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.

 

Fighting tears, shah's son calls crisis a 'moment of truth'

page: 4
10
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by The Last Man on Earth
 





don't mean to sound mean, but your knowledge of history is patchy at best, sorry.


I don't mean to sound mean but two things.

(1.) Biblical history (which you heavily rely on) is not real history.

(2.) History is rewritten so many times by various victors and conquerers no one's knowledge of history can be anything but 'text' book correct, but there is no gaurantee that the 'texts' themselves are correct.

I appreciate your passion for 'Biblical' history, which I do not put any stock at all in for the simple reason that it's all evidently purely manufactured.

I appreciate your passion for 'text' book history which I too very much enjoy but put no more faith in that 'Biblical' history as being entirely accurate.

I personally know people who can't get the version of what they did 5 minutes ago right! If you read the Opening Post's article by CNN's writer they certainly did not reflect accurately what caused the ouster of the Shah to leave Iran and that was 30 years ago.

In fact most of the history books regarding World War I and II are chaulked full of so many omissions and fabrications as to make most 'text' book history little more than an historical time line of 'major' events, that are not rendered in 'accurate' but 'political' detail.

While today's society has been taught to be 'politically' correct as a substitute for 'common' sense, which has become quite 'uncommon' as a result, do keep in mind that being 'politically' correct, is not the same thing as being truly correct regardless of how many stars the teacher gives you on your forehead!

I have a reversed engineered theory that I put forth with that disclaimer of being "a stretch and difficult for people to believe".

It might be historically innacurate or completely innacurate but have you truly considered that the information you are taking from your books are also innacurate, or do you really believe what CNN had to write about why the Shah's regime fell in Iran?

Think about it.




posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

I have a reversed engineered theory that I put forth with that disclaimer of being "a stretch and difficult for people to believe".

It might be historically innacurate or completely innacurate but have you truly considered that the information you are taking from your books are also innacurate, or do you really believe what CNN had to write about why the Shah's regime fell in Iran?



PT, (Over morning coffee)

You realize the pitfall in just blanket statement claiming sources can be inaccurate. Whose to say the ones you use are right, but those of others are not.

Your Vatican/Hebrew thesis is fascinating. It would be fun to go over it all elsewhere.

Refocusing on Iran, what is interesting using the telescope of history, is that the country for the first time in two and a half millennia, does not have a traditional monarchy.

It's flirtation with benign democracy in the early 50s was fleeting. So they went directly from the Shah to a Supreme Leader without blinking.

One might claim Iranians invite paternalism. Maybe a mindset problem throughout the region. The willful assertion of power is respected. Conforming to the wants of the masses is considered weak.

Over here we prefer a system that we think represents our needs and opinions. In other cultures people want to be told what is best for them. We see this in the male/female aspect of the Muslim World. We try tell the women they want complete freedom of choice. They find that an alien concept. We think having your own business is the best. They want jobs for life.

The idea of a reinstated monarchy might have some appeal emotionally. But only if it were asserted by force not stealth.


Mike





[edit on 23-6-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
(1.) Biblical history (which you heavily rely on) is not real history.


"History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon." - Napoleon.

When you say "Biblical" I'm going to assume you mean "ProtoplasmicTraveler's Conspiracy of History History"? If you mean text-book history, then yes, I am passionate about it. If you mean history according to the Bible, then you are wrong, I am just aware of what wildly-inaccurate assertions the Bible makes.


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler(2.) History is rewritten so many times by various victors and conquerers no one's knowledge of history can be anything but 'text' book correct, but there is no gaurantee that the 'texts' themselves are correct.


That's right, which is entirely why we have archeology and why it is so important. It's also why I think religious-types put the "mental" in "fundamentalist".


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTravelerI appreciate your passion for 'Biblical' history, which I do not put any stock at all in for the simple reason that it's all evidently purely manufactured.


Erm...I think you're going to have to back this up to the hilt, mate. "Evidently purely manufactured"? How exactly do you think the Arc of the Covenant could possibly have "Hail Caesar!" carved on it?


