Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by whosit, Apr 20, 2011.
Also, even Radiohead couldn't save this. Posted because I hate all of you almost as much as I hate myself for posting this:
The problem with that is that that isn't what Griffin said. A casual WP reader won't pick up on that, though. They'll pick up "G. Edward Griffin", "Protocols of Zion" and "anti-Semitic" and that'll do the job the author intended.
Dead agenting wasn't invented by Hubbard and didn't die with him. Grand Wurlitzer FTL.
Okay, again, i'll admit that i have not been following this story, but it does raise a question -
If we were to talk about the ancient artifact which was once known as Journalism, there was a certain importance placed upon a "source" of information. I don't think that having some curiosity about an individual's intellectual sources of reference is out of line. He may have been making some pretty big claims, and there may have been interest in determining the source of his "Dox", and no, i am not sure that it was just Dead Agenting. but, i don't know.
Yes, and if journalistic integrity is to raise its hoary head, then... see my previous comments. That's my point. "Having some curiosity about an individual's intellectual sources of reference" does not mean "finding a way to dismiss someone with inaccurate ad hominem slurs".
Having actually read at least some of the "Protocols", I can readily agree with Griffin: they do describe a lot of what we see happening around us. To proceed from that observation, however, to "ZOMG da joooooooooz wroted dem!!!!eleven!! " is a non sequitur. Who actually wrote them? I don't know, and although I'd like to know, it's less important to me than their content. Why is the content of interest? Not for any racial or other demographic reason, but for the outlining of methods of control of the masses by a corrupt elite -- any corrupt elite, anywhere, any time. Aren't you curious about how you could be controlled and manipulated? Wouldn't you like to be aware of such techniques? Or are you scared of entheta "anti-semitism" cooties?
The same thing applies to the "Report from Iron Mountain". Regardless of the authorship, both documents are worthwhile reading for the curious mind, and editorials such as the WP's do such minds no favors (and that's only one of the serious failings of that editorial).
Be the entheta you want to see in the world, my groggy anonymous friend.
Here's some Wikipedia if you're interested.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion
It is important to know the origins of that work, in order to determine it's actual validity, beyond the hyped conspiracy rhetoric. From the objective "journalistic view", just because you believe something to be true, does not actually mean it is actually true. And, in this case, it is not true, and it has been debunked on numerous occasions. Now, to address what may appear to you to be merely a "knee jerk" reaction by people who are Jewish to this work, you may not be aware that this tract does hit a nerve, and it does, not because it is true, but because this text was, in fact, used by the likes of Hitler to justify the genocide of the Holocaust. and that is not an exaggeration in the slightest.
Yes, is it interesting to try to have some awareness on a sociological level of what current trends and topics are affecting us all? sure. Could it be that there is some elite power structure seeking to promote and protect itself, and find corporate means to prosper? probably.
But to narrow down something so very complex and intricate (and quite frankly, over my head) into such a narrow definition, implicating or targeting a specific group of people could be a terribly grave error in judgment and outlook.
things are not as simple as they seem, and to pander to that lowest common denominator on the basis of fear and hate, to also, yes, control their attitudes and opinions, is another topic in itself. Go ask Alex Jones and those types of people how much money they themselves are making from pandering to this element of society?-the disenfranchised. There is irony in there, to be sure. and, it's not so clear-cut.
haha thanks. I enjoy talking to you, Johnny. You keep being you, too.
It is called being a bigot. There is a bit of that on this site... Judging someone based off of their religion is just kinda sleezy. People are free to do so, but I am free to say it is sleezy, and uninformed.
I agree, but don't lose your sense of humor over it. Everybody must get stoned...
i like this sort of stuff... good news in real time - i can't find a better site right now, but here's two that popped up in a google search -
True Stories about good things and people in the world...
Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!