Page 1 of 1 1
Topic Options
#996 - 10/09/07 10:05 AM Your masters are telling you.
MCSA TEK Offline
pledge


Registered: 09/13/07
Posts: 97
Loc: Orlando Fl USA
Last presidential election cycle, I was struck by how badly the democrat fumbled things. Then I realized that it was a set up.

Politics isn't a game to these people. Its money, power and control. They spend millions of dollars creating a look, choosing colors, deciding on exactly how to speak and how to smile. They employ psychologists, human behavioral scientists, and a host of other people who study behavior and population control as a career. This is a deadly serious task for them.


So how does it happen that a candidate would fumble so badly?


Because your being set up. You were intended to vote for bush. what they do is simple. They bring out two choices, then make one of them self destruct. You simply respond by making a common sense decision. The decision they intended for you to make.



Now, lets fast forward to the present. I have noticed that the major media and talk shows are all pushing Fred Thompson. They are grooming the population to accept the actor as the republican candidate. Even a democrat (during a televised debate)was seen to ask excitedly if Thompson was to be there. The not so subtle innuendo was that Thompson was the real heavy hitter.

But do your masters intend the actor to win? Do they intend to have another republican in the white house? No, no they don't. Its the democrats turn to rule. They intend to have Thompson put up a reasonable fight, yet major gaffs at key points will dissuade you from choosing him. You will then vote for the other candidate as the only logical choice.

Expect to see small blunders like this one. By the way, this one is intended to place the seed in your mind that he makes little errors. It also makes the devastating mistakes during the presidential debate more believable. First impressions do stick with us.

Little Minor Oopsie.

(Fred Thompson's Daughter Eats Diaphragm On Fox TV)


Let history prove me right or wrong.

Chris


Edited by MCSA TEK (10/09/07 10:17 AM)
_________________________
Read about this great Patriot and Vote!
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

Top
#1011 - 10/09/07 04:40 PM Re: Your masters are telling you. [Re: MCSA TEK]
Veldrin Offline
pledge


Registered: 10/04/07
Posts: 55
Loc: Melbourne, Australia.
"And they haven't given us any other options outside the occasional, purely symbolic, participatory act of voting. You want the puppet on the right or the puppet on the left?"

I am not one to indulge in idle conspiracy theories, however, that being said, Politics is a serious business. It is about money, power and control. It has been since it began.

"I feel that the time has come to project my own inadequacies and dissatisfactions into the socio political and scientific schemes, let my own lack of a voice be heard."

I feel a similar situation is taking place in Australia, as we speak, between the Prime Minister John Howard, and Labor leader Kevin Rudd.

Sure, it seems as if Labour is leading this race, but I would not be surprised to see, somehow, Rudd fumble the ball at a critical stage and then Howard steps in gracefully (and fully prepared I have no doubt).

Top
#1014 - 10/09/07 06:06 PM Re: Your masters are telling you. [Re: Veldrin]
Fist Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/31/07
Posts: 1453
Loc: B'mo Cautious MF
So based on your understand of how the game is rigged, who do you predict to win the nomination from each party?

And should this prediction not play out, how will this impact your theory?
_________________________
I am the Devil and I am here to do the Devil's work.

Top
#1016 - 10/09/07 06:56 PM Re: Your masters are telling you. [Re: Fist]
MCSA TEK Offline
pledge


Registered: 09/13/07
Posts: 97
Loc: Orlando Fl USA
 Originally Posted By: Fist
So based on your understand of how the game is rigged, who do you predict to win the nomination from each party?

And should this prediction not play out, how will this impact your theory?
Very interesting question. And not as straight forward to answer as you might think.

While at work, I sit in my dungeon and listen to talk radio. Over the last few days the news media (and today) the talk hosts are bedazzled by Fred Thompson. Thompson is being groomed to be the Republican candidate. (He is Verile! His wife needs a Diaphragm!)

Now the Democrats candidate is a little bit harder to figure. Clinton is a "skull and bones" initiate as is Bush and Kerry. Based on this alone, I would think Hillary would be the most logical choice. (perhaps a repayment for loyalty throughout the public embarrassment.) The problem is that whoever is chosen has to have a reasonable chance of winning, otherwise people may wake up and begin asking questions.

