The Shrine

I don’t know about Castro, but Hugo Chavez called the press the enemy of the people. Also used Twitter as a means to broadcast his own version of the news.

Except Trump has never called the Press "the enemy of the people". But don't let that fact interfere.

If you want to get pedantic, none of these leaders have made precise declarations that "The press is the enemy of the people!" but instead targeted specific segments of the media and certain individuals and called them liars and the enemy of the people; and Trump has done precisely that on numerous occasions.

Julius Seeker wrote: ↑

Sat May 18, 2019 1:20 am

If you want to get pedantic, none of these leaders have made precise declarations that "The press is the enemy of the people!" but instead targeted specific segments of the media and certain individuals and called them liars and the enemy of the people; and Trump has done precisely that on numerous occasions.

Fake news is the enemy of the people. It illustrates a deeply incestuous relationship between the media and political interests & money. There is nothing "pedantic" about it and to suggest otherwise would imply the media is a golden calf and perpetuates the problem.

kali o. wrote:

Julius Seeker wrote: ↑

Sat May 18, 2019 1:20 am

If you want to get pedantic, none of these leaders have made precise declarations that "The press is the enemy of the people!" but instead targeted specific segments of the media and certain individuals and called them liars and the enemy of the people; and Trump has done precisely that on numerous occasions.

Fake news is the enemy of the people. It illustrates a deeply incestuous relationship between the media and political interests & money. There is nothing "pedantic" about it and to suggest otherwise would imply the media is a golden calf and perpetuates the problem.

Yea, he said the 'fake news' media is the enemy of the American people... somehow leaving out Fox News, or any other right-leaning source, in his examples:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/17/busi ... eople.html

To Trump, Fake News is simply any network or news source that doesn't consistently cover him favourably.

Trump claimed the election process was rigged - media and even Obama mocked him. Proven correct, both with the DNC hack/Sanders and Russia gate. Trump claimed his administration was spied on -- the media laughed at him and called him crazy. Proven correct. And then of course we have the Russia lie itself, a Democrat fantasy perpetuated on the public for over two years, with the full support of media and even after the Mueller report -- they can't give it up.

The closest scientific study of "fake news" we have in the Trump era is the Harvard study that found Trump negative coverage (CNN, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, NYT) were all approximately 90%, while positive or neutral coverage was 10% or less. This is completely out of step with other Republican presidents, nevermind Dems. If we are to look a little further out, obviously media bias, propaganda and manipulation has been an issue for decades (operation mockingbird) and liberal bias has been studied since the 80's at least.

I think it's an interesting culmination of a number of factors that have pushed MSM completely off the rails (they feel "responsible" for electing Trump, cable news is dying, a resurgence of cultural Marxism/identity politics etc)....but if you DONT think fake news is an issue (bias to Trump), then I'm not sure you are paying attention. It's overt and disturbing.

Of course the election process is rigged. The problem is that it is just as rigged for him as for everybody else, Killer. David Horsey has so far put it best:





Are we supposed to embrace our new Russian overlords with open arms? Do you think that Putin feels very charitably towards the United States after we destroyed the Soviet Union in pride and boast? I am far less anti-Russia than most liberals - but Putin's a murderer, he kills journalists and foreign government heads who disagree with him. Full stop. And he's also an autocrat who has revoked all elections which compete with his power - he is effectively Tsar, and if he were honest he'd simply call himself that. Russia has not outgrown autocracy yet, and we don't need any more of that here at present.

Not my vision for the States, brother.

Oh, and yes, fake news is an issue. I've tried to expose a lot of it here myself over the years, and you have often called me a lunatic for doing so. So perhaps it is your own karma that you're now screaming about how unfairly President Pussy-Grabber is being treated by a dishonest media - they are, but so is he, and few tears will be cried outside of conservative circles. Be nicer! For fuck's sake, that includes our bully of a President and it includes you too. Every time he does something good he follows it up with some kind of atrocity towards immigrants, his political opponents, or whoever that just turns me cold on the man again. Me as well, I have to stop being such a jerk just because the general public doesn't know the level of information know, being a descendant of an FDIC Chairman who had access to a high level of education.

We all need to be kinder and we can start to fix some of these problems.

I'll tell you right now, Trump could have my support - but he needs to do three things:

1. Stop being a bully and calling names. He's the fucking President. He has ascended to the highest post in our land. There is no accomplishment greater, and he could show the world some decency by not hating himself inside so much that he has to hate everyone else too. The Presidency is a diplomatic position whether he likes it or not - he is America's top ambassador, de facto, simply by virtue of the fact that he is our head of state, and if he's not up to that I can't support him for the job.
2. Indicate that he has *some* kind of a plan to restore solvency to the government and the dollar. Trump's business empires usually go in a particular pattern - everyone around him and everyone on board with the zeitgeist makes money for awhile, meanwhile debts accumulate and eventually something goes bankrupt and creditors are not repaid and the surrounding area is impoverished. He has accumulated a TRILLION-dollar deficit in a supposed economic boom, which is unprecedented and terrifying. If this doesn't get dealt with early it could literally lead to a bankruptcy of the United States during the next bust cycle, and given that Republican deregulatory tendencies are not getting better, a bust is more likely than not within a decade.
3. In general, bring back the man who gave Jennifer Hudson a room at the inn (his hotels) and a shoulder to cry on when her family member was murdered. That is the strongest evidence I know that Trump is capable of rising above the worst instincts of his base and being a true American from time to time. There is a human in there somewhere, but it's being buried deep at present. He has compassion, but it is so rare and it needs to be everyday in the woman or man I back for the Presidency. Obama said once that he woke up every day of his Presidency to ask "How can I make America better today?" - and while it will just enrage the man to have me praising his predecessor, I no longer care. That needs to be a thing. Much that was bad happened under Barack Obama, but in general things got better in America from the terrors of *his* predecessor - and without the eight years of stability he brought from the Bush excesses this economic boom doesn't happen - guaranteed.

