TODAY! Listen up. Lifting all sanctions from Iran; your thoughts, please

[Matt3737]

I have already clarified that by hegels dialectics i am speaking about his theory of 'thesis, antithesis and synthesis' and how some powerful people have taken this idea and used it to manipulate people....i'm not sure how you think i am misusing hegels ideas?

Powerful people misusing Hegel's ideas are not Hegel's ideas. You are misusing Hegel's ideas just the same as these supposed powerful people. Comprende?

 

[muir]

Powerful people misusing Hegel's ideas are not Hegel's ideas. You are misusing Hegel's ideas just the same as these supposed powerful people. Comprende?

No you have only made statements but not explained the basis for them

 

[Matt3737]

No you have only made statements but not explained the basis for them

If people misuse Hegel's ideas, then they were not Hegel's ideas. They were ideas that were 'misused'. You said it yourself and cry foul when others do it to you. Have some respect for others, man.

In other words, when these people misuse those ideas, they are now those people's ideas and no longer Hegel's.

 

[muir]

If people misuse Hegel's ideas, then they were not Hegel's ideas. They were ideas that were 'misused'. You said it yourself and cry foul when others do it to you. Have some respect for others, man.

You have done it again...you have made a statement that i have 'misused hegels ideas' but you have not explained the basis of your statement by explaining how i have misused his ideas

So if you want to speak about having respect for people then show the respect of explaining your statements

How have i misused hegels ideas?

I can't put that any clearer

 

[Matt3737]

If people misuse Hegel's ideas, then they were not Hegel's ideas. They were ideas that were 'misused'. You said it yourself and cry foul when others do it to you. Have some respect for others, man.

In other words, when these people misuse those ideas, they are now those people's ideas and no longer Hegel's.

You have done it again...you have made a statement that i have 'misused hegels ideas' but you have not explained the basis of your statement by explaining how i have misused his ideas

So if you want to speak about having respect for people then show the respect of explaining your statements

How have i misused hegels ideas?

I can't put it any clearer

How did these powerful people misuse Hegel's ideas? That will answer your own question.

 

[muir]

How did these powerful people misuse Hegel's ideas? That will answer your own question.

It's looking like you can't back your mouth up

You can make an accusation alright but you can't then explain your accusation...that's a bit lame and frankly it looks like trying to pick a fight for the sake of it

 

[Matt3737]

It's looking like you can't back your mouth up

You can make an accusation alright but you can't then explain your accusation...that's a bit lame and frankly it looks like trying to pick a fight for the sake of it

I have already clarified that by hegels dialectics i am speaking about his theory of 'thesis, antithesis and synthesis' and how some powerful people have taken this idea and used it to manipulate people....i'm not sure how you think i am misusing hegels ideas?

You're inability to connect Hegel's philosophy with these supposed people is not my failure.

 

[muir]

You're inability to connect Hegel's philosophy with these supposed people is not my failure.

