|
|
Post by ophello on Nov 26, 2008 0:21:06 GMT -5
Max, jumping to conclusions is also still called "jumping to conclusions". If it were an olympic sport, you'd have won a gold medal for that faithful leap.
Allow me be perfectly clear...because there seems to be some confusion in the air. I have generally agreed with the ideas presented in Freedom to Facism. I have a track record on this site as not only promoting this film but another film like it as well (and both are clear on their points of view). I googled the film title and came across a NYT article. I read the article and thought, "Hmm, if this guy has a point, I bet the people who would know best how to respond are on HQ."
THUS, I posted the link with no expectations and no opinion. In typical HQ fashion, I am being psychoanalyzed and called a useful idiot and a liberal.
Judge not, lest ye be judged. This is a forum of discussion, and as such, I'll bring anything to the table that might enlighten our discussion. The writer of said article seemed to have valid points and I dared to present them here. I could care less who he works for. If I am going to say an entire newspaper is a lie, I am also going to disagree when the front page says "attack on america".
The majority of NYT articles are truthful. And saying so does not make me a communist. Get off your high horse.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jerseyboy on Nov 26, 2008 10:23:23 GMT -5
all good disinformation outlets present a high quantity of truth in order to set the reader's mind at ease. On certain levels of dimensions of socio-political information given, only the truth is presented. At the most subtle and sophisticated levels of philosophy, however, the truth is either twisted or downright lies are told in a way that only the strongly educated can percieve. Thus the disinformation succeeds in "turning" those with weaker education and thus perception.
NYT is such a propaganda organ.
So, discriminating people can find true statements and stories therein, and use that to be informed of that particular matter. The same people can also detect a false editorial bias in a story, or a down right untruth being told. These same people warn others against reading such propaganda outlets until they are foundationally educated in the truth, so as not to be caught off guard.
The Urantia Book is one of these types of Propaganda outlets.
So are most all of the major newsprint and television media outlets in America today, as they are owned and editorially controlled by 5 entities, none of which can be considered 100% scripturally and constitutionally founded in their philosophy, in my opinion.
The internet is another thing.
Check out News With Views.com to find out what the Constitutional conservatives are talking about these days. Of course some of those who post here fit that bill also. /:^)
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by e-Male on Nov 26, 2008 13:25:45 GMT -5
The NYT is not all lies. That sort of simple thinking is useless. So, Op, why are you wasting time promoting and arguing "useless simple thinking"? You created the straw-man argument. No one else said NYT is all lies. Max, jumping to conclusions is also still called "jumping to conclusions". If it were an olympic sport, you'd have won a gold medal for that faithful leap. You are the one who made the giant leap, not Max. I suggest you re-read what has been written in this thread. Your reading comprehension and analytical skills need work. /e |
|
|
|
Post by ophello on Nov 26, 2008 15:39:57 GMT -5
e-Male, im not the one with trouble reading. I have been called a liberal and it is this conclusion that he jumped to based on the "evidence": I posted a link to a NYT article that I have since stated that I don't really agree with but posted anyway for the sake of discussion.
In my opinion, they did:
These statements suggest to me that the people who made them have such a distrust in the NYT that EVERYTHING they print is somehow poisonous or useless. Perhaps that is my interpretation, but it was interesting to note that as soon as the letters "NYT" were dropped, three of you went off on it. I posted an article. The discussion then centered around the newspaper itself.It is so hard to see why I came to this conclusion?
|
|
|
|
Post by hollis on Nov 26, 2008 20:41:07 GMT -5
Hey Max: kiss my ass and ditch the name calling. I wasn't involved in this discussion, but now that I am, I'll say this. If your truths are so fragile that they cannot stand scrutiny by your "liberals", then you rightfully should go to a message board without "liberals" where everyone will hold hands and pat you on the back and tell you how smart you are and agree with you. I don't have any opinion on this particular issue, but really, if you can't stand the heat...
