deprogrammed

Again, please enlighten me as to when the rules of grammar changed to imply that a name or generic term placed within quoation marks indicates that a surrounding statement or quote is moking?

If you have thought this then i am pleased to inform you that you are simply wrong.

How, can you say you have no position on PrisonPlanet.com when you said this: -----he was mocking it and insinuating that it should be obvious that a web site with an over-the-top name like prisonplanet would have an agenda than was something other than to provide a fair and balanced view.

You have a really hard time admitting when you wrong, even when it's over some inconsequential item, don't you? You are making yourself look foolish by insisting that the guy was making a serious statement and crying foul because he later contradicted that statement. Maybe English isn't your first language, or maybe he should have put a smiley face at the end of his statement, but your barking up the wrong tree over this one.

You said you have no position on PrisonPlanet.com - but you previously said this:

-----he was mocking it and insinuating that it should be obvious that a web site with an over-the-top name like prisonplanet would have an agenda than was something other than to provide a fair and balanced view

So when you said the above you were obviously moking Or not - so what is your position. Do you stand by the above statement giving your position or do you not have a position.

You have a real talent for latching onto the irrelevant. What difference does it make if I have a position on prisonplanet? I think that it's a very biased sounding name, that's all that I can say confidently about it.

No difference really, but you gave your position then said you didn't have a position. I stated my position - I think Alex Jones is a shill. He mixes some truth with some BS therefore making the truth questionable. He also makes a few quid out of selling doom. My position

Again, please enlighten me as to when the rules of grammar changed to imply that a name or generic term placed within quoation marks indicates that a surrounding statement or quote is moking?

If you have thought this then i am pleased to inform you that you are simply wrong.

How, can you say you have no position on PrisonPlanet.com when you said this: -----he was mocking it and insinuating that it should be obvious that a web site with an over-the-top name like prisonplanet would have an agenda than was something other than to provide a fair and balanced view.

You have a really hard time admitting when you wrong, even when it's over some inconsequential item, don't you? You are making yourself look foolish by insisting that the guy was making a serious statement and crying foul because he later contradicted that statement. Maybe English isn't your first language, or maybe he should have put a smiley face at the end of his statement, but your barking up the wrong tree over this one.

You said you have no position on PrisonPlanet.com - but you previously said this:

-----he was mocking it and insinuating that it should be obvious that a web site with an over-the-top name like prisonplanet would have an agenda than was something other than to provide a fair and balanced view

So when you said the above you were obviously moking Or not - so what is your position. Do you stand by the above statement giving your position or do you not have a position.

[

Wait a moment you said: I think that a writer associated with "prisonplanet.com" is likely to provide a fair and balanced view of any "secret society"

Please readers, read what his guy said in post no.4 and read what he says in this post. 180 degree turnaround - strange one thinks!

Don't be daft. Read the statement again and notice the words that he chose to put inside quotation marks. He wasn't endorsing that site, he was mocking it and insinuating that it should be obvious that a web site with an over-the-top name like prisonplanet would have an agenda than was something other than to provide a fair and balanced view.

So you speak for this guy - you must be a team So pray tell me why did he keep refering to Alex as Eric? And what is your view on PrisonPlanet - or have you made up your fair and balanced view by the name alone.

And by which rules of grammar are we to understand that a statement made within quotation marks indicates moking???

I have no position on prisonplanet and I know nothing about Eric nor why anyone would call Alex by that name, I'm just telling you that his statement was obviously laced with sarcasm. It's hard to understand how you could have not picked upon on that.

Again, please enlighten me as to when the rules of grammar changed to imply that a name or generic term placed within quoation marks indicates that a surrounding statement or quote is moking?

If you have thought this then i am pleased to inform you that you are simply wrong.

How, can you say you have no position on PrisonPlanet.com when you said this: -----he was mocking it and insinuating that it should be obvious that a web site with an over-the-top name like prisonplanet would have an agenda than was something other than to provide a fair and balanced view.

