Please expound on what assumptions motivate this as reasonable or funny (if it is to be a joke).

Here's an idea. Burn down CK's house and wait till he gets home. Tell him that you burned his house down, and when he tries to kill you, shoot him in one kneecap and then the other as you start to laugh. Explain to him that violence always wins then start in on his torso with a hacksaw. Take out one rib at a time until he gets it.

here, let me re-word mine for you.

The next time you see a Jew, walk up to him and plead to him for peace and coexistance. When he starts to draft up a treaty, suicide bomb 20-100 civilians at a nearby shopping mall. When they start gasing up their attack helicopters, remind them that we are at a cease fire and are working towards peace. After all, violence only begets violence. After they appease the UN by not counter attacking, suicide bomb another mini mall. Repeat the following steps, until all Jews are dead.

or how about this one?

Kill all americans. Hijack their airplanes and crash them into buildings. When they try to counter attack, plead to the UN using the guise of a defenseless bullied country until the stupid americans are fooled into stopping. then go back and release anthrax capsules into their subway systems. repeat until all americans are dead.

Any one remember that show "Herman's Head"? I picture CK with just the libido and anger dudes sitting in his head tore up on beast saying "huh huh uh huh watch this"

------------------
L33T_h4x0r_d00d you are the king of obscure references - miNus

"Give us Osama bin Laden, and we'll give you CatKnight."

A very peaceful and reasonable solution, don't you think? CK would make a wonderful specimen of Devilus americanii.

"how bout i just call u a twat and throw u off a cliff"

"yes that WOULD be a more constructive use of time"

------------------
simultaneity is not absolute. So just because you think i'm wrong, from my frame of reference i'm right!

Enjoy.

BTW, I'll eb back to my normal posting habits in a few months when I'm finished moving.

That is all.
------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by RenegadeSnark:
If you have a problem with the average IQ around here, don't do things to lower it.

---

This message has been edited by TheTaxMan on October 04, 2001 at 04:08 PM

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheTaxMan:
[B]I'll take this moment to show how I support Isreal kicking the hell out of the Palestinians.[B]

---

TheTaxMan. yields nothing
1 tbsp concentrated intelligence
2 cups American media
3 gallons of compassion
a dash of problem-solving skills
1 cup of urine, warm

Mix and throw away.

------------------
~Anztac [ I'm just this guy, you know? ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CatKnight:
hey would any of you like to offer a competent alternative point of view rather then just flaming me and calling me an asshole? it's fine by me if you don't, I'm satisfied laughing at your ignorance.

---

Some people believe all violence is bad.

Some people believe too many innocent people will die if the US & Britain choose to attack Afghanistan.

Some people believe that Americans cannot win a war in Afghanistan, and cite the loss of the Soviets in the same region as evidence.

Some people believe US action in the region will lead to WW3.

Some people believe that the US is, directly or indirectly, responsible for September 11th due to crooked foreign policy.

I don't necessarily agree with any of this, but I realize these viewpoints are just as valid as mine. If you took your bigoted head out of your distended ass, you would realize that there is a lot of persuasive evidence to support the beliefs mentioned above.

The reason everyone is flaming you, CK, is because you consistently think that your opinion is correct, no matter what. You come off in a brash and foolish manner, acting cocky, and further promoting the stereotype of the ignorant, 'gung-ho' American asshole. You refuse to entertain alternatives or opposing theories because you're always too busy fitting every situation to your prejudicial political beliefs.

Happy?

quote:

---

The reason everyone is flaming you, CK, is because you consistently think that your opinion is correct, no matter what.

---

what kind of person (politican, whatever) would I be if I came into an argument thinking my opinion was anything other then the fact?

quote:

---

opinion n A personal belief that is not founded on proof or certainty

---

...I'd have to say it would make you a more intelligent one.

