|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2016 0:45:33 GMT
In an earlier posting I offered a view of the reference to ‘speaking Roman’ and that such a use of the term 'Roman' would have meant the linguistic Babylon of the Roman world. I won’t quote the entire thing again, but to speak Roman was to live in a sea of multiple language with multiple levels of Latin and multiple levels of Greek, as well as the various Germanic languages and the other Celtic versions.
For the SPLC to mis-define this reality is seemingly by intention, but then they have rarely allowed the truth to be a barrio to a political agenda.
|
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Jul 4, 2016 2:10:12 GMT
# Well, a selective reading of 1400 years of history. Not quite the same thing. The trouble with conservatives is that, like leftists, when push comes to shove they always side with authority against the people. No no Lin, you've got that backwards. It is liberals who side with governments and conservatives who side with the people. It isn't the people who want to let all these Muslim immigrants in. No way. It is the loopy EU government in Brussels along with left leaning governments in countries like Sweden. If the people were to decide, I think they'd round up all the Muslims and export them to the border with instructions to go away and stay away forever. |
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jul 4, 2016 6:23:39 GMT
no hon. NOTHING that comes from the racist splc is fact. try and find some facts to back up your claim. you have to get it from a legitimate source, and not from a bunchof racist bigots Yes, sweetiepie, a FACT is a FACT whatever the source. It's a simple FACT that the Germans did NOT speak Roman - in fact, no one does or ever HAS spoken 'Roman.' It's literally as foolish as suggesting that Europeans speak European or Now just stop pretending to be silly, dear Jim; I know you're not too wimpish to admit when you're wrong (in this case because you believed the propaganda of a man who is either a complete fool or a deliberate liar or - possibly - both.) nothing foolish about it hon. it's just simple FACT, although, africans speak afrikaner. americans speak american. australians DO speak austraLian. the british speak british. NO ONE speaks english english. everyone speaks their country's version of english |
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jul 4, 2016 6:28:44 GMT
# Well, a selective reading of 1400 years of history. Not quite the same thing. The trouble with conservatives is that, like leftists, when push comes to shove they always side with authority against the people. No no Lin, you've got that backwards. It is liberals who side with governments and conservatives who side with the people. It isn't the people who want to let all these Muslim immigrants in. No way. It is the loopy EU government in Brussels along with left leaning governments in countries like Sweden. If the people were to decide, I think they'd round up all the Muslims and export them to the border with instructions to go away and stay away forever. that's just the simple reality.the people of europe never agreed to allow the hordes of muzzies into their countries. it was solely the worthless trash that they have for leaders, such as merkel, who follows the imbecilic eu dictates against the will of the people who have caused the problems |
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jul 4, 2016 21:28:44 GMT
In an earlier posting I offered a view of the reference to ‘speaking Roman’ and that such a use of the term 'Roman' would have meant the linguistic Babylon of the Roman world. I won’t quote the entire thing again, but to speak Roman was to live in a sea of multiple language with multiple levels of Latin and multiple levels of Greek, as well as the various Germanic languages and the other Celtic versions. For the SPLC to mis-define this reality is seemingly by intention, but then they have rarely allowed the truth to be a barrio to a political agenda. Nor do Islamophobes it seems. Now I'm getting rather sick of feeling like I'm a teacher addressing a bunch of 5-year old kids. The simple FACT is that NO ONE - now or EVER - not at ANY time in history - spoke a language called ROMAN. The language of the Roman Empire was Latin. NOT Roman. Why don't you just accept that French is - as usual - FACTUALLY WRONG? I'm beginning to feel like I'm addressing a convention of Flat-Earthists! |
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jul 4, 2016 21:40:24 GMT
