[EMAIL PROTECTED],Internet writes:
>>Oh! Ahaaaahm ... I see.
>
>>I see that mommy forget to change junior's poohey nappy.
>
>And you're ugly and your mother dresses you funny.
>
>However, that's not the topic of this particular list. This list is about
>conspiracy theory, not your mother, not evolution, not abortion and not
>comparative religion.
>
>>So . "nessie"? Hmmm .. doesn't your name appear under a post below
>something about . Pffffffffffffffffft!!! "elephant poop".
>
>Perhaps. Refresh my memory. Cite the exact quote to which you refer.
>
>>This would have to be the most pious piece holier-than-thou paranoid
>claptrap I've read on this list thus far.
>
>"Pious"!?! That's an interesting choice of terminology for you to use to
>describe my attack on what is essentially a religious position, not for
>BEING a religious position, but for being off topic and disruptive. I
>think you are a little confused about what the word pious actually
>means. Buy a dictionary.
>
>>Your pious "study of the truth" - what - by condemning it!
>
>I'm condemning what YOU say is the truth. I say it's
a
>superstitious delusion.
This is not the proper venue for debating who's right. This is a
conspiracy theory list. The comparative religion lists are somewhere else.
>
>
>>You sound like a complete control freak.
>
>Far from it. I'm a life long anarchist activist. What I'm doing here is
>opposing control. Again and again people who are either religious zealots
>or paid infiltrators with disruptive intent have attempted to gain
>control of this
list
>, flood it with their off topic propaganda and distract serious
>researchers of honest intent for whom this space is a vital resource.
>This is not an appropriate venue for the discussion of religious
>doctrine. This is a venue dedicated to the discussion of conspiracy
>theory. The net is FULL of venues dedicated to the discussion of
>religious doctrine. Go do it there.
>
>>Well, if for a moment you can lay aside your infantile B.S. and paranoia
>-the simple FACT is, that in the real world of the elite establishment -
>areyou aware that people are discriminated against from such basic rights
>as
>employment for one example?
>
>This sentence isn't English. It's vocabulary is English
, but
> I can't tell what the syntax is. It sounds sort of Indo-European. Closer
>than that I couldn't even guess. Could it be an obscure dialect of
>Gibberish, perhaps? Or maybe it's Babble. Whatever it is, it's not
>English.
>
>What exactly were you trying to say? Were you trying to say that the
>world of the elite establishment is the real world? I disagree. It's part
>of the real world, nothing more. Am I aware of employment discrimination?
>Yes I am, and from personal experience. And you?
>
>>This discrimination is not based on lack of ability, but on the basis
>that a
>person does not subscribe to a
>non-establishment view of the origins of life
>and its associated social engineering dogma - this to me, seems would be
>of
>concern to ANYONE on a - supposed "Conspiracy" forum.
>
>What are you trying to say here, that it is the result of a conspiracy
>that people are not hired to teach religious doctrine in the public
>schools? This is not the result of a conspiracy but of very specific
>wording in the US Constitution which prohibits the establishment of a
>state religion.
>
>>The fact that there are brave men and women out there - prepared to stick
>their necks on the line, not because they hold, or do not hold to a
>particular religious view, and as the article indicated - most did not,
>but
>rather, that they had the tenacity to simply state the truth as they saw
>it - even if contrary to the power and propaganda of the elites - this
>seems
>to have escaped your paranoid consensus reality and censorious mindset.
>
>Oh, I know they're out there alright. But they, their employment and
>their religious doctrine are off topic here. Like I said, it's not a
>conspiracy that keeps them from cramming their superstition down our
>kids' throats. It's the Constitution.
>
>>Perhaps in future, you'd like to actually offer constructive rational
>argument rather than attempt to demonise every post that your bigoted
>little
p
>aranoiac bonehead disagrees with?
>
>Debate theory states that ad hominim attacks are a fairly good indication
>that the debater has no evidence to present. Posts I disagree with fall
>into two categories, on-topic posts and off topic posts. On topic posts I
>either answer of ignore. Off topic posts don't belong here. They belong
>in venues to whose focus their subjects are relevant.
