Witch Hunt 2006. We haven't changed in 400 years

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 12:26 PM
link   
This article is short and sweet and straight to the point:


Wikepedia definition of the ancient practice of a witch hunt


A witch-hunt was traditionally a search for witches or evidence of witchcraft, which could lead to a witchcraft trial involving the accused person. Many diverse cultures throughout the world, both ancient and modern, have reacted to allegations of witchcraft either by superstitious fear and awe, and killed any alleged practitioners of witchcraft outright; or shunned it as quackery, extortion or fraud. Today such events are recognised as a type of moral panic. Witchhunts still occur in the modern era, in many and various communities where religious values condemn the practice of witchcraft and the occult. On a general basis, the term may also denote the persecution of a perceived enemy (commonly socially non-conformist groups) with extreme prejudice and disregard of actual guilt or innocence.


Wikipedia Article

Does this sound familiar?

We supposedly live in an "enlightened" age. But we havent progressed. Today replace the word Witch with the word Terrorist and the defintion above could easily be an indication of our state of affairs today.

We can stop this. Do not be a sheep and believe what every one else wants to believe or has been told by the glowing box in the corner of your room or worse by your "friendly" politician. All you have to do is stop and think for yourself and open your eyes to what is really happening around you. Ask questions and demand answers.





Mod Edit: CAP title and provide article url.


[edit on 29-10-2006 by kinglizard]

Mod Edit to apply external quote code, please review this link

[edit on 29-10-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]




posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 02:43 PM
link   
.....

Welshslider is a witch! Throw him in the river and if he floats, he's guilty! If he sinks... well... no matter!

Well at least the trials these days are a bit more realistic than those^. Either way, once accused there's still probably not much chance that you're coming out of the river/gitmo alive and well.



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Trial??? What if you are in Guantanemo bay??? Do you get a trial then?

Burn the witches?



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 03:13 PM
link   
If witches were horses......

Mankind will never change- only weapons change



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 03:15 PM
link   
MMMM, while I can see how someone might make the connection. I don't see the comparison. Witches were burned for what they supposedly believed. Terrorists are being held accountable for actions that they have supposedly committed.
There is a difference.

The whole witch trial was a ploy by the "puritans" to rid their society of dissenting voices; this is not the case with the terrorists. Terrorists are not dissenting voices but people who supposedly want to kill anyone who doesn't think as they do. In this respect, terrorists have more in common with the "puritans" than they do with the witches.

The Unlawful Witch Trials

[edit on 29-10-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 04:49 PM
link   
UK media is the worse and second to none when it comes to witch hunts.

Our media has brought down numerous people who have public lives, its shattered careers, which is not nice. There is a saying about the UK media

if they get you in their sights, your a dead man



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 05:11 PM
link   
I live in a city where a man was recently found guilty of killing his wife 10 years ago. A typical case of trial by media. 10 years ago his wife disappeared. She was never found. There was no evidence of foul play. no corpse. The best evidence they had was the lack of evidence in his favor, and several paid witnesses(including a cellmate from when he was awaiting trial who was bribed with a shortened sentence ).
From the start, the local media reported rumor as fact, and seldom issued retractions when the rumor were proved to be rumors. He was found guilty of murder, abuse of a corpse( ????) and with his father, conspiracy to solicit murder(based on the testimony of a convicted felon.

And there is no physical evidence that she is dead.



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Terrorists are not witches.
Back in the old days Christians hunted and found witches. Closer inspection of this part of history reveals that the witch hunters were not really Christians at all. Does that mean that the pagen witches were the good guys? No, I don't think so. The funny thing is that nobody is actually hunting for terrorists. The war on terror is about as paper thin of a veil as the war on drugs. And guess what? The government that keeps lying to everyone by saying that they are hunting terrorists are the ones who create the terrorism that we see. And thats not the best part. The terrorist hunters(the government) are the pagen witches. Prove me wrong.

