THE DERAILING ROOM

A place to relax and socialize - to muse, think aloud and suggest
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: THE DERAILING ROOM

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

We are all potential students of each other here.

Your amazing reply is indicative to me that you are not approaching this with reason but with a knee-jerk defensive attitude.

When you say things like this:
The curved flight paths are not "proof" to me, but more of a clue; it does point towards a spherical rotating model, not to a different model.
It shows me that you won't question your model or show proofs, but you will simply choose the clues you like and throw away the ones you don't — and thereby prematurely conclude with the model you refuse to let go of, while throwing out the data that doesn't fit and ignoring its problems. You sound like a real Einstein.

Except, at least that clown would have given us a formula demonstrating that the airplane making efficient flight paths has anything at all to do with curvature, rather than purely the looping nature of Earth's locations.

Your "explanation" of distant objects rising to eye level and incorrectly calling it "parallax" seems so wrong that I doubt you even studied the sciences you claim.

Your belief that you don't have a belief when you talk about your so-called understandings of science is just absurd.

Please return to that thread when you are capable of showing readers that you can actually read the entire thread and report back. If you need to see me as an authoritarian 'threat' or as a 'teacher' because I'm moderating the topic and preventing it from being cluttered by sarcastic protests about the entire topic, that's kind of your problem. I am just as much a student of these topics as you. But right now, I am pretty sure I have been doing more homework than you. Or you just had a bad pizza night.
Selene
Banned
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:59 pm

Re: THE DERAILING ROOM

Unread post by Selene »

Why all the attacks? Why "education" between parentheses, why "frothing blind bat" and all the other attacking comments? That wouldn't be necessary if you have points to prove; the points and explanations would speak for themselves.

Your attitude is "if you do not understand what I am saying, you don't read well (enough)". That's very different from my attitude (e.g. on the Langrangian "points" in the NASA comedies topic where my almost exact words were "I realise I can be hard to follow sometimes, tell me which points you do not understand and I am more than happy to explain them in more detail".

On one point (for noe, the long post doesn't allow long replies on a mobile phobe:
"We take with us the 'flat' perspective as we walk the Earth's surface"? Yes, because the Earth is very big compared to us. If we would walk on a ball of let's say 100 km diameter, we would recognise the curvature and thus "non flatness" of that ball much much easier, right?

[ADMIN: Actually, the only known documented experiment to measure this showed the curvature is concave, not convex. Observations show flatness. -hp]
Your comment in bold, colors would take me even longer on this smartphone...blame Samsung...

If "observations show flatness", then it would be possible to see very far on the horizon.

Take the North Sea for instance. From Calais one can see Dover and vice versa. From the Dutch coast however it is impossible to see the British coast and vice versa.

If "observations would show flatness" it would be possible to viee the yearly fireworks festival in Scheveningen from the British coast. Or any other light strong enough to be seen. Is that the case? Well no.

So which "observation shows flatness" are you talking about actually?

And again: how does plate tectonics work on a flat surface?
Or, if you "do not believe in" plate tectonics; how can someone sail or fly around the world? If the Earth would be flat or concave, there'd be a point where the sailor or pilot would fall off....

Selene
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Noctilucent Clouds

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

Nink wrote:HAARP.
I am not so sure what you mean by pointing to this particular culprit.

And since we have had plenty of activity recently that forgets the public and general readership and forms post discussions without regard to them, it would really benefit us to lock a few threads for a bit and remind y'all that we do have some standards.

Mainly, your contributions in our forum are meant to consist of plenty of cogent research rather than peppering things with rabbit trails and arguments (as opposed to contextual speculations) based on personal opinion.
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: THE DERAILING ROOM

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

Why all the attacks? Why "education" between parentheses, why "frothing blind bat" and all the other attacking comments? That wouldn't be necessary if you have points to prove; the points and explanations would speak for themselves.
"Why all the attacks" you ask — after you responded to my piece in such an obviously condescending tone?

Is this a continuation of the sarcastic attitude with which you answered my very well meaning piece? Or are you now asking that we treat each other with the civility and respect that I began on? If so, I would be happy to sincerely apologize and move on. Yet, you follow your complaint about your treatment with another complaint about me — odd as it is to say I have a point to prove. I don't. And so what if I have no point to prove? Why do I need to prove anything more than what is already evident had you done any research on the subjects you complain to me about? When reflecting your rudeness back at you, you don't take it well. Anyway, I don't find "education" to be a very respectable word, and a rabid bat is definitely not at fault for being so, so don't feel too insulted.