>
>>And as far as spooks being on your paranoid delusional tail - I'm sure
>they
>have better things to do with their time than waste it on a silly prat
>like
>yourself - such as using the crapper - though on the other hand, the guys
>from your local funny-farm - well . I'd advise you to keep looking over
>your
>shoulder!
>
>No problem. I like looking over my shoulder.
It makes me feel good inside. And well it does, because s
>ooner or latter one of you religious fanatics is going to try to kill my
>ass just like
they
> did Alan Berg. Unlike Berg, I watch my back. I intend to see
him
> coming and when I do I intend to defend myself effectively.
I'm armed, dangerous and ready rumble.
>Capiesc'?
This does not make me paranoid. This makes me a survivor. I'm 51, healthy
and free, so I must be doing something right.
>
>
>>And just for the record AGAIN - the majority of the quotes (would you
>like
>4,000 more - and referenced?) were from your own priestly elite -
>
>I'm an anarchist. We have no elite. If you want to have an elite, go
>right ahead. We think you're making a serious mistake, but that's your
>prerogative. It is not your prerogative to inflict them on us.
As for quotations, it is not the number that counts but the sources and
quality.
>
>
>>the Evolutionists themselves, stating unequivocally that there IS NO
>EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE for their own THEORY.
>
>Using capital letters does not make what you write true.
>
>>The same E THEORY that Nazi Germany adopted to murder the weak,
>malformed, minorities, and the demonised so-called racially impure.
>
>>The same E THEORY that your Social Engineers originally employed to
>majoritively,
>
>
>"Majoritively"!?! What's that mean
in English
>?
>
>>and racially target BLACK babies for abortive extermination.
>
>>The same E THEORY that Hitler based his Master Race plan, and racial
>hatredon.
>
>>The same E THEORY that hastened steps toward the Holocaust, and
>extermination of millions of Jews, and adopted by Nazi quacks to mutilate
>and torture their human subjects because they were lower on the E THEORY
>scale.
>
>You confuse evolution with eugenics. Like I said, buy a dictionary.
>
>>The same E THEORY that promotes imperialist capitalist dog-eat-dog,
>survival of the fittest, and rapacious "progress" mentality to plunder
>the weak, and the poor, and rape weaker nations of their sovereignty and
>resources.
>
>
>I
,
> too
,
> once believed that the Social-Darwinists drew their theory from Darwin.
>After all, whatever else Darwin was he was human. That means he was as
>much a product of his culture and are any of us. Darwin was an
>Englishman. The English are, and have been for as long as anybody can
>remember, a predatory People. Ask any of their victims. Start with their
>neighbors and work outward in a spiral. You'll see. Ergo, I thought,
>Darwin must have been culturally biased to give undue weight to the
>relative value of predation in his theorizing.
>
>Then I read Steven J. Gould, who explains at length and in detail, in
>numerous places, that Darwin never said what the Social-Darwinists say he
>said.
>
>Then I read Darwin.
And y
>ou know what? Gould is dead right. Darwin never said any of that stuff the
Social-Darwinists
> say he
said
>.
>
>Have you read Darwin? If not, you don't know what you're talking about,
>do you?
>
>It is significant that today people associate evolution with the name of
>Darwin and not also with the names of Wallace and Kropotkin. This was not
>always the case. It could be argued that Social-Darwinists in power
>conspired to bring this about. We could talk about that. That is on
>topic. Whether creationism or evolutionism is the more correct analysis
>is not on topic.
>
>Personally, I favor Kropotkin's
take on evolution
>.
A great man he was, that Kropotkin.
>He was the Einstein of his day. He wrote
, for example,
> 22 articles for the 1888 Encyclopedia Britannica. If you ask
ed
> a typical man in the street in the late nineteenth century to name a
>scientist, odds are he would have said, "Kropotkin." Such was Kropotkin's
>renown as a scientist during his life
time
>. Yet he has been virtually expunged from history, not because of his
>science, but because of his politics. Despite being born a Prince of the
>house of Romanov, fourth in line to be Tsar, Kropotkin rejected his
>class. He worked for a living all of his life. He was also an outspoken
>anarchist. He was, in fact, one of our leading theoreticians. This meant
>that both capitalist and communist educators found it politically
>expedient to purge his name from history.
