Tyranny: The greater evil behind the liberals...

Rat

I’ll cover the rest later but lets tackle this -

But do I lie or do you?

You claim to have never said anything about thinking the elite are Lucifer worshippers?

NEVER?

Here you are Rat -

Post 8 ‘The conspiracy’ what’s the point?’ thread
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144901

When I asked him in the thread

Post-Industrial Revolution Society
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=261860&page=10

if he had stopped believing this he replied

*

See how easy it is to prove you lie. Now if you want to prove me a liar do so or stop saying it, and that is a warning.

 

But you don't even know what Luciferian means. It simply means hidden knowledge. They use hidden knowledge against those who are in the dark (ie. the "profane" masses), which is also where the owl symbolism comes from, because owls can see in the dark. So yes, they are in fact Luciferian. The idea of Lucifer as an entity or being comes from the biblical interpretation. The elite worship themselves as gods. Lucifer only has symbolic meaning to them. It's the masses which interpret Lucifer as the devil, which is what you are doing. You're going by the biblical/Christian interpretation. Lucifer is represented by the morning star, the bringer of light, which is Venus. It just so happens that Jesus in the bible is represented the same way. This begins to make more sense once you realize that ALL religions have an occult/esoteric interpretation for the adepts, and a base/exoteric interpretation for the "unenlightened" masses.

I should also note that what you quoted from me is from 3 1/2 years ago and is dated 1-30-2006.

I don't have a problem with you stating that I said members of the elite are Luciferian. I have a problem with you plucking stuff from threads I wrote years ago and using it to put your own spin on it, deliberately misquoting and misrepresenting what I write in a desperate and utterly childish attempt to try and marginalize me and make me look foolish.

So let me point out where you lied. You said:

Where did I say "all left wing ideas" are "under the control of evil Lucifer worshipers"? See, that is YOU putting your own spin on things to fit your own personal agenda. Unlike you, I realize that BOTH sides are controlled and don't simply attack one side. When I speak out against something, I speak out against the system itself. I am not living in the idiotic left vs. right pea-brain world you're living in.

Sorry to take this thread so far off topic, but really it started with Balbus and his petty insults against me, which I am simply defending myself against.

 

Aren't fire departments and public libraries examples of successful collectivism? The interstate highway system was a collectivist effort.

Big words like "all" or "none" or "never" are seldom true in politics or any human field.

 

Rat

You’ve stated this before and my reply is the same - It is very difficult to know what your views are because you refuse to talk about them in an open and honest way or without resorting to conspiracy theory.

Sometimes you express right wing libertarian ideas at others you push some type of vague social Darwinist viewpoint, a return to the land where each individual would fight each other individual for survival.

But mainly it seems to be right wing libertarian ideas.

I’ve been trying to discuss your views openly honestly and rationally for some years but you refuse to do so.

Until then I can only go by what you post, and that is as I’ve said mainly supportive of right wing libertarianism.

*

Intriguing I’d love to know more, what is your vision, can it stand up to scrutiny?

Now if you were truly open and honest you’d discuss this, can you?

I mean in the thread Free market = plutocratic tyranny, you seemed to be calling for a true ‘free market’ you never mentioned another non-free market idea, and when I asked you to explain your thinking you refused.

 

Rat

This isn’t a lie it seems like a fair summery of your beliefs.

Look you admit you think many of your imagined ‘elite’ are Lucifer worshipers.

You’ve said many times that you believe they want to kill millions so you must think them evil.

You have hinted, implied or come right out and said that you believe many if not most left wing ideas are the invention of your imagined elite and that they are ultimately in control of all left wing movements.

Oh once and a while you say you’re against the right but that always seems to be the mainstream right that don’t accept you extreme take on right wing ideas.

But anyway your main focus has always been the left and most of the so-called ‘evidence’ you use comes from right wing sources.

I mean only a few days ago you tried to post in politics (the May Day thread) your view that the illuminati were behind and responsible for socialist thinking.

And you’ve started threads with titles like ‘The Controlled Left’ or ‘Socialism - A Con Game of the Economic Elite’ to push your ideas of a control and invented left.

 

Rat

It doesn’t matter if a quote comes from three years ago or three minutes ago, the question is of relevance.

The question was - did you still believe that many of the elite are Lucifer worshipers, and it seems clear that you views today are virtually the same if not exactly the same on this subject as they were two years ago.

In other words - the quotes were relevant.

And the claimed that I had lied by mentioning your stated views about Lucifer worship were wrong.