Also, I understand exactly why I get called a liberal here. I don't agree with the judgment, and I correct the assumption when I see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Caligastia Lanonandek on Nov 26, 2008 22:35:58 GMT -5
Hollis
Shame
|
|
|
|
Post by hollis on Nov 27, 2008 2:36:54 GMT -5
So noted. I stood up for myself against name calling and folks being snarky, then used a dirty word, and I deserve shame. Got it.
|
|
|
|
Post by z on Nov 27, 2008 7:02:19 GMT -5
Hollis, I think that on the "Shame" there is more to it. Are you sure, you stood up for your self? I think, you stood up for the 'program'. To me, that is a very common thing to witness. - Max didn't insult anyone. He was stating a fact and like JB said, one can learn the dubious methods of MSM, their influence on 'softheaded idiots' (like the KGB agent told in the video I posted) and the results of this program in the society - communism. Slow process, but terrifyingly efficient. I beg you to watch the video (especially videos 8 and 9), but like the ex-agent said, he could shower 'demoralized' person with facts, proofs, pictures 'and' even if he could take this person by force to see the actual communist concentration camps, 'demoralized' person would refuse to believe. Such is the nature of the program. - and no, this was not an insult. |
|
|
|
Post by imbasile on Nov 27, 2008 8:44:22 GMT -5
We stand on the precipice of the most exciting times in our modern history, and you fellows are arguing a moot point. Each to their own moment of evolution.
The small view: true individual freedom on this planet means NO society, any society and the individual must give up some freedoms. The pendulum moves back a forth.
The large view: there has never been any freedom only the illusion of: the master of this world (satan for lack of a better term) allows for humanity to think they have this and that while deception abounds and he runs the world. (check your history, there has always been the elite who rule by force, even in the small tribes)
This leads us to the confusion we have and the differing opinions that you are discussing.
This world is ALL lies and deciet with only a small amount of truth mixed in to keep you coming back for more.
Even if one should be able to throw off the shackle's of error and awake to the facts of this planet the best they can do is watch the others wallow in the mire, only those like Jesus who came from without with the message of difference and truth have made any difference or change in this world, and that only for those that wished to take on the very hard road of being an "alien" on this planet of the nephalim.
It is by due coarse that this newspaper is liberal (definition your own) and the other one is conservative (also your own) if there were only one side to the story then divide and conquer would miss it's mark.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Nov 27, 2008 11:07:52 GMT -5
We stand on the precipice of the most exciting times in our modern history, and you fellows are arguing a moot point. Each to their own moment of evolution.
Dave question: Please define your meaning of moot?
The small view: true individual freedom on this planet means NO society, any society and the individual must give up some freedoms. The pendulum moves back a forth.
Dave comment: If all individuals behaved then the yoke of society is light.
The large view: there has never been any freedom only the illusion of: the master of this world (satan for lack of a better term) allows for humanity to think they have this and that while deception abounds and he runs the world. (check your history, there has always been the elite who rule by force, even in the small tribes)
Dave comment: Last time I heard, Satan is being held in a facility at home base. To be let loose in the future, so he can stand and answer for bad behavior. As I recall, it was said that Satan comes from the Lanonandek family of angels. Interesting that Old One is the Father of the Family. Old One runs home base. Anyhow the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is the vehicle for freedom. That individual choice (behavior) can choose to do good or bad is free will. However free will comes with a price. On judgement day.
This leads us to the confusion we have and the differing opinions that you are discussing.
This world is ALL lies and deciet with only a small amount of truth mixed in to keep you coming back for more.
Dave comment: The truth is all around you. You nor I are judge of the world. And we are on a journey to Ascendancy. All we are asked to do is our best with what we have been GIVEN.
If individual life came with a guarantee then there would be no free will. This world is about how well you as an individual can do.
Even if one should be able to throw off the shackle's of error and awake to the facts of this planet the best they can do is watch the others wallow in the mire, only those like Jesus who came from without with the message of difference and truth have made any difference or change in this world, and that only for those that wished to take on the very hard road of being an "alien" on this planet of the nephalim.
Dave comment: Well let it not be said that you are a victim of optimism. I would kind of like to think that my human brethren would object to your analysis, of their ability to make a difference. As I recall even Jesus spoke to humans about his Fathers Kingdom. On the subject of the person's that are Nephalim - the Prince of this World has spoken.
It is by due coarse that this newspaper is liberal (definition your own) and the other one is conservative (also your own) if there were only one side to the story then divide and conquer would miss it's mark.
Dave comment: Being liberal is a choice. Being conservative is a choice. Since reality shows that there is not one side to the story. I don't want laws passed and guns pointed at me. What I want is reason, justice and the pursuit of happiness for all. Communists yearn for a one sided story.
|
|
|
|
Post by z on Nov 27, 2008 11:16:45 GMT -5
Besides irrational bursts of hate and anger aimed to the 'threat' to the program, the program generates also a series of 'words' on random basis, such as imbasiles last example.
