A Question for Conspiracy Theorists.

[MRC_Hans]

Your first complaint 1337m4n. I guess it ain't that easy after all. LMAO.

Easy enough, I just didn't think I'd bother to register for the sake of a joke.

But if this is enough to stop you from fighting the NWO, you must be a very brave person, indeed.

Hans

 

[Dcdrac]

I have an I O U from the NWO for setting up their deliberatly leaky servers distributing false information to Ct beleivers while hiding the real plans....


OOOPPPPSSS

 

[000063]

... so you keep fighting the NWO by thinking about it?

Um.

 

[uke2se]

Yes it is.

No it's not.

I disagree, Vernon Howards New Life foundation teaches love and I doubt you have the ability to do so. (You cannot teach something you do not know) If you meant we are both as equals in essence then I would agree but as highly evolved? No, you and many others as well as I have much work to do, some more than others

You're wrong. Evolution doesn't have a direction. You and I are as highly evolved as an earth-worm and a mosquito and even an amoeba. Also, please drop the personal attacks. I know love very well (possibly better than Vernon Howard).

The darkness is attributed to a lack of knowledge of self. This is what I gather from researching his works, Vernon elaborates further but you would have to research his material.

Not interested in quasi-philosophical mumbo jumbo.

From researching Vernons works he speaks of home as in your personal happy place, a simple self-contentment not to be confused with ego-excitement.

Then I'm home.

I don't think you took that in the correct context. Do you think the word 'they' in that sentence meant rationality and woo itself? It looks to me as if it was referring to the masses of people.

That's what it looked like to me as well. Still don't get what you're trying to say by "they". Do you believe yourself above or apart from other people?

I didn't put the quotes on myself I peeled it off a faq list. But I agree with the quotes because people do think in concepts of right and wrong as if they were black and white, and usually people cannot handle an observer on the sidelines who refuses to get involved with the fighting so become targets themselves due to the demands and irrationalities of the masses not being met by the observer.

People who snipe from the sidelines are never taken seriously when it comes to dealing with the real problems of this world. You can't really opt out of living in reality.

Them or they refers to someone other than you.

Who? Names?

Ahh so your one of the angry masses who cannot handle an observer who refuses to get involved with your fighting.

You are involved with "my fighting", if that's what you call a discussion. The only way for you to live as you preach is to stay away from online message boards. Somehow I think that's more than you could handle.

 

[1337m4n]

Strawman. I didn't say the actual setting up part was easy. Filling it up with content is. Thank you for proving my point at that.

You click "New Post". You type in the ideas that pop into your head. You Google some sources to back up your ideas. All of this can be done from an air-conditioned room with soda and nachos and your favorite radio station playing.

I can think of literally nothing easier that would still qualify as "work". Heck, you're doing it right now. You're clicking "new post" buttons, typing in ideas that pop into your head, and occasionally adding sources--bad sources, but sources nonetheless. The only difference is that JREF Forum isn't called a "blog".

You know what men of the past did when they felt the government was in the wrong? They coordinated pickets, walkouts, and hunger strikes. They willingly got themselves arrested just to send a message. MLK never once complained that any of this was "too hard". Yet here you are, whining on the internet about how hard it is to whine on the internet. Which is the best idea you can come up with in response to believing that your own government directly murdered 3000 people and then covered it up. If that's "hard", I shudder to ask what you would consider an example of an "easy" task.

"Dull"? "Tedious"? Arguably. "Difficult"? *********** no.

 

[1337m4n]

I'm gonna ask my boss for another week's vacation; all this posting on the Internet is so hard I am emotionally and mentally drained.

 

[jaydeehess]

deleted

 

[Natan]

You're clicking "new post" buttons, typing in ideas that pop into your head, and occasionally adding sources--bad sources, but sources nonetheless.

Ha. The actual arguments on the facts started to get pretty quiet in the 5 dancing joooos thread when I used my bad sources. One comment I got, is I shouldn't have used it as I'm a CT and hence official sources are not allowed.

 

[Natan]

I'm gonna ask my boss for another week's vacation; all this posting on the Internet is so hard I am emotionally and mentally drained.

Interpretation?

 

[uke2se]

Interpretation?

Typing is hard work, isn't it, Simon? Thank God there are heroes like you, typing the NWO into oblivion.

 

[Natan]

Typing is hard work, isn't it, Simon? Thank God there are heroes like you, typing the NWO into oblivion.

I see the sneering isn't going to end. Have fun, I'm out.

 

[Straw Man]

Typing is hard work, isn't it, Simon? Thank God Unfortunately, there are heroes people like you, typing the NWOThird Reich into oblivion. life.

ftfy

 

[uke2se]

ftfy

Giving him a bit too much credit there, but sure.

 

[Bell]

I see the sneering isn't going to end. Have fun, I'm out.

Are you going to give up? FIGHT! Dammit!

 

[cecil1]

Right so you breached the MA by spamming material from elsewhere (and presented it as your own) and helpfully point out "they" are somebody other than uke, with out answering Ukes question of whom specifically you meant when you said "they".


See we know "they" means somebody. I too would like to know the name of the person youwere attributing characteristics to when you said "they".

I don't have 15 posts yet you can relax there columbo. The faq list comes from new life foundation .org it's not a secret.

Did you think the word "they" was referring to you?

 

[Straw Man]

He can't be destroying the NWO. Aren't his heroes involved in there somewhere with their Neuordnung?

 

[uke2se]

I don't have 15 posts yet you can relax there columbo. The faq list comes from new life foundation .org it's not a secret.

