The Georgia Guidestones have been demolished:

[Subduction Zone]

A bomber damaged them badly, the state investigated and called them a hazard and have since destroyed them:

Georgia Guidestones: 'America's Stonehenge' demolished after blast

 

[The Hammer]

A bomber damaged them badly, the state investigated and called them a hazard and have since destroyed them:

Georgia Guidestones: 'America's Stonehenge' demolished after blast

The State (allowed) destroyed them...


Then designated them. A hazard, so as to remove them. That's what I see.

 

[Aštra’el]

That is unfortunate.

 

[The Hammer]

People are uncomfortable with certain truths.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The State (allowed) destroyed them...


Then designated them. A hazard, so as to remove them. That's what I see.

And that was BS on their part. They took no time to consider the various possibilities. It could easily have been fenced off while they considered all options. They rushed to destroy it since they did not want to see it come back. Perhaps there is a well meaning multi millionaire somewhere that could fix this.-

 

[Viker]

~One crowd member, a local pastor, immediately professed his belief that the stones were built for cult and devil worship because of their similar appearance to Stonehenge~

~The Georgia Guidestones have long been a focus for conspiracy theories. Some believe the monument to be "Satanic" and a "portal to hell"~

More victims of America's ongoing Satanic Panic. Not that the guide stones ever had anything to do with Satanism or anything vaguely Satanic.

 

[The Hammer]

And that was BS on their part. They took no time to consider the various possibilities. It could easily have been fenced off while they considered all options. They rushed to destroy it since they did not want to see it come back. Perhaps there is a well meaning multi millionaire somewhere that could fix this.-

~One crowd member, a local pastor, immediately professed his belief that the stones were built for cult and devil worship because of their similar appearance to Stonehenge~

~The Georgia Guidestones have long been a focus for conspiracy theories. Some believe the monument to be "Satanic" and a "portal to hell"~

More victims of America's ongoing Satanic Panic. Not that the guide stones ever had anything to do with Satanism or anything vaguely Satanic.

Yup. I thought they had a good message on what to do after the inevitable societal collapse.

 

[74x12]

A bomber damaged them badly, the state investigated and called them a hazard and have since destroyed them:

Georgia Guidestones: 'America's Stonehenge' demolished after blast

An act of defiance against the liberal world order. Reminds me of the Boston tea party. Good riddance.

 

[Subduction Zone]

An act of defiance against the liberal world order. Reminds me of the Boston tea party. Good riddance.

So I guess church bombings are okay too since the would be an act of defiance against the conservative world order.

I will try to remember that you are on the probombing side.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I wonder if they will rebuild.

 

[74x12]

So I guess church bombings are okay too since the would be an act of defiance against the conservative world order.

I will try to remember that you are on the probombing side.

What conservative world order? It doesn't exist.

They recently openly admitted this is a liberal world order. Something I had been saying for awhile.

I did not in fact condone bombing. I simply stated what I believe are probable facts. This is an act of defiance against the LBW and secondly it is good riddance. They took it down. The bomb only damaged it.

Besides it seems you want to harm people. Because people could be in churches. You're in fact violent. I suppose you want to bring the world population down like the monument said. That would be one motive for advocating murder and terrorism. Also it would be a hate crime to target Christian churches.

The left has already been going after monuments every chance they get and getting away with it. So let's not play the sanctimonious here like no one hsa ever harmed monuments and statues. That's just something the left would never do.

Now that we know you want to bomb churches ... atleast you're consistently in favor of killing more people. You also support abortion which I guess you believe will lower population counts as well.

I am not for bombing especially people's private property; but I am happy the spirit of the people rises to resist the plans of the elites.

I also wouldn't support stealing and throwing tea in the harbor but hey ... it got the point across.

 

[Estro Felino]

I think that we all ought to fight for justice, truth, environment.
And monuments have a value. And a meaning.
They belong to history.

But what I find weird in the story of this monument is that the one who erected it was a member of some Rosicrucian lodge (I call them all Freemasons) who preferred to stay anonymous.

That is something I really dislike. Usually people are proud of showing up, of saying who they are and why they donate a monument or a statue to the community.

These people always do things secretely...clandestinely.
If they had nothing to hide, they would do things aboveboard.

And they didn't even show up when these unfortunate facts took place.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What conservative world order? It doesn't exist.

They recently openly admitted this is a liberal world order. Something I had been saying for awhile.

There is more of a "conservative world order" than there is a liberal one. You appear to be blinding yourself. And it is rather amazing when a self proclaimed Christian has so much trouble telling right from wrong. There was no "admission" there was merely a use of a phrase.

By you "logic" you should be okay with church bombings.

I did not in fact condone bombing. I simply stated what I believe are probable facts. This is an act of defiance against the LBW and secondly it is good riddance. They took it down. The bomb only damaged it.

Yes, you did. In your prior post. You condoned it. Do you need me to quote you? And yes, Georgia is also partly to blame. What they did was immoral as well.

[quote[]
Besides it seems you want to harm people. Because people could be in churches. You're in fact violent. I suppose you want to bring the world population down like the monument said. That would be one motive for advocating murder and terrorism. Also it would be a hate crime to target Christian churches.[/quote]
Wow! The person that is for church bombing claims that I am the violent one that wants to hurt people.

