Who here buys into the Illuminati thing?

Oh, of course this isn't going to be perfectly comparable. But at the underlining core, there are similarities; and within this, you can see patterns. They both took down a perceived threat... even if we see threats as something different, today.

If it wasn't about the government, then it's about another establishment: religion.

Doesn't really matter if we understand how matters like this works, now.

Btw, that article goes so much into the importance of reason and atheism, that it forgets to give proof; I found it a bit distracting. I didn't really need a lecture on reason. I already understand that something in the natural world would leave behind trails. But for whatever reason, we may be missing the trail of information - Looking everywhere then where we are supposed to.

I recommend reading, "The End of America" by Naomi Wolf.


If there is any evidence, then we haven't really found it. I have seen those Alex Jones video. They say a lot, but never provide proof. Not many really provide proof. The sad thing about all of this; is perhaps the only time you can figure anything out, or realize what is going to happen, it's too late to do anything about it. The only people that knows whats going on, are the ones that are directly involved. Anyone with strong atheistic philosphical ideals would look at that as an excuse, and I can accept that, and I realize this. But I believe in intuition, and I see intuition as another form of intelligence that can be just as useful as reason.

We need to feel out, for now, because if these people exist, then they are great at playing hide and seek.

(Yes, I realize that I can be perceived as being delusional. But that usually comes from a lack of conceptual thinking skills, more than anything else).

I don't mean for anything to come out as rude; That is just how I talk.

 

Def

Oh I’m all for being wary and I’ve warned about many of the things she does on these very forums even before I’d read her arguments I believe before she even published The end of America.

Fascist America, in 10 easy steps -
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00.html

But I believe I’m right in saying that Naomi is a left winger (some have described her a socialist) and many of the most vocal conspiracy theorist that come to this and many other forums claim that all left wing thought is moulded (and was even invented by) ‘the conspiracy’. They have actually said that anyone holding or supporting left wing ideas is really working for the conspiracy.

As I say many seem to have a bias that always seems to favour the right.

 

Yah he probably saw the owl there.....

 

Many times people get to looking at a thing so up close that they end up actually looking in the wrong direction altogether.

I think it is totally obvious that there are others in control besides those who are PRESENTED as being in control. Just because it is not talked about in mainstream circles as being a reality does not make it not a reality. Money talks. And money controls. That's a fact. And there ARE ways of creating situations by using mind games, mass hysteria, etc. I've actually seen FIRST HAND on a "small" scale of a few hundred, some pretty evil things happen due to certain people doing and saying certain things at certain times and actually CREATING mass hysteria AND hallucinations! Now that I see how it can work on a small scale, I see it happening on a much larger scale all the time. Perhaps many people don't buy into that simply because they can't see it, they are looking too closely in the wrong direction. I find it obvious.

 

I think that's very true, for a lot of people. Well said. There's a few more things mixed in that really exacerbate the concept for them, most of them revolving around each other:

Media control: The biggest factor being that the government has steered their thinking very pointedly since the invention of the newspaper.

Denial: People simply cannot admit to themselves that such a thing is possible, because their government "would never do that."

Grandiose: The idea that a relatively small group of people can wield that much power is impossible for some people to grasp, since "America is so big."

Patriotism: Even though it is misguided/uninformed, loyalty TO the United States is what stops a lot of people from thinking their government could be so corrupt, instead thinking that they need to protect their government and their country from *insert evil entity here*

 

K7

Media control: The biggest factor being that the government has steered their thinking very pointedly since the invention of the newspaper.

Or rich media proprietors, corperations and their wealthy shareholders have steered government thinking or backed candidates for office that most suit their own interests (rather than the country’s or the peoples)

Denial: People simply cannot admit to themselves that such a thing is possible, because their government "would never do that."

I agree with this many of the Americans I’ve meet here seem to know little about the US political or social history, and that is verifiable and documented occurrences not will’ o’ the wisps of the conspiracy theorists.

Grandiose: The idea that a relatively small group of people can wield that much power is impossible for some people to grasp, since "America is so big."

Left wingers have for years been documenting the relatively small group of people that have disproportionate power in the world due to their wealth (and therefore influence). Just go and check wealth distribution for somewhere like the US.