kali o. wrote: ↑

Sun May 19, 2019 5:34 pm

Julius Seeker wrote: ↑

Sat May 18, 2019 1:20 am

If you want to get pedantic, none of these leaders have made precise declarations that "The press is the enemy of the people!" but instead targeted specific segments of the media and certain individuals and called them liars and the enemy of the people; and Trump has done precisely that on numerous occasions.

Fake news is the enemy of the people. It illustrates a deeply incestuous relationship between the media and political interests & money. There is nothing "pedantic" about it and to suggest otherwise would imply the media is a golden calf and perpetuates the problem.

You've said so yourself no one is above criticism. This includes Trump. Past US Presidents understood this concept. Trump does not. When news organizations criticize the President, it doesn't make them the enemy of the people; that's why the first amendment is there.

Other than that, I was pointing out that none of the above leaders said exact words: "The press is the enemy of the people!" but did what Trump did and targeted individuals or organizations in the press, called them fake news/liars and the enemy of the people. I am not sure how pointing this out implies the media is a golden calf; explain further.


Kali, question: is your support of Trump just to piss certain people off? (If so, you’re good!) =P
You never struck me as the type who would support that. I always pegged you as a more sophisticated/high-brow type. If Republican, more a Romney type at the least.

Julius Seeker wrote: ↑

Sat May 25, 2019 5:14 pm

kali o. wrote: ↑

Sun May 19, 2019 5:34 pm

Julius Seeker wrote: ↑

Sat May 18, 2019 1:20 am

If you want to get pedantic, none of these leaders have made precise declarations that "The press is the enemy of the people!" but instead targeted specific segments of the media and certain individuals and called them liars and the enemy of the people; and Trump has done precisely that on numerous occasions.

Fake news is the enemy of the people. It illustrates a deeply incestuous relationship between the media and political interests & money. There is nothing "pedantic" about it and to suggest otherwise would imply the media is a golden calf and perpetuates the problem.

You've said so yourself no one is above criticism. This includes Trump. Past US Presidents understood this concept. Trump does not. When news organizations criticize the President, it doesn't make them the enemy of the people; that's why the first amendment is there.

Other than that, I was pointing out that none of the above leaders said exact words: "The press is the enemy of the people!" but did what Trump did and targeted individuals or organizations in the press, called them fake news/liars and the enemy of the people. I am not sure how pointing this out implies the media is a golden calf; explain further.


Kali, question: is your support of Trump just to piss certain people off? (If so, you’re good!) =P
You never struck me as the type who would support that. I always pegged you as a more sophisticated/high-brow type. If Republican, more a Romney type at the least.

EDIT: actually Oracle said some of what I replied to below. My bad. All you White Canadian males look alike to me. Still, I'll leave my reply unedited since it still expresses my thoughts accurately.


No, you stated Trump criticizing the bias and propaganda (fake news) was inherently flawed, as he left out Fox News (important to note, Trump has criticized Fox plenty btw -- he's a pretty big fan of OAN though). Then you dismissed the obvious and provable MSM bias by asserting Trump simply calls fake anything that isn't favorable; which I tried to show was false via the actual metrics of coverage from the Harvard study and a couple of important examples.

The dems (in collusion with the media) will continue to gaslight on Trump in the hopes it can create enough doubt into 2020 (or at the very least voter exhaustion). I have a fundamental issue with the dishonesty and unethical behavior in media, that is central to this plan.

This is important. Trump is not a Russian puppet. He's a billionaire TV personality with a huge Ego that wanted to be president and has simplistic solutions. That's it. End of story.

Watching your fellow humans fall so easily for modern day propaganda is disturbing...most of us, on a basic level, find it ridiculous when we get a peek into the propaganda of countries like North Korea or China -- but we aren't immune. The information we consume structures our perceived reality; except for people that take the time to apply the logic and the Socratic method (as a personal example, yes I often take on entirely contradictory positions to my real beliefs, just to explore their ideas in more depth). Of course, there are times when people have an error in their logic, some fallacy, and this can lead people astray -- but more often it is an effective counter to propaganda and way too few people bother using it.

As to the rest of what you wrote....Romney is a slimy pig, as are most politicians. I am not a "Trump" fan, except in the sense he is an outsider and exposing not only the insanity of current western "progressive" policies / ideas, but also how incestuous the media and the government is. I am a libertarian, primarily, but also believe in Nationalism (globalism does not work under an unbalanced model and is inherently exploitive in absence of sufficient and expansive regulation. If it was balanced and fair, I would likely be unconcerned with anything Nationalistic and be a Libertarian Conservative under a single world government model). I'm not religious but I am accepting of the Christian foundations of Western society and give it due honor it for creating the best damn countries in the world (so separation of Church and State; but culturally important). Ron Paul would have made an amazing President in my opinion, if that helps you identify me. Or perhaps more locally, I will be supporting Bernier and have donated a shitload.

