i still don't see why this matters

3/6/2006 10:53:55 AM

Quote :

"i still don't see why this matters"

And you still don't "see" that 9/11 was an inside job either, do you?

There are a lot of things people won't "see" (or rather WON'T ACKNOWLEDGE).

3/6/2006 10:57:01 AM

Duke, do something about this.

This tripe is not worthy of debate, discussion, or mere mention on these boards.

3/6/2006 11:23:26 AM

Quote :

"Duke, do something about this. This tripe is not worthy of debate, discussion, or mere mention on these boards."

Here you go with your censorship agenda again.

How is a discussion of who the "Lost Tribes of Israel" might be warranting censorship?

3/6/2006 11:26:12 AM

Quote :

"The camps were slave labor camps. They were NOT "death camps." There was no plan to exterminate the Jews."

I'm going to need some proof here.

3/6/2006 11:35:38 AM

Quote :

"I'm going to need some proof here."

Why don't those supporting the official Holocaust story provide some proof to support their claims? Is the burden of proof only on those questioning the official Holocaust story?


And if you want to turn this thread into a debate on the Holocaust...

Former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl agrees that Holocaust a myth
http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=6086

Quote :

"Iran: Helmut Kohl agrees with Ahmadinejad on Holocaust Mon. 06 Mar 2006 Iran Focus Tehran, Iran, Mar. 06 – Former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl reportedly told Iranian businessmen in Germany that he agreed with statements by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that the Holocaust was a “myth”, the semi-official Jomhouri Islami reported on Monday. The government-owned daily wrote that at a dinner gala with Iranian hoteliers and entrepreneurs, Kohl said that he “heartily agreed” with Ahmadinejad’s remarks about the Holocaust. “What Ahmadinejad said about the Holocaust was in our bosoms”, the former German chancellor was quoted as saying. “For years we wanted to say this, but we did not have the courage to speak out”. Ahmadinejad caused an international furore last year when he publicly declared that the Holocaust was a “myth” and threatened that Israel must be “wiped off the map”. His comments were supported by senior Iranian officials, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and former president Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. The country’s state-run media have systematically defended the position of the Iranian president and given extensive coverage to historians and “experts” who deny the Holocaust took place."

3/6/2006 11:41:12 AM

Iran says a lot of things.

3/6/2006 11:42:47 AM

Quote :

"Why don't those supporting the official Holocaust story provide some proof to support their claims?"

Go visit the "labor" camps. Then tell me its all a myth.

I'm gonna need more proof than statements by a former leader of Germany.
- couple of things about Kohl, if I recall:
1. He fought for Germany in WWII
2. His party (CDU) was the driving forcce behind a Holocaust memorial in Berlin

And you're going to believe what leaders from Iran have to say about it? Seriously.
They are merely playing the Palestine sympathy card like Saddam would.

3/6/2006 12:03:37 PM

Quote :

"And you're going to believe what leaders from Iran have to say about it?"

What real reason do you have to believe that Iran's leaders are not telling the truth?

3/6/2006 12:04:59 PM

Quote :

"What real reason do you have to believe that Iran's leaders are not telling the truth?"

Would you agree that Iran is under a lot of pressure and taking a lot of heat from the rest of the world?

Would you agree that they might be looking for support/sympathy from the Islamic world regarding their situation?

What better way to gain support than to give "factual" reasons why Israel should not be a recognized state - do you understand the Islamic sentiment regarding Palestine?

-It was best explained to me by a Bahrainian friend who made this comparison:
Imagine going home one day only to be told that your land is no longer your family's, your house is being given away or destroyed, and that you can move into a trailer park in the worst part of town. If you resist it doesn't matter, because you are no longer a citizen of any country and you no longer have any rights.

Iran wants to boost their image among Islam - and playing the Palestine card is just a part of it.

3/6/2006 12:18:36 PM

see

this is exactly it

in what you want to be a discussion of the lost tribes of whatever, you can't help but just go down your little rabbit trail of insanity and exclaim that 9/11 and the holocaust are both hoaxes

THIS IS EXACTLY WHATS WRONG WITH YOU

3/6/2006 12:39:35 PM

and you still haven't answered WHY THIS MATTERS AT ALL

3/6/2006 12:40:18 PM

Quote :

"Would you agree that Iran is under a lot of pressure and taking a lot of heat from the rest of the world?"