Alex/Eric, what's the difference - his video is nonsense. When someone believes he has developed a unified conspiracy theory, it has to be air tight. It's similar to sudoku, you don't get a wrong number in one cell - the problem is evident in many cells. When Alex lies about one thing, his supporters reply, "Sure he lied about one thing, but everything else is OK." When a second lie appears, his supports say, "OK, so he lied about a second thing, the rest is OK." When you point out a dozen things that are wrong, his supporters say, "You're not a free thinker, you should do research." Well, we do, and it's evident that the conspiracy fanatics are the ones who refuse to open their eyes, and do research. Bygon developed a conspiracy theory that had "the US declared war on Viet Nam", as his lynchpin argument. Well, he's wrong - the US never declared war on Viet Nam - and the conspiracy websites that he trolls are wrong. There is a point of law that could very well be used to advance the conspiracy theory of why the US did not declare war (in Viet Nam, in Afganistan, or in Iraq) However, no conspiracy website has visited this point. Since no conspiracy website has visited this point, neither you nor you like-minded friends have considered this point. Put on your thinking cap, deprogrammed, you might make sense of this yet.

I remember the old days, when only minorities complained about being exploited by the man. Now, with the advent of the internet, and the explosion of "alternative media websites", we can now call ourselves victims. Thank goodness for the alternative media blowhards!

Wait a moment you said: I think that a writer associated with "prisonplanet.com" is likely to provide a fair and balanced view of any "secret society"

Please readers, read what his guy said in post no.4 and read what he says in this post. 180 degree turnaround - strange one thinks!

Don't be daft. Read the statement again and notice the words that he chose to put inside quotation marks. He wasn't endorsing that site, he was mocking it and insinuating that it should be obvious that a web site with an over-the-top name like prisonplanet would have an agenda than was something other than to provide a fair and balanced view.

So you speak for this guy - you must be a team So pray tell me why did he keep refering to Alex as Eric? And what is your view on PrisonPlanet - or have you made up your fair and balanced view by the name alone?

And by which rules of grammar are we to understand that by placing a name or general generic term within quotation marks indicates that the whole statement is moking???

Any reader who understands basic rules of grammar knows you are talking absolute BS> You may fool some retards though!

Alex/Eric, what's the difference - his video is nonsense. When someone believes he has developed a unified conspiracy theory, it has to be air tight. It's similar to sudoku, you don't get a wrong number in one cell - the problem is evident in many cells. When Alex lies about one thing, his supporters reply, "Sure he lied about one thing, but everything else is OK." When a second lie appears, his supports say, "OK, so he lied about a second thing, the rest is OK." When you point out a dozen things that are wrong, his supporters say, "You're not a free thinker, you should do research." Well, we do, and it's evident that the conspiracy fanatics are the ones who refuse to open their eyes, and do research. Bygon developed a conspiracy theory that had "the US declared war on Viet Nam", as his lynchpin argument. Well, he's wrong - the US never declared war on Viet Nam - and the conspiracy websites that he trolls are wrong. There is a point of law that could very well be used to advance the conspiracy theory of why the US did not declare war (in Viet Nam, in Afganistan, or in Iraq) However, no conspiracy website has visited this point. Since no conspiracy website has visited this point, neither you nor you like-minded friends have considered this point. Put on your thinking cap, deprogrammed, you might make sense of this yet.

I remember the old days, when only minorities complained about being exploited by the man. Now, with the advent of the internet, and the explosion of "alternative media websites", we can now call ourselves victims. Thank goodness for the alternative media blowhards!

Wait a moment you said: I think that a writer associated with "prisonplanet.com" is likely to provide a fair and balanced view of any "secret society"

Please readers, read what his guy said in post no.4 and read what he says in this post. 180 degree turnaround - strange one thinks!

PS as you quote PrisonPlanet in post no. 4 you obviously are well aware that the the host is Alex Jones - yet you have repeatedly refered to him as Eric in numerous posts. Readers may want to ask why hhzg trys to distort and debunk esp. following his comments in post no.4.

PPS I personally think Alex Jones is a shill by the fact of what he doesn't report. However, i did not make the statement that you make in post no. 4: I think that a writer associated with "prisonplanet.com" is likely to provide a fair and balanced view of any "secret society"

As I said to Naam, I read both sides and try to take a balanced view. You seem to have an agenda to distort!!

"Since the inception of Federal Reserve in 1913 a number of large and small wars have commenced, With the three most pronounced - the World War I, World War II and Vietnam...The United States official declaration of war with Vietnam in 1964..."

That's wrong - you're getting even the most obvious details of your postings incorrect. Despite your conviction otherwise, there never was a declaration of war with Viet Nam.