Patriotism: Even though it is misguided/uninformed, loyalty TO the United States is what stops a lot of people from thinking their government could be so corrupt, instead thinking that they need to protect their government and their country from *insert evil entity here*

OK here is something I wrote back in August 2004 -

“One thing I have learnt is that there seems to be a certain desire to simplify things to ‘yes or no’, good or bad, with us or against us in American thought. This I believe has led to a viewpoint amongst many Americans that the US ultimately cannot be criticised.

Think about it if someone only has two choices ‘good’ or ‘bad’ then when such people think of the US it is most likely they will think ‘good’. Incidentally this is why I think so many on the right use the ‘love it or leave it’ argument. If a person criticises America they must hate it this being either/or and so cannot be ‘truly’ American so they should leave. If I demonstrated against a British government, institution or establishment or if I criticised the brutal imperialism of Britain’s past (and present) those opposed to my view don’t see this as an attack on ‘Britishness’, but as an attack on government policies.

This belief in American ‘goodness’ means that even when a US policy does things that look ‘wrong’ it can only mean that it did it for a higher purpose. From the treatment of the native Americans to the Iraqi Occupation, there is a belief in some quarters of the American public that see such actions as ultimately leading to good since otherwise the US wouldn’t have done them. It isn’t logical but belief systems usually aren’t, but it is comforting which belief systems usually are.

The US government and elite even gives the American people ‘good intentions’ to believe in. They give them ‘good’ goals and the slogans to go with them. These aims also portray the American people as the guardians of the light and the champion of civilisation. So there was the destruction of the ‘evil empire’ and the scourge of ‘communism’, as one American I talked to commented a lot of ‘bad shit’ might have happened in the Cold War but the objective was still righteous. Then there was the ‘War on Drugs’ which kept the torturers and right wing paramilitaries trained in the cold war in a job. Now there is the ‘War on Terror’ and as another American right winger argued Iraq might not have had anything to do with 9/11 but it was still part of the scheme to end Islamic terrorism.

To me the US is just another country like any other in history it and its people are not chosen by god and it has no ‘manifest destiny’. To me policies and decisions are to be looked at on their merits and those merits can be argued over.

(full text of post 34 here - http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19321&page=4&pp=10)


**

Thing is you don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist to be critical of a society or political system.

But some conspiracy theorists attack left wing ideas and criticisms - based solely on dubious conspiracy theory rather than rational argument and often show a bias toward right wing thought or promote ideas that would be advantageous to the wealthy elites.

For example there is a right wing libertarian branch of conspiracy theory that promotes the idea of ‘small’ government which would only increase the power of the rich elites.


**

 

Again, Balbus, you are showing your immense conditioning by making everything out to be a left wing versus right wing battle. One side could not exist without the other, and what better way to control the population than by dividing the public up into opposing teams, so they are arguing amongst themselves instead of uniting against their common enemy. So who do you really think this left vs. right nonsense really benefits? Now I believe a person can have certain beliefs without having to be grouped or pigeonholed as you like to do. I can point out the flaws in the arguments you present, but that doesn't mean I adhere to any artificial labels or ideology, simply because it is in opposition to what you believe.

One thing you like to keep repeating, yet are never able to explain, is how less government helps what you call the "wealthy elites." What we have today is a system administered through a form of scientific socialism, which is fascistic at the top. As Mussolini once said, fascism would be better referred to as corporatism, since it represents the merger of the corporations and state. This is what we have today. The difference between what we have today and what we saw under the communist and fascist (which are one and the same) regimes of the 20th century, is that back then the state took over the corporations. Today, the corporations have taken over the state. The outcome, however, is still exactly the same, and that outcome always results in the enslavement of the people through a totalitarian regime. So if we have a government that is bought and paid for by the multinational corporations, and is used as a vehicle of control by these very same multinational corporations, then how is more big-government socialism -- which is exactly what the elites want because it creates a system where the people can be better controlled and managed -- going to do anything but further the current trends?

You see, you have been duped into believing the government is your protector. You are also blind to the fact that these "wealthy elites" you speak of don't care about money. The super-elite, which is the international bankers, do not care about money because they have all the money they will ever need. They are the ones who print the money out of nothing, then determine its value. So what makes you think they care about money, when they have all the money they will ever need and more? These people are after control, and if you understand the money system, which you clearly do not, then you would understand that at the top, money is just another form of control. You focus on the corporations being the pinnacle of evil, while failing to see the whole system which the corporations are merely a part of.

