the odd thing is
stories like this were the norm rather than the exception a few decades ago

Bertrand Russell (part of the Foundations that work behind the scenes from 18C onwards - such as the Cecil Rhodes society , Royal Institute for Int Affairs etc) wrote in The Impact of Science on Society about the creation of the ego-centronic society with the indoctrination of a value system from the culture industry and educational establishment that would over write the values of the family and communities (its why you find more humane system when you travel to the less developed countries with less of a technocratic influence - with a culture of co dependance through necessity of treating your fellow man as you would yourself)

even HG Wells in his role as propagandist for the British Establishment wrote that the family unit and altruistic values needed to be destroyed so that Government could impose itself directly on the individual and instil its own value system of the pursuit of hedonism and egocentricity

the most effective way to impliment governance in the guise of government - as they move towards their collectivist world government based on the soviet model


*the Royal Institute and The Council on Foreign Relations are private organistations that work globally towards world standardisation with codes and mandates and are what Prof Carrol Quigly(official royal historian) referred to as the true power behind politics
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 15:19, 90 replies)

Oh...
do fuck off.
(GloriaHull you puerile slack-jawed drooling meatslapper, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 15:28, closed)

;)

(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 15:31, closed)

It is impressive how he manages to do this,
regardless of the question posed.
( Thinker, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 15:34, closed)

with alot of subjects
you can either swat each individual mosquito or talk about drying the swamp they're breeding in
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 15:40, closed)

Dear Mister The Goat
May you please explain to me how HG Wells was a propagandist?

(I'm not being faceti facaeti shitty, I'd be keen to find out where that info came from. I just thought he was a novelist...)

EDIT: Saved you some trouble there and did a bit of googling.

DOUBLE EDIT: Still can't see anything about destroying the family unit/altruistic values.
( Devil_In_Tights the *real* DiT!, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 15:47, closed)

most of Well's writing was non fiction such as his 2 volume 'Outline of History'

and he was one of one of the front men for the Fabian Society - which was funded by the British Aristocraacy

Bertrand Russell was also a member of the Fabian Society and like Wells pretended to be on the working mans side

Russell was also a eugenicist as were alot of the members of the Futurist society and Fabians, and its obvious from Well's writing that he was too - as well as introducing something called 'predictive programming' of ideas in his works - so when things are introduced to society they seem familiar and are more easily assimilated

the mandate of these figures was to influence the public into adopting the values presented in their works

Orwell was one of the few figures who rejected this movement
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 15:55, closed)

Citation Please
It's a bit like saying "Karl Marx was sponsored by General Motors you know".

The senence: "Russell was also a eugenicist as were alot of the members of the Futurist society and Fabians, and its obvious from Well's writing that he was too Bertrand Russell and Wells et cetera PREPARED THE MINDS OF PEOPLE THROUGH BOOKS." does not in any way qualify your statement as fact, how exactly was Wells a eugenicist? Again, The Time Machine and War of the Worlds both describe genetically engineered beings with advanced societies as being morally degenerative.

As any fule kno.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:32, closed)

I have it on good authority
that ane ful kno that ceiling cat is also watching you masturbate.
( Bazongaloid, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:38, closed)

*looks up*
Fuck...
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:46, closed)

QUOTE from my reply "as well as introducing something called 'predictive programming' of ideas in his works - so when things are introduced to society they seem familiar and are more easily assimilated"


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._G._Wells
see bazmorningstar's reply below (9th reply)

also the Marx/general motors ;

see free ebook in my profile
Wall Street & the Bolshevik Revolution : how western bankers created communism

.
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:57, closed)

tell me more of this
Bertrum Russell.

Was he related to Bertrand Russell?
(apeloverage committed the vile act of onanism on, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 15:51, closed)

Heh
I was wondering that. Maybe Bertrum was Bertrand's brother?
( Devil_In_Tights the *real* DiT!, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 15:52, closed)

Odd coincidence!
I just finished reading Nineteen Eighty Four last night. And I watched Citizen Kane last week, which has some bloke in it whose name is also Welles! You might be right, the lizard people work in mysterious ways, you know. *secret handshakes*
( baw__bag contains traces of nuts on, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 15:54, closed)

you have to stop reading that David Icke bullsh*t
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 15:57, closed)

But
his golden locks and rational thinking make me moist. It was he who designed the tin foil helmet I am currently wearing!
( baw__bag contains traces of nuts on, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:33, closed)

"HG Wells in his role as propagandist for the British Establishment "
Clearly, you've never read "War of the Worlds". Or "The Time Machine".

HG Wells was partly commentating on the fact that the British Empire (read: Establishment) was exploiting it's colonials with a disregard of humanity equal to that of the Martians themselves. It's very much a critique of the British class system of the day, just as The Time Machine was a critique of exploitation - you only have to look at the dependence of Eloi society on the predatory Morlocks to see that.

Quite how you made that assumption is utterly beyond me, I'd appreciate it if you'd qualify that statement.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Tue 7 Oct 2008, 15:58, closed)

Watch out PJM
he'll edit his post to remove that reference now you've shown it to be bollocks, just you wait.
( Bazongaloid, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:37, closed)

so, Goat,
what do you think of George Orwell?
(apeloverage committed the vile act of onanism on, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:00, closed)

No point rationalising it
It's just a lot of crap.
(GloriaHull you puerile slack-jawed drooling meatslapper, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:04, closed)

the reason I asked
was to see if he read the people he was referring to, or just read what other people said they said.