https://hendersonlefthook.wordpress.com/2014/10/26/red-scare-over-america/

Red Scare Over America

Posted on 10/26/2014

The budding genre of left-wing conspiracy research, intuitively attractive as a unifying force to many, attempts to break imposed philosophical molds and to deprogram minds in a world traumatized and confused by the Illuminati’s biggest psyops program ever – the Cold War. This delicate task requires a historically-grounded progressive political framework which, while taking a backseat to realpolitik, remains pertinent. While the mainstream left refuses to acknowledge any hint of conspiracy, no matter the number of footnotes; the Alex Jones “right/left paradigm is dead” crowd, while open to deep politics, leans right ideologically, enabling the banker cabal in its quest for global hegemony via 18[SUP]th[/SUP] century mercantilism – the purest form of capitalism ever practiced.
It is incredibly naïve to believe that the Illuminati bankers wish to usher in communism as their economic model. The real world tells us that wealth is not being redistributed. It is being concentrated in the hands of the few at historic levels.
The left’s problem lies in naiveté and cowardice, and in its inability to deconstruct the brutal state capitalism imposed via the Soviet Union. The libertarian conspiracy crowd lacks a background in political theory – their Cato Institute is funded by the same corporations that fund the two major political parties. They too have been brainwashed since birth by the mysterious events that culminated in the Soviet Union.
An analysis of these events is key to understanding the Red Scare, which haunts an increasingly extreme right-wing American political landscape and hinders our ability to formulate practical economic solutions that incorporate both capitalistic and socialistic economic tenants. It also goes a long way in explaining the incredible naiveté of the American mainstream “left”.
(Excerpted from Chapter 19: The Eight Families: Big Oil & Their Bankers…)
In 1822 Russia’s Czar Alexander banned Freemasonry from his country. When Czar Nicholas took the throne he renewed the ban, but the secret society went underground and survived. Karl Marx was a member of the League of the Just which later became the Communist League. The group was an off-shoot of the Society of Seasons, which had close ties to the Grand Orient Freemason Lodge of Paris. Frederick Engel was a wealthy German industrialist. [714]
Marx and Engel were driven by the philosophies of Freidrich Hegel, whose now infamous Hegelian dialectic put forth a process whereby opposites thesis and antithesis are reconciled into synthesis.
Though Hegel’s philosophy was adopted by Marx, it was equally attractive to Adolf Hitler and the Rothschild Business Roundtable that sponsored him. The Roundtable saw in the dialectic a boon to their monopolies by presenting phony communism (antithesis) as bogeyman to capitalism (thesis). The ensuing conflict – the Cold War – produced a huge market for arms and oil which their trusts manufactured.
Genuine revolutionary struggle in the Third World could be labeled as a “Soviet communist conspiracy” and more arms could then be sent to depopulate the undesirable poor, dispensing of agitators who threatened Roundtable interests. The pure application of communism, which indigenous peoples practiced for thousands of years prior to the arrival of Annunaki invaders in Sumeria, was the real threat to the “special bloodline” international bankers.
By upholding Soviet state capitalism to all the world as an example of “failed Communism”, the bankers could discredit this dangerous idea while producing their desired synthesis – a New World Order ruled by the Illuminati banking families and Black Nobility monarchs, with laissez-faire monopoly capitalism as their economic paradigm.
The Russian Hohenzollern family monarchy to which the czars belonged wasn’t playing ball. They grew suspicious of the Freemasons, who they knew to be agents of the international bankers. In 1915 the American International Corporation (AIC) was formed to finance a Russian revolution aimed at deposing the Hohenzollerns and launching the banker’s grand Hegelian experiment. AIC directors included Frank Vanderlip, who two years prior had attended the secret Jekyll Island meetings that formulated the private Federal Reserve; and George Herbert Walker, grandfather of George Bush Sr. The families of Rockefeller, Rothschild, Du Pont, Kuhn, Loeb, Schiff and Harriman were represented on AIC’s board. [715]
WWI was looming and the Allied powers needed to open a diversionary front against the Germans. Russian Bolshevik leader Leon Trotsky left New York by ship on March 27, 1917, just days before the US entered WWI. He had with him a US passport, 300 revolutionaries and a wad of cash supplied by the Wall Street banker crowd. Twelve days earlier Czar Nicholas II had stepped down amidst an uprising launched by genuine anarchist revolutionaries, inspired by the writings of the Russian philosopher Kropotkin, who preached revolution followed by immediate decentralization of power, a sharp contrast to the iron-fisted state capitalist control under which Russia was about to fall. The anarchists struck fear into the heart of Wall Street, so they dispatched Trotsky to derail their Menshevik plans.
As Trotsky and his Reds sailed east, Vladimir Lenin left Switzerland in a sealed train with 150 more “revolutionaries” and $5 million in cash. The train passed through Germany without inspection thanks to banker Max Warburg’s intervention. Meanwhile, fifteen international bankers under Red Cross cover traveled to Petrograd to provide additional financing to the Bolsheviks and to make off with Russia’s gold reserves, just as they would later make off with German gold reserves following WWII and Chinese gold reserves after the 1949 Revolution.[716] Prince Lvov, who replaced the deposed Czar Nicholas II, and his successor Alexander Kerensky both publicly denounced Trotsky and Lenin as German intelligence agents.
The war between Mensheviks and Bolsheviks lasted until 1922. Some 28 million Russians died. The unruly anarchists were eventually disposed of and the Roundtable crowd launched its “antithesis” in Moscow. Trotsky and Lenin were likely unaware they were being used by the bankers. Trotsky fled to Mexico City, where he was murdered by Stalin’s agents in 1940. Lenin died in 1924. He had by then identified the powerful forces behind his ascent as “monopoly finance capitalists”. Towards the end of his life he wrote, “The state does not function as we desired. A man is at the wheel and seems to lead it, but the car does not drive in the desired direction. It moves as another force wishes.”[717]
