It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

OP/ED: Dark Days. (The black band on ATS)

page: 10
3
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jamuhn

See, to me this definition is contradictory and very noncoherent.


i knew as always you had some ulterior motive for your question....and as always trying to make ad hominem and degrading attacks.... Didn't i clearly say IMO?..... What is there not to understand when someone says In my opinion....


Originally posted by Jamuhn
A natural economic system is capitalism, so how could liberals be against so many laws?


There are other economic systems that exist in the world...and perhaps you have been absent for a while here but quite a few people around these boards have been bashing capitalism in some threads. I can only make an opinion about liberals for what i see them post, and from what i know liberals doing in the past.

Anyways, all the liberals that i know these days are from these forums. So if i have to form an opinion about what a liberal is, it would be according to what they post.


Originally posted by Jamuhn
As well, I thought conservatives were for less federal laws, and giving power to states.
I think i also clearly metioned laws against drugs.... how many conservatives want pot to be legalized?...


Originally posted by Jamuhn
And what does "being against the US government" mean? Does this mean disagreeing with some of what the government says? After all, if you trying to equate liberalism with democrats, then we see that the democrats and republicans overlap on many issues. Not only this, but would liberals disagree with democrats?

Which majority of people have always been in disagreement with the US government, making protests against the government of the US whether a democrat or a republican was in office?.... oh yeah, i forgot, it has always been conservatives doing this....



Originally posted by Jamuhn
Not only this, but the other parts of your definition contradict the standard definition of "liberalism."


Not really, i stated that the definition has chanced over the years, nowdays many liberals consider themselves to be anarchists, others consider themselves democrats. Over the years liberalism has "sprouted" several branches, but in essence aren't they all liberals? Liberals look for reforms, or change, and deviate from tradition and conservatism.


Originally posted by Jamuhn
As well, I think your assertion about your version of liberalism being regarded as fact all across ATSNN is largely untrue and baseless.


Where did i say that my definition of what i think a liberal is is written in stone?.... It is an opinion i have because of what i have seen liberals do over the years and what i have seen liberals post here.


Originally posted by Jamuhn
My point though is not to show the faults in your definition, but to show that merely throwing around the term "liberal" does nothing.


Your point was clearly to start an argument. I gave a definition that is "my opinion" on what liberalism is, yet you decided to make a discussion into an argument.



Originally posted by Jamuhn
All it attempts to do is put some kind of abstract label on people that doesn't really mean anything. If you just stated what specific things are regarded as true all across ATSNN, I might have not said anything.

[edit on 17-3-2005 by Jamuhn]


You are the one being insulted by the word, maybe because you have some liberal ideals or you are a liberal. So tell me, since the word liberal seems to be a dirty word for you , what would you want us to call liberals?.....

[edit on 18-3-2005 by Muaddib]




posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 12:33 AM
link   
Jamuhn, if you want to continue this discussion let's do it in another thread, so this thread can return to it's original purpose. Anyways, both our arguments show why people are not going to chance their minds. Anyways, i am still in favor of this research.


[edit on 18-3-2005 by Muaddib]



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
i knew as always you had some ulterior motive for your question....and as always trying to make ad hominem and degrading attacks.... Didn't i clearly say IMO?..... What is there not to understand when someone says In my opinion....


Actually, it wasn't an ad hominem
, but yes I asked the question with the intention of responding. I didn't say anything to call your personal integrity into question...this discussion is not personal by any means.


Originally posted by Muaddib

Originally posted by Jamuhn
All it attempts to do is put some kind of abstract label on people that doesn't really mean anything. If you just stated what specific things are regarded as true all across ATSNN, I might have not said anything.


You are the one being insulted by the word, maybe because you have some liberal ideals or you are a liberal. So tell me, since the word liberal seems to be a dirty word for you , what would you want us to call liberals?.....


As I said though before, it is not the fact you have your own opinions, I mean we all do!!! This is related to the "Dark Day" discussion because saying "I have seen ATSNN become a venue where only what liberals say is being "accepted as the only truth." you try give this relative, abstract term and apply it to a giant group of people who most likely have diverse individual opinions among themselves. What I get from this statement and your definition is..."Only communists [per your definition of liberal] think what they read on ATSNN is true."