I figure it has to do with what the polls and focus groups are saying. If people will accept her, I believe she will be the one. If the poll shows we aren't ready for a woman, they will choose some other insider.

Chris
_________________________
Read about this great Patriot and Vote!
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

Top
#1084 - 10/14/07 12:57 PM Re: Your masters are telling you. [Re: MCSA TEK]
ballbreaker Offline
member


Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 134
Loc: Toronto, Canada
 Quote:
I figure it has to do with what the polls and focus groups are saying. If people will accept her, I believe she will be the one. If the poll shows we aren't ready for a woman, they will choose some other insider.


This is not controversial at all; most committed Democrats and Republicans are paying attention to the polls and think tanks so that they can pick a candidate who is most likely to win.

The method of analyzing public opinion on the part of party members presupposes any conspiracy theory of a "planned" democracy.

Top
#1483 - 11/06/07 12:28 PM ReLOVEution. [Re: Veldrin]
Dakindas Offline
stranger


Registered: 10/20/07
Posts: 24
Loc: The Web
 Originally Posted By: Veldrin
I am not one to indulge in idle conspiracy theories


Good for you. Why, what would the neighbours think!?

 Originally Posted By: Veldrin
Sure, it seems as if Labour is leading this race, but I would not be surprised to see, somehow, Rudd fumble the ball at a critical stage and then Howard steps in gracefully (and fully prepared I have no doubt).


Kevin Crudd vs Johnny Coward eh?

I reckon Crudd has it in the bag. Murdoch backs Crudd. Of course if he said Washington should go fuck itself he'd win by a landslide, without or despite Murdoch, but it's about who's ass you kiss and how much the public can stomach. He knows what's good for him. He's also a total whore for Israel. Of course Coward is too but the sheep are a bit sick of Puppa Smurf.

"If we are elected to form the next government of Australia, I would say this to this gathering here in Melbourne tonight: there is no greater challenge or opportunity I look forward to more than working with the great American democracy, the arsenal of freedom, in bringing about long term changes to our planet."

Onya Crudd.

Funny, i thought it was a Republic.

 Originally Posted By: Fist
So based on your understand of how the game is rigged, who do you predict to win the nomination from each party?


My prediction for the US election is the same i laid out about twelve months ago.

Hillary vs Ron Paul with Hillary winning due to scandalous events (overt rigging, martial law or suspension of election after a 'terror attack' (right when they need it - gotta love textbook state terrorism, never fails) or Ron Paul's assassination or mysterious death).

The Republicans aren't even running any real horses (as per the plan). Hillary will save us, she's got a vagina, that's her platform and the 'useful idiot' left will rally around that banner. Murdoch is also for Hillary. Ron Paul has literally panicked both camps (naturally, as they are in total unity in terms of policy).

Fox news for Hillary Clinton - just you wait and see. What won't change? Their demonisation of 911 truth and (it's a separate issue) Ron Paul. Except instead of them being dangerous far left loons (giggle, he's such a fucking idiot) they'll be dangerous far right lunatics (mark my words).

Oh! Vey! News just in: Ron Paul's November the 5th Campaign has raised 4.2 million dollars in one day!!

That's historical people!! To all who donated today I fucking love you!! \:D

It's going to be absolutely thrilling to see how the propaganda organs are going to try spin this one as a bunch of poll breaking anarchists with some spambot software!

Fuck you Bill O'Rielly you fucking chicken neck shill!

Ron Paul baby, Ron Paul.

Yo Fist, you said Guns and Taxes secure the vote, if you truly believe that and that is where your heart is then how could you vote for any one else?

Pentabotic programming aside you gotta be out of your freaking skull to not support this most courageous and notable of American patriots.

Case in point: Ron Paul, when asked what he meant by phasing out the IRS and Federal reserve said,

"When I say cut taxes, I don't mean fiddle with the code. I mean abolish the income tax and the IRS, completely, and replace them with nothing. I also want to abolish the Federal Reserve... The value of our dollar and the level of our interest rates are not supposed to be manipulated by a few members of the power elite meeting secretly in a secret place. . ."