As to the 1st amendment, I am unaware that Trump has in any way restricted the freedom of the press (by law or action). Calling out a provable metric is not infringing on the freedom of the press and if the examples and study don't convince you this is a real thing....what will? And if Trump cannot criticize the press without being compared to Mao -- whether you accept it is real or not -- then we go back to my Golden Calf comment. A press should always be free -- but they should be judged and held accountable through professional self regulation and some laws. The free market is not sufficient to govern an institution this important (for a similar example, see real estate agents and the self regulation / laws that were deemed needed for them).

A deeply unselfaware man wrote:Watching your fellow humans fall so easily for modern day propaganda is disturbing...

Do tell.

Replay wrote: ↑

Sat May 25, 2019 8:35 pm

A deeply unselfaware man wrote:Watching your fellow humans fall so easily for modern day propaganda is disturbing...

Do tell.

Your reply/content/insult is more suitable to twitter/facebook/reddit. Try there. Maybe you'll get those coveted likes/upvotes! Or reformulate your thoughts into something more substantive and honest -- then I might reply in kind. Thanks!

I don't see a compelling reason to read your complaints about Trump over the Chocobo-singing cockatoo either, for what it's worth. :>

TLDR: Few outside Trump's circles care about unfairnesses done to him, or media bullying, because he has been deeply unfair and bullying to so many himself for so long. #yougetwhatyougive

Maybe you'll get those coveted likes/upvotes!

*snort* As if you or Brendan give two shits about this place enough to put in the work to make an upvoter.

A Very Stable Genius wrote: ↑

Sat May 25, 2019 9:09 pm

I don't see a compelling reason...

Ok then. Thanks for sharing. Bye.

Aw, you wanted to talk about all your concerns, and now you don't want to talk anymore.

Fancy that. Funny, too. Guess they're not that important to you after all. Possibly overblown. Sad!

"This is important. Trump is not a Russian puppet. He's a billionaire TV personality with a huge Ego that wanted to be president and has simplistic solutions. That's it. End of story."

We agree! =D

Where we disagree is that, I think this is a bad thing, and (I assume) you think this isn't a problem. Although, I might say instead of "simplistic solutions" that he has "poorly thought out solutions" as he doesn't seem to know much about the issues despite having great confidence he is an expert. To put it bluntly, I see him as a fool with a lot of followers. But it's fair to agree to disagree, here.

I would agree with you that the media has made WAY too much noise over the "Russia collusion" thing, but not because it’s unfair to Trump, but because they are ignoring the more important issues of his competency in the role of President.

On their motivation for doing this: the media works within the market forces, the agenda is profitability. These sorts of stories with "USA vs. Russia" generate viewership. I also see no evidence there is some major conspiracy between the Democratic party and the US media. Not even Fox News. They are acting within their niche. There is no conspiracy between government figures and the media; that’s TYT talk - again, mainly to market toward their own niche. Suggesting that the media is the enemy of the people based on a conspiracy theory is something I can’t agree with.

One question I am interested in: if you're a libertarian, why support an interventionalist policy like the Trump tariffs? Personally, I support tariffs for raising tax revenues (such as on various finished products like alcohol, cigarettes, and other items we may oppose consumption on: for me, that would include the commercial livestock and fossil fuel industries.) but using them to fight trade wars and for protectionism is bad for a fair free-market economy. I would argue tariffs (for trade wars/protectionism) and libertarianism are opposing concepts. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm curious about your perspective.

Julius Seeker wrote: ↑

Sun May 26, 2019 9:02 pm

One question I am interested in: if you're a libertarian, why support an interventionalist policy like the Trump tariffs? Personally, I support tariffs for raising tax revenues (such as on various finished products like alcohol, cigarettes, and other items we may oppose consumption on: for me, that would include the commercial livestock and fossil fuel industries.) but using them to fight trade wars and for protectionism is bad for a fair free-market economy. I would argue tariffs (for trade wars/protectionism) and libertarianism are opposing concepts. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm curious about your perspective.

As you have astutely alluded to here, modern conservatives are far more fond of yelling loudly about the virtues of laissez-faire capitalism and the dangers of socialism on Fox News than they actually *are* of real, unrestricted free markets.

The real unrestricted free labor market, for instance, contains no immigration restrictions, and they have very large problems with that. The real unrestricted goods market has no tariffs, either, and they are not very fond of that either.

Modern conservative economists are fond of protectionist systems, not actual free trade. They in general seek to restrict the flow of cheap immigrant labor and cheap foreign goods, ostensibly to maximize opportunities for American labor and entrepreneurs. I might give the theory and its backers more thought if most didn't so fully and actually treat most American workers like sweat on a ballsack, and if they weren't taking fat gobs of corrupt and foreign Russian and Chinese money at the higher end themselves while seeking to ruin the lives of the poorest immigrants.

Middle-class wages are essentially stagnant in terms of real PPP in America since the *1980's*, while the highest wage brackets have accumulated such corruption and inequality that your average Russian mobster can buy up five or six New York penthouses - often with help from high places, these days - while public safety officials like police and firefighters are having to endure moving outside their cities and two-hour commutes that vastly decrease their ability to serve their communities and the public.

Julius Seeker wrote: ↑

Sun May 26, 2019 9:02 pm

We agree! =D

Cool.

Where we disagree is that, I think this is a bad thing, and (I assume) you think this isn't a problem.

Why? Maybe it's time for simplistic solutions? A border barrier DOES prevent entry. Leaving homeless and addicts on the street is NOT compassionate. Free money, housing and food does NOT improve the prosperity of a population. Open borders is a drain on the social safety net and not sustainable. There are no such thing as FEMININE penises.

