• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Kalbear

  • Rank
    57 Warning Points
  • Birthday 10/26/1974

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    The worst BwB meetup area EVER

Recent Profile Visitors

14,034 profile views
  1. I wander around a lot on whether Kellhus is actually wanting to end damnation or if he's just wanting to rule everything. Kellhus might have a plan, but so far his plan has involved buggery in order to abandon his entire army. There are a lot of different ways to go with Kellhus being damned too. I think he will not be damned because he's Bakker. I think he knew that she needed to forgive him. Without that forgiveness he would not be completely without sin right before he died. The Judging Eye doesn't approve of forgiveness or not - all it does is judges. It is Mimara that chooses. This is the same thing with what's his name from WLW - she forgave him as he was trying to rape her, and it wasn't because he had come to some amazing internal conclusion - it was because she saw all the horrible things that he had to do to survive, and chose to forgive him. Koringhus, I believe, recognized what Mimara represented - quite possibly in a way she does not herself understand - and knew that she has the power to absolve the damnation that was inherent in Koringhus. And once he gets that, he immediately kills himself before he can do anything else bad. Now, it's certainly possible that Kellhus knows all the things Mimara can do. He apparently knows about nukes that have not shown up a single time in the history that we've seen and had never even been hinted at, so we'll just say that what information is out there about TJE is a bit scarce (since Akka doesn't know much) and also likely available to Kellhus the convenient.
  2. US Elections - The white power-suit vs the white-power suit

    Terry Tate will save us
  3. I think you need to separate out the Fanim's power from their damnation. Both Meppa and Psatma agree that Meppa is going to be fucking hosed when he gets into the Outside. And while you don't have a mark from casting spells, you can easily have a mark from all the other stuff you do. Heck, as far as we know blinding yourself is a damnable offense. The Fanim are probably the most correct as far as their religion goes. I'm not sure that's going to matter all that much. Moe would be absurdly damned anyway, per Mimara's vision of the Whale Mothers. I also think that the only person in the books who has even hinted at actually being able to end damnation is Mimara, with her forgiveness. And possibly 3 times, depending on how you view what she did at the end of TJE. Kellhus has promised many times that people will be saved and whatnot, but per Saubon we know this to be a huge, ugly lie.
  4. Making it impossible for news agencies to report to most people what election results are? That's the obvious one. The secondary one would be to use it as a way to allow attacks on other things while the big attack is going on. If you were wanting to hack election officials computers during that time it would be not as hard to do.
  5. It's pretty simple for the US government to kill Wikileaks if they so chose to do so. And while it's a smidgen harder compared to Ecuadorean diplomacy, it's not that bad. More importantly, again I ask - if the goal is to actually suppress the information, why not do both? Because you don't appear to be arguing that the US can't do it.
  6. Star Wars Rogue One: Now With Less Rouge

