|
Zeitgeist: Addendum (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DJ Shibby |
| quote: | Originally posted by hardcore trancer
PKC I just enjoy hearing about new things in this world.These types of movies are different and some of the ideas on these films did actully made me think about alot of things.
Bottom line I watched the movie for what it is and just for something to think about.;) |
I respect this kind of honesty. |
|
|
| DJ Shibby |
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
"The LORD PKC is my shepherd; I shall not want moonbatiness. It maketh me to lie: he leadeth me beside JREF. He restoreth my intellectual honesty: he leadeth me in the paths of academia for his name's sake. Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of paranoia, I will fear no moonbat: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me... lol [this part needed no revision, other than the lol]. Thou preparest a thesis before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with the oils of academia; my cup runneth over. Surely Krypton and Trancer-X shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD PKC for ever."
PKC 23
I think the only reason my plagiarized and revised Psalm 23 seems fitting at the moment is because I've been reading Capital for the last 6 hours... and now I'm really blazed... I needed something to cut through the dryness and seriousness. =P
EDIT: THC induced typo. |
I'm jealous. :( |
|
|
| Funkesthesiac69 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
"Why are you changing the subject? Are you incapable of refuting my rebuttals of your ridiculous assertions about the Fed? We're not talking about Obama or the media. And yes, you are not a skeptic. Otherwise, you'de take these conspiracy theories with a grain of salt, and it's obviously, you've swallowed all of it without even examining opposing points of view. Congrats, you're officially a follower." |
..........Changing the subject? wasn't it your primary contention that I was not thinking critically and that if I did I would subscribe to your views by attempting to rebut my arguments by trying to highlight your so-called expertise on the subject? I was just highlighting the fact that you would not have taken any politician's words at face value if you were truly a skeptic (especially in a political climate where both presidential candidates support a bailout package that is a disaster for both "mainstreet" and "wallstreet"). And as far as being a "follower" is concerned, are you attempting to diminish my argument by saying that I am just as blindly subscribing to a contentious and non-mainstream view of the federal reserve system as in any way parallel to being a strict adherent to a fundamentalist religion? Also fundamental in your assertion is that "conspiracy theories" and the pejorative connotation that pop culture has ascribed to people with deviant worldviews that follow these so-called conspiracy "theories" is somehow inherently diminutive to my credibility? ................
| quote: | | "First of all, critical thinking is simply the examination of BOTH sides of an issue, without any preconceived opinion. I have had your exact opinion on this issue before, until I examined the other side of the issue, critically, and decided there really isn't a lot of meat to your side of the argument." |
.........To naively assert that anyone can approach a problem without preconceived opinions only highlights your naivety concerning human nature, I am not blindly subservient to any view but at the current moment when the perspicacity of truthful and well educated politicians like Ron Paul (despite his disagreeable views on abortion) who predicted this crisis years before this actually happened only reinforces my skepticism of the united states government. Especially considering right now we are mired in a debt which exceeds 12.3 trillion dollars according to many inside sources and which at the very least exceeds 9.6 trillion dollars, has only served to reinforce my doubts about the efficacy of the federal reserve system. And if you even read my argument the only thing I am contending is that the federal reserve is not a transparent institution and it exerts much more power than you claim it does NOT that bush blew up the towers or that the NWO is coming in 2 years just like the always "veritable" extremist lunatics like alex jones assert. I bring up the income tax constitutionality issue to highlight how as I said in my first post that there is a lot of behavior that occurs behind the scenes and also in part to educate people that there is much evidence that the IRS is a completely fraudulent institution, true that evidence is not unequivocally irrefutable but it should at least be considered. ............