Did you think the word "they" was referring to you?

We have no idea what the word "they" was referring to. That's why I have repeatedly asked you what it was referring to.

 

[timhau]

Typing is hard work, isn't it, Simon? Thank God there are heroes like you, thinking about typing the NWO into oblivion.

Fixed that for you.

 

[cecil1]

No it's not.

Saving the world is a hoax, yep.

You're wrong. Evolution doesn't have a direction. You and I are as highly evolved as an earth-worm and a mosquito and even an amoeba. Also, please drop the personal attacks. I know love very well (possibly better than Vernon Howard).

I disagree, evolution as in obtaining a degree of understanding of self will suffice for the example. Evolution doesn't have to refer to biology. A simple mistake of assumption on your part due to the fact you are ignorant of these matters. If you disagree with the faq you could always write the new life foundation and obtain confirmation of the context the word was to be used in.
I also doubt you know love. You could always attempt to prove me wrong.

Not interested in quasi-philosophical mumbo jumbo.

Hence your ignorance in these matters, the problem is you
don't know enough to know why you're wrong.

Then I'm home.

I would disagree as you still live from a self-induced hypnotic state that you have not identified yet. If you could elaborate your position with more detail I would be swayed into believing you, but as it stands you've made nothing but clever remarks with no substance.

That's what it looked like to me as well. Still don't get what you're trying to say by "they". Do you believe yourself above or apart from other people?

Do you take the faq personally? Perhaps that is an indication of the message disrupting your ego. I didn't think people would become upset when reading that saving the world is a hoax when they didn't believe in some evil dark power ruling the world in the first place. This facet amazes me about you, can you elaborate further why you feel it is neccessary to save the world from nothing?

People who snipe from the sidelines are never taken seriously when it comes to dealing with the real problems of this world. You can't really opt out of living in reality.

You mean people who do not take "your" side according to your demands expectations and desires? Yes, yes, if only everyone in the world would agree with you this world would be perfect. Catastrophic amounts of suicides a year as recorded by WHO on the stats tables would disagree that you cannot opt out of living in reality.

Who? Names?

Still taking it personally I see. The word they and them was a sweeping generalization of the masses, but if you disagree with that you could always get confirmation from the new life foundation on what they meant exactly, they do reply to emails on the contact us page. I doubt they know your name though.

You are involved with "my fighting", if that's what you call a discussion. The only way for you to live as you preach is to stay away from online message boards. Somehow I think that's more than you could handle.

I disagree, you seem to think observers must live in an ivory tower seperated from the world. You simply want another to take your side in the fighting so your ego can be sedated for the time being. I refuse to take "your" side. Now can you tell me how saving the world is not a hoax? What terrible evil has the world in it's grips?

 

[uke2se]

Saving the world is a hoax, yep.

Nope. It can't be. Not grammatically possible.

I disagree, evolution as in obtaining a degree of understanding of self will suffice for the example. Evolution doesn't have to refer to biology.

Evolution does refer to biology, or makes an analogue to the biological process of evolution.

A simple mistake of assumption on your part due to the fact you are ignorant of these matters.

No mistake. You're just using the word wrong.

If you disagree with the faq you could always write the new life foundation and obtain confirmation of the context the word was to be used in.

Don't have to. I'm quite satisfied pointing out that it's woo.

I also doubt you know love. You could always attempt to prove me wrong.

I don't take kindly to being solicited by men I don't know.

Hence your ignorance in these matters, the problem is you
don't know enough to know why you're wrong.

Or you're talking BS. I think my version is more likely.

I would disagree as you still live from a self-induced hypnotic state that you have not identified yet.

How do you know that? You've never even met me.

If you could elaborate your position with more detail I would be swayed into believing you, but as it stands you've made nothing but clever remarks with no substance.

My remarks have more substance than yours. Mine are grounded in reality, yours aren't.

Do you take the faq personally? Perhaps that is an indication of the message disrupting your ego. I didn't think people would become upset when reading that saving the world is a hoax when they didn't believe in some evil dark power ruling the world in the first place. This facet amazes me about you, can you elaborate further why you feel it is neccessary to save the world from nothing?

I think it's strange that you are attempting to answer my question with a heap of questions and assumptions of your own. Now, could you please snap back to attention and answer the question? Who are "they"?

You mean people who do not take "your" side according to your demands expectations and desires?

No, I mean people who snipe from the sidelines. People who won't commit to a position. The kind of people you apparently hail as true heroes. People who disagree with me get the respect they deserve. The people you talk about get no respect.

Yes, yes, if only everyone in the world would agree with you this world would be perfect. Catastrophic amounts of suicides a year as recorded by WHO on the stats tables would disagree that you cannot opt out of living in reality.

Are you blaming me for suicides now?

Still taking it personally I see.

No. Never did. Just asking you to clarify.

The word they and them was a sweeping generalization of the masses, but if you disagree with that you could always get confirmation from the new life foundation on what they meant exactly, they do reply to emails on the contact us page. I doubt they know your name though.

I would hope they don't know my name. I'd be scared if they did.

I disagree, you seem to think observers must live in an ivory tower seperated from the world.

Nope. Never said that. Stop assuming so much. You know what they say about assumptions.

You simply want another to take your side in the fighting so your ego can be sedated for the time being.

No, I want to wind you up some more for more comedy gold.

I refuse to take "your" side. Now can you tell me how saving the world is not a hoax? What terrible evil has the world in it's grips?

The burden of evidence is on the person making the assertion: you. How is saving the world a hoax? How is it even grammatically possible?