← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Franco
Thread ID: 7235 | Posts: 36 | Started: 2003-06-09
2003-06-09 23:05 | User Profile
Yes, just when you thought than Uncle Franco was full o' beans about his claims that Christians aid The Jew daily, and just when Uncle Franco MIGHT have been thinking he was a little harsh on Christians, here comes this news item, about Mel Gibson possibly suing people who denounced his movie about Christ....including Catholic leaders. Who'da thunkit?
Yes, it keeps getting better an' better, don't it... :D
"They're just like us, but they have bigger noses!" says your average church-goer....uh-huhh...[slap, slap]
[url=http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=32987]http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=32987[/url]
"According to the paper, Gibson has threatened lawsuits against both the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Anti-Defamation League. The groups have been critical of Gibson's film portrayal of Jewish complicity in the execution of Christ..."
[edited]
2003-06-09 23:50 | User Profile
Originally posted by Franco@Jun 9 2003, 18:05 ** "According to the paper, Gibson has threatened lawsuits against both the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Anti-Defamation League. The groups have been critical of Gibson's film portrayal of Jewish complicity in the execution of Christ..." **
Franco a.k.a. rban of the Linderites,
Please indulge me as I want to gain an assessment of your understanding of the debates taking place within Christendom. Why do you think Mel Gibson, by all accounts a vociferous adherent to traditional Roman Catholicism, would be talking about suing the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops?
For Mr. Gibson, with regards to said suit against the bishops, I would suggest his taking council from St. Paul's writings in 1 Corinthians 6. For the ADL, hit 'em hard.
2003-06-10 00:22 | User Profile
Originally posted by Octopod@Jun 9 2003, 17:40 ** So when atheists or pagans aid Jews, it doesn't even register on your radar; when some Catholics do it means Catholics are the enemy?
Keep in mind that these "Catholics" are allying with Jews and atheists in attacking the more traditionally Catholic Mel Gibson. **
Where are the atheists and pagans? All I see are Catholics and Jews.
2003-06-10 00:56 | User Profile
Tex --
The point here is that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops must have ENORMOUS power and influence in America. Yet, they side with The Jew against the truth about Jews. They side against their own kind.
In other words:
Christian: "Mr. Jew, do you have any rope for me to hang myself?"
Jew: "Sure, Mr. Christian -- heck, I'll even help you hang yourself!"
Christian: "You will? Gee, thanks, Mr. Jew!"
Jew: "But, I'll only help you kill yourself if you promise never to mention my name."
Christian: "Well....OK."
Bwa-ha-ha-ha! Too funny, itz. :D
2003-06-10 01:56 | User Profile
Franco;
Mel is a traditional Catholic rebeling against the blasphemy that is Vatican II. From the article:
"The groups have been critical of Gibson's film portrayal of Jewish complicity in the execution of Christ.
The actor reportedly is part of a traditionalist Catholic movement that holds to the belief that Jews were collectively responsible for the death of Jesus. The movement rejects changes made in Catholic doctrine in the '60s that eliminated the emphasis on Jewish guilt, the Herald Sun reports."
In your misguided zeal to bash Christianity, you miss the point that Mel is doing good here.
2003-06-10 02:15 | User Profile
No, no, no. Franco isn't misguided here. He's siding with Gibson AGAINST the Judaization of the Catholic Church.
2003-06-10 02:27 | User Profile
Mel Gibson is a Godsend. In his large heart he knows the truth and how it cannot be compromised. I'm not talking about those of you whom are die hard White racists, who really believe that a separate nation though blooodshed including your own death is a good move.. I'm talking about Old School Catholicism and damn straight, however young Mel was brought up, there's certaintly an affirmation there. You know, that in Catholicism all the other sects are WRONG. The jerks spew lies on shortwave, in news, the Protestants.. they were only following their King back then, who sought an heir.. but the Anglicans under King James wrote a Bible which has undivine elements. They ommited some of the most Precious Work. The Latin Vulgate as written by Saint Jerome is faithfully translated into the Douay-Rhiems Bible. That IS the Bible. English wont aside. Racial pride is a heritage, but racial hatred is a sin. I don't care if you like it or not. It is a fact.. there hath no glory in the flesh. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. I recently read a great short story, The Hill Of The Ravens.. but aFfter all, you should not take foot hold in your white race, take FOOT HOLD in your GOOD HEART because flesh is unliving. UNLIVING. Just because the nogs and the rest are obviously inferior, does not mean that they can at times utter the real Word Of God.... so don't tread too hard.. and remember to keep spiritually clean. And I do not mean in the Wiccan or New way or Old way as those liars will steal your soul. Think,just Think.