John D. Rockefeller, Nathan Rothschild, Max Warburg, Jacob Schiff and J. Pierpont Morgan seized the new Soviet opportunity. Their Four Horsemen always had interests in Russia. The Rothschild and Nobel families discovered oil in Baku in 1898 with their Far East Trading Company, but anarchist oilfield revolutionaries burned their newly renamed Royal Dutch/Shell installations to the ground.
By 1922 Rockefeller’s Chase National Bank launched the American-Russian Chamber of Commerce. In 1925 Chase negotiated a deal with Soviet Prombank to market Russia’s raw materials to the West, while helping the Bolsheviks import cotton and machinery. Chase and its sister insurance conglomerate Equitable Trust led the way in providing credit to the Soviets, selling Bolshevik bonds in the US by 1928 with help from Morgan Guaranty.
Rep. Louis McFadden (D-NY), chair of the House Banking Committee, remarked, “The Soviet government has been given US Treasury funds by the Federal Reserve Banks acting through Chase Bank and Guaranty Trust Company…Find out what business has been transacted for the State Bank of the Soviet Union by its correspondent bank, Chase Bank of New York.”[718]
The chaos caused by the Bolshevik Revolution had been a boon to Rockefeller oil interests by eliminating much of Standard Oil’s competition in Russia. In 1926 Standard Oil of New York (Mobil) loaned $75 million to the Bolsheviks in exchange for exclusive rights to market Soviet oil in Europe. Mobil built a refinery in Russia.
In 1969 Rockefeller’s International Basic Economy Corporation (IBEC) – which later gave birth to the draconian Caribbean Basin Initiative – formed a partnership with N.M. Rothschild & Sons of London. Rockefeller’s partner in IBEC was Cleveland financier and industrialist Cyrus Eaton. The Rockefellers, Rothschilds and Eatons made huge profits facilitating Soviet trade with the West. In 1976 they signed an exclusive licensing and patent deal with Licensintorg, giving them a monopoly on technology transfer to the Soviets.
President Nixon forged detente with the Soviets and Chinese following the Vietnam War in 1973. That year also brought the Arab oil embargo, the pegging of oil to the US dollar, the launch of oil futures markets and the advent of a burgeoning Eurodollar market in London. Soon after Nixon held the detente summits with his counterparts Leonid Brezhnev and Zhou En-lai, Chase Manhattan opened a branch in Moscow and started a correspondent banking relationship with the Bank of China. [719]
Nixon appointed William Casey to head the Export-Import Bank. Casey was a CFR insider and leading Knight of Malta. He later managed Ronald Reagan’s 1980 October Surprise Presidential Campaign and was appointed CIA Director. At ExIm Bank Casey financed one of the grandest industrial schemes in history, the world’s largest truck factory at the Kama River in the Soviet Union. The factory was built by Pullman Corporation and was financed 10% by the Soviets, 45% by ExIm Bank and 45% by Chase Manhattan, where David Rockefeller was now chairman.
Chase risked nothing since its money was guaranteed by the Overseas Private Investment Corporation and Foreign Credit Insurance Association. If the Russians failed to pay the loans back, US taxpayers were on the hook for 90% of the Kama money. George Schultz – CFR, Bechtel and Chevron Texaco director who was Reagan’s Secretary of State – was key to the Kama River deal. Casey provided an ExIm Bank loan for Schultz’ Bechtel to build a Permindex-affiliated International Trade Center in Moscow in a deal arranged by Occidental Petroleum scion and Tennessee Gore political dynasty sponsor Armand Hammer. Other Casey ExIm Bank loans funded oil and gas pipelines and petrochemical and fertilizer plants. [720]
The US detente with the Soviets and China had more to do with a thirst for new energy supplies by the Four Horsemen than it did with grandiose statements of “promoting world peace”. China has huge oil deposits off its Senkaka Island in the East China Sea. Just northeast of Senkaka lie the Soviet Sakhalin Islands, an area that contains massive oil and gas deposits. The Soviet regions of Siberia and the Caspian Sea were even bigger oil prizes. As Chase Manhattan Senior Vice-President Albert Wentworth put it, “The Soviet Union is the last great undeveloped market for the US.”
Columnist Paul Scott hit the nail more squarely on the head when he wrote in 1976, “It is Kissinger’s belief that by controlling food one can control people, and by controlling energy – especially oil – one can control nations and their financial systems. By placing food and oil under international control along with the world’s monetary system, Kissinger is convinced a loosely knit world government can become a reality by 1980.”
Nixon Agriculture Secretary Earl Butz once bragged that through USAID’s P.L. 480 program the US employed “food as a weapon”, doling out food to nations who agree to follow IMF mandates, while withholding food from those who don’t. Just as Kissinger’s IAE benefits the Four Horsemen of Oil – Exxon Mobil, Chevron Texaco, BP Amoco and Royal Dutch/Shell; P. L. 480 enriches the Four Horsemen of Grain – Cargill Continental, Louis Dreyfus, Bunge and Andre. As Chilean Minister of Agriculture Jacques Chonchol said, “Whoever controls food exports controls the world.”[721]
The Soviet Union was an artificial construct cooked up by the Illuminati bankers to create profitable conflict and, more importantly, to confuse the world’s population in the arena of political economy. The Red Scare they manufactured has become a Red Scar.
[1] The Robot’s Rebellion: The Story of the Spiritual Renaissance. David Icke. Gateway Books. Bath, UK. 1994. p.160
[2] Rule by Secrecy: The Hidden History that Connects the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons and the Great Pyramids. Jim Marrs. HarperCollins Publishers. New York. 2000. p.195
[3] Icke. p.163
[4] Marrs. p.196
[5] The Rockefeller File. Gary Allen. ’76 Press. Seal Beach, CA. 1973. p.101
[6] The World’s Money: International Banking from Bretton Woods to the Brink of Insolvency. Michael Moffitt. Simon & Schuster. New York. 1983 p65
[7] Allen. p.114
[8] Merchants of Grain. Dan Morgan. Viking Press. New York. 1979. p.398
Dean Henderson is the author of five books: Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families & Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics & Terror Network, The Grateful Unrich: Revolution in 50 Countries,Das Kartell der Federal Reserve, Stickin’ it to the Matrix & The Federal Reserve Cartel. You can subscribe free to his weekly Left Hook column @www.hendersonlefthook.wordpress.com