| quote: | | "To answer your question, "explain to me how the income tax is not a direct unapportioned tax?" First off, I will not prove a negative, because that would be a negative proof fallacy. Instead, I'll prove to you how it is an indirect unapportioned tax. In your deluge of court cases you posted, you conveniently left out one...Springer v. United States, 102 U.S. 586 (1881)...this court case reinforced the legality of the Revenue Act of 1864, which taxed "the gains, profits, and income of every person residing in the United States, or of any citizen of the United States residing abroad, whether derived from any kind of property, rents, interest, dividends, or salaries, or from any profession, trade, employment, or vocation, carried on in the United States or elsewhere, or from any other source whatever [ . . . ]" |
...........You do make a valid logical argument about the rhetorical question I asked you but please keep in mind my intention in posing it was not to attempt to prove you wrong but rather to illustrate a broader point. I am sorry i got carried away I just felt insulted by the general response I got when I attempted to provide an alternative perspective on the rectitude of U.S. political and economic institutions not to attack you per se. I was honestly more upset that because my pictures depict me as somewhat younger (a 19 year old sophmore in college) I felt that everyone disregarded my opinions based on very sophomoric assumptions about my intellectual capacity as a 19 year old which frankly pissed me off considering that I am a national merit scholar, i will concede that you probably have more education under your belt and might know more than I do. I just felt outraged over the lack of regard for my opinions on ageist prejudice more from other posters than from you yourself, but since you obviously presented the most rational and intellectual argument against my notions I decided to challenge you to consider my opinions, but I DID DO IT DISRESPECTFULLY and for that I am sorry. ............
| quote: | | "The Supreme Court has time and again upheld the constitutionality of the income tax. Do I personally like the income tax? No. If I had my way, all taxes except for a national sales tax, would be abolished. Income, corporate, property, etc. But the income tax is constitutional." |
......Some of the rulings you cite predate the decisions I discuss, and the mere fact that the supreme court at one point even declared that the income tax was unconstitutional but was never nullified is a key one to make if you want to assert that the US government has not been entirely truthful to the american people, and shows how the constitution itself is being violated when the supreme court declares the income tax has no new powers of taxation but allows the IRS to disgracefully continue to pillage people's homes. The supreme court is supposed to enforce its rulings for if it doesnt it negates the system of checks and balances built into the U.S. Constitution. And despite the fact that the supreme court now declares the us income tax constitutional it is only to save face for we have become so dependent on the income tax as a mechanism whereby to pay off the interest on the national debt that to have the supreme court overrule it would cause mass uprisings so obviously they will uphold decisions these days, but in lower courts many people can still get away without paying taxes by citing the argument I have cited. In fact I personally have a friend whose uncle was feature in the film from freedom to fascism he was the IRS agent from san jose who quit his job when he realized there wasn't express written constitutional authority for what the IRS was doing, whether implied or not there is not a specific statute that states the constitutionality of the income tax........
| quote: | | "Stop changing the subject." |
.......Again you continue to maintain that issues like how the unconstitutional CSA of 1970 ever became law in the first place are irrelevant to the argument im making when I am just trying to inform people of the absurdity of the war on drugs and raise key questions about what forces really dictate who runs the government. The patriot act is another such example of how america has strayed from being the apotheosis of liberty into becoming a state where the government can track the movement and conversations of all citizens..pointing out that the government has stripped us of our liberty to fight a senseless war on terror that could be won simply by improving border security, port security and returning troops from the islamic holy land as to not provoke islamic fundamentalist solidarity and influence. .........
| quote: | "Again, changing the subject. Are we talking about the Federal Reserve, or the Patriot Act?
The first two central banks of the USA, were hardly the central banks we know of today. They were not regulatory bodies, had no monopoly on money supply, and were not lenders of last resort. The Second Bank especially, was simply a depository for government tax revenue. They made loans to anyone they wanted to make a loan to, backed by tax revenue. Ultimately, this led to corruption. The Federal Reserve System is completely different. They don't keep tax revenue from the Federal government. They are strictly, a regulatory body, charged with maintaining the stability of the currency and of the financial system of the country, and are the "lender of last resort". They make loans only to member banks, not just to anyone they want. You're comparing apples to oranges.
