General

Re: Wikileaks

liberty student — Wed, 15 Dec 2010 08:22:40 GMT

Peter Schiff and the Kochtopus

Re: Wikileaks

jmorris84 — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 04:26:34 GMT

You don't have to do anything that you don't want to do, liberty student. Enjoy the rest of your night. :)

Re: Wikileaks

liberty student — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 04:20:35 GMT

jmorris84:
What gives liberty student?

To give you guys a response, since you're apparently not able to search or follow this stuff in realtime, requires free time for me. Something that has been in short supply today.

jmorris84:
You made a claim with zero proof.

What claim did I make?

jmorris84:
Aren't you going to at least give us a link or something?

Do I owe you something? Have I not given enough, you feel I am somehow in your debt?

You guys will get a post, maybe tonight if I have time. Then you can all benefit from my labor, as you seem to believe is your due.

Seriously jmorris84, what have YOU ever done for ME?

Re: Wikileaks

jmorris84 — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 04:15:11 GMT

What gives liberty student? You made a claim with zero proof. Aren't you going to at least give us a link or something?

Re: Wikileaks

jmorris84 — Thu, 09 Dec 2010 15:31:43 GMT

liberty student:

auctionguy10:
it'd be nice if you could clarify this Koch thing- its the first time I heard it.

Will try to do so tonight in a new thread.

Looking forward to your thread, liberty student.

Re: Wikileaks

liberty student — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 21:44:42 GMT

auctionguy10:
it'd be nice if you could clarify this Koch thing- its the first time I heard it.

Will try to do so tonight in a new thread.

Re: Wikileaks

auctionguy10 — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 19:56:56 GMT

Nielsio:
Schiff gave a speech at a free market oriented meeting and suddenly he's a 'Koch agent'?

Did I say that?

You definitely didn't- but I think you already know why nielsio was confused, it'd be nice if you could clarify this Koch thing- its the first time I heard it.

Re: Wikileaks

liberty student — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 19:43:41 GMT

Nielsio:
Schiff gave a speech at a free market oriented meeting and suddenly he's a 'Koch agent'?

Did I say that?

Re: Wikileaks

Nielsio — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 19:41:20 GMT

Schiff gave a speech at a free market oriented meeting and suddenly he's a 'Koch agent'?

Schiff also gave a speech in Saudi Arabia, does that mean he's also an agent for the oil barrons?

Re: Wikileaks

liberty student — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 18:51:47 GMT

Nielsio:

liberty student wrote:

Schiff is a Koch agent from what I can tell. You'll notice Lew Rockwell doesn't cover him at all since he was outed with Glenn Beck and others as attending Koch secret retreats.

?

The other day you accused me of 'reckless speculation'.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/lewrockwell-show/?s=schiff

And when was that interview done relative to when the information about the Kochs came out?

Nielsio, you were recklessly speculating. I am not. But I am amused to see it has bothered you enough that you're looking for an opportunity to create a tu quoque instead of addressing your own intellectual errrors.

Re: Self-defeating Libertarians

liberty student — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 18:47:59 GMT

SirThinkALot:
Actually I would say the state is immoral, capable of unspeakable atrocity, and incompetent. If I'm shocked at something the government does, its not because I think they wouldnt do it, but because I dont think they are CAPABLE of doing something(or on occasion because I cant understand how the people would let the state get away with something)

I can work with this.

If you believe the state is incompetent, why do you pay its fines and taxes? Why do you follow its rules?

Why do you think the government is not capable of doing something that they claim that men in a cave can do? If you believe they aren't as powerful as the men in the cave, why aren't you paying taxes to the men in the cave? Either from fear, or respect, those cave men seem to be the superior agency of force.

SirThinkALot:
I never said the government COULDNT have pulled of 9/11, only that they DIDNT. When you actually look at the evidence, the claims of people who think the government masterminded 9/11 fall apart very quickly.

That is negative proof. It's a logical fallacy.

Just because someone can't prove something, doesn't disprove it. If a government is capable of extracting more wealth than anyone in the history of mankind, largely without violence, can have no meaningful political change in a democracy for almost 100 years, assassinate its own leaders, make torture legal, while breaking every moral law known to mankind, while launching wars under false pretenses without holding anyone accountable for what is essentially treason, how can you possibly believe that they could not blow up some buildings and hijack some planes?

I don't know if you are American, but Americans in general seem to suffer from this affliction of thinking they are exceptional, and yet being incredibly paranoid about men in caves at the same time. Either the US government is supreme or it is not.

Again, if there is a higher power, why are people paying their taxes to the US government? Why are libertarians licensing to travel, and paying fines to courts with no standing?

Yes, the truth is out there, and it is damn uncomfortable. Because the evil isn't in the state. The evil is something we create in our minds and enslave ourselves to. The revolution is not against people with guns, but with our consent to be treated like children and slaves.

Re: Wikileaks

Nielsio — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 18:43:49 GMT

liberty student wrote:

Schiff is a Koch agent from what I can tell. You'll notice Lew Rockwell doesn't cover him at all since he was outed with Glenn Beck and others as attending Koch secret retreats.

The other day you accused me of 'reckless speculation'.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/lewrockwell-show/?s=schiff

Re: Self-defeating Libertarians

liberty student — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 18:04:57 GMT

Prateek Sanjay:

They know the state is completely immoral and capable of unspeakable atrocity

The state is not immoral or committing atrocities, because the state is not a person.

The state as an agent. Really Prateek, I expect a higher standard.

Liberals are self-defeating if they are for limited liberty.

Re: Self-defeating Libertarians

K.C. Farmer — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 17:57:43 GMT

I'm interested in more specifics on how libertarians are self-defeating...

Failure to organize - Not sure this it true. Seems there are as many libertarian organizations and groups as there are libertarians. If you mean failure to effectively organize, I can see your point.

Prone to Conspiracy Theories - Seems just about every segment has this problem, so it's not unique to libertarians. Some folks are just skeptical, as they probably should be. Is being skeptical to be taken to mean a person is a nut job? If so, I'd wear the nut job badge with honor. To me a nut job is one who goes along with what he's told without exploring the truth. That definition fits most people.

As for specific conspiracy theories, most people probably don't care. In my observations, people tend to follow issues and subjects that impact them directly. They don't want to invest in the time required to follow-up for things that impact them, let alone topics they really don't care about. Going with the flow is a convienence, and people tend to like convienence. So they accept things and move on.

A skeptic doesn't advance a claim without solid evidence that is confirmed by other parties. If anything, each discovery tends to lead to more questions. I do think there are a lot of people who get worked up on a particular point, and then try to advance it without the required evidence. I've seen far too many claims that are lacking, and that includes official claims as well.

Re: Self-defeating Libertarians

SirThinkALot — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 17:53:20 GMT

Many Libertarians are funny. They know the state is completely immoral and capable of unspeakable atrocity, and yet they still maintain the pretense that something is beyond the state, structurally or ethically.

Actually I would say the state is immoral, capable of unspeakable atrocity, and incompetent. If I'm shocked at something the government does, its not because I think they wouldnt do it, but because I dont think they are CAPABLE of doing something(or on occasion because I cant understand how the people would let the state get away with something)

Obviously someone destroyed those buildings. If some rag tag guys in caves with backroom funding from desert backwaters *supposedly* could do it, why not the largest military and covert intelligence operation in the world?

I never said the government COULDNT have pulled of 9/11, only that they DIDNT. When you actually look at the evidence, the claims of people who think the government masterminded 9/11 fall apart very quickly.