That means No Income Tax EVER. Ya dig?

And this,

"One thing is clear: The Founding Fathers never intended a nation where citizens pay nearly half of everything they earn to government."

On guns,

"Prohibiting guns on campus made the Virginia Tech students less safe, not more."

On borders,

"I certainly would change this whole attitude about the obliteration of our borders and working toward a North American Union."

On the budget,

"Mr. Speaker, I once again find myself compelled to vote against the annual budget resolution for a very simple reason: it makes government bigger"

On the National ID,

"I am absolutely opposed to a national ID card. This is a total contradiction of what a free society is all about. The purpose of government is to protect the secrecy and the privacy of all individuals, not the secrecy of government. We don't need a national ID card".

Fist, dear readers, this guy is fucking HARDCORE. You want punk motherfucker!? This guy is a fucking punk! Todays punks wear Death To The Federal Reserve T shirts and shock the nihilist zombies with their integrity!

Couple the above with this from a fortnight ago:



"Ron Paul supporters, real liberals, real conservatives, constituionalists, 911 truthers, anti North American Union activists, perceptive people, non idiots, patriots, peace activists etc are peddling terrorist propaganda and something needs to be done about them!" - COMING SOON TO A TELEVISION NEAR YOU!

I fucking love this stuff! \:D

 Originally Posted By: fist
And should this prediction not play out, how will this impact your theory?


I'll throw that back at ya. If this prediction does play out then how will this affect yours?

Of course there's always Plan B. . .




*lights cigarette with looted red light saber*

Haven't said this since i grew hair round my nipples but fuck it,

HAIL SATAN!
_________________________
Qui Bono?

Top
#1573 - 11/08/07 12:43 AM Re: ReLOVEution. [Re: Dakindas]
Cody Offline
pledge


Registered: 09/16/07
Posts: 72
Goddamnit, another probing mission?
Top
#1581 - 11/08/07 02:22 AM Re: ReLOVEution. [Re: Dakindas]
ballbreaker Offline
member


Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 134
Loc: Toronto, Canada
I wonder sometimes if you're actually a libertarian or if you really are that caught up in Murray Rothbard's attempt to explain away warfare as the result of a partnership between Wall Street and the state.

I know that, in your infinite wisdom, you think that if you can manage to toss enough ad hominems at the "sheeple" then somehow your message will either acquire greater legitimacy or your points will be paid attention to and accepted; only state propaganda and corporate media interference could explain why so many people disagree with Dakindas.

However, the main point I disagree with you on is your conspiracy nonsense, i.e. your method of reaching out to people. Do you really think that by insulting those who disagree with your [extreme] view of "the oligarchy" you will help or hinder the dissemination of libertarian ethics?

Actually, if you focussed more on the ethics of libertarianism rather than treat it as a desperate last resort in the face of a mysterious banking syndicate you could probably make a more positive impact. Would it be wrong of me to suggest that perhaps you're not a libertarian at all, and that your only concern is having access to Area51 and the CIA documents that will explain the Kennedy assassination? From what I've heard from you this would not be far from the truth.

Someone like Dr. Ron Paul, a man who is invited to give lectures at a place like the Ludwig von Mises Institute, is a libertarian who is well respected in genuine, intelligent Austrian School circles. Someone like Alex Jones, on the other hand, is a blue-collar conspiracy theorist who needs the threat of a secret "Elite" to validate his brand of libertarianism...see the difference between these two guys? Where do you fit in, Dakindas, or are you just going to yell "Statist! Fascist apologist!" at me?

Let me clarify something for you again: I support your political position, but when it comes to convincing others of libertarianism's worth you depend on fear as much as the government you hate. For you, libertarianism is just a jumble of patriotic, flag-waving emotions coupled with an intense fear of a conspiracy that does not exist, no matter how immoral the state is.