What the hell is your alternative? Who is going to regulate the financial system, control money supply, be a lender of last resort, etc. etc.???" |
...........My alternative is not to eliminate the federal reserve system but to reform it so that it is once again restrained by the stabilizing power of gold backed money instead of worthless fiat money, lowering inflation dramatically and increasing the knowledge of the american public of the federal reserve system so they will be more apt in the future to investigate the inner workings of that secretive institution so that CONSUMER CONFIDENCE AND INDEED WORLD CONFIDENCE IN THE FED IS RESTORED because the fed has made the mistake of overextending its liquidity to the extent that the credit markets are frozen and foreign countries lack confidence in our financial system, which will ultimately lead to the emergence of other countries that have been and will continue to overtake the US in economic superiority and political influence. Also I believe that the war in Iraq is a strategic failure for it just increases the likelihood of a more cohesive Iran when in reality if we never invaded iraq in the first place in 2003 and instead focused on securing our borders and improving our own infrastructure Iran would be more politically fragmented and easier to subdue. I am also making the argument or at least raising ethical questions about laws like the patriot act and to try to hint at the impracticality of a war on drugs that barely decreases the demand for illegal substances while simultaneously driving the profit margins for violent cartels through the roof creating more violence at home. by decriminalizing many relatively innocuous drugs and providing safe havens for those already addicted to drugs like herion more people could receive safe injections, crime would go down dramatically and more people would be able to participate in the labor force and drugs could be taxed instead of the american people for income to help pay off the national debt if we started growing marijuana in this country and selling it with a tax to marijuana smokers we could raise a considerable amount of money to combat the deficit while eliminating the income tax assuming we assumed a more non-interventionist foreign policy because our country is virtually bankrupt but the federal reserve is preventing many institutions from collapsing and thus filing for bankruptcy so there true value could be established and prices would better reflect the value of the assets in question.............
| quote: | | "And with that, I have to go to sleep, I'll certainly answer the rest of your stuff tomorrow..." |
Anyway to the members of this board, yes I am somewhat partisan on this issue but I am open to hearing counterarguments and I want everyone to know the main point of my post was merely to express outrage about how ignorant ppl are about the federal reserve system, and how that ignorance is leading people like my mom to the verge of foreclosure
I concede you have many valid points and it was somewhat arrogant of me to assume I could outfox you on an issue you obviously have much more knowledge of than I do. But as a 19 year old i feel like I did a reasonably good job of arguing my point and presenting alternative views. As far as the rest of my posts are concerned they just simply were posted in the hope that more people might consider the possibility that the government is not irreproachable in this crisis and neither is the federal reserve not to argue that bush blew up the towers or the NWO is coming
I apologize to everyone if i came off as presumptuous
please understand what I really intended to say is being outlined in this statement |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
Everytime a wikipedia article is sourced as truth, Socrates cries.
For God's sake, when was the last time some of you people did academic research? You use this kind of sourcing and research to make ridiculous claims in an academic paper and you'd be laughed out of your degree program.
I don't care if you source blogs and newspaper articles, but trying to pass off absurdly counterintuitive quotes and assertions as accurate fact (and casting anyone who is rightly skeptical of such bald-faced intellectual dishonesty as a troll or somehow un-intelligent) is absolutely absurd. This whole thread is simply farcical. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Funkesthesiac69
I felt that everyone disregarded my opinions based on very sophomoric assumptions about my intellectual capacity as a 19 year old which frankly pissed me off |
nobody here is making assumptions about your intellectual capacity. we are judging you on the merit of what you have posted, and what you have posted is either inaccurate or demonstrably untrue.
here's a good overview of why we don't use the gold standard anymore:
link
here is a link that explains a lot of the nonsense re the federal reserve:
http://www.conspiracyscience.com/ar...ist/part-three/ |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
nobody here is making assumptions about your intellectual capacity. we are judging you on the merit of what you have posted, and what you have posted is either inaccurate or demonstrably untrue.
here's a good overview of why we don't use the gold standard anymore:
link
here is a link that explains a lot of the nonsense re the federal reserve:
http://www.conspiracyscience.com/ar...ist/part-three/ |
Furthermore, intellectual dishonesty is not indicative of mental capacity but rather laziness in sourcing and jumping to conclusions without valid evidence as support. |
|
|
| LazFX |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
Furthermore, intellectual dishonesty is not indicative of mental capacity but rather laziness in sourcing and jumping to conclusions without valid evidence as support. |
and also the use of blurry youtube videos with poor production really sways my opinions............and makes me think "wow, maybe the joos and the knights templar are really in cahoots to control the world along with the greys and the reptilian interdimensional overlords."
The internet has made a lot of smart people really ing stupid. |
|
|
| culorut |
| quote: | | The internet has made a lot of smart people really ing stupid. |
The internet has brought awareness, this is the primary reason they want to pull the plug on the world wide web.
People who are stupid will always remain really in stupid. Internet or no internet. |
|
|
| culorut |
Interesting, Funkesthesiac69 "our new friend" is schooling everyone on this subject.