 

If anyone wants to have an understanding of how the scam called politics really works, they need to check out my video about Carroll Quigley:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRkCvubUGCM

Carroll Quigley was a professor at Georgetown University. He was Bill Clinton's mentor at Georgetown, and selected Clinton for the Rhodes Scholarship in 1968. He was also the official historian for the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). In his books, Tragedy & Hope (1966) and The Anglo-American Establishment (1980), Quigley sheds light on to the inner-workings of the establishment he was very much a part of and it's agenda, which he was NOT against.

Here are some revealing passages from Tragedy & Hope:

On the Anglo-American Establishment:

"There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies ... but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known."

On the money system:

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

On the left/right scam:

"The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can throw the rascals out at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies."

 

Pressed_Rat has said what I cannot, very well I might add. I have the problem of being an extreme minimalist, even in my rationale, so trying to paint out in detail what I've already processed in my head can be hard for me.

In other words, I'm very pointed. My dad always told me, "In more words there is less truth." I dunno if that's true or not but it always stuck with me.

If I may throw out some references to what Pressed_Rat is talking about, the money first, I don't know if you're aware that America is, for all intents and purposes already OWNED by The Federal Reserve Bank. We borrow money that THEY print (technically illegal) and lend to us at interest. Until that money is paid off (which is in the trillions) America's "pink slip" is theirs.

The people in charge of this, NOT the politicians you see, don't care about money then because it's just as easily coupons clipped from a newspaper for them, actually, it's probably easier. It is then, like Pressed_Rat says, just a tool to accomplish their true objective, which readers digest means to obtain as much control as possible.

How do you do any of this without getting attention? There's a very long list, I'm too tired, suffice to say it's all about distraction, misdirection, lies lies lies lies lies lies lies lies lies and of course denial and media control.

 

Hi Rat, I thought you were refusing to talk to me because you don’t like my line of questioning?

Again, Balbus, you are showing your immense conditioning by making everything out to be a left wing versus right wing battle. One side could not exist without the other, and what better way to control the population than by dividing the public up into opposing teams, so they are arguing amongst themselves instead of uniting against their common enemy.

So your solution is what, so far all you have ever suggested is that people do nothing so that the elite can gain more power and influence unopposed.

So who do you really think this left vs. right nonsense really benefits? Now I believe a person can have certain beliefs without having to be grouped or pigeonholed as you like to do. I can point out the flaws in the arguments you present, but that doesn't mean I adhere to any artificial labels or ideology, simply because it is in opposition to what you believe.

But why have you continually attacked left wing ideas as the work of the conspiracy while often praising right wing libertarian ideas, while all the time claiming you were neither of the right or left. Isn’t that a little dishonest?

One thing you like to keep repeating, yet are never able to explain, is how less government helps what you call the "wealthy elites."

Oh yes the libertarian idea of ‘less’ government, I have discussed this many times, sometimes with you

Try -
Bringing in libertarianism
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151086

And of course –
The Rat "I am willing to debate you" thread.
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=112948


What we have today is a system administered through a form of scientific socialism, which is fascistic at the top. As Mussolini once said, fascism would be better referred to as corporatism, since it represents the merger of the corporations and state. This is what we have today. The difference between what we have today and what we saw under the communist and fascist (which are one and the same) regimes of the 20th century, is that back then the state took over the corporations. Today, the corporations have taken over the state. The outcome, however, is still exactly the same, and that outcome always results in the enslavement of the people through a totalitarian regime. So if we have a government that is bought and paid for by the multinational corporations, and is used as a vehicle of control by these very same multinational corporations, then how is more big-government socialism -- which is exactly what the elites want because it creates a system where the people can be better controlled and managed -- going to do anything but further the current trends?

I agree that wealth has too much influence in some forms of government (especially under the present US system) but your solution seems to be to just stand back and let the wealthy take over and try and get others to do the same, thereby aiding the elite.