This is the whole polarization aspect....liberal vs. conservative and then extrapolate that concept onto a series of issues. And obviously, as you've shown, not everyone has the same notion of liberal.

I am not trying to insult you, I just think that this was a good example of the whole polarization concept at play.

[edit on 18-3-2005 by Jamuhn]



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 02:00 AM
link   
Is this forum going to be shut down? I hope not, there is still plenty of good reading once you weed out the BS.



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 03:23 AM
link   
My Take On SkepticOverlord's Point

First, I'm glad he has addressed the topic directly and with dramatic aplomb.

In truth, his message has been repeated here many times, in many ways. I did so myself not all that long ago.

I had -- and have -- similar concerns, and try to point them out whenever I can. And these concerns always seem to fall on deaf ears.

I have similar complaints and similar frustrations, but I try not to blame anyone in in particular for them, because in truth we are all guilty of polarized thinking to some degree or another throughout our lives.

Just because I'm making this observation, for example, in no way makes me “holier than thou”. I'm a sinner, too, just like everyone else.

Face it: it's comfortable and reassuring to know you're right, that you are with the “in” crowd. People you respect say such and such is true, and you agree, therefore you are also worthy of respect.

It's classic “herd mentality”, to use a less-than-flattering term, but humans are social animals, and thus we inevitably do adopt behaviors reminiscent of herds.

Why American Political Parties Are Symbolized By Herd Animals

Both donkeys and elephants are herd animals. The irony in this is almost palpable.

Adoption of partisan ideologies is a prime and classic example of herd thinking in action.

It's an extension of the classic anthropological “us and them” dichotomy that Pink Floyd so famously commemorated in song, and that is at the root of all forms of bigotry, social injustices, wars and genocides, among other things.

Its trademark is the use of fear, whether rational or irrational, to coerce people into agreement.

Whether you choose to admit it or not, when you choose an extreme position in any debate, refuse to acknowledge the possibility you might be wrong and shout your righteous indignation proudly from the rooftops, you are being a partisan ideologue, and have outsourced your thinking to someone else.

When you label someone else as “the enemy” because that person disagrees with you, you are taking it a step further, and turning a dispute into a war.

That's how every war in human history begins, without exception.

Any Discussion Involving Two Or More People Is Always A Political Discussion

My definition of politics, presented in the heading above, may be a bit broad for some palates, but I have found it to be very accurate over the years.

If you accept my definition of politics, then you must also accept that every Internet discussion forum will, ultimately, be a political discussion forum to some extent or another.

If you reject my definition of politics, then you must also accept that you will forever be frustrated by seeing my definition proven correct again, and again, and again.

I'll leave the choice to you.

ATS And Boards Like It Are Natural Magnets For Propaganda And Disinformation

I study, among many other things, Information Warfare. Since I began my studies of it, I view the world in much different terms.

I now understand that there can be no escape from it -- that we must accept its existence just as we must accept the inevitability of politics dominating all human interactions.

Well, actually we don't need to accept any of that -- we can remain ignorant of it if we choose. If we're happier doing so, that's not necessarily a bad choice, either.

I've seen some very good points made in this thread. SkepticOverlord is absolutely correct about the clever use of deliberate polarization in the U.S. as a tool for political control. It is also used elsewhere -- everywhere, in fact -- because it works.

He is also very much correct to see the hidden hands of the puppet masters at work here, but they hold no more sway on ATS than anywhere else.

The world is saturated with their handiwork, an escape is impossible. Even hermits carry the ideas of the puppet masters with them into isolation.

Though escape from the psychological tyranny of Information Warfare is impossible, awareness of it at least makes resistance possible.

Truly Denying Ignorance Is A Personal Choice

SkepticOverlord mentioned recent acceleration of the phenomenon, and there is indeed such a trend rising in concert with the advent of our Information Age, but political polarization is much, much older than Nixon, however.

In America, its active adoption predates his birth by well over a century. The Civil War was a good example of political polarization in U.S. politics, for example.

You will also find it in the Federalist Papers and in documents of discussions and arguments predating the founding of our country by decades. And in the Bible, in the histories and sacred texts of every civilization for which written records exist.