That's clear. Now would you acknowledge that the Zionists and Neo-cons are lying about Iran's nuclear power program to try to create the pretext for a war against Iran? (just like they lied about Iraq's mythical wmd threat)

Why do you believe the Zionists and Neo-cons when they try to drum up support for another war? Didn't they already deliberately lie to trick us into war with Iraq? So why believe them when they say that Iran is trying to get WMDs?

I find that Iran is far more credible than the Zionists, Neo-cons, and the Zionist-controlled media and Hollywood.

Quote :

"in what you want to be a discussion of the lost tribes of whatever, you can't help but just go down your little rabbit trail of insanity and exclaim that 9/11 and the holocaust are both hoaxes THIS IS EXACTLY WHATS WRONG WITH YOU"

Well, I don't see how it's "wrong" at all. Bringing up seperate subjects is natural in any debate or discussion (eg, to use as analogies...as I did above). Especially if those subjects are related to the initial topic. I started this thread, and I'm not trying to take the discussion off onto a tangent. The same goes for other threads I posted in prior to my current restrictions. I was not trying to "hijack" threads or "mess them up." I brought up the subjects because they were related to the initial discussion, and contributed to the discussion by aiding in the understanding of the subject.

Quote :

"and you still haven't answered WHY THIS MATTERS AT ALL"

That's a lie. First off, I've made it absolutely clear why it matters (from the initial post of the thread). Then, in response to questions from others I've repeated why it matters.


[Edited on March 6, 2006 at 1:09 PM. Reason : `]

3/6/2006 1:05:52 PM

you've explained why in your crazy derranged anti-semitic brain it matters

you have yet to explain why it matters to society as a whole, to our government, or hell, even to the wolf web

and please tell me how 9/11 conspiracies and lying about the holocaust are relevant in a discussion of Biblical history and bloodlines

3/6/2006 1:11:52 PM

Quote :

"you've explained why in your crazy derranged anti-semitic brain it matters "

OH NOES!1 NOT THE "ANTI-SEMITIC" SMEAR LABEL!

And, FYI, God himself is an "anti-Semite":
http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=392028

So, thanks for the compliment.

Quote :

"you have yet to explain why it matters to society as a whole, to our government, or hell, even to the wolf web"

As I stated before...

Quote :

"Basically, the Bible was only written for racial Israelites, and Jesus only came for the Israelites. So, it is of vital importance as to who the real racial Israelites are."

3/6/2006 1:16:58 PM

the B-I-B-L-E

that's pretty much the book for me.

3/6/2006 1:17:32 PM

So salisburyboy,

I am going to have to disregard the info you posted from iranfocus.com - sorry, but I'm not buying Iran's government owned "news" website as a reliable resource for information. If Kohl truly felt that way I am surprised he allowed the party he controlled to begin planning the Holocaust Memorial in Berlin (do some research on that if you'd like).

Do you have any other resources proving the Holocaust was a "myth"? It'd be great if you had any resources that didn't come from http://www.kkkoogle.com or whatever you're using to do research. Thanks

3/6/2006 1:43:50 PM

no salisburyboy

that may make it matter to crazy ass people like yourself

but society as a whole is going to keep rolling along fine

3/6/2006 1:49:24 PM

Quote :

"Why don't those supporting the official Holocaust story provide some proof to support their claims? Is the burden of proof only on those questioning the official Holocaust story?"

It has been proven repeatedly. However, you refuse to recognize anything as legitimate proof.

3/6/2006 1:50:41 PM

Quote :

"I am going to have to disregard the info you posted from iranfocus.com - sorry, but I'm not buying Iran's government owned "news" website as a reliable resource for information. "

But you'll rely on the Zionist-controlled western "mainstream" media as "reliable" sources of information?

Quote :

"Do you have any other resources proving the Holocaust was a "myth"?"

There are several alternative media sources with information and evidence related to the falsities in the official Holocaust story. And there are millions of people in the U.S. and Europe...and hundreds of millions in the Islamic world who know that the official Holocaust story is false. Just because practically all we hear from the western mainstream media, Hollywood, and western academia is the "official" version on the Holocaust does not mean it is true. There are MANY people who have a different view.

Quote :

"that may make it matter to crazy ass people like yourself but society as a whole is going to keep rolling along fine"

So, I'm "crazy ass" for actually caring who the real Israelites are? And what about all the millions of people (including evangelical Christians) who think that the Jews are the real Israelites? Does this issue not matter to them? Of course it does (even though they are wrong in their belief of who the real Israelites are).

