DANG YOU, JEFFREY!!!

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

DANG YOU, JEFFREY!!!

Postby Floyd Smoots » Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:35 pm

Dawg Bite It, Jeff, why'd ya go 'n' lock the thread about Hitler bein' uh British Agent afore Dreams End could at least, answer mah post??? I want some answers from a lot of your (our?) "Poster Boys" ('n' Gurlz) about how they "know" whut they know!!!<br><br>We ALL have certain beliefs that we hold dear, and others that we only hold until we are shown proof to the contrary. That's kind of how I feel about the "lizard aliens" masqwer......masqueee..... uh looking like people. You've really gotta have a tinfoil hat to go with that "meme or paradigm". Geeze, I HATE both of those words. Sometimes, buzzwords, like buzzsaws, just lose their teeth. That's how it is with those words (and others) and Me!<br><br>I really feel that I (for once in my miserable blogging) have made a perfectly valid point. I don't care if you read it in a book, saw it on TV, in a movie, or found it on the internet; if you didn't see it, touch & feel it, taste it, smell it, or hear it, then your belief in it is NOT A FACT, it is only a matter of "faith"; faith in the veracity of the reporter, writer, or other producer of the "information".<br><br>That is NOT opinion, gentle-bloggers, that is FACT!!!<br>Don't feel free, just feel cheap, to discuss amongst yourselves.<br><br>The Floydinator<br><br>"Edited ONLY 'cuz Floyd misspelled "discuss" in the original"<br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=floydsmoots>Floyd Smoots</A> at: 2/4/06 6:37 pm<br></i>
Floyd Smoots
 
Posts: 548
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 11:50 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Floyd,

Postby Rigorous Intuition » Sun Feb 05, 2006 3:29 am

I have to say I find it very difficult to read you, let alone understand you, when you write in such an affected manner.<br><br>But I <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>think</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> you're saying something about how we know what we know. I think it's mostly implicit, but that's been a recurring theme for me on the blog.<br><br>Briefly, because that's all the time I have right now, I'll say that I think you create a false dichotomy between "fact" and "belief." Mediating our understanding of both, and everything between, is our judgement. And that's not just our rationality, but our intuition as well.<br><br>There are many things which have first offended my judgement before I've been able to see their truth. That's the way with paradigm shifts. But that's different than becoming so open minded that my brains fall out.<br><br>It may be just my judgement, but that's the only judgement I can exercise as I try to maintain a healthy board. <p></p><i></i>
Rigorous Intuition
 
Posts: 1744
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:36 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Floyd,

Postby Dreams End » Sun Feb 05, 2006 4:37 am

Hello Floyd,<br><br>It's not an easy question. Somewhere on this board awhile back I wrote a "guide to internet research". Not meant to be comprehensive, and naturally people took it to mean I was suggesting what they HAD to do.<br><br>There is a spectrum. On one end is somebody saying something without so much as pretending to offer a source for his knowledge. I don't mean alleged "insiders" or whistleblowers, I mean people who simply post that such and such is part of the "Illuminati agenda" as if the "Illuminati agenda" had just been printed in TV Guide.<br><br>On the other end are articles which show some attempts at verification, sourcing and logical analysis. But even then, you have to have some rigor. That is, often I'll track down a cited quote or source and find it has been misunderstood, taken out of context or even manufactured entirely. <br><br>For example, there is a famous letter to the editor from an alleged "insider" that ended up being read into the Congressional record by a Mississippi Congressman which alleged that the civil rights struggle was simply manufactured by the "communists" (or the jews...now I forget...I'll try to find the letter). This letter is still cited as proof. And it was a complete fake, written by Eustace Mullens...a favorite of some around here. I don't know that there was proof he wrote it, but since his own website suggests that slaves were happier under slavery than they were after the Rockefellers :created the civil war"...well, you get the picture.<br><br>I have admitted before and admit again now that I've fallen for bogus thinking by genuine people, genuine thinking by bogus people and out and out disinfo. I think I'm pretty good at sniffing it out, though.<br><br>So the idea that all theories which posit a sinister force are more or less accurate because someone BELIEVES in such a force, is of no use to me. Notice that I admit there are nonrational ways of "knowing"...faith is a kind of knowledge and people have all kinds of irrational, transcendent experiences which defy rational description. <br><br>But there are some things that are simply knowable, whether we actually do know them or not. There is either a sinister group that is running the world or there isn't. If someone wants to claim there is, then proof should be offered. Seems a reasonable request to me...but it really pisses some people off.<br><br>Now, should this group itself be supernatural...well, then rational proof may be hard to come by. I can accept that. But if someone wants to say Hitler was a British agent with vague and unsupported assertions that he has "Jewish blood" which isn't even germane to the thesis anyway, then yeah, I have no trouble calling it bullshit.<br><br>One thing I recommend EVERYONE do is read up on "blood libel". These were the accusations beginning in the middle ages that Jews were killing gentile babies and using their blood in Matzoh. Seriously, that was the allegation. The details of this sinister Jewish plot have found their way into all kinds of modern theories, despite "Jews" being replaced by other alleged groups. Nevermind the anti-Semitic origins...when one b.s. theory is simply repeated with different alleged perpetrators, then this indicates that it's just more b.s. and in that sense, it's completely irrelevant whether the writer dislikes Jews or not. It's simply a very flawed theory.<br><br>So anyway, I look for the weight of evidence, logical analysis, some awareness by the writer as to what that evidence supports and what it DOESN'T support. I look for validation elsewhere, especially when the original source is suspect or unknown to me. I also look at who else is repeating the same message and if there is any kind of agenda that might be in play which is not being openly stated.<br><br>I don't claim to be perfect, but I think my approach is far more reasonable than simply buying every theory that comes along just because it agrees with the idea that SOME sinister group is running the show. After all, who's to say that MY group won't be targeted. I'm a leftist...and these theories have OFTEN been used to allege that "communists" were the root cause of all evil, even the things that communists were organizing against! Oh, yeah, and Communism itself was a Jewish creation. Some guy came on here not long ago and made the following assertion offering no evidence whatsoever:<br><br>The illuminati paid Karl Marx to create socialism.<br><br>There are so many screwed up things about that short statement that it's not even wrong. But someone should be embarrassed to make such sweeping claims without at least SOME evidence.<br><br><br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