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTravelerI appreciate your passion for 'text' book history which I too very much enjoy but put no more faith in that 'Biblical' history as being entirely accurate.


Thank you, but again, I don't think it is entirely accurate however archeology does corellate with most of what established text-book history tells us.


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTravelerI personally know people who can't get the version of what they did 5 minutes ago right! If you read the Opening Post's article by CNN's writer they certainly did not reflect accurately what caused the ouster of the Shah to leave Iran and that was 30 years ago.


Indeed.



Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTravelerIn fact most of the history books regarding World War I and II are chaulked full of so many omissions and fabrications as to make most 'text' book history little more than an historical time line of 'major' events, that are not rendered in 'accurate' but 'political' detail.


Again, I agree, but that does not mean that in a thousand years time archeology won't reveal the truth of the matter, regardless of what modern propaganda says.


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTravelerWhile today's society has been taught to be 'politically' correct as a substitute for 'common' sense, which has become quite 'uncommon' as a result, do keep in mind that being 'politically' correct, is not the same thing as being truly correct regardless of how many stars the teacher gives you on your forehead!


I did not do history at GCSE level, foolishly I did geography. My passion for history has only really manifested itself in the last few years. But I get what you're saying, however most of the things you have claimed simply could not have happened.


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTravelerI have a reversed engineered theory that I put forth with that disclaimer of being "a stretch and difficult for people to believe".


The thing is, most of the people you mention could never have interacted with each other, as they lived in completely different historical periods or you are describing events that are anachronistic.

For example, you are suggesting by "force of arms and doctrine" that the Christian Romans were still expanding their empire - by that time, they weren't, really, they were just trying to hang on to what their pagan ancestors had conquered.


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTravelerIt might be historically innacurate or completely innacurate but have you truly considered that the information you are taking from your books are also innacurate, or do you really believe what CNN had to write about why the Shah's regime fell in Iran?

Think about it.


The thing is, history is dominated by archeology now, not simply myths and fairytales that came before.

I'm sure that, in years to come when all of this has blown over and nobody really cares about it any more, the real truth of the matter will come out.

Documents will be found, or something similar to prove one story right or wrong, and the "truth" of the matter can be settled upon to a satisfactory degree.

Contemporary propaganda is not history.



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by mmiichael

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

I have a reversed engineered theory that I put forth with that disclaimer of being "a stretch and difficult for people to believe".

It might be historically innacurate or completely innacurate but have you truly considered that the information you are taking from your books are also innacurate, or do you really believe what CNN had to write about why the Shah's regime fell in Iran?



PT, (Over morning coffee)

Oh I sure do realize that there is a danger no matter how you slice the pie of history.

As I am often fond of telling people "I really don't know" some days what to believe. Like a lot of people I find it easier just to determine what "I don't believe", which of course if you "don't believe" something someone else takes literally as the 'gospel' of a situation, then at the least you have an argument on your hands and at the most your going to be branded something that usually carries some imagined ugly connotation through that inference.

Of course if by some strange chance I could figure everythign out, which I think we all would really like to do in some manner or form, I am not really in a position to do anything with the answers other that to say I got them.

It's all an exercise of curiousity born out of boredom and the tedium of anotherwise dull life to wisle away the time.

The patriarchal mindset of the Persians is a very deep and ingrained one.

There was a Persian Rug store next to one of the Travel Agencies I once managed and the 30 something 'manager' of the store, that could turn a profit off of 1 sale a month to 30 some shoppers a month, was to say the least an underpaid and very bored man.

His fiancee lived in Tehran and they had been betrothed as youngsters by their parents. He lived with two other Iranian immigrants in a home they shared together and saved as much of his meager paycheck as he could hoping for the day it would all add up to enough to pay for the wedding, to fly her to America, to buy them a home, and for them to start a life together.

In other words at the rate he was earning and saving some time around his 349th birthday (not accounting for inflation) he would have enough money to realize his plans and dreams.

He was pious and all heart and a kind and gentle soul who basically just read the Koran all day long at work when there were no shoppers or social visitors immersing himself in the authoritarian world and word of G-d and taking as much comfort in the existence of that in his mind as he did his Fiancee 10,000 miles away.