:eyes: |
|
|
| culorut |
| quote: | | and also the use of blurry youtube videos with poor production really sways my opinions............and makes me think "wow, maybe the joos and the knights templar are really in cahoots to control the world along with the greys and the reptilian interdimensional overlords." |
The video was just released, why would he want to upload a DVD quality video for free when it still has to make the rounds first?
Releasing the video (even if not of the highest quality) a few days after the official showing of the documentary was more then good enough.
If you do not like it too bad for you, don't watch. |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
The internet has brought awareness, this is the primary reason they want to pull the plug on the world wide web. |
Also, the mysterious use of pronouns when referring to undistinguishable dangers is the mark of pre-pubescent logic and reasoning. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Funkesthesiac69
..........Changing the subject? wasn't it your primary contention that I was not thinking critically and that if I did I would subscribe to your views by attempting to rebut my arguments by trying to highlight your so-called expertise on the subject? I was just highlighting the fact that you would not have taken any politician's words at face value if you were truly a skeptic (especially in a political climate where both presidential candidates support a bailout package that is a disaster for both "mainstreet" and "wallstreet"). And as far as being a "follower" is concerned, are you attempting to diminish my argument by saying that I am just as blindly subscribing to a contentious and non-mainstream view of the federal reserve system as in any way parallel to being a strict adherent to a fundamentalist religion? Also fundamental in your assertion is that "conspiracy theories" and the pejorative connotation that pop culture has ascribed to people with deviant worldviews that follow these so-called conspiracy "theories" is somehow inherently diminutive to my credibility? ................ |
You've made a small fallacy. The straw man argument, "Changing the subject? wasn't it your primary contention that I was not thinking critically and that if I did I would subscribe to your views by attempting to rebut my arguments by trying to highlight your so-called expertise on the subject?" I never made any such argument, but rather, you've changed my argument in such a way as to make it easy for you to dismiss my points. The most essential point is (i.e. why i say you haven't practiced critical thinking), is that you have no idea how the Federal Reserve System works. You've just regurgitated, almost word for word, the conspiracy theories about the Federal Reserve, which are unfounded. Then you go off about Obama, politicians, and the media. Can't you conspiracy theorist stick to the topic at hand? You are a "follower" in the sense that you have yet to demonstrate a competant understanding of the Federal Reserve System, how it works, and its purpose. Until then, I'm going to have to debunk every one of your false assertions like, "Nothing backs the dollar." If you don't even know the basics of our economic system, you shouldn't even be commenting on the supposed evilness of the Federal Reserve System.
| quote: | | .........To naively assert that anyone can approach a problem without preconceived opinions only highlights your naivety concerning human nature, I am not blindly subservient to any view but at the current moment when the perspicacity of truthful and well educated politicians like Ron Paul (despite his disagreeable views on abortion) who predicted this crisis years before this actually happened only reinforces my skepticism of the united states government. Especially considering right now we are mired in a debt which exceeds 12.3 trillion dollars according to many inside sources and which at the very least exceeds 9.6 trillion dollars, has only served to reinforce my doubts about the efficacy of the federal reserve system. And if you even read my argument the only thing I am contending is that the federal reserve is not a transparent institution and it exerts much more power than you claim it does NOT that bush blew up the towers or that the NWO is coming in 2 years just like the always "veritable" extremist lunatics like alex jones assert. I bring up the income tax constitutionality issue to highlight how as I said in my first post that there is a lot of behavior that occurs behind the scenes and also in part to educate people that there is much evidence that the IRS is a completely fraudulent institution, true that evidence is not unequivocally irrefutable but it should at least be considered. ............ |
People are entirely capable of approaching an issue from an objective point of view. It's called looking at both sides of the issue, "critical thinking". Scientists bet their careers on it. You don't go into a scientific question with your answer already in mind. You let your observations tell you the answer. Don't take this as insult, becuase I think this is how your taking it. It's just an observation of your arguments. You lack a competant understanding of the Federal Reserve System but yet, you preach on and on about the Fed does this, or the Fed does that. I've demonstrated, clearly, you are wrong on almost everything you've posted. For example, again, you said, "Nothing backs the dollar." Clearly, you don't even have a competant understanding of what fiat currency really is, and that it is actually backed by something. In order to make the conspiratorial assertions about the Fed which you make, you must first understand and grasp what the Fed really is, what it does, and the purpose of its existance. Until then, your assertions are unfounded.