What then should I say about any point you have to make, since you began the discourse this way? It is obvious you wanted to engage me on that level. The truth is, if you are interested in science, then we have the same interest, and there is no need to be snappy and rude to one another. After reading some of your responses, I am still skeptical that you are capable of listening to these points until you actually go back and read the thread. You say an insult is not "necessary", and I may very well have replied to you in the same way. That comment implies you were not aware that I felt insulted by your completely unwarranted response to my request that we discuss and face the facts presented. Now, we should both be aware that we do not like the way the other is addressing the topic. What good does that do us? Well, perhaps, now we can simply move on.
Your attitude is "if you do not understand what I am saying, you don't read well (enough)". That's very different from my attitude (e.g. on the Langrangian "points" in the NASA comedies topic where my almost exact words were "I realise I can be hard to follow sometimes, tell me which points you do not understand and I am more than happy to explain them in more detail".
It isn't as if I don't know it's a challenging subject, but wouldn't you rather deal with challenging subjects without resorting to hyperbolic arguments? Can't you simply ask a question without rattling off the entirety of your belief system, while lecturing me about what you think is mine?

Simply look at the various belief systems and how they have come to exist, and which documented experiments demonstrate the cogent understanding of the topics they address. Until you are willing to do that, you will not be of any use to that topic, because you will be stuck in your own belief system, unwilling to look at the scientifically conducted experiments.

If you would just humor those of us exploring this body of research, you would not need to ask the question about the horizon or challenge me on my scientific diligence because you will have personally noted, after reading the thread, that we are all equally challenged in this area, when it comes to the results of experiments which we prefer to dismiss as hoaxes because they do not fit in with our preferred model. We must accept that science challenges itself to do better, and that is its incredible strength.

But now you will probably take offense on being told what to note, even though I mean it as a compliment that you would hold intellectual curiosity to the higher standard we must have in our groundbreaking discoveries of enormous hoaxes in various fields.

My point is that it is an unscientific attitude to have a model to hold all other models to, upon being given the revelation that various experiments contradict one another in a variety of ways that have yet to be explained (rather than merely explained away), and which suggest (at first blush) wildly conflicting models.

If we are to unite the experiments into a single model, throwing away experiments we dislike is not the way to go about it. Nor is conjuring the wrath of a moderator doing their damnedest to have each post be more informative than the last.

My attitude is certainly not that I write so well that you must understand it immediately. On the contrary. But I definitely expect attempts to understand, and I expect at least as much familiarity with the subjects as they've been discussed in one convenient place — this forum. Before the failure to understand is typed out, read the topic.

I know how poorly I write and how difficult it is to communicate challenging subjects. You have done well to point that out and even bring out worse writing from me. Fine. Well done. But a number of things we have taken are being challenged.

When we presume the existing heliocentric Coppernican/Kepler model is perfect, and it is indeed in question, then we fail to be relevant to the topic. What those places are would be useful to list, I am aware.

That is why we have this thread and why so many good posts have been written in it.

Just one example is what we actually call the horizon, including waves that rise and fall to cover up objects that have become so distant (and small) that they are made invisible by the closer waves. This doesn't work on enormous cities, which can be visible beyond what they should. It also has to do with the bending of light, which may be very different from refraction.

Do some reading on experiments that show recovery of ships and buildings beyond the alleged 8" per mile - per mile curvature, and debunk those first. Seriously, just search for them. Or, if you can't be bothered to look at a view that opposes your own, at least read the thread you are posting in with such confidence.

Once more, please do not take it personally that I have given myself the assignment of protecting this thread. My stupid insults you can rightly blame me for. You will learn more about those when you read in the start of the thread that I saw things the way you do and was unwilling to look at the evidence like the complete and utter fool that I can be.
Critical Mass
Member
Posts: 544
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:33 pm

Re: Songs that Expose Truth

Unread post by Critical Mass »

Sometimes our opponents don't bother to hide their opinions... I suppose that can be considered an 'exposed truth' on some level.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5Sd5c4o9UM

Lyrics added by Moderator request
"E.T."
(feat. Kanye West)

