Imaginary Clocker Bob Thread Titles

91
Rick Reuben wrote:
rick reuben wrote:You better focus on me then, because if you attempt to defend the Federal Reserve or the 9/11 Commission Report, you will just look silly.
El Protoolio wrote:
Yeah, when have I ever defended either of those things? Show me one quote of mine refuting one of your two pet causes and I will leave this forum entirely.

I don't want you to leave, but explain this:
El Protoolio, referring to me in a thread about having your mind changed about 9/11 wrote:I can credit you for sparking my own research into the Federal Reserve and the history of money, banking and corporations in this country. It was something I had ignored for too long if I was going to further develop my worldview. However I believe I have drawn some different conclusions then you about it.


I forgot to say, this quote of mine you dug up? You did that because I told you to. I controlled your actions yet again. Just saying.

Imaginary Clocker Bob Thread Titles

92
Rick Reuben wrote:
El Protoolio wrote:
Rick Reuben wrote: You need to have people like me in your world- to give you an escape clause. Then, in 20 years, when you're waist deep in a police state with a broken economy and constant 'terror alerts', you can tell your friends this charming anecdote( out of the view of the telescreens, of course ): "I, El Protoolio, stopped telling the truth about America, but I had a good reason: one person that I didn't like forced to me to shut down my public anger, because if I wrote about it, it put me in agreement with that one person too often. I was more worried about peer pressure retaliation against me if I publicly agreed with that one, lone person, more worried than I was about the future of the whole damn country. I thought micro when the world needed me to think macro. One person made me dilute my anger.

See, my friends- isn't that a good excuse??"


You're fucked in the head dude. Again you make up straw men. I have publicly agreed with you plenty of times. Even today I posted a PM of mine to you saying that I agree with you on a lot of the subjects you write about. It was never about your opinions, just your methods.

Doesn't disprove my point. And you did say, "Fuck your ideas", did you not? So you went way beyond my methods.


I said it in the context of a larger "fuck you", like "fuck you and the horse you rode in on", or "fuck you very much". Sometimes "fuck you" by itself just doesn't fully convey the right feelings.

Rick Reuben wrote:If you get gun-shy about the political stances you take on this forum because you're reluctant to find yourself on the same side of the line with me, then you are letting your animus for me overrule your duty as a citizen.


This is not a political forum for me. I come here to get away from news and politics. I also continue to contribute when I feel the urge but mostly my feelings on a subject are usually already expressed by someone else. My civic duty does not suffer because I decline to get into political debates on a rock and roll forum, what utter nonsense.

You told me yourself that you read, watch baseball, record, listen to music and maybe you even have sex with girls. Are those not temporary escapes from the hard facts of life? Can I not have my own? Do I really need to discuss in detail every little fucking thing that bothers me? If I did we would be here a very long time.

Also, this is not your forum, it's the forum on the website of a recording studio business. It is not up to you to decide what we discuss and your constant steerage towards whatever subjects interest you most is part of what bugs me so much. Your contributions are out of proportion to what this website is supposed to be all about. No one person should be dominating the discussions all the time but thats what you do. You have not been the only one but you do do it and I would argue you are the biggest culprit. That is why I call you a fascist authoritarian and a bully. Because you act like you are all of those things.

Rick Reuben wrote:Do you want to live inside some bitter world like Scott Chrome Robe, who is letting his politics atrophy on the forum because he's too wrapped up in personality issues to share a thread with me? Or Andrew L.? tmidgett? Does that sound like fun? I guess they think they are making some 'statement' with their behavior, but they're just being petty, and they are giving me 'control' ( whatever that is ) over the political threads on a silver platter.


Good, now you have stumbled upon another reason why I have taken issue with you - your behavior towards people who disagree with you.

I am not that familiar with whatever arguments you had with these two fellows but both Scott and Tim are two of the people here that I am friendly with and interact with socially on a semi regular basis. Both of them are stand up guys who would bend over backwards to help someone. I do not know if I agree with all of their views and I do not care to find out because both of them have shown me nothing but kindness and respect both in person and online. We are all in the same boat, even if we have some differences, and as such I would not hold those differences against them, whatever those differences may.

Because you are such an ass towards them and because I know from personal experience that they do not deserve it I am willing to give most of the subjects of your wrath the benefit of the doubt because your attitude towards them has led me to believe that you are full of shit. If are wrong about their characters how could you be right about anyone else's?

Rick Reuben wrote:The world moves fast and every day wasted discussing nonsense when you'd rather be discussing politics is gone for good.


If I wanted to spend my time immersed in that subject I would be a politician or a political scientist. There is too much in life to enjoy to get caught up spending all my time discussing this crap.

Rick Reuben wrote:If you people want to make it a central point of your attacks on me to be 'Bob has no influence', then prove it- act like I have no influence. Act like I don't exist.


Most of the time I do act that way. For some reason I've had way too much time lately to get caught up in this and I've already wasted enough of it today.

Rick Reuben wrote: Do you think I am going to change my activity in the police corruption thread because you are taking the lead? Hardly. I go to where the action is, and design my position around the facts, not around the fraternity.


I don't think of myself as taking the lead on anything. I am just contributing to the discussion. It would be nice if you took the same stance.

Imaginary Clocker Bob Thread Titles

95
Rick Reuben wrote:
sunlore wrote:I actually have a soft spot for satanists. I've known some, they're hilarious all things considered.
You have never met the satanists I am talking about. The only true satanists are born satanic. It is not a choice one makes.