Post No.4 on this thread - by hhgz: "I think that a writer associated with "prisonplanet.com" is likely to provide a fair and balanced view of any "secret society"

YET YOU GO TO EXTAORDINARY LENGHTS TO DEBUNK EVERYTHING SAID BY EVERY WRITER ASSOCIATED WITH PRISON PLANET - AND YOU CONSTANTLY REFER TO ALEX JONES AS ERIC,

For anyone who wants to know where hhgz's head is at just read his post no.4 (as quoted above) and then read what Alex Jones has to say re the Bilderbergers or 911 etc.

Hoi errorprogrammed you haven't showed me yet in which topic I posted that I believe in conspiracies.

New days resolution - I don't correspond with the brain dead. I thought you might be a spook, however I think even spooks must have half a brain. Maybe I am wrong

[

Midas as I think you are aware the list of conspiracy theories came from google and were by Lucas Graves. To each his own to which ones are worth consideration and which ones aren't.

What do you propose to do about the Bilderberg conspiracy now that you are convinced it is fact?

i propose to continue with an open mind and watch events unfold. I regard this as just a small part of the jigsaw.

And why is it that you are prepared to give the Bilderberg's the benefit of the doubt and what to the subject are a bit annoying and to bug them a bit is rewarding with the response it gets. You are not included as one of the annoying posters.

But if I believed the entire conspiracy theory I don't believe there is anything meaningful that I or anyone on this thread can do about it. So my time can be more enjoyable spent pursuing other things. If I was convinced my opinion would matter I would look at it differently.

BT

It is exactly your type of attitude that allows dishonerable men to control every aspect of your life. Then again if you think as you write, I agree you are useless to act. Better as you say, to have no opinion either way - amaizing indeed

PS You obviously have an opinion on what your brain can cope with, like your opinion on who is annoying poster. Best stick with the simple stuff !

PPS You write like a Brummy (native of Birmingham, England - for our foriegn readers) speaks. Tell me if I am wrong?

As usual you are wrong, I think you need to brush up on your reading ability and comprehension.

Comprehension is reading ability - Brummy my boy

This guy woud do well to learn English prior to attempting to Teach. Does ya now whats a mean

I think it is quite obvious that I prefer supporting Naam to many of the other posters on this thread.

Yes that is quite obvious and that is entirely your affair.

Midas as I think you are aware the list of conspiracy theories came from google and were by Lucas Graves. To each his own to which ones are worth consideration and which ones aren't.

What do you propose to do about the Bilderberg conspiracy now that you are convinced it is fact?

i propose to continue with an open mind and watch events unfold. I regard this as just a small part of the jigsaw.

And why is it that you are prepared to give the Bilderberg's the benefit of the doubt and what would convince you otherwise?

Midas that is a reasonable question and since you responded to mine I will respond to yours.

As I stated I don't really have a strong opinion on this one way or the other. The reason for that is I do not think what my opinion on the matter would really make any difference to anyone.

For that reason I don't wish to spend all of the hours many of you have put into this trying to figure out who to believe and who not to believe. You might wonder why with that attitude I post on the subject at all. To tell you the truth I wonder that myself.

But I must admit there are a couple of posters whose attitude and approach to the subject are a bit annoying and to bug them a bit is rewarding with the response it gets. You are not included as one of the annoying posters.

But if I believed the entire conspiracy theory I don't believe there is anything meaningful that I or anyone on this thread can do about it. So my time can be more enjoyable spent pursuing other things. If I was convinced my opinion would matter I would look at it differently.

BT

It is exactly your type of attitude that allows dishonerable men to control every aspect of your life. Then again if you think as you write, I agree you are useless to act. Better as you say, to have no opinion either way - amaizing indeed

PS You obviously have an opinion on what your brain can cope with, like your opinion on who is annoying poster. Best stick with the simple stuff !

PPS You write like a Brummy (native of Birmingham, England - for our foriegn readers) speaks. Tell me if I am wrong?

Amazing after 249 post someone realizes that Naam is of German decent. Some real fast learners here.

I also notice that he is now being compared to the pope, and some call him the high priest.

Has this thread drifted from the Bilderberg group?

To be more accurate Naam is being compared to Catholic Priests, following revelations of their activitys in Ireland over the past 50 or so years.

mmmmmmm, pepsimax

http://www.mercola.com/article/aspartame/dangers.htm

I will stop buying and eating this

Wise indeed - you are the only one who took note of this poison Seems the rest don't mind so long as it tastes good

Oh, your not telling me Naam is a German Now everthing makes sense

Any begger or tealeaf from a list of EU states (to numerous to list) can walk straight into the nearest housing office and get preferential treatment. 12 months doing any old job and they're made for life - benefits wise.