 

[Matt3737]

[MENTION=1871]muir[/MENTION]

Marx and Engel were driven by the philosophies of Freidrich Hegel, whose now infamous Hegelian dialectic put forth a process whereby opposites thesis and antithesis are reconciled into synthesis.
Though Hegel’s philosophy was adopted by Marx,

In contradiction to Hegelian idealism, Karl Marx presented Dialectical materialism (Marxist dialectics):

My dialectic method is not only different from the Hegelian, but is its direct opposite. To Hegel, the life-process of the human brain, i.e. the process of thinking, which, under the name of 'the Idea', he even transforms into an independent subject, is the demiurgos of the real world, and the real world is only the external, phenomenal form of 'the Idea'. With me, on the contrary, the ideal is nothing else than the material world reflected by the human mind, and translated into forms of thought.

 

[muir]

@muir

Marx was reacting to hegel's ideas

marx is an agent of the bankers

marx and the bankers (who had studied hegels ideas) used this idea to create their marxist philosophy to create the dialectic of capitalism v's communism out of which they intended to synthesise their new world order

I don't understand why this is confusing to you

Do you understand the concept of 'thesis, antithesis and synthesis?'

 

[muir]

The triad thesis, antithesis, synthesis is often used to describe the thought of German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel never used the term himself.
The triad is usually described in the following way:[SUP][by whom?][/SUP]

• The thesis is an intellectual proposition.
• The antithesis is simply the negation of the thesis, a reaction to the proposition.
• The synthesis solves the conflict between the thesis and antithesis by reconciling their common truths and forming a new thesis, starting the process over.

Hegel used the "thesis-antithesis-synthesis" idea only once, and he attributed the terminology to Immanuel Kant. The terminology was largely developed by Johann Gottlieb Fichte, also an advocate of the philosophy identified as German idealism. Although Hegel rejected the Fichtean schema, it is at least arguable that his dialectic can be described in Fichtean terms.[SUP][2][/SUP]

The triad was extended and adopted by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, especially in The Poverty of Philosophy (1847). Here, in Chapter 2, Marx is obsessed by the word "thesis".[SUP][4][/SUP] It can be said to form an important part of the basis for the Marxist Theory of History.

[h=2][/h]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesis

 

[Matt3737]

Marx was reacting to hegel's ideas

marx is an agent of the bankers

marx and the bankers (who had studied hegels ideas) used this idea to create their marxist philosophy to create the dialectic of capitalism v's communism out of which they intended to synthesise their new world order

I don't understand why this is confusing to you

Do you understand the concept of 'thesis, antithesis and synthesis?'

