Presidential Debate - Page 5

LordZoma · 10-09-2004, 02:08 AM

I'm sorry I'm bringing this up already...

But you all ARE aware that both Kerry and Bush graduated from Yale as members of the Skull and Crossbones Society. I'm sure, not many of you are overly steeped with knowledge of the occult or secret societies, but if you know anything about the Skull and Crossbones, it's basically the bridge, that connects Freemasonry and Luciferian Masonry ie the illuminati.

Now I'm not bringing up any criticism or questions in relation to secret societies, or their political influences... but I am bringing up this simple little fact.

Did you ever think of the election in the frame of a two party system as being a WIN WIN / LOSE LOSE situation. Regardless of which candidate is chosen, they still play for the same team, know what I mean?

And if you think I'M being naive, please, don't respond.

shiney · 10-09-2004, 04:46 AM

Or in other words, if you don't agree with me don't say so? Regardless of whatever societies they were a part of, that sounds like the most ridiculous bunch of crap I've heard yet. Rational arguments not working? Bring in conspiracy theories. They're all on the same side!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xellos

I don't like supporting Bush through all his flaws but............ I gotta vote for who I gotta vote for.........

Man, that's flawed logic. "Yeah I know he's messed up and stuff..and I don't like supporting him...but I'd rather vote for him than someone else.."

So what makes Kerry worse? That the whole flipflopping thing has been essentially rebutted. And Kerry is coming out stronger than before on the issues the american people care about. And Bush is already proven to be a giant screwup of a president. So why is it you really support him?

This may be an election of lesser of two evils, but half the rhetoric spewed by the Bush administration is hogwash. i.e. "The world is a safer place now". It's not safer for anyone. Iraq might have been a bit shady but they weren't a threat, at least at the time, and now we took them over and global terrorism is at something like a 25 year high. Not even the Iraqi people are safer than they were before.

LordZoma · 10-09-2004, 07:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiney

Or in other words, if you don't agree with me don't say so? Regardless of whatever societies they were a part of, that sounds like the most ridiculous bunch of crap I've heard yet. Rational arguments not working? Bring in conspiracy theories. They're all on the same side!

"When we compare this disturbing conclusion with the comforting picture purveyed by Illuminati controlled-mass media and education, we experience "cognitive dissonance," or psychological stress. This is usually resolved by evading reality, dismissing it as "conspiracy theory." "

I_Like_Swordchucks · 10-09-2004, 08:17 AM

In the debate I saw, Kerry stereotyped. On both the abortion and stem cell questions he automatically brought religion into it and stereotyped the questionee's as religious fanatics? Why, because if he made their entire point of view based on religious grounds he could dismiss them as being non-scientifically grounded. Well I'm doing an honors in Biotechnology, and I say the stem cell issue is fairly large. Abortion is one thing, killing something that you didn't want. But stem cells you're growing, HARVESTING, human embryos for the very sake of taking them apart. We don't even do that with monkeys. And doesn't that sound creepily like the Matrix? I have no problem with with stem cells themselves, but take them from embryos that were miscarried and were going to die anyway. The whole making life for the sole purpose of taking it is wrong. Medically speaking, its a violation of the Hippocratic oath and it goes against what most scientists stand for. All my peers at my university have a problem with it, and we'd much rather see funding into adult stem cells and umbilical research. Kerry is just blind to see that people actually do care, and not all of it in religious terms. And for the abortion question he used the extreme questions. Rape and health of the mother are important, yes, but how many abortions are due to those cases compared to how many teenagers just getting pregnant by their boyfriends? Again he avoided the issue by stereotyping and using the exception rather than the rule to gain his point. If a guy can't take a firm stand on issues like that, I wouldn't want him as a leader. Even if you disagree with Bush, at least he has convictions.