And that's just it! You don't need a Patriot Act to prove the immorality of the state; the state's existence in and of itself, what a state is by definition, is reason enough to condemn it.

Cut the bullshit, Dakindas. I don't give a flying fuck what you think about us "sheeple", but what I can say for myself is that your brand of marketing is about as irritating, obnoxious, and off-putting as "Theirs".

If you want to talk liberty then great: come out swinging for libertarian ethics but don't try and sell me this basement-activist crap. I've yet to see you post anything of substance, and no, excerpts of Orwell's 1984 don't count and don't make you well read.


Edited by ballbreaker (11/08/07 02:24 AM)

Top
#1625 - 11/09/07 08:55 AM What A Panty Twist! [Re: ballbreaker]
Dakindas Offline
stranger


Registered: 10/20/07
Posts: 24
Loc: The Web
Did i spill beer on your woolly cocoon?

Do my praxeological ramblings from the organo-cybernetic multiverse scare you, when they are more like bold, dark and fearless satire (at heart) to most others?

Look at my post again. It's not only funny as fuck; it speaks volumes to most.

Despite my stylised rants, over many years, i've not seen a single poster talk about underground bases full of generational slaves, shape shifting reptilian aliens from the planet X, ion cannons bringing down the twin towers, any communist 'private property is theft' hysterics, any calls for violence or any other quite absurd insanity, for which the 'baseless conspiracy theory' smear fits well.

What i have seen is less reactionary dismissals for unusual or dissident ideas and claims, a growing awareness of the Machiavellian tactics of statecraft, the honest expression of a seeming universal powerlessness and futility and thus a growing dissatisfaction with the way things are and are headed; all of which appear to have the inspiring effect of unshackling political apathy and stirring passionate political and ethical debate.

I don't mean at all to suggest that i have managed this singlehandedly, don't mistake my honesty for arrogance, but i've not changed my viewpoint, stance or approach since before i discovered dial up. Such issues and concepts were considered much more absurd and outrageous even just a few years ago and a hell of a lot more scary under, what was then and is now, a thick and tangible mantel of global intimidation.

Unlike yourself i don't feel a need to protect the other or myself from ideas. I have a firm belief that people seek the good and expect it in kind and that only they may sift the gold from the dross. This law is sound except when people are disillusioned to the point of apathy, cowed into complacency or worse, ignorant of many things or stand much to gain from acts of wickedness!

What you seem to think might lead the impressionable to some far out and lunatic or dangerous niches i think will in fact do the opposite. I think a hearing for these often not illegitimate grievances is necessary to free up what without them will be a very stale, cliche and state managed debate.

If such fringe ideologies or grievances remain vague, reflexively mocked or dismissed a priori then that will lead only to increased hegemony of consensus for the mainstream and increased compartmentalisation with a very real potential for radical extremism for the fringe.

This is NOT my will. To even think my ethics require a bibliography is absurd and pathetic.

You know what is even funnier than my post and your reactionary dummy spit?

That you seem to trade your old 'ism' for a new 'ist' every semester! Good boy! You get a distinction!

You know who has the credibility problem?

You do!

Perhaps you like to think that a few thinkers gathered around a table pondering a supreme secular basis for ethics, and discovering it, by virtue of its flawless reason alone, will convince the murderous and ruthless monopolists and their hopelessly indoctrinated serfs of their immoral ways and make the world all better, Amen.

Well i tell you this: If you think i am the naive idiot who's been suckered into the most absurd and scary of internet fruitcakery for pissing all over your idealistic country bumpkin bullshit then it is you who are naive.

There was no reason to criticise the state prior to your latest little academic schooling was there Ballbreaker, because criticising the state for being a murderously savage machine with a psychopathic human direction (oh let's not mention that scary fact) was also an 'outrageous conspiracy theory' not too long ago.

But now that you've discovered an academic and learned ethical critique of the state in being, it's ok to bash the state but only in a most detached and philosophical way. It's not that daily, the nightmares of millions of small children feature wailing missiles and blood and gore, good will gestures they call them, from mysterious 'liberators' known only as 'American terrorists', and that's why the state is objectionable.

