The Mother Of All Conspiracies

[lazs2]

yep.. I fail to see how chair is wrong about the spanish situation.

perhaps you can explain?

lazs

[Momus--]

Originally posted by Chairboy
Spanish voters helped the terrorists change their entire government.  Up until the election, one party was polling strong.  The bombs happen right before the election, and the other party (the one that wanted to pursue appeasement) was voted into office.

Actually no. The PP's lead over the PSOE had shrunk progressively over the months leading up to the election - the most any poll showed it to be immediately prior to the election was 5%, which pretty much what Gore led Bush by on the eve of the 2000 US election. Of course, I wouldn't expect someone who apparently doesn't even know the names of the political parties involved to know any of this.

Funnily, by using a loaded term like "appeasement" you just reiterate your own willingness to swallow the big lie that conflates the attack on Iraq with any kind of meaningful response to the problem of islamist revivalism. 90% of the spanish electorate didn't buy that one back in 2003; you're still to catch on apparently.

All that apart, your contention is totally undermined by the fact that Spain continues to maintain forces in Afghanistan.

So yes, Viking is basically right.

[lazs2]

if the polling was more wrong in spain because of terrorists than it was in the US with gore then I would say that the terrorists had a major impact and that chair was correct.

lazs

[68ROX]

Originally posted by Chairboy
Well done, Spain.  You proved terrorism is an effective tool for foreign policy.

Spain is just a France that spells things different.


68ROX

[Viking]

What Momus said, and in addition: The Spanish government fell not because of the terrorist attacks, but because of the Iraqi War and the government's poor handling of the aftermath. The Spanish government tried to pin the attack on ETA instead of the Islamics, and their deceitfulness cost them the election.

I know the American mindset is to support your government in war ... misguided patriotism and all. However the Spanish government involved the Spaniards in an illegal war they wanted nothing to do with, and after the March 11 attack they even lied and tried to use the attack for their own political agenda. Unlike the American public the Spaniards are not as stupid as to let something like that go unpunished. Spain has been a democracy for only 30 years now, perhaps they are not as complacent and decadent about their freedom as you people seem to be.

[Bluedog]

Originally posted by lazs2
but not the way you think.

lazs

LOL!! Tell me lazs, what is it that Im thinking about this topic that is wrong?
That some people will jump to conclusions without knowing the whole truth?.....seems I'm bang on the mark with that part at least.

[AKIron]

Originally posted by Bluedog
LOL!! Tell me lazs, what is it that Im thinking about this topic that is wrong?
That some people will jump to conclusions without knowing the whole truth?.....seems I'm bang on the mark with that part at least.

I know what lazs is thinking and he is thinking that you are thinking of the number seven. Tell me you aren't.

[sgt203]

Originally posted by Viking
I know the American mindset is to support your government in war ... misguided patriotism and all. However the Spanish government involved the Spaniards in an illegal war they wanted nothing to do with, and after the March 11 attack they even lied and tried to use the attack for their own political agenda. Unlike the American public the Spaniards are not as stupid as to let something like that go unpunished. Spain has been a democracy for only 30 years now, perhaps they are not as complacent and decadent about their freedom as you people seem to be.

You know I, as an American, had this long and brilliant response to this post but decided that you put so much effort and time into this all I need to say is <>  and GFY for taking the time to post this...

[Reschke]

Also based on Greek Mythology and a few other stories from other religions around the whole Mediterranean region. In short could it all have been conceived by one man (Paul aka Saul) who was a Roman citizen and some think might have been linked to Nero later in life???? All in a way that would allow the Romans to get past the true beginnings of a religion that was based on the basic tenets of Judaism (Old Testament Jewish faith) and that was something that the every day Roman would never accept since they all absolutely despised the Jews in every sense.

Who knows!!!! None of us were there and none of us know the truth.

Originally posted by crockett
I didn't watch the whole video, have no clue what it's about, skiped to a few parts and listened for a min or two. As far as what he said about Christianity being based on Ancient Egyptian religion he is totally correct.

Anyone whom has studied ancient Egyptian culture knows about this. Of course Christians will never admit it, but you can't hide from history but i guess you can ignore it.

As far as the rest of the video I have no clue, not even really interrested.

[red26]

<----- Dust off old combat boots, picks up rifle, Sends his AMERICAN FLAG UP THE FLAG POLE and....






 Gets ready to fight for GOD And his beloved country.  Im always ready to fight for my Country and the Wonderful GOOD BOOK.

[Bluedog]

Originally posted by AKIron
I know what lazs is thinking and he is thinking that you are thinking of the number seven. Tell me you aren't.

Well...yeah, seven it is.
But I am more used to thinking of the number seven as five plus two.
Same end result, differant approach.

I personally think the beginning of that movie has a lot going for it, the explanation of how the same story/ideal has been in circulation for a lot longer than 'Christianity' as we think of it has been around, with just the names changed to suit the audience, I find very interesting.

I have long felt that the Bible was less of a factual account of events, and more of a set of morals and ideals, 'packaged' in stories surrounding people and places that it's original intended audience could relate to.

For instance it is far easier to tell a child a story about a baby king borne in a manger and visited by three kings under the light of a star in the east, than it would be to convey the workings of the Sun, stars ,planets etc, and their impact and influence upon day/night, the seasons, life and everything else on this planet, in a manner that would be understood and retained.

The basic gist or moral of the story is no differant, it is just the manner in which it  is approached, or the names given to the entities being spoken of that are differant.

To me it boils down to wether one chooses to believe that God created the universe and everything in it and is as such a seperate entity, or wether in fact God IS the universe and everything in it.

My personal lean is more toward the latter.

As for the second part of the movie, well, I hope and pray that it is all utterly false, for were it true, it would change my outlook about a whole bunch of things.....I believe someone up-thread said "It would break my heart if it were true", or at least words to that effect, and I couldn't agree more.
I may not be an American,but I have allways held in very high regard your nations creed of equality and freedom, to find that to have been a well presented lie would be a great slap in the face to a great many things I have come to belive in.
However, I am allso open minded enough to realise that some, if not all of it is within the realms of possability, and at the least worthy of some consideration.

Where that consideration leads is an altogether differant question, but all that it takes for that whole scenario to be possible and happening is for everyone to refuse to believe it or learn more about it, for whatever reason.

I would rather be wrong and live happily ever after, than be right and be a part of the reason it was or is possible by refusing to question.





There ya go, you can pick that apart all you like.

[lazs2]

"The whole point that movie makes can be seen in action right here in this very thread."

well... I am not sure how that is true so...  my guess is that it is not what you think.

My take on the movie is that... its a movie.. nothing serious... like a michelle moore film..  say something outrageous and then "prove" it by saying something you made up or is half true or out of context or simple made up... you zip right by it and.. then build on it... no one is going to check and you already got their money... you throw a lot of info at the rubes in an hour and a half... no time for them to sort it out or research...

it is not info... it is raw emotion... pretty much what he accuses religion of.. "documentaries" like this and moores are exactly like the worst part of religion.

As for organized religion..  I may agree with you... my god is a personal one who is the universe... I think that some religion is a mans way of gaining power and some is divinely inspired... not sure about your childrens story part.. kids don't tithe.

The second part... like I said... I will wait for the book and footnotes.   Like moores work... when taken apart it can be seen that moores work would embarrass even the most shoddy author.

But.. it is raw emotion...  the media potato is the evangilist of the new century.    People writhing around in their seats in the dark... eyes big as saucers saying "lordy lordy!!!"  at the half truths and lies comeing at them in a blur from the evangilist on the screen.  

No checking... they will simply take away from the experiance a "feeling".   A myriad of soundbites burned into their little pea brains.

It's not important enough for a book and too dishonest for footnotes.

ohhh...  I forgot.. a perfect example of such a thing is "an inconvienient truth"  lots of doom and gloom and a hairs sprayed evangelist up on stage... preaching fire and brimstone and... using the bible of his religion to point out truths... some simply made up... only by the most painstaking slow motion tearing apart of the crap he spouts are we able to see that his whole scenario is a house of cards built on a foundation of dishonesty.. and greed...by then.. it is over.. the emotion is the only thing that gets across... soundbite after soundbite.... most will not be able to recount the things that horrified em correctly.. (correctly meaning quote in this case).  few or none will actually do some research to see if anything said has any basis in fact.

lazs

[Viking]

Originally posted by sgt203
You know I, as an American, had this long and brilliant response to this post but decided that you put so much effort and time into this all I need to say is <>  and GFY for taking the time to post this...

Thanks <>

Just out of curiosity ... was your reply going to be a rebuttal or a confirmation?

[lazs2]

viking... what did you think of the kennedy speech and the impication (made up soundbite full of emotion) that.... that.. somehow... oswald was some sort of secret society in and of himself?   That kennedy was warning us about oswalds society and that's why he was shot?

Where does this guy get all this inside info?   from moore?  algore?

laughable stuff.

lazs

[sgt203]

Originally posted by Viking
Thanks <>

Just out of curiosity ... was your reply going to be a rebuttal or a confirmation?

It was not going to be an affirmation of your opinion of America and Americans.