What? They don't have a choice, they're just born to annoy you?

And by Babylonian, do you mean Baalism? As in, Taxil Hoax Baal/Baphometism? As in that Chick Track about Masonry?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxil_hoax

Imaginary Clocker Bob Thread Titles

97
Rick Reuben wrote:
El Protoolio wrote: Your contributions are out of proportion to what this website is supposed to be all about.

Then why has Steve only asked me one time to alter my posting behavior? Why should I go by what you say?


You don't have to do anything I say. It's just like, my opinion man. I think most reasonable people would stop and reflect on their behavior when their behavior has bothered so many people. But I am guessing you are not like most people.

I do not make the rules here, I am just going on what this site was originally designed for which is an advertisement for a recording business. The moderators here hold the principle of free expression in a very high regard. So since they won't ban anyone for expressing themselves, something I completely agree with, it is up to the individuals in the community to speak out against other users whenever there is disagreement because all of us are free to express ourselves. That is what I have done. Not everyone will agree with me and that's just fine. At least I spoke my mind and at least I never once called for you to be banned nor have I ever complained about anyone to any moderator.

I think if we all interacted face to face we wouldn't even be having this discussion, but because it is so easy to dehumanize all the people here when all you know of a person is a silly picture and a stupid name it is easy to speak and behave in a way that you never would in a real social situation.

Maybe I just confuse it as a real social situation because I personally know so many of the regular posters here. This website to me is like an internet college lounge. In any case I have wasted enough of both of our time. I said what I have wanted to say and it only took you 6 days to understand so I think we can just move on now.

Imaginary Clocker Bob Thread Titles

98
Rick Reuben wrote:
Antero wrote: Most of his posted "facts" either do nothing to prove his position


Well, it's a fact that you can't see a fact even when it falls on your head then.

During an unprecedented US building boom, with demand for construction labor very high, real wages fell. Amount of blame that a douchebag trust fund fake liberal like Antero places on undocumenteds selling themselves cheap to builders: Zero.

If you can't unplug your head from your rectum, then you can't see facts.
http://www.epi.org/images/figurea2.gif
See, again, here's a perfect example: You draw the conclusion that the solution to the problems of illegal immigration is to resort to internal class warfare against the poor and xenophobic isolationism. The unfortunate fact is that this is an irrational position entirely removed from the data you cite.

True liberals - though I know enough of the economic history of the term "liberal" as to not apply it to myself when talking to those who should know better - are those interested in increasing the power of the working classes, and support egalitarian measures designed to take illegal labor and turn it into legal labor, removing the ability of the employer to wield the immigration status of the employee against them, and thereby returning their wages to the world of regulation, oversight, and potential labor-union action.

Of course, there's a bigger issue than the fundamental disconnect between your positions and the support you provide, and it's this: your recent tendency to swing about the term "fake liberal" is ultimately meaningless, as it is an attempt to disguise the actual movement of your political position by aligning yourself with "liberalism."

You're not a liberal. You're not interested in the preservation of basic freedoms and human rights, nor in the well-being of the citizenry and the inequality fostered by laissez-faire capitalism. This has been made more than apparent by your support for the nationalist authoritarian Putin, and by your support for a racist, laissez-faire capitalist presidential candidate.

What are your issues? Banks. Banks and globalism, and their opposition at any cost. You are perfectly willing to accept any abuse of power, any dictator, any aggressive fucking-over of the poor and the environment, as long as it is in opposition to the "fake currency."

I would suggest that your political stance has begun to slide rather sharply towards a distressing protofascism, and would suggest serious reevaluation of the things you consider politically significant before you find yourself supporting your own foes.

----

[edit to add]: BTW, "trust fund"? Please. My parents are artists, making that as inaccurate as it is unoriginal. The only part of your insult that retains relevance is "douchebag," which is just vague and toothless. Do you need help with insults? I'm the product of miscegenation, for one. You could also throw in "self-important." That's pretty accurate.

You could call me a "self-important half-breed banker-Jew intellectual," with that last word dripping with the confused scorn commonly displayed by those who care little for democratic principles.
http://www.myspace.com/leopoldandloebchicago

Linus Van Pelt wrote:I subscribe to neither prong of your false dichotomy.

Imaginary Clocker Bob Thread Titles

99
Rick Reuben wrote:Here's the link that will take you straight to the first page of this lying fraud's post history:

http://www.electrical.com/phpBB2/search ... &start=100


For clarification, RJR has been here a lot longer than that sign-in.

Other than that, I quite liked Dr Venkman's earlier intervention. And this:

sunlore wrote:I actually have a soft spot for satanists.
Gib Opi kein Opium, denn Opium bringt Opi um!

Imaginary Clocker Bob Thread Titles

100
Rick Reuben wrote:In the world of the NWO, all crimes against races and religions and all crimes blamed on races and religions are layered distractions to confuse minds and send people on wild goose chases after phantom perpetrators. It has always been about the ancient bloodlines that lead back to a Satanic cult, and those they view as cattle, us.


Bob - honest question - are you serious about this? Or are you taking the piss? I can't tell anymore.
Rick Reuben wrote:
daniel robert chapman wrote:I think he's gone to bed, Rick.
He went to bed about a decade ago, or whenever he sold his soul to the bankers and the elites.


Image

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests