Metathread

POSTED BY: dreamtrove
UPDATED: Sunday, September 13, 2009 03:09
VIEWED: 1935
PAGE 1 of 1

DREAMTROVE

Friday, September 11, 2009 3:02 AM

For those of us without enough time, if people would be so kind as to post links to interesting threads and what they're about, that's another way to keep track. I'd appreciate it, and I think Byte would too.

Thanks - DT

BYTEMITE

Friday, September 11, 2009 3:51 AM

Meep!

I try to read as many threads as I can. My problem is that I stay up too late, honestly. ^_^

Time should be an issue, though it's not, because I sorta spend time here when I REALLY shouldn't...

Oh damn! I forgot, brownies!

Hold that thought.

BYTEMITE

Friday, September 11, 2009 3:54 AM

Mmm. Okay, I'm good. Brownie quota has been filled.

KWICKO

Friday, September 11, 2009 5:15 AM

Define "interesting".

Our working definitions may differ radically.

KWICKO

Friday, September 11, 2009 5:16 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Mmm. Okay, I'm good. Brownie quota has been filled.

Mmmmm... Brownies GOOOOOOOD.

I just finished the last one of my last batch, made with dark chocolate. Quite tasty.

Mike

"It was already blue when we got here!"

BYTEMITE

Friday, September 11, 2009 2:56 PM

The only problem is, making them with egg replacer makes them more gooey than normal, so it's kind of like eating fudge instead of cake. But, chocolate is chocolate.

DREAMTROVE

Friday, September 11, 2009 4:01 PM

Mike

I'll try process of elimination:

Not interesting:

1. Two people are locked in a vicious battle over a divisive issue

2. Someone has posted a conspiracy theory relating to a dead issue like the moon landing

3. Someone has posted something about bagels.

4. A thread beginning in the words "Sarah Palin" or for that matter "Obama" or anything like that which is liable to be partisan bickering.

Interesting:

Theories about ways people work, govts, power structures, cause and effect relationships.

Ideas about how to go about doing things, like starting a revolution, religion, terrorist network.

Fascinating new discoveries about anything from jellyfish to neutron stars.

Brownies, but only if they come with a recipe

KWICKO

Friday, September 11, 2009 5:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Mike

I'll try process of elimination:

Not interesting:

1. Two people are locked in a vicious battle over a divisive issue

2. Someone has posted a conspiracy theory relating to a dead issue like the moon landing

3. Someone has posted something about bagels.

4. A thread beginning in the words "Sarah Palin" or for that matter "Obama" or anything like that which is liable to be partisan bickering.

Interesting:

Theories about ways people work, govts, power structures, cause and effect relationships.

Ideas about how to go about doing things, like starting a revolution, religion, terrorist network.

Fascinating new discoveries about anything from jellyfish to neutron stars.

Brownies, but only if they come with a recipe

DT: Point taken, but you'll agree that most of the really active threads around here tend to wind up including everything listed but the bagels and brownies. Now if only I could find a way to make a brownie bagel...

Mike

"It was already blue when we got here!"

DREAMTROVE

Friday, September 11, 2009 9:26 PM

Made brownies instead. I was ref'ing whozit. You posted something inaccurate on a thread, but I can't find it now, I didn't want to leap into the frey of the argument. It wasn't the Zaire thing, I think it was just something you were serious about that contained an error. From the right perspective, you see how little that stuff actually means, I mean, if people just searched before posting, they wouldn't make errors. Oh, and just once I'd like to see Wulf make it through a thread without mentioning race. He's like the white sharpton. By the time you read this, John will have posted 6 new threads.

Still every once in a while there's something interesting.

KWICKO

Saturday, September 12, 2009 1:41 AM

Oh, I got the reference to WhoZit, all right.

And if you found only one error or inaccuracy in my posts, I'm surprised (that you found so few), and I view it as a failing (that I included even one).

Point taken, and I'll work on that.

Mike

"It was already blue when we got here!"

DREAMTROVE

Saturday, September 12, 2009 5:16 PM

I meant to take you to task for it.
Of course, that's the sort of thing that makes us waste time. I think you either credited Clinton for something good that he didn't do, or blamed Bush for something Clinton did. (this sort of stuff can be confusing, because we tend to blame whoever is president when the story breaks, rather than who instigated it) For instance: Secret torture prisons? Clinton, story got one mention, broke many years later under Bush. Torture as US military policy? Pure Bush baby. Expect this same thing to happen to Obama: There are fiscal disasters already perpetrated that we don't know about yet. When we do, Obama's in big trouble, even if it's Bush that did them.

