Page 5 of 8
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 8:37 pm
by seckle
alien pimp wrote:seckle wrote:alien pimp wrote:seckle wrote:alien pimp wrote:then i am thousands of pages and hours ahead of your research
are you an expert?
not as much as many of my sources!
are you up to your own words? then would be nice to know what's debatable about the monetary system as described in zeitgeist, since you only saw that one (all parts?) and alex jones'
and if some of it is true, would be nice to tell us why isn't that in history books and media?
i will reply later, but i will, a bit busy know..
your sources. are they all internet sources? do these sources rely on income from their research or their products (dvd's,books)?
apparently your opinion about "conspirationism" is based on one movie and some alex jones' stuff, it's not how i do things
that contradicts yourself also
on the other hand i don't judge truth by the media format is transmitted on, but you keep failing at answering me if official sites of governmental institutions or UN institutions are to be believed
you also failed answering me if your belief system is based only on offline sources
basically you keep moving focus from my questions because you can't be up to your words with your superficial knowledge, looks to me
basically, i've never moved focus. all you've done is put yourself on this "thousands of hours" of research pedestal. that doesn't give you some sort of smoking gun. in fact right now, you seem to be getting pretty upset about a simple conversation. i'm not asking you to defend what you believe in. i'm telling you how i see it.
1. i watched all of zeitgiest. all parts. i think the allegations of the amero are full of holes and smoke in mirrors and he said/she said. i think the tie into the rockerfeller family is a bit dark because the rockerfeller family ties into oil money, and standard oil from 100 years ago. the motive of unification of mexico into north america and the NAFTA implications are interesting, and it made me look into NAFTA more closely. there's no clearcut evidence right now that a one world government is a reality. it maybe something that's being discussed in certain circles, but i think zeitgiest is not meant to give you all the answers to that. its just to make you ask questions. it does this very well.
2. i'm up on 9/11. not every fucking NWO/big brother/apocalypse is here conspiracy blog out there. i've said that. i'm not someone that's spent "thousands" of hours pouring over conspiracies. if you want to have a discussion about who you consider an expert and who you don't we can do that. i asked you a bit further back if you have faith in science, and you never answered my question. so?
3. who brought UN sources into this? all i asked you is if your sources were online or offline?(offline meaning something i can go to a library and read on my own. in my mind an offline source means that its been somewhat fact checked and published via a publisher that i've heard of, or is recognized in the literary world.) this is critical, because as with wikipedia...online knowledge is being put into a microscope more and more in the world we live in because there is barely fact checking involved. most online sources and blogs are mostly in the "business" of conspiracy...ie: making income from conspiracy theory. if so, then i'm sorry but in my mind, thats a conflict of interest, and in my non-expert opinion, i'll probably find them to be a big house of cards of one unproven allegation upon another. sitting on top of a foundation of hype and profit motivation.
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 8:52 pm
by alien pimp
you started by telling me how you see ME, a subject you don't know scrap about.
then you continue saying things you picked up from internet, while accusing me of doing same thing. again you don't know scrap about what i did
1. "you think"... proves?
2. i have faith only in truth and harmony, and science is closest thing to that. according to your own words, there's nothing scientific about how you build your views. btw, scientific community has thousands of online publications.
3. if you need to have heard before of something to aknowledge it, that's the worst case of cognitive dissonance. also see 2.
plus if you operate with personal definitions of "offline", start by letting us know we're outside the English dictionary.
we can continue discussing after you read all my latest 25 links posted on nsfw so i can know you grasped a fraction of what i am about, until then you're talking too much about myself, less about my ideas and questions (you haven't yet answered none of them, i did yours), and nothing about things you actually know about
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 8:54 pm
by capo ultra
research is boring. Drugs are more fun
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 10:27 pm
by fooishbar
alien pimp wrote:we can continue discussing after you read all my latest 25 links posted on nsfw
lolz, argument by attrition. the person with the fewest meaningful things to do in their life wins?