His culture had so rigidly disciplined him that he pined not to go to Tehran to see his fiancee but to go to Mecca and Haj. He would spend a 3rd of his conversations on a personal level talking about getting married one day and 2/3rds about how important it was for him to go to Haj one day.

At his rate of earnings and savings he could have afforded Haj by the time he was 149!

So when Luftansa gave me a couple free override tickets for exceeding sales volume quotas good to travel anywhere I gave him one to go to Haj.

The man who owned the store and a chain of others around the world was a bit surprised to say the least by my act of charity and felt compelled to question me as to why I was so motivated.

When I told him that it weighed heavily on my heart to see his employee in such solitary circumstances every day in his employ with dreams he longed to carry out but couldn't afford to that I felt it was my duty as a human being to help another where I reasonably could.

It so shamed him he gave his employee the spending money for the trip to go along with the airline ticket and wasted no time introducing me to his own pantheon of influential Persian friends who almost all turned out to be SAVAK.

I truly think the piety and chastity that so many young Persians go through as an absolute matter of course leaves them vulnerable to authoritarian figures in what is essentially a class oriented society where the vast majority have no real status and those that do pardon the pun have little class or empathy for those below them in the food chain.

The lower class minions seem to have so little and expect so little to come there way anytime soon or at all, what they seem to live for is simple absolution from authority figures government, religious and spiritual.

That's what I noticed the most about their society.

Hows the coffee?

You realize the pitfall in just blanket statement claiming sources can be inaccurate. Whose to say the ones you use are right, but those of others are not.

Your Vatican/Hebrew thesis is a fascinating thesis. It would be fun to go over it all elsewhere.

Refocusing on Iran, what is interesting using the telescope of history, is that the country for the first time in two and a half milennia, does not have a traditional monarchy.

It's flirtation with benign democracy in the early 50s was fleeting. So they went directly from the Shah to a Supreme Leader without blinking. One could almost claim Iranians invite paternalism.

Maybe a mindset problem throughout the region. The willful assertion of power is respected. Conforming to the wants of the masses is considered weak.

We prefer a system that we think represents our needs and opinions. In other cultures people want to be told what is best for them. We see this in the male/female aspect of the Muslim World. We try tell the women they want complete freedom of choice. They find that an alien concept.

So the idea of a reinstated monarchy might have some appeal emotionally. But if it were done with force not stealth.


Mike






posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 11:05 AM
link   
Good thread you have here, not sure how this one flew under the radar.

Was very very surprised to see that all guns are blazing in re-establishing a pro western order in Iran. To be honest i am lost for words,The paper or should say money and political trail that is being left is so obvious that it makes Watergate seem like a traffic infringement.

We must keep in mind that Iran has been allowed until September or October to accept or deny terms which were set in motion earlier this year. While all this term oil is in full swing in Iran, Israel is as ready as ever for the preemptive strike on Iran itself. The only disturbing aspect of everything is that Iran's citizens do not realize to what danger they will be facing, if either government is put into place.

edit: bad syntax

[edit on 23-6-2009 by tristar]



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
I truly think the piety and chastity that so many young Persians go through as an absolute matter of course leaves them vulnerable to authoritarian figures in what is essentially a class oriented society where the vast majority have no real status and those that do pardon the pun have little class or empathy for those below them in the food chain.

The lower class minions seem to have so little and expect so little to come there way anytime soon or at all, what they seem to live for is simple absolution from authority figures government, religious and spiritual.

That's what I noticed the most about their society.



Hard for us to relate to, but having your identity and role mapped out for you is something necessary for maybe the majority of humanity.

We may want to have freelance careers. They need the security of being lifetime employees.

Something I found when I did some consulting work for the Honda plant here in Canada. The imported Japanese execs set up in small Ontario town and employed locals. They tried to create a Japanese model of employees being one big family with guarantees of employment for life.

They couldn't understand why people they trained who seemed happy suddenly quit after 9 months. I explained to them the rural Canadian mindset. You work for a company for 9 months, the minimum requirement to receive unemployment insurance. Then you either work under the table for the same company or somewhere else. After UI runs out, you get another job for 9 months and the cycle repeats itself.