As for Ron Paul, I voted for him in the primaries...;)...I'de like to see all income taxes abolished, but I will not say they are illegal.
| quote: | | ...........You do make a valid logical argument about the rhetorical question I asked you but please keep in mind my intention in posing it was not to attempt to prove you wrong but rather to illustrate a broader point. I am sorry i got carried away I just felt insulted by the general response I got when I attempted to provide an alternative perspective on the rectitude of U.S. political and economic institutions not to attack you per se. I was honestly more upset that because my pictures depict me as somewhat younger (a 19 year old sophmore in college) I felt that everyone disregarded my opinions based on very sophomoric assumptions about my intellectual capacity as a 19 year old which frankly pissed me off considering that I am a national merit scholar, i will concede that you probably have more education under your belt and might know more than I do. I just felt outraged over the lack of regard for my opinions on ageist prejudice more from other posters than from you yourself, but since you obviously presented the most rational and intellectual argument against my notions I decided to challenge you to consider my opinions, but I DID DO IT DISRESPECTFULLY and for that I am sorry. ............ |
Don't take anything I say as an insult. For once, we have someone who actually tries to debate rationally, unlike colorut or trancer x, who copy & paste other people's opinions, and use them as their own; then insult anyone who disagrees with them. You are someone I can have an intelligent conversation with. I take your opinions seriously, though with a very skeptical mindset, because I really don't think you truly understand the Federal Reserve System enough to critically examine this conspiratorial viewpoint which you subscribe to. I'm not disregarding your opinion, becuase here I am, debating you point for point on it, and spending my precious time doing it...:D
| quote: | | ......Some of the rulings you cite predate the decisions I discuss, and the mere fact that the supreme court at one point even declared that the income tax was unconstitutional but was never nullified is a key one to make if you want to assert that the US government has not been entirely truthful to the american people, and shows how the constitution itself is being violated when the supreme court declares the income tax has no new powers of taxation but allows the IRS to disgracefully continue to pillage people's homes. The supreme court is supposed to enforce its rulings for if it doesnt it negates the system of checks and balances built into the U.S. Constitution. And despite the fact that the supreme court now declares the us income tax constitutional it is only to save face for we have become so dependent on the income tax as a mechanism whereby to pay off the interest on the national debt that to have the supreme court overrule it would cause mass uprisings so obviously they will uphold decisions these days, but in lower courts many people can still get away without paying taxes by citing the argument I have cited. In fact I personally have a friend whose uncle was feature in the film from freedom to fascism he was the IRS agent from san jose who quit his job when he realized there wasn't express written constitutional authority for what the IRS was doing, whether implied or not there is not a specific statute that states the constitutionality of the income tax........ |
I think you're wrong here. If the Supreme Court was so worried about public insurection against its decisions, they wouldn't have passed the racial desegregation rulings in the 1960's. That certainly got White Southerners up in arms. The case which you are referring to, called Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company, 157 U.S. 429, did not rule income taxes to be unconstitutional. But rather, it ruled that UNAPPORTIONED income taxes were constitutional. That is an entirely different thing than to say income taxes are unconstitutional. There is actually a statute which does state the constitutionality of the income tax. It's the 16th amendment, and all supreme court cases which have all affirmed its constitutionality. I don't know about you, but I put my faith in the competant understanding of constitutional law, which is the job of Supreme Court Justices. If your friend's uncle is so adamant about his viewpoint, then he needs to go before the Supreme Court and argue his case. Otherwise, his view is not relevant to the law.
| quote: | | .......Again you continue to maintain that issues like how the unconstitutional CSA of 1970 ever became law in the first place are irrelevant to the argument im making when I am just trying to inform people of the absurdity of the war on drugs and raise key questions about what forces really dictate who runs the government. The patriot act is another such example of how america has strayed from being the apotheosis of liberty into becoming a state where the government can track the movement and conversations of all citizens..pointing out that the government has stripped us of our liberty to fight a senseless war on terror that could be won simply by improving border security, port security and returning troops from the islamic holy land as to not provoke islamic fundamentalist solidarity and influence. ......... |
Yes, but the war on drugs, and the patriot act have nothing to do with the topic we originally were debating, which was the Federal Reserve System. If you want to go on about the War on Drugs, and the Patriot Act, fine, I'm just saying, we're digressing from the original debate. Anyways, I agree, the War on Drugs, and the Patriot Act are digusting pieces of paper which negate freedom of liberty.