The fact that he got Bertrand Russell's name wrong implies that he's not familiar with his writing, he's just read that "Bertrand Russell wrote that the government should destroy the family" or similar.

Also I noticed that all his references are in the form "X wrote that such-and-such should happen", rather than direct quotes.
(apeloverage committed the vile act of onanism on, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:14, closed)

Orwell was one of the few figures who rejected this movement
and you could do worse than looking into the Tavistock Institute in London
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:14, closed)

Oooo
get you apeloverage, you're not just a pretty face are you!
( Bazongaloid, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:36, closed)

Do you have any quotes
from any of the authors you refer to?

My suspicion is that you don't, and that you haven't read them - you've just read other people saying that they had such-and-such a view.

In fact some of the opinions you ascribe to particular authors are right, in the limited sense that George Orwell was against oppression, Bertrand Russell wanted a world government etc.

But this isn't hidden or secret, or even controversial, in any way.

What you've done is essentially taken "author X wanted policy Y", added "author X is 'respectable', famous, oft-cited and taught at university etc"...and somehow taken it as proof that "policy Y is secretly being pursued."

For example: Bertrand Russell wanted a world government, the Establishment gives a high status to Bertrand Russell, therefore the Establishment is secretly pursuing a world government.

And the proof of this is "you should read Bertrand Russell, he wrote about the whole plan way back in the 1950s."

"Oh yeah, well what about the United Nations? Or the World Trade Organisation? They're a kind of world government aren't they?"

If you mean "do they show evidence of carrying out the blueprint of Bertrand Russell", the answer is no, they don't. They're international bodies, they have power, they do bad things...but in the specific sense that "they show evidence of having been organised specifically based on the lines that Bertrand Russell laid down", no, they show no evidence of that at all.
(apeloverage committed the vile act of onanism on, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:18, closed)

where possible when I have th e book in e-book format I put direct quotes - go to my reply to this post here - 12th-14th reply down i think:
www.b3ta.com/questions/getrichquick/post215944


and you could do worse than reading this - alot of the quotations and sources are valid
www.amazon.co.uk/Ascendancy-Scientific-Dictatorship-Examination-Epistemic/dp/1419639323/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1220609744&sr=8-1

EDIT: nice bit of editing - rewriting your whole post practically after i replied

briefly, yep, with Bertrand Russell look as the schools and educational experimentational models he set up with establishment approval and with royal charters - the RIFA is working towards this world government collectivist socialist model check out what Prof Quigley says about them in the link at beginning of this post
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:25, closed)

Seriously, fuck off
Retrospectively editing your posts to simply sidestep the responses to arguements that you've instigated isn't a way to get your message across.

Its alienating your audience and frustrating otherwise sympathetic readers, who, like myself are going to simply click on "ignore"
(GloriaHull you puerile slack-jawed drooling meatslapper, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:31, closed)

can I suggest
clicking ignore, you're getting yourself in a right state

go have a nice cup of tea
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:33, closed)

Can I suggest
you actually take on board some of these comments particularly the ones about you editing your posts without making reference to the fact. It just illustrates what a cock you are when you incapable of producing a rational argument without having to go over it three or four times after your mistakes are pointed out.
( Bazongaloid, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:35, closed)

I edited the devil in tights reply
to include information to reply to some of the other questions - so I'm not constantly replying to individual posts

sue me
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:38, closed)

Sue you?
well, that is indeed an excellent response. Well done, you may have just won the internet.

It's well known that you consistently re-edit your posts without referencing the fact, not just here, but in every stupid ill thought out meandering pile of bollocks you have ever put up on the QOTW board.

I personally have called you on it more times than I care to remember. So why don't you learn from that and stop doing it.
( Bazongaloid, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:41, closed)

ah yes, sorry
I forget they made you Queen of Teh Internets

;)
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:55, closed)

Very amusing
you can't really try and come over all superior and like you don't care though since you're the one that started this thread about some random conspiracy theory shite in the first place.

If you genuinely believe this stuff, then one, you're a fucking moron, but two, you should at least have the balls to debate it properly with people rather than running back and changing things, it's a written forum, you have time to construct your argument properly, if you can't even do that then goodness knows why you bother even starting this sort of thing.
( Bazongaloid, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:58, closed)

and
if posters like apeloverage extensively edit their posts so I have to edit to keep up

which department in your palace do I lodge the complaint with?

don't make me laugh - you hypocritical puffed-up f*ckwit


;)
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 17:09, closed)

Cunt

(GloriaHull you puerile slack-jawed drooling meatslapper, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 17:20, closed)

blimey
still looking for that ignore button then?
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 17:21, closed)

hypocritical?
and you are allowed to swear on this board you weak minded twat.

Can you point out where in my post I was hypocritical? Where have I edited my responses to suit the replies?

apeloverage did indeed add something to one of his posts, but, and here's the killer, he is not the one spouting this bollocks in the first place.

As I quite clearly said earlier, this is NOT the first time you have been told about retrospectively editing your posts and how it makes you come across as even more of a deluded freak than you actually are.

So by pointing out one example where you had a legitimate reason to edit your post, and yet I should add that you didn't put in the word "edit" to make this clear as is the custom here, you in fact show yourself to be even more stupid that your initial post.
( Bazongaloid, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 17:57, closed)

I am guilty of adding extra info to a point if I feel I haven't answered it well enough or I've thought of some extra detail to flesh it out

but radically re editing? - I don't think so

seriously, get over yourself, you puffed up little pr*ck
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 10:56, closed)

But you are
in our first encounter you constantly removed things from your replies that Enzyme showed to be crap.