In the Middle East, I guess many are so grateful they have work and aren't starving, the last thing they want to do is rock the boat with the Powers That Be.

I'll get crucified (metaphorically) for suggesting again that many people in certain parts of the world really want to be worker ants. They don't wan to be told they are drones. Too much uncertainty, too much responsibility.
With our inflated egos we may think it's a matter of low self esteem. Hard for us to connect to the concept of no self esteem.

The religion fills in the need for context, philosophy of life. Dying for the cause is an honour, not a sacrifice.

With our blasphemous arrogance in being self determining, we are an alien life form to them, as much as they seem like an alien beings to us.

Lunch time now,

Mike



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 

I don't think the CIA orchestrated the last Iranian Revolution, they had NOTHING to gain by having access to a crititical portion of the Middle Eastern oil fields be cut off, not to mention raising tensions in the Gulf shipping district. They sure didn't have anyting to gainby establishing such as destructive theocracy, it has gotten them nowhere.



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by secretagent woooman
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 

I don't think the CIA orchestrated the last Iranian Revolution, they had NOTHING to gain by having access to a crititical portion of the Middle Eastern oil fields be cut off, not to mention raising tensions in the Gulf shipping district. They sure didn't have anyting to gainby establishing such as destructive theocracy, it has gotten them nowhere.


Ah but they had lots to gain when you look back at what happened. Saudia Arabia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates all were soon asking for U.S. Flagged Status and protection for their oil tankers...Kaching!

The Soviets blundered into Afghanistan, Iran's neighbor hoping to eventually make their way down to the Persian Gulf through Iran but instead got sucked into a bankrupting war against the CIA funded and equiped Mujahdeen.

The Arab Gulf States soon were looking to the U.S. for so much protection from the possibility of hostilities by an Asian Iran whose Theocracy if spread could upset their own Monarchies that they were no longer in a position to protest or boycott the U.S.'s support of Israel and had much more plentiful oil that could be secured even more cheaply than Iran's.

If you really look at the situation, what we have been doing over the past couple decades is taking certain supplies of oil off the market (Iraq's) and perserving it to when we need it and who we want to give it to, and Iran has been much the same way.

Look below the surface and there is a lot more to be seen.

Thanks.



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by secretagent woooman
 


True. The US military industrial complex was having a field day selling equipment and services to the Shah's govt. An Iranian pilot crash a craft? They would just laugh it off and buy a new one to replace it.

The money came from oil revenue. Americans were pumping high priced fuel, and the $$ were going to heads of state and their "security", i.e. military, so part in bank accounts and part back to American corporations.

Also, back then, Iran was a CIA listening post to gain intelligence on the Soviet Union, our major Cold War foe at the time.

edit to add


Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Look below the surface and there is a lot more to be seen.


Hmmmm, here is some food for thought. Your quote could be taken literally! What's with all the Kazakhstan tv ads on US tv the last few days? Like I see them, and they make me want to vacation in K?


Kazakhstan and Iran (Ahmadinejad!) and the US (Obama) actually agree on something...an international nuclear fuel repository/bank in K. With talk of nuclear helping to solve a global energy crisis, this is important stuff.

K would also play a role as a military supply route.

source

It's all so much more nuanced than "bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran". Call off the mad dogs, unless you understand their bark is merely instinctive and for their own pleasure.

[edit on 23-6-2009 by desert]



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by desert
reply to post by secretagent woooman
 


True. The US military industrial complex was having a field day selling equipment and services to the Shah's govt. An Iranian pilot crash a craft? They would just laugh it off and buy a new one to replace it.

The money came from oil revenue. Americans were pumping high priced fuel, and the $$ were going to heads of state and their "security", i.e. military, so part in bank accounts and part back to American corporations.

Also, back then, Iran was a CIA listening post to gain intelligence on the Soviet Union, our major Cold War foe at the time.