| quote: | | ...........My alternative is not to eliminate the federal reserve system but to reform it so that it is once again restrained by the stabilizing power of gold backed money instead of worthless fiat money, lowering inflation dramatically and increasing the knowledge of the american public of the federal reserve system so they will be more apt in the future to investigate the inner workings of that secretive institution so that CONSUMER CONFIDENCE AND INDEED WORLD CONFIDENCE IN THE FED IS RESTORED because the fed has made the mistake of overextending its liquidity to the extent that the credit markets are frozen and foreign countries lack confidence in our financial system, which will ultimately lead to the emergence of other countries that have been and will continue to overtake the US in economic superiority and political influence. Also I believe that the war in Iraq is a strategic failure for it just increases the likelihood of a more cohesive Iran when in reality if we never invaded iraq in the first place in 2003 and instead focused on securing our borders and improving our own infrastructure Iran would be more politically fragmented and easier to subdue. I am also making the argument or at least raising ethical questions about laws like the patriot act and to try to hint at the impracticality of a war on drugs that barely decreases the demand for illegal substances while simultaneously driving the profit margins for violent cartels through the roof creating more violence at home. by decriminalizing many relatively innocuous drugs and providing safe havens for those already addicted to drugs like herion more people could receive safe injections, crime would go down dramatically and more people would be able to participate in the labor force and drugs could be taxed instead of the american people for income to help pay off the national debt if we started growing marijuana in this country and selling it with a tax to marijuana smokers we could raise a considerable amount of money to combat the deficit while eliminating the income tax assuming we assumed a more non-interventionist foreign policy because our country is virtually bankrupt but the federal reserve is preventing many institutions from collapsing and thus filing for bankruptcy so there true value could be established and prices would better reflect the value of the assets in question............. |
Firstly, the fiat currency IS NOT worthless. It is backed by the value of the country's goods, services, and assets. Take a look at the Gross Domestic Product and you'll know what I'm talking about. Has the Federal Reserve made mistakes? Of course. That still doesn't mean it a conspiratorial body out to enslave you. Yes, the Fed may have overextended liquidity by lowering the Fed rate to 1% in 2003. Guess what? Today the Fed lowered the Fed rate to 1.5%. Do you think they are overextending liquidity today? You jump from subject to subject and its hard to keep up with you. But, I'm a moderate liberal. I agree with you. The War on Drugs, Iraq War, Patriot Act, are all horrible policies which should be scrapped immediately. Hell, I even want our forces out of Afghanistan. The Taliban never attacked us...
| quote: | | Anyway to the members of this board, yes I am somewhat partisan on this issue but I am open to hearing counterarguments and I want everyone to know the main point of my post was merely to express outrage about how ignorant ppl are about the federal reserve system, and how that ignorance is leading people like my mom to the verge of foreclosure. |
You demonstrate far more maturity than some of our other 9/11 truther dickwads on this board. Not saying you're a 9/11 truther, but I think the Federal Reserve conspiracies are in that league. At least you're tolerant of criticism, unlike trancer x. I'll say to you what I say to him. The moment you become intolerant to criticism is the day you become no different from the neocons running Washington.
| quote: | I concede you have many valid points and it was somewhat arrogant of me to assume I could outfox you on an issue you obviously have much more knowledge of than I do. But as a 19 year old i feel like I did a reasonably good job of arguing my point and presenting alternative views. As far as the rest of my posts are concerned they just simply were posted in the hope that more people might consider the possibility that the government is not irreproachable in this crisis and neither is the federal reserve not to argue that bush blew up the towers or the NWO is coming
I apologize to everyone if i came off as presumptuous
please understand what I really intended to say is being outlined in this statement |
I have no problem with you posting your viewpoints, and I enjoy debating them with you. If you go to this thread, http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...995&forumid=66, I basically came out screaming everything you mentioned in this thread, almost verbatim! Some intelligent voices calmed me down, and informed me of the same problem you yourself have. A lack of understanding of the Federal Reserve System. Since then, I've come back from the fringe...:p
Read the bottom post (occrider) on this page... http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...66&pagenumber=8 |
|
|
|
|