So the tossers who like to thieve money from the public (MPs) use the same old tactics - attack an easy target

However, a blessing in disguise one thinks. The Uk is a sh*t hole run by thieving scumbags.

Can you guys quit stroking Naam and find your way back to the topic. Perhaps we should put an age limit on this thread. anyone under 16 is banned, but that would just leave Naam apparently.

Naam congratulations on reeling in a bunch of suckers. You didn't even have to troll to get em.

Another Naam fan rears their head. Go directly to the Catholic priesthood and collect your rewards - all under 16 gauranteed

"Philip Hayton - BBC reporter on the day. Watch and debunk. His final words after an uncomfortable interview 'I sense you think their is a conspiracy here - and you might be right'".

As an unbiased reporter, that's an appropriate response. There are obviously several wide-eyed TVers who, if they had the ability to "report", would have exclaimed, "THAT'S IT! That's exactly what I was thinking! Yes, Eric is in the know. Wow. You are right on!"

If you watched Eric's "The Obama Deception", he asked the viewer several times to "check out the facts presented in the video". It was a safe thing for him to do. He knew that only one person out of 10,000 would bother to do so. The other 9,999 viewers would accept his word carte blanche, believing everything without question. He purposely made an error with a discrepancy between a voiceover and the statement on the screen. It was a nod and wink: if you caught it, you are in on his hoax. There are those who are intellectually lazy, and accept the "alternative media" without critical analysis. Among the many problems with "Deception", Eric claimed that, because 100 reporters were on a plane, the mainstream media couldn't report on Obama's secret whereabouts. Unfortunately for Eric, there are more than 100 reporters in the mainstream and, just because someone has a private conversation behind closed doors, it does not mean they're plotting anything nefarious.

Who the fck is Eric And why do you retort with such jibberish BS. What has building 7 got to do with Obama. There is a certain pattern emerging in your tactics - in that when you are faced with something you can't debunk you talk utter sh*t to throw of the brain dead majority.

Or are you simply nutts?

I think it is quite obvious that I prefer supporting Naam to many of the other posters on this thread.

Midas as I think you are aware the list of conspiracy theories came from google and were by Lucas Graves. To each his own to which ones are worth consideration and which ones aren't.

What do you propose to do about the Bilderberg conspiracy now that you are convinced it is fact?

You are the epitome of a Naam supporter - your ignorance is on par with your high priest I am sure he would be gratefull and invite you to join the priesthood as good reward

PS please keep up this has nothing to do with the Bilderbodys - or whatever they are called anymore

I would like to ask our distinguished panel of skeptics especially Naam, Beenthere, EndofDays

what exactly are they arguing against?

I find it interesting that you say I am arguing against your conspiracy theory. If you take the trouble to read my post on this thread you will find I have never stated a position one way or another. I ask a couple of question (which no one ever answered) and provided a list of popular conspiracy theories for your consideration.

But you can interpret this anyway you like, I don't really care.

BTDT based on your numerous postings particularly Post #156

your propensity for sarcasm in support of the other skeptics gave me the distinct impression that

you're a Naam supporter.

I have certainly never read anything in this thread from you which could be considered to show even

anything close to a balanced approach to this matter?

The list of conspiracy theories you provided as you well know your self included some that were not worth

further consideration, but as someone subsequently said quite quite rightly -surely this doesn't mean that

we can afford to ignore conspiracies altogether.

Naam has supporters let them show themselfs

How can one idiot talk so muck BS. The best thing is to ignore this complete moron. PS I have one wish to meet this guy in a bar - please God!

my deprogrammed friend. this is the last time i tolerate that you call me or others (as it happened) an idiot or a moron. read the forum rules and watch your language.

p.s. i don't frequent bars but i offer you in all honesty and inspite of my age to beat the living shit out of you in my front yard. sshhhh... this offer is of course not in line with the forum rules. that means we have to keep it a secret

No need to defend otheres my boyscoutish friend. Now why am i not surprized that you feel you could beat the blah blah out of me when you know little of the phisical attributes of your apponent. Not very scientific is it.

PS I reccommend that you try to visit some bars you may learn some lessons. (please spell check recommend for me and be a good boy)

According to your personal standards, exactly what constitutes a " wild and unfounded assumption " ? When we found out 500 priests all around the world had also sexually abused children and if I had told you ten years ago that even the Pope knew about all these events and had not just ignored them...

yawnnnnnn... the global conspiracy and child abuse by priests condoned by the POPE in this thread. what next? quoting Jingthing and insinuate that the two tier baht Thai/Farang bus fares in Pattaya are a Bilderberg conspiracy?