And what's with "seriously, get over yourself, you puffed up little pr*ck".

I will print this large so you can get it.

I. AM. NOT. THE. ONE. WHO. STARTED. THIS. THREAD.

You are the one who needs to firstly, learn to type a well constructed argument, your random bollocks do not an easy read make, and secondly, fuck off back to your conspiracy website where, presumably, not everyone thinks you are a total cunt.
( Bazongaloid, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 11:24, closed)

"in our first encounter you constantly removed things from your replies that Enzyme showed to be crap."

that's absolute bollocks and you know it

do tell - where? what points? - i'll debate everything I've said right now - or have they slipped your memory?

it takes the biscuit when you have to invent things to put across a point, but what can we expect?
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 12:11, closed)

"that's absolute bollocks and you know it "
And i'm going to cry to mummy if you don't play nice!

Are you monumentally stupid? YOU REMOVED THE POINTS HE SHOWED TO BE WRONG. so how can I show them to you?

And funnily enough, yes the finer details of a conversation I had on the internet with a conspiracy nut have not stuck in my brain for all this time.

"when you have to invent things to put across a point"

You absolutely define irony.
( Bazongaloid, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 12:18, closed)

when did I remove these posts
do tell

and what was it about?

come on - you claim to have read the original post, after all?

if as you claim, you know that I removed something you must have known what it was to notice it missing

and the proof would exist within Enzymes posts - replying to points absent in my original!

you must have some inkling in that puffed up little head of yours?
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 12:19, closed)

As stated before
(you really don't read these replies do you) It was some time ago, you mean nothing to me therefore I don't memorise the content of the drivel you put on the internet. Enzyme and me were debating whatever it was and you kept changing your posts. I called you on it several times but you ignored me. If you are that worried about it, you can probably find it by looking back through your posting history. But I can't be bothered.
( Bazongaloid, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 12:30, closed)

ah how convenient
if you're making a claim like this you best be damn sure you have the facts to hand before making it, at the very least a link to the post - it would show Enzyme's replies and the proof would be there

you understand now, einstein?

and like I said, if as you claim, you know that I removed something you must have known what it was to notice it missing - even a general idea

it's not rocket science

you must know unless you're either lying or a retard

take your pick
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 12:35, closed)

The general thread
regarded the ability to remove yourself from having to pay taxes based on some spurious claims by another bloke who you have read about.

The page contained over 100 replies so I no longer have any idea what it was you were taking out. BECAUSE YOU DELETED IT YOU DOSY CUNT.

Now, to get back to the whole point of this thread, editing replies is fine, but you should reference the fact that you have done this. You don't do this. Which makes your posts irritating to read, and makes you come across as a twat.
( Bazongaloid, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 12:52, closed)

pfffft
I haven't deleted the post - post is all there

www.b3ta.com/questions/getrichquick/post215221

now, were are Enzyme's posts that show him replying to me about points which are missing which prove, as you claim, I've deleted sections?

I'm still waiting mouse fart

here's the bit where you back tread some more with another excuse

put up or shut up, simple enough for you?
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 12:56, closed)

I never claimed you
deleted the post nob cheese breath.

I was calling you out for retrospectively editing your posts without reference. Something you did in that thread and have repeated in this thread. I can't make it any clearer. You shouldn't edit your posts without referencing the fact.

That's all there is to it.

edit - you also have failed to point out where I have been a hypocrite
( Bazongaloid, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 13:06, closed)

nope
sorry fela, you dug this hole for yourself ,
you need to get out of it

you made a claim which I know you made up and now I'm calling you on it

you really should have thought this one through

here's the post you're claiming I deleted info from after Enzyme replied

www.b3ta.com/questions/getrichquick/post215221


show me Enyme's post which shows him replying to deleted information as you're claiming

I have been accused of adding and elaborating information by Enzyme but never deleting

remember what you said further up?

YOUR QUOTE
"in our first encounter you constantly removed things from your replies that Enzyme showed to be crap."

you said this, now I'm calling you on it

put up or shut up

go to the posts in the links provided and show me, you lying toerag

remember these are closed QOTW posts so they can't be edited

and like I said I admit to adding infomation in but I have never deleted information i've put in , and certainly not if someone challenges it -

the proof would be in their post, as it would contain a reply over an issue that isn't cointained in the original post they're replying to


it's not rocket science you dim witted mouse fart


.
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 13:08, closed)

No
that wasn't the post I was actually talking about, but if you scroll down thorough that one, you can see me pointing out where you edited a post without referencing it.

Like I said, I don't know, or care enough to find out, which particular post of yours it was when I first pointed this out to you.

And once again, you still haven't pointed out where i'm a hypocrite.

I do like however, that your response sounds so enthusiastic, I can practically feel your erection as you gleefully think that you might have "scored a point" on the internet.
( Bazongaloid, Thu 9 Oct 2008, 10:43, closed)

pffft
you only took 24 hours to think up that reply, well done

you must mean this post;

www.b3ta.com/questions/quitters/post165091

notice the word EDIT in the original post midway down (remember old QOTW posts cannot be edited when they're closed so I couldn't habve just put this in)

then go to Enzymes post (reply 67)

he mentions I changed original post by adding in information about US being socialist because of the CAFRs point I edited in

you said I removed stuff when Enzyme pointed it out to be bollocks - this is obviously the post your referring to

and it's bollocks because he's referring to info I've added in - I even added the EDIT note

no where in that thread did Enzyme point out anything I posted was bollocks which I edited out after he said it - he said what I edited in extra was bollocks - big f*cking difference, einstein

you're a hypocrite because you turn a blind eye to posters radically editing
posts in this very thread because they are on your side of the argument while taking a hissy fit over some extra info I put in

and you're a moronic little lying twat because you invent and bandy lies around which you know to be false or are too f*cking moronic to even bother checking your serious accusations

I won't hold my breath for an apology
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Thu 9 Oct 2008, 11:53, closed)

Funnily enough
I don't spend 24 hours a day on the internet looking at your posts.