Then it's Marxist's philosophy that you have a problem with and not Hegel's. I'd appreciate it if you would quit referencing that these people are using Hegel's philosophy in such a manner.

 

[muir]

Then it's Marxist's philosophy that you have a problem with and not Hegel's. I'd appreciate it if you would quit referencing that these people are using Hegel's philosophy in such a manner.

The triad thesis, antithesis, synthesis is often used to describe the thought of German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel never used the term himself.
The triad is usually described in the following way:[SUP][by whom?][/SUP]

• The thesis is an intellectual proposition.
• The antithesis is simply the negation of the thesis, a reaction to the proposition.
• The synthesis solves the conflict between the thesis and antithesis by reconciling their common truths and forming a new thesis, starting the process over.

Hegel used the "thesis-antithesis-synthesis" idea only once, and he attributed the terminology to Immanuel Kant. The terminology was largely developed by Johann Gottlieb Fichte, also an advocate of the philosophy identified as German idealism. Although Hegel rejected the Fichtean schema, it is at least arguable that his dialectic can be described in Fichtean terms.[SUP][2][/SUP]

The triad was extended and adopted by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, especially in The Poverty of Philosophy (1847). Here, in Chapter 2, Marx is obsessed by the word "thesis".[SUP][4][/SUP] It can be said to form an important part of the basis for the Marxist Theory of History.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesis

 

[muir]

So like i was saying before i was rudely interrupted the sons of the bankers went to university and studied under hegel where they became aware of the concept of thesis, antithesis and synthesis

They then used this idea to formulate a plan to subvert and take over western civilisation

 

[La Sagna]

I wasn't attacking your character i think you're reading too much personal stuff into what i'm saying

Let me give more context so that you can see where i'm coming from

But before i do i want to say that yes i am generalising and that no i'm not lumping all women into one category

The idea that the truth always lies in between two poles is a fallacy because it depends where the two poles are to begin with (hence the political term 'gerrymandering' which is to move the goal posts as and when it suits you)

An example would be how the media is framed in the public sphere. So the powers that be want to conceal from people that there are options relating to how you can order a society from people so to conceal that they frame the public dialogue into a box of their creation

To hide the true left they will call centre-right newspapers or political parties 'left wing' thereby making the public think that those centre right institutions represent the left wing of the political spectrum thereby removing the true left pole from public sight

here's a clip of chomsky talking about the myth of the 'liberal media'

[video=youtube;KYlyb1Bx9Ic]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYlyb1Bx9Ic[/video]

This works in every area of life because if you control the parameters of peoples thought then you control what they perceive as being possible

So for example lets say you are the powers that be and you want to mislead the public about the nature of our universe then you tell them that the world is flat and you persecute, burn or imprison anyone who says that the world is round

By doing this you create a box within which human thought is controlled. For anyone unable to think outside the box all their thought and conversation is founded upon a belief that the world is flat

If you can constantly tell people that something is the case then you can make them believe it and then behave the way you want them to behave. The nazis called this the 'big lie'

So if you want to control the global population numbers because you are a eugenicist then you make toxic vaccines and you tell the public that the vaccines are there for their health; you even bribe or fool people the public look upto into promoting the vaccines to create the impression that they are safe

You have created an illusion in their mind...a box in which their thought is contained. They cannot conceive any possibility outside that box and if someone comes along and offers them contrary information they will instantly dismiss it as 'crazy' because they have been conditioned to think that only things within that box are possible

Inventors and visionaries are people who are unconstrained by the boxes...they see beyond them

If you look at the banking fraternity for example who use hegel's dialectics...the most prominent clan amongst that fraternity is the rothschilds. 'rothschild' means redshield and they took the name (they were originally called bauer) because their house in frankfurt had a red symbol on the front of it of a 6 pointed star

The six pointed star is most commonly called these days the 'star of david' but its older name is the 'seal of solomon' and it is made up of two triangles. One triangle points up and one points down. The triangles are overlayed.