Yes, lowering world population would be a good thing. But that does not imply hurting people at all. It would only take a few generations of limiting people to one child a family. One does not need to hurt people to accomplish that.

The left has already been going after monuments every chance they get and getting away with it. So let's not play the sanctimonious here like no one hsa ever harmed monuments and statues. That's just something the left would never do.

The left has only gone after racist monuments. Too bad that you do not know the history of Civil war monuments or why they were erected. Most of those should be taken down,, Destroying them is too much. But they should be hidden in the basement in shame at the very least. Do you understand how those were erected as a racist gesture? Are you support racisms and church bombings?

Now that we know you want to bomb churches ... atleast you're consistently in favor of killing more people. You also support abortion which I guess you believe will lower population counts as well.

Dude!! That is you. When you supported the bombing of the monument you also by the same logic supported church bombings. I am the one that is against all bombings.

Once again, try to use logic.

I am not for bombing especially people's private property; but I am happy the spirit of the people rises to resist the plans of the elites.

I also wouldn't support stealing and throwing tea in the harbor but hey ... it got the point across.

Sorry, too late now. You already came out for bombing the memorial. I tell you what. I am a reasonable person. You should be for funding its replacement with another identical memorial. If you make that claim then you can say that you are against church bombings.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I think that we all ought to fight for justice, truth, environment.
And monuments have a value. And a meaning.
They belong to history.

But what I find weird in the story of this monument is that the one who erected it was a member of some Rosicrucian lodge (I call them all Freemasons) who preferred to stay anonymous.

That is something I really dislike. Usually people are proud of showing up, of saying who they are and why they donate a monument or a statue to the community.

These people always do things secretely...clandestinely.
If they had nothing to hide, they would do things aboveboard.

And they didn't even show up when these unfortunate facts took place.

They were put up a while ago. I think that person is probably dead. Or since we are talking about Georgia: I think that person is daid.

 

[Estro Felino]

They were put up a while ago. I think that person is probably dead. Or since we are talking about Georgia: I think that person is daid.

But people used to visit the monument, right?
I think it was a beautiful attraction.
And it really looked like Stonehenge.

 

[74x12]

There is more of a "conservative world order" than there is a liberal one. You appear to be blinding yourself.

Just listen to the open admissions from the Biden administration and others. This is not a conservative world order. It's openly talked about and admitted as to what it is. From Washington DC to Australia and every "Western" country in between they're all the same thing.

You'd have to be from another planet to think it was a conservative world order!

If it was then I would be among the first to be talking against it. If it is a conservative world order they're pretending to be liberal and doing a really bang up job. Maybe that is true. But all I know is by their actions they're "liberal" so called.

There was no "admission" there was merely a use of a phrase.

Even if so, your poorly structured post called for violence.

By you "logic" you should be okay with church bombings.

Wrong. It's not in fact the same thing.

Besides, just because I had joy at the bombing doesn't mean I supported it. We don't get the luxury to always support the things that make us happy. Maybe I even prayed for it to be destroyed but that doesn't mean I support bombing.

Still it does seem an answer to prayer. For all I know maybe some evil curse was lifted off the land and so the monument went down.

So good riddance.

Yes, you did. In your prior post. You condoned it. Do you need me to quote you? And yes, Georgia is also partly to blame. What they did was immoral as well.

Quote it all you want but read it better this time and understand it. It's called reading comprehension.

[quote[]
Wow! The person that is for church bombing claims that I am the violent one that wants to hurt people.

According to your post you do support violence and terrorism. All I allegedly supported was vandalism. But, I don't even really support that.

As for what I said. I thought I explained myself well enough.

Yes, lowering world population would be a good thing. But that does not imply hurting people at all. It would only take a few generations of limiting people to one child a family. One does not need to hurt people to accomplish that.

That does hurt people. If you can't even bother to look at countries like China and see how families and people were hurt by one child policies then you have no business even talking about it.

The problem with these simplistic ideas is that no one wants to go along with them. So you have to force your rules on people. That's how it always starts. That's how we get to where we are today.

The left has only gone after racist monuments. Too bad that you do not know the history of Civil war monuments or why they were erected. Most of those should be taken down,, Destroying them is too much. But they should be hidden in the basement in shame at the very least. Do you understand how those were erected as a racist gesture? Are you support racisms and church bombings?

You're oversimplifying.

Besides, you're wrong. The left has targeted other monuments as well for various excuses. Even going so far as to burn down churches and vandalize them.

Since you apparently think it's alright to destroy monuments that are allegedly racist (and I'm not necessarily saying you're wrong) then logically it should be alright to destroy this monument which is arguably just as evil and even more evil.

So once again you're not using logic. You're very inconsistent.

Dude!! That is you. When you supported the bombing of the monument you also by the same logic supported church bombings. I am the one that is against all bombings.

Once again, try to use logic.

Oh I'm trying but it's just that you don't seem to understand logic.