Progressive policies, from economics to culture, have jumped the shark. Shit isn't working and you see it not only in the major cities, but everywhere.

In truth, the left / right populism seems cyclical historically. Too far in one direction and it starts sling shotting the other way. Taking in the bigger picture, I would also say this is more of a Global phenomenon and a reaction to Globalism.

I would agree with you that the media has made WAY too much noise over the "Russia collusion" thing, but not because it’s unfair to Trump, but because they are ignoring the more important issues of his competency in the role of President.

I find political propaganda efforts from what should be an unbias media to be terribly disturbing. I am a little surprised if you do not.

On their motivation for doing this: the media works within the market forces, the agenda is profitability. These sorts of stories with "USA vs. Russia" generate viewership. I also see no evidence there is some major conspiracy between the Democratic party and the US media. Not even Fox News. They are acting within their niche. There is no conspiracy between government figures and the media; that’s TYT talk - again, mainly to market toward their own niche. Suggesting that the media is the enemy of the people based on a conspiracy theory is something I can’t agree with.

Well then you are simply wrong and not paying attention. The media cultivates partisan leak sources in the government, as famously plainly spoken about by Stelter when discussing the importance of the correspondence dinner, and the quid pro quo is in favorable or held back stories, in addition to "special correspondent / contributor" positions. It was just this year that Yashar Ali exposed NBC managing editor Dafna Lizner of trying to intimidate in order to quash a story on behalf of the DNC.

One question I am interested in: if you're a libertarian, why support an interventionalist policy like the Trump tariffs?

As I mentioned, Globalism simply doesn't work on an uneven playing field. It makes a very select group rich while slowly siphoning off the wealth of developed nations; all while simultaneously exploiting the most vulnerable in developing nations.

If globalism was not an issue, and the playing field was fair, then there would be no need for tariffs.

I find political propaganda efforts from what should be an unbias media to be terribly disturbing. I am a little surprised if you do not.

Do you now! Tell us more! You seem quite eager to have this discussion with Seek, but not with me - why is that?

kali o. wrote: ↑

Thu May 30, 2019 10:40 pm

There are no such thing as FEMININE penises.

OH MY GOD! STRAP-ONS ARE FAKE NEWS. DILDOS ARE THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE. NOW IT ALL MAKES SENSE.

THE SKY IS MOTHERFUCKING FALLING FOLKS. DON'T BE THE LAST TO BUILD A SHELTER.

When you are ready to converse like a big boy, Mental, I'll start paying attention to you again.

Until then, be content with the eye rolls and silence.

Thanks for understanding.

kali o. wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 01, 2019 10:41 pm

When you are ready to converse like a big boy, Mental, I'll start paying attention to you again.

Until then, be content with the eye rolls and silence.

Thanks for understanding.

Ahhh, the joys of watching a sociopathic thief and white-collar criminal who once "joked" about "having me killed" lecture me about "maturity".

But hey - if you can't recognize how far off the rails you've gone by going from "Trump's adversarial relationship with a free press resembles that of dictators throughout history" to "girls don't have any dicks" with this discussion, I'm not inclined to think there's much hope for it either.

I will certainly say, though - the transphobic flavor-of-the-month rant with which you've decided to spice up your lectures here about a dishonest press makes the overall series of incidents in which you gained your power here twelve years ago even more appalling. We never will get that discussion on how you manipulated the entire board via the dishonest accusation of me as "fag-bashing" over the entire "Tony Homo" scandal, will we?

Don't you ever complain about dishonesty in others, Kali.

Just as with our President - any discomfort you may experience over the world's dishonesty or unfair treatment of him, or you for that matter, can be filed directly in a column reading "This is your karma."

Does every subject title read to you as "let's talk about me and my personal list of deranged perceived injustices and slights"?

Oh. what a surprise. You still won't talk about it, because you remember exactly what you did, and how you played everybody, and you really don't want those actions examined on the record.

How did you ever make it in business? You don't have the balls of a baby porcupine.

An old, wealthy, terrified criminal wrote:Does every subject title read to you as "let's talk about me and my personal list of deranged perceived injustices and slights"?

Only with you, Kal. No one else here has made it a twenty-mission to steal from, defame, and otherwise harass my various legacies here the way you have - including the way this board has devolved from an outlet of hope with current-for-the-time technology into a disused old pirate bay and run-down online bar scene with less traffic now than *on the day of its creation*.

Besides which - you're on my damned thread! You want to talk about the freedom of the press instead? Go for it! You don't believe in it in the first place!

I don't like dishonesty. But *you* should get on your criminal knees and give thanks to God that the world is as dishonest as it is; if not, you'd be in a prison cell right now.

kali o. wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 03, 2019 11:50 am

Yeah, screw you for this one too. You're sicker in the head than anyone here.

I'd bet most people at the Shrine have never murdered anyone, for instance. That threat you made against me came far too easily for me to think it was your first.

I'll break my own rule for a sec here...

Listen you fucking turnip head, I wasn't even involved with your little "Tony Homo" spaz out. The only thing I did was show up in your little "all about me" yearly goodbye thread and suggest you don't leave. You remember it differently because you are mentally ill, have a persecution complex and your meds clearly don't work - but all the posts still exist.

Stop making every thread about you and try interacting like a normal human. Up your meds if that's what it takes.

I love it when I get under your skin.