[Kanye West - Verse 1]
I got a dirty mind
I got filthy ways
I'm tryna bathe my ape, (ape),
In your milky way (way)
I'm a legend
I'm irreverent
I be reverend
I'll be so faaaaa-ar up
We don't give a fuuuh-uh-uck
Welcome to the danger zone
Step into the fantasy
You are not invited to the other side of sanity
They're callin' me an alien a big headed astronaut
Maybe it's because your boy Yeezy get ass a lot

[Katy Perry]
You're so hypnotizing
Could you be the devil?
Could you be an angel?
Your touch magnetizing
Feels like I am floating
Leaves my body glowing

They say, be afraid
You're not like the others
Futuristic lover
Different DNA
They don't understand you

[Bridge]
You're from a whole other world
A different dimension
You open my eyes
And I'm ready to go
Lead me into the light

[Chorus:]
Kiss me, kiss me
Infect me with your love and
Fill me with your poison
Take me, take me
Wanna be your victim
Ready for abduction
Boy, you're an alien
Your touch so foreign
It's supernatural
Extraterrestrial

You're so supersonic
Wanna feel your powers
Stun me with your laser
Your kiss is cosmic
Every move is magic

You're from a whole other world
A different dimension
You open my eyes
And I'm ready to go
Lead me into the light

[Chorus:]
Kiss me, kiss me
Infect me with your love and
Fill me with your poison
Take me, take me
Wanna be a victim
Ready for abduction
Boy, you're an alien
Your touch so foreign
It's supernatural
Extraterrestrial

[Kanye West - Verse 2]
I know a bar out in Mars
Where they drivin' spaceships instead of cars
Cop a prada space suit about the stars
Getting stupid hah, straight up out the jars
Pockets on shrek, rockets on deck
Tell me what's next? Alien sex.
Imma disrobe you
Then Imma probe you
See I've abducted you
So I'll tell you what to do
I tell you what to do (what to do, what to do)

[Katy Perry]
Kiss me, kiss me
Infect me with your love and
Fill me with your poison
Take me, take me
Wanna be a victim
Ready for abduction
Boy, you're an alien
Your touch so foreign
It's supernatural
Extraterrestrial

Extraterrestrial
Extraterrestrial

Boy, you're an alien
Your touch so foreign
It's supernatural
Extraterrestrial
Last edited by Critical Mass on Tue Sep 15, 2015 12:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Songs that Expose Truth

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

Could you please keep with the request at the start, and post the lyrics?
brianv
Member
Posts: 3971
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:19 pm
Contact:

Re: Songs that Expose Truth

Unread post by brianv »

hoi.polloi wrote:Could you please keep with the request at the start, and post the lyrics?
Really? Is this the sort of shit we want on Cluesforum?
Critical Mass
Member
Posts: 544
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:33 pm

Re: Songs that Expose Truth

Unread post by Critical Mass »

brianv wrote:Really? Is this the sort of shit we want on Cluesforum?
I added the screwed up lyrics but I agree with brianv... I'd consider just sticking it in the derailing room or something.
antipodean
Member
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:53 am
Contact:

Re: NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY

Unread post by antipodean »

Just to keep things simple, I always thought water going down a plug hole in the Southern Hemisphere does so in a different direction ( clockwise & anti clockwise) to the Northern Hemisphere.
This in itself would mean that the Earth is round.
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

antipodean wrote:Just to keep things simple, I always thought water going down a plug hole in the Southern Hemisphere does so in a different direction ( clockwise & anti clockwise) to the Northern Hemisphere.
This in itself would mean that the Earth is round.
Sorry, but I think this mythical proof is a bit too simple for the topic, which discusses the actual strategy of a DBA campaign.
I’ve heard of charlatans who hang around the equator in Kenya, carrying basins of water. They’ll stand on the southern side of the equator with the basin, pull a plug at the bottom, and show that it swirls out counter-clockwise. Then they’ll walk to the northern side of the equator, fill the basin and pull the plug, and it swirls out clockwise. Irrefutable proof? Be careful! You have to know all the initial conditions in any experiment, and in this one, there is one that is hidden from you. The huckster just has to add a slight rotation to the water before letting it out (for example, pour the water in at a very slight angle to give it an initial rotation, and it will “remember” that rotation as it swirls out of the basin.
- http://blog.sciencegeekgirl.com/2008/04 ... emisphere/

