-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 1/12/99 7:24:55 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>
>> -Caveat Lector-
>
>>
>
>> An apologist for slavery and . . . You may think what you want, but do you
>
>> realize your rationalzations are inhumane.
>
>
>
>No I don't... As a matter of fact, if you could read (and understand what you
>
>read), I have repeatedly said that I do not advocate the enslavement of
anyone.
>I
>
>do not personally approve of slavery. Seems you would finally get that
through
>
>your head.
========================================================
Gee, Hawk, thanks for your condescending attitude. I am sure you are ready to
listen.
1. Oh, you don't PERSONALLY approve of slavery. Well, I guess that makes you a
good person(PC) or do you have someother reason for you letting us know that
you don't PERSONALLY approve of slavery.
Have you ever heard of the word hypocrite?
hyp-o-crite (h p2�-kr t1) n.
A person given to hypocrisy.
hy-poc-ri-sy (h -p�k2r -sT) n., pl. hy-poc-ri-sies.
1. The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not
hold or possess; falseness.
2. An act or instance of such falseness.
from:
<A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind9901a&L=ctrl&D=0&O=A&
P=67326">CTRL archives -- January 1999, week 1 (#625)</A>
Hawk sez:
I do not say that "owning a human being is a humane idea" -- but neither is it
an inhumane act.
-----
in-hu-mane ( n1hy�-mEn2) adj.
Lacking pity or compassion.
in-hu-man-i-ty ( n1hy�-man2 -tT) n.,
1. Lack of pity or compassion.
2. An inhuman or cruel act.
a-pol-o-gy (�-p�l2�-jT) n.,
2.a. A formal justification or defense. b. An explanation or excuse.
a-pol-gist n.
1. One who argues in defense of any person or cause.
slav-er-y (slE2v�-rT, slEv2rT) n.,
1. The state of one bound in servitude as the property of a slaveholder or
household.
2.a. The practice of owning slaves. b. A mode of production in which slaves
constitute the principal work force.
ra-tion-al-i-za-tion (rash1�-n�-l -zE2sh�n) n.
2. An instance of rationalizing.
ra-tion-al-ize (rash2�-n�-lhz1) v. r
3. To devise self-satisfying but incorrect reasons for (one's behavior).
from:
<A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind9901a&L=ctrl&D=0&O=A&
P=67326">CTRL archives -- January 1999, week 1 (#625)</A>
Hawk sez:
I personally do not wish to own a slave nor be a slave.
-----
Gosh, again, how noble. Gee, you wouldn't wish to be a slave. But by your
vaunted interpretation of scribblings you give PROVIDENTIAL AUTHORITY to the
actions of slaveholding.
Which I will stand-up again, and again and say -you are wrong.
===================================
>
>
>> Your contention that owning people, because of interpretations of
scripture,
>is
>
>> a valid human endeavour is ill-founded.
>
>
>
>A "valid endeaver?" Of course its a "valid endeavor." Murder is a "valid
>
>endeavor," if it accomplishes the perpetrator's goal. That doesn't make it a
>
>"desirable" activity in which to engage one's self.
================================================
So you say that owning humans is a "valid endevor"
val-id (val2 d) adj.
1. Well grounded; just.
2. Producing the desired results; efficacious.
3. Having legal force; effective or binding.
4. Logic. a. Containing premises from which the conclusion may logically be
derived. b. Correctly inferred or deduced from a premise.
5. Archaic. Of sound health; robust. �
en-deav-or (Rn-dRv2�r) n.
1. A conscientious or concerted effort toward an end; an earnest attempt.
2. Purposeful or industrious activity; enterprise.
ear-nest1 (�r2n st) adj.
1. Marked by or showing deep sincerity or seriousness.
2. Of an important or weighty nature; grave.
Again, you are a hypocrite. In "desirable' to you mean worth doing, advisable
or is it wrong to do?
==============================
>
>
>> Slavery is wrong, is known by the fact of the actions of slavery, not by
any
>
>> vaunted scribblings.
>
>
>
>Is it "wrong" because YOU say its wrong? Or because an amendment to the
>
>Constitution says its wrong? What makes an action "wrong?" Your bemuddled
>
>"logic" -- if such it could be called -- is "X (and action) is wrong because
the
>
>action of X is wrong." I fear you'll have to improve before your "argument"
is
>
>convincing to anyone who can string a group of words together and form a
logical
>
>statement.