No Dak, that's scary, wow that's freaky even, no!

No Dak!! It's more an abstract thing!!!

And if you want to tell me that appeals to compassion are some vile and weak emotive ploy then i tell you that appeals to a stiff upper lip and a hardened heart are exactly the same.

Let's face it, Reason isn't even on the table.

So fuck you and your woolly little cocoon like existence.

And fuck this insane and offensive War On Liberty.

PS: Do i need to write a disclaimer concerning my internalised commitment to the principles of free speech and non violence in all but self defense so that your reactionary and state managed paranoia doesn't trigger?

And if you think i do no justice to Ron Paul - here - in SATANLAND - you're a twit.
_________________________
Qui Bono?

Top
#1629 - 11/09/07 10:49 AM Church of Dak [Re: Dakindas]
ballbreaker Offline
member


Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 134
Loc: Toronto, Canada
Aghh, I can see you frothing at the mouth from across the Pacific Ocean (in my wooly cocoon?).

Did I say that your ramblings frighten me, or did you just make the obvious assumption that for me to even criticize your position would amount to the Big F-Word; that must be what I'm flip-flopping on, right? From Fascist to "Freedom Fighter", you think, huh?

Look at my post again: you haven't encountered this much sense in one place since before you started drinking the Alex Jones kool-aid.

Hyperbole is your way of dealing with everything: taxation and a little gun control, eh? Nope, not in Dak's World, now it's BLACK HELICOPTERS AND DEATH CAMPS, THIS IS GENOCIDE THIS IS GENOCIDE.

That ain't fringe, you say? Yeah, Dak, now why don't you tell us about the Queen of England's drug cartel and how Condy Rice is an emissary for the bankers; you're like a LaRouchie sometimes for shit's sake.

Wait. Don't say anything, I know what's coming:

"Oh yeah, you think I'm a LaRouchie? Well you're a...a...cybernetical praxeodorkoid meatbrained Hitlerite from the furthest spherical outreaches of the multitudinous freakoverse." Yeah, I guess that was funny as fuck, and it speaks volumes!

Wait, drop Ron Paul's name in there somewhere and cross your fingers that the first thing I'll do is make a hit on Google.

And oh yes, Dak, you are a real man of the people...so long as the people are awake and unafraid; let me give you a wake up call: the people don't give two shits' worth for all the suffering in the world if they don't have to face it on a daily basis, and why? Because they see no reason to care, they have no conception of ethics.

If you really want to catch the Average Joe's attention, just ask him what he'd think if the only thing he could be sure of was death...no more taxes; it's a more sure way of opening someone's ears than telling them all the horrors they will face in the After-Liberty with the Death Camps and the Helicopters (black, naturally) and the Great Sa...ahh....Syndicate of Bankers! Who sounds like a sheep now?

Is it really about being abstract? Maybe, if you want something other than great buckets of pity for the "millions [?] of small children [whose nightmares] feature wailing missiles and blood and gore". Is it about the children now, Dak?

"Weak emotive ploy" would be absolutely right. "Outrageous conspiracy theory", though? Maybe. The state might suck, but it isn't enough to explain savagery and barbarism millenia old.

Check your premises, son.

Ultimately, Ron Paul and respectable free marketeers aren't making their rounds on the internet conjuring up the old spectre of fascism and the Afterliberty to spook folk into making a financial contribution to a campaign or Googling their name: so why are you?

Top
#1648 - 11/09/07 10:01 PM Re: Church of Dak [Re: ballbreaker]
Dakindas Offline
stranger


Registered: 10/20/07
Posts: 24
Loc: The Web
Thank you Dakindas, Ballbreaker.

The Prosecution, The Defense, rest their case.
_________________________
Qui Bono?

Top
#1649 - 11/09/07 10:10 PM Re: Church of Dak [Re: Dakindas]
ballbreaker Offline
member


Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 134
Loc: Toronto, Canada
We'll have to let history (or History) be the judge; to each his own.
Top
Page 1 of 1 1


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.026 seconds of which 0.001 seconds were spent on 25 queries. Zlib compression disabled.