When we open up science topics again, let's get back to this point, though, since it's an interesting one when actually explored.
antipodean
Member
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:53 am
Contact:

Re: THE DERAILING ROOM

Unread post by antipodean »

I’ve heard of charlatans who hang around the equator in Kenya, carrying basins of water. They’ll stand on the southern side of the equator with the basin, pull a plug at the bottom, and show that it swirls out counter-clockwise. Then they’ll walk to the northern side of the equator, fill the basin and pull the plug, and it swirls out clockwise. Irrefutable proof? Be careful! You have to know all the initial conditions in any experiment, and in this one, there is one that is hidden from you. The huckster just has to add a slight rotation to the water before letting it out (for example, pour the water in at a very slight angle to give it an initial rotation, and it will “remember” that rotation as it swirls out of the basin.
I'd just read that site a few moments prior to making my post. The force of the direction of the water would obviously increase the further out one travels from the equator.
I dare say that the closer you are to the equator the easier to manipulate the direction of the water.
jumpy64
Member
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 12:44 pm

"Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspiracy"

Unread post by jumpy64 »

Hi everybody,

I couldn't find this subject already proposed or developed, so I think it might be worth a new topic, because I see a huge elephant in the room here.

I salute many brilliant investigators in this forum, most of whom are intent in effectively dissecting the latest media hoaxes. That's great, but I think the most important thing would be trying to find out who's really behind the conspiracy to keep humanity in its present sorry state, and what, if anything, we can do about that. I mean, we can very effectively discover and denounce the media hoaxes here, but do we agree on who the "hoaxers" might be?

I think that's the most important thing, because they say you can’t fight an enemy if you haven't even identified it yet.

Many could say that it's what we're trying to do here too, but it's very difficult. Well, I don't know... Is it really so difficult? I used to think so, but I don't anymore. And I'll explain why here, so please bear with me.

Since I discovered that there is a giant conspiracy in the world, I've been trying to find out who rules the current state of civilization by looking in its darkest corners, trying to imagine who are the real people in power and where they could hide. But recently I've come to question this basic assumption. Are the "perpetrators", as they're often called in this forum, really hiding? Maybe, but do you remember E.A. Poe when he said – I think it was in "The Purloined Letter" – that the best way to hide something is "in plain sight"?

Allow me another, literal quote here: "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize". It's attributed to Voltaire, although our beloved Wickedpedia considers it a "Voltaire misattribution" (of course!).

Let's try and apply it here anyway. Who are today the people we’re not allowed to criticize, to the point that you are heavily stigmatized and ostracized if you do?

I'm not going to respond to this question here, because I'm sure that everybody knows the answer. And also because even here mentioning a certain ethnic group makes people feel uncomfortable, including the administrators of this forum, who reasonably don't want it to be labeled in a certain way and lose its credibility.

So let’s not mention this group here. In a sense it's even useless to do it, because I'm positive that everybody here will understand who I'm referring to. And I think this is a very meaningful clue in itself... So I'll just talk about an "ethnic group" and use other generic terms, confident that you'll understand me anyway and hoping that you'll play along. It could also be an interesting experiment, no? Or maybe just a game, funny or not I don't know...

In fact, these people are so confident in their power and control of the media and of financial and political institutions that, while we should be afraid to mention them, they can even brag openly about what they're doing to the rest of the world. They say it plainly in countless books, newspapers and magazines (which they own, by the way), but also in public speeches in front of their own:"We rule Hollywood", "We control politics", "We own the banks", and so on. Anybody can verify this for themselves by doing a few web searches.

They even have a collective name for the rest of the world, talking about it as an inferior species even in their religious texts. Consider this: in a "multicultural" world where everybody is supposed to say "no to racism", they can be openly and often viciously racist (and act upon their racism in very concrete ways, not just theorize about it), and have people not noticing or justifying it.

And not only that. They're even considered "progressive freedom-fighters" by most people because in the last couple of centuries at least they've been actually leading organizations that fight for the rights of “oppressed minorities” and immigrants. Admirable, you might say. But the problem is that, in the most blatant case of "double standards", in their own state they do the exact opposite of what they preach in others, expanding their borders with terroristic violence and closing them to anybody who doesn't belong to their race (they even have DNA tests to insure that!). They want us to think that race is just a form of "cultural conditioning", while they do everything to preserve their own.