Please Big Lin relax. A lot of people talk about the American language or the Australian language. Maybe it is a nationalist tendency to replace the word 'dialect' with 'language'. Latin like Oxford English wasn't spoken in it's pure form by many. Best wishes for Mike!  Anna, I get deeply offended by FALSEHOOD. French has made NUMEROUS statements that are downright FALSE. The 'Roman' one is simply the most obviously stupid - so stupid that even a 5-year old kid would see through it. But I've posted a while back now EIGHT examples of PROVABLY, FACTUALLY FALSE statements that he's made (nearly all of which, by the way, I KNOW to be false from direct personal experience). Now to me French is an evil man pushing an agenda of hate on the basis of FALSEHOOD. And that HAS to be resisted. Truth always has to win out over lies and propaganda. Frankly as someone who is not only deeply passionate and knowledgeable about history but who knows several professional historians, French offends me deeply because he is deliberately telling LIES about the past. It really is that simple. His version of 'history' is about as credible as the account 'Mein Kampf' gives of the 'Jewish peril.' Frankly he's a disgusting little toerag and ought to crawl back under the rock he slimed his way out of. The sheer volume of factual errors he makes is beyond belief. If you actually look at the Islamic world at its height you'll find that 'most of Christianity' was NOT conquered by the Muslims. But truth has no meaning to the likes of French. Any more than it did to Goebbels or Stalin. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2016 22:02:20 GMT
In an earlier posting I offered a view of the reference to ‘speaking Roman’ and that such a use of the term 'Roman' would have meant the linguistic Babylon of the Roman world. I won’t quote the entire thing again, but to speak Roman was to live in a sea of multiple language with multiple levels of Latin and multiple levels of Greek, as well as the various Germanic languages and the other Celtic versions. For the SPLC to mis-define this reality is seemingly by intention, but then they have rarely allowed the truth to be a barrio to a political agenda. Nor do Islamophobes it seems. Now I'm getting rather sick of feeling like I'm a teacher addressing a bunch of 5-year old kids. The simple FACT is that NO ONE - now or EVER - not at ANY time in history - spoke a language called ROMAN. The language of the Roman Empire was Latin. NOT Roman. Why don't you just accept that French is - as usual - FACTUALLY WRONG? I'm beginning to feel like I'm addressing a convention of Flat-Earthists! Big Lin, you can refer to all of us or some of us as 5-year old kids or Flat-Earthists or those accused of Islamophobia or any disparaging descriptive term that you want, but that will make little difference as from my perspective you are not reading what is written here. The City of Rome was a world community in that it was comprised of all sorts of people and cultures. Obviously they spoke Latin and did so as representing differing versions of societal groups within the Latin world. So too with Greek as it was the language of the educated and the language of logical interchanges of rhetoric, and there were languages of the Germanic peoples in all of the differing Celtic people languages, and obviously there was Hebrew, and on and on and on. The acceptance and use of multiple languages was a very Roman trait in that they did little to force people to change their local beliefs and activities and so too with language. To speak Roman was to speak in the languages of Rome. That doesn’t seem difficult to understand. |
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator 
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jul 4, 2016 22:37:09 GMT
Please Big Lin relax. A lot of people talk about the American language or the Australian language. Maybe it is a nationalist tendency to replace the word 'dialect' with 'language'. Latin like Oxford English wasn't spoken in it's pure form by many. Best wishes for Mike! Anna, I get deeply offended by FALSEHOOD. French has made NUMEROUS statements that are downright FALSE. The 'Roman' one is simply the most obviously stupid - so stupid that even a 5-year old kid would see through it. But I've posted a while back now EIGHT examples of PROVABLY, FACTUALLY FALSE statements that he's made (nearly all of which, by the way, I KNOW to be false from direct personal experience). Now to me French is an evil man pushing an agenda of hate on the basis of FALSEHOOD. And that HAS to be resisted. Truth always has to win out over lies and propaganda. Frankly as someone who is not only deeply passionate and knowledgeable about history but who knows several professional historians, French offends me deeply because he is deliberately telling LIES about the past. It really is that simple. His version of 'history' is about as credible as the account 'Mein Kampf' gives of the 'Jewish peril.' Frankly he's a disgusting little toerag and ought to crawl back under the rock he slimed his way out of. The sheer volume of factual errors he makes is beyond belief. If you actually look at the Islamic world at its height you'll find that 'most of Christianity' was NOT conquered by the Muslims. But truth has no meaning to the likes of French. Any more than it did to Goebbels or Stalin.
