"Are You Afraid Of The Truth"........

by **nomo** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 4:50 pm

I'll butt in with one observation: If the "Protocols" can be applied to Jews as well as Masons or Illuminati or what have you, then what value could they possibly have? No conspiracy theory is valid if it doesn't at least point at a possible motive and possible perpetrators. Without that, it's nothing more than a generic observation -- and if that's all you wanted to put out, why not look for a less questionable source? It's not rigorous. It's sloppy, and sloppy doesn't belong here. -- When all else fails... panic.

by **proldic** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 4:57 pm

Politically, I'd take 5 "red state" housewives over 10 "blue state" academics anyday of the week.

by **zundel** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:16 pm

To Nomo If one is interested in Economics And Politics, I believe a few hours to read them is time well spent. I would be most interested in your views then as a result. I somehow think you would not repeat the post you have recently made. Zundel

by **Qutb** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 6:16 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Here it is, one last single time, as basic and as primitive as i can make it for you. Take the nationalility, ethnicity out, look at the content in regards to world events etc, is that even too basic a line of intellect for you two clowns to follow?<hr></blockquote> Michael, are you a fucking idiot, man? What planet do you live on? Have you spent your entire life surfing conspiracy sites on the internet? If you knew anything at all about the world, you would understand what purpose this forgery was meant to serve. And you would know how it has been used. The Protocols was used by the Russian Czar to rally public support around him, the state, and the flag in the face of this fake external and internal enemy (sounds familiar?). It was used by Hitler, Goebbels et al. to "condition" the German people to accept persecution on Jews. The better-educated Germans had less of an excuse than the Russian peasants for believing it was real, but that's a testimony to the efficacy of state propaganda. And today, it's still a favorite of white power groups, neo-Nazis, and radical Islamists, who for the most part don't even believe it's real, but, like toscaveritas, find, ahem, great literary value in it. Why is it still popular? Because it purports to show that one specific ethnic group - the Jews - are behind everything that's wrong with the world. Don't give me that disengenous bullshit about "taking the ethnicity out and look at the contents in regards to world events". The Protocols was written as a propaganda tool to blame the Jews. For everything. Pray tell, what is it they can tell us about "world events"? Even if you don't know anything about the history of the 20th century, and the role the Protocols played in events like the Holocaust (yes, it did happen), just a cursory reading of it would make it obvious that a) it's not the real minutes of a real meeting, and b) it's written for the sole purpose of creating a convenient scapegoat for common people's hardships, for "subversive" political movements like liberalism and socialism, and of creating support for the aristocratic-monarchic rulers of late 19th century Europe. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>take the jewish angle out of the content and replace it with what you wish<hr></blockquote> Any convenient scapegoat will do, in other words. Qutb means "axis," "pole," "the center," which contains the periphery or is present in it. The qutb is a spiritual being, or function, which can reside in a human being or several human beings or a moment. It is the elusive mystery of how the divine gets delegated into the manifest world and obviously cannot be defined.

by **antiaristo** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 7:42 pm

I would like to express my own views on this matter. I view the Protocols as a TOOL. I view Masonry as a TOOL. It ALL depends on WHO is at the top, pulling the strings. If that changes, then everything changes. They are both TOOLS OF CONTROL. I only read a bit of the Protocols. I found it extremely distasteful, but I read enough to get the idea. That said, it seems logical to me that the imperitive is to identify exactly WHO is at the top, pulling the strings. It's no good talking about the elite, or ANY group, because they have no legal identity, no legal personality. So we have to name names. You all know who I identify as the chief villain, because I talk about it all the time. But that is only because of the imperitive I cited above. I'm not trying to win a popularity contest here. I'm trying to educate as many lurkers as possible to my line of thought. I would be only too happy to abandon that line of thought, if only somebody could show me the flaw in my reasoning. But I don't get that. What I get is silence, not inquisition. What I get is dishonest smears, not examination. What I get is called names, and not confronted with facts. Is THAT rigorous?

by **slimmouse** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 8:49 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>What I get is silence, not inquisition. What I get is dishonest smears, not examination. What I get is called names, and not confronted with facts. Is THAT rigorous?<hr></blockquote> Dont be surprised Anti. Ive sat on a board for long enough, to know exactly how those who sit here smearing the fuck out of us all, and censoring conversation operate. You only need to look at this thread to understand that. How many reasonable questions have I asked ,which these smartarsed spineless wonders havent had the decency to answer ? You shouldnt expect any different here either to be honest. I think that if someone asks you a reasonable question such as "why do you comedians keep misquoting me both out of context, or putting words into my mouth, or otherwise insulting me based upon such "intelligent" manipulation of my words ?" I might deserve a reply. So lets start there shall we ? So thats a question Id like to ask to YOU QUTB, and you DREAMS END. No doubt you'll be asking for a list of examples next, cos youve conveniently forgot ? Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=slimmouse@rigorousintuition>slimmouse</A> at: 10/18/05 7:00 pm

by **Inanna** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:04 pm

Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Inanna, some of the most frequent posters on this board argue that the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is the real minutes of a real meeting, and not a forgery. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have no idea what you are talking about, as I don't even know what the protocols are. I really meant it when I said I know very little about this stuff and usually try to steer clear of it. The only rights I reserve are those which allow me to criticize any country based on policy.