Not involved? Bullshit. You swept in at the end to accuse me of "fag-bashing" so you could win points with everyone here who wanted to get drunk and call Tony Romo a "homo". And I'll sure say this for all of that - I proved one thing to myself very well, as well as anyone else who is being honest about it all: Flip didn't like being slurred with the same flavor of anti-gay terminology he proudly proclaimed to be harmless, drinking, sports-gambling fun.

In fact, no one did. It's almost as if "homo" and "faggot" are words that need to die out of the American lexicon - like "nigger" or "kike" or "spic" or a thousand other abusive insults based purely on an identity that the holder of the identity cannot change. I will reiterate again that no one would fucking put up with anyone here calling a sports figure "Tony Nigger" in "fun", for instance, for even a heartbeat.

Anyway, with regard to your complaints about a dishonest media? OH POOR YOU. You're a liar, probably a murderer, certainly a real estate white collar criminal and I do have evidence that you had me tracked and spied on back during the time of all those disagreements, even if you shat a brick after taunting me over it and then realizing that my family might actually have the power to punish you for criminal misuse of the real estate databases you no doubt got my information from. You're a criminal and a coward, and you've cost me a lot of good nights of sleep that I would have otherwise enjoyed with your criminal bullshit here. But OH NO THE FUCKING MEDIA, right?

It's like that Chris Rock skit - "When I go to the money machine tonight, I ain't looking over my back because the media outside! Oh shit, Mike Wallace! Run!"

Yeah, you motherfucker, sure. The media is the problem! Not a bunch of sordid, real-estate-embezzling, money-laundering fucking criminals keeping America poor, and sticking up for media dishonesty when it suits them, but failing to give a shit otherwise.

There's certainly some dishonest media in America - but I can't see as how you give a shit about it sideways if it's not harmful to your interests personally, or those of your heroes.

So, until you do - tant pis. Too bad.

Try not being an evil man for once and see if it changes your odds on other people giving a shit.

Your Tony Homo Spaz Out:
https://www.tows.cc/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=12074

Your #248 farewell thread:
https://www.tows.cc/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=12138

You call this place a fagfest, want people to lick your balls and state you will jizz in their eyes.

You were, and apparently still are, fucking crazy and delusional. lol

As to the rest of what you wrote...Ok, I "shat a brick" if that's code for rolled my eyes and forgot about you 3 seconds later, at best. You were never "surveilled". I haven't killed anyone. Sorry about your sleepless nights over your delusions but you are simply sick. You need help and I feel awful for you.

Actually, we should start a thread on the failure of mental health support in western culture. I think it's symptomatic of a larger change in culture and perception -- it's not compassionate to leave addicts and the mentally ill on the street; it's the height of cruelty, made that much more sickening by the fact people pat themselves on the back for leaving people in a personal hell without support. Institutionalization is sometimes the actual compassionate choice - the electroshock prisons of old do not have to be the standard.

Being an asshole for the entirety of my youth here on the Shrine has taught adult me that there's not much chance of changing people's opinions, but that doesn't mean "no point talking to people with different opinions!" that'd be boring. We can debate issues and learn from other perspectives. It's a lot better than making assumptions about each other's POVs and then talking past one another.

I've often thought that maybe we can find a way to monetize our differences of opinion at some point; it might motivate everyone to post more if we had economic incentives =D

Julius Seeker wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 12, 2019 7:35 pm

Being an asshole for the entirety of my youth here on the Shrine has taught adult me that there's not much chance of changing people's opinions, but that doesn't mean "no point talking to people with different opinions!" that'd be boring. We can debate issues and learn from other perspectives. It's a lot better than making assumptions about each other's POVs and then talking past one another.

Are you implying you are not an asshole as an adult?

We post often enough, I think, given how few are left. And I think our (you & I) back and forth above was enlightening, no? Bigger sites, like reddit, and of course social media, dominate the coversations online....but there"talking past each other" is the norm (or pithy and witty comebacks), as its all about upvoting / liking people you agree with; actual arguments and reasoning be damned.

And the only thing we monetize online currently is drama. We are a bored people in search of entertainment, I think.

(And yes, I find mental very entertaining and interesting)

Only an asshole when I kick off a conversation =)
With some exceptions.

If we were to monetize drama on this forum, we would need an editor to clean things up a bit to make it digestible by the general public who don't necessarily know our ~23-year history.

kali o. wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 12, 2019 12:02 pm

Your Tony Homo Spaz Out:
https://www.tows.cc/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=12074

Your #248 farewell thread:
https://www.tows.cc/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=12138

So many old names in those threads.

Eric wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 13, 2019 4:53 pm

kali o. wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 12, 2019 12:02 pm

Your Tony Homo Spaz Out:
https://www.tows.cc/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=12074

Your #248 farewell thread:
https://www.tows.cc/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=12138

So many old names in those threads.

A number have stopped by but, after failing to remember their login info, went away. Hopefully in the future a few create a new account and let me know -- then I can reset their old passwords for original accounts.

kali o. wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 12, 2019 12:02 pm

Your Tony Homo Spaz Out:
https://www.tows.cc/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=12074

Your #248 farewell thread:
https://www.tows.cc/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=12138
You were, and apparently still are, fucking crazy and delusional. lol

As to the rest of what you wrote...Ok, I "shat a brick" if that's code for rolled my eyes and forgot about you 3 seconds later, at best. You were never "surveilled". I haven't killed anyone. Sorry about your sleepless nights over your delusions but you are simply sick. You need help and I feel awful for you.