Illuminatus · 10-09-2004, 11:54 AM

Single issue people confuse me. Why vote against Kerry because on one point you disagreee with him? Yes, Bush has convictions, but so did Hitler, And Stalin. Convictions don't make things you do better. And Kerry does have convictions, they're just not the ones you agree wtih. Your statement is inherently flawed, though the abortion thing has merit.

However are you going to vote for the man who declares war on nations without good reason then makes things up later to justify it, JUST because he's against abortion and stem cell research? That sounds at least as bad as harvesting life for life.

Furthermore, you sound like an intelligent scientific type. Guess what? Bush HATES you. You may agree on this, but I bet Bush doesn't respect your interests anywhere else.

I_Like_Swordchucks · 10-09-2004, 02:29 PM

It's not the point of disagreement that bothered me. It was the fact that on both issues, Kerry automatically stereotyped the women as religious fanatics. If the guy can't take educated criticism, and has to demean everyone that has a philosophical disagreement by writing off their opinion, should he really be president. Actually I don't like either of them. As said before, it is a lesser of two evils debate....

Elminster_Amaur · 10-09-2004, 02:50 PM

I was watching the debate last night, and I had to turn it off because I was disgusted by both of them. Someone would ask Kerry a question and he wouldn't answer it, he'd just start talking about something entirely different. Someone would ask Bush a question, and he would attack Kerry's stance on that issue. What the hell is the point of a debate where neither person is debating the issues? I remember, someone asked Bush about the environment, and, for a while, he didn't attack Kerry, he started talking about all his accomplishments. Kerry countered with a speech about No Child Left Behind. WTF does that have to do with the environment? I don't know, but he made it sound like it was entirely about the environment. Then Bush countered with, "Look at his voting record." My roommate and I watched for three more questions after that, but it didn't get better. Someone questioned Kerry about how he would run the war. He started talking about how he wouldn't raise taxes. Bush actually looked at that one rationally and gave us the numbers from both parties' campaign commitees, and said it was probably somewhere in between the two, and how that was still 2 trillion short of the new spending Kerry planned.

Kurosen · 10-09-2004, 03:02 PM

Quote:

"When we compare this disturbing conclusion with the comforting picture purveyed by Illuminati controlled-mass media and education, we experience "cognitive dissonance," or psychological stress. This is usually resolved by evading reality, dismissing it as "conspiracy theory." "

"If you disagree with me, it proves you're wrong," is not a valid response. It makes you sound like this guy.

10-09-2004, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ih8stupidppl

Furthermore, you sound like an intelligent scientific type. Guess what? Bush HATES you. You may agree on this, but I bet Bush doesn't respect your interests anywhere else.

Oh yeah, he hates black people too let's not forget. Please, why does bush hate scientists? Because you say so?

LordZoma · 10-09-2004, 09:04 PM

This is taken as a quote from the website Brian just linked.

"Jesus did not come to save the apes & dolphins, He did not come to save the puppies & kitties, and He certainly did not come to save the Zeta Reticulans & the Alien Grays. Jesus Christ is called theKINSMAN REDEEMER.
The atonement work of Jesus was only to save His kinsman, the sons of Adam. If a being is not a descendent of Adam, this being --no matter how intelligent -- will not take part in the promise of Jesus Christ. Watcher 's research confirms that there are beings genetically similar to the race of Adams, but have been genetically tampered with by rebel angels, or engineered to be superior humans in some illuminated laboratory. These hybrids are not capable of "being saved" by the grace of the Kinsman Redeemer, for they are not His kinsmen. This increase in humans who aren't genetically sons of Adam is a symptom of the end times, just as in the days of Noah when Nephilim walked the earth among humans."

There's a major difference between my political commentary, and this guy's rhetoric.

He has an agenda.

I do not.

I don't even want to get into nitpicking the conclusions this guy has come to. Once you get into the realm of mixing biblical interperetation with involved occultic studies, you are entering the realm of lies and deceipt. There are a lot of groups out there that have agendas of their own. Disinformation is rampant between these groups, and individuals who try to make sense of it all. This, is something I try to avoid.