And isn't it significant that they're fighting their battles for the rights of minorities exclusively in the countries were the predominant race is still (but most probably not for long) the one their religious texts consider their worst enemy? They seem to be applying to the West the "divide and conquer" tactics that their sacred books, but also their religious and political leaders, often preach openly about. And they’re doing it to the point of taking us to the verge of what can be considered, to all effects and purposes, a genocide against the targeted race.

It seems pretty clear to me that there is only one ethnic group in the world who really stands to benefit from the havoc that "multiculturalism" and mass immigration (to mention just a couple of main problems of our times, but this group seems to be behind several others too, like the usury of banking systems, for example) is causing in the western world. It seems just reasonable to think it must be the same group that spreads these phenomena in the rest of the world while protecting itself from them.

And talking about protective measures, they have found the most effective of all. I won't say what it is, but I'll just ask this question: what is the only thing that in our current, relativistic society you cannot question, and you even risk being thrown to jail if you do? Really, you can question pretty much anything today: you can question, and even deny, God, love, religions, moral values. You can even question or deny, as we do here, the reality of gigantic hoaxes like 9 11 or the moon landings. Of course, if you do you can be ridiculed, sneered at, emotionally attacked, but at least you cannot be denounced or thrown in jail. Not yet. :)

No, really, what do you think is the strongest dogma in our current society? What is the only thing that you can't question without being defined a "negationist", as if just by questioning a specific event in history (as you're allowed to do with any other historical fact) you could be deemed capable of negating anything. How much more Orwellian can all this get?

So do we really need to look any further for the “perpetrators”? Aren’t they already in front of our eyes? Or maybe by denying this we can delude ourselves into thinking that if we did find them we could do something about it, but now we can’t because we don’t know them…

But after all, what could really be done? I honestly don’t know. If any of you does, I'm open to suggestions. We must concede to this ethnic group that they are incredibly resilient. They have resisted to thousands of years of harsh criticism, persecutions, expulsions and attempted exterminations. Maybe it’s because they’re programmed since birth to fight for their own against the rest of the world, even though mainly in a stealthy way. Being a small minority, they’ve learnt do defend themselves to survive. And wanting to rule the world, they have chosen the more effective method available: ruthless deceit. They can be considered “masters of lies”. They even have a “religious” rite to ask their God’s forgiveness not for the lies they’ve told (as they would want us to believe), but for the lies they already know they will tell in the year to come!

Here we say the media are “masters of lies”. But they admittedly own the media, so can we do the math?

Of course, they’ve also found other ways to exploit the weaknesses of human nature to their advantage. But now I want to question this: is it really an advantage to live as they do? Yes, they may be controlling the world, but at what price? They’re heavily traumatized practically at birth, when they are mutilated by a religious figure who even sucks their blood. Then they’re brainwashed to think that everybody else in the world is out to get them, so they live in fear and think they always have to defend themselves. And maybe to find the strength necessary to do this they have to consider themselves superior to everybody else, and entitled to lie continuously and to have no respect for what they consider lesser living beings, from animals they slaughter in a merciless way to other humans they treat at best with no respect. Would you want to live like this, even with all the power in the world? I wouldn’t. Would you?

So maybe, more than hated or feared, this people should ultimately be pitied, because I think it’s better to suffer evil than to do it. As an evangelist said a long time ago: “What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, yet lose their soul?”

Or maybe I’m just too conditioned by my Christian upbringing. Perhaps, as we say in Italian: “Sono troppo… gentile!”

Now let me just conclude this long vent with another quote. It’s by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, who denounced a true extermination of tens of millions of European, Christian people. Actually he inspired me to avoid naming the “perpetrators”, as he calls them too.
You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse.
The October revolution was not what you call in America the ‘Russian Revolution’.
It was an invasion and conquest over the Russian people.
More of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history.
It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time.
The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrators.
omaxsteve
Banned
Posts: 192
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 12:44 am
Contact:

"Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspiracy"

Unread post by omaxsteve »

@ Jumpy:

The problem with your analysis is that you have not really identified who the "hoaxers" are; only what ethnic group they belong to.

This is equivalent to saying that because Mafia leaders are Italian. all Italians are responsible for crimes committed by the Mafia. Some african americans are criminals, does that give us the right to paint the entire race with the same brush?