  7. Again, I ask - if it was important to suppress Wikileaks information, why not just kill the page? At the very least it would eliminate any chance of more going on - which has still happened, by the way. And it's pretty trivial for the US to kill that website in any number of ways if it chose to do so. Plus, stopping Assange's internet doesn't stop Wikileaks as an organization either. It just stops Assange. If your goal is to suppress information that doesn't help at all. If your goal is to limit the ability for known criminals to contact someone, it does.
  8. They don't care about the secrets being released. They care about aiding and abetting other criminals. Again, it has nothing to do with information. You do know that there are other things to do on the internet than post illicit emails, right? Yes, as does sabotage. Espionage is simply the practice of using spies. Attempting to influence the election by a foreign government is by US definition an act of espionage. Assange is (by the US) known to be in contact with people they consider foreign agents attempting to commit acts of espionage. One way to deal with criminals or suspected criminals is to isolate them from anyone that might aid them so that they become more desperate or attempt to contact in more easily monitored ways. Again, this is pretty standard police work stuff. I don't understand why it's so hard for you to get.
  9. I'm not disputing that blindness and passion brings you closer to God - I'm just saying that the first use of magic was almost certainly not an utteral/inutteral combination, unless that's how nonmen psychology naturally works anyway. Which...is possible, but it seems far more likely that utterals came first. Though that'd be an interesting thing - nonmen never did anagogic sorcery because they are incapable of thinking in metaphor. That'd be very Mievillian, but I don't think that's where it is going. Would be very cool if true.
  10. Because it stops him from being able to easily communicate with potentially criminals? It's a pretty standard law enforcement ploy, actually. Corporate espionage is a thing too, but so is the act of attempting to destabilize an election. Again, the problem isn't necessarily the act, it's the deliberate attempt to use that act as a means of espionage. The real issue that Obama is pissed about is that Russia is attempting to influence the US election. Which is an act of espionage. Assange hasn't been charged with anything. My suspicion is that State believes that Assange has been interacting and helping those who have broken laws and committed acts of espionage against the US, which is what I stated above. And State telling Ecuador 'hey, you know you're aiding and abetting a person who is aiding and abetting enemies of the US' is all that was needed. This is also, likely, why Ecuador cut off his internet access but didn't kick him out. Hanging out with Assange and giving him refuge is fine; allowing him to talk with criminals on their dime is not. You still didn't answer the question: does the US have the right to attempt to prosecute criminal activities by foreign nationals?
  11. But that's almost certainly not what happened with the creation of sorcery. Quya mages probably discovered magic the same way humans did to start with - shamans who were of the Few who could use their will to do things. They refined it and worked on it. You don't start with the utteral/inutteral thing. That makes it more powerful - but the anagogic magic came first, almost certainly. Sadly per Bakker we'll get like nothing regarding creation myths or anything of that nature and thanks to the Cnaiur stuff we can't really trust anything he says.
  12. No, that's not my position, and you don't understand it at all. You continue to paint me with this, and it continues to be wrong. My position is that the state department does not care about the information whatsoever. Another point in this favor is that the US absolutely has the power and likely the justification to bring down Wikileaks right this instant - and has not done so. Because the information is not the issue. What the US is interested in is actually prosecuting criminals involved in espionage, and making sure other countries are not aiding and abetting those criminals. Again, this follows because Assange is being targeted and Wikileaks as a website is not. And one of the ways they can do this (as is the case with every extraterritorial breaking of law) is by using the state department to influence the other country. Do you believe that the US has a right to prosecute foreign actors who break laws? Because that's what I'm talking about.
  13. There are other ways to release it such that the relevant data is presented and the rest omitted. And again, I don't think that the state department cares about suppressing more data one way or another. You keep trying to pin that on me, and that's not what I'm saying at all. That is your argument, not mine. You're all over the map here. The state department is concerned that a foreign government is willfully and deliberately attempting to influence and manipulate the US democratic process. This is not only my opinion, this is what has been stated by Obama. It doesn't matter about if it is the DNC or not - any more than it mattered that Nixon broke into Watergate to steal fairly boring data. The important key here is that the US has credible intelligence to indicate that Russia is specifically attempting to affect the election. It isn't specifically an issue with the Russians at all, save Trump's weird-ass relationship with him. But that's immaterial. No, that's a huge mischaracterization of privacy rights and laws. The function of whistleblowers is not to alert people to things that are negative impacts; it is to reveal actual laws being broken and conspiracy to cover those actions up. Private leaks might be interesting and often salacious, but that is true of basically anyone's email ever. What you're saying is that if you are working in politics then you cannot ever assume privacy, you can never talk badly about anyone else, ever, and you can't ever even engage in anything that might be taken out of context, ever. That's ludicrous. Again, there is no evidence that the state department is attempting to suppress any information. That's your spin. There is evidence that they are attempting to stop a foreign government from attempting to influence the US election by means of unlawfully obtained data. Again, wikileaks has operated for years and done FAR more damaging information before - why not attempt to use political power then? Or worse? Wikileaks has done a lot more damage to HRC earlier - why not stop then? It doesn't make sense. There's no correlation to data being bad for a campaign == state work. There IS a correlation to data being proven to have been stolen by foreign agency with express desire to influence the election == state work.
  14. Environmentalists oppose carbon tax proposition in Washington State

    Exactly. And that's precisely why the liberals above opposed the Carbon Tax approach.
  15. NFL 2016 Week 7: Nobody's Burfict

    And seriously, he's a fucking kicker. They protected a kicker.