Thoughts, please!

[iOWNme]

If that was a corporate/private security "police" would you find it acceptable then? Even if the government was done away with you'd still have the same thing but just privately owned.

NO. Morality is not altered by a costume, title or position. Morality is not altered by 'legislation' or 'law'. No documented 'procedure' or 'ritual' can alter morality. You STILL dont even comprehend the concept of what Anarchism is, yet you cant stop bashing it. Its makes it literally impossible to have a discussion when one of us doesnt even grasp the others position.

Actually the police have more oversight since they answer to the public.

Im speechless. You literally know that is not true, yet you attempt to use it to strengthen your position. SHEESH.

[iOWNme]

What........refusing to answer the question?

Its a simple question asking a simple....yes or no answer?
What contradiction is posed by this question?....its a "yes or no".

Ive been through this with you 100 times. You dont grasp or comprehend my position, so any attempt from you to discredit it, results in you contradicting yourself and disagreeing with yourself in principle.

How about you just stop trolling me, until you actually grasp my position?

Or you could just debate me live on skype, as ive offered 100 times. Because when talking live, you cant hide behind time and a keyboard. Your contradictions can be immediately pointed out and made to be clarified, to the point you will have to disagree with yourself to try and make yourself right.

Your position can never be valid if it is based on contradictions. I dont need to have all of the answers to know that your wrong if you contradict yourself. And the ENTIRE belief in ANY form of 'Government' rests on a gigantic contradiction soup of dry water and square chicken eggs.

[Hitch]

Or you could just debate me live on skype, as ive offered 100 times.

Don't do that, 7th. It won't be a debate. A debate is an honest interaction and discussion, what sui is offering is not honest.

[iOWNme]

Don't do that, 7th. It won't be a debate. A debate is an honest interaction and discussion, what sui is offering is not honest.

You IMAGINE im dishonest, because you dont even comprehend my position. I can understand why you IMAGINE me to be dishonest.

LOL.

The whole point of debating live is so if i am dishonest, i can be called out on it, live, and then re-posted for the world to hear.

I have no fears whatsoever of debating live. What does that tell you?

[Hitch]

I have no fears whatsover of debating live. What does that tell you?

It tells me you have an agenda. An agenda you want to prove.

You pulled this same shit with me regarding cops. I didn't bite. So I just thought I'd recommend 7th not to bite at your offer.

Your idea of "debating live" is not honest, at all. You'll storm out of the gate...manipulating things, to where it's not honest at all. It is obvious.

[Dogman]

A chat channel would be perfect!

Audio and or video chat could be fun for they equipped!

Or keyboard to keyboard but not as revealing!

Thought not!

[osoab]

It tells me you have an agenda. An agenda you want to prove.

You pulled this same shit with me regarding cops. I didn't bite. So I just thought I'd recommend 7th not to bite at your offer.

Your idea of "debating live" is not honest, at all. You'll storm out of the gate...manipulating things, to where it's not honest at all. It is obvious.

It would be a one sided debate solid. Sui, would eat "headless chicken's" lunch.

7th is truly delusional. He would rather kill anyone that doesn't agree with him. He is truly a blind radical.

[Hitch]

It would be a one sided debate solid. Sui, would eat "headless chicken's" lunch.

7th is truly delusional. He would rather kill anyone that doesn't agree with him. He is truly a blind radical.

No argument here. My point was an "honest" debate. What does that mean to sui?

My take, say I debated Sui live on police/law/constitution, etc. Here's how it would go "my thoughts":

A 60 minute debate would break down to this:

58 minutes = Sui on the attack, you suck, you are evil...blah blah blah.

2 minutes = Me. Saying "I didn't say that" "You are putting words in my mouth" "Back up, you are making assumptions" etc etc.

See what I'm saying? Sui is an agenda predator ready and looking to pounce on someone. A debate with that guy would be a total cluster. No reasonable person would waste the time on that nonsense.

[osoab]

No argument here. My point was an "honest" debate. What does that mean to sui?

My take, say I debated Sui live on police/law/constitution, etc. Here's how it would go "my thoughts":

A 60 minute debate would break down to this:

58 minutes = Sui on the attack, you suck, you are evil...blah blah blah.

2 minutes = Me. Saying "I didn't say that" "You are putting words in my mouth" "Back up, you are making assumptions" etc etc.

See what I'm saying? Sui is an agenda predator ready and looking to pounce on someone. A debate with that guy would be a total cluster. No reasonable person would waste the time on that nonsense.

I can see your point on Sui's zealousness. The dude can be overwhelming and in your face. I still think he would have to breathe while skyping though. 7th would get enough of his drivel in.

[Hitch]

I can see your point on Sui's zealousness. The dude can be overwhelming and in your face. I still think he would have to breathe while skyping though. 7th would get enough of his drivel in.

I would much rather see a 7th and Ximmy debate. The way they go back and forth is absolutely hilarious. Imagine them as a couple sitting down at the dinner table together. What a riot.