Sometimes you have to give to get, and the U.S. eventually gained a lot on the other side of the Gulf by allowing a newly freed Iran to frighten it's Arab neighbors who in turn looked to the U.S. for protection and gaurantees.

The Shah was on his way out regardless, they tried to reinstall him once and failed, so why not orchestrate the next government coming in to power and milk the other side of the fence for a while by using that to your advantage.

There are so many ways to skin a cat!

In life you get added points and an advantage by not just doing the obvious but orchestrating the unobvious to your advantage too.

The U.S. gained a strategic ally in the Saudis in Regan's plan to bankrupt the Soviets through Star Wars and flooding the petroleum markets with an increased production of artifically low priced Saudi Oil to keep the Russians from being able to utilize their own oil reserves to fund their own Space Based Defense Initiative.

Lot's of good things worked out for the U.S. in letting Iran apparently fall to it's own devices and taking a hands off approach.

Lot's of good things happened for the U.S. because the regime that came to power was so unsettling and disturbing to it's neighbors.

Sounds like making the best of a bad situation to me, was it luck, providence or all designed.

I think when you reverse engineer it there is an argument as to why it could have been and may have been all designed.



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Hey, PT, I edited my above post to add a quote from you and a response. Made me think.
I guess I'm inclined to see a lot of what happens as luck-response-more luck- response-
not too much design
at least design that is successful



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by desert
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Hey, PT, I edited my above post to add a quote from you and a response. Made me think.
I guess I'm inclined to see a lot of what happens as luck-response-more luck- response-
not too much design
at least design that is successful


Kazikstahn is the new big boy on the block internationally it's land locked oil deposits are reputed to be the largest on earth and the powers that be are desperately looking for a way to get those oil deposits to a sea port without having Russia control the pipeline.

Georgia was a failed attempt this past summer to liberate a path for that oil.

The Afghanistan/Pakistan War is another attempt to liberate a path for that oil, they have a pipeline now built all the way through Afghanistan but still have to lay it through the hotly contested Tribal area.

Iran could be possibly another route for that oil if Iran can be made to play ball on it, and they are certainly trying to make Iran play ball on a lot of things.

Just like they hyped Georgia through TV Commercials in the previous couple of years now they are taking to doing the same thing in Kasikstahn itself.

Kasikstahn currently is considered by some to be the most important country on earth because of it's vast untapped oil wealth. Russia, China, the EU, London and Washington are all courting it like it's the only date to the prom, and what ever is going on over there is pretty darn interesting as the Kazikstahni government is actually building an extra terestial Space Port.

I guess they might be having as much trouble you could say as finding a seaport for their oil to be exported as they are an alien life form to do the same, but they sure are trying every angle and so is everyone else, and Russia sure does not want to be cut out of the existing picture.

Lot's going on beneath the surface once you ignore all the emotional appeals of religious fundamentalism and the War on Terror and just look and think with an open mind in my humble oppinion.



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by The Last Man on Earth
 





Erm...I think you're going to have to back this up to the hilt, mate. "Evidently purely manufactured"? How exactly do you think the Arc of the Covenant could possibly have "Hail Caesar!" carved on it?


Ever seen the Arc of the Covenant? Do you know anyone who has? Do you have anything from history that actually dates to the precise period that documents it? The oldest Bibles known to exist date from a much later period of History than it supposedly does, so how do we date its existence accurately? We can’t! We can only choose to believe or not to believe what’s been written about it in books that were written in hand at a much later date.

This is what I mean about how Biblical History muddies that water and since there is no actual artifact to carbon date or one of the other imprecise sciences that can yield widely varying results of their own depending on the researchers and what theories they are trying to make science find a fit for in applying forensic sciences to archeology we can’t ever have a clear picture beyond assumption.

You assume that it’s dating is accurate based on biblical accounts I am discounting that it’s accurate based on Biblical accounts, and neither of us can enjoy any concrete certainty as to our suppositions.

Oh and by the way my theory is the Arc of the Covenant contains a pact and contract with Rome, you are confusing what I am speculating might exist on the inscribed Silver Plate resting on top or the Corner Stone buried in the foundation of the Nation’s Capital building which coincidentally looks like a mighty Roman Edifice to me!