In any case, SOME of the material on the website is very illuminating. I am particularly fond of his whimsical approach on the Ouroboros, and his instant glancing over of Maian time cycles from a greek perspective. He also manages to AVOID mentioning anything specific from the flower of life paradigm, while beating around the bush with it, when he begins referencing fractal geometry, apollo and Ra.

Anyway. I digress. I wasn't saying "If you think I'm wrong don't respond." I said, "If you think I"m being naive, don't respond." There is a distinct difference between disagreeing, and not even having the foresight, the imagination, or the spiritual advancement to recognize even the VICINITY of the point of view I'm expressing here.

I didn't want to stir up a hornets nest, and I don't plan on it. The point is, politics is for the masses. Bankers and politicians are only men of straw.... even though they occupy high places and appear to be authors of the plans which are carried out...

If you happen to be a man of history, and scientific inquiry, rather than one of faith (which is certainly my position) I highly reccommend beginning that inquiry with steps in the right direction, rather than approaching into the mirky depths of orthodoxy. I WISH that I had a link for the first half of this political document, but I do not. In my several minutes of web searching, I found only one link to the second half. Which is fine. If it intrigues you enough to want to read more about it, it's printed in manuscript in 1968 titled "The Red Symphony: X-Ray of Revolution." Like the website I found the link on, I reccommend the following book which has it in its entirety, as the original publication is no longer procurable. "Fourth Reich of the Rich." (1988) by Des Griffin.

Here. Enjoy. Red Symphony, second half

PS. Brian, you should read my book. It's humor's right up your fuckin alley. I'm waiting for contact from DAW books on it, but they take forever, so it is currently UNpublished. If you want, I'll e-mail you the current manuscript.

10-09-2004, 02:08 AM	#41
LordZoma Sent to the cornfield Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 157	I'm sorry I'm bringing this up already... But you all ARE aware that both Kerry and Bush graduated from Yale as members of the Skull and Crossbones Society. I'm sure, not many of you are overly steeped with knowledge of the occult or secret societies, but if you know anything about the Skull and Crossbones, it's basically the bridge, that connects Freemasonry and Luciferian Masonry ie the illuminati. Now I'm not bringing up any criticism or questions in relation to secret societies, or their political influences... but I am bringing up this simple little fact. Did you ever think of the election in the frame of a two party system as being a WIN WIN / LOSE LOSE situation. Regardless of which candidate is chosen, they still play for the same team, know what I mean? And if you think I'M being naive, please, don't respond. Last edited by LordZoma; 10-09-2004 at 05:49 AM.

10-09-2004, 11:54 AM	#45
Illuminatus The Dread Pirate Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Where the wild things are Posts: 1,310	Single issue people confuse me. Why vote against Kerry because on one point you disagreee with him? Yes, Bush has convictions, but so did Hitler, And Stalin. Convictions don't make things you do better. And Kerry does have convictions, they're just not the ones you agree wtih. Your statement is inherently flawed, though the abortion thing has merit. However are you going to vote for the man who declares war on nations without good reason then makes things up later to justify it, JUST because he's against abortion and stem cell research? That sounds at least as bad as harvesting life for life. Furthermore, you sound like an intelligent scientific type. Guess what? Bush HATES you. You may agree on this, but I bet Bush doesn't respect your interests anywhere else. __________________ Man, n. An animal so lost in rapturous contemplation of what he thinks he is as to overlook what he indubitably ought to be. His chief occupation is the extermination of other animals and his own species, which, however, multiplies with such insistent rapidity as to infest the whole habitable earth and Canada. -Ambrose Bierce's Devil's Dictionary