You see, you have been duped into believing the government is your protector. You are also blind to the fact that these "wealthy elites" you speak of don't care about money. The super-elite, which is the international bankers, do not care about money because they have all the money they will ever need. They are the ones who print the money out of nothing, then determine its value. So what makes you think they care about money, when they have all the money they will ever need and more? These people are after control, and if you understand the money system, which you clearly do not, then you would understand that at the top, money is just another form of control. You focus on the corporations being the pinnacle of evil, while failing to see the whole system which the corporations are merely a part of.

And again your solution is to just stand back and let the wealthy take over and try and get others to do the same, thereby aiding the elite.

That’s my problem, you talk very LOUDLY about your hatred of the elite but when you actually look at what you are suggesting everything seem to favour the elite.

I’ll ask you again the question you never seem to get around to answering – why is that?


**

 

K7

I have the problem of being an extreme minimalist, even in my rationale, so trying to paint out in detail what I've already processed in my head can be hard for me.

This sounds like if you thing something true it must be true and it doesn’t matter what anyone else says they must be wrong because you are right, because you’re right?

In other words a closed mind?

In other words, I'm very pointed. My dad always told me, "In more words there is less truth." I dunno if that's true or not but it always stuck with me.

You don’t know if it’s true or not and you don’t care if it is or isn’t, its what you’re going to stick with?

You like things simple, black and white, right or wrong, with me or against me – that kind of thing?

As to dear old rat.

He’s one of those that would have you chasing shadows and gazing into your own naval, so that you leave the rich elites alone to gain more power and influence.

As to this nonsense be pushes about not being left or right it’s a sham, a façade from which he pushes many an anti-leftist assault. This is the man that is on record as saying he thinks the Bush admin is too left wing and has for most of his time on the forums (we’ve been crossing swords for a few years now) been pushing a right wing libertarian message, oh and he believes that ‘the conspiracy’ is headed by Satan worshipers.

And what is his latest’s wheeze?

Well that we should just leave the cities and kinda, you know, like live off the land, become like subsistence farmers, like medieval peasants. And you know kinda use wood for fuel and barter stuff to get some type of goods and services, or whatever. And you know like kinda have a tribal system, without government or corporations and you know whatnot.

So in the meantime what should people do?

Well kind of nothing, that is talk about ‘the conspiracy’ and try and get others to do nothing but talk about ‘the conspiracy’.

Don’t organise –there is no point
Don’t vote - there is no point
Don’t believe in democracy it is a sham
Don’t believe in ‘governments’ they do no good.

But above all, DON’T give your support to left wing groups that are trying to counter the establishment, because they are really just the illuminati or Satanists or some other such shit.

The thing is that there is an elite, an establishment, made up of the wealthy and therefore influential. It isn’t a conspiracy it is the self interest of themselves and their class that motivates them.

And what would make them more powerful?

Well if people are not organised and act as individuals then they are a lot less powerful and haven’t the clout to confront the interests of the rich.

And if instead of organising they talk endlessly about conspiracies and talk ineffectual gibberish about unrealistic ‘new systems’ then that serves the riches purpose as well since they can gain more power in the real world.

The fewer the people that vote the better, fewer people are easier to manipulate. And all the better if the people put off voting might have voted for parties with left wing ideas that oppose the interests of the rich.

And if people become disillusioned with democracy and government then other institutions take over control, such as the corporations and the market, which just consolidates the power of the rich.

Here are a few blasts from the past -

The Rat "I am willing to debate you" thread.
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=112948

Libertarian Presidential Tickets
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67124&page=3&pp=10

The conspiracy’ what’s the point?
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144901

Tribute to Immigration's Terry Anderson
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/sho...818#post1519818

The Controlled Left
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/sho...26&page=6&pp=10

Pushing conspiracy theory? Why? http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103731

Why do the national libertarians keep reminding me of the Nazis?
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=104835


**

 

That's so far off base it actually surprised me.

My point in saying I'm a minimalist was merely to point out that I have problems typing out really long explanations BECAUSE I am a minimalist. I have no idea where you got all that closed minded crap. And on that, just because I disagree with you does not mean I am closed minded.

And for the other, "Dad told me 'in more words is less truth,'" it's a theory for some different aspects of business, so yeah, I dunno that it's true 100% of the time, but it suits me (minimalist) so yeah, I stuck with it. And...?

