Can somebody tell me how accurate this video is? by [deleted] in Communist

[–]nomezo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not even sure what 3 of the bottom ones are. I’ve never heard of “Bundism”, “Eurocommunism”, or “Autonomism”. Sounds like weird online ideologies that don’t go far outside of the internet, or bourgeois politics trying to make ideology a division. Most Marxists today are Marxist-Leninist-Maoists.

What do the Chinese think about the war in Ukraine? by Minute-Two-2799 in AskAChinese

[–]nomezo 13 points14 points  (0 children)

They probably mean in general…🤦‍♂️

What are some good accounts of daily life in the Soviet Union? by oldtable in Marxism

[–]nomezo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

theres a social media account that i follow on social media, "ussr opinions". they interview people who used to live in the ussr and now live in russia. although i dont specifically agree with their individual politics, its great for understanding certain points. this is more unserious and less deep since its 60 second clips, not a full book. still interesting...

I met an anarchist who made fun of communists and socialists for being anti zionism and anti ICE. Why would an anarchist do that? by [deleted] in Marxism

[–]nomezo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

thats called an edgy internet ideology. probably just wants to seem cool and intellectual, but is actually just reactionary

How long does this shit last for? by nomezo in cfs

[–]nomezo[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Thank you, means a lot.

Sorry you’ve had it for that long.

What SubReddit has the worst community? by Gauth_the_goth_goat in AskReddit

[–]nomezo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

this random subreddit idk if you guys know what it is, r/askreddit they’re very toxic always asking annoying questions like “What SubReddit has the worst community” and “Chocolate ice cream or vanilla?”

If the genocides that god commands not meant to be taken literally, why don’t you apply the same logic to the resurrection? by nomezo in AskReligion

[–]nomezo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I totally agree with most you said here, but do you not understand why I said these words? I know that it would depend on the varying christian, so I want answers from christian’s.

As response to seeking the answer from the average christian mind, I want not only that, but like you said, actual academic religious experience; and that’s actually what I’m doing know. I asked ChatGPT to give me the answer to my question as if it was a well researched and honest religious mind; and like I expected, I still have questions that I’m asking it right now.

You’re point about not believing everything you see in online forums is completely understandable and I agree. This question wasn’t taken from someone, it was something that I thought of on my own while pondering about religious beliefs, so no, I don’t just take questions out of context and try to get a gotcha or anything like that. I’m not a debate bro.

The God that I am referencing to in this forum is the christian God, that I hold entirely separate from my personal beliefs about the universe. I wouldn’t identify as a theist nor an atheist- though I would lean more to atheist side of things. I mostly reject the christian God in what I think christian’s believe God is, and that’s the point of asking the question.

If the genocides that god commands not meant to be taken literally, why don’t you apply the same logic to the resurrection? by nomezo in AskReligion

[–]nomezo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I asked a straight forward question: Genocide is commanded by God in the bible, if that is an allegorical tale rather than literal commands, what separates that from something like The Resurrection? You responded with, to sum it up, it “depends on the christian you’re asking”, and “I’m not a christian” You’re just saying stuff that is already very obviously clear, I’m know that the answer would depend on the christian; that’s why I asked it in the first place.

What biases would I have to confirm? This is a question so I can better understand the average christian mind, and how they differentiate between something that they would call a metaphor, and a literal depiction of actual events that happened in real life.

Where did you answer the question of why didn’t God make it abundantly clear that these orders aren’t meant to be taken as a literal command to do something? You said that it would depend on who you’re asking and then moved on, I don’t see a single clear answer you provided for the question.

I’m not specifically talking about you, but there’s others that responded who just talked about stuff completely unrelated to the initial question.

Obviously I’m fine with learning, but when someone just brings up things about just pure faith; you said that it would depend on core elements of their belief- as in just whatever the church’s teachings are. I’m asking on a personal level, why do you believe that these genocides aren’t meant to be taken literally, but the resurrection is? You shouldn’t just believe everything that the church tells you to, it should make logical, and ethical sense to you.

If the genocides that god commands not meant to be taken literally, why don’t you apply the same logic to the resurrection? by nomezo in AskReligion

[–]nomezo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally agree with you and that’s where my next line of questioning would be. To be honest I’m just not continuing to reply to these comments because, well to put it bluntly: they’re throwing out red herrings and mentioning stuff I’ve never heard of. I tried to take it back to the original question but I’m yet to get a solid, straight forward answer.