Make me believe you, Killer. I have apologized for the way I chose to confront people about the hatefulness of hate speech - but I didn't start the fire, and it was twelve years ago. What can I do? I'm not that person today; I've learned to teach people to stop using hate speech in better ways now. Remember how that entire incident started because the community collectively refused to ban homophobic slurs here in the first place. That is going to smell a bit Gamergate to the public at large.

Why am I never able to let it go? Because I made this place. And I'm sick of seeing my technology used by an evil man who has hounded, harassed and despised me for nearly twenty years, before using it to fence the remnants of Wall Street's destruction of Greece. Remember how you treated me when I started inquiring too deeply about that? Remember, I have some of your greatest hits too, and I don't have to make anyone here click a link to go rehash the old grudges and fights. You should learn to code!

kali o. wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 12, 2019 12:02 pm

Actually, we should start a thread on the failure of mental health support in western culture. I think it's symptomatic of a larger change in culture and perception -- it's not compassionate to leave addicts and the mentally ill on the street; it's the height of cruelty, made that much more sickening by the fact people pat themselves on the back for leaving people in a personal hell without support. Institutionalization is sometimes the actual compassionate choice - the electroshock prisons of old do not have to be the standard.

We should. You put the poor out of their homes, brag about it, lie, and then go "just kidding" when you want to get out of some drama you caused or some nonsense you've done. So please speak DEEPLY and ELOQUENTLY - but not dishonestly, if you are even capable of such a concept - to us all on how to have a mentally healthy planet.

You make me want to go review the dossier and see if I got any decent shots of you laughing about the surveillance you did of me in Palms! Quite frankly, since you are lying here and we both know it - consider how admissible in court those lies are if anyone ever had the logs pulled. As you love to remind me, the Internet is forever. I think you're a bad man hiding a lot of sins, and I believe you to be using the Shrine as an outlet for real estate transactions that - if not illegal in the United States - are certainly immoral and contrary to the public good.

You fucked up. You sent a death threat to a man whose last name is on the side of a Federal headquarters. You do know that as much restraint as you believe you've shown me - I've shown you *far* more, right? You want to get yourself in some real trouble? Think about what prevents me from sending that to the FBI the next time you get too fucking spicy with me. You treat me like absolute shit here, you always have, I do not believe that you're not a violent man and a killer - and if I weren't such a good man myself I would have banned you twenty years ago the way you deserve.

But I didn't, and you are what you are, and so am I - so let's have that conversation. Make me believe. Make me believe you were really "kidding" and that I haven't bequeathed the very first piece of technology I ever engineered to an overworked or apathetic man who then gave it to a criminal. Let's have the conversation you claim you want to have.

Have a good night. Oh, and THPOILERTH:
SPOILER: Sine, fix the fucking board please.

Julius Seeker wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:04 pm

Only an asshole when I kick off a conversation =)
With some exceptions.

If we were to monetize drama on this forum, we would need an editor to clean things up a bit to make it digestible by the general public who don't necessarily know our ~23-year history.

Do you *want* to be a reality show star? Goodness, maybe you do.

I redacted my first take on this. No offense to you meant, Seek - but if the drama here were marketable, there would be *people here*. It has mostly driven our older users away.

Of all the ways to monetize this site...it's a social network that's older than Google. Social networks are just message boards evolved - any smart person would have upgraded the tech years ago, implemented a tiered system of access to preserve older community, branched off to improve the network size on a different set of boards or forums - and we'd all be original admins of a viable, commercial social network, but when I suggested that the community said it preferred a closed community and it was like a favorite bar they didn't want too many people at.

As for being an asshole - no doubt. We all are, and can be, from time to time. But it's largely provoked by hatred, casual slurs, callousness, or minor violations of the social contract in the first place.

I remember when this site mostly promoted hope, in the first few years I ran it:

I hope one day you get the help you need. Society has failed you.

Who is "society"? You have failed me. You have failed the community, too. You are now the primary manager of technology I initiated. And you are a liar, a cheat, a thief and a man who makes death threats.

As my messages get more and more detailed about your wrongdoings, your own get shorter and shorter. That is because following up a pack of lies is very difficult.

One day I hope *you* learn that you are a very, very scared man hiding behind the dishonest acquisition of money and power - and no offense, but that's why you can't get a girl without paying for one.

Speaking of which, since you seem engaged for at least the morning - let's continue the mental health discussion aspect of it all. In particularly, let's go back to "girls don't have any penises." I mean, at least that was unexpected, spontaneous and amusing - not an entirely insane thing to say in a thread in response to freedom of the press, or anything.

Which brand of news are you insisting promotes girlie dicks, and/or is thus foisting fake news on the public about? Is it your supposition that trans people are not real people, and that discussion of transsexual Americans is fake news? You are, after all, the one who was extremely proud of the sex junket to Thailand where you "avoided the cock". Did you also avoid sex encounters that would have been of an illegal nature in the United States? Can we introduce these issues into the mental health thread I plan to start in accordance with your wishes?

Oh, what a surprise. No responses to the hard questions.

