223 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Where is your evidence that Marx understood economics?

And how does one deal with scarcity without a government or market?
User avatar #67230 to #67224 - Shiny ONLINE (08/06/2014) [-]
"Where is your evidence that Marx understood economics?"
Reading books is useful.
"And how does one deal with scarcity without a government or market?"
Right and left do not mean market and non-market.
User avatar #67232 to #67230 - undeadwill (08/06/2014) [-]
He fucked up understand that there would still be a middle class, and that the rich did not buy up all the property.

So how is it different from communism and capitalism?
User avatar #67236 to #67232 - Shiny ONLINE (08/06/2014) [-]
I never said his conclusions derived from capitalism were correct (which is why I have strong reservations about Marxism). Merely that he understood it and why it was supported.

That said, communism is generally on the furthest left of the spectrum; in contrast, social democracy and similar ideologies are capitalistic. The main difference from the right is that they use markets as a necessary tool rather than an ideal method.
User avatar #67240 to #67236 - undeadwill (08/06/2014) [-]
He said it was because people were ignorant, religion blinded them and other such calls.

>Social democracy are capitalistic.
No they are mixed economies neither communist, socialist, fascist or capitalist.

Market=/= capitalism
User avatar #67345 to #67240 - Shiny ONLINE (08/07/2014) [-]
Partially capitalistic is still capitalistic. If anything, a non-mixed market is pretty much a pipedream, since it requires a state to go to tremendous lengths to avoid passing any sort of legislation that might indirectly have an effect on the economy.
User avatar #67150 to #67141 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
Workers' councils and coops and shit.
#67206 to #67150 - anonexplains (08/05/2014) [-]
Basically Anarcho-Syndicalism?
User avatar #67265 to #67206 - oxan (08/06/2014) [-]
That'd be a variant of it, I suppose.
User avatar #67143 to #67141 - Shiny ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
Libertarianism on the left. There are many very different interpretations of libertarianism, most of them divided on economics, but in general they have far, far more in common philosophically than authoritarian schools of thought.
#67134 - Kingcgc (08/05/2014) [-]
Gaza deserves everything.
#67127 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]

Tell me what party to join and I might just do it.

Labor, Liberals, Nationals, Greens, Sex Party, Liberal Democrats, First Nations (lol), Fred Nile, Drug Law Reform, HEMP, Natural Medicine, Republican (double lol), Secular, Socialist Alliance and the Socialist Equality Party are all wrong answer.
#67140 to #67127 - anonexplains (08/05/2014) [-]
Sustainable Population Party?
User avatar #67149 to #67140 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
You might be right, Anon. They seem okay. Would probably vote for/10.
User avatar #67131 to #67127 - Shiny ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
Pirate Party Australia. Show up on ballet day in schmaltzy pirate costume and pretend to think it's related.
User avatar #67129 to #67127 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
User avatar #67132 to #67129 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
I already told you that the Liberal Democrats are out.

Those fuckers want to create an French Foreign Legion-style unit of the Australian Defence Force. It's like a 13 year old wrote their fucking platform, I shit you not. The only good thing is progunz and airsoft.
#67211 to #67132 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
I don't know what you're ranting about the Australian Defense Force, but Libertarianism is about liberty, not liberalism. It's pretty much the opposite of Liberal Democrats these days.
User avatar #67255 to #67211 - oxan (08/06/2014) [-]
I have to clarify that Australian Liberals are not like American Liberals.

Our current government is made up of the Liberal Party, which are comparable to American Republicans. Our 'Democrats' are the Labour Party.

The Liberal Party advocate neoliberal economics. The Liberal Democrats are full Libertarians. I suppose just to make it more confusing, we also have a minority party called the Australian Democrats and the Republican Party of Australia. Lol.
#67269 to #67255 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/06/2014) [-]
Hmm, well whichever one resists excessive business regulation and price controls, supports ownership of firearms, wants to promote free trade and keep government small and avoid socialized medicine and other government subsidies, and treats people equal under the law instead of granting supposed "special privileges" to the disadvantaged. Oh, and is against the overuse of the prison system in favor of alternatives, such as was published by the U.N. [1], or just revert to lashings.

1. www.unodc.org/pdf/criminal_justice/Handbook_of_Basic_Principles_and_Promising_Practices_on_Alternatives_to_Imprisonment.pdf
User avatar #67271 to #67269 - oxan (08/06/2014) [-]
>Resist excessive business regulation and price controls
>Supports ownerships of firearms
>Wants to promote free trade and keep government small.
>Avoid socialised medicine
Utmost hue. This is Australia we're talking about. Proposed changes to Medicare that would mean paying $7 to see a doctor resulted in anti-government rallies (although I exaggerate. The rallies were against the budget generally).
>Treats people equal under the law instead of special privileges to the disadvantaged
Depends on who you define as disadvantaged.

