Unread

Ryan_76's picture

I wonder if this can be substantiated.

AKA Sunshine_State at Popular Liberty

If you can't trust people with freedom, how can you trust people with power?

johnbernard1984's picture

Making bomb threats or death threats is not protected under free speech. Making a physical bomb hoax threat is one way to get shot by someone who thought it was real. Many of these pranks that insinuate imminent mortal danger to public bystanders whether the threat is real or perceived, will result in pranksters getting hurt, shot or possibly killed by people that thought the threat was real. All for some youtube views to feed their narcissistic ego. If this death threat prank stuff becomes socially acceptable then it will lead to the mental illness that defending yourself against an attacker is socially unacceptable because it could be a prank. Which is the point of this fad or meme put out by social engineers, lapped up by narcissist youtube rejects only in it for their 15 mins of fame.

Broadcasting live from globalist occupied mother Canadastan

crabacado's picture

I've learned a lot already. So much to learn from a docu series like this. Such good people just trying to live and serve others

A man who chops his own wood is warmed by it twice

crabacado's picture

why Nonna never spoke with me again as of late. I so loved her and still do. Personally, I know nothing of the old guard thing. The back room? Yeah I spilled my life beans, because I felt comfortable there, only there. Anything else is pure speculation ...

If anyone feels they need to know what I posted in the back room, just ask...I will tell, it's fixed in my life.

But this old guard thing? Makes me curious, but I can assure you, I know nothing of this

A man who chops his own wood is warmed by it twice

crabacado's picture

Life is too short

A man who chops his own wood is warmed by it twice

crabacado's picture

and needs a place to crash, my home is open to him.

A man who chops his own wood is warmed by it twice

crabacado's picture

for no reason other than your right to vote

A man who chops his own wood is warmed by it twice

Ron Paul Support's picture

I hope he continue to support Rand Paul. Thank you Mr. Yass and everyone that help Rand.

.

crabacado's picture

Do Tell!

"I had some parting words for PL that I was working on before the computer grinch pulled her down. Perhaps they were meant to be better said here, moving forward, than left where they might never be read."

A man who chops his own wood is warmed by it twice

crabacado's picture

I initially didn't want to share publicly, my thoughts, because there's obviously some members here who have yet to forgive Michael. I will be the first to admit, it took me a while too.

I still don't completely understand it, but I accept it and I forgive him.

I could only hope for the same.

When I OP'd this, my train of thought was simply this....he had pressure from some Alpha Beta Central federal agency to turn over information by X date. ...and couldn't tell anyone.

He refused and scattered the members of the ARK, for our own sakes and his own conscience.

Just a theory.

Am I crazy? It was 'out of character' for him. What else would cause this?

A man who chops his own wood is warmed by it twice

The Rebel Poet's picture

Bump

ΟΥ ΓΑΡ ЄCΤΙΝ ЄξΟΥCΙΑ ЄΙ ΜΗ ΥΠΟ ΘЄΟΥ

The Rebel Poet's picture

First of all I wasn't intending to "come after" either of you but rather to clarify something I feel went unseen.

As for the supposed fallacy, I understood quite well what you were trying to say, but I can see that I was not as clear. I also want to clarify again that I am not agreeing with circe's premise at all, but intend to demonstrate that her logic is not fallacious. I'm going to go slowly so I can see exactly where I went unclear.

Let me put it in formal logical form:

First a fallacy:
Some A are B,
C is A,
Therefore C is B.

With some nouns this becomes:
Some politicians are bad,
Rand is a politician,
therefore Rand is bad.

Am I correct that this is what you understand circe's argument to be? This argument is totally fallacious, but my point is that this is not the argument circe is using.

Now I will create a valid logical argument:

All A are B,
C is A,
Therefore C is B.

This is a valid logical form. With some nouns it becomes:

All government officials are bad,
Rand is a government official,
therefore Rand is bad.

Even though I disagree with the premise, the form of this argument is correct and hence not fallacious. This seems to me the argument that circe is making. Did I miss something?

ΟΥ ΓΑΡ ЄCΤΙΝ ЄξΟΥCΙΑ ЄΙ ΜΗ ΥΠΟ ΘЄΟΥ

TheTaoistTroll's picture

I will not vote for an establishment puppet. Hillary, Jeb, Rubio, and Christy are the known puppets. I would vote for Donald or Bernie over a puppet. We can do better; his name is Rand.

Puppet vs puppet? That is where we don't have any choice.

As it regard to the post subject matter. Donald is a brilliant player. Don't know where he stands. The real Trump or that fictitious Trump. 

 

 

Those who are; are those whom are not.

Shonn33's picture

for my own post...lol...can 'we' give ourselves a Bump now & then???

 

"Justice is indivisible, an injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere". MLK

harley9883's picture

Rand Paul for aid to Israel and Ukraine 

.

Pages