.
Submitted by classified info... on Wed, 2007-06-06 02:41.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit»
- Login or register to post comments
- 2853 reads
- Email this journal
- classified information's journal
- 4 points
.
.
I totally agree with both replies...
and it would be wonderful to have read, even if it was a piece of crap, what it is that they read that made them post the two excellent come backs or flames at the original blog. Did who ever write it delete his/her account or had they been censored and banned? Hope it is not the latter...because that censor button is used way too freely by Internet sites professing to welcome and offering freedom of expression to diverse opinions. BTW, I'm not against throwing out garbage because I just complained myself to the mods about that xxx blog entry and hope it is deleted...because it basically borders on something which is of as much interest to anyone...as an advertisement. But someone posting an asinine statement...or even a hate filled statement ought to be allowed to unless they are running rampant all over a site otherwise words and ideas which are basically nothing more than confrontational in their challenging of people to put their very lives on the line for their ideals...will be the first to really be obliterated from public view.
--
nIhILiST, sometime solipsist, part time poet, full time Artist, force of Chaos & Anarchy, erotic writer to be, prophet unwelcome in my own land, the buddha is a shit stick & if you see it on the road piss on it for it is an impediment to your enlightenmen
rich people are stylish
13 is trollin for debate, but to be honest the post seems to be below a certain threshold of relevance. They always say there are no dumb questions, but you know what? they're full of shit. Because this IS a dumb post. I'm all for diverse perspectives, but those perspectives have to have some minimal argumentative merit.
Well okay there is one interesting phrase:
13 wrote:
>> Frankly,i don't like poor people and poverty and something needs to be done to get rid of poverty.
This phrase is either communistic or genocidal. Let's give 13 the benefit of the doubt and assume the post is not advocating genocide or moving poor people out of 13's sight.
So, the idea could be communistic in the sense of: lets wipe out poverty by giving everyone the beautiful stylistic clothes they need to satisfy 13's refined aesthetics. In this case 13, we are in agreement.
Of course next we will have to do something about all the ugly rich people:
Because frankly I don't like rich people and tuxedos and something has to be done about it.
In honesty
my main reaction to this post is *gag*
I am holding to the hope that this is satire, but I'd hoped the same when I read Cindy Sheehan's letter-of-resignation from the peace movement.
I don't love the poor so much that I don't want to make us all rich, but as matters of observation poor people tend to be more helpful and giving toward their fellow human beings than those with the privilege and resources to do so much more.
Most importantly, poverty overwhelmingly exists due to injustice, historical and actively inflicted. We all have an obligation to overturn injustice and make the world more fair.
A tourist trip to the moon is emblematic of wasted resources, like yachts and $100,000 cars. If we, the vast majority of this planet, were not robbed of our share of resources and control, we would make much, much better use of the money. Eating, yes, but also educating our children and solving problems that are felt by everyone.
Finally, sharing food can be much more than maintaining.
I feel a little less dirty now than I did after reading 13's post.
ben
~ In living, loving memory: John Melançon ~