Sorry, too late now. You already came out for bombing the memorial. I tell you what. I am a reasonable person. You should be for funding its replacement with another identical memorial. If you make that claim then you can say that you are against church bombings.

Rubbish just like the monument you apparently love.

 

[Heyo]

A bomber damaged them badly, the state investigated and called them a hazard and have since destroyed them:

Georgia Guidestones: 'America's Stonehenge' demolished after blast

They were built to last through a catastrophe, possibly a nuclear war. What the planners didn't anticipate was the stupidity of humans.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Just listen to the open admissions from the Biden administration and others. This is not a conservative world order. It's openly talked about and admitted as to what it is. From Washington DC to Australia and every "Western" country in between they're all the same thing.

You'd have to be from another planet to think it was a conservative world order!

If it was then I would be among the first to be talking against it. If it is a conservative world order they're pretending to be liberal and doing a really bang up job. Maybe that is true. But all I know is by their actions they're "liberal" so called.

You take things far too literally at times. And the last Republican president often referred to a conservative world order. And I seriously doubt f you did as you said that you would.

And seriously. You really really need to learn what "liberal" means.

Even if so, your poorly structured post called for violence.

Citation needed. You were the only one that supported violence. Not me.

Wrong. It's not in fact the same thing.

Besides, just because I had joy at the bombing doesn't mean I supported it. We don't get the luxury to always support the things that make us happy. Maybe I even prayed for it to be destroyed but that doesn't mean I support bombing.

Still it does seem an answer to prayer. For all I know maybe some evil curse was lifted off the land and so the monument went down.

So good riddance.

Of course it is the same thing. It is using violence against something that someone does not like due to foolish and ignorant prejudice. If you had joy at the bombing you are no different than someone that had joy at a church bombing. You are just opposite sides of the same coin. You can't logically support one and oppose the other.

And no, there was no silly superstition involved. Most people get over that at some time in high school.

Quote it all you want but read it better this time and understand it. It's called reading comprehension.

Oh my! The cognitive dissonance is so thick that one could cut it with a knife!!

According to your post you do support violence and terrorism. All I allegedly supported was vandalism. But, I don't even really support that.

As for what I said. I thought I explained myself well enough.

Once again citation needed. I think you should reread your phrase about reading comprehension. The only one advocating for bombing has been you. When I point out how you are for bombing churches that is not me being violent. That is me pointing out that you support violence.

That does hurt people. If you can't even bother to look at countries like China and see how families and people were hurt by one child policies then you have no business even talking about it.

The problem with these simplistic ideas is that no one wants to go along with them. So you have to force your rules on people. That's how it always starts. That's how we get to where we are today.

Some sort of "force' might be necessary because there are always people that are a bit too self centered and evil. There are alternatives to physical force. This again shows your violent side. Severe taxation is a possible answer. And it would not be unjust either. There are other possible answers besides force.

You're oversimplifying.

Besides, you're wrong. The left has targeted other monuments as well for various excuses. Even going so far as to burn down churches and vandalize them.

Since you apparently think it's alright to destroy monuments that are allegedly racist (and I'm not necessarily saying you're wrong) then logically it should be alright to destroy this monument which is arguably just as evil and even more evil.

So once again you're not using logic. You're very inconsistent.

Please, please do not accuse others of your wrongs. How am I wrong? Do you know the history of those monuments? I do. I originally opposed taking them down until I learned the history. You are probably in a safe little ignorant Republican bubble. The left at times may have taken down other monuments inappropriately, but we were not talking about them. I would not know about that right now. I do know enough about the confederate monuments and why and when they were erected.

And you could not find anything evil about that monument. You only have your misinterpretation of it.

You should never accuse others of being inconsistent when you refuse to look into the evidence of both sides.

Oh I'm trying but it's just that you don't seem to understand logic.

Logic is clearly not what you are using. If you had you would hopefully never have made the comment that set this off.

Rubbish just like the monument you apparently love.

And there you go. Stating once more that you are for church bombings I definitely did not love that monument. But it was on private property. It was not harming anyone. The state had no business demolishing it so quickly. The state should be the one to replace it since they were part of the screw up.

Let me give you an example that you would understand. Let's say that you had a neighbor that you were "meh" about. You did not like him, you did not hate him. One day a car runs into their front door and takes out a major picture window too. The city, which has never been a fan of your neighbor, quickly demolishes the house because it is a "hazard" without checking whether it could be repaired or not. You can't go after the person that ran into the house. They had stolen the car and escaped on foot. Would you support your neighbor for going after the city for their hasty decision? I know that I would.

 

[danieldemol]

A bomber damaged them badly, the state investigated and called them a hazard and have since destroyed them:

Georgia Guidestones: 'America's Stonehenge' demolished after blast

If the guidestones were of a religious nature and on public property they could have been moved to private property.

Whoever bombed them should be charged for it though.

In my opinion.

 

[Heyo]

If the guidestones were of a religious nature and on public property they could have been moved to private property.

Whoever bombed them should be charged for it though.

In my opinion.

Yep, and maybe the government too for completing the work of the bomber.
The question is who is going to file the suit? Somebody must own the monument. Is it still "Robert Christian"?