by **slimmouse** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:10 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I have no idea what you are talking about, as I don't even know what the protocols are. I really meant it when I said I know very little about this stuff and usually try to steer clear of it. The only rights I reserve are those which allow me to criticize any country based on policy.<hr></blockquote> Inanna ,might I apologise for any confusion. This is a complete quote of a sentence from a post from QUTB earlier. I was hoping that the title of the post would suffice there. I followed his quote with a question. It is just one of the questions he has yet to find the decency to answer to. I remember asking at least one question at least more than once on the "controlled demolition" thread, and never got the decency of a reply. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=slimmouse@rigorousintuition>slimmouse</A> at: 10/18/05 7:12 pm

by **Inanna** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:11 pm

I read the post wrong. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/ohwell.gif ALT=":\">

by **Sweejak** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:34 pm

I guess my post disappeared on the way from the cafeteria to the Group W bench. Here is is again, quickly. Aristo, a tool, indeed, and like most tools they can be used the wrong way, like the Nazi's used them. Everyone agreed on that? With this tool anyone who uses it is bad news. But, we can see how the tool is made. No? sociologyesoscience.com/ "<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Michael Hagemeister, a German expert on the Protocols, has stressed that Heiden's undocumented assertion that someone gave Rosenberg a copy of the Protocols in Moscow and that he then brought them to Germany belongs in the "realm of legend."<hr></blockquote> <blockquote>Quote:<hr>"He has been in the archives of the former USSR and has made heroic efforts to correct the very tangled and error-ridden record concerning Nilus, Nilus' own writing, and the Protocols (which he certainly did not write). He is working on a full-length study of Nilus and the Protocols. If you can wait until the spring of 2005"<hr></blockquote> Seems he is coming out with a book sometime in 2005. I have not found it, only referneces to a lecture. Even the Nazi's had a hard time with the origins of the protocols. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>"When Rosenberg examined the Protocols in his 1923 book. Die Protokolle der Weisen von Zion und diejudische Weltpolitik- (The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Amish World-Politics), he remained more skeptical than Eckart. He claimed that the famous Zionist author Asher Ginsburg could very well have written the Protocols, but no “conclusive" proof of this existed, so the question of the authorship of the Protocols remained "open." He further noted that there was no "juridicially conclusive proof' for the Protocols either as absolutely genuine or as a forgery. In a manner similar to Hausen, Rosenberg noted that in any case. documents from -ancient times as well as from the most recent past" existed that demonstrated -precisely the same sense" as the Protocols, from "the Talmud to the Frankfurter Zeitung (Frankfurt Times) and the Rote Fahne (The Red Flag)." He further asserted that the Protocols stated that which the "Jewish leaders of Bolshevism themselves openly describe as their plan." While he harbored doubts of the Protocols authenticity, Rosenberg internalized what he saw as a profound point of the Protocols, namely -first subversion, then dictatorship."':' The first concrete evidence of Hitler's internalization of information from the Protocols comes in his notes for an August 1921 speech."<hr></blockquote> I dont know, sounds a little like the yellow cake of the era? And this regarding Joly: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>It will be noticed that Joly in his preface never claimed to have originated the scheme described in his book; on the contrary he distinctly states that it "personifies in particular a political system which has not varied for a single day in its application since the disastrous and alas! too far-off date of its enthronement." <hr></blockquote> Now I don't have Joly's book, does he in fact say that? Far off date? What is he referring to? Sumerians, Egyptians? Nephilim?

by **Qutb** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 5:56 am

Thurnandtaxis, thanks for the link to Marc Levin's blog. I'm looking forward to the documentary, it should be interesting. That there are still people who believe in this hoax is a mind-boggling testimony to human gullibility. I guess it doesn't help that feel-good fascists such as David Icke "argue" that they're real (while "doubting" the holocaust). It's chilling in fact. The "conspiracy" subculture is infested with a lot of these old anti-Semitic ideas which are usually only found in extreme right-wing circles and among radical Islamists. I'm just glad the people on this forum who want to debate the "working practicalities" of the Protocols have gotten their own forum in which to do so. Maybe you folks can debate all the "physical evidence" which proves the Holocaust never happened, while you're at it? <img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f1/KKK_holocaust_a_zionist_hoax.jpg" style="border:0;"/> Qutb means "axis," "pole," "the center," which contains the periphery or is present in it. The qutb is a spiritual being, or function, which can reside in a human being or several human beings or a moment. It is the elusive mystery of how the divine gets delegated into the manifest world and obviously cannot be defined.

by **antiaristo** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 6:48 am

Qutb. Pray explain to me. Why is it that you are so free and easy with the smears, but you never answer difficult questions? Do you hold yourself to different standards? Is the objective to "win" at all costs? I see you've started smearing others in the main forum again. You see, I'm the only Englishman on this site. You perhaps mean British? Is that really necessary? Even for one with so much spirituality, he boasts about it in EVERY post? Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=antiaristo>antiaristo</A> at: 10/19/05 4:56 am

by **slimmouse** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:54 am

QUTB. Thanks for youre reply. You are exactly what I thought you were. Might I suggest you take your bullshit elsewhere ? Im gutted that you ever came back now. Oh and, yes the conspiracies centre. Its where a dedicated team tell people the truth about 9/11. Its very theraputic telling the truth. You ought to try it some time, instead of this pseudo intellectual timewasting act you engage us all in. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=slimmouse@rigorousintuition>slimmouse</A> at: 10/19/05 6:14 am

"Are You Afraid Of The Truth"........

Protocols

re: ALP

Protocols

Re: when the anti slur fails

My Position

Re: My Position

Sorry slimmouse

Re: Sorry slimmouse

Oops, disregard my above note

Re: My Position

Re: Mark Levine film

Re: Mark Levine film

Re: Mark Levine film

Who is online