This message has been edited by whiskey@throttle on October 04, 2001 at 08:28 PM

why the fuck would I argue an opinion if I didn't consider it to be the truth? and the logical opposite: if I didn't consider an opinion to be true, how the fuck could I effectively argue for it?

This message has been edited by CatKnight on October 04, 2001 at 11:22 PM

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHHAHAHHHA

ROFLMAO!!!!

did you make that?

hahahhahahahhahahahahhahaha

fucking help me i cant breathe!!!

all i'm trying to say is when dealing with an issue like this, it’s generally a bad idea to consider a violent, extremist opinion as the hands-down answer.

if we were talking about cheetos vs fritos, i’d expect you to hold on to your opinion and stick with it, because that’s a situation where you’ve gone through the experience of tasting both, and have the proper authority to assert an opinion about why one is better than the other.

this is a unanticipated, volatile situation, with a "solution" swimming in drawbacks and no foreseeable end. to take such a hardline position and then ram it down our throats with these obscene little scenarios you drum up for inflammatory threads is a bit gauche, I think.

ps - i'm not a lawyer. thank god.

In 1729 Johnathan Swift wrote < A Modest Proposal For Preventing The Children of Poor People in Ireland From Being Aburden to Their Parents or Country, and For Making Them Beneficial to The Public >

This was THE classic example of satire. No, I don't mean Mel Brooks-ish satire. Satire in the classic sense meant to take an overly-extremist position on a topic in order to bring attention to it, jumpstart discussion about it, and hopefully get something accomplished.

Swift proposed that to alleviate the famine in Ireland, they should just feed the Catholic babies to the rest of the nation. Two problems solved: no more hunger, and get rid of the overabundance of Catholics. Swift didn't really want people to eat Catho(ho)lic babies, but in order to generate the controversy, he took a ridiculously extremist position to generate the necessary "press" so to speak.

Just my 2 cents.

------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dark-Angel99:
How come {name removed} doesn't like you? I find you really funny :D

---

Never argue with an idiot...he may be doing the same thing

quote:

---

Originally posted by whiskey@throttle:
< check out this flash >

---

i find that sick disgusting and highly offensive...TOP MAN!

------------------
simultaneity is not absolute. So just because you think i'm wrong, from my frame of reference i'm right!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beldurin:
Perhaps there's another way to look at CK's post (not that I'm defending him).

In 1729 Johnathan Swift wrote < A Modest Proposal For Preventing The Children of Poor People in Ireland From Being Aburden to Their Parents or Country, and For Making Them Beneficial to The Public >

This was THE classic example of satire. No, I don't mean Mel Brooks-ish satire. Satire in the classic sense meant to take an overly-extremist position on a topic in order to bring attention to it, jumpstart discussion about it, and hopefully get something accomplished.

Swift proposed that to alleviate the famine in Ireland, they should just feed the Catholic babies to the rest of the nation. Two problems solved: no more hunger, and get rid of the overabundance of Catholics. Swift didn't really want people to eat Catho(ho)lic babies, but in order to generate the controversy, he took a ridiculously extremist position to generate the necessary "press" so to speak.

Just my 2 cents.

---

UM, Now I am not completely sure of this, but I think you got it wrong-- Actually the letter "a Modest proposal" is by Alexander Pope, a good friend of Johnathan Swift wrote that.... At least that is what it says in my 200 level European History class's Primary documents compainion book. Now I look on the web and all the sites that have it say swift wrote it-- But the history books we are using in the class were used to teach clases at U of M and several other major univerisities--- I am not going to stake my life on this though that it is right, but it does make for an interesting question-- does anyone else in here know any thing about this?

------------------
"We're all monkeys......HEY! Get Outta my CHAIR!" - 12 Monkeys

I saw a great modern adaptation of Tartuffe(same script) a while back...some Shakespearian troupe. Pretty good stuff.

</kirk>

Thank you, thank you.

(This is a CK topic, it's OK to get OT, right?)

------------------
This is the home of Pokerface,
eater of the human race!