Current Avatar:
No Avatar image uploaded
No Avatar image uploaded
Talk Sense Member Posts
Boozy82's Profile
Boozy82's Posts and Other Poster's Replies To Boozy82's Posts
To Boozy82's last 5 rumours posts
To Boozy82's last 5 rumour replies
Boozy82's rumours posts with other poster's replies to Boozy82's rumours posts
23 Nov 2014 12:11:58
I see the documentary on Hitler has caused a bit of a stir and has proved to be an eye-opener.
I posted the very same documentary on here almost a year ago and got slated for it? Strange lol
1.) Never noticed mate sorry.
2.) Sorry if you got slated for it Boozy82. Doubt it was any of the regulars. Hitler is a fascinating man no doubt about it.
Ryan.
3.) We all improve Boozy82. With every passing year we change. Commend your fellow humans for improving so that we may continue improving.
zari
4.) 28 Nov 2014 23:01:47
Fascinating yet twisted. The nazis were the most repellent regime ever to walk the planet. Look how many of their scientists and engineers escaped to America and look at American foreign policy since 1945.
Kim Philby
03 Feb 2014 19:47:26
Interesting documentary I came across over the weekend.
http://thegreateststorynevertold.tv
1.) I do not doubt that Hitler was not the man he was presented to be by those who targeted him, but anyone willing to stoop to the level of those who attack him is a fool. I am referring to the bombings of civilian targets of course.
Zari
2.) 05 Feb 2014 18:20:39
He loved his mum, pets, was always courteous especially to women, described as a good host, was a non smoker, teetotal vegetarian who abhorred animal cruelty. He was also a genocidal maniac prone to violent psychotic fits.
3.) Zari I don't doubt your intellect and all round knowledge at all, but sometimes your posts are as clear as mud. No offence pal you're obviously very bright, but I rarely understand what you're saying.
Ryan.
4.) Hey Ryan, that is to be expected in the absence of personal contact. People have different backgrounds, different analytical processes and different ways of expression. It's impossible for someone to say something and for it to be understood the same way by everyone.
To clarify what I meant by that statement is that, the image in which certain historical figures are presented cannot be accurate. In any two sided conflict the one which dominates gets to establish their version of the events that took place, which we come to call (his+story?). Losers are always portrayed as evil figures because it helps the winning side appear as righteous and their actions justified.
I do not know what kind of person Hitler was, but what one can fault him with is for using the same criminal practices as the allies, namely bombing civilian targets.
Zari
5.) I've read quite a bit about Hitler over the years and he really only has himself to blame for the caricature that has been created in his image.
Churchill authorised the bombing of Berlin in response to the Germans bombing residential areas in London. Hitler then ordered carpet bombing of British cities and London in particular. The allies responded in kind. Britain was defending itself against an aggressor that was trying to destroy it.
I agree there is no moral high ground for either side to stand on with regard to civilian casualties Zari. But the way I see it, Hitler was responsible for the bombing of German cities. Britain had every right to defend itself by all and any means available to them.
Ryan.
{Ed001's Note - I don't see how you figure out he was responsible for that, he was responsible for many things, but not for Allied bombings. Only the ones who made that decision are responsible for that. You can only blame those who made the decision, just like a drunk getting into trouble while drunk can't blame a bartender for selling him a drink. An adult is responsible for their own actions, whether provoked or not, it is still their own choice.}
6.) Fair point ED001, not withstanding the drunk/bartender comparison. Churchill was indeed provoked by Hitler and took the decision to retaliate. You’re absolutely correct. I guess the point I was trying to make (rather poorly perhaps), was that Hitler’s moral outrage at the bombing of Berlin as though it was a completely unprovoked attack, was not credible, as the bombing was a direct response to the luftwaffe bombing London the previous day. He then used that moral outrage to declare that they would raze British cities to the ground. It was one of many examples of his warped morality.
Ryan.
{Ed001's Note - now that I would agree with.}
7.) 07 Feb 2014 14:25:18
"they have sown the wind now they shall reap the whirlwind" so spoke your own air Marshall Harris, head of your bomber command.
Hitler certainly had no right to take the moral high ground given the bombing of Warsaw and Rotterdam earlier.
But what did it achieve? 55000 British casualties, plus the Germans killed. Speer I believe thought it wasn't much of a disruption especially once everything was underground.
And then we have Dresden.