Is calling people "crazy ass" your substitute for a rational discussion? How about informing us using reason and logic why virtually no one cares about who the real Israelites are?

Quote :

"It has been proven repeatedly. However, you refuse to recognize anything as legitimate proof."

By what? TV shows and movies from Zionist-controlled MSM and Hollywood?

3/6/2006 2:08:25 PM

as opposed to nutjobs like you

i'll stick with the MSM kkthx

3/6/2006 2:10:04 PM

Quote :

"So, I'm "crazy ass" for actually caring who the real Israelites are"

YES

and the average person in the average church (especially in the south) couldn't give a fuck and doesn't know a fuck about Jews, Edomites, or anything else you've been babbling about

3/6/2006 2:11:19 PM

alright salisbury boy, since I'm disregarding the Iran media, I'll do the same with the western media.

I am now basing my opinion of the Holocaust only on what I have seen.

You do the same, and now tell me why it's a myth.

3/6/2006 2:12:55 PM

Quote :

"and the average person in the average church (especially in the south) couldn't give a fuck and doesn't know a fuck about Jews"

Are you telling me there isn't a significant number of evangelical Christians who believe the Jews are the descendants of the Israelites? This is what 99% of the preachers in the mainstream churches teach. And isn't this why many of these Christians strongly support the Jews in their ongoing struggle with the Palestinians over the land in Palestine? The Jews being descendants of the Israelites (though incorrect) is the primary reason for believing the Jews have a right to the land.

Quote :

"I am now basing my opinion of the Holocaust only on what I have seen. You do the same, and now tell me why it's a myth."

I haven't been to the camps as you apparantly have. But even if I had been there, it would have been around 50-60 years after the alleged events occured. Most of the physical evidence has been lost. And the camps could have been modified to support the story put forth by the Allies.

How about thinking about this in common sense terms? Why would the Germans transport millions (supposedly) of Jews (and non-Jews) to camps just to kill them? Why go through all that trouble when you could just execute the people on the spot? Why go though all the expense of transporting them and feeding and housing them if just to kill them? And then to kill them by using gas chambers? That would be very expensive, complicated, and more difficult than a bullet to the back of the head. Why do it that way? IT MAKES NO SENSE.

Those camps were slave labor camps. The people were brought there to work as slave laborers and make goods for the war effort. They were not extermination camps.

[Edited on March 6, 2006 at 2:24 PM. Reason : `]

3/6/2006 2:16:56 PM

Quote :

"The Jews being descendants of the Israelites (though incorrect) is the primary reason for believing the Jews have a right to the land."

You sure about that? I think there are other reasons - I don't think evangelicals formed Israel.

3/6/2006 2:19:21 PM

Quote :

"You sure about that? I think there are other reasons"

Quote :

"The Jews being descendants of the Israelites (though incorrect) is the primary reason for believing the Jews have a right to the land."

Use of the word "primary" implies another reason (or other reasons) exist.

I realize the United Nations played a role in the creation of Israel, and that there are legal reasons for the Jewish state's existance. But my point is that many Christians believe the Jews have the right to the land because they believe that the Jews are the descendants of the Israelites.

3/6/2006 2:29:59 PM

Quote :

"How about thinking about this in common sense terms? Why would the Germans transport millions (supposedly) of Jews (and non-Jews) to camps just to kill them? Why go through all that trouble when you could just execute the people on the spot? Why go though all the expense of transporting them and feeding and housing them if just to kill them? And then to kill them by using gas chambers? That would be very expensive, complicated, and more difficult than a bullet to the back of the head. Why do it that way? IT MAKES NO SENSE."

Just because you cant grasp something doesn't mean that it is a conspiracy.

3/6/2006 2:37:53 PM

Quote :

"Just because you cant grasp something doesn't mean that it is a conspiracy."

Nice try. Can you answer any of those questions? Or would you just rather avoid them?

The official "Holocaust" story defies common sense and all the real evidence. That's why they need laws to throw people in prison for up to 20 years for questioning the official story. The "Holocaust" story is now in the ranks of religious dogma, and the skeptics, historical revisioniists, and truth-seekers are the modern-day "heretics."

3/6/2006 2:44:03 PM

You obviously have done little research on the Holocaust. Perhaps if you studied legitmate sources instead of turning to rense.com for answers you would be able to answer those questions. Why don't you actually stop to consider the real evidence, instead of brushing it aside as zionist propoganda?