Thank you, but again, I don't think it is entirely accurate however archeology does corellate with most of what established text-book history tells us.


What a surprise, if you can’t baffle them with nonsense then baffle them with science.

Where would it how would it benefit governments, institutions, corporations to have the science of archeology ‘back up’ what’s been written in the books by governments, institutions and corporations that coincidentally usually happen to be the funders of archeological expeditions.

People love to point to the virtues of science but people overlook the fact that science was born from alchemy, that original endeavor to turn other substances that weren’t gold into gold.

Science has failed in that endeavor, but has given us some great machines for killing people, animals, marine life and the environment! It’s managed to institutionalize things like Cancer, the Cocaine delusions of Freud and that none of us really want or know how to use free will, but it’s still failed in it’s original mission though it does get close where archeology is concerned when it comes to backing up propaganda gold!




Again, I agree, but that does not mean that in a thousand years time archeology won't reveal the truth of the matter, regardless of what modern propaganda says.


Some people see and say Rock, some people see and say Rock and Roll but it’s still just a rock! A rock is a rock is a rock is a rock and with a fancy enough title and enough romantic and gullible people in the audience well that rock can be any thing you want it to be!

It’s still a rock!




I did not do history at GCSE level, foolishly I did geography. My passion for history has only really manifested itself in the last few years. But I get what you're saying, however most of the things you have claimed simply could not have happened.


Take a real close look around at your money, at the law, at the system of banking and commerce, look at what it’s all based on, what the common elements are and really honestly tell me how it couldn’t have happened.

Yes there is a huge school of people who would like to chalk up all the coincidences, patterns, and telltale signs as being inconsequential based on this or that, or that or this, but all the this and that’s they rely on to dismiss what in reality is so frighteningly obvious the only way you could make it seem different is through a culture of lies and fabrications to make people believe…a rock is not a rock!

It if looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, it’s a duck!

You can make the duck look ugly, you can make the duck look like a swan but it’s still a duck!

What you are taking as absolute truths there is no absolute truth to establish it with other than taking a whole lot of altered books and texts and assuming for the sake of assuming and faith that they are correct.

You know what doesn’t lie? Treaties, start reading them and understand that Treaties are meant to be taken literally not figuratively and when you read the various Treaties from the Golden Bull on…well let’s just say it sheds a whole lot of truth on what really did happen.

When you read the Treaties the only way you can escape the logical conclusions is “oh well it doesn’t really mean that?” “That’s just the way they talked back then”…no it really means that, that’s why they put it in writing and all signed it!




The thing is, most of the people you mention could never have interacted with each other, as they lived in completely different historical periods or you are describing events that are anachronistic.

For example, you are suggesting by "force of arms and doctrine" that the Christian Romans were still expanding their empire - by that time, they weren't, really, they were just trying to hang on to what their pagan ancestors had conquered.


The dark ages provided a huge hole in history, most of what we know is pieced together from ‘lost’ records and ‘finds’ that are interpreted typically always to fit the biblical account of history. I am sure in either the Vatican or Seborga a great wealth of history remains buried away but is only made available to a few.

If you want to take as the gospel what came out after a thousand years of almost a complete media and scholar blackout by the Papacy as being accurate, well hey, I have some swamp land, I mean some vacation land in the Everglades, I mean in South Western Non Coastal Florida that would be perfect for you!




The thing is, history is dominated by archeology now, not simply myths and fairytales that came before.


When scientists can achieve their original mission of turning my Milky Way bar into Gold we can pretend that every rock tells a real story, in the meantime they better hurry because I am about to eat it!

One man’s science is another man’s fairy tale, many rivers, one ocean, and there is nothing archeologically that’s been found that can dispel my theory either.

Seriously look around, take a hard look, a questioning look, it’s literally all around you everywhere you look. That can’t be an accident, or a coincidence.

Not in this world, with humans being what humans are.

We live in the Roman Empire and we live in it as slaves.



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Ever seen the Arc of the Covenant? Do you know anyone who has? Do you have anything from history that actually dates to the precise period that documents it? r most of the things you have claimed simply could not have happened.