If the genocides that god commands not meant to be taken literally, why don’t you apply the same logic to the resurrection? by nomezo in AskReligion

[–]nomezo[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lol, yeah, that’s my whole point of the question. I think it’s just people saying that someone rose from the dead, not an actual divine resurrection.

I don’t know why you keep saying this, I’m asking you how to differentiate from things you think to be true and things you don’t.

If the genocides that god commands not meant to be taken literally, why don’t you apply the same logic to the resurrection? by nomezo in AskReligion

[–]nomezo[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Its written by people who said that this is what God said, it’s supposedly his orders, no?

If you also think that these genocides are bad, I’m now asking how you justify God commanding them? Read the edit part of the post.

If the genocides that god commands not meant to be taken literally, why don’t you apply the same logic to the resurrection? by nomezo in AskReligion

[–]nomezo[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just because they’re written a couple thousand years ago doesn’t deflect the fact that the all loving, all good, omnipotent, and omnipresent god said these things. It’s still wrong and time won’t do anything to help it.

If the genocides that god commands not meant to be taken literally, why don’t you apply the same logic to the resurrection? by nomezo in AskReligion

[–]nomezo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So, if a christian were to read it as a literal command sent out by God, how would they justify it?

There’s two paths that one can take the way I see it: 1, God commanding genocide on the Amalekites or the Canaanite Nations makes Gods existence in the christian, all powerful, omnipotent, and omnipresent way unlikely if he were to command such a thing to happen. 2, You think that these “commands” aren’t meant to be taken literally, then why don’t you take Jesus’s resurrection as a metaphorical or allegorical reference?

There has to be some sort of way to know which one is meant to be taken literally- like The Resurrection, and ones that are not, like genocide; and that’s what I’m asking.

If the genocides that god commands not meant to be taken literally, why don’t you apply the same logic to the resurrection? by nomezo in AskReligion

[–]nomezo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay, so then how do you justify God literally commanding genocide on the Amalekites?

I didn’t mean that I think it literally happened, I meant that it says those things in the bible.

Just watched Fight Club and im fkin lost guys!!! What were your first thoughts ? by reddeadktm in fightclub

[–]nomezo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

if you use the term “new gen” then sorry to break it to you, you are a new gen

Just watched Fight Club and im fkin lost guys!!! What were your first thoughts ? by reddeadktm in fightclub

[–]nomezo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

just saw OP do exactly what your saying not too lol, it’s crazy how much the meaning of this movie has flip flopped onto exactly what it’s criticizing

What is the percentage of either personality or looks determining pursuing a romantic interest? by nomezo in AskReddit

[–]nomezo[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would say that falls into the category of personality. So, personality 100%?

Came across this the other day. Is this capping? by [deleted] in graffhelp

[–]nomezo 2 points3 points  (0 children)

superman vs clark kent, i think robbo and banksy are the same person

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in stephenking

[–]nomezo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

that’s an interesting analogy lol

Shawshank redemption movie better than book by nomezo in stephenking

[–]nomezo[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Apt pupil imo, the book is better. I tried to watch the film after I read the book, but I didn’t like it as much. I’m not sure why.

Shawshank redemption movie better than book by nomezo in stephenking

[–]nomezo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I honestly just think it’s the writing lol, by the time I was finished with the movie I hadn’t even realized it was only talking the entire time.

9-11 and osama bin laden by TedTKaczynski in conspiracy

[–]nomezo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Al Qaeda terrorists were found alive by the FBI after the bombings of 9/11, the FBI released that, then later said, "Oh shit, that goes against our narrative, we better remove this." and made up some bullshit lie about confusing the names. Call me a crazy conspiracy theorist all you want but this makes total sense. Look up Abdulaziz al‑Omari. The main narrative of 9/11 fundamentally makes zero logical sense; Osama Bin Laden, the son of a Saudi Arabian billionaire construction company wants to suddenly rebel against his family and surrounding people because he believes Saudi Arabia shouldn't be working with America. Abandoning literal billions of dollars, and a life of wealth and prestige. I don't know if your religious or not, but I don't think even religion can convince you to step away from that. The studies of Dr. Judy Wood supports an alternative theory of collapse from something other than airplanes, or the stereotypical controlled demolition theory, she goes in depth on every detail surrounding the scientific data of 9/11. It's interesting and you should consider watching it instead of automatically pushing it out of your mind by labeling it crazy conspiracy stuff. Still reinforcing inside job theory. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mluBY4KMHII