Now, your most recent link is still not the right post because as you may have noticed, I never posted a reply to that question.

So what apeloverage did is a radical re-editting and what you did is adding some extra info. Hmmmmm. I did actually recognise that apeloverage added stuff to his post, and he should have noted that, but it's the first time I've ever seen him do that, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

I invent and bandy about lies which I know to be false? Well, yes, it's true, I didn't kidnap and murder Madeline Mcann and I never had a wank on m radiator. I did however eat beans flavoured with apple juice and they were very unpleasant.
( Bazongaloid, Thu 9 Oct 2008, 12:07, closed)

yep its the post
you referred to

it's the post with over 100 replies you mention above

the only post of mine to have that many

there's a big difference between a serious discussion and personal accusations in the context of them and the other malarky we get up to on this site, and you well know it

don't worry, I don't expect anything else - keep with the wise cracks to try to save face
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Thu 9 Oct 2008, 12:14, closed)

Can I make this clearer?
It isn't the post I'm talking about, the post I'm talking about had replies from me. I didn't reply to that post ergo, it cannot be that post.
( Bazongaloid, Thu 9 Oct 2008, 12:18, closed)

you're a joke

(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Thu 9 Oct 2008, 12:24, closed)

And once again
you define irony.
( Bazongaloid, Thu 9 Oct 2008, 12:28, closed)

from a guy
without balls enough or self respect enough to admit he's wrong when hes found out

here's a tip; next time you bandy accustaions around - have a f*cking idea what you're referring to in the future without wasting my f*cking time finding the posts for you

otherwise you just come across as a little moronic tit

YES, IT'S THAT POST
reread your own f*cking posts to see how you described it - you even told me the amount of replies it had
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Thu 9 Oct 2008, 12:30, closed)

Actually
you'll find that by wasting your time searching endlessly for a post in order to try and prove a point not just on the internet, but on a site like B3ta, you look far more like a moron.

You've been shown to have edited posts again and again without reference and yet you continue in your little deluded world where everyone is out to get you.

They aren't. Nobody actually cares about you at all.

edit - you've just done it again! You just added two paragraphs to the end of your previous reply. And I'll say it one more time. It isn't that post.
( Bazongaloid, Thu 9 Oct 2008, 13:01, closed)

like I said
still a stubborn tit to the very end

and here's the point again as you seem to keep missing it,:

next time you bandy accusations around - have a f*cking idea what you're referring to in the future without wasting my f*cking time finding the posts for you

otherwise you just come across as a little moronic tit

I can't say it any clearer for you

it's the ONLY post of mine with more than 100 replies on the subject you mentioned

reread you own f*cking posts shit-for-brains
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Thu 9 Oct 2008, 13:41, closed)

Has the thought crossed your mind
that my original throwaway comment regarding the number of replies could have been incorrect?

I did try and make it clear that I don't know when you posted it and what it was about, since I never bother reading your garbage properly.

You wasted your own time searching and getting your little knickers all sweaty and twisted.

As it happens, it's irrelevant as you have done all the re-editing I talked about on this very thread. So, you know, nerrr nerrr ne nerr nerrrrrr!

You should probably have a lie down and take some deep breaths and maybe even go outside, look at the sun and talk to some real people.
( Bazongaloid, Thu 9 Oct 2008, 13:50, closed)

let me remin d you
of what you said eh?

YOUR QUOTE:"in our first encounter you constantly removed things from your replies that Enzyme showed to be crap."

I HAVE NEVER DONE THIS , yes, I've added stuff in to expand a point - but never delete when someone is debating it

I asked you to prove it by showing me Enzymes post

you said you didn't know but it was 'about tax' with well over '100 replies'

i provided you the post you described , over 100 replies, tax, Enzyme reply e etc

and even though this is the ONLY post of mine fitting that description

you say it's not that yet are unable to even provide a general clue of where it is any more

don't make me f*cking laugh you little prick
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Thu 9 Oct 2008, 13:57, closed)

Well
if you're going to be like that. I'm taking my ball home and we're not going to play any more.
( Bazongaloid, Thu 9 Oct 2008, 14:02, closed)

YAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWNNNNNNNNNNNN
Edit (see it's that fucking easy you gormless cunt): the big yawn was getting in the way of me looking at the replies
( Bazongaloid, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:34, closed)

HG Wells
right, im not pro or anti anyone's point of view on this but I remembered having read about HG Wells having supported eugenics before here:



Wells believed in the theory of eugenics. In 1904 he discussed a survey paper by Francis Galton, co-founder of eugenics, saying "I believe .. It is in the sterilisation of failure, and not in the selection of successes for breeding, that the possibility of an improvement of the human stock lies." Some contemporary supporters even suggested connections between the "degenerate" man-creatures portrayed in The Time Machine and Wells's eugenic beliefs. For example, the economist Irving Fisher said in a 1912 address to the Eugenics Research Association: "The Nordic race will... vanish or lose its dominance if, in fact, the whole human race does not sink so low as to become the prey, as H. G. Wells images, of some less degenerate animal!"[19]



It's from Wikipedia so presumably spurious - ha!
(bazmorningstar efil4nat3b, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 16:41, closed)

"its why you find more humane system when you travel to the less developed countries"
Well, no, you don't.