Polarization is as old as politics, and politics is as old as human communication.

What To Do About It

We will not be changing any of that here on ATS.

However, for those who choose to become aware of how they are being manipulated, there is at least hope of overcoming the shackles of subconscious mental oppression.

But to do so, one must first become aware that they exist, and to do that requires having enough personal integrity to realize that not only are you not right about everything, but quite possibly wrong about everything as well.

From there, the effort of seeking to realize the world for what it truly is may bear fruit.

But such an endeavor must start with honesty -- bold, unflinching honesty -- because the penalty for dishonesty is not only the deception of others, but self-deception, and the consequence is indefinite confinement in a prison of your own delusions.

Thus I recommend at least trying to be honest if you wish to sincerely Deny Ignorance.

After that, the rest is entirely up to you.


“Free your mind.” -- Morpheus


I strongly recommend studying the following subjects:
Disinformation | Information Warfare | Propaganda | Psyops | Public Diplomacy

But please, don't stop there!



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 04:39 AM
link   
It couldn't be helped already the argument has started in the very thread it was bought to attention. Who cares liberal or otherwise. It is all the same in the long run.

As an aussie who thinks politics is the greatest game ever invented it is pathetic to see people arguing over left wings and right wings and liberal views.

What is a liberal anyway? In Australia Liberals are the conservative party yet liberal means basically generous and unconservative.

It's all crap and all a control mechanism, party politics..oh yeah we give you a choice ..us or them.......forget the shades of grey.....

I really don't think that this thread was started to argue politics and to argue liberal or otherwise...get over it...they all own you.........................................Doesn't matter who's in power or which of the "two" in your country it is.......

I thoguht this thread was started to say your all arguing over the same thing....the chicken in the middle of the wings..............

but that's just my view anyhows



[edit on 18-3-2005 by Mayet]



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 07:26 AM
link   
It certainly is ironic that this discussion about the manipulation and creation of the "Fanatical Divide" (my phrase, feel free to use it) has devolved into incorrect discussion about what is liberal or conservative. Even when the game is shown to you, you still desire to play by their rules?



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 07:42 AM
link   
has brought us together and pulled us apart.words take us to places never seen or heard.but as human kind we fail to connect to reality and hide behind words.the written word one of our greatest inventions.muses us all into confusion when all the answers are already hard wired in our brains to tap into.......flukemol



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 07:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
It certainly is ironic that this discussion about the manipulation and creation of the "Fanatical Divide" (my phrase, feel free to use it) has devolved into incorrect discussion about what is liberal or conservative. Even when the game is shown to you, you still desire to play by their rules?



Isn't it funny how labels contain so much power? It's interesting to see how the fear of labels contains even more power.

*Shakes fist in air at Partisan Sympathizers*



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowHasNoSource
They come because they are bored. They come because they
read a thread that produced an emotional response and they
got hooked. They do not come for the truth. The zombies are
only looking for their next emotional meal.


So ... who are 'they'?

Is there a 'THEY' and a 'WE' here?
Interesting. Elementary school
style cliques at ATS?



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow

Originally posted by EnronOutrunHomerun

Originally posted by soficrow
Who else is up for this?

I'll be more than happy to lend a hand....

Now that we finally have some direction, I'll be glad to offer my skills in any way to better our community...



Cool.

...I'll start a sign up sheet on "Political Conspiracies" - call it "Polarization Research Project" for now - and we can bank ideas, categories, etc there too, just to get things rolling.

.


Count me in, is not way I will stay away from a good research project.



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowHasNoSource
They come because they are bored. They come because they
read a thread that produced an emotional response and they
got hooked. They do not come for the truth. The zombies are
only looking for their next emotional meal.




So ... who are 'they'?


'They' are 'Us' when we act upon emotions without logic.



Is there a 'THEY' and a 'WE' here?


That seems to be what partisanship is all about. It's a personal choice of whether you want to see an "Us vs Them" reality.



Interesting. Elementary school
style cliques at ATS?


So, who was your Elementary school pyschology and partisan politics teacher?



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowHasNoSource
So, who was your Elementary school pyschology
and partisan politics teacher?

I don't get it.

'us' and 'them' was used a lot.
Sounded 'clique-ish' to me.