I rate it hue/10.
User avatar #67254 to #67211 - oxan (08/06/2014) [-]
I'm ranting about the Defence policy of the LibDems. And I assure you, they are Libertarians. Google Liberal Democratic Party of Australia and have a quick look at their website.
User avatar #67133 to #67132 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
I actually like the idea of the FFL for a military unit.

Go with the motor club
User avatar #67148 to #67133 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
aw, Senator Ricky Muir is just the cutest.
#67069 - lulzfornigeriagirl (08/05/2014) [-]
So what do you guys think of the completely stupid actions the U.S is taking with the Ebola virus?
#67097 to #67069 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
I think: Good!
An American missionary who went out to help people with Ebola got sick, and now needs American medical care. It's unlikely to spread by him, but will help us gain experience in treating it for when it comes here unexpectedly. Never be too afraid to do the right thing.
User avatar #67103 to #67097 - lulzfornigeriagirl (08/05/2014) [-]
Is this supposed to be sarcastic?
#67110 to #67103 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
No. Have I not heard the whole story, or do you really think we're going to catch Ebola?
User avatar #67135 to #67110 - alimais (08/05/2014) [-]
Even in the cleanest lab, mistakes can happen.

"Could Ebola now be airborne? New research shows lethal virus can be spread from pigs to monkeys without contact"



#67207 to #67135 - anonexplains (08/05/2014) [-]
>both articles from 2012
>both articles from 2012
#67200 to #67135 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
1. They already wear breathing equipment.
2. This guy isn't the one to worry about. Even if a mistake happens, it can be quickly and easily quarantined. What you should worry about is someone flying over here on a plane while still in the incubation phase. That's the real danger, and if we don't have any experience treating it by then, then what shame turning away a fellow American and Christian peace keeper today.
User avatar #67154 to #67135 - huntergriff ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
It's not airborne. Otherwise most of africa would be infected by now.
User avatar #67172 to #67154 - alimais (08/05/2014) [-]
Africa doesn't have a high population density
User avatar #67173 to #67172 - huntergriff ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
It would have spread with all the people leaving west africa via air travel, as well.
User avatar #67174 to #67173 - alimais (08/05/2014) [-]
I think they got pretty strict at those airports duo their countries having a Ebola outbreak
User avatar #67175 to #67174 - huntergriff ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
Remember it takes 21 days for the disease to show up...you're not contagious until you start showing symptoms.
User avatar #67176 to #67175 - alimais (08/05/2014) [-]
2 to 21 days
User avatar #67177 to #67176 - huntergriff ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
still...had it gone airborne the CDC would have known by now. While it has the capability to go airborne, it hasn't shown up with humans yet.
User avatar #67179 to #67177 - alimais (08/05/2014) [-]
also the the article still says it a hypothesis so it's not really proven.
User avatar #67180 to #67179 - alimais (08/05/2014) [-]
the risk is still there
User avatar #67182 to #67180 - huntergriff ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
there's also the fact that the last time there was an ebola outbreak, of this strain was in 2008-2009...so i mean if it hasn't changed since then, what does that tell you?
User avatar #67183 to #67182 - alimais (08/05/2014) [-]
in the last months more people died of Ebola than in the
Ebola outbreaks last 10 years combined.
User avatar #67185 to #67183 - huntergriff ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
Simple explanation: Unsanitary conditions. remember, it's a third world country for a reason.
User avatar #67187 to #67185 - alimais (08/05/2014) [-]
But outbreaks before were in countries with a much higher population density
User avatar #67188 to #67187 - alimais (08/05/2014) [-]
in Africa
User avatar #67178 to #67177 - alimais (08/05/2014) [-]
I'm pretty sure most opportunities to fly with a plane got much harder even for not infected people.
User avatar #67082 to #67069 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
it would as it often does kill itself off so long as the sick are quarantined.
User avatar #67102 to #67082 - lulzfornigeriagirl (08/05/2014) [-]
And they are not being quarantined, in fact they are being flown into America.
User avatar #67156 to #67102 - huntergriff ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
they are being quarantined.
User avatar #67104 to #67102 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Civilian or CDC airlines?
User avatar #67080 to #67069 - pebar (08/05/2014) [-]
Why do Bats Transmit so many Diseases like Ebola? I think people are overreacting.
User avatar #67101 to #67080 - lulzfornigeriagirl (08/05/2014) [-]
And that video helped your point how...?