Re: Floyd,

Postby antiaristo » Sun Feb 05, 2006 5:09 am

Hello Dreams End,<br><br>You are such a reasonable chap.<br><br>Could you tell us what you know about Freemasonry please?<br><br>And can you tell me what happens when a "good" Mason is told to do something "bad" under protection of the lodge?<br><br>Does he have the prerogative to leave?<br><br>Other than in a wooden box? <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

It's ALL Rigorously "Rigged"

Postby Floyd Smoots » Sun Feb 05, 2006 8:15 pm

Jeff, you first. No you don't. You're far too well read and intelligent to let a little "dialect" get in the way of what you are reading. You "may" find it annoying (sorry), but I don't really believe that you find it that "difficult" to follow and understand at all. You must really skip over "sceneshifter's" posts something awful.<br><br>I AM saying exactly, "How do we 'know' what we KNOW?". You understood my question clearly. I can see your point about the "false dichotomy" because, ofttimes, as you say, between judgement and intuition, we become absolutely certain of a "fact".<br><br>My point is that sometimes, "what we believe as fact" is, IN FACT, almost absolute Truth. Sometimes, it ISN'T!<br><br>I feel that I have made a valid point about "whom" we believe, and WHY. Some of us hold the "Holy Bible" as truth, some of us disparage it as myth. Thus, my comment on "faith". Most of us USED to believe in the Mainstream Media becaused we were taught to buy it. Now, (I hope) most R.I.'ers know not to trust 95% of what they tell us.<br><br>Some of us "formerly ignorant" Americans voted for Bush, not Once, but TWICE, because we were totally fooled into thinking that he is a good guy who cares about ALL of us Americans, North, Central, and South. I'm very sorry that we were wrong. However, at the time that we voted, we believed that we knew the "truth" about his character.<br><br>I agree with your posit about things that "offend" our judgement. That's when we first become aware that something stinks like a rotting corpse, and we are forced to ferret it out like a homeowner looking for a dead mouse in the woodwork.<br><br>Dreams End, you next. I think you made a perfectly reasonable argument for your way of finding out the "real facts" in the best way you know. It appears to me to be a well thought out set of guidelines for testing what we are shown, told, or otherwise exposed to. (Dang, boyz, Ah jist luvs endin' uh sentense wif uh preposa.....prepositiiii.....uh, one o' them danged ol' thangs we wuz taught not to end uh sentens wif.<br><br>On a lighter note, I'd like to pass on a U.S. Southerner joke I heard on an old sitcom "Designing Women".<br><br>A Southern lady was invited to a fancy dinner party in New York City. She turned to the lady on her right and asked, "So where y'all from?". The highly offended guest replied, "From where I come, WE do not end our sentences with prepositions!". The Southern belle thought about the reply for a few seconds, then amended her question, "So where y'all from, BITCH!".<br><br>Made me laugh like a hyena when I first heard it. Hope it gives you gentle folk a grin or two. <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :lol --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/laugh.gif ALT=":lol"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br><br> <p></p><i></i>
Floyd Smoots
 
