Forum posts made by byronlord

Topic would you be a boyfriend for a girl who wants to save her virginity till marriage?
Posted 25 Jul 2013 04:52

i promised mum before she died. i have a stepmum now and she doesn't mind id i lose virginity before marrying. but my mum did. Hugs

That is a terrible reason. It is no business of parents whether their adult kids have sex before marriage. Attempting to control their lives from beyond the grave is obnoxious beyond belief. It is emotional blackmail.

Live your life for your own moral principles, not someone else's.

Do you really want to marry in your 20s just to have sex? What happens if the guy you marry tends to be crap at it? Women are much more likely to end up with a crap lover than men are. The woman does not need to put in any particular effort for the man to have a fun time but the reverse is not the case.

Sex before marriage is a much better option than getting married and then having affairs because hubby is crap in bed. See my poem 'to all the husband's I have cuckolded'.

Sure you can find men who would wait. Even today it is pretty common to want to wait till a relationship is serious to have sex, even though men aren't supposed to admit that. But the risk you face by holding off till a wedding ring is that you will be picking from the pool of men who are just not into sex or are closet homosexuals etc.

Topic Thoughts on Anthony Weiner's wife - Huma Abedin?
Posted 24 Jul 2013 20:30

Maybe they are into swinging or the poly scene. Assuming that a woman jealously guards her mate is not always correct.

The problem here isn't the infidelity, its the exhibitionism. Wiener can line up willing females on his office desk and bang them in turn for all I care. But sending nude selfie shots to random women on the net is the net equivalent of standing on a street corner and flashing passing women.

It isn't his wife's call.

Topic Are all men unsatisfied with the size of their penis?
Posted 15 Jul 2013 09:45

This is just an excuse for a dick size measuring contest.

I have never had a woman complain it was too large. I have had women concerned that it might be too big to take them anally but that has never turned out to be a show stopper.

Topic IRS admits they deliberately harrassed Conservative groups
Posted 30 Jun 2013 05:59

House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-California told the treasury department to exclude liberal groups from the May audit of the IRS concerning IRS treatment of political groups that were applying for tax exempt status. According to treasury inspector General J. Russell George, Issa said to, “narrowly focus on tea party organizations.”

The Inspector General was a Bush appointee and very clearly his report was partisan and intended to deceive.

He should be fired immediately and put under investigation for lying to congress.

Issa has an unsavory business past with many criminal charges. His Benghazi investigation turned out to be a witch hunt and now his IRS investigation has done the same. Meanwhile no investigation of the wiretapping which is a genuine scandal because the Republicans know that any investigation of Obama will raise questions about why they supported the same behavior (and worse) under Bush.

Topic breaks into the Top 5000 sites
Posted 17 Jun 2013 16:29

It's anticipated that there will be over 1 billion websites by the end of 2013.

We have broken into the Top 5000 (in the 3 biggest target markets), according to Alexa - putting us in the top 0.000005%.

Who'd have thought erotica would be so popular? evil4

There is porn on the Internet, I am shocked! shocked I tell you!

Topic It’s OK in Texas to shoot a woman for refusing to have sex! You're within the law.
Posted 14 Jun 2013 18:01

You can steer any issue you'd like toward your beefs with gun ownership and other cultural traits you hate, but this isn't really a gun control issue. We have a few threads already for that flavor of bloviation. People kill others without guns on a regular basis, sometimes quite gruesomely. There's no basis for asserting what he would or would not have done in different circumstances.

The statistics simply don't back that claim. Take out the deaths due to guns and the US per captia murder rate is the same as that of France, the UK and Germany. The gun deaths in the UK are practically zero because guns are banned completely.

Now you can claim that this jerk could have murdered the girl just as easily with his bare hands or a knife, but he would have had to run pretty fast to catch up with the car, then ripped the door open and overpowered her while the driver looked on.

Now you can say that being able to kill people with the press of a button makes no difference to people's willingness to kill but that does not make it true.

And the people who oppose gun control laws are the same people who push for the type of gunslinger justice that led to this girl's murder and the murder of Treyvon Martin in Florida. Its the NRA that pushes for the stand your ground laws and for putting machine guns in the hands of loonies.

Posted 13 Jun 2013 05:20

Hope you find one of these...

Topic It’s OK in Texas to shoot a woman for refusing to have sex! You're within the law.
Posted 13 Jun 2013 05:16

Don't turn this into a gun control issue. That's just grasping at straws. Would it have been better if he had bludgeoned or stabbed her to death?

Guns annoy me as much as the next person who wants to see some gun control. But that's really not the issue here. That poorly written 'deadly force to recover property' law is the issue here. It just so happens that his deadly force of choice was a gun.

No, the coward would never have bludgeoned her to death, it was the gun that made it easy for him to do.

It is because of places like Texas that we need federal gun control. Its the macho gun slinging culture that people find offensive.

Topic PRISM, The NSA and your right to privacy
Posted 11 Jun 2013 18:34

Well I really don't want to get too deep into this. But one of the things that is really noticeable about the whole episode is how little people who are meant to be in charge of it all really know.

PRISM was obviously not the holy of hollies at the NSA. It was on a non-compartmentalized computer being overseen by a contractor for a start. And from what we hear a blue badger not even a black. He wasn't fully cleared. But he was sufficiently cleared to see all the data washing across PRISM.

So yes, Snowden was a shit, he was the worst fucking shit ever. And he is one of the hundreds of people that the NSA gave access to all our emails and private stuff. So what does that tell us about how far we can trust the rest? How many blackmailers, rapists and other criminals are among them? Statistically about 10% of any population are utter shits. And the military isn't any better no matter what bullshit they try to fill peoples heads with.

The NSA is a military intelligence outfit. Part of the same institution that was up on capitol hill explaining why they have such a rape problem this week. And that isn't a new problem either. The Japanese living on Ockinawa have been complaining about the rape thing for decades without the slightest interest from DC. Now we are told we have to trust the same institution with all our private data and no controls at all.

At a conference recently there was a presentation about problems in the Do Not Fly program. A husband had decided to get rid of his wife by listing her on the Do Not Fly List and she was stopped from reentering the US for two years because of it. Nobody checked, nobody listened to her protests. The crime was only detected when the manager was up for promotion and the background check revealed his wife was a security risk. This was presented as a threat to national security because he might have taken someone off the list as easily as put them on. The presentation had been given to several agencies. I was the first person to point out that what it actually demonstrates is a callous disinterest in the welfare of the woman and the arrogance of the bureaucrats.

Another thing about these PRISM revelations is that so far all we actually know is that the program exists and some pretty hazy outlines of its capabilities. But despite this we are being told that the revelations are a grave blow to national security. You can almost hear them pinching themselves so they stop short before going on about stopping the commie bastards.

We are also being told that the administration welcomes the debate and moreover everyone knew about these programs. Which makes the threat to national security all the more mysterious as how can we be threatened by revelations about what we already know? And how could we have a debate without being told?

Topic To shave or not to shave, that is the question!
Posted 10 Jun 2013 09:28

Do men prefer shaved pussy over hairy?
Do Women prefer shaved cock over hairy?
Or is trimmed the best option?

The main issue for me is whether the girl's slit is covered in dental floss or not. I will go down on a girl who is au naturelle, but if she prepares herself by shaving then I feel more welcomed.

I prefer shaved aesthetically as well. But looks are not so important to me. The idea of women having plastic surgery on their pussies to make them look prettier is just ridiculous in my view. But then is pretty much all plastic surgery except for correcting really major disfigurement, burns etc.

Topic PRISM, The NSA and your right to privacy
Posted 10 Jun 2013 08:31

What sticks in my craw is the people in Congress who voted for the PATRIOT act because they were too cowardly to stand up against this when they had a choice and are now running round telling us how terrible the Administration is for doing exactly what the law was written to enable.

PRISM may be unconstitutional, but it is not illegal. Congress gave that power to Bush.