No, I don't consider you a heretic. I just consider you an ill informed conspiracy theorist who doesn't think for himself.

3/6/2006 2:50:22 PM

I consider him a nutjob.

3/6/2006 2:59:36 PM

Quote :

"You obviously have done little research on the Holocaust."

WRONG. I have done a LOT of reading and research on the subject.

Quote :

"Perhaps if you studied legitmate sources instead of turning to rense.com for answers you would be able to answer those questions."

I've seen BOTH sides of the argument. And what you call "legitimate" (ie, mainstream) sources are not necessarily, in fact, legitimate. A mainstream source is "mainstream" only because it is most popular. But that doesn't mean they are right or correct in their claims or viewpoints.

Quote :

"Why don't you actually stop to consider the real evidence, instead of brushing it aside as zionist propoganda?"

The "real" evidence, according to you, is whatever the mainstream media and the information gatekeepers at CNN, NBC, ABC, Hollywood, etc. are spouting. And anyone who's not affiliated with these "mainstream" sources is automatically "illegitimate" according to you.

Quote :

"I just consider you an ill informed conspiracy theorist"

Oh, no! Not the "conspiracy theorist" label! You do realize how pathetic it is to use of that term in the attempt to discredit an unpopular viewpoint? I guess not. For instance, 9/11 is a conspiracy either way you look at it. Either it was a conspiracy by 19 guys and an evil genius from a cave, or it was a conspiracy from some other group (possibly a criminal element in the government). Now, it's only a matter of which "conspiracy theory" you are going to believe. The government's "conspiracy theory", or another.

Quote :

"who doesn't think for himself"

Who is more likely to be thinking for themselves? The person who is spoon-fed their worldview from CNN, FOXNews, NBC, ABC, etc...OR...the person who is skeptical of the claims coming from the "mainstream" and goes and seeks out alternative viewpoints and sources of information? Who is really asking questions and seeking answers and making more of an effort? And who is just sitting back and believing whatever the "establishment" tells them to believe?

3/6/2006 3:04:05 PM

Sure, if that person isn't a nutjob.

Meaning just about everybody but you.

[Edited on March 6, 2006 at 3:06 PM. Reason : *]

3/6/2006 3:05:56 PM

Quote :

"Sure, if that person isn't a nutjob."

Do you think calling me names is anything approaching a rational argument?

And what do you mean when you call me a "nutjob"? Is that just someone who holds views that are in the extreme minority? If so, how does that demonstrate that the beliefs are false? It doesn't. It only shows that a minority of people hold the beliefs.

3/6/2006 3:18:14 PM

SINCE YOU MISSED IT BEFORE:

Quote :

"alright salisbury boy, since I'm disregarding the Iran media, I'll do the same with the western media. I am now basing my opinion of the Holocaust only on what I have seen. You do the same, and now tell me why it's a myth."

How about thinking about this in common sense terms? - Ok.

Why would the Germans transport millions (supposedly) of Jews (and non-Jews) to camps just to kill them? - Because killing them in the streets of Berlin and Munich was not the image the Nazis wanted to put forth.

Why go through all that trouble when you could just execute the people on the spot? See above.

Why go though all the expense of transporting them and feeding and housing them if just to kill them? - I really feel like that was answered above - they needed the German public to believe that the outcasts were going to "labor" camps. That was acceptable, killing them in the streets was not or the Nazis wouldn't have minded.

And then to kill them by using gas chambers? That would be very expensive, complicated, and more difficult than a bullet to the back of the head. Why do it that way? - Killing up to 400 people at once with toxic pesticides that are manufactured in your own country isn't cheaper than the bullets needed for war? There is also less of a chance for riots/resistance when you are killing in mass. Would you stand in line knowing you were the next to be shot? I would be kicking someone's ass, as would the other 399 people in line.

[Edited on March 6, 2006 at 3:26 PM. Reason : 400 was a # bulled squarely from my butt cheeks]

3/6/2006 3:22:03 PM

Quote :

"SINCE YOU MISSED IT BEFORE"

Not so fast there chief. Here's what I posted:

Quote :

"I haven't been to the camps as you apparantly have. But even if I had been there, it would have been around 50-60 years after the alleged events occured. Most of the physical evidence has been lost. And the camps could have been modified to support the story put forth by the Allies."

Did you not see this, or do you still think I "missed it"?