I didn’t lie, but you did.

 

*


To me this is about political dislikes (even hatreds) been based on irrational and biased ideas.

In this thread Ghost seem to base his hatred of the left on the flawed ideas of Ayn Rand and Rat’s ideas are based on even more irrational views (see above).

This is part of something I’ve noticed before here, the way that some people seem to view their political views in religious terms.

The emphasis been on faith rather than having ideas based in the rational, it is not about the judicious weighing up of differing ideas but fixed in a dogmatic believe that their ideas are right however bizarre or unsubstantiated they may be.

It’s like a creationist confronting evolution, in the end they cannot defend their views without falling back on their faith in a irrational superstition.

And that is exactly what those that base their politics on faith do also, they don’t seem able to defend their ideas without falling back on the dogmatic.

For some it is the ‘free market’ and that ‘all private is good and all public bad’ for others it’s based in fantasies of aliens, illuminati and Lucifer worshipers.

*

The question of lying is also important.

There are certain ideological motivated people that believe that ends justifies the means. That dishonestly is alright because they totally believe they are right and they can’t let ‘reality’ get in the way of that.

The neo-cons totally believed that occupying Iraq was the right thing and that it would be an easy victory. They couldn’t defend that policy from its reality based critics so they lied and doctored the ‘evidence’ and refused to debate in an open and honest way.

That happens here, there are people that know they cannot defend their ideas so they use tainted ‘evidence’ and refuse to debate in an open, honest or rational way.





*

 

Balbus, you have hijacked yet another thread. One of probably hundreds. (I'm not lame enough to go looking thru all your past posts) You are singling out people and slinging personal insults. Again. Give it a rest, try following your OWN rules for this forum! Please. If not, how do I go about reporting your posts to the mods?

Rat, I speak english and I totally understand what you are saying. I completely grasp your ideas. You can stop trying to defend yourself. When people say things relentlessly in order to put someone down, it is to attempt to make them look stupid and discredit them, turn them into a victim. And once a person begins to LOOK like a victim, it's even easier to discredit them. Balbus is very adept at making people appear to be victims, or FEEL like victims (probably because they are), thus taking away their power.
No one EVER wins a debate, discussion, or disagreement with someone like that. EVER.

Rat, you are a DAMN SMART GUY. Don't allow yourself to be a victim by getting side tracked into trying to defend yourself from something taken out of context 3 years ago from a different conversation!!! Any of us regulars know better. You have been here a long time and you are always quite clear and straightforeward. And I agree with most of what you say. Which is quite the feat considering that you "refuse to discuss" so many things. Yet, I think I understand everything you say. So I must be telepathic... Oh, that's right, I too "refuse to discuss" things regularly.

Now, what was this thread about again?

 

the problem i learned with both marxist communism, and libertarianism is, they both have their belief system or, model, that when it has been tried and, it has failed, yet they keep holding to it no matter what. just like the belvers of some dogmatic religions do.
so what does work? i have found that the liberal model of moderate change works best in most cases, and most of the time... notice, i said: 'most cases,' and 'most of the time.' never once did i say it works 'all the time, and in all cases.'

ghost, i have come to this board, and gone on a wild eye rant several times myself. i have found, that the people here, are understanding about venting whatever political shit is eating at you. jesus h. christ just don't rant like that idiot of an asshole bully bill o'reilly does!

rat, please just quit trying the rush limbaugh and sean hannity type shit here. i have read a lot of your posts through out hip forums, and i know you are one hell of a lot smarter guy then hannity or limbaugh!
rat, i have to agree with balbus, and what he is saying about your repeated behaviour.
balbus has been far, far, far quite tolerant with your behaviour!
i just don't understand what makes you keep pushing the enveolpe with balbus, and others of us here.
rat, i would sorely miss your input to the forums, if you were to get yourself banned!
please rat, quit pushing the enveolpe with everyone... i would really hate see you gone from here!

 

Earth

LOL

Since you claim to know Rat’s views, I’d ask you to explain them, but of course you wouldn’t because just as you say, you do refuse to discuss stuff that you are unable or unwilling to address.

*

Besides bias, why do you think it out of context?

One quote was from about three and a half years (01-30-2006) and the next from about one and a half years ago (10-10-2007) and both are pretty consistent with what Rat said yesterday – that he thinks many of his ‘elite’ are Lucifer worshipers.

Remember he said that he’d never said anything about Lucifer worshippers which implied he didn’t have views on the subject when in fact he has believed the supposed elite were mostly Lucifer worshippers pretty consistently for over three and a half years.