The phrase "Roman language is used by other researchers too.
prezi.com/5wdzgaaqukf6/roman-language/ QUOTE:
www.crystalinks.com/romelanguage.html QUOTE:
Ancient Roman Language and Scripts
www.legendsandchronicles.com/ancient-civilizations/ancient-rome/language-of-the-ancient-romans/ QUOTE:
Latin and the other Roman languages
www.danxner.com/extramaterials/art003/Final_Project/language.htm QUOTE:
Roman Language: Written and Spoken
Roman language - definition of Roman language by The Free Dictionary
www.thefreedictionary.com/Roman+language
study.com/academy/lesson/legacies-of-roman-literature-language-law.html QUOTE:
Legacies of Roman Literature, Language & Law
In this lesson, you will explore the legacies of Roman language
Lin I just picture Dr. Warren trying to reconstruct these historical events and wishing to avoid going off on a linguistic tangent by NOT saying the Germanic tribes spoke Latin or Romanesco.
"The Germanic tribes ( Goths, etc. ) spoke the Roman language" is simply understood as the "language of the Romans" by most readers.... Of course the nit picking, pedantic SPLC wants to bring down Dr. Warren at all costs.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jul 5, 2016 12:06:39 GMT
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jul 5, 2016 12:31:12 GMT
You know, I LIVE in London and what he says about London is again a PROVABLE LIE. Please stop trying to defend this scumbag who has NO regard for truth. I hate ALL extremists - left, right, religious or otherwise. Why are you soft on right-wing liars and oppressors? |
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Jul 5, 2016 13:01:51 GMT
Hi Menantol, I said that only love will bring peace to this warlike world and I meant it. The minute someone kills another, that has been accomplished by hate not by love. A person whose heart is filled with love will not harm a hair on anyone's head., that is what I was stating. Love naturally has to be in everyone's heart in order for peace to reign. As long as their is hate there will be war. I hope everything is now clear.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jul 5, 2016 13:21:49 GMT
Hi Menantol, I said that only love will bring peace to this warlike world and I meant it. The minute someone kills another, that has been accomplished by hate not by love. A person whose heart is filled with love will not harm a hair on anyone's head., that is what I was stating. Love naturally has to be in everyone's heart in order for peace to reign. As long as their is hate there will be war. I hope everything is now clear.
We have to maintain this physical world in an orderly fashion so that people like you and others can enjoy their free speech and grow and develope in peace.
|
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Jul 5, 2016 16:25:39 GMT
Hi Menantol, I said that only love will bring peace to this warlike world and I meant it. The minute someone kills another, that has been accomplished by hate not by love. A person whose heart is filled with love will not harm a hair on anyone's head., that is what I was stating. Love naturally has to be in everyone's heart in order for peace to reign. As long as their is hate there will be war. I hope everything is now clear. Consider the lesson of history from Sparta and Athens. Athens was a peace loving democratic society with equal rights, voting for leaders every year, education for all, equal opportunities for everyone. Young men had to serve just two years in the army which was defensive by nature. Sparta was a militaristic society. All boys were trained for the army from age seven. The men were in the army until age 60. They could have wives but they lived separately in army barracks. Preparing for war was central to their culture. They wanted to conquer other city states, take slaves, and take any valuables. Sparta won the long war with Athens, which Sparta started. They had the dominant army though Athens had a much stronger navy. Athens fair minded equality based society lost to a hostile militaristic hateful society. Love isn't the answer Scottish Lassie. We don't want to be another Athens. |
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Jul 5, 2016 16:32:24 GMT
You know, I LIVE in London and what he says about London is again a PROVABLE LIE. Please stop trying to defend this scumbag who has NO regard for truth. I hate ALL extremists - left, right, religious or otherwise. Why are you soft on right-wing liars and oppressors? That 60 Minutes video does a great job of showing us just how bad things are in East London. If I lived in London I'd be lobbying to have them rounded up and evicted from England. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2016 20:51:23 GMT