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by ShadowHasNoSource
So, who was your Elementary school pyschology
and partisan politics teacher?

I don't get it.

'us' and 'them' was used a lot.
Sounded 'clique-ish' to me.



How else would I distinguish a group of people different than another group of people? It's simple use of objective personal pronouns.

"me," "you," "her," "him," "it," "us," "you," and "them"



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
We fortunate few here in these forums have aspired to be different. A theme has been adopted, "deny ignorance," that for many of us means we try harder. But we we're wrong. We are not different. We are subject to the same shame as everyone else.


I agree though perhaps for different reasons...
Having a political viewpoint is perfectly reasonable and logical. It's human nature, people want their say, and they want likeminded people to tell them they are right to think that way. However, one should be able to seperate their political views from what the facts of a situation are.



Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
We have allowed the sickness of petty political bickering to find a foothold and cause a widespread infection. "Deny Balance" should be the new motto, as right-blaming-left and left-blaming-right is pervasive throughout the board.


I won't "deny" that this is indeed a problem, but I think a larger problem is the morass of posts with spectacular claims made on nothing but speculation, and without a shred of evidence offered by the poster. Anyone can pretend to be "in the know" and "mysteriously connected" when all they do is say spout something they read in a tabloid, or in one of the Illuminatus triliogy. For some of us, though, we require some evidence besides regurgitated political rhetoric. Hence the prolific nature of it getting thrown back and forth.


Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Make no mistake, you are being expertly controlled. Even here, in this venue that should be beyond the puppet masters' strings, we have succumbed to the subtle manipulations of thought and reason. Instead of looking in agner toward the puppet masters, you yell at the puppets.


I would ask that you give us specific examples, evidence, or proof. As it is, a case could be equally stated, without any evidence, that this happening because mankind inherently likes to argue, and rather than being controlled, we are breaking that control by our diversity.


Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
ATS has fallen. We're not out, but we're mortally wounded.

It is indeed, a sad day.


What do you recommend we do then?



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 08:48 AM
link   
ok, a lot has already been said in this thread. I think everyone is guilty of the polarisation, give or take. I'll admit that I don't come here for the conspiracy much anymore. I come to gawk at what I perceive to be ignorance. I can't stop myself either. I'm not addicted to the conspiracy, i'm addicted to the idiocy.

Anyway. I kinda believe that the mainstreaming of ATS has become the antithesis to the true intent of a conspiracy site/forum. Above top Secret is not really that top secret now. It's definately not the place I once scoured for bigfoot, aliens, ghosts and secret military bases anymore. All of those sections of the site have staled it seems, and have become secondary to ATS's new direction. ATS is fairly popular, and as a result the "Above Top Secret" name seems like a bit of a gag now.

Part of the fun in putting on your trenchcoat and black sunglasses and delving into the world of conspiracy is that it feels like you are discovering something only a few people know about. Like you have become witness to something very important and very shadowy. I just don't get that feeling here anymore.

It's a sad paradox, but with some things, success can bring digress. ATS has strayed. But I'm not sad anymore, I had my grief regarding this quite a while ago and have on numerous occassions expressed my annoyance at what has happened to ATS hidden within posts inside threads.

I'm not an angry person in real life, but that's how I come across here at ATS now. That's what this place has become to me now. I have no interest in making friends here really, or becoming allies with those who have a similar mindset. I am just here...inserting comments into threads, sometimes angry ones.

I was reading ATS well before I joined in order to post. A long, long time. I say there is a point of no return that ATS in it's new found popularity has passed. You have to decide whether you run with it, or start again. In my honest opinion.

EDIT:
I'd just like to add, that there are people who began reading and then joined this forum purely based on their conspiracy interests (like me). And then there are those who joined in more recent times purely to back their team "country/political party/ideology" and nothing more. Have a think about that when you browse the WOT forum etc. and see certain people, who will remain nameless, spam up the board with their inane and regurgitated threads. The circular thinking, typing and posting that goes on at this forum sucks up 500 times more bandwidth than any pointless one-line-post.

[edit on 18-3-2005 by cargo]



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowHasNoSource
It's simple use of objective personal pronouns.