3/6/2006 3:26:20 PM

Quote :

"WRONG. I have done a LOT of reading and research on the subject."

WRONG. You only consider sources that agree with your opinion.

Quote :

"I've seen BOTH sides of the argument."

Then why do you know so little about the "official story"? You have made it abundantly clear that you have no grasp of the realities of the Holocaust.

Quote :

"A mainstream source is "mainstream" only because it is most popular. But that doesn't mean they are right or correct in their claims or viewpoints."

A source becomes mainstream by reporting the truth accurately with no spin. Your sources do neither.

Quote :

"The "real" evidence, according to you, is whatever the mainstream media and the information gatekeepers at CNN, NBC, ABC, Hollywood, etc. are spouting."

Misrepresentation. I've seen the camps and I have a degree in history. In fact, one of my key points of interest in Nazi Germany. You don't gain an understanding of history by watching CNN, NBC, ABC, Hollywood, etc. Nor do you gain one from extremist websites.

Quote :

"And anyone who's not affiliated with these "mainstream" sources is automatically "illegitimate" according to you. "

Misrepresentation again, little buddy.

Quote :

" Who is really asking questions and seeking answers and making more of an effort? And who is just sitting back and believing whatever the "establishment" tells them to believe?"

You don't think that you're buying into whatever your establishment tells you? The fact that prisonplanet.com and rense.com are your primary news sources says it all. Just because it is from an alternative source doesn't mean that it is right.

Again, you assume that I believe what I am told to believe, not that I have come to these conclusions myself.

3/6/2006 3:44:28 PM

You missed it. You are still making assumptions based on "facts" that you have gotten from secondary sources (to you at least).

Quote :

"I haven't been to the camps as you apparantly have. But even if I had been there, it would have been around 50-60 years after the alleged events occured. Most of the physical evidence has been lost. And the camps could have been modified to support the story put forth by the Allies."

So the allies planted bones in mass graves and fabricated other aspects of the camps?

Quote :

"Those camps were slave labor camps. The people were brought there to work as slave laborers and make goods for the war effort. They were not extermination camps."

At Dachau - yes. But I guess taking away a citizens rights and turning them into slaves is ok?
Auschwitz-Birkenau, Treblinka were death camps. Go there and tell me otherwise. They weren't a couple of miles outside of Munich, but in desolate areas where no questions would be asked.

3/6/2006 3:45:58 PM

Quote :

"WRONG. You only consider sources that agree with your opinion."

No, you are wrong. I have read and considered sources that disagree with my opinion as well. How would you know that I haven't? Are you omniscient?

Quote :

"A source becomes mainstream by reporting the truth accurately with no spin. Your sources do neither."

So the "mainstream" sources like CNN, FOXNews, ABC, NBC, etc always report the truth? They're always accurate? They never spin things?

Quote :

"You don't gain an understanding of history by watching CNN, NBC, ABC, Hollywood, etc. Nor do you gain one from extremist websites."

Calling a website or other source "exremist" (or "conspiracy theorist" or "nutjob") does not mean that those sources are not accurate or reporting the facts.

Quote :

"Misrepresentation again, little buddy."

Oh, so you're going back to your tactic of trying patronize me again. How pathetic. Can't you come up with something more persuasive than that, Mr. Joshua?

Quote :

"Just because it is from an alternative source doesn't mean that it is right."

I never said it was right just because it was from "alternative" sources. But, by the same token, just because it's from "mainstream" sources doesn't mean that it is right. "Alternative" and "mainstream" are just labels.


[Edited on March 6, 2006 at 3:55 PM. Reason : `]

3/6/2006 3:53:59 PM

Quote :

"No, you are wrong. I have read and considered sources that disagree with my opinion as well. How would you know that I haven't?"

Your complete lack of understanding regarding the subject makes it clear.

Quote :

"So the "mainstream" sources like CNN, FOXNews, ABC, NBC, etc always report the truth? They're always accurate? They never spin things?"

I never said that. However, they report much more accurately than your websites and with considerably less spin.

Quote :

"Calling a website or other source "exremist" (or "conspiracy theorist" or "nutjob") does not mean that those sources are not accurate or reporting the facts."

No, but you won't gain an understanding of a subject by being spoon-fed information from the same people.

Quote :

"Oh, so you're going back to your tactic of trying patronize me again. How pathetic. Can't you come up with something more persuasive than that, Mr. Joshua?"