I observe daily very intense and heated debates around this exact topic over here where i live. Pattern is quite clear.
Idealists sticks to their vision and while defending it they get stripped out from anything that resembless even remotedly anything civilized. It is like somesort of primal being is summoned from these people when confronted with calm logic, reason and provable facts..
|
|
|
|
Post by Jerseyboy on Nov 27, 2008 11:52:23 GMT -5
I recall reading that originally the guarantees were to Life, Liberty, and sanctity of private ownership of property. Then, at the last minute there was a concession for whatever reason to change to "pursuit of happiness".
I wish I was more scholarly on the constitution. I figure the same types who wanted to downplay the self-evident right to own property were the ones to push for the later ammendment downplaying (and eliminating) the ownership of property as a qualification to have an proper perspective on who to elect to govern.
If good government insures ones right to protect and keep one's body and soul together, and the liberty to make free will choices for better or worse, but cannot guarantee private ownership of property, how is that soul supposed to pursue happiness to its logical end without the factors and functions that one's private property facilitates toward that goal?
The pilgrim story of the switch from socialism/communism to free enterprise capitalism would never have been possible if the elders stripped anyone of the right to run their property as they saw fit. No personal responsibility would have evolved.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Nov 27, 2008 13:04:34 GMT -5
U.S. Constitution: Fifth Amendment
Fifth Amendment - Rights of Persons
Amendment Text | Annotations
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
|
|
|
|
Post by imbasile on Nov 27, 2008 13:23:23 GMT -5
moot (my def) - of little concern.
That is the point, society DECIDES what behavior is proper for each, versus the individual
Sorry, "satan" as the allegory of the negative spirits that "still" control this planet - even as Cal has said the main players may be in hold but the first officers and such are still doing the dirty work. The constitution is only as good as the people who back it (or don't as the case may be)
Agree, but with the reservation of: We do judge our world and those around us (material and spiritual) . Binding?
perhaps not, but still the observation of and judgment of outcomes are part of our lives.
"like to think" is the operative. MOST humans would rather live their lives WITHOUT having to think. Therefore even IF they read my post they might get upset but that would be the end of it. As far as making a difference - ? isn't that why WE are in the shape we are in?
Dare I say that what you or I WANT is also a moot point? The lessons shall be as they are, we are to work with what is the best as we can. I have no fondness for ANY government, but it seems that most of this planet is either socialist or communist or a derivative of said. Even the republic that has now gone to democracy and into socialist/communizm is not a "free" society. America has the "illusion" of freedom while the elites do what they want and send the rest of our children to fight the wars they set up to gain more power. "We the people" have never had what the constitution guaranteed us. "We" have only been as "free" as "they" allowed us to be at any given time (try not going to war when "they" say you will or not paying the illegal IRS your taxes, you have the choice of jail or.....ummm jail)
As far a optimism, the only person that I know OF that I trust is Jesus (but since His words have been twisted and changed over the years I can only speculate on the small amount that does make sense), the rest have to earn that trust and I dare to say they have been far lacking. If you think this rude of me, I would remind you that only God the Father CAN prove that He exists and if He is un-willing then there is no proof (thanks be to the Father that He does this daily for us) I myself have to continually prove myself (trust) to these persons on this planet and that is not enough for them. So I now move from the side of the "benefit of the doubt" to the side of prove yourself to me or get away from me. (on my terms)
|
|
|
|
Post by imbasile on Nov 27, 2008 13:38:57 GMT -5
Break it down?
U.S. Constitution: Fifth Amendment
Fifth Amendment - Rights of Persons
Amendment Text | Annotations
No person apply's only to the elite, YOU are NOT a person, YOU are OWNED by the STATE shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury Grand Jury being paid by the government (corrupt), except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger marshal law/military tribunal (both outside the dictates of the constitution); nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; criminal vs civil ? Just ask OJ nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself unless you like living in prison , nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;can you say patriot act? nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. "just compensation" is in the eye of the elite
Lovely words IF backed by God fearing, morally held persons, IF not then they are/have been twisted to fit the needs of the elite since the inception of the nation.
|
|