Okay. I guess I was reading into it more than you intended.
Sometimes it's hard to get points across, or to understand
where a person is coming from, when using the internet.



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by ShadowHasNoSource
It's simple use of objective personal pronouns.

Okay. I guess I was reading into it more than you intended.
Sometimes it's hard to get points across, or to understand
where a person is coming from, when using the internet.



I agree. I do sometimes add emotional supplementors such as "zombie" which are obvious exaggerations but are used for effect. Otherwise, my writing would always "seem" cold because I'm basically neutral on the majority of human affairs. I suppose being a Gemini helps with being able to see both sides as correct and incorrect, simultaneously. So if you see me spouting off or getting angry it's usually for effect and isn't meant to harm or divide anyone. I mean I don't be carin' who you be, you all be my family. Yea, even my boy Cheney.

But yea, the internet is a sterile environment and doesn't do well as host to the more subtle aspects of human emotions and interactions.



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 01:25 PM
link   
A research project would be a waste of time. The answers you seek are already out there, way before the time of Nixon. The problem is most do not believe that the illuminati infiltrated and/or created most of our trusted organizations and media. We listened to those who are not ignorant, those we trust but are they telling us the truth or is it deception?

At first, I liked the new ATS motto, Deny Ignorance. Now I see that while we deny ignorance, we listen to sources that continue to deceive us.

You say 'Deny Ignorance' .....................I say 'Deny Deception'

The following is a paragraph from a page that I hope all of you will read.


'Simultaneously; the Rothschilds set up similar CFR-like control-groups in England, France, Germany, and other Nations to control world conditions and cooperate with the CFR to bring about another world war. But the CFR's first and foremost job was to get complete-control of our mass-communications media. The control of the press was assigned to Rockefeller. Thus; Henry Luce, who recently died, was financed to set up a number of national magazines, among them 'Life,' 'Time,' 'Fortune,' and others, which publish 'U.S.S.R.' in America. The Rockefellers also directly or indirectly financed the Coles Brothers' 'Look magazine' and a chain of newspapers. They also financed a man named Sam Newhouse to buy up and build a chain of newspapers all over the country. And the late Eugene Myer, one of the founders of CFR, bought the 'Washington Post,' 'Newsweek,' the 'Weekly magazine', and other publications. At the same time; the CFR began to develop and nurture a new-breed of scurrilous columnists and editorials-writers such as Walter Lippman, Drew Pearson, the Alsops, Herbert Matthews, Erwin Canham, and others of that ilk who called themselves 'Liberals' who proclaimed that 'Americanism' is 'isolationism;' that 'isolationism' is 'war-mongerism;' that 'anti-communism;' is 'anti-semiticism' and 'racism.' All that took time of course; but today our 'weeklies,' published by patriotic organizations, is completely controlled by CFR stooges and thus they finally succeeded in breaking us up into a Nation of quarreling, wrangling, squabbling, hating factions. Now if you still wonder about this slanted news and outright lies you read in your newspaper; you now have the answer. To the Lehmans, Goldman-Sachs, Kuhn-Loebs, and the Warburgs; the CFR assigned the job of getting control of the motion-picture industry, Hollywood, radio, and television; and believe me they succeeded. If you still wonder about the strange propaganda broadcast by the Ed Morrows and others of that ilk; you now have the answer. If you wonder about all the smut, sex, pornography, and mixed-marriage films you see in your movie-theater and on your television set (all of which is demoralizing our youth); you now have the answer.

www.freedomfiles.org...



posted on Mar, 18 2005 @ 03:07 PM
link   
All along Ice was right,
The puppet masters were in sight,
For he did see the mass warfare,
Moving coherently through your lair,
At last you all have seen,
What we did work on behind the scene,
Before I did leave his cause,
A message was sent about what was,
But now as you all may see,
A plan is in action which will free,
IgnoranceDenied from most of the subtle attacks,
Yet none of them will sit back,
The "black band" has long since waited,
In readiness it never abated,
Although the wolves defensive plan,
Does not involve ATS I'm the fan,
This is my new outpost,
I've retired and so I ghost
For no one else wants to stray,
From the two's safe haven without a fray,
This may have come as a shock,
But now is not the time to mock,
Rally round SO's design,
Be alert, watch the rhyme.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join