No one is patronizing you, little buddy. I was simply calling you out for misrepresenting me.

Quote :

"I never said it was right just because it was from "alternative" sources. But, by the same token, just because it's from "mainstream" sources doesn't mean that it is right."

Who has a better track record: mainstream or alternative sources?

3/6/2006 4:01:55 PM

KEYLOGGERS

3/6/2006 4:12:28 PM

Quote :

"No, but you won't gain an understanding of a subject by being spoon-fed information from the same people."

There you go repeating the things I say. Stellar work there Mr. Joshua.

Quote :

"Who has a better track record: mainstream or alternative sources?"

The alternative sources. And thanks for bringing up that point.

But keep in mind that you can't lump all "alternative" sources together because clearly there are some good alternative sources, and there are many bad ones. When I speak of these "alternative" sources, I'm referring to the good ones, such as infowars.com and whatreallyhappened.com.

Classic examples of this gap in credibility is how the "mainstream" press and media continue to lie and cover-up the truth surrounding government involvement in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and the 9/11 attacks. The evidence is overwhelming in both cases, and proves with 100% certainty that the government was involved in both cases and is lying about what really happened. After looking at the evidence, there is no debating this.

Now, consider the implications given that the mainstream media is actively involved in covering up the truth on these 2 government-sponsored terror events. This is a HUGE betrayal of trust. It completely destroys any credibility one may have in the "mainstream" media (or at least until they come clean and expose the truth...the likelihood of which is slim to none).

Sources like infowars.com and whatreallyhappened.com, on the other hand, are actively exposing the truth about these monumental events. They have demonstrated themselves to be real journalists by reporting the entire truth, as opposed to lying and covering up the truth.

9/11 and Oklahoma City are just 2 excellent examples. There are hundreds (if not thousands) of other issues and topics where the MSM is lying, covering up the truth, suppressing information, not telling the whole truth, etc.

3/6/2006 4:15:38 PM

Quote :

"So the "mainstream" sources like CNN, FOXNews, ABC, NBC, etc always report the truth? They're always accurate? They never spin things?"

If CNN & Fox are spinning things... its certainly not in the same direction.

I don't think the left & right have a secret alliance to spin things the same direction, all away from the truth of prison planet.... yet you lump the left and right together as if they were one team vs whatever team you are on. I don't want to call it the conspiracy team, but I lack the terminology to describe those not on the left-right political spectrum.

3/6/2006 4:21:13 PM

so there is no comment on my posts?

[Edited on March 6, 2006 at 4:33 PM. Reason : [guess not]

3/6/2006 4:24:15 PM

oh here we go again

oklahoma city bombing

that is 100% proven fact

3/6/2006 4:29:45 PM

Quote :

"If CNN & Fox are spinning things... its certainly not in the same direction. I don't think the left & right have a secret alliance to spin things the same direction"

They just pretend to be different. It's just like with the Republicans and the Democrats. They masquerade as opposing parties, but putting all the phony rhetoic aside, the parties are really the same and advancing the same agenda. Both parties are bought and paid for by the corporate/establishment/elite. Deep down, virtually everybody of above average intelligence who's paying attention knows this. That's why the Republicans are advancing a big government agenda, spending way out of control, and doing nothing about illegal immigration (no, proposing amnesty for illegal aliens). And that's why the Democrats are really supporting the Iraq War, and are not mounting a real opposition to the Bush Administration (even over clearly impeachable offenses like deliberately lying to trick us to war and spying in violation of the law and Constitution).

As for FOXNews (supposed right) and CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC (supposed left), it's the same thing. Now, I suspect there are more openly "leftist" news sources because the democrats and the left are the party that openly promotes the elite agenda on social issues (ie, pro-homosexuality, pro-abortion, anti-gun rights, pro-illegal immigration, etc.). And notice that all of the networks are, in effect, cheerleaders for the Iraq war and the "war on terror." None seriously challenge the government on the Iraq War and the War on Terror (such as should have occured on the lies about Iraq having WMDs, and with the Downing Street Memo, open support and use of torture, etc). And I'm talking about serious challenges, not fluff rhetoric acknowledging it and pretending to oppose it. If they were really challenging the government, they would be harping on that stuff like gangbusters virtually nonstop and making a lot of noise. When the media wants to make a big deal out of an issue, they clearly know how to do it. But no, they make a bigger deal of some shmuck from Oprah's book club fudging the facts about his book than the President lying to trick us into war. And the Downing Street Memo (of monumental importance) was buried here in the U.S. media after a few token mentions of it.