[edit on 22-11-2006 by testingatheory]

[edit on 22-11-2006 by testingatheory]



posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by testingatheory
Terrorists are not witches.
Back in the old days Christians hunted and found witches. Closer inspection of this part of history reveals that the witch hunters were not really Christians at all. Does that mean that the pagen witches were the good guys? No, I don't think so. [edit on 22-11-2006 by testingatheory]

[edit on 22-11-2006 by testingatheory]


Your name suits you quite well.


Closer inspection of this part of history reveals that the witch hunters were not really Christians at all.


Wow,talking about historical revisionism!! Your post reeks of it!!



Terrorists are not witches


No,terrorists are much,much worse.

[edit on 22-11-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]

[edit on 22-11-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 01:21 AM
link   
Illustrate how I have "revised" history. What is the definition of a Christian? Is the Pope a Christian? Maybe the Knights Templar are Christians, or the Knights of Saint John? What about George Walker Bush? He claims to be a Christian, so does that mean that he is? Who was responsible for witch hunts? Under what banner was all the killing done? My invitation to prove me wrong still stands.



posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 04:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
The whole witch trial was a ploy by the "puritans" to rid their society of dissenting voices; this is not the case with the terrorists. Terrorists are not dissenting voices but people who supposedly want to kill anyone who doesn't think as they do. In this respect,


Well... everyone of us is a potential terrorist.

If the Administration defines you as an "Unlawful Enemy Combattant" then you will be held in some prison. Your defense will not be able to know what and why you are accused of unless you sign some paper declaring yourself guilty, after having been almost tortured to death or organ failure.

No geneva conventian, no minimal Human Rights either.

It can happen to you.. to everyone. Even in europe. Although you will probably end up in some torture-camp somewhere in Siria instead.

I'm not sure if you have been keeping track of the newest juridical and political changes in the USA.

But I like to give you a little hint. Stop believing the funny Terrorists fairy-tale.
Because it is sooooooo hilarious.



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 01:54 PM
link   
The term witchcraft and satanism was created by the church as an excuse to eliminate Pagan ideology, nothing more and nothing less. Welshslider has a point, the word terrorist is abused by the government to give them a "proper" reason to mask their true agendas.



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by testingatheory
Illustrate how I have "revised" history. What is the definition of a Christian? Is the Pope a Christian? Maybe the Knights Templar are Christians,


Well,considering that the Catholic Church was the first "Christian" church,yeah,I'd say that the Pope was Christian... Protestantism was a break off from the Catholic Church with Luther....

By the way,yeah, the Knights Templar were probably more Christian than what exists today if the truth be told... However, the "church"
had them executed because they perceived them as a threat..



The term witchcraft and satanism was created by the church as an excuse to eliminate Pagan ideology, nothing more and nothing less.
You are absolutely correct. Anything that the "church" has perceived as a threat to its authority and control, it has seeked to demonize and eliminate.

[edit on 9-12-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]

[edit on 9-12-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]

[edit on 9-12-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]

[edit on 9-12-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by welshslider
Trial??? What if you are in Guantanemo bay??? Do you get a trial then?

Burn the witches?


You wouldn't be there if you hadn't been shooting at US/Allied forces.



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by osram
If the Administration defines you as an "Unlawful Enemy Combattant" then you will be held in some prison. Your defense will not be able to know what and why you are accused of unless you sign some paper declaring yourself guilty, after having been almost tortured to death or organ failure.

*snip*

But I like to give you a little hint. Stop believing the funny Terrorists fairy-tale.
Because it is sooooooo hilarious.


Here's a hint. If you're not visiting terror training camps in Afghanistan/Pakistan, or talking to folks on the phone who are, or planning attacks, then it's highly likely you're gonna be just fine.


Mod Note: Trim Those Quotes - Please Review this link


[edit on 21-1-2007 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 06:03 PM
link   
@ GT100FV

Right, unless of course you seek to expose the crimes the government is engaged in, such as smuggling drugs and guns to fund black budget projects. Then you are subject to being summarily labeled an UEC, smeared in order to discredit your testimony, given a high tech lynching in order to convince the masses that you deserve whatever you get, and then tortured, poisoned, persecuted and deprived of property, privacy and profession until you submit to the evil you seek to fight against. Nothing to worry about at all! Just do whatever you're told like a good little slave and perhaps you'll be allowed some peace.