The same justifications are being trotted out for PRISM as were used to defend torture in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo and the Drone Program: Terrorism! Run! Hide!

Terrorism isn't a national security issue, it is a criminal matter. Bin Laden killed 3,000 people on US soil. Thats less than were murdered with handguns since the start of this year.

The big problem with the PRISM program in my view is that it is being managed by a military agency. The NSA is military intelligence, not a police force.

Topic Who played the best James Bond?
Posted 08 Jun 2013 13:24

I suppose Sean Connery is the best but I don't like the Bond formula writing and the stretching of believability (even allowing for the far fetched stories) for example Oddjob killing the guy to get the gold back but crushing the car so the gold had to be separated from the crushed car when all he had to do was take the gold out of the boot (trunk) and put it in the other car which he drove away with the crushed one. I prefer the stuff John Le Carr comes out with - realistic and amoral intelligence novels.

Connery was the definitive Bond but the Craig movies are the best movies.

I think the original movies jumped the shark with Moonraker.

Topic Can we dispense with the labels "MILF" and "Cougar"?
Posted 08 Jun 2013 05:45

The point about the cougar is not really the age gap, it is agency.

Traditionally the man hunts the woman. A Cougar is not merely an older woman, she is an older woman on the prowl with the objective of seducing young men.

A Cougar is quite definitely not a slut. A slut is easy, a Cougar picks her prey, stalks and devours him.

A Cougar is not a MILF either. A MILF is a woman with children that the boy seeks out and seduces.

Topic Why do men impersonate as women or post ladies' pics on their profile
Posted 08 Jun 2013 05:33

My guess, and it is only just that, is that most harbor a latent bisexual curiosity that they themselves fear to accept. By posing as a woman, they can get the attention from men they secretly desire.

Others lack self confidence and the role playing lets them explore with an alter ego.

Maybe a few think that women get better responses on their writing.

Whatever it is, really what difference does it make? We all come here to express a part of ourselves that must remain hidden in ordinary life. If there are guys who wish to do it as women, so be it.

Even should you cyber one, the words are just pixels, and the thoughts are true, even if the biology is not. If a truly straight man hooks up with one, he is no worse for the not knowing, only his fears of 'being seduced by a gay man' are bruised.

This is lush, fantasy is huge, and we are all role playing to some extent.

Umm I don't think it is that. Most of the men posing as women claim to be bisexual and then seek out a huge number of women to hook up with.

Topic I want it deep
Posted 06 Jun 2013 16:15

i can dig it, man - happens to me all the time. rr

They gonna throw you out of the lesbian club if they catch you saying that too loud.

Topic What turns you off immediately?
Posted 04 Jun 2013 13:28

Queen Victoria tattoo on her pussy.

Her labia and slit make up the queen's mouth.

Topic In what spaceship would you travel the universe?
Posted 04 Jun 2013 10:44

Does the TARDIS count? :)

Of course, that would actually be my pick. But nobody had proposed the death star and I couldn't resist.

Topic In what spaceship would you travel the universe?
Posted 03 Jun 2013 20:16

The Death Star of course.

After all, it only had one small technical flaw and that was easily fixed.

Topic What was your first vehicle you owned?
Posted 03 Jun 2013 20:12

First owned was an Austin Maxi from the parents
First I paid for a '72 MGB GT with the chrome bumpers I paid GBP 650 for
First new car a '99 Jaguar XK8 Convertible that I still drive every day.

Topic Punk Chicks
Posted 03 Jun 2013 19:10

omg...i'd so let her take advantage of me.

Me too, threesome?

Topic 2 years after - Do you feel safer?
Posted 03 Jun 2013 17:08

Everybody else is wrong, and only you with your vague assertions - are correct?

Google: Bin Laden CIA asset - and 12 pages of returns comes up. Many repeat the same basic assertion, often repeated since 2002. Several will insist that the CIA had nothing to do with Bin Laden, I assert that those are CIA plastered websites.

I prefer to believe the 2nd version I've listed above from Alexander Cockburn's site.

But then again, I haven't rubbed shoulders with all the movers and shakers of world politics as you have constantly implied that you have, Forrest.

Try this book

The fact that people repeat a claim does not make it accurate. The story of how Bin Laden became involved in Afghanistan was reported at the time. His role was not a secret.

The Global Security piece you quote backs my claim. The only reference made to Bin Laden is quoting administration and CIA sources denying a link. The counterpunch piece is obviously a polemic written by someone without first hand or even second hand knowledge and he is spouting a tin foil hat theory that Bush wanted Bin Laden kept alive so as not to annoy the Saudis. Which is obvious nonsense for reasons I'll get to.

Ask yourself why the man moving the Saudi money into Afghanistan would have any use for more cash? His problem was not having enough people who could make use of what he had.

Bin Laden's change of course came when he came home from Afghanistan. He came home to find himself on the fringes of government circles, not being a member of the royal house and not having a role in the family business. He came to view the Saudi government as corrupted by Western influences. And he came to see the US bases on Saudi soil as a symbol of that corruption, besides which they would make it rather hard for Bin Laden to replace the House of Saud in the coup he began planning.

At the time the counterpunch piece was written, Bin Laden was under a death sentence in Saudi Arabia. He had declared war on the regime before his declaration of war on the US. The idea that Bush would be keeping Bin Laden alive as a favor to the Saudis is ludicrous, they wanted him dead long before 9/11. It was Bush who needed a convenient bogeyman to play off.

Topic 2 years after - Do you feel safer?
Posted 03 Jun 2013 05:22

Bin Laden died @ Tora Bora in December 2001.

Stick that in your tin foil pipe and smoke it.

I didn't feel any more in danger on 09/12/2001 - from Bin Laden than I do now. He was a CIA asset in the 1980s and 1990s. One of the good bad guys or the bad good guys - or what the fuck ever. Why was his entire family allowed to fly out of the USA while the rest of the US domestic air fleet was grounded?

It's the US Government I worry more about than any other individual or government on this planet.

Bin Laden was never CIA your sources are wrong.

When Carter first began discussions with the Saudis on funding the Afghani rebels, the Saudis said they would match the US dollar for dollar. The Saudis needed a bag man to carry the money into Afghanistan. Since no Saudi Prince would do anything so close to actual work Bin Laden got the job.

There was never a reason for the CIA to send money through Bin Laden. They had their own clients.

Topic IRS admits they deliberately harrassed Conservative groups
Posted 03 Jun 2013 04:40

What about the 225 applications that were singled out that weren't from conservative political organizations? Do only liberal and conservative groups count? Ninety groups were conservative, two hundred twenty five were not. Not just conservative groups were asked to justify their tax exempt status.

Political organizations do not get tax exemption but they are not (usually) paying much in the way of taxes because the money they collect as donations goes out as political activity. The only taxes that a political campaign group would be paying would be interest etc.

What this dodge is all about is hiding the origina of vast amounts of cash, over $100 million in the case of Sheldon Adleson, from the public. The reason so many Republican linked groups prefer this dodge is that groups wanting to buy favors tend to see the GOP as easier to buy than the Democrats. Its quite hard for a Democrat to support a plan to build a pipeline to ship toxic oil sludge across the US so that it can be loaded onto ships in Texas and sent off to China. But paid enough money the Republicans will do that for a donor.

Not having to open the books makes it easier to divert funds as well. Ginny Thomas, the wife of a Supreme Court judge gets pait $800,000 a year for 'lobbying' from companies with cases before he husbands court.

Topic IRS admits they deliberately harrassed Conservative groups
Posted 01 Jun 2013 08:28

I agree with much of what you said regarding how these PACS are operated, but right now the law allows this, and the fact remains that the IRS based their actions on affiliation, not action.

Actually the law is very clear that it DOES NOT allow charities to engage in political action.

It was the corrupt conservatives on the Supreme Court who decided that corporations are people and so unlike people can give unlimited contributions to political causes.

Three of those judges are the ones that stole the 2000 election for Bush by stopping the Florida recount and so the only count available was the one made by King George's brother.