[Edited on March 6, 2006 at 4:41 PM. Reason : `]

3/6/2006 4:30:03 PM

Quote :

"the left are the party that openly promotes the elite agenda on social issues (ie, pro-homosexuality, pro-abortion, anti-gun rights, pro-illegal immigration, etc"

So the elite run everything, but they fund one half of their force to promote their agenda, and they fund the other half of their forces to work against their agenda? I think they might be funding their opposition half of their forces a little too much... because they've succeeded in having real opposition to gay marriage even though pro-homosexuality is actually want the people who run fox want.

Quote :

"Deep down, virtually everybody of above average intelligence who's paying attention knows this"

I'm not convinced of this. I think either you are wrong about everything, or that the elite left-right alliance is succeeding in confusing even the above average intelligence people. Either way, it seems like a bad thing for you.

3/6/2006 4:38:31 PM

Quote :

"So the elite run everything, but they fund one half of their force to promote their agenda, and they fund the other half of their forces to work against their agenda?"

In the case of the Republicans and the Democrats (or the mainstream media), both sides work to advance the elite agenda. Generally speaking, the democrats openly promote the elite agenda on social issues (eg, promoting abortion, gun-control, illegal immigration, etc.). Then the Repubicans openly promote the elite agenda on other issues (eg, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, police state legislation gutting our freedoms, etc.). But that's only talking about appearances and who's openly promoting those things. Because, in reality, both parties (though sometimes secretly) are working to advance all these elite goals. So, for example, the Democrats pretend (via fluff phony rhetoric) to oppose the war in Iraq, the Patriot Act, or the domestic spying. But, in reality, they have been voting in favor of the war. And now democrats like even Hillary Clinton and John Kerry openly talk of how they support the Iraq War. Before long, some of them will probably even say they support the domestic spying (ooops, I mean "domestic surveillance"). And most of them voted for the Patriot Act, and it is going to be extended. So, both parties are supporting this agenda.

Quote :

"I think they might be funding their opposition half of their forces a little too much... because they've succeeded in having real opposition to gay marriage even though pro-homosexuality is actually want the people who run fox want."

It takes time on certain issues, but given the right amount of time, the elite can easily manipulate public opinion on issues via the power of the MSM. And, if they wish, they will just totally ignore public opinion and do whatever they want (as they have with illegal immigration when around 90% of Americans oppose illegal immigration).

As for the homosexual agenda....despite the opposition, the homosexual agenda steamrolls forward. No one can seriously deny that. The homosexual movement continues to gain momentum and victories in the courts and legislatures (eg, hate-crime legislation, civil unions, gay marriage legalized in some states, etc.). It's this way with so many other "liberal" issues. The courts will ram the "liberal" agenda down Americans' throats whether they support it or not. And notice that those judges handing down those "liberal" verdicts are both republican and democrats appointees.


[Edited on March 6, 2006 at 5:02 PM. Reason : `]

3/6/2006 4:49:25 PM

How about thinking about this in common sense terms? - Ok.

Why would the Germans transport millions (supposedly) of Jews (and non-Jews) to camps just to kill them? - Because killing them in the streets of Berlin and Munich was not the image the Nazis wanted to put forth.

Why go through all that trouble when you could just execute the people on the spot? See above.

Why go though all the expense of transporting them and feeding and housing them if just to kill them? - I really feel like that was answered above - they needed the German public to believe that the outcasts were going to "labor" camps. That was acceptable, killing them in the streets was not or the Nazis wouldn't have minded.

And then to kill them by using gas chambers? That would be very expensive, complicated, and more difficult than a bullet to the back of the head. Why do it that way? - Killing up to 400 people at once with toxic pesticides that are manufactured in your own country isn't cheaper than the bullets needed for war? There is also less of a chance for riots/resistance when you are killing in mass. Would you stand in line knowing you were the next to be shot? I would be kicking someone's ass, as would the other 399 people in line.

[Edited on March 6, 2006 at 4:51 PM. Reason : [Repost to point out you aren't replying]

3/6/2006 4:50:39 PM

^^So is it just that the elites tactics are bad, or is it that some of their ideas are bad, or is it the case that the elite who are smart enough to secretly control the left & right actually are exactly wrong on every issue?

3/6/2006 5:37:22 PM

100% proven fact

3/6/2006 6:08:57 PM