>
==========================
Thanks again for mocking my syntax. I am so sorry that you have a problem
understanding it.
I was paraprhasing some wise words from a wise man. 'By the fruits, ye shall
know the tree"
Slavery is wrong from the actions of slavery. Simple.
Now, some words from "Hypocrite hawk"
from:
<A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind9901a&L=ctrl&D=0&O=A&
P=67326">CTRL archives -- January 1999, week 1 (#625)</A>
That is merely your opinion, and it does not comport with the Bible. You are
welcome to it, and you are certainly not alone in that opinion. But I base my
criteria on "stronger stuff" than personal opinion.
I would have to reject slavery, either an an owner or a slave. But as a
Christian, I cannot condemn it.
Anyone who understands the bible (which I allow as the only reliable source of
determining "good" and "evil"), should quickly pick up on the idea that God
does not consider the institution of slavery as evil. And if God doesn't
consider it evil, then I certainly am not going to condemn HIM for His
position on it. It is clear from the Bible that involuntary servitude is not
preferable in many cases, but it is not condemned.
I personally do not wish to own a slave nor be a slave... So it isn't a "good
idea" to me in most respects. I can say clearly, however, that it isn't an
evil idea.
=======================================
>
>> Lord, have mercy, the sufferrings from arrogannce saited by piety.
>
>
>
>Funny... I was just thinking the same thing...
>
==============================
pi-e-ty (ph2 -tT) n., -
3.a. A position held conventionally or hypocritically. b. A statement of such
a position.
=================================
>
>> A side-kick , someone to kick around.
>
>
>
>No... Someone to "kick around with." A "pard," a "buddy." Or if you prefer
the
>
>definition from the American Heritage Dictionary:
>
>
>
>side�kick (s�d�k1k�) n. Slang. A close companion or comrade.
>
>
>
>Hardly, "someone to kick around." Your own arrogance and accusatory manner
is
>
>amazing!
======================================
A close companion that you allowed social mores to be more important than your
friendship. In other words a hypocrite.
======================================
>
>> Embarrased? Shucks, wonder what your side-kick had to endure.
>
>
>
>Probably embarassment... Frustration... Anger... Resentment.. At least that's
what
>
>I would have felt.. However, I was no more at fault in that situation than
YOU
>
>were (assuming you were even alive at the time, and considering the rather
>
>juvenile nature of your posts, I have my doubts).
>
===================================
Again, thank-you for attacking me personally, instead of addressing the matter
at hand.
Are you more grown-up than I am? Wow, I bet you are wise, by now. hunh?
==================================
>
>> The social rules were racist.
>
>
>
>Of course they were.... Do you think anyone is denying that? Would you say
that
>
>there are NO racist tendencies in yourself? Or that racism is to this day as
>
>rampant or more than ever before? Or that minorities are not themselves
racists?
>
==================
Questions, questions . . . and I am sure that your Biblical 'authorized'
slavery option is very healing.
===================
>
>> Valid in the eyes of Jesus aka The Christ?
>
>
>
>Why should it matter? You put no stock in the Bible anyway, and I have been
>
>accused of "religious pandering." But then, I have noted a "slight" double
>
>standard from you in other issues too. If you wish to 'ban' the use of the
bible
>
>in determining whether something is "right" or "wrong," then don't use it in
YOUR
>
>arguments. If you do want to use it, you're in a heap o' trouble, boy....
and
>I
>
>look forward to the debate.
>
===================
This isn't a debating list.
Who said I put no stock in the Bible.
I don't put stock in people that use the Bible to sanction slavery.
You are just a hypocrite.
======================================
>
>> Like I said, I was raised in the South, home of gentlemen/women and racism
>
>> fostered by an illegal social and political system.
>
>
>
>Again... You seem to confuse "what you believe" with what is actually true.
I
>
>think, if you are speaking of some time prior to the 1960's, racism (or
>
>discrimination based on race) was LEGAL. If not, cite your references.
>
>Documentation is important.
>
==========================
It was not LEGAL. It was a sham.
The Constitution of the United States.
===============================
>
>> The seperate facilities has stopped, why? Because it was wrong.