*

The thread it seems to me is about irrationally based political bias and that they don’t seem willing to debate their ideas or views openly and honestly.

People like you Earth, you seem to have some similar right wing libertarian views to Rat, and just like him you don’t seem to like to discuss them, oh you like to promote them, it’s just you don’t want to see if they stand up to scrutiny, possibly because you know in advance they wouldn’t.

Please prove me wrong and lets have an open and honest debate.

 

What the hell does this mean?

Also, in case you have not noticed, maybe because you've been coming here for only a year and a half, Balbus is the one repeatedly starting in with me and pushing the envelope with me. I would be content just to ignore him, but when he tries to put his spin on things I've said (often years ago), that really burns my ass and I feel as though I have to defend myself against his bogus accusations, which are designed only to smear me.

 

How important is it?
:toetap05:

 

Could we all please remain on topic?

 

as of this post you are showing 7 posts....so you posted 6 other things...that doesnt constitute..''a lot''...or...''various other things i post''.......so how can i give you credibility...you lied to me right from the get-go

 

Rat

But they don’t seem to be bogus accusations (see above); I mean you do seem to have an irrationally based political bias.

I remember when you were a lot more honest. You openly called yourself a libertarian and openly put forward right wing libertarian ideas.

The problem was that you couldn’t defend that viewpoint and your ideas didn’t stand up well to scrutiny (just as Ghost’s don’t seem to).

Now the honest thing to have done at that point would be to begin questioning your ideas and change them to ones that you could defend.

But instead you seem to have clung to the belief your ideas were right even if you couldn’t defend them, put you faith in dogma, and closed you mind to any possibility your ideas could be wrong.

But the only way to seemingly carry on promoting your ideas was through dishonesty

So that was when you began saying you were ‘neither of the right nor left’ in an attempt to claim some type of political impartiality that was completely bogus, if anything your right wing bias become even more intense.

And unable to defend your political views openly or rationally you either refused to discuss them at all or had to depend on irrational conspiracy theory.

I’m not interested in smearing you Rat but I would like to know why you seem to be holding onto views you seem unable to defend in any rational way?

*

 

Aris

I think the thread is on track

It seems to me that this thread is about irrationally based political bias and those that try to spread them.

There are those that come to the forum (like Ghost) who seem to have this intense political bias against leftish ideas and it seems to me that since they don’t seem able to defend that bias in an open or honest way, it can only be an irrational political bias.

The question I’m asking is where does this way of thinking come from? And why do people hold and even try and promote ideas they seem unable to defend?

 

I think we took care of the OP, so let's leave Pressed_Rat out of this one if we can, okay?

 

First of all it's "EARTHMOTHER", not Earth. Some respect please.

Second of all, NOTHING, not one idea, not one "fact", no matter what the subject, can stand up to intense scrutiny. It is ALWAYS possible for someone to pick apart a philosophy, idea, thought....

And when someone CAN NOT see any subject in anything other than black and white, but insists on picking apart and labeling and categorizing everything, no truth can be found. It all just becomes drama.

Even if we both witnessed the same exact event with our own eyes, we would probably not tell the same story. This does not make me a "liberal" nor a "conservative". Neither does it make you right or left, only one individual seeing things from their own perspective. And individual perspectives are as numerous as individuals are.

Which is why I understand Rat. I don't require to see everything in categories. I understand the individual perceptions. I also understand that a topic being discussed last year may very well be just different enough to warrant somewhat different responses this year. Again, because I find it very hard to place boundaries around my own perceptions. Nor do I want to.

I find that placing too much emphasis on labeling and categorizing creates an environment where true thought is stifled. The human-ness is removed, and we must conform to something that may not in all ways be our "selves".

And that is the environment which leads to people like the OP feeling like ranting. Which in turn opens the gates of hatred, bigotry, oppression, victimization.

Balbus, on a personal note, I would HAPPILY discuss this subject or any other with you if you could refrain from trying to place a label on me, attack me, or at very least if you could behave as if you really WANTED to discuss anything with an OPEN MIND. However, I really do not grasp what it is exactly that you REALLY WANT TO KNOW. Nor do I see why it is so utterly IMPORTANT for you, personally, to force people to go into lengthy and detailed explainations of every single thing you profess not to understand.

You would seem to be in the minority of people who do not understand the majority of things said only by people you don't agree with...

 

EXACTLY, Earthmother! You nailed it. Thank You!

 

thats going in my sig