Kim Philby
{Ed001's Note - the only real effect that killing civilians caused was hatred. It left a real bitter hatred among the general populace for years. My grandad, for instance, despite speaking fluent German, hated the Germans up until he retired and went on a coach trip there. That hatred allowed the Nazis to fight on long after a surrender would normally have taken place.}
Weed, blow, dope. Whatever we like to call it, will always be a touchy subject. I can grasp the whole 'it's a plant' theory. I think it was Joe Rogan who said 'if you're going to put a person in jail for smoking a plant that makes them feel happy, then you're the terrorist' something along them lines.
I fully believe that humans should be allowed to consume anything that is naturally produced on this planet.
I've seen plenty of publications on how cannabis oils can help with medical problems, even know a few people who take it for arthritic problems.
However, I really don't believe it is completely harmless. Being a young 'scally' if you like to call it, growing up in Northern Ireland. 'Blow' as we liked to call it, was a completely anti-social (anti-norm) substance.
We used to smoke it daily in our early teens, and I can definitely say getting off of it was quite hard. My friends and I used to love going to clubs, pubs, what have you, but when we really started smoking dope regularly, we gradually stopped going out and preferred to sit in each others houses just to get stoned, being really anti-social.
Any nights we did venture out to the clubs, we would have most definitely ended up taking 'E tabs' or LSD, never just a social bevvy.
All of these substances, be it chemically enhanced plant extracts, or drugs. All can be disturbing to ones mind.
I left Ireland in the early 2000's to do a bit of travelling around the U. S and sampled my 1st proper 'blunt' a cigar paper filled with pure 'weed' not a chemical filled tabbaco 'rollie'.
Again, in my shame. I became very fond of smoking 'pure weed'. Maybe I have a very addictive personality but when I decided that 'weed' was once again, in a different form, taking over my life (being lazy, anti-social). I decided to knock it on the head also and had a torrid time getting off of it, no sleep, anxiety, and short temper.
I really don't know where I stand on this subject but can give my 1st hand view that the old smoke is just as bad as most of the addictive s*** that's out there.
1.) 04 Jan 2014 04:19:59
Great post mate, I have a mate that does weed regularly, he said you can't get addicted to weed but he's the same guy constantly smoking it being anti-social, born in England grew up in Australia, it's something that you can't escape, my kids have been offered weed an as young parents me and my wife do not want our kids to be accosiated with drugs as they are harmful, and cause anti social ness and other sorts of problems, my mate was depressed and went to every other drug he could, I don't want to be accosiated with it and either my kids, although I have no problem with people that smoke plant drugs, at there own risk
Cheers
Aron
2.) Cannabis creates a psychological addiction much like alcohol, not a chemical addiction like tobacco (nicotine).
If you have a strong character (will power) and do not wish to be using the substance you can do so.
Regarding the anti-social behavior people attribute to the particular substance, it is something personal and depends on the environment.
In societies where cannabis is accepted, I have seen no evidence from its users of anything that can be described as an anti-social behavior.
Perhaps if one tries to understand that the extrovert entertainment people search for in pubs, bars and clubs are designed for alcohol consumption, then one might understand why users of other substances would opt for a more relaxing environment, where people can interact with others through discussion.
The use of entheogenic substances as party drugs stems from the lack of an understanding as to the reason why such substances exist and their effects on human nature.
Don't blame the substance for the "bad trip", blame the self.
The legalization of cannabis would revolutionize the paper, textile, rope and pharmaceutical industries overnight. That is the reason cannabis is still illegal.
Alcohol, tobacco, coffee, sugar etc. are detrimental to human health. The overconsumption of these substances is proven to cause serious health issues.
There are no proven side effects from consuming cannabis and it is practically impossible to overdose on.
Physical entities have the right to do as they wish with their bodies.
Zari
3.) Like with everything weed/beer/food etc everything in moderation, I think its a jeremy kyle line that cannabis causes you psychological problems the person, its down to the person who would problery be cranky without a daily fix of caffeine, my mum uses it to take the edge of her arthritis, like I mentioned apart from the odd joint bk in the day I do not smoke but giving the choice I would make pot legal none of that super skunk s### that is laced with as many chemicals as cigarettes.
4.) Some great points, I'm with zari in that I believe the issues surrounding any substance use lay mostly with the individual rather than the substance. As mentioned above, if your will power is strong and you can use in moderation then no problem, whether we're talking weed, alcohol or other. Its the people who have addictive personalitites who can suffer or those who use to escape reality. Unfortunately i'm speaking from experience there!
very good point zari also, regarding the anti social behaviour and the way our 'social scene' is set up to make it that way for cannabis users. In my home town I feel like an outsider because I don't want to go out drinking til 2am in places that play loud, terrible music. I would rather listen to good music with close friends, in a comfortable environment where we can actually hear each other talk. If 'they' provided public places for me to do so or even allowed me to do so at home without breaking any laws, I would feel more in touch with the rest of society.
