Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [steiner] Re: Politics

Expand Messages
  • Durward Starman
    ******* I doubt very much that anything about the issue will make sense to you: it s about as likely as that you would be comfortable living around the
    Message 1 of 41 , Jun 6, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      ******* I doubt very much that anything about the issue will make sense to
      you: it's about as likely as that you would be comfortable living around the
      Goetheanum in Switzerland, where every adult male has to have a modern
      firearm in working order and know how to use it, and the men teach their
      sons shooting on the weekends... even though somehow Dr. Steiner never tried
      to get them all to change (which was good, because it was these habits which
      saved them from the Nazis a generation later), nor is there (impossible to
      find credible to the liberal mind) any gun violence .... just as there was
      almost none in the Old West: the reason the names of the Clancy Brothers,
      Billy the Kid and other outlaws are so remembered today is because they were
      so rare--- where every one was or could be armed, no one normally dared act
      like a 21st-century rapper or the Virginia Tech killer so crime was
      virtually non-existent, contrary to the movie myths.

      To flat-earthers or Darwinists or other politically correct thinkers, no
      debate is possible: all evidence is interpreted only one way, so facts are
      meaningless---- such as the fact that every city in the US experiencing gun
      violence while having gun control laws has had a DECREASE in violent crime
      when concealed-weapon laws were changed to permit law-abiding citizens to
      carry arms, or the obvious truths repeated so often by the NRA that guns
      don't kill people but people do, so guns themselves are neutral not
      'filthy', and that "if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns" since
      criminals do not have to care about, or use, legal methods of obtaining
      them.

      Yes, a mentally ill person should not heve been allowed firearms, and
      black racists should not have been allowed to attack all the Korean
      shop-owners in LA in the name of Rodney King. Which would I depend on, the
      efficiency of government to do the job of keeping guns out of the hands of
      nuts, or a private citizen armed and able to respond in kind? If I were on
      that campus or a shop-keeper in LA, the latter would be my choice every
      time. The ones who bought guns to defend themselves didn't have their stores
      destroyed by thugs. The students weren't allowed to, so they're dead. If
      pilots were armed, the World Trade Center would probably still be standing.
      If Jews had had free access to arms the Holocaust would never have happened.
      If the American colonists had NOT had access to arms, we would probably
      STILL be a vassal of the British Empire with few or none of our American
      freedoms we take for granted, perhaps not even those in the Magna Carta.

      Starman

      www.DrStarman.com





      >From: "Stephen Hale" <sardisian01@...>
      >Reply-To: steiner@yahoogroups.com
      >To: steiner@yahoogroups.com
      >Subject: [steiner] Re: Politics
      >Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 01:09:02 -0000
      >
      >Starman, you said:
      >"I am quite happy that not only the police are armed. If Virginia
      >Tech students were armed, more would be alive, since one of them
      >would have taken out that murdering Korean before he had the chance
      >to kill so many. A disarmed populace is a docile one...."
      >
      >Please try to give me some sense of reason to this you wrote above.
      >The Korean student had guns, which he acquired with ease, although
      >he had a record of mental imbalance. Now, doesn't that show flaws
      >in the system of selling guns? Yet, you say that if other students
      >had had guns, then he would have been taken out without so many
      >being killed, correct?
      >
      >Now, it is my understanding that Wyatt Earp was the only one at the
      >gunfight at OK Corral who didn't get shot, which is pretty lucky
      >considering that they all had guns, and were shooting. Of course,
      >he lived to go to Hollywood in the early days of cinema.
      >
      >The Virginia Tech student blew his brains out after making his
      >show. And he bought the guns right here in America, rather than in
      >Korea. As an American, he had the right to buy the filthy bastards.
      >
      >Steve
      >
      >
      >

      _________________________________________________________________
      Picture this � share your photos and you could win big!
      http://www.GETREALPhotoContest.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us
    • saggitar4swas
      What does the possession of a guns do to the soul of the possessor? In the case of the Swiss (who do military service - & only those who do hold weapons) is
      Message 41 of 41 , Jun 7, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        What does the possession of a guns do to the soul of the possessor? In
        the case of the Swiss (who do military service - & only those who do
        hold weapons) is seems to add to their self-possession (nationally not
        always individually). The context seems important there. Canadians too
        seem (with a few rare exceptions able to manage the ownership of
        rifles - primarily for hunting). As for Iraq -

        > As we're learning now in Iraq, a well-armed militia filled with
        > patriots willing to kill and die for their nation is impossible to
        > rule over.

        The "free people of Iraq" as an example to all those who feel that free
        access to machines made for the sole purpose of killing might not be a
        good idea? Really, Matthew?

        And if guns should be available to all free people, why not durgs?
        After all a completely doped population have no reason to worry about
        invasion, or anything else...Where does the abortion issue fit in with
        a perspective that seems to see readines to maim or kill others as a
        major contribution "free" societies?

        Guns, no guns? - all this seems more a matter of simple commonsense -
        the best & only basis for Anthroposophy - than spiritual science.


        --- In steiner@yahoogroups.com, "Mathew Morrell" <tma4cbt@...> wrote:
        >
        > So long as the average American is armed, as he now is, we are
        > unconquerable by invading powers, whether that power is China or the
        > UN.
        >
        > As we're learning now in Iraq, a well-armed militia filled with
        > patriots willing to kill and die for their nation is impossible to
        > rule over. Napoleon learned the same lesson when invading Russia.
        > The Brits learned this lesson in 1776. The next to learn are
        > liberals.
        >
        > This is why the One World Government wishes to disarm the US. People
        > like me and Starman will never bow down before false gods and their
        > Marxists priests.
        >
        > Long live freedom and democracy! Long live the Republic!
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.