Friends in Las Vegas, please check in.

[filghy2]

As to my bizzare interpretation of history, do you seriously believe that holocaust would have even taken place if Jews in Germany had guns?! Do you think that Nazi Germany would have even been an issue if people of Europe had guns?!!! What kind of moronic logic is that?! I'll go even further: maybe WW2 would have been avoided all together if people had guns!

So civilians with guns would have been able to resist the German tanks, artillery and planes, even though the armies of European countries were unable to do so?

[filghy2]

As to the sketch about Arthur and the Black Knight, both the King had a choice to take a longer route, and the Knight had a choice to step aside.

Polish humour might be different, but you are missing the point of the sketch, which is about the black knight being completely delusional. Like some others I can think of.

I'm starting to wonder whether your persona is just a clever send-up and you are just acting out a role here. You almost sound like a Monty Python character.

[Stavros]

Stavros you are clearly against liberty, and advocate that the state has all the power over its citizens. It tells people what they can or cannot do - that is not freedom. Freedom is when you decide whether or not to have a gun and whether to shoot clay pigeons or another person with it. You want the state to have monopoly on weapons, and who knows what else. Of course later you say you had only quoted some philosophers.. You advocate social democracy, whose name speaks for itself. - Which is a system where 2 winos from underneath a local bridge have the same vote as 2 educated engineers. Needless to say that probably none of these four have any idea of how to run a country. Personally, I think a monarchy is by far the best system our civilisation has come up with, as if you have a stupid king then at least there chance that the following one is going to be smart. Democracy, is a system where the majority of idiots always has advantage over the minority of the wise.

If there is no need for one to own an ak47 or whatever then they will simply not get one. There is no need to regulate that.

You could link to 100 books about Polish history and it would not make any difference as each and every one of them is also a mere interpretation. You may as well say that you believe in God because The Bible reads there is one, or that you believe in Spider-Man because you read multiple the comics or saw a film about him.

Nazism is also known as German national socialism for a reason. Oh and guess what! It also had to do with worker's party... Calling a pile of shit "poo" doesn't change the fact that it is a pile of shit.

RedVEx I could answer all of your points in a reasonable manner, arguing for example that it is legitimate for someone with an interest in European and Polish history to rely on the research of others, not least when they have either first hand access to the original sources in Poland or may even be Poles themselves -whereas all you offer is your opinion dressed up as fact with no objective facts in support, but you are of course entitled to interpret history in any way you can, even if it is just fantasy.

Your remark in another post about guns and the holocaust does however raise the question how much do you know about the difference between the Jews of Poland, who were quite different from the Jews of France and Germany with regard to their politics and their social organization. Armed gangs of Jews and armed gangs of Poles wreaked havoc o each other even before the Germans and the Russians piled in to take the country into an even darker place. You also completely ignore the role played by pacifism in the inter-war period whether it is the Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928 or the simple fact that Europeans were so exhausted by war and the devastation of the Spanish Flu epidemic another war was no desirable nor conceivable, something Hitler exploited to his temporary advantage.

As to the citizen and the state, human beings are collective by nature and communist, if you believe that two people are joined together in matrimonial harmony and share what they have in common.

I believe in individual liberty, just as I believe the state should not have complete power over its citizens so your assertion is the opposite of what I have said before but does imply you are either unwilling to understand the point, or just delight in turning it upside down. I could go on, but I am not sure you want an open debate free of personal abuse. But thank you for responding to my posts, it is comforting to know you have been thinking of me.

[Ts RedVeX]

As we say in Poland: "You can't braid a whip out of horseshit", so I'll just finish with an anecdote:

After World War II a decent and hard-working peasant is found to be in possession of some old rifles by his lazy communist neighbour who, obviously, grasses him up. The peasant is brought before court:
- It is illegal to have guns in our democratic country and we have a witness who confirmed that you keep rifles in your household! What do you have in your defence? - Asks the prosecutor.
- A tank, in my barn. - Replies the peasant.

[Stavros]

[Aticus100]

Mr Fanti,
A simple question. Do you believe that no problems should be tackled unless, simultaneously, all other problems can be resolved. It’s a simple yes or no.
Anything else will be conceding that you can’t answer it and still remain credible.

Redvex, come your glorious, anarchic, kill or be killed revolution, you would be the first against the wall.
You are the ultimate hypocrite. Thriving in a country that uses restriction and regulation to provide you with the freedom you so strongly excercise to damn the very restrictions and regulation that allow your lifestyle and liberty.

In both cases I assume you will disappear up you own asses as you throw in further confusion and conjecture rather than respond in to simple comments.

[Nikka]

Jesus...................

[Jericho]

Fucking hell B1, what have you started?

[GroobySteven]

Read the first post - and jumping to the end to comment, I can live without the rest of the rubbish, because honestly, your politics, I really don't give a fuck.

When we're in a fringe group like this, when people often only know each other under names other than their own, and when very little of society give a fuck, then social media like this IS a vital part of checking in on friends. There are people here I know as friends, but if I communicate with them it's usually via here (Ed Jaxon for example, is someone I've had dinner with, smoked with - but I don't believe we have each others numbers, and I contact him thru here, or many of us considered outselves friends with Prospero, even though we hadn't known each other outside the boards). Many of the girls, whom I'm friends with I don't know them through their legal names (although I'm able to find out).

You can be friends, whether we know each other in person from clubs - or online - or if they are part of the broader circle, it doesn't mean you've always got their contact details so a check-in is a really good idea when something like this happens. I've a lot of friends in Vegas, some who were there - and I was checking the reports when they came in.

Frankly, I'm pretty disgusted by Red Vex's outburst - if you didn't like it, then just ignore it and move on but to attack someone and the idea of what they've done, is pretty pitiful. If you can't get with this community and give it the respect, then perhaps this isn't the place for you.