I could get into specific examples, like the countries where they've charged female rape victims with adultery.

But, more broadly, look at any survey of human rights in the world. The countries 'secretly run by soul-less socialist technocrats' are measurably more humane by any standard.

In fact this is true even within the First World. The Nordic countries are clearly more planned societies than, say, the US, and equally clearly have higher standards of personal freedom (and, as a side point, higher standards of not giving a trillion dollars to the people who just nearly wrecked their economy).

Your statement doesn't sound like something you've experienced, or even analysed by looking at (eg) Amnesty International reports on various countries. It sounds like something you've read and then passed on without thinking about it.
(apeloverage committed the vile act of onanism on, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 17:31, closed)

Now that's enough
you just stop with all those researched and logical arguments there. It's not fair on the poor chap.

I'm finding it very off putting seeing all this rational argument coming from you instead of pictures of kittens.
( Bazongaloid, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 17:59, closed)

Apeloverage...
...has gone right up in my estimation. Not only does he supply fluffeh on demand, but he's also got a brain almost as big as Enzyme's the size of a planet.

*raises virtual pint*
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Tue 7 Oct 2008, 18:08, closed)

Apeloverage
has always been pretty high in my estimation ever since I read the post from his mother asking us to click as he was sad about not having a first page post for a while.

And I'm glad you edited that response to remove the reference to being as clever as Enzyme.

No-one is as clever as Enzyme. Ane fule kno that.
( Bazongaloid, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 18:10, closed)

Ah, it wasn't edited
It was the safest way I could acknowledged Ape's cerebral awesomeness without inadvertently slurring Deep Thought Enzyme.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Tue 7 Oct 2008, 18:16, closed)

I'll answer this post and the one below in this reply
nice to see you're actually thinking about this but I couldn't disagree more

YOUR QUOTE
"its why you find more humane system when you travel to the less developed countries"Well, no, you don't. I could get into specific examples, like the countries where they've charged female rape victims with adultery.

well yes you do - I'm not talking about cases in countries like Pakistan, which is what you're refering to - I'm talking about the grassroots value system you see at the community level - in the areas with a notable absence of an imposed technocratic system or male orientated religious dogma


YOUR QUOTE
And I just realised that describing the United Nations as powerful makes no sense Obviously the UN has staff etc, which aren't employed by any of the individual governments that make it up.
But the decision-making, such as it is, is entirely done by representatives of the respective governments.
It's like saying that the World Cup has a great soccer team.
No law passed in Britain was passed by Labor or the Conservatives: they were all passed by Parliament. You could conclude from that that there's a permanent government which operates whether Labor or the Conservatives are in. But most people wouldn't, because they realise that 'Parliament' isn't a seperate force to political parties, it's the means by which one party or the other pass laws.
Ditto the UN. It, considered as an entity seperate to the national governments that make it up, has never done anything.
In fact most criticism of it is based around the fact that the larger powers can veto anything in defiance of the rest of the world ie it's criticised for *not* being a world government..

sorry but that's bollocks and I was talking about the UN as merely a tool through which the Foundations and The Royal Institute for International Affairs operate, as you well know

Prof Carrol Quigley said that Technocrats like Brewsinsky, Kissinger, and Maurice Strong work behind the scenes to get things done and are not elected, with more power than any president

also look into the purpose and formation fo the UN pre cusor the League of Nations


they have always wanted and pushed for a global government set-up with three trading blocks - pushed by The Royal Institute for International Affairs - the organization backed by the British Crown (the Crown corporation not the Queen) and The Council on Foreign Relations (US wing)

the first, a united Europe, followed by a united Americas - the North American Union up and running by 2012 (with the Amero as its currency) and then a united Pacific Rim region

they set-up these organizations and foundations to bring it about

and you say they have no influence and power??

The Council on Foreign Relations came out admitting that they drafted up the legislation for the integration for the Americas, NAFTA amalgamation and gave it to the governments to sign

no power of these unelected groups?

don't make me laugh

The Royal Institute for International Affairs essentially runs the world through their satellite arms like the Trilateral Commission and The CFR - drafting up income tax and property tax bills

and we have thinktanks working for them like The Club of Rome who push the collectivist soviet model (soviet means rule by councils) - Lenin said the world must be given services which will eventually become authorities over the people

you seriously need to research the power behind the UN and the Foundations and let go of the notion you have about it as a charming bunch of bumbling foreign stereotypes who can't agree on the lunch menu
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 10:33, closed)

"I'm talking about the grassroots value system you see at the community level"
You mean like shotgun weddings, racist lynchings, loveless marriages, rampant homophobia, xenophobia and general bigotry, and strict, brutal upbringing for children?
(Musuko, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 13:58, closed)

nope
I'm talking about the humane system of co dependance - a value system which regulates itself out of necessity to treat your fellow man as you would yourself - the barter system which existed way before the introduction of finance, city state civilizations and the beaurocratic bullshit which comes with it - this isn't some ideological fantasy

the examples you've given are aberrations either as a result of religious dogma or skewed group political ideology
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 14:27, closed)

I'm not sure...
.. Was I just spanged?!

I realise after lurking and reading previous posts and countering replies that this isn't the case, so the next question is why?

Why here? Why on QOTW?!