Posts: 548
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 11:50 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: It's ALL Rigorously "Rigged"

Postby Dreams End » Sun Feb 05, 2006 8:28 pm

For the record, "y'all" is plural and we are the only region of the country to have a second person plural like most other languages. <br><br>anti -- I don't know enough about the freemasons to comment. I've commented before that P-2/gladio is enough to convince me that the Masons are involved in high level shady stuff. But is it them controlling the affairs or are some chapters being used for it? I don't know. In fact, I really want to learn more and there are some HUGE books on the shelf at my local bookstore that I'd like to look into.... <br><br>But, this will not convince you that I'm not a Freemason agent/ Talmud Merchant because you wouldn't be antiaristo if you didn't think that because I dared to...oh hell, I have no idea what I did that pissed you off. <br><br>Anyway, most of the internet stuff I've seen is crap on the Masons...as in poorly researched. Also the Masons themselves are fond of creating bogus histories of themselves going all the way back to Moses. <br><br>I'd say the late eighteenth century was a very interesting time in History...with Rosicrucians, the (real) Illuminati and the Masons (who weren't formed them but I think maybe took on some of their current "flavor" from those times and their overlap with Rosicrucian type thought.)<br><br>But correct me...or, for once...just once....SAY WHAT IT IS YOU KNOW rather than criticizing me for not saying what YOU THINK I SHOULD KNOW. Lay it out there... personally, I think you go too far with the "Zionist/monarchy/mason" plot to rule the world...but I think you continually confuse my criticism of that with the belief that I think they are somehow wholly innocent of anything.<br><br>Lot of gray out there. <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

It's ALL In The Rigging, Just Like A Sailboat

Postby Floyd Smoots » Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:02 pm

D.E., I have read on many, many sites that Freemasonry is a two-tiered organization. And, no, I can't "cite the sites" right now, but you can Google them, and hopefully "read" what I've read. The posits suggest that Freemasonry is a "two-headed" beast.<br><br>That is to say, that MOST of the people around the world who belong to this "fraternal" organization are NOT AWARE of what those at the "top of the pyramid" are privy to. I, personally know many members of the A.F.&A.M. (Ancient Free and Accepted Masons), who have NO idea whatsoever who, or what their world wide organization is all about.<br><br> Apparently, if you're not 32nd, or possibly 33rd degree, you are NOT apprised of the information that your innocent, charitable, community-oriented organization is financially, spiritually, and actually, promoting the plans of Lucifer, the shining one; the one whom "they" anxiously await. <br><br>You would probably have to go to a fundamentalist Christian site to read the testimonies of those who entered Freemasonry unknowingly, became Christians, and, under conviction of the Holy Spirit, felt that they had to disclose the information that had been imparted to them, even under the threat of death.<br><br>Bottom line on Freemasonry is that 95% plus or minus, have no idea what their leaders at the top of the pyramid are up to or into. That said, I have come to believe that Freemasonry is only "One Small Part" of the octupus that is trying to strangle the life out of free people everywhere on planet Earth.<br><br>But, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.<br> <p></p><i></i>
Floyd Smoots
 
Posts: 548
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 11:50 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: It's ALL In The Rigging