10-09-2004, 02:50 PM	#47
Elminster_Amaur Her hands were cold and small. Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: My Mind Posts: 2,049	I was watching the debate last night, and I had to turn it off because I was disgusted by both of them. Someone would ask Kerry a question and he wouldn't answer it, he'd just start talking about something entirely different. Someone would ask Bush a question, and he would attack Kerry's stance on that issue. What the hell is the point of a debate where neither person is debating the issues? I remember, someone asked Bush about the environment, and, for a while, he didn't attack Kerry, he started talking about all his accomplishments. Kerry countered with a speech about No Child Left Behind. WTF does that have to do with the environment? I don't know, but he made it sound like it was entirely about the environment. Then Bush countered with, "Look at his voting record." My roommate and I watched for three more questions after that, but it didn't get better. Someone questioned Kerry about how he would run the war. He started talking about how he wouldn't raise taxes. Bush actually looked at that one rationally and gave us the numbers from both parties' campaign commitees, and said it was probably somewhere in between the two, and how that was still 2 trillion short of the new spending Kerry planned. __________________ "It just rubs me the wrong way." -CJ, most likely about non-yaoi porn or something

10-09-2004, 09:04 PM	#50
LordZoma Sent to the cornfield Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 157	This is taken as a quote from the website Brian just linked. "Jesus did not come to save the apes & dolphins, He did not come to save the puppies & kitties, and He certainly did not come to save the Zeta Reticulans & the Alien Grays. Jesus Christ is called theKINSMAN REDEEMER. The atonement work of Jesus was only to save His kinsman, the sons of Adam. If a being is not a descendent of Adam, this being --no matter how intelligent -- will not take part in the promise of Jesus Christ. Watcher 's research confirms that there are beings genetically similar to the race of Adams, but have been genetically tampered with by rebel angels, or engineered to be superior humans in some illuminated laboratory. These hybrids are not capable of "being saved" by the grace of the Kinsman Redeemer, for they are not His kinsmen. This increase in humans who aren't genetically sons of Adam is a symptom of the end times, just as in the days of Noah when Nephilim walked the earth among humans." There's a major difference between my political commentary, and this guy's rhetoric. He has an agenda. I do not. I don't even want to get into nitpicking the conclusions this guy has come to. Once you get into the realm of mixing biblical interperetation with involved occultic studies, you are entering the realm of lies and deceipt. There are a lot of groups out there that have agendas of their own. Disinformation is rampant between these groups, and individuals who try to make sense of it all. This, is something I try to avoid. In any case, SOME of the material on the website is very illuminating. I am particularly fond of his whimsical approach on the Ouroboros, and his instant glancing over of Maian time cycles from a greek perspective. He also manages to AVOID mentioning anything specific from the flower of life paradigm, while beating around the bush with it, when he begins referencing fractal geometry, apollo and Ra. Anyway. I digress. I wasn't saying "If you think I'm wrong don't respond." I said, "If you think I"m being naive, don't respond." There is a distinct difference between disagreeing, and not even having the foresight, the imagination, or the spiritual advancement to recognize even the VICINITY of the point of view I'm expressing here. I didn't want to stir up a hornets nest, and I don't plan on it. The point is, politics is for the masses. Bankers and politicians are only men of straw.... even though they occupy high places and appear to be authors of the plans which are carried out... If you happen to be a man of history, and scientific inquiry, rather than one of faith (which is certainly my position) I highly reccommend beginning that inquiry with steps in the right direction, rather than approaching into the mirky depths of orthodoxy. I WISH that I had a link for the first half of this political document, but I do not. In my several minutes of web searching, I found only one link to the second half. Which is fine. If it intrigues you enough to want to read more about it, it's printed in manuscript in 1968 titled "The Red Symphony: X-Ray of Revolution." Like the website I found the link on, I reccommend the following book which has it in its entirety, as the original publication is no longer procurable. "Fourth Reich of the Rich." (1988) by Des Griffin. Here. Enjoy. Red Symphony, second half PS. Brian, you should read my book. It's humor's right up your fuckin alley. I'm waiting for contact from DAW books on it, but they take forever, so it is currently UNpublished. If you want, I'll e-mail you the current manuscript. Last edited by LordZoma; 10-09-2004 at 09:18 PM.