For your bit about Pressed_Rat, I'll just say thanks, you reassured me. You were dead wrong about him in 2 parts, made glaringly apparant by the fact that he talks about both in THIS thread. (Few elites and vote/organize)

So I'm gonna start over, because this is what happens; we start a topic, then go back and forth until eventually we're talking about things 27 tiers below the main topic.

The Illuminati is Who: They exist.

What? They are the group who reinforce illegal tax laws, started fraudulent voting machines, shot down the electric car, faked stories in Vietnam, and are single handedly taking away our rights as Americans.

Why? Because people will always be corrupt and abuse their power, and people will always group together.

How? Mostly through time. People become apathetic and lazy because they have nothing to fear or worry about, further conditioned by programming from the media over many years.

Where? From behind the pawns they set up in the public eye, and from all over the world.

When? Right now. H.R. 1955, The Patriot Act, and a slew of other documents strip Americans of their rights in a very pointed fashion.

But you want real proof? Free Speech Zones, being asked to show your "papers" because you're sitting in a car reading a book, being told you can't put up candidate signs on your own home (tho other candidate supporters can) being arrested for reading The Constitution in a public park, being tazered for parking in a 24 public parking lot and asking why you're being asked what you're doing there....

 

"H.R. 1955, The Patriot Act"

I can't believe how anyone can support that bill...

Our current laws are sufficient enough to deal with any violent group.

It just amazes me.

 

The Patriot Act (1 & 2) is actually quite tame compared to some of the other legislation that has more recently been passed, but has garnered much less attention from the media. For instance, the Military Commissions Act of 2005 (H.R. 6166), which suspended habeus corpus and sets the precedent for US citizens to be deemed "enemy combatants" -- and thus treated as domestic terrorists subject to torture -- simply for having opinions contrary to those which are considered favorable towards the government. We also have the John Warner Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 5122) of 2006, which not only expands the president's authority to declare martial law, but allocates vast resources towards combating civil unrest and so-called "domestic terror."

 

Socialism is the biggest tool of the elite, as it is the easiest way to consolidate power into the hands of the state and its controllers. So naturally it would make sense that I seem to be against many things that are associated with the left, as the left is all about socialism, which is nothing more than a control mechanism that presents itself as being for the benefit of the people. Much of the so-called right has also been conditioned to accept big-government socialism under the false guise of "security," so I see very little difference between the two. Both of the major political parties are essentially socialistic in nature, and socialism is the tool by which we are moving in the direction of a global totalitarian state.

Most left wing groups -- most of which only APPEAR to be against what they claim they are (at least at the top) -- are part of a controlled opposition. All one needs to do is look at some of the big, elite foundations that are funding these groups. This doesn't mean that all left-wingers are part of some nefarious agenda, merely they are being used as dupes without their knowing. The same can just as easily be said about the fundamentalist right that embraces neoconservatism (which is a creation of former leftists and self-professed Trotskyites).

It's the left (with or without their knowing) that wants to give the government -- and the corporations the government is in bed with -- more power and control to rule over the people. Of course you need to sell it to the people in a way that appears to be in their favor, but as you may or may not know, things are very rarely as they seem. Socialism has nothing to do with helping people, but rather managing people.

Contrary to what you said, I am not against people organizing. However, first people need to know what they're organizing against. Most people are only against what they know, which is what whatever the media tells them. Most people do not understand the power structure they are living under, so how can they possibly make a change if they are focusing all their energy on expendable puppets who were put into the positions they're in so the public can direct all their frustrations at them? Meanwhile the REAL controllers continue to operate with impunity from behind the proverbial curtain. So that point I am trying to make is that they WANT you to aim all your frustration at people like Bush, because Bush is just the frontman for the public to believe in, for them to THINK is the one in charge. It makes no difference who is in power -- Democrat or Republican -- as they are all reading from the same script. You don't become president unless you have proven that you're loyal to the establishment you're put into office to serve. This is why, despite who is in office, nothing really changes, except maybe superficially at best.

There is so much empty rhetoric coming from the left about "change" and "democracy" -- vapid slogans which were downloaded into them by the corporate media, which they regurgitate without thinking -- but why do I only hear the left talking about change at the political level? How come the left, which claims to be all about change, never mentions the establishment which controls both parties, the media, and the economy from behind the veneer of left vs. right politics?