Just yesterday Me and a friend were going over elections of the last century: The guy with the most personal audacity *always* wins. The only audacity reduction is when a VP or hand picked party successor inherits the throne. After that, he'd have to beat a calm and reserved challenger (Barry Goldwater? George McGovern?) <-- of course these two would quite likely have made better presidents. Democracy, it seems, favors audacity.

I can see Obama winning re-election in a three way split in 2012 between himself, Sarah Palin and Jesse Ventura, but losing to either one in a run off

Not sure who would win a run off between the two.

Oh yeah? Okay. You probably think Ventura is tougher than he looks above (isn't everyone?) Okay. Here's Jesse ready to take Sarah down:

Uh oh, I think, boy, you're just about to learn why technology is the great equalizer

Oh, yes, I'm sure there are those of you out there who say all of this is just silly. May I remind you that this man is now a US Senator:

TRAVELER

Saturday, September 12, 2009 8:01 PM

From DreamTrove:

At least Al is one senator who can laugh at himself.

http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=28764731
Traveler

BYTEMITE

Sunday, September 13, 2009 1:11 AM

I'm not sure if he's shaved his legs or if the picture quality is too grainy to make out detail, but THANK GOD either way.

TRAVELER

Sunday, September 13, 2009 1:20 AM

I think it is the quality of the photo. His face seems to be rather blotchy to me. Maybe he has pantyhose on to prevent rug burn.

http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=28764731
Traveler

KWICKO

Sunday, September 13, 2009 1:49 AM

I also have to show some respect for a Senator who can draw a map of the entire country from memory:

I love that he starts with his home state, Minnesota (probably a good idea, too, since he's doing it at the MN state fair!). You know what my state fair's big winner this year was? Deep-fried Butter. I am not making this up. It won a blue ribbon at the Texas state fair. :(

So it makes me feel just a little giddy to know that there's a Senator who can actually do something, even if it's little more than a stunt. Also, I've seen Penn Gillette do it, too.

Oh, and this video absolutely broke my heart, and it seems I'm not alone. This is from "Ukraine's Got Talent" - and it proves that they do. A young lady uses "sand painting" to tell a love story in a time of war, and absolutely brings the audience to tears. Her talent is simply astonishing.

Mike

"It was already blue when we got here!"

TRAVELER

Sunday, September 13, 2009 2:11 AM

Hello Kwicko:

That sand art was lovely. I have never seen this kind of work before. I am not surprised by her theme. I am sure the Ukrainians are all to familiar with what she portrayed. This is why I believe in the internet. I do not believe I would have seen her work anywhere else.

Thank you for sharing;
Traveler

http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=28764731
Traveler

DREAMTROVE

Sunday, September 13, 2009 3:09 AM

Mike,

amazing.

Yes, an all too familiar theme in the Ukraine:
WWI: 5-11 million
The Russian Revolution: 1917 3-5 million
Russian Civil War: 1921-1923 c. 13 million
The great Purge: 1937-1938 2.2-5.0 million
WWII: 1.6-13.7 million
The Holocaust 1941-1945: c. 5 million

All of the above are casualty estimates of Ukrainians and people of Ukranian descent, a story that no one in the west is telling, and for good reason: If you knew why, our entire society's justification for its policies would collapse.

Pirate News is 1/2 right: there's something wrong with the picture of the holocaust, but it's not what he thinks. "Jewish" is just a religious designation. Khazar jews are a portion of the unscientific definition "Ashkenazi," and while their survivors make up a decent % of the population of Israel, they are not the ones guiding the agenda, and never were.

In WWI, the russian civil war, and WWII, ukrainians were put on the front lines, and the battles were fought in the ukraine for maximum ukrainian casualties. In addition to that, socialist regimes enacted multiple exterminations against the civilian population of the ukraine:

1921 Trotsky
1937 Stalin
1942 Hitler
Each directly exterminating around 5 million ukranians in direct genocide, on top of the massive wars being fought on their territory. The total death toll is extremely hard to measure.

Both the "holocaust industry" of the zionists and the "holocaust deniers" are in essence wrong about one thing: The fact that ethnic ukrainians were as likely to be jewish as catholic or eastern orthodox was not really all that important to the surrounding powers.

What's equally not clear is how many native ukrainians remain in the ukraine. One way to prevent futurre massacres of Ukrainians is, based on the historical record, to remain an independent state of the Ukraine. Right now there's a fairly strong struggle between the pro-russia side and the pro-EU side. Both are misguided, either would end in disaster. Curiously, Many Ukrainians "russians" have no long russian history at all. They were acculturated under the Czar during the 19th c. So called "Polish" Ukrainians were acculturated under the Hapsburg empire.