Active Users:694 Time:01/07/2025 11:56:55 AM
"Intended or serving to subvert, especially intended to overthrow or undermine an established govt". Joel Send a noteboard - 14/11/2010 01:44:14 AM
I'm generally opposed to treason, so, sorry, can't help ya. Your note on bin Laden underscores the point well; anyone who's ever bothered to read any of his manifestos could've told you most of them read like that essay you found. The problem is that he's willing to incite rebellions and murder innocents en masse to achieve those goals. That, and the fact that he's no more committed to self determination of liberty or conscience than is any other self aggrandizing psychopath: It just makes good copy.

Try the Book of the Sub-Genius or Discordians; they'll be just as indulgent of impotent directionless rebellion for its own sake, but a lot funnier. :) A Northern Sun catalog will allow you to dress the part, too.
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
This message last edited by Joel on 14/11/2010 at 01:44:59 AM
Reply to message
Subversive Websites - 13/11/2010 10:49:15 PM 1274 Views
"Intended or serving to subvert, especially intended to overthrow or undermine an established govt". - 14/11/2010 01:44:14 AM 670 Views
Re: Gee, thanks dad! *NM* - 14/11/2010 01:32:32 PM 474 Views
Well, I'm hoping I simply disagree with your diction rather than your motives. - 14/11/2010 03:36:57 PM 738 Views
Re: No, you disagree with my motives. - 15/11/2010 01:06:54 AM 732 Views
The Founding Fathers of the US? - 15/11/2010 10:18:32 AM 740 Views
"Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God". - 15/11/2010 01:15:33 PM 781 Views
I'm sure bin Laden completely agrees - 15/11/2010 01:32:53 PM 761 Views
When you give me an example of Jefferson murdering women and children that analogy will work. - 15/11/2010 01:49:04 PM 685 Views
yes because Jefferson was a PARAGON of virtue himself - 15/11/2010 02:17:58 PM 784 Views
I wasn't aware I'd made that statement. - 15/11/2010 02:25:27 PM 628 Views
nvm, I was going to argue but I have decided not to *NM* - 15/11/2010 07:46:42 PM 439 Views
So you are being completely subjective here? It is wrong, unless it is for a cause you support? *NM* - 15/11/2010 02:30:37 PM 361 Views
No, it's a question of precedence. - 15/11/2010 04:13:04 PM 646 Views
His analogy works very well, and you are still being subjective. - 15/11/2010 08:23:25 PM 879 Views
The precedence is inherent in the statement; that was Jeffersons point. - 15/11/2010 09:17:01 PM 834 Views
Re: The precedence is inherent in the statement; that was Jeffersons point. - 15/11/2010 10:52:40 PM 657 Views
I don't believe that at all. - 16/11/2010 12:08:26 AM 557 Views
Re: As I mentioned numerous times. - 16/11/2010 11:52:36 PM 743 Views
Re: As I mentioned numerous times. - 17/11/2010 01:34:29 AM 731 Views
No, its relevancy is difficult to grasp. - 16/11/2010 07:19:11 AM 830 Views
Maybe I just have an unusual perspective. - 16/11/2010 04:15:39 PM 801 Views
I didn't know they bombed a SCHOOL!!! - 16/11/2010 04:31:24 PM 673 Views
Please. If there were any soldiers in the WTC on 911 it was coincidental. - 16/11/2010 04:40:51 PM 701 Views
perhaps, but not all important targets are military targets. - 16/11/2010 04:57:20 PM 849 Views
Not all important targets are LEGITIMATE targets either. - 16/11/2010 05:06:11 PM 672 Views
I don't wish one, but I hate sidebars - 16/11/2010 05:09:33 PM 717 Views
All about priorities; your call. - 16/11/2010 10:33:53 PM 631 Views
That's so many hours of my life I'll never get back. - 16/11/2010 10:41:55 PM 728 Views
This your first time on the CMB? - 16/11/2010 11:18:03 PM 673 Views
No, NOW I know what's going on! - 16/11/2010 04:36:04 PM 811 Views
Still doesn't work. - 16/11/2010 04:50:58 PM 810 Views
Those last sentences are going way overboard. - 16/11/2010 05:08:40 PM 680 Views
Terrorism is inexcusable and indefensible, but at least there's a LOGIC to it. - 16/11/2010 05:21:15 PM 770 Views
First of all, your generalizations were misguided. - 16/11/2010 05:40:55 PM 778 Views