You would have fit well in the Catholic Priesthood

I see Herr Naam is no too well informed when mentioning the use of ID cards and other forms of Id's and why governments want you to have and at all times carry them with you. It will be a rather shocking experience for anyone when that truth becomes clear.

the shocking truth is that ID cards are primarily meant to calculate what amounts of artificially engineered deadly viruses need to be produced to wipe out this planet's population. only the staunch efforts of those who oppose ID cards prevented that until now. but the opponents are not aware of the dirty Bilderberg move to make passports mandatory when travelling from one country to most others. as soon as this trick is made publish one can expect that hundreds of millions of passports will be burned.

by the way, another inhuman but globally adopted law -which the Bilderbergs introduced a long time ago- is that one needs a driver's license to operate a motorised vehicle

How can one idiot talk so muck BS. The best thing is to ignore this complete moron. PS I have one wish to meet this guy in a bar - please God!

You are a bit dissapointing now Naam. I thought you as a self proclaimed scientist would at least have a peak at the site I mentioned and consider the possibility of what is claimed there. The scientists I know have at least an open mind.

And why you think I would be on the front of mass demonstrations against "The New World Order" Bilderbergers and other evil people is a bit strange to me.

Are you willing to consider the possibility of a different truth?

This guy Naam is a complete - - - - - ! He refuses to look at anything which he knows he can't refute. If he is a scientist than we are all f*cked.

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. 'Plato'

i pity people who's wisdom is limited to quoting greek philosophers randomly as a substitute of their own thinking.

Maybe you should try reading some Greek Philisophers - start with Platos Republic I don't pity the scum of the earth who are limited to debunking anything they find uncomfortable, and try to be clever by quoting Latin phrases.

As I asked previously, please enlighten us by informing us where you get your unquestionable knowledge. Especially as you confirm you never read anything which is oppossed to your fixed views.

At what point in your life did you realize that you were always right - what a complete (fill in the blanks - - - - - - - - )

Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish - Abraham Lincoln (not a Greek philosopher)

PS Do you think your favourite politicians compose their own speaches ! Yes , i guess you do

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. 'Plato'

[quote name=deprogrammed' post='2756685'

I watched the video and you're right it is clearly a fake because if you look good at the left side of the world trade center you will see Bayoke tower.

I suggest you change your username to error programmed.

Your obviously a spook my son! Even the BBC don't deny the fact they reported the destruction of building 7, 20 minutes prior to its fall. <deleted> has your statement got to do with reality. The BBC reporter in the studio, when later interviewed, confirmed the conspiracy. Anyone with half a brain can do their own research, The fact that the BBC announce the fall 20 minutes in advance is admitted by the BBC, yet you deny It. Who are you working for - trawling these sites and making pathetic attempts to debunk the truth. Did they tell you you were special, rather than a usefull idiot

One conspiracy theory you don,t mind mentioning online! What you said in a previous post: (NOT NECESSARILY ME!!)

some folks believe (not necessarily me, i'm just reporting it) that HIV was originally a laboratory created bio weapon introduced into the world by certain eugenicist illuminati groups with the sole intention to eradicate certain other groups of the populous..

controversial stuff i know, but this theory is widespread...

Can you please post a video link where we can see that BBC reporter confirms the conspiracy.Not from somebody who says that he said but where he is openly admitting it himself.

Also can you please enlighten me with what you mean with this sentence "One conspiracy theory you don,t mind mentioning online! What you said in a previous post: (NOT NECESSARILY ME!!)".

I'm probably not the smartest but can you please repeat what I said in a previous post.

What you said in a previous post (as i posted ) Your post - look below and above:

some folks believe (not necessarily me, i'm just reporting it) that HIV was originally a laboratory created bio weapon introduced into the world by certain eugenicist illuminati groups with the sole intention to eradicate certain other groups of the populous

Philip Hayton - BBC reporter on the day. Watch and debunk. His final words after an uncomfortable interview "I sense you think their is a conspiracy here - and you might be right"

Funny how the BBC lost the tape then found it after they became aware it was posted in numerous locations throughout the net

Yes, I hear you say he doesn't exactly admit it! Agreed, he hedges a bit just like you when you say (not necessarily me, i'm just reporting it) Same training

PS why do you say the video is clearly a fake when the BBC never ever ever even attempt to say it is anything but real!