Your prose smacks of somebody that went OTT cutting and pasting. You obviously enjoy the 'banter'...

Saying that, the animations you do are pretty good.

Meh.
( elgordo, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 18:29, closed)

And I just realised
that describing the United Nations as powerful makes no sense.

Obviously the UN has staff etc, which aren't employed by any of the individual governments that make it up.

But the decision-making, such as it is, is entirely done by representatives of the respective governments.

It's like saying that the World Cup has a great soccer team.

No law passed in Britain was passed by Labor or the Conservatives: they were all passed by Parliament. You could conclude from that that there's a permanent government which operates whether Labor or the Conservatives are in. But most people wouldn't, because they realise that 'Parliament' isn't a seperate force to political parties, it's the means by which one party or the other pass laws.

Ditto the UN. It, considered as an entity seperate to the national governments that make it up, has never done anything.

In fact most criticism of it is based around the fact that the larger powers can veto anything in defiance of the rest of the world ie it's criticised for *not* being a world government.
(apeloverage committed the vile act of onanism on, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 19:47, closed)

And
I just realised that this little fellow has been sadly overlooked.


( Bazongaloid, Tue 7 Oct 2008, 20:06, closed)

I answered this post above
providing you don't radically re-edit it again

;)
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 10:34, closed)

Aaaah
it's the cheeky wink at the end that just screams "i'm a fucking wanker who needs to socially interact with more human beings"
( Bazongaloid, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 11:25, closed)

pffft
wild presumptions and wishful thinking

kind of sums up your posts

and from the guy that craves popularity on an internet message board
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 12:12, closed)

and again
with the extra editing. This is turning into a circular argument.
( Bazongaloid, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 12:18, closed)

ah f*ck it
you're not worth it -

unless you're debating the post - I seriously have better things to do than trade insults with some internet mouse fart still wet from his mother's tit
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 12:22, closed)

Oh no!
The Goat is upset with me, i'm really really sorry if I hurt your feelings.
( Bazongaloid, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 12:25, closed)

let's not forget...
the fact that no government, armed force or police can act without the express consent of it's populace. Any country which is under totalitarian rule is only that way because it chooses to be. Even in places like Iraq, or similar, there are many more members of the public than there are police, politicians or monarchs. It is only the will of the populace to be governed that keeps any regime in place - elected or not.

Think about this - if the economic crisis went on to the point of total economic collapse, what would happen? Would we all starve and live in boxes, or would people say "bollocks to your tax, your bills and your interest rates"? One or two people might lose a house or get arrested, but if it continues, then what? Could the police control 60-odd Million people? No. Could the army? No - they might kill a thousand here or there, but at that point anyone in uniform would be torn apart by the mob. No - regardless of what the cranks think, anyone at the top of the heap is there because those below them let them stay there.

If the UK populace has enough of funding the rest of Europe via the EEC and wants to withdraw, the beurocrats will say "we can't do that, or we'll be sued for billions". By who? The European Court? If we refuse to recognise it's authority, then what? There's no EEC Army to invade us and if France, or Germany, tried, well, we've been there before and it didn't work for them then, either.

I love a good conspiracy - from Men In Black, to Area 51, to Project Blue Book to David Icke's Pan-dimensional Lizard Beings, but I appreciate that, at best, they are an amusingly diverting fiction. At worst they are the product of a diseased mind.

Oh, and there was a *huge* support base for Eugenics in the early 20th century to combat the perceived failings of moral standards and rise of bolshevism (which tended to start with ill-educated peasants and work up the chain). Given that Hitler was also voted Time man of the year in 1934 for his work on turning Germany's failing economy around, and the US was already sterilising single mothers (of low moral fibre, i.e the pram-faces of their day), lunatics and repeat criminals in order to try and prevent a decline in society. Given that Genetics and Evolution was still a relatively new concept and you can understand how such notions might be misguided.

However, the fact is that we could argue that we are in a worse position now because we have gone so far the other way that we aren't allowed to be proud of our National Identity without being branded fascistic and we have a billion thieving chavs breeding like rats and turning our streets into a warzone. We now have a governmental system too scared of its populace to actually govern, so it is reduced to micromanaging via Health and Safety and spends the rest of its time lining it's coffers.

I despair at times!
(Chad, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 13:16, closed)

good reply, cheers
"Think about this - if the economic crisis went on to the point of total economic collapse, what would happen? Would we all starve and live in boxes, or would people say "bollocks to your tax, your bills and your interest rates"? One or two people might lose a house "or get arrested, but if it continues, then what? Could the police control 60-odd Million people? No. Could the army? No - they might kill a thousand here or there, but at that point anyone in uniform would be torn apart by the mob. No - regardless of what the cranks think, anyone at the top of the heap is there because those below them let them stay there."


a very good method of controlling the population is through basic needs and necessities, like food for example - remember the panic buying during the fuel crisis? few people realise how much this society is hanging by a fragile thread and how dependant we are on the system - unless you have your own power generator, means to grow your own food and a water hole you can be controlled easily

also the recent Dept of Defence document predicts 30 years of riots in this country so they have certainly planned for it - traffic wardens taking on police duties , extending police powers, id cards for greater control etc
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 13:27, closed)

I think you're missing the point...
It doesn't matter whether it's the MoD, MI5, The Illuminati, The Queen, or God - if 95% of the populace are starving, there is no authority figure in existence (be it legitimate, elected, or a shadow conspiracy) that will prevent the pack mentality taking over.