Being, (by birth-not by choice) a member of the group you're referring to I can assure you that I (nor any of my siblings cousins, aunts uncles) have any desire, ability, or special powers or influence, or to commit any hoaxes. I have no more access to the mainstream media than any of my catholic, or muslim, friends.

While many of my fellow "ethnics' take offense when their entire group is criticized, I personally do not. I only feel sorry for those who make such statements, and those who actually believe that an entire ethnic group, race, or religion, can be painted with one brush.

For example, a few minutes of research pointed me to Leslie Moonves (CEO) and Sunmer Redstone (executive chairman majority shareholder) of CBS corporation. While I am not certain, let's assume that they were both born to Jewish parents. It is perfectly acceptable to hold those two individuals accountable for the actions of the CBS corporation, religious affiliation not withstanding. It is not acceptable to blame other members of that ethnic group for their actions. NOR is it acceptable to attribute the cause, or motivation, for their misdeeds to the fact that they are Jewish.

In conclusion, Although I can, and do, acknowledge that much of the mainstream media is owned/controlled by members of my religion, I believe that each person, each human being, is individually responsible for their own specific actions. To castigate, or vilify, an entire ethnic group, race, or religion, for the acts of a handful of the "elite" power brokers is not only naive and misguided; It is wrong, and it is the definition of prejudice. It is no different than saying that all muslims are terrorists.


Best regards,

Steve O.
Flabbergasted
Administrator
Posts: 1244
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:19 am

Re: Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on A Very Open Conspi

Unread post by Flabbergasted »

omaxsteve wrote:To castigate, or vilify, an entire ethnic group, race, or religion, for the acts of a handful of the "elite" power brokers is not only naive and misguided; It is wrong, and it is the definition of prejudice.
Jumpy´s analysis is actually quite sober and level-headed, even charitable in some respects.

On the other hand, of course you know your own immediate reality to be completely different.

The only way you can both be right is if we split Jews into two isolated groups: Organized Jewry and Unorganized Jewry. The former occupy 50-80% of all visible key positions of influence in the world. The latter unthinkingly give them a good name.
jumpy64
Member
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 12:44 pm

Re: Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on A Very Open Conspi

Unread post by jumpy64 »

The only way you can both be right is if we split Jews into two isolated groups: Organized Jewry and Unorganized Jewry. The former occupy 50-80% of all visible key positions of influence in the world. The latter unthinkingly give them a good name.
I agree with you, Flabbergasted, and I want to thank you for you comment.

As for what Omaxsteve writes, of course there are decent people in all ethnic groups, and you and your family and friends may very well be among them. And yes, I just wanted to identify the ethnic group to which the "hoaxers" might belong to, and you don't seem to contest the possibility that I'm right.

I just wanted to point out something: usually a people's religion represent its highest moral standards, don't you agree? Of course most people can't conform to these moral standards. And so, to use the example you've given, in Italy the moral standards are given by Christianity as expressed in the Gospels: love your neighbor as yourself, love even your enemies, turn the other cheek and so on. This is what we've been taught, and what we measure our moral value against. And then we have Mafia, which is the opposite of those moral standards, or it's at best a heavy degradation of them.

So if in a nation which refers to the Gospels for its moral standards we can have Mafia, I wonder what we can have in an ethnic group whose religious texts, which should establish its moral standards, preach racial superiority in the most vicious forms, to the extent of saying that the best members of the other races "deserve to be killed" and can and must be wronged in any possible way.

It seems to me that Christians are not taught to discriminate others but just the opposite, although we don't always manage to live up to what we're taught, while this other ethnic group is taught just that: discriminate and favor your own people at any cost to survive, prosper and rule the world.

But I'm sure that even in this group there are people who feel that the negative things their religion preaches are wrong, so if you are one of them, please suggest to me other colors with which to paint your people. Tell me how you distance yourself from the negative things you've been taught, if you think they're negative. And if in your religion (because that's how you define it) there are other, positive precepts you abide by, please let me know what they are. I'm open and I want to learn to appreciate what's good in everyone.

I believe we're all human beings, and the differences between us are given mainly by different conditionings, but if I see a conditioning that I consider bad, dangerous and damaging for humanity, I feel entitled to express my opinion, as I have done here.

So please, instead of generically talking about "prejudices", let me know what are the good principles of the religion we're talking about, and show me how they are applied by its members, or even only by yourself.

I'd be grateful if you or anybody else could do this.
Post Reply