Personally, I would welcome decriminalisation but only alongside some sensible education - which is another vital issue imo. A big problem we face in the west is a lot of people still have no idea what cannabis is like and what properties it shares because they've been brainwashed with the whole 'reefer maddness' and 'drugs are bad' routine for years.
I remember being in a coffee shop in Amsterdam and being impressed by the common sense and open approach they showed. In particular, I was reading a pamphlet on the table that explained what's happening to your body when you 'whitey' (low blood sugar levels) and how to address it (take in sugary drink, stay calm etc) should you need to. Its this kind of honest, sensible and open approach to educating people that would need to accompany any decriminalisation, rather than the old propoganda form of 'dont smoke a reefer or you'll think its a good idea to jump off a tall bridge' I used to have to endure in school/society.
So decriminalise it yes but only alongside good, open education and firm controls over supply.
Harold
14 Nov 2013 23:10:59
This is a fantastic insight into the State Controlled Killing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XZWJG4-hUw
10 Nov 2013 01:14:30
See a few people have posted about something of great magnitude happening soon, starting with the States. Came across this last night.
Military training for martial law one day
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9U1DES2_SI
Not being rude mate. You claim Messi is rapidly in decline? Seriously, have you been watching any football this past few months? the guy is a footballing genius. He's on top of his game. Barca's decline is most definately to do with Guardiola moving on. Messi thrived much more in Pep's team but if anything he's showing how good he really is by still ripping it up with a different manager.
Franky, I watched that documentary myself. Think it was on a Dutch website, can't remember the name though. In my view she was most definately killed and that documentary cemented my view.
I've thought about it Frankie but don't fully understand the implications of it. I've two kids to think of and don't know if it would effect them in later years?. As I said before, one stupid mistake, which was the result of a messed up situation, got me into trouble and has basically f****d with my life.
I would be quite interested in this also. I stupidly got a flash car out on finance when I was going through a bad patch in my life. The repayments were extortionate, however, after years of having a mortgage on a house I was used to paying out ridiculous amounts on material things.
Without getting too deep into it, I suppose you will realise and come to your own conclusion.
I was paying a house mortgage for a number of years but got out of it by having to sell up. Finding myself with extra disposable income and having my head messed up a bit, I decided to be stupid and have a stupid material object to fill a certain void.
I realised it was ridiculous on my part paying this amount every month and decided to basically give the car back. I am now stuck with a 7k deficit that I am supposed to pay?
Weed, blow, dope. Whatever we like to call it, will always be a touchy subject. I can grasp the whole 'it's a plant' theory. I think it was Joe Rogan who said 'if you're going to put a person in jail for smoking a plant that makes them feel happy, then you're the terrorist' something along them lines.
I fully believe that humans should be allowed to consume anything that is naturally produced on this planet.
I've seen plenty of publications on how cannabis oils can help with medical problems, even know a few people who take it for arthritic problems.
However, I really don't believe it is completely harmless. Being a young 'scally' if you like to call it, growing up in Northern Ireland. 'Blow' as we liked to call it, was a completely anti-social (anti-norm) substance.
We used to smoke it daily in our early teens, and I can definitely say getting off of it was quite hard. My friends and I used to love going to clubs, pubs, what have you, but when we really started smoking dope regularly, we gradually stopped going out and preferred to sit in each others houses just to get stoned, being really anti-social.
Any nights we did venture out to the clubs, we would have most definitely ended up taking 'E tabs' or LSD, never just a social bevvy.
All of these substances, be it chemically enhanced plant extracts, or drugs. All can be disturbing to ones mind.
I left Ireland in the early 2000's to do a bit of travelling around the U. S and sampled my 1st proper 'blunt' a cigar paper filled with pure 'weed' not a chemical filled tabbaco 'rollie'.
Again, in my shame. I became very fond of smoking 'pure weed'. Maybe I have a very addictive personality but when I decided that 'weed' was once again, in a different form, taking over my life (being lazy, anti-social). I decided to knock it on the head also and had a torrid time getting off of it, no sleep, anxiety, and short temper.
I really don't know where I stand on this subject but can give my 1st hand view that the old smoke is just as bad as most of the addictive s*** that's out there.