Now that's on topic. So is a discussion of the Veliskovsky-like
persecution of scientists who present anomolous evidence or heretical
theories. The relative validity of that evidence and veracity of their
theories is NOT on topic.
>
>
Kropotkin's books, incidently,
> are still in print
. They are a little hard to find but they are available
>. Check out:
>
>Mutual Aid: A Factor in Evolution by Peter Kropotkin
>ISBN 0-87558-024-6
>Porter, Sargeant Publishers Inc.
>11 Beacon St.
>Boston MA 02108
>
>
>Even if creationism had merit enough to be taught as anything other than
quaint
>superstition, the problem of which creation myth to teach remains. If
>Judeo-Christian-Islamic creationism
is to be taught in public schools
>, why not Hindu creationism or Wiccan creationism? If I were to abandon
>science for myth, I'd
definitely
>choose
the
>Kwakuitl version of where we come from. Raven went for a walk on the
>beach. He turned over a clam shell and underneath it found First Man and
>First Woman. It's as good a myth as any and all else being equal, I much
>prefer Raven to Yahweh. Raven, for all his mischief, is a pretty nice guy
compared to Yahweh
>. Even his
tricks and
>mischief
are
> good for us because
from them we learn
> thing
s
> we need to know. Yahweh, on the other hand is a vain, selfish, jealous,
>bloodthirsty tyrant.
>
>
>>The same E THEORY that led Ted Bundy to kill wantonly - writes Dr Loftus,
>"he rambled on once about hunters who stalked and killed deer and were
>never plagued by a guilty conscience. Why are we so moralistic, Bundy
>wanted to know, when it comes to human life? Why is a human life worth
>more than a deer's life?" [1] Now I wonder which E THEORY taught him that!
Curious that you find Bundy so fascinating that you read an entire book on
the subject. What does this tell us about the workings of your mind?
>
>
>Bundy killed because he was a psychopath. It is disingenuous to imply
>that it was Darwin's fault. This is not to say that Darwin's words cannot
>be twisted to suit the agenda of people with whom Darwin himself would
>profoundly differ. The
y
> can and they have been
twisted repeatedly
>. In this
,
> Darwin is far from alone.
>
>Consider Jesus of Nazareth. "Love one another," said Jesus. Yet
>Christians have robbed, raped, murdered and enslaved more human beings tha
n
> any other
single bunch
> of
people
> in all
of
>human history. Is that Jesus's fault? I don't think so.
I think Jesus would be disgusted.
>
>
>
>>So tell us My big shot guru of "Conspiracy Theories" - what "THEORY"
>drives
>your precious bogie man NEW WORLD ORDER - if not the same E THEORY that
>the Third Reich put into such horrid PRACTICE - which, as you say, is
>your OWN
>blindly accepted as fact E THEORY also -
>
>The New World Order, or the Neo-Liberals, or the Elite, or the Ruling
>Class or whatever you care to call them, are driven by selfish greed,
>nothing more and nothing less. Our rulers are selfish, greedy men. Their
>fathers were selfish, greedy men. Their grandfathers were selfish, greedy
>men. And so on, all the way back to the founding of the first hierarchal
>society back on the steppes of what is now Russia, four to six thousand
>years ago, long, long before evolution was ever conceived of.
>
>>you intellectual fraud and charlatan.
>
>Sticks and stones may break my bones, but name calling doesn't prove your
>case or make you look very smart
either
>. Au contrair, they make you look intellectually bankrupt and your
>position
appear
> bereft of validity.
>
>Any good library has a number of books on debate. Read one. Perhaps then
>you'd look less the fool. While you're there, check out a couple books on
>logic. Read up on scientific method. You could stand to learn some
>comparative religion, as well. Some familiarity with common etiquette
>wouldn't do you any harm, either. And of course, don't forget Darwin
>himself.
First read Darwin. Then talk about him. That way you won't look so stupid
afterwards.
>
>
>In the meantime either stay on topic or go away.
>
>
>
>
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid
matters
and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
<A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