Postby antiaristo » Mon Feb 06, 2006 11:17 am

Dreams End,<br>About six months ago I was expounding as usual about the evil done by the Windsors. A new member sidled up to me and inquired "Have you heard of Lyndon LaRouche?"<br>"Yes" I replied, I've heard of him."<br>"He says much the same as you about the British Monarchy. Have you thought of getting in contact with him?"<br><br>"When it comes to the British Monarchy Larouche is very much correct. But he carries too much baggage and I don't know enough about him or his past. My own case stands on its own two feet and I DO NOT WANT TO ASSOCIATE WITH HIM."<br><br>A month or so later I had noticed that this same poster was being obstructive when it came to the Windsors. Perhaps it was simple ignorance, perhaps something more Nelsonian.<br><br>He then issued a rash challenge. "Come on then. Where are all the "I'm a gatekeeper posts." So I decided to call him on it.<br><br>He ducked the challenge.<br><br>So I started a new thread on the topic of this poster.<br><br>His response was to wallpaper the thread with Makow and LaRouche extracts, smearing me with the words of others "anti has been misled", while avoiding his own words and my own words.<br><br>That poster was you, Dreams End.<br><br>Over time I concluded that you were acting in bad faith, and that you were indeed a Freemason.<br><br>I did indeed call you a "Talmud merchant".<br><br>Catherine Austin Fitts had commented here.<br><br>You took the opportunity to start a thread under her name and issue a challenge to her. You wanted this visitor to explain the words and deeds of someone with whom she had ONCE SHARED A FORUM. Frankly, I was disgusted. For not only will you not defend your own act and deeds, you demand that others do far more than that and defend tenuously connected third parties. The stench of hypocrisy was overpowering. I called you a Talmud merchant. Personally I see little difference between "Talmud merchant" and "Bible basher". Evidently I am wrong, and the reprisals came immediately. My comment was sent to the Fire Pit and I was admonished as "beyond the pale" by the moderator. The moderator then did something I've not seen before or since. He split the thread and sent my part to the Fire Pit, but left your own on the main forum.<br><br>Since then I've been Fire-Pitted for "scapegoating Jews" because I cited an individual Jewish banker. When I later titled a thread "Jesuit Banker Goes Home" nothing happened. I noticed other occasions when people could say things about the Jesuits that were beyond the pale for Jews. I wondered if it was just me, so I juxtaposed two quotes and was immediately Fire-Pitted again. Both original quotes had been left on the main forum, with no reprisals.<br><br>It's not my forum. So I can lump it or leave it.<br>Sort of like the Palestinians in Palestine.<br><br>So no, I don't like the license you have been given. But I'm going to stay and fight it, not go off in a snit. <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: It's ALL In The Rigging

Postby Dreams End » Mon Feb 06, 2006 11:51 am

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Personally I see little difference between "Talmud merchant" and "Bible basher".<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>You might try dictionary.com. <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

"Jewish banker" vs "Jesuit banker"

Postby Rigorous Intuition » Mon Feb 06, 2006 1:40 pm

Where are the accents on those two terms? Maybe it's just me, but the bloody use to which Nazis and their sympathizers put "Jewish banker" means it always reads to me like "<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Jewish</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> banker." When I see "Jesuit banker," I see "Jesuit <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>banker</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->." Does that make any sense?<br><br>I would also say there is a considerable distinction between using race and institutitions, including superficially religious institutions, as identifiers. The latter may be informative. The former tells me more about the author's agenda and prejudice. <p></p><i></i>
Rigorous Intuition
 
Posts: 1744
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:36 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: DANG YOU, JEFFREY!!!

Postby antiaristo » Mon Feb 06, 2006 4:04 pm

Dreams End,<br>You asked what had pissed me off. The casual reader would assume you were an innocent. When I answered you you chose to emphasise something else. Why?<br><br>Talmud merchant was my own personal construction. I don't know about others but I will do as you suggest and look it up for my own education.<br><br>Jeff,<br>Sorry, doesn't wash.<br>You know how many times I have refered to Hollick in all sorts of ways. I had no idea he was Jewish until scollon posted that he was. If my agenda was as you suggest I'd have led on the Jew aspect, not included it as an afterthought. I'd have KNOWN, not have needed to be told.<br><br>And let's just remember who did what to whom, who is the predator and who is the victim. The victims are two little girls aged five and three.<br><br>Added on edit<br><br>While we are dealing with cultural sensitivity, what about "beyond the Pale". You do know the origin of that expression, I take it? The Pale was the area around Dublin under tight control of the British. If you were beyond the Pale you were in the land of the lawless Irish. The land where the genocide struck in 1845 - 1849. The land of the Irish Holocaust. The land of my forebears. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=antiaristo>antiaristo</A> at: 2/6/06 1:10 pm<br></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: DANG YOU, JEFFREY!!!

Postby antiaristo » Mon Feb 06, 2006 4:19 pm

Talmud merchant?<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>No entry found for Talmud merchant.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>From Dictionary.com<br><br>Dreams End,<br>What sort of game do you think you are playing? <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: DANG YOU, JEFFREY!!!

Postby Rigorous Intuition » Mon Feb 06, 2006 4:28 pm

So how about we make a deal, antiaristo? I won't use "beyond the pale" again and you drop "<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Jewish</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> bankers"? <p></p><i></i>
Rigorous Intuition
 
Posts: 1744
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:36 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: DANG YOU, JEFFREY!!!

Postby antiaristo » Mon Feb 06, 2006 5:04 pm

Very smug of you, Jeff <p></p><i></i>
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: DANG YOU, JEFFREY!!!

Postby Dreams End » Mon Feb 06, 2006 11:35 pm

anti, I was suggesting you look up the difference between "basher" and "merchant". <br><br> <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

Next

Return to FIRE PIT

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests