Hezbollah claims to have captured Israeli spy-bird
A rapidly increasing phenomena, this ‘animal accused of spying’ trend, and the majority of such stories are from Middle Eastern countries who obviously blame Israel. I suppose Zio-phobia knows no bounds…
Isn’t it obvious? That eagle is a dirty zionist. It should be put to death immediately. In all level of seriousness, Israel is not innocent of what it accuses others of.
[size=150]Altru-Phobia is a far greater trend[/size]
The use of spies, deception, and false flags has been going on for 6000 years along with the fear of it, true terrorism.
Not using such things and being honest would be a far greater phenomenon.
What’s funny is that there are probably tiny little drones flying around their neighborhood that they haven’t even noticed while they’re out trying to convince themselves that a bird is the problem.
Oh, it is even worse than that.
Das Experiment is just a drone. 
Robotics engineers make machines into drones.
Nano engineers make creatures into drones.
Socialist engineers make people into drones.
“Serve me, serve me, serve me!”
“To Protect and Serve”
“I w-a-n-n-a b-e G-o-d!!!”
“Consume the fruit of the tree of good and evil, and thou shall surely die.”
Charming.
Tell me James, if that is your real name, can you discuss politics without blaming ‘socialism’ for EVERYTHING? It’s like listening to a hardcore teenage Marxist, but in reverse. They just go ‘capitalism, capitalism, capitalism’. You go ‘socialism, socialism, socialism’…
Every drone thinks it’s a free spirit… to the degree it thinks.
But I’ll tell you what…
You get your masters to stop being bad guys, and I’ll stop pointing out the fact of it.
How’s that?
I don’t think you know who you’re talking to.
I don’t have any masters. I don’t think you know who you’re talking to…
And you think that you do?
I’m talking to you, who for some reason frequently extols the virtue of understanding rational metaphysics so as to develop an appreciation of the immutable and yet when it comes to politics talks in the most biased, mutable, contingent terms.
I find that odd, hence my question to you. I note you that still haven’t answered it, but that is as I expected. Meanwhile, you’re implicitly accusing me of being a Zionist and a Socialist, neither of which is correct.
So I’d conclude I know who I’m talking to more than you know who you are talking to…
Apparently not considering that I haven’t accused you of being a Zionist nor a Socialist… merely a drone.
The bias appears to be entirely on your part. But then I have said to be careful of that accusing of your own guilt thing.
And btw, if you try to talk about politics and find that you are not talking about Socialism, then you are not talking about politics.
How would you control where a wild bird goes??? Paranoia running amok.
A) You don’t really have to
B) Eagles are very territorial, staying in their own territory
C) They can be easily trained to respond to signals.
…Normalcy Bias running amok. 
The accusation was implicit, as I said.
I asked you a question. You’ve still not answered it.
Are you being serious?
That reminds me of the discussion that I tried to have on a psychology site concerning the dynamics of diverse intelligence. I used the example of a human having to serve under a monkey. Every actual racist around accused me of being racist because obviously (to them) I must be talking about Obama as the monkey. 
I seriously wasn’t at all. I was intending on talking about intelligence testing for mangers. 
So I have to wonder why you think that if I accuse someone of being a drone, I must be talking about socialists.
What was your question?
Emm…
… yeah, I think so.
No doubt you consider Obama a socialist. Tell me, do you consider Bush II a socialist? What about Reagan? Nixon?
It isn’t my fault Americans are phenomenally stupid when it comes to politics. I’ve tried to encourage them to actually, y’know, think about things before opening their mouths, but years of mass culture and mass education tailoring them to believe that the quickest response is the best makes it almost impossible.
Perhaps because you constantly talk about socialists? Maybe? Just possibly? No?
Can you talk about politics without using the term ‘socialist’ or ‘socialism’, and without blaming that/those words for anything and everything that’s wrong?
What if I wanted to discuss politics in an era centuries before socialism existed?
And finally, please define ‘socialism’ as you are using it, preferably with reference to the above-mentioned administrations and whether or not (and why) you consider them to be ‘socialist’. That might help me understand your fixation on what is, after all, just a word.
One more for you James:
What if I wanted to discuss (as I sorta wanted to on this thread until it got derailed) the relative merits and demerits of Islamism and Zionism, neither of which are socialist political philosophies? Would I still have to talk about socialism?
Just as drones don’t know they are drones, Americans don’t know they are puppets, and the free don’t know they are free, quite often, and certainly before the name was coined, socialists don’t know they are socialists.
But frankly, it doesn’t matter to me what you think that you are. Talk about Zionism if you like. Call it what you like. I am a conceptualist and rationalist (which should be more than obvious to you by now). But do remember that the Jewish tradition is to hate rationalists even more than Christians. Theirs is a god of jealousy.
…and “Socialism” in concept is merely, "we the elite know what is best for the species, not the species itself. And thus deserve control over them. We should be their God."
Could you give me an example of a socialist who calls themselves a socialist who believes in this philosophy?