The upward pointing triangle represents the male phallus and the downward pointing triangle represents the female yoni. In magical or alchemical terms then the symbol siginifies the union of opposites

So what are these opposites? Jung would speak of the anima and the animus

Also these banking fraternities are also freemasonic. In freemasonry you have the two pillars of solomons temple. These pillars are the male and female energies or what the chinese would call 'yin and yang'...two polarities

The initiate entering the temple represents the third pillar in the middle....the union of opposites as they seek to integrate the parts of their psyche and find balance (like the buddhist 'third way')

If you are Jung helping people with this knowledge then you could be said to be one of the 'good guys'

However if you are a banker who wants to dominate the world financially and politically then it is not in your interests to help people find balance; in fact you can then use this knowledge about human psychology to shape society in such ways as to deliberately throw people off balance and thereby keep them divided within themself and amongst themselves so that you can more easily exploit them and control them and so they won't be able to stand up for themselves and challenge your control

For example you can mess with language in the ways Orwell outlines in his book '1984' and you can mislead people as to what represents 'left' and 'right'

In fact once you become rich enough you can buy up all the media (now consolidated into 6 mega corporations in the US all controlled by the CFR...a forum for the corporate network including the banking fraternity) and you can then use the media to tell the public whatever you like. Heck if you told them the world was flat enough times some of them would begin to believe it because you are using the principle of 'plato's cave' ie you are controlling the flows of information to peoples minds and thereby controlling how they perceive reality and also the limits of their understanding and awareness

You can also buy up politicians and judges and so on. With enough money you can influence many people. Those you can't bribe you threaten or kill.

Going back for a moment to solomon whose wisdom people always talk about. The most famous story about solomonic wisdom is the story of the two women and a baby isn't it?

two women are brought before solomon each claiming that a child is theirs. Solomon says that he will chop the baby in half so that they can each have a half. The babies true mother breaks down and says 'no let her have the child' so that she can save the life of her baby

this story is showing how a person can be psychologically manipulated. Solomon synthesises a result from the dilemma he creates for the true mother

I do not dispute that the media and people can and are manipulated, but what I don't understand is why people who don't believe anything the 'mainstream' media says then believe dubious other sources that are just as likely to be manipulating people to believe what they want. I am sceptical of it all.

 

[muir]

I do not dispute that the media and people can and are manipulated, but what I don't understand is why people who don't believe anything the 'mainstream' media says then believe dubious other sources that are just as likely to be manipulating people to believe what they want. I am sceptical of it all.

There really is a group of bankers, they really do control your money supply and they really do want to create a world government that they will control

There is a world of evidence out there for it

You be 'sceptical' i'll be informed

 

[La Sagna]

There really is a group of bankers, they really do control your money supply and they really do want to create a world government that they will control

There is a world of evidence out there for it

You be 'sceptical' i'll be informed

How do you know that your information sources are not manipulating you to believe what they want?
I don't have the time to go through all the information you post but my best friend has similar beliefs as you do and she sends me stuff and I will consider and look up her sources and they are usually not credible. Some of it may be, but a lot of it isn't.

 

[muir]

How do you know that your information sources are not manipulating you to believe what they want?
I don't have the time to go through all the information you post but my best friend has similar beliefs as you do and she sends me stuff and I will consider and look up her sources and they are usually not credible. Some of it may be, but a lot of it isn't.

if you knew the amount of evidence i have sifted through in my life and the amount of sources i have got it from you wouldn't ask me that

 

[La Sagna]

if you knew the amount of evidence i have sifted through in my life and the amount of sources i have got it from you wouldn't ask me that

I don't want to sound like i'm licking my own lollypop but i'm not your common garden variety 'conspiracy theorist'

Lol, well, enjoy licking your lollypop!

My friend got mad at me at first because I didn't believe her without doing my own research and often disproving what she was believing, but I won't let disagreements ruin a good friendship so I told her that I would support her right to believe whatever she wanted to believe and I hoped that she would do the same for me. So now we think the other is totally crazy but we love each other anyway.

 

[muir]

Lol, well, enjoy licking your lollypop!

My friend got mad at me at first because I didn't believe her without doing my own research and often disproving what she was believing, but I won't let disagreements ruin a good friendship so I told her that I would support her right to believe whatever she wanted to believe and I hoped that she would do the same for me. So now we think the other is totally crazy but we love each other anyway.

Your friend is right, you're wrong

I've been saying stuff on this forum for years and people like you have called me crazy and every time i do it the truth then comes out in the mainstream news and i am proven right

It's because there are so many people like you who are still not ready to face reality that the rest of us are having to continue being kept in this shitty society

It's only when people like you wake up that things will finally change

We live in hope that you won't take too long