Making an argument is easy when you just make things up. Good strategy.



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by IranRevolutionary

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Ever seen the Arc of the Covenant? Do you know anyone who has? Do you have anything from history that actually dates to the precise period that documents it? r most of the things you have claimed simply could not have happened.


Making an argument is easy when you just make things up. Good strategy.


You mean kind of like pretending to be an Iranian Revolutionary?

I trust you prayed all prerequisite six times today facing Mecca like every good Israeli?

Don't worry I am sure they have a place for you in Martyrs Square!

Too funny.



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler


You mean kind of like pretending to be an Iranian Revolutionary?

.


You keep bringing this up so I suppose you think you are somehow making a point here? Given that most of what you post is inaccurate and disingenuous, I shouldn't be surprised.

So let me ask you again, since the last time I posed the question, you didn't answer. Are you under the impression that our names we select here are indicative of who we are in real life?

Are you a Protoplasmic Traveler?

Stop with the silliness. I'm sure you are embarrassed that others have called you out on your ridiculously historically inaccurate posts but trying to suggest that I am pretending to be anything is juvenile.

So, are you or are you not, a PROTOPLASMIC TRAVELER?????



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by vox2442
I am willing to bet that people are actively talking about the return of the Shah to replace the theocracy by the end of this week. Political commentators, perhaps the odd politician or two, and a few influencial members of the Iranian expat community. By the end of Friday, June 26th.


Protest in Washington DC. Yesterday, apparently. Note the flags of the Pahlavi dynasty being waved by all in attendance.




posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 01:22 AM
link   
While I don't think there are too many Iranians pining for the Pahlavis, it's interesting to note how Gen Franco in Spain decide in 1969 that his successor would be the grandson of the Bourbon King Alfonso who was deposed in 1931.

Immediately after Franco's death in 1975 Juan Carlos became King of Spain and still is today.

A very different set of circumstances and personalities. Still ...

A hardline ultra-conservative rule succeeded by a monarchy.

Patriarchy rules.


Mike



posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by IranRevolutionary
 





So, are you or are you not, a PROTOPLASMIC TRAVELER?????


Why yes I am, we are all made up of protoplasm.

I guess biology like Iran is a weak subject for you to friend.

There is a Middle Eastern section here on ATS that you might be able to find out more about Middle Eastern cultures if you so desire.

There is an Above Politics section here on ATS too that you can find out more about political issues and concerns here in the United States.

ATS is a Conspiracy Oriented Website where a very wide range of topics are discussed here most with a conspiratorial theme or bent to it.

Occassionally on Breaking Alternative News Items they will have regional or political twists to them but the whole purpose of the site is basically a place to give skeptics an opportunity to refute and dissprove conspiracies of all kinds exists.

There are some Terms and Conditions for decorum and civility that the site owners are pretty serious about.

It's clear by your screen name that you have just joined, and just joined with a political agenda, and it's equally clear by your posts you are neither an Iranian, nor a revolutionary, or know much if anything at all about Iranian culture or what is driving the disturbances in Iran.

ATS is someplace by the way you could learn a good deal about those things.

ATS is a place where people try to deny ignorance in all it's forms and try to overcome it.

Occassionaly someone will join ATS with a political agenda or motive for the sole expressed purpose promoting ignorance.

That goes over good on some sites, but not too well here on ATS.

Some food for thought my friend, shalom.



posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

There are some Terms and Conditions for decorum and civility that the site owners are pretty serious about.



Interestingly enough, I was just going to point out the T and C section to you since your last post is nothing more than a personal attack on me. You have accused me on numerous occasions of pretending to be something I am not.

That is untrue. Just as most of the "historical" nonsense you posted earlier was absolutely inaccurate as has been pointed out by others.

Just so we are clear here, I never pretended to be Iranian nor a Revolutionary. I thought the name was relevant given that I am sympathetic to the struggle of the Iranian people to fight for personal freedoms.

So perhaps, you might want to read your suggestions to me and follow them.

Peace



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join