I believe it is not anywhere near worth the risk and it seems completely illogical. I hate to be conspiracy like but it seems like a lot of people have to gain from this.
User avatar #67137 to #67101 - alimais (08/05/2014) [-]
I can give you some tinfoil material :3

The Ebola labs where the current outbreak is happening in West Africa is officially financed by a mad-businessman who's known only to do something if it benefits him or ideal George Soros

The US has officially a patent on ebola since 2009

Patent us20120251502

The Ebola patient in the US recovered duo a how You need to login to view this link describes it "a secret serum".
User avatar #67138 to #67137 - alimais (08/05/2014) [-]
Also the labs may be bioweapon labs
#67157 to #67138 - huntergriff ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
Google "Geneva conventions", and "Biological Weapons Convention"
Google "Geneva conventions", and "Biological Weapons Convention"
User avatar #67181 to #67157 - alimais (08/05/2014) [-]
I know those but what's your point ?
#67184 to #67181 - huntergriff ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
So...even though you know what those are...you're still going to say that they may be bioweapon labs?
So...even though you know what those are...you're still going to say that they may be bioweapon labs?
User avatar #67186 to #67184 - alimais (08/05/2014) [-]
Well, if I look them up every article suggests those are bio-weapon labs.

You know, the US has Al-Qaeda still on their terror-list but are officially supporting Al-Qaeda linked groups in Syria.

#67052 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Also today I found out my philosophy teacher is an objectivist.
Also today I found out my philosophy teacher is an objectivist.
User avatar #67068 to #67052 - ablueguy (08/05/2014) [-]
My first philosophy teacher was a nihilist.
His class was seriously depressing.
User avatar #67070 to #67068 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
What is a nihilist again?
User avatar #67074 to #67070 - ablueguy (08/05/2014) [-]
Someone who believes that everything is pointless, even their belief itself.
User avatar #67078 to #67074 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Well that is depressing and pointless.
User avatar #67145 to #67078 - ablueguy (08/05/2014) [-]
Well yeah, nihilism is pointless. Heh.
User avatar #67152 to #67145 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Its pointless as it deals with a absolute of nothingness and from it nothing can come from it.
User avatar #67055 to #67052 - pebar (08/05/2014) [-]
That doesn't really say anything. All it means is that they think reality exists outside people's minds.
User avatar #67056 to #67055 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Ayn Rand objectivist.
User avatar #67063 to #67056 - lulzfornigeriagirl (08/05/2014) [-]
ohh god, OHH GOD.
User avatar #67065 to #67063 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Did you cum?
User avatar #67066 to #67065 - lulzfornigeriagirl (08/05/2014) [-]
No yes she is just a horrible person.
User avatar #67067 to #67066 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
I like her.
User avatar #67072 to #67067 - lulzfornigeriagirl (08/05/2014) [-]
I forgive you my nigga
User avatar #67079 to #67072 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Nothing to forgive nigga. I am proud of it.
User avatar #67059 to #67056 - pebar (08/05/2014) [-]
Milton Friedman - Greed Meh.... I never saw the attraction of the "greed is good" bit
User avatar #67060 to #67059 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Not so much greed as self interest.
User avatar #67061 to #67060 - pebar (08/05/2014) [-]
Same thing.
User avatar #67064 to #67061 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Adam Smith vs. Ayn Rand - Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights

What is wrong with self interest?
User avatar #67076 to #67064 - pebar (08/05/2014) [-]
Self interest can cause lots of problems. Capitalism however, within an certain economic framework, takes that self interest and turn it into something productive.
I'm leaning more to siding with Adam Smith
User avatar #67071 to #67064 - pebar (08/05/2014) [-]
stealing, government corruption, etc
User avatar #67077 to #67071 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Ayn Rand - The Virtue Of Selfishness

Ayn Rand - Conflicts Of Interest

You do mistake self interest with that of force to seek ones goals. It is not a philosophy of me first but rather man with the duty to only himself and not at the forced expense of others.
It states the nature of man's goals should foremost be himself and not others. This is not to state that charity is immoral but when it is self sacrificing it is. If one seeks to give money to other he does so but it should not be one's life goal.

Think of it like this, there is nothing wrong with eating a unhealthy food you enjoy but it should not be one's life goal.
User avatar #67049 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Do the demands of many out weigh the rights of individuals?
#67159 to #67049 - anonexplains (08/05/2014) [-]
A collective only has as much rights and liberties as the individuals who compose it. Screwing over individual rights for "collective rights" is hypocritical and self-defeating.
#67158 to #67049 - anonexplains (08/05/2014) [-]
you will find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.

#67122 to #67049 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
The short answer is no. The needs of the many is a noble end, but the means are terrible. The best way to satisfy the needs of the many is by maximizing individual rights. After all, no one knows what's best for you better than you. A good example of that is gift giving. A group of people can either buy each other gifts or each buy something for themselves. In which scenario will benefits be maximized for everyone? Obviously, the latter. Generally, no one can have the will or desire to look out for you as much as you do. So, everyone is best looked after by themselves, first. Then, you can look after others when you're ready, but self-sacrifice for its own sake is only self-destruction.