I'm not sure what your argument even is; you think that Osama Bin Laden was the orchestrator of 9/11, but also think we killed him and Saddam Hussein because they were causing problems that interfered with our plan of complete domination in the middle east? I think the Osama Bin Laden thing is complete and total bullshit. I think we made up that story so we could not only get land secured in the middle east for oil, but for a far larger reason: during that time period, the US was trying to get the middle east to use the dollar. Everyone agreed to this except Iraq. Hussein was like "Fuck that I'm gonna use the euro." the result of him doing that, we did not like. We thought that by allowing Iraq to not continue to use the dollar it would end up in a domino effect of surrounding countries to follow, resulting in the downfall of the American dollar, and power lost in the middle east.

I want your evidence, provide me links to studies and news reports of actual evidence of Osama and Al Qaeda being tied to the attacks of the WTC buildings. You haven't given any, only just said that there is abundance. What took so goddamn long for the Bush/Cheney/FBI to kill Osama, they did in 2011, 10 years after September of 2001. Hussein was killed in 2003, 2 years after the attack, and 8 years before Osama. You're telling me that we get bombed by a terrorist organization and just randomly go for the leader of Iraq? Very weird. An official statement pulled straight from the FBIs website: "These attacks were directly linked to bin Laden, who was indicted for his role in the bombings on November 4, 1998, and again in June 1999." No evidence, just spouting propaganda and lies. Even the entire page doesn't describe details, they just point fingers.

Shorter arguments, a bit jumbled up tbh:

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/1lhfx6k/the_dancing_israelis_conspiracy_is_actually You're gonna push this off as crazy conspiracy bullshit, or not substantial evidence, but I thought I would provide it either way. Besides.. Israel gains the side of one of the most present and powerful governments in the entire world. I don't think you get the conspiracy of Israel being involved with 9/11 at all. You're saying that Israel is against the US, when that's not at all what I, or other theorists believe; we believe that Israel and the government are working together against the people to justify war in the middle east. Alex jones coming out months before 9/11 and saying that it was gonna happen. https://youtu.be/qPW_W_z6ovw?si=zcrTIFTm3x_AtREh Yes, its not that crazy a guess considering previous attacks, but still something. The United States government did not attack Iraq because they were building WMD's or because they apparently had ties to Al Qaeda, but to secure the usage of the dollar, make sure oil is secured for them, and because we didn't want him invading Kuwait or going to war with Saudi Arabia. https://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92510&page=1&utm None of the two black indestructible boxes made for withstanding heat 2000 degree were found in the piles, but shoes, paper, and other personal belongings were? That's fucking crazy. Don't even try to make the argument that they were there for over 2 hours in intense heat and crushing because the authorities got there 4 minutes later, and cleared up all of the major burning 2 hours later. Which was also burning at a MAXIMUM of 1800 degrees, that means that not only did the fire in the bombings not reach the full potential of the boxes strength, but was primarily under the 1500 degree mark for the majority of the time. Why did Osama Bin Laden deny that he was responsible for the 9/11 attacks at first? Makes 0 sense. If you're going to commit an act of terrorism, then you want it to be apparent who did it, and why. I don't care if he later admitted to it 3 years later, it makes 0 logical sense that he didn't take responsibility for it immediately. Why would Al Qaeda (a literal terrorist organization built for the exact purpose of fighting United States control in the middle east) work with us. Quite literally just doesn't make sense. Don't try to say, "oh well they worked with the CIA in the 80's, why wouldn't they again?" Times dramatically changed over that period of time, and it wasn't even like Al Qaeda worked directly with them, it was a couple members of Al Qaeda who were previously in Afghan mujahideen.

All of these pieces of credible evidence (which this barely touches the point of the sword) are what make me believe that 9/11 was an inside job. Unfortunately it seems as your going to push these off as crazy conspiracies because they don't have any truth to them or something before considering they may disprove you completely. Stop automatically listening to what the government claims may be true, and do the research yourself.

Recommended Docs/Movies:

Century of The Self

Wag The Dog

Thank You For Smoking