>
>
>
>No... because it was declared illegal, and some pretty hefty fines and
penalties
>
>might be slapped on those who insisted on continuing the practice.
=============================
Only, where there were racist, ignorant people.
It was stopped because it was WRONG and could not be supported intellectually,
culturally or legally.
===================================
>
>> Ladies couldn't even vote untill this century.
>
>
>
>I'm not so sure its a good idea now... But that's another topic altogether.
>
==============================
So, you add sexism to your 'sins'.
Only MEN good enough to vote.
Sir, you are not only a hypocrite. but you sir have shown yourself to be a .
. .GOOBER.
Now, I hope you realize, that just a few nazis have had the privilege of being
called a goober by me, but gosh, I got to call them as I see 'em.
==============================
>
>> Slavery comes in many forms. We shall overcome.
>
>
>
>Oh.... Are YOU a slave? If so, I guess you DO have a unique perspective from
>
>which to speak.. Pardon me... I didn't realize I was talking to one with
personal
>
>experience in that "peculiar institution."
>
===============================
Yes, I do consider the 'FED' to be an usurious slavemaster, among others.
===================================
>
>> You write me personally and complain about this post and this person and
what
>
>> are the rules.
>
>
>
>I did that rather than "clutter up" the list... I thought it was a
considerate
>
>thing to do. If you'd rather, I can point out the obvious infractions of
others
>
>(regarding the so-called "rules") in the clear.
=========================
How considerate of you.
========================
>
>> Yeah, there are rules and rule makers and rulers and yardsticks and junk-
yard
>
>> dogs.
>
>
>
>I agree.... I have personally witnessed actual critters such as you
mention...
>
>However, I don't see the connection with the discussion at hand. Its like
saying
>
>"Yeah, there is earth, wind, fire, and water." Not a particularly
enlightened
>
>argument.
>
>
>
>> I ain'y yo mamma and if ya want a cop call 911.
>
>
>
>Is that somewhere in the rules? Maybe I have a truncated list...
>
>
>
>> Actions begat reactions and so forth.
>
>
>
>I've noticed... but I wasn't the first.. I read about this fellow named
>
>"Newton.."... ever heard of him?
>
>
>
>> Chill . . .
>
>
>
>I'm cool! I'm cool...
>
>
>
>> Om
>
>> K
>
>
>
>Might I ask a personal question? What does "Om" mean? Is it something like
"YOS"
>
>for "your obedient servant?" I've been meaning to ask you.
>
>
>
>Hawk
=====================================
Om means 'peace be with you', among other . . .
Now, lets us look at hypocrite hawk:
<A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind9901a&L=ctrl&D=0&O=A&
P=67326">CTRL archives -- January 1999, week 1 (#625)</A>
I was in the USAF for almost seven years as a professional military officer
and aviator. During three of those years, I was involved in what later became
known as the "Delta Force," but which then was "Blue Triangle" and a couple of
other secretive names. As such, I engaged in numerous "informal" wars,
insurrections, and general mayhem for the govm't of the U.S. -- often not even
allowed to wear the uniform (we called these "T-shirt and blue-jean missions).
I was also in VietNam quite a bit, before the conflict became a "war." In all
of those missions, we were directly involved on the "wrong" side, or were
sticking our noses into other peoples' affairs, generally helping some
dictatorial govm't obtain or maintain its harsh control over the populace.
Then, for three more years, I was directly involved in intelligence gathering
operations. For three years, every morning, I saw "raw intelligence" --
information that had not been "laundered" for public consumption. Not one time
-- and I mean not even ONCE -- did the truth about what was going on reach the
average American. We were lied to on a continual basis, and are being lied to
at the present time. I was trained in the process of developing "cover
stories" about things that happened, . . .
-----
Gee, kinda sounds like a government shill.
So big boy, show your colors, whise side you on . . .?
Hve you related to us citizens what you did for the illegal goverment, Come on
BigBoy, put your mouth where your mouth is.
Disgustingly uours,
Om
K
-----
Aloha, He'Ping,
Om, Shalom, Salaam.
Em Hotep, Peace Be,
Omnia Bona Bonis,
All My Relations.
Adieu, Adios, Aloha.
Amen.
Roads End
Kris
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