Lest I have the record altered here for 'threadjacking' again, like the days of old, let me get back on topic:

Many members of the media are frequently dishonest, it's true. I remember being given a lesson in media dishonesty very well when interviewed in high school by a classmate for a school paper - who badly misquoted me in a way that made a story seem more interesting, but which caused my own reputation to suffer. That lesson is that the media is full of human beings, and human beings are frequently flawed and irresponsible. In addition, it's probably not really possible to remove bias from human reporting. I'd bring back the Fairness In Telecommunications Act that once mandated equal time to debate participants and participants in any multi-sided controversy in a heartbeat; I think things were better then. You can't get bias out of the act, but you can at least ensure that all viewpoints are given an attempt at an equal chance. These things are why I respect gonzo journalism, and the legacy of Hunter S. Thompson particularly - it is almost impossible for an emotional, culturally biased human (and all humans have emotions and cultural biases) to truly present an unopinionated take on any issue, but one can at least present one's observations and commentaries on facts in honesty and with bravery, and to confront corruption unashamedly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzo_journalism

That all being said - there is no society I am aware of that has ever prospered by limiting press freedoms, nor any leader who has cemented a positive legacy in history by doing so. Modern history's autocrats and anti-press-freedom leaders include Hitler and Stalin as well as a wide range of banana-republic dictators, and nearly all of them have committed genocides. Our President's stance on the press is thus wrong and dangerous for the ideals of the United States, no matter how right it may seem to him or to anyone else who is angry at any of our dozens of media outlets - most of which do indeed involve a great deal of bias, and sometimes even outright dishonesty.

You don't keep freedom of the press around because the press is this unimpeachable institution, even if it likes to present itself as such - it isn't. Reporters are human, and as with any profession, a small minority is dishonest and will use the profession for self-serving and dishonest gains.

You keep it around because governments are made of humans too, and without a free press, government officials who also use their own profession for self-serving and dishonest gains run unchecked. Autocracy and state-mandated news as a way of existence is much, much worse, generally far more full of dishonesty and cover-ups of government-sponsored violence and brutality - and a bad way of life generally.

Replay wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 15, 2019 8:52 am

Is it your supposition that trans people are not real people, and that discussion of transsexual Americans is fake news?

"Real people"? What an odd phrasing... Is that the "transphobic" attack de jour?

Of course they are "real people". Mentally ill people. I find the whole thing incredibly sad -- that the medical profession, in tandem with a deeply flawed Psychology institution (with a history of terrible decisions on little science), has seen fit to advocate for body mutilation and hormones, in order the bring the patients delusion more in line with reality. My view is that in a few decades, we will look back on transition surgeries as highly wrong headed and even cruel. Just like we now view castration and electroshock.

Transgenderism or the new distractive term, body dysmorphia, is a terrible mental illness. Contrary to the APA, transgenderism is NOT simply gender non-conformity and they know it.

A trans woman is either a biological man (the hardline stance) or a trans woman (my middle ground). They are not, nor will they ever be, simply a woman. So if that latter part is where you see the "not a real person" aspect...well, OK. That's your language though, not mine. They are a real person -- but it is unequivocally a FACT, from every measurable biological aspect, that they are NOT a woman. They are something else and I don't see the redefinition of the words/terms (woman/sex/etc) to be rational, required or even healthy

And I'm not sure why you appear to be mocking me for "avoiding the cock" or prostitutes. Let's not forget, you were the one blissfully unaware you were oogling an obvious tranny prostitute until you posted here and we all laughed and pointed out it was actually a man. Glass houses and all that, buddy.

kali o. wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 01, 2019 11:53 pm

And I'm not sure why you appear to be mocking me for "avoiding the cock" or prostitutes. Let's not forget, you were the one blissfully unaware you were oogling an obvious tranny prostitute until you posted here and we all laughed and pointed out it was actually a man. Glass houses and all that, buddy.

You mean the trans woman who was an escort, a martial artist and a practicing witch? My goodness. Did you think I wanted to actually purchase her escort services? I found the person that she was trying to be interesting - an occultist, a martial artist, and a geisha, basically. But yes, I failed to notice that she was trans. Here's the link in question, lest we all forget.

https://tows.cc/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=17797

I have no shame over that incident at all. And I didn't find the escort side of things all that interesting - semi-legalized hookerdom is not really among my interests. That's your own wheelhouse - probably why you were so quick to spot her biological history. The fact that *you* define that whole thing as "me ogling an obvious tranny prostitute" does show me how your brain works, though. You probably don't see any reason someone would even take a look at her site unless they were looking for sex, right?

How often do you actually purchase sex?

Do you know what the fun thing about *not* going to hookers is?

I have never *once* had to worry about whether or not my date for the night was biologically female or not. I mean, I don't generally worry about that anyway as I'm not a bigot - but the percentage of people misrepresenting themselves generally is a lot lower when you take prostitution out of the equation.

Hence, why I insist that hooker sex is pretty unfulfilling - besides which, I told you about the story of the girl I paid once to kiss me at a party. It was obvious she wouldn't have had anything to do with me if I hadn't paid her - I clearly wasn't actually an attractive person that night, just a guy with money trying to kiss a girl who was kind of greedy.

That felt bad to realize, and woke me up. It felt bad to be someone so unattractive that I had to pay to have a pale imitation of the real, freely given, and fulfilling physical love that others routinely got for free.

I am not sure you've realized *yet* that your prostitutes don't love or care about you. You're just being used for money, the same way you're using them - most probably don't enjoy your company and wouldn't spend a minute with you without being paid, and the notion that you haven't developed social skills I was working on twenty years ago is certainly telling. And no matter how "mocked" you think I was for that - I'm the one out of the two of us who doesn't have to pay just to be allowed to be in the presence of a woman, as a general rule.

But yes - I should be kinder about it. It doesn't feel good to be an incel. And I'd hate to increase your issues with women, which already seem rather serious.

So I'll try to be nicer.