Hi Menantol, I said that only love will bring peace to this warlike world and I meant it. The minute someone kills another, that has been accomplished by hate not by love. A person whose heart is filled with love will not harm a hair on anyone's head., that is what I was stating. Love naturally has to be in everyone's heart in order for peace to reign. As long as their is hate there will be war. I hope everything is now clear. Hello Scottish Lassie. I accept that you believe those words as you have uttered versions of them many times. At least you think you believe them. Of course they aren’t true as those who profess love will kill another just as fast as anyone else given the motivations to do so. War does not necessarily require ‘hate’ to be started or to continue. Certainly there are those who do hate those of the other side in a war. There are those who hate others without war. There are those of a ‘loving’ religion who hate those of the ‘other’ loving religions. But hate is not required for any type of aggression. Not knowing those of the other side often leads to aggression. Misunderstanding the motives and goals of others can often lead to aggression. Two parties can dislike and even hate each other but as long as they know the other side, war is unlikely. |
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Jul 7, 2016 15:42:27 GMT
Hi Anna, I am talking about people as a whole. People are motivated by either love or hate, so when there is love in our hearts for each other, then peace will reign.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Jul 7, 2016 16:01:29 GMT
Hi Menantol, I still go along with what I said before. If there is love in a person's heart then as far as I am concerned, it is an impossibility for anyone to want to harm another. That is how love affects people who truly love.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2016 17:06:42 GMT
Hi Menantol, I still go along with what I said before. If there is love in a person's heart then as far as I am concerned, it is an impossibility for anyone to want to harm another. That is how love affects people who truly love. Scottish Lassie, that is like saying that if all flowers smelled good, all flowers would smell good. That can be taken as true but without meaning because the reality is, not all flowers smell good and they never will all smell good. If all people have love for all others, then all people will love each other, but the reality is that not all people have had, do have or will ever have, love in their hearts for all others. That is reality and to not accept that reality is to live in a myth and in fact stand aside as those without love in their hearts do bad things. On the other hand, to accept reality is to learn to live in, and work within, the reality that not all people are loving to all others and with that realization, learn to find ways to live in a world where people do not like each other. Living in a myth doesn’t help anyone. |
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Jul 7, 2016 18:06:35 GMT
Hi Menantol, I still go along with what I said before. If there is love in a person's heart then as far as I am concerned, it is an impossibility for anyone to want to harm another. That is how love affects people who truly love. Scottish Lassie, that is like saying that if all flowers smelled good, all flowers would smell good. That can be taken as true but without meaning because the reality is, not all flowers smell good and they never will all smell good. If all people have love for all others, then all people will love each other, but the reality is that not all people have had, do have or will ever have, love in their hearts for all others. That is reality and to not accept that reality is to live in a myth and in fact stand aside as those without love in their hearts do bad things. On the other hand, to accept reality is to learn to live in, and work within, the reality that not all people are loving to all others and with that realization, learn to find ways to live in a world where people do not like each other. Living in a myth doesn’t help anyone. It takes two to tango. If you were a Jew who loved Himmler and Htler, they still would have sent you to the gas chamber and stolen the gold fillings out of your teeth. Their hate trumped your love. It is exactly the same with ISIS terrorists. They hate you because you're a Kafir, an unbeliever, not a Muslim. |
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Jul 10, 2016 14:41:38 GMT
Hi Bush Admirer, so we are all like flotsam & jetsam floating in the sea carried hither and thither by the waves?We are all in a position to be able to change our minds, so all anyone needs is the will to do just that.