As far as voting, I have never told anyone not to vote. I have simply expressed my opinion on it, and the fact that I don't vote because I believe it's another sham designed for the dumbed-down public to believe in. As long as the public believes they can make a change by pulling down a lever for their puppet of choice every 2-4 years, the people will never resort to real change -- whether in the form of civil disobedience or otherwise. They will continue to play the game designed for them by the same establisment that continues to sell them further and further up the river.

I am a staunch individualist and I try to warn people against the trap of collectivism. This doesn't mean I am against people organizing, but they need to organize as individuals. Most people have been conditioned to follow "leaders," and this is one of the reasons we are in the position we're in today. People need to learn, not only to THINK for themselves, but ACT for themselves and take something called PERSONAL RESPONSIBLITY into account, which I know is something that many of those who identify themselves as "leftists" are strongly against.

 

K7

My point in saying I'm a minimalist was merely to point out that I have problems typing out really long explanations BECAUSE I am a minimalist. I have no idea where you got all that closed minded crap. And on that, just because I disagree with you does not mean I am closed minded.

A minimalist in thought someone that relies on the fewest and barest information to make a decision? Someone who put the minimal thought into what they say or do?

And for the other, "Dad told me 'in more words is less truth,'" it's a theory for some different aspects of business, so yeah, I dunno that it's true 100% of the time, but it suits me (minimalist) so yeah, I stuck with it. And...?

So you come to a decision on the smallest amount of information and then stick to that whatever other information might come along even if it contradicts it?

As to the Illuminati.

You think they exist, why do you think they exist, because you think they do and since in you minimalist brain what you think must be true, it therefore must be true.

Maybe if you stopped limiting your mind it might open up and you might just start wondering why so many of these vocal conspiracy theorists seem to be actually trying to aid the elite.

**

 

So strip away all that shrill rhetoric from Rat’s little rant and he makes it clear that what I’ve criticised him for is correct.

He claims he’s not against organising – he just thinks people shouldn’t organise in groups – they should just act as individuals (in other words they should organise).

I said – “if people are not organised and act as individuals then they are a lot less powerful and haven’t the clout to confront the interests of the rich”

To him voting is useless, a sham and he is not shy in try to convince others the same thing.

I said – “The fewer the people that vote the better, fewer people are easier to manipulate. And all the better if the people put off voting might have voted for parties with left wing ideas that oppose the interests of the rich”

He thinks democracy and government are a sham

I said – “And if people become disillusioned with democracy and government then other institutions take over control, such as the corporations and the market, which just consolidates the power of the rich”

But he is at his most vitriolic when it comes to left wing ideas he is very, very insistent that people shouldn’t have anything to do with them

As I said – “But above all, DON’T give your support to left wing groups that are trying to counter the establishment, because they are really just the illuminati or Satanists or some other such shit”

Read his post he doesn’t refute my criticisms of his stance or counter the charge that he seems to be a stooge for wealthy interests.

Why do you think that is?

And here are a few blasts from the past -

The Rat "I am willing to debate you" thread.
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=112948

Libertarian Presidential Tickets
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/sho...24&page=3&pp=10

The conspiracy’ what’s the point?
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144901

Tribute to Immigration's Terry Anderson
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/sho...818#post1519818

The Controlled Left
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/sho...26&page=6&pp=10

Pushing conspiracy theory? Why? http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103731

Why do the national libertarians keep reminding me of the Nazis?
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=104835

 

I havent read one thing you guys have written cuz its toooo long lol

 

Hey Balbus, I got something you can quote me on right here without messing it up.

FUCK YOU.

You're a fuckin moron. Either you're so stupid you misread EVERYTHING or you're so pathetic you have to put words in people's mouths in order to create arguments for yourself.

I'm not wasting my time defending your ineptitude.

 

Balbus intentionally misreads and misquotes whatever he wants, whenever he wants, in order to fit his own agenda. He always resorts to using the same lawyer tactics and circular arguments when he cannot defend his own flawed ideas with facts. That is just the way Balbus operates. It's his modus operandi. It's really a complete waste of time trying to get through to him. I don't know why I keep explaining myself to him when it's clear that there are some people who will only believe what they want to believe. Some people don't care about truth, but rather their own ego.