Communism is a nice idea for governments - it subjugates the individual rights and freedoms in deference to the good of the "state", but even Marx himself said this was an unrealisitc ideal. The fact is that if you put two workers in a field and tell them to dig, on the promise of an equal share of food for all, one will work hard, the other will bunk off for a smoke and, after a couple of weeks the hard-worker will get resentful of the fact the slacker also gets his meal provided when he's done less work.

The fact is that we are nothing but monkeys with ideas above our station and anyone taking the piss, or acting too far outside the group consensus (either at the top or the bottom of the hierarchy) will get it's head bashed in, or poo thrown at it. Or, in humans, a bloody revolution/ousted at the next election/total refusal to co-operate and recognise the authority being claimed.

At that point, unless you are strong enough to take on the entire populace in single combat and win, I can guarantee the general consensus will win. After all, if we all say "sod the banks, we're keeping our homes and you can whistle for the mortgage after the way you bankers have screwed us all over", who exactly is going to enforce the law? The police? Nope - the fact is that whilst there might be 60,000 policemen, they are outnumbered 10,000 to 1 and, at the end of the day, unless they honestly believe in what they are doing, they won't enforce it. Not only that, but any government only has authority as long as we, the people, endorse it. Same for the economic system - what I want in return for my time at work is food, shelter and goods. Money is a myth that acts as a promissory note. I could, under UK law, cessate from the government, the laws and the authority of the crown and live as a free man if the United Kingdom. I wouldn't pay taxe, be liable for any law other than theft assualt or murder and I'd be alloted my choice of land on which to live and farm without charge. There is nothing the legal system, the state or the civil service can do about this, as it is part of the Magna Carta and to deny me this right would be to admit that they do not value the fundamental tenets of law and order - the sole things keeping them in power.

The fact is that traffic wardens becoming police officers is still pissing in the wind if society breaks down. All it is there to do is fill the cracks if we have no power for a week (I believe it was proved that modern society breaks down to survival of the fittest in something like 72 hours without power and running water, given the experiences suffered in New york in the 1970s, etc).

You are attributing far too much power to these bodies - the fact is that very quickly Armies would mutiny, police would disappear and there would be no "society" outside of extended family groups, as we all fight for our territory, food and resources. You only have to look at Africa, where after the stabilising effect of a colonial ruler is removed, countries rapidly breakdown into lawlessness and tribal conflict based on large extended family groups trying to grab the best of the spoils.
(Chad, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 15:24, closed)

thats great
but here's the rub

try convincing a fractured I'm-all-right-jack-society to co ordinate themsleves and work together in the way you describe

and there will be large groups who are either submissive to authority aswell as others who stay on the sidelines hoping they can ride the problem so long as they don't get involved hoping others will sort it out for them

the sad fact is most people in this system don't lift a finger until things affect them personally - as Bertrand Russell predicted with his educational models, to come back to my original post

it's why they needed to attack the family to fracture society as this is the basic tribe they needed to destroy - with an egocentric population the government can impose itself most effectively - as they tend not to cluster together in cohesive groups looking out for each other when individual members are attacked

alot of the counter culture stuff used to create tension and divison between the generations to break the family unit were from above - not the grass roots - Timothy Leary, was CIA funded, like Gloria Steinem and her radical 60s feminist magazine
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 15:46, closed)

not only that..
but the person/people at the top are more reliant on those at the bottom of the heap than vice versa.

Your feudal lord/billionaire/king cannot farm all the land, run all the factories, etc, themselves, whereas the general populace has the ability to fend for itself. Left to their own devices, people will work with their skills and trade goods and services (I'll scratch your back...", etc) - whereas a king can only rule and is thus useless without people to rule.

In fact, until the 20th century, most wars were between armed professional armies that could die without leaving the farms untended, the cattle unmilked, etc.
(Chad, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 15:30, closed)

no doubt they still need us - but not in the numbers as before with the rise of automation and technology - however they still need a percentage (500 million is the number quoted in some circles as the amount the population needs to be reduced to)- hence the need for tighter controls and mechanisms to punish us should we step out of line - do you really believe ID cards are for our own safety? (the safety line has been used through the ages to hoodwink the population into accepting greater liberty restrictions)

ex politician and film producer Aaron Russo famously reported a converstion he had with a member of these foundations Nick Rockefeller, whom he was freinds with at the time - and was told by him that the end goal is to get everyone chipped - all credits and id on this chip - so if anyone protests or disagrees they threaten to switch the chip off
why take my word for it? - here/'s the link fo him saying it.......
LINK

incidentally Quigley stated that you could achieve more radical changes in society with 5 years of war than through 50 years of peacetime - after the 1st WW they tried to draft in the League fo Nations for a unified Europe which they have succeeded in doing - with North American Union next (2012) after their econmic war Jaques Atalli wrote about 15 years ago - all pushed by the foundations I mention above

.
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 16:02, closed)

No ID cards aren't for our own good...
nor are speed cameras, or half the other ludicrous stealth taxes and laws. We live in a society where the PC hairy-armit brigade are calling the shots and, of course, they have de-valued education and made University the presever of the rich idiot, as opposed to the gifted intellectual, so they can declare open war on the middle class and then say "we won't listen to you, you're a criminal because you have a speeding ticket and we're much cleverer than you, because we went to public school and Oxford" to 90% of the populace. It doesn't get past the fact that such policies would not have gotten anywhere if we hadn't had a lazy selfish underclass of scum breeding like rabbits that are happy to live like parasites. If we had a working class that worked, as opposed to the chavs we are lumbered with, then maybe we might have some pride in ourselves and we might also have avoided the rampant over-borrowing made by those who could never afford to pay it back, thus leading to the financial quagmire we are now in.