Topic 2 years after - Do you feel safer?
Posted 29 May 2013 19:17

Most likely London again. All the crowd did was watch and videotape it. There just as guilty as the 2 men that killed him for doing nothing. It's evident to criminals you can get away with pretty much whatever you want over there considering no ones going to even try to stop them. If the bad guys polite enough they'll stand and have a concersation with him as hes chopping someone up. angry7 it's shameful.

If you go and watch the videos that arent edited a woman walks by him covered in blood
nonchalantly. Sprang even care that he has two knives. That angered me more than the murder.

They also called the police. Calling the police and taking video and doing nothing else is exactly what the London authorities would want people to do in that situation.

They certainly do not want unarmed members of the public trying to apprehend someone who is obviously violent and dangerous.

One woman asked if she could try to save the soldier's life but it was clear he was already dead.

Taking video of a murderer caught red handed would seem to me to be exactly the right thing to do. Armed police arrived promptly and had no difficulty arresting the suspects.

Topic 2 years after - Do you feel safer?
Posted 28 May 2013 18:15

No - the objective of terrorism is to exert your influence over political or other means by threats of violence - either suggested or acted upon.

It is not to make people worry about it . . . seems outright silly to suggest that. How are you to counter act anyone who's trying to do wrong if you're not worried in some slight bit?

Worry breeds awareness, safety and concern.

Seems that what you're wanting to say (perhaps) is that you shouldn't let it dictate your life to an infinitive degree . . . which defaults me into the 'fail' category seeing as how my family is military.

Since someone brought up tin foil hat theories a while back, it seems a good time to point out that I know Joe Nye quite well. He is one of the three chairs of the trilateral commission that gets talked about rather a lot in tin foil hat circles.

Nye is best known for his concept of 'soft-power'. The gist of the idea being that it is impossible to explain the flow of world history by military power alone since most of the time conflicts are settled without war. So there is another ingredient that has to be considered, the US has outsided influence beyond its military capability because of Hollywood and Wall Street and the work fo the State department and so on.

Terrorism is a strategy of groups that are weak in hard power. The whole of Al Qaeda at its peak was barely 300 fighters they have light arms and not much else. Their ability to influence governments comes from soft power - the fear that their attacks on civilians creates.

When I say don't worry I mean that the general public should keep calm and carry on, not that governments should ignore terrorist attacks and do nothing about them. But governments also need to make sure that they act in the right way and that they don't compromise their own soft power by taking actions that are hasty like the disastrous internment order of Ted Heath back in 1971 or the Patriot act or invading Iraq.

Topic 2 years after - Do you feel safer?
Posted 28 May 2013 10:49

Not for one second.

Do you feel less safe now than we were during the cold war when the US and USSR came close to mutual nuclear annihilation a few times?

In the 1970s liberal democracy was limited to former parts of the British empire, countries liberated by the Western powers after WWII and a handful of regimes that mostly lasted only a few years before they were blotted out by military coup. The world was not a safe or secure place either. Pol Pot was murdering millions, the military juntas in South America were murdering tens of thousands and the Soviet Union was a murderous dictatorship.

Today there is only one regime left that is Stalinist, North Korea. NK is the only regime where there is a serious risk of a murder of millions of people or a Mao like mass starvation. There are a handful of brutal authoritarian states but they are all waning in influence. Iran has two friends left, one of which is on the losing end of a civil war, the other is only just emerging from a civil war. Sudan, Saudi Arabia and the Caspian sea region are all pretty ugly but life for most people in the rest of the world is a lot more free than life for black people in the US during the 1960s.

I have lived with the threat of terrorism my whole life. I have not lost any family members but one was targeted in an assassination attempt. Next to the other threats the threat of terrorism is really small.

More people died in Newtown than in all the terrorist attacks in the US this year. More under 6s have died this year because their parents did not keep their guns locked up than died in Newtown.

The whole objective of terrorism is to have a disproportionate effect by making people worry about terrorists. To worry about it is to give in.