In fact, the "needs of the many", and the "greater good" or the "public good" are the excuses used by governments throughout history to perform all of their mass executions. They are used to rush into excessively liberal and socialist policies that ultimately fail or have the opposite effect that was intended.

This actually a very old question. The view that people should give to each other, versus the view that people should work their own way goes back at least as far as some Mayan hieroglyphs I remember seeing. The hieroglyphs seemed to imply the former was the path to destruction.

Don't get me wrong. It's important to give, and to be your brother's keeper. Nature puts that on our heart already, and teaches us to work together. But, to tell someone that he has to give his life or belongings to someone else for the greater good, or we're going to come in and take it, tends to have a net negative benefit.
User avatar #67083 to #67049 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
You just reminded me of this fucking arsehole I had to work with in a UN Youth event and his own interpretations of the UDHR that he presented as fact. Fuck that guy. SJW to the fucking max.
User avatar #67084 to #67083 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
User avatar #67085 to #67084 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
Universal Declaration of Human Rights you anti-democratic pleb.
User avatar #67086 to #67085 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Human rights should not be determined by either the tyrant or the tyranny of many, creating in a effect creating the tyrant. For if one's rights are subject to this can one say that he has rights or privileges that exist till his neighbors deem them illegal?

I wouldn't expect a Marxist to understand that.
User avatar #67087 to #67086 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
>He thinks there's natural rights

Rights are determined by the tyranny of many, m8. Your 'natural rights' mean shit when people think they're shit. Shit is alarming, but is true.

Thankfully we Ausfags have awesome constitutional safeguards on the misuse of political power.
User avatar #67089 to #67087 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
>Implying there aren't.

So what you are saying, is that rights only exist from a legal basis, and that there is no means to determine what a right is, only what is not banned from the government.
In that you have no rights, and that you are little more than a slave.
User avatar #67090 to #67089 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
>There is no means to determine what a right is

There is. It's what the majority think is a right.

Rights have no meaning unless they're backed by force. There is no force without the majority. Even if there were natural rights, they'd be meaningless unless the majority of the people believed in them.

Look at your Second Amendment. Fuckers want to amend your constitution to remove that natural right. They don't give a shit if it's natural.
User avatar #67091 to #67090 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Would you then make murder a right for another to take the rights another because 51% percent desired to kill 49%?

Would this be moral?

And how is the right to life backed up by force if it is taken by the government? The only means in which force is legalized?
#67093 to #67091 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
>He thinks I like the idea that rights are defined by the majority
User avatar #67094 to #67093 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Well stating that one's rights should come into question of majority rule and the tyranny of a majority. By this nature if ones rights are only what the government allows does that in fact take away a man's right to speak or rather does it only punish him for speaking.
User avatar #67095 to #67094 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
>By this nature if ones rights are only what the government allows does that in fact take away a man's right to speak or rather does it only punish him for speaking.

Er, both, I suppose, in some contexts.
User avatar #67096 to #67095 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
So natural rights are rights that man may do at the expense of no other and remains something that a man still would hold a right without the structure of force.
User avatar #67120 to #67096 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
Nigga wat

Possessing firearms is a right than does not infringe on the rights of others and fuckers still want to make us nogunz.
User avatar #67121 to #67120 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
The fact one man wishes to take your rights does not invalidate their existence.
#67123 to #67121 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
Oh snap, good retort.

I just want muh gunz ;_;
User avatar #67126 to #67123 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Btw that made my day. Thanks.
User avatar #67128 to #67126 - oxan (08/05/2014) [-]
Which part? Pic related? I like that pic.
User avatar #67124 to #67123 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Thank you

Don't we all?
User avatar #67051 to #67049 - ablueguy (08/05/2014) [-]
Which demands?
Which individuals?
Which rights?
User avatar #67054 to #67051 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
Does it matter?
Does it matter?
The rights of life, liberty, and property. Basic human rights.

The question is not meant to be subjective but rather one of principle. For if one finds some crack in a system, they can chip away at it to erode what is someones rights.
User avatar #67057 to #67054 - ablueguy (08/05/2014) [-]
I'm of the opinion that criminals forfeit their right to liberty, and possibly life, depending on the crime.
#67100 to #67057 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
I hope you emphasize the "depending on the crime" part. Anyone can be charged with a crime, or even commit one in some eyes, and it might seem foreign to you that you could end up on the wrong side of the law, until it happens. Don't forsake all your criminals. Ironically, they're not all bad.
User avatar #67144 to #67100 - ablueguy (08/05/2014) [-]
Yeah, I do put emphasis on what kind of crime it is
#67201 to #67144 - cabbagemayhem ONLINE (08/05/2014) [-]
Well...ok then!
#67062 to #67057 - anonexplains (08/05/2014) [-]
John Stossel - Policing For Profit
User avatar #67058 to #67057 - undeadwill (08/05/2014) [-]
That is a criminal who violated someone else's rights.
 Friends (0)