Instead we have a country where you'll live a better lifestyle if you scrounge off the state, as you'll be housed, fed and given money, your kids will be clothed and you have zero responsibility, whereas if you work hard, own your own home and try to live decently, you'll be taxed into the next millenium by a government which has still not escaped it's class-war socialist roots and which does it's best to bolster the benefit culture at the expense of Middle England. Why? Because those on benefits tended in the past to vote Labour as it meant more dole cheques and no requirement to go to work.

However, the rampant mis-management of the Economy, the disastrous home and foreign policies and the grass roots hatred of the thought-control Health and Safety culture, that Labour loves so dearly, have all conspired to ensure that the odds on Labour staying in power are equivalent to Elvis being found alive on Mars.

Yes, there is always a non-elected permanent Civil Service, but calling that a "Shadow Government" is ridiculous - with them, you wouldn't have your bins emptied, roads repaired, schools run, etc - the Civil Service takes charge of the pragmatic things required to run a country - collection of taxes, running of infrastructure, etc. The elected government controls policy, but you wouldn't expect the Prime Minister to go around collecting VAT, etc.

Look, if you go to Public School (Eton, Harrow, etc), on to Oxford or Cambrige and in to business or the Civil Service, you will always look favourably on those of a similar nature - you're similar people, so you know you can work together in accord. Having said that, it's no different to saying that a White Christian would struggle to find work in a Halal butcher's shop if there were Asian Muslims applying for the job, too - most business decisions are made by a relatively small number of people, all of whom tend to know one another. If you're a decent barrister, the odds are you went to Oxford, if you are a senior civil servant, you'd have been Public School educated and the reason for this is simply because that education grooms a person to fit those roles well. It's not a conspiracy, it's simply a case of like-minded people tending to have a similar viewpoint.

After all, can you imagine how far in the shit we'd be if John Prescott, not Blair or Brown, had been PM for 10 years? Or if, when you rang the council to complain about your bins not being collected, the person at the other end of the line told you to "fuck off before I blade you for disrespecting me, innit, blud"?

Morons don't get made into CEOs or government ministers. There are very few top class educational establishments, so those at the top, by default, tend to know each other, or of each other, or at least move in the same circles. It's like saying it's a conspiracy because most technology/computer/software breakthroughs come out of Silicon Valley, whereas it was more a case of being a good location for those types of businesses and then more springing up as the talent migrated to where the work was.

Your behaviour is *always* your choice, regardless of who is in power, or what is on TV, etc. To blame the woes of society on a secret society is just another way of saying "it's not our fault we screwed up/letc the kids get obese/can't read/prefer to live on the dole than work" - another course of action would be to take the Daily Mail tack and blame all our woes on immigrants, but the truth is that if you are an adult of sound mind, any action you take is directly, 100%, your responsibility.
(Chad, Thu 9 Oct 2008, 11:52, closed)

I'd agree with most of that
but its like someone said earlier about teh financial crisis being caused by city wide boys and not some 'shadowy elite'

the fact the RIFR works behind the scenes to get things done is something not said by the likes of me - but official historians for the org like Quigley

yep, the city wide boys caused the financial troubles but bacause they operated in an unregulated arena created by those above them - despite the seeming chaos - along with the social elitism you mention - it all still exists within a created system at the higher level - despite the seemingly random and free movement which exists within the convines of it

do you think its odd the likes of Jacques Attalli, presidential adviser, talked of the tanking of the US economy 15 years ago (book: Millenium: winners and losers )as a step toward the formation of the North American Union in 2012 - and the rise of China?

there are those that steer the ship , and there's those that live on deck - despite the freedom of choosing deckchairs, lounging around and all the other randomness - they still exist on a ship streerd by a smaller group

these are the foundations I'm talking about , as others have talked about

for example look at the private families that own the fed reserve and look into the cause of the 30s depression - you will see how precisely ochestrated and contrived it was to consolidate greater ownership of property and greater wealth into fewer hands (the crucial timings of the calling of the loans, the release of currency to devalue it, the run on th ebanks, gold act etc - all detailed ion an excellent book by G Edward Griffin called Creature From Jekyll Island uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWKlz2Z4Nlo )

you only realise the narrow confines of how created and contrived this system is (with all teh activity operating within it you mention above) once you deconstruct it - and realise it's one big business plan

they create the conditions for the chaos to occur in - with their 'solution' waiting in the wings

we will have hyper-inflation next year (a consequence of all the money they are pumping into the system right now) followed by their 'proposed solution' - wait for it



edit: did you watch the link? I think it's only about 3 mins long
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Thu 9 Oct 2008, 12:08, closed)

Have I missed something?
Read "The Island of Doctor Moreau".
(Dr Teeth Who asked you, you fuckin' hobbit?, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 14:24, closed)

yep
check the wiki link above

and predictive programming is just that - it doesn't necessarily have to show postive aspects, just introduce the idea so when it is introduced into real life it becomes more readily accepted as it is presumed to be 'inevitable' - another example is Huxley and his Brave New World - another bopok with a strong eugenics slant - and a nod to Bertrand Russels experimental schools encouraging freee sex he set up with a Royal charter

i could give you examples of this today with the microchip agenda - as it's themes are introduced into popular culture and films to soften us up for its 'inevitable' introduction LINK
(The Goat www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com, Wed 8 Oct 2008, 14:29, closed)