Of course I disagree, but that's a different and older debate. - 16/11/2010 11:10:23 PM 933 Views
I will try to be brief. Try. - 16/11/2010 11:28:28 PM 732 Views
Heh. - 16/11/2010 11:55:40 PM 687 Views
mostly agree - 16/11/2010 11:18:14 PM 627 Views
. . . and now I'm thinking you're the one willfully misunderstanding. - 16/11/2010 05:36:15 PM 708 Views
Not willful, at least. - 17/11/2010 12:29:42 AM 677 Views
sorry - 16/11/2010 11:24:44 PM 728 Views
Well, you know what I was going on about, if that helps? *NM* - 16/11/2010 11:25:18 PM 421 Views
"Subversion" has the connotation of treason, however wrongly. - 15/11/2010 01:32:06 PM 752 Views
Re: Non-sequitur, non-sequitur, CAPS LOCK, opinion, CAPS LOCK. - 15/11/2010 10:45:41 PM 584 Views
Either my mind moves much faster than ya'lls, or ya'll are deliberately missing the point. - 16/11/2010 12:05:28 AM 769 Views
I am curious. - 16/11/2010 01:10:52 AM 607 Views
Argggh, ya got me! - 16/11/2010 05:11:41 PM 616 Views
the dictionary has -nia and -iums. - 16/11/2010 05:16:32 PM 711 Views
I prefer "millennia" but recall someone telling me that's not technically right. - 16/11/2010 05:32:34 PM 648 Views
well, in American English, they're apparantly both "correct" *NM* - 16/11/2010 06:13:40 PM 459 Views
In American English, almost anything is. - 17/11/2010 01:02:15 AM 758 Views
It is right. It's the one thing that's easy in Latin and Greek declensions. - 16/11/2010 06:33:12 PM 683 Views
You call then "neutral" over there? Interesting. *NM* - 16/11/2010 06:42:00 PM 456 Views
Neutral, neutrum, neuter, whatever. Details. *NM* - 16/11/2010 06:45:29 PM 408 Views
Do only neuter words end in -um? - 16/11/2010 06:57:39 PM 738 Views
Yes. I think so, anyway - been a good while since I had Latin. - 16/11/2010 07:12:09 PM 719 Views
Thanks. Maybe that's what I'm remembering. - 16/11/2010 07:17:05 PM 695 Views
IIRC, the number of "n"s was the issue. - 17/11/2010 01:06:24 AM 721 Views
Should definitely be two. *NM* - 17/11/2010 01:48:51 AM 374 Views
Ah, thanks. - 17/11/2010 02:08:08 AM 718 Views
Silly laptops.... - 16/11/2010 05:32:34 PM 807 Views
- 16/11/2010 05:35:22 PM 641 Views
I'm horrible about using "conjugate" as a blanket term. - 17/11/2010 01:09:34 AM 762 Views
I'm definitely missing the point. - 16/11/2010 06:58:17 AM 734 Views
Well, hopefully we've cleared things up now. *MN* - 16/11/2010 05:30:46 PM 743 Views
I don't know if it qualifies as subversive... - 14/11/2010 02:47:34 AM 849 Views
Re: That's not bad. - 14/11/2010 01:38:02 PM 710 Views
The Chap - 14/11/2010 01:58:27 PM 614 Views
Thanks. - 14/11/2010 03:04:49 PM 711 Views
All my subversive websites are religious. - 15/11/2010 02:26:42 AM 667 Views
Re: I'm certainly interested. - 15/11/2010 03:37:11 AM 693 Views
Well, okay then. - 15/11/2010 04:23:35 AM 763 Views
Some stuff I think is pretty neat: - 15/11/2010 07:24:41 PM 780 Views
Re: Noice, noice. - 15/11/2010 11:01:31 PM 713 Views
That first link is really good. - 15/11/2010 11:18:25 PM 807 Views
Re: Ha! - 16/11/2010 11:55:42 PM 612 Views
Re: Also, I like your poems. *NM* - 17/11/2010 01:02:27 AM 401 Views
Re: Dude. - 20/11/2010 02:14:38 AM 763 Views
you mean besides this one? *NM* - 15/11/2010 07:55:03 PM 308 Views
Re: I AM NOT SUBVERTING NEBHEAD!! - 15/11/2010 11:02:10 PM 713 Views
Re: William Faulkner would be unhappy with my thread. - 16/11/2010 08:29:42 PM 675 Views
My work here is done. - 16/11/2010 08:34:22 PM 629 Views
Re: Yes, it's fairly obvious that you need to respond. *NM* - 16/11/2010 11:40:10 PM 436 Views
I often wish I didn't. - 17/11/2010 01:49:33 AM 598 Views
I'm calling you out on this one. - 18/11/2010 12:06:17 AM 666 Views
It's not perfect, but it's the lesser of many evils, IMHO. - 18/11/2010 01:12:43 AM 699 Views
You people with your words. - 16/11/2010 08:34:17 PM 803 Views
. - 16/11/2010 08:54:22 PM 586 Views
Re: I still say we should start a band. - 20/11/2010 02:42:48 AM 719 Views
Re: Man, that attack on Cameron is brutal. *NM* - 20/11/2010 02:47:12 AM 385 Views
Re: Awesome. - 16/11/2010 11:38:29 PM 721 Views

Reply to Message