Do you want to be a person who can't get any attention from women all your life without paying them? That's the question you have to ask yourself, really. It seems like a bad way to live, to me - hard on the self-esteem and the soul.

kali o. wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 01, 2019 11:53 pm

Of course they are "real people". Mentally ill people.

This one's pretty telling too. Another one for the files.

Do you believe you are better than trans people are, or more mentally fit?

Replay wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 02, 2019 7:10 am

Did you think I wanted to actually purchase her escort services?

Yes, you clearly did. You were online searching for dominant hookers (aka ninjistsu...lol)

How often do you actually purchase sex?

Twice a week.

Do you know what the fun thing about *not* going to hookers is?

As a married man; yes.

I mean, I don't generally worry about that anyway as I'm not a bigot

Its not "bigotry" to have no interest in the cock. If you are cool with it - congrats, you are a homo.

You're just being used for money, the same way you're using them

Ya... You've figured out the prostitute and john dynamic, professor...

Do you believe you are better than trans people are, or more mentally fit?

Yes. In the sense I dont have a mental illness. I am better than you for the same reason.

kali o. wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 02, 2019 12:04 pm

Yes, you clearly did. You were online searching for dominant hookers (aka ninjistsu...lol)

And this is why I can never leave, sad to say. Whenever I do, I find an incel "billionaire" lying about me.

Read my lips: I don't have to pay for sex.

The fact that you do, however, seems to be coloring your perception of this discussion greatly - possibly understandable, as a man in the habit of going to prostitutes twice a week doesn't seem to understand that there are people out there who don't have to do that all the time to be sexually fulfilled.

How often do you actually purchase sex?...Twice a week...As a married man; yes.

Immense. Do you tell your wife that you're going to get a blowjob from the poverty-stricken or do you just bring the smorgasbörd of diseases home for scientific research?

Your poor wife. Your "billions" cannot be worth all this.

kali o. wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 02, 2019 12:04 pm

Its not "bigotry" to have no interest in the cock. If you are cool with it - congrats, you are a homo.

Putting some holes in your coming argument that you don't have a mental illness, there. Keep talking. This entire conversation is likely admissible in court regarding a future diagnosis of you with either NPD (narcissistic personality disorder) or actual sociopathy/psychopathy one day.

kali o. wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 02, 2019 12:04 pm

Ya... You've figured out the prostitute and john dynamic, professor...

Do you enjoy being a john?

Do you realize the title isn't substantially different than "an incel with money"?

I find the entire "incel" phenomenon curious. Back in the day it didn't need a fancy name; it was just a way of talking about guys who couldn't really attract women - usually due to a lack of social skills, though being evil and creepy tends to work too as you are proving to us here.

Of course, you'd probably deny the label.

But prostitution is generally a disease caused by what is now being called involuntary celibacy - men and women capable of acquiring fulfilling romance and sex from partners in traditional, legitimate means based on love and respect generally don't frequent prostitutes.

Do you believe you are better than trans people are, or more mentally fit?...Yes. In the sense I dont have a mental illness. I am better than you for the same reason.

I think you're fooling yourself - you are a seriously, severely and dangerously mentally ill person who needs to be treated - and soon - or one day you will be diagnosed and/or subject to serious criminal penalty due to the crimes your mental illness causes you to commit.

You admit that you frequent prostitutes as a married man. You believe anyone who would pursue a relationship with a trans person is a "homo". You lie with abandon, here and elsewhere, and I have quite enough records on you to prove that you are a pathological liar if the need arises. And, of course, you make death threats.

Take it from someone who's known some very good psychologists - you are as sick as they come, and a danger to society because of it.

Indeed, I don't know a single mental health professional who would fail to diagnose you as mentally ill based simply on the things you've said here in the last several days. Your wealth is not proof positive against this diagnosis, either, no matter how much you flap it around as proof of success and mental fitness - many of our millionaires and billionaires oddly constitute an underserved mental health population in the United States, as even though they can afford it, the stigma is profound and so a great many desperately ill people go untreated due to fears that they'll be blacklisted in business.

I am trying to feel compassion for it, even after all you've done against me here to cost me good nights of sleep over the years, even with your little boasts of having "plants" at the FDIC - because the sickest people are the ones who need help the most.

But I will certainly say, you do not make it easy.

Incel stands for involuntarily celibate. You are using it for someone telling you they fuck random whores twice a week and their wife. I don't think the word means what you think it means, Vizzini. If you want to look less stupid; try understanding the newest silly buzzwords before using them.

And my wife knows and understands. She is a great woman, but I need younger, vibrant and energetic women to satisfy me. As close to the legal limit wherever I am -- 18 is ideal. My wife is fully aware that powerful men sometimes have specific needs and desires.

Finally yes, if you like a trans woman's dick -- you are a homo. Sorry to break the news to you, since it appears you didn't know this...but congrats on learning something new about yourself. Self discovery is the best kind of discovery.

Mass media has a clear purpose. And it is money and power. And truth and tearful stories are left far in the background. I think everybody knows well that all your quotes can be easily played around and the meaning of your words will dramatically change. I am from [website redacted], and here it is especially noticeable.

The bigger story is, who are you?
Are you new?
I don't think we've had a new face around these parts in 15 years!

The bots -- they are too clever and fooling ya

I do want to thank the bot for bumping this thread though -- my last reply was utterly hilarious and brought a much needed smile to my face,

On the plus side of being easily fooled by AI, it's a damn good thing I wasn't friends with John Conner when T1000 was pretending to be his mom asking around about him.