Why is it that we can't have the frame of mind that works towards having peaceful intentions instead of the hatred that is being displayed at the present time? Why is it that people can seek to harm another human being without a care as to the pain and suffering that it is causing? There surely has to be an answer. Are we all working towards that end?
|
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Jul 10, 2016 15:05:40 GMT
Hi Menantol, you are being facetious now. I think there is a difference. Flowers have no say whether they are perfumed or not, but human beings have the ability to think and therefore decide what action to put into practice. It is just as easy to love as it is to hate. Nobody has the right to destroy a life and cause so much suffering to so many people. Something needs to be done to prevent all this carnage. Any ideas? Peaceful ones.!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2016 16:49:38 GMT
Hi Menantol, you are being facetious now. I think there is a difference. Flowers have no say whether they are perfumed or not, but human beings have the ability to think and therefore decide what action to put into practice. It is just as easy to love as it is to hate. Nobody has the right to destroy a life and cause so much suffering to so many people. Something needs to be done to prevent all this carnage. Any ideas? Peaceful ones.!!! Nice selective editing on how you want to respond. Obviously the flower reference was a metaphor, maybe not a good one but a metaphor nonetheless. But then you simply passed over the rest of the response, which was: “ . . . If all people have love for all others, then all people will love each other, but the reality is that not all people have had, do have or will ever have, love in their hearts for all others. . . . . That is reality and to not accept that reality is to live in a myth and in fact stand aside as those without love in their hearts do bad things. . . . . . On the other hand, to accept reality is to learn to live in, and work within, the reality that not all people are loving to all others and with that realization, learn to find ways to live in a world where people do not like each other. Living in a myth doesn’t help anyone. . . “ To begin with you make the mistake of making this singularly between the emotions of ‘love’ and ’hate.’ That is to see humans as two dimensional cartoon characters and that has nothing to do with how people interact. People, both individually and in groups, have the capacity to do great things. They can certainly do things which make life easier on all others. At the same time, they can kill others without a blink of the eye. Both extremes exist and there is far more between those extremes. To live in a world of myth at one end of those extremes is to contribute nothing to lives of these individuals. Such a perspective has nothing to do with making better the lives of others. |
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Jul 10, 2016 18:14:23 GMT
Why is it that we can't have the frame of mind that works towards having peaceful intentions instead of the hatred that is being displayed at the present time? Why is it that people can seek to harm another human being without a care as to the pain and suffering that it is causing? There surely has to be an answer. Are we all working towards that end? Those are good questions Scottish Lassie. You'd have to ask Muslims why their Quran is so hateful toward non Muslims, and why their Jihadist history of attacking Christians and other non Muslims. And why an incubator for terror groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS, Al Queda, Boko Haram, and hateful individuals like the San Bernardino and Orlando shooters. |
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Jul 10, 2016 23:28:00 GMT
Hi Menantol, when a person goes on holiday what do they do? Are they going to choose a place that is dilapidated or are they going to choose somewhere that has great scenery and the accommodation squeaky clean? We plan our actions and choose something that will produce the best experience, that is logical.
Every choice that we make depends on the emotions of love and hate, we are going to gravitate towards a choice that hopefully will be beneficial for our all over wellbeing. We are making decisions all the time and I am sure that we are always trying to improve on our circumstance personally and for the smooth running of life in general.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scottish Lassie on Jul 10, 2016 23:55:12 GMT
Hi Bush Admirer, How come there are thousands of Muslims living in peace in western countries? Because they obey the law of the land, so if THEY can do it, so can others.We have to resolve the present situation somehow. Life is precious as I see it and we could quite easily solve the problem by having a more peaceful attitude, we have to work towards that aim. The question is : how do we do it? I think children need to be taught appropriate behaviour for starters and we need good role models for that to be successful. Any suggestions?
|
|
biglinmarshall.proboards.com/thread/7917/bits-pieces-magazine-issue-2024
Nov 4, 2024 17:39:29 GMT
*
biglinmarshall.proboards.com/thread/7917/bits-pieces-magazine-issue-2024
Nov 4, 2024 17:39:29 GMT
*
yay! 
thanks
Nov 2, 2024 17:09:05 GMT
thanks
Nov 2, 2024 17:09:05 GMT
Oct 23, 2024 18:34:05 GMT