Mod Note: Trim Those Quotes - Please Review this link


[edit on 21-1-2007 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Well the similarity makes for easy name calling.

In the Middle Ages, tens of thousands of peasants, mostly women, were accused of trying to destroy their neighbors. They were tortured until they named names.

There was no punishment, other than the death penalty.

The accusers were usually given the alleged witch's property. Soon, the accusations began to be made against the wealthy, and was used to terrorize petty merchants and seize their homes, at a time when cities were overcrowded, and having a home within the city gates was a guarantee of political freedom and entreprenurial opportunity.

It went on in periodic epidemics for about 200 years, with a total of several hundred thousand being killed.

So far, in the US, only several hundred have been accused. While I don't doubt that there has been torture for "naming names," the accused generally don't lose property to their accusers. They have generally been foreign nationals, with little stake in US society. The witches were born and raised in the villages that turned on them.

The witches were doomed, regardless of what they told the authorities. I seriously doubt that applies to the kid from california who trained in a taliban camp in Afghanistan, or the hispanic kid from Chicago who offered to import a dirty bomb into the US.

By their behavior, the US authorities seem far more interested in neutralizing threats than in seizing property. Prince Al Makhtoum of the UAE had his horse win the 2002 Kentucky derby; he has been investigated for supporting terror in the US, but he's been allowed to keep his horse . . .

The term "witch-hunt" was also appied to the McCarthy led proceedings in the House on Un-American Activities Committee in the late 50's. People usually leave out the fact that several of those who were jailed really were in communication with Moscow, and that they had previously tried to muscle anticommunist actors. Elia Kazan, one of the most hated names in hollywood was "reverse black-listed" by the Hollywood establishment for saying that there really were commies in hollywood. The same with the young Ronald Reagan.

If the HUAC was a witch-hunt, so was the "reverse blacklisting" of anticommunists. But then, liberals write the textbooks . . . .



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by resistor


Right, unless of course you seek to expose the crimes the government is engaged in, such as smuggling drugs and guns to fund black budget projects. Then you are subject to being summarily labeled an UEC, smeared in order to discredit your testimony, given a high tech lynching in order to convince the masses that you deserve whatever you get, and then tortured, poisoned, persecuted and deprived of property, privacy and profession until you submit to the evil you seek to fight against. Nothing to worry about at all! Just do whatever you're told like a good little slave and perhaps you'll be allowed some peace.


Can you cite a few examples of this persecution, where critics of Bush have been labeled as combatants, sent to Guantanamo, and tortured?



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
UK media is the worse and second to none when it comes to witch hunts.

Our media has brought down numerous people who have public lives, its shattered careers, which is not nice. There is a saying about the UK media

if they get you in their sights, your a dead man


how true, working for the bbc really cost me any chance of having a life. no truer words spoke on this board. the stuff i have gone through since i left the bbc has been horrendous.

todays society is like a tabloid newspaper, get the wrong people on your back, and you may as well be dead.

[edit on 19-1-2007 by andy1033]



posted on Jan, 27 2007 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by niklaus
I live in a city where a man was recently found guilty of killing his wife 10 years ago. A typical case of trial by media. 10 years ago his wife disappeared. She was never found. There was no evidence of foul play. no corpse. The best evidence they had was the lack of evidence in his favor, and several paid witnesses(including a cellmate from when he was awaiting trial who was bribed with a shortened sentence ).
From the start, the local media reported rumor as fact, and seldom issued retractions when the rumor were proved to be rumors. He was found guilty of murder, abuse of a corpse( ????) and with his father, conspiracy to solicit murder(based on the testimony of a convicted felon.

And there is no physical evidence that she is dead.


When you see a situation like this, you can be sure that a frame-up is going on in order to protect someone with connections. Today's lynchings are of the high-tech variety.





top topics
 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join