Topic IRS admits they deliberately harrassed Conservative groups
Posted 28 May 2013 06:16

There won't be any impeachment over Benghazi. At least any successful impeachment. But I would like to see the IRS be forced to tone way down. They can be used as a weapon against opposition by either party that gains power and have been in the past. I would like to see that possibility taken out of the filthy entangling political equation.

I think the GOP lost control of their Tea Party base long ago. Avoiding impeachment is going to be a big political cost to many in the primaries. Before long they will be telling each other it is not going to be such a disaster.

It is far from clear that anything wrong, let alone illegal happened with the IRS. The Tea Party groups were claiming to be charitable institutions that were not engaged in political activity. It is a matter of public record that Karl Rove's Crossroads 'charity' spent over $100 million on campaign ads in 2012. Damn right there should be investigations. They should investigate any liberal groups who abuse the tax code to conceal donors as well.

A simple way to eliminate the problem would be to require all groups that spend more than $25,000 on political campaign ads to disclose their donors over $1,000 regardless of their tax registration. That would eliminate the incentive to abuse the system.

Lerner was a Bush administration appointee. It is hardly surprising that she would plead the fifth after GOP members of Congress had already demanded she be arrested and charged.

Topic 2 years after - Do you feel safer?
Posted 28 May 2013 05:21

I don't like conservatism any more than the next guy (which, for many, means not at all), but is your whole worldview dependent upon the diabolical, dastardly Republicans and their evil plans? I'm sure you and I could rattle off a similar list of corporations, individuals, and conglomerates that supposedly rule the world and its money*. But at the end of the day, do you really believe that neo-conservatives could or would provide escape for Bin Laden in order to kill him later, in accordance with their political whims? Do you think maybe he was cool with that too, and they all had a few whiskey shots and laughed at the suckers who fell hook-line-and-sinker for the whole "9-11" bit? What a fool he was when they finally shot him, in that case.

Yes, I do believe that they wanted to keep Bin Laden alive:

1) They lied to us all about the invasion of Iraq.
2) The Neo-cons believed that 'real men want to go onto Tehran', i.e. they would invade Iran after Iraq.
3) Bush refused to deploy ground troops at the Tora Bora despite warnings that Bin Laden would escape.

Now we can argue the extent to which this was a desired outcome or merely an outcome that they saw a side benefit to. But they did far worse.

Topic 2 years after - Do you feel safer?
Posted 27 May 2013 15:17

It has now been a bit over 2 years since US special forces eliminated Osama bin Laden. The mastermind behind amongst others the embassy bombing and 9/11 is dead, but the question I wonder is; do you feel safer knowing that Osama bin Laden is dead?

From the point of view of incapacitating Al Qaeda, Al Zawahiri was the more important leader. He was the real brains behind the operation and has a long history going back to a major part in the assassination of Sadat.

From the point of view of winding down the counterproductive war on terror and applying counter terrorism techniques that have proven most effective, I think it was a win. It seems more likely than not that Bin Laden had been allowed to escape the Torra Borra deliberately as he provided a useful pretext for advancing the neo-con crowd's broader imperial ambitions. It would have been much harder to invade Iraq with Bin Laden dead.

The Republicans were certainly very angry after Bin Laden was killed and they certainly put scant effort into doing it themselves. Now that Bin Laden is dead the US can close the remaining idiocies of Bush's misrule. The gulag in Guantanamo for a start.

Back in the 1970s the UK and German both faced a terrorist threat. The UK initially tried the 'Rambo' approach favored by the US post 9/11 and ended up fighting the Catholic community that the troops had originally been sent in to protect. Germany could not apply the same approach for historical reasons and was forced to treat the Baader Meinhof gang as purely a police matter.

By 1974 it was obvious that the German approach was more effective. Northern Ireland went from bad to worse while the Baader Meinhof gang was marginalized and on the run. The UK government formally switched to a policy of decriminalization and the number of deaths due to terrorism dropped to a third year on year and stayed there or lower. It was a big mistake for the US to ever create a special class of political prisoner as the Bush Admin did.