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 10:42 pm
by alien pimp
blah
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:26 pm
by slothrop
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:58 pm
by alien pimp
seckle wrote:
your sources. are they all internet sources? do these sources rely on income from their research or their products (dvd's,books)?
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:02 am
by alien pimp
seckle wrote:if you bury your head in the sand, and just choose to put faith in things simply because its in juxtaposition to popular opinion or the media's viewpoint then, you're not using rational thinking, but simply following your own or someone else's agenda. .
CounterPunch is the bi-weekly muckraking newsletter edited by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair. Twice a month we bring our readers the stories that the corporate press never prints. We aren't side-line journalists here at CounterPunch. Ours is muckraking with a radical attitude and nothing makes us happier than when CounterPunch readers write in to say how useful they've found our newsletter in their battles against the war machine, big business and the rapers of nature.
We're in our sixth year now and have exceptionally loyal readers, who have delighted in our irreverent and biting approach. Time and again they tell us they're sick of dull, predictable writing. They want fresh facts, a newsletter that they can enjoy rather than just endure--and we give it to them. Barbara Ehrenreich says, "CounterPunch makes me think. It makes me laugh. Above all it tells me things I didn't know."
Here at CounterPunch we have many friends and all the right enemies. And, guaranteed, you'll never see any of us on the pundit line up at MSNBC. We try to stay beyond the pale.
Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:10 am
by alien pimp
seckle wrote:
do i think that government's hide things for their own reasons or maybe to protect their own agendas? absolutely.
conspires:
1 a: to join in a secret agreement to do an unlawful or wrongful act or an act which becomes unlawful as a result of the secret agreement <accused> b: scheme2: to act in harmony toward a common end <circumstances>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conspires
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 8:58 am
by hackman
waffle waffle waffle
what gives him credibility? he makes alot of suggestions, but no hard stone facts, exactly why you all diss conspiracy theorists, the word hypocracy springs to mind?
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:03 am
by lloydnoise
If there is a New World Order I don't think they would be too worried by this thread
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:20 am
by missedthebus
oh no Lord Skelator, dsf have found out our secret
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:20 am
by a_k47
lloydnoise wrote:If there is a New World Order I don't think they would be too worried by this thread
that has nothing to do with it
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:47 am
by the wiggle baron
Im trying to remember, do I just have to be really racist to get this thread locked?
Im guessing some despicably violent porn would probably do the trick.
...bear with me
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:25 pm
by elbe
The Wiggle Baron wrote:Im trying to remember, do I just have to be really racist to get this thread locked?
Im guessing some despicably violent porn would probably do the trick.
...bear with me
lol
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:25 pm
by hackman
The Wiggle Baron wrote:Im trying to remember, do I just have to be really racist to get this thread locked?
Im guessing some despicably violent porn would probably do the trick.
...bear with me
only the welsh can be utter, total stnuc
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:46 pm
by missedthebus
hackman wrote:The Wiggle Baron wrote:Im trying to remember, do I just have to be really racist to get this thread locked?
Im guessing some despicably violent porn would probably do the trick.
...bear with me
only the welsh can be utter, total stnuc
ooh hell no girlfriend *click *click *click
'ch 'm chyfaill ydy 'r tnuc
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 1:01 pm
by formula
eLBe wrote:The Wiggle Baron wrote:Im trying to remember, do I just have to be really racist to get this thread locked?
Im guessing some despicably violent porn would probably do the trick.
...bear with me
lol
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 1:06 pm
by alien pimp
The Wiggle Baron wrote:oh my god, something i don't know shit about and it pisses me off cuz i feel excluded for my ignorance, let's be cuntish and make retard posts that help no one, maybe i can ruin it for everyone even more. If i cant be wiser, at least i can beat them at being a moron
fixed!
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 1:11 pm
by nousd
alien pimp wrote:Here at CounterPunch we ... try to stay beyond the pale.
Congratulations, you've succeeded,
thousands of pages ago.
So go flog some more "dubstep clothing" to the ignorant masses, Pimp.
