Anti-Imperialism & Anti-Humanist Rhetoric of Gilad Atzmon

[JackRiddler]

PS - Just to be fair to this thread.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=34135

Since Atzmon's defenders never deal with it.

[slimmouse]

A third-grader bully's understanding of metaphor and generosity with respect to shorthand also come as no surprise.

Indeed. If the cap fits et cetera

But we can still beat up slimmouse, right? Cos that's just too much the bilge.

[barracuda]

Stop.

[JackRiddler]

Stop.

False equivalence. Shoot him. (I'm doing "the voice" from Dune.)

[slimmouse]

When I read Atzmon, which by all the "best" standards, such as "Proffesor" Dershowitz is "anti humanist", I hear a voice of serious emotion and genuine compassion for humanity in general. So to suggest that this is a guy who is "anti humanist" to me stinks.

Which is probably why the smear campaign is louder than most against such voices. Find the worst quotes you can and ignore the rest of what hes saying is a tried and tested trick by such campaigns.

And if people around here dont see that, then this might well be rigorous but it aint fukin intuitive by any standards.

[Simulist]

No, it's not false equivalence, Jack.

The exchange was an embarassment. Or should be.

[JackRiddler]

When I read Atzmon, which by all the "best" standards, such as "Proffesor" Dershowitz is "anti humanist", I hear a voice of serious emotion and genuine compassion for humanity in general. So to suggest that this is a guy who is "anti humanist" to me stinks.

Which is probably why the smear campaign is louder than most against such voices.

No one here is defending your red herring Dershowitz, or buying into your false double bind that to reject one is to defend the other.

When you read Atzmon, as you go through the "serious emotion and genuine compassion for humanity in general," what do you do when you get to the parts about how the Jew Christ killers, who are far worse than "ordinary" British and French colonialists, are responsible for what the Europeans did to them in the 1930s? Do you ignore these outbursts of Atzmon's, excuse them, or approve of them? Looks like you approve them when you read them, but for your purposes on this board, it's more convenient to ignore them. For example, you're not going to address Atzmon's actual words in whatever reply you now make to this post. Atzmon at least has the balls to repeat his own odious words and defend them (his self-defense was posted a few pages ago).

.

[JackRiddler]

Find the worst quotes you can and ignore the rest of what hes saying is a tried and tested trick by such campaigns.

I don't get it your honor, 29 days a month I'm a hard-working legitimate businessman, and just because on that one day I set fire to one of my own buildings for the insurance money, they want to call me an arsonist!

[brainpanhandler]

Let us assume then that even the common folk at that time were consciously aware of a future whereby the mass media was to be controlled by entities who would promote the destruction of reality as they lived it until then, and the fact that a century plus on, we now know that indeed they were right to be anxious, for it has actually been realized.

If one considers that the coincidence of the MO/strategy as laid out in the Protocols in the late 19th century matching the actual strategies of real actors from that point in time to now as not being due to prescience, then surely the alternative explanation is that there really did and does exist perps/cabal who consciously implemented the now historical mass media acquisition and control, and subsequently began the corruption process of the cultural mindset of the people.

Do you follow? If there has been no cabal behind these developments referred to (not the Protocols themselves), then it must be concluded that the actual actors who today own and control the prime mass media assets of the world are in that position by some natural evolutionary process, and in which case the Protocols 'predicting' this development can be reasonably considered an example of prescience. On the other hand, if as you say, even the common folk knew this was coming, and that the Protocols were exploiting the anxiety about such development, then the actual actors who today own and control the prime mass media assets of the world are in that position, not be some uncanny coincidence, but because they knew also what was in the pipeline for humanity's future, and acted as agents of the first order to make it happen.

I don't expect an honest forthright answer, but I'll ask anyway. Who do you believe are the above bolded "entities", "actors" and "perps"? So many generic names for them.

[AlicetheKurious]

Stop.

barracuda, that nearly gave me a heart attack. I've been working my butt off on a post, and I'm almost done. Please, nobody lock this thread until I've posted. Even if nobody gets it, or even reads it, I do want to have it up. Please.

[barracuda]

Okay.

[slimmouse]

When you read Atzmon, as you go through the "serious emotion and genuine compassion for humanity in general," what do you do when you get to the parts about how the Jew Christ killers, who are far worse than "ordinary" British and French colonialists, are responsible for what the Europeans did to them in the 1930s? Do you ignore these outbursts of Atzmon's, excuse them, or approve of them? Looks like you approve them when you read them, but for your purposes on this board, it's more convenient to ignore them. For example, you're not going to address Atzmon's actual words in whatever reply you now make to this post. Atzmon at least has the balls to repeat his own odious words and defend them (his self-defense was posted a few pages ago).

.

What I do in this instance, if you want the truth and it is worthy of repeating, (since youve clearly missed a lot of where Im coming from) is see this as yet another construct which Atzmon has fallen for. I do believe Ive said in this thread "God" save us all from organised religion. Theres a couple of sentences within that post which contain my beliefs on the whole subject. Im also on the record as clearly explaining why I think Atzmon has written some of the stuff , and that his beliefs are (IMO) mistaken -so dont try that with me mister Riddler.

Over the years, Ive posted multiple times about what I consider to be the "myth" of Jesus as a historical figure. Well researched stuff by many people, all too numerous to list just now. Id like to talk to Atzmon about that. But hey we cant all be experts about everything can we ? Especially those of us with limited IQs who need banning from this place for whatever reason.

Ive given my sincere opinions about the whole Atzmon stuff, of which I knew little to zero prior to reading here. I did know that Mr Dershowitz was on his case, and Ive also said what I think about that and him.

Meanwhile Jack, you continue attacking my "protocolesque" and "lizard stuff" opinions. As above so below.

[Simulist]

Here's my problem with Atzmon: his mouth.

If his heart really is in the right place (as I have tried to suppose), then his mouth betrays that heart by rhetoric that is, frankly, anti-Jewish.

I have no use for that; nor should anyone.

[slimmouse]

Here's my problem with Atzmon: his mouth.

If his heart really is in the right place (as I have tried to suppose), then his mouth betrays that heart by rhetoric that is, frankly, anti-Jewish.

I have no use for that; nor should anyone.

Absolutely simulist. Hes fallen for the fukin organised religion con, like just about the rest of the world.

Cui Bono ? Imagine my surprise !!

Take that out of the equation, and what have you got ? Youve got a guy who to me doesnt like the idea of anyone considering themselves superior to anyone else - "Jew", "Christian","Muslim" or anyone else. And you can rest assured that each of these "holy" bullshit texts contain references to the superiority of the faith of the particular duped sect in question.

Hes pretty damned angry about it by the sounds of it too just like anyone in their right mind would be.

Unfortunately we live in a world where being in your right mind is out of the question for most of us.

[compared2what?]

I think you should post that a few more times, it's so amazing. You seriously overestimate the time your usually incoherent Protocols-plus-lizards redux posts merit in the way of refutation. I'd save everyone the time by banning obvious trolls and others who lower board IQ on a hair-trigger, but that's actually a reason why I refused the moderator's cap. Live and let die.

Well we can't all have super IQs. Those guys usually end up working for the usual suspects anyways. They need that kind of intelligence ( compassion factor irrelevant, in fact better off zero) to defend the indefensible by all neccesary means. So, whats your excuse ?

Show me where what I've written lacks compassion. Or, alternatively, show me where what you've written exhibits any.

Thanks.