2003-06-10 02:28 | User Profile
Ruffin;
You might be surprised at the number of conservative Catholics who take issue with the hierarchy of the Church. I suspect Franco's agenda to be one of Christian-bashing, not enlightenment.
2003-06-10 02:42 | User Profile
Exelsis Deo;
"Racial pride is a heritage, but racial hatred is a sin."
Thanks for that one, I was beginning to think that I was the only one on this forum who felt that way.
2003-06-10 02:44 | User Profile
damian - It wouldn't suprise me at all. In fact, what Franco is rightly ridiculing is the number of Christians there are, along with their mighty church, who claim to be divinely appointed protectors and defenders of the faith, bending over at the altar of Jewish wealth and influence, to the point of officially altering their doctrine. What he is "bashing" is something that deserves to be bashed. Don't you think a church that apologetically bows to its mortal enemy deserves to be bashed? Gibson certainly does.
2003-06-10 02:48 | User Profile
Originally posted by Octopod@Jun 9 2003, 23:40 **
Keep in mind that these "Catholics" are allying with Jews and atheists in attacking the more traditionally Catholic Mel Gibson. **
I hope that is something many people will take note of, seriously. That council is a reflection of post-Vatican II Catholicism. Think of "The Catholic League". This group raises a stink whenever something newsworthy happens that openly mocks Christianity, Catholicism to be specific. I find them to be no better than the Al Sharptons (who I'll be voting for next year ;) ) and the Jesse Jacksons. I even visited their website. I expected it to be some apologist, tolerant, in-the-know coalition. And I was right!!
2003-06-10 02:57 | User Profile
Originally posted by Octopod@Jun 9 2003, 22:44 **Damian,
What gives you the impression that any of us "hate" other races? Even Hitler admitted to admire, not hate, the Japanese and Chinese.**
Come on, don't be disingenuous here. There are plenty examples of that on this forum.
2003-06-10 03:00 | User Profile
Originally posted by Ruffin@Jun 9 2003, 22:44 Don't you think a church that apologetically bows to its mortal enemy deserves to be bashed? Gibson certainly does.
Perhaps, but Franco's motivation for doing so stinks.
2003-06-10 03:05 | User Profile
Originally posted by damian@Jun 9 2003, 22:57 ** > Originally posted by Octopod@Jun 9 2003, 22:44 **Damian,
What gives you the impression that any of us "hate" other races? Even Hitler admitted to admire, not hate, the Japanese and Chinese.**
Come on, don't be disingenuous here. There are plenty examples of that on this forum. **
Ah, the "hate" question. I, for one, do not "hate" other races and so on, since "hate" requires a sustained amount of considerable emotional energy that I would prefer not to waste. My true feelings toward "minorities" is actually one of indifference. I neither wish them well or ill, since they're just not a relevant factor for me when I calculate what policies to support or actions to take. I have a set of interests and goals I seek to pursue, and I let minorities worry about taking care of themselves.
I don't prefer to see non-whites in the same geographical location as whites, but that's not because I "hate" non-whites, but only because I seek to secure the best possible environment for the people "most like me" to thrive in. There's nothing emotional about it--it's like wiping snow off your windshield on a winter day. I have nothing against the snow, it's just in the way of my plans and gets pushed aside. The snow ends up somewhere else once it's been transferred off the windshield by my hand, and where it goes after that is up to fate. It's not about "them," it's about "us."
2003-06-10 03:08 | User Profile
damien - Are you sure? Whatya wanna bet that if the church stood up for its traditional beliefs and refused to scrape, Franco wouldn't be cheering them on? Hell, maybe he'd join!
Where is he anyway?
Franco? Franco?
2003-06-10 03:21 | User Profile
Rban admitted he hated other races. Does he count?
Couldn't resist.
2003-06-10 03:22 | User Profile
Originally posted by Ruffin@Jun 9 2003, 23:08 ** Where is he anyway?
Franco? Franco? **
Didn't you see the movie Betelgeuse? You have to say his name three times in a row to make him appear. You're up to two, so far. Of course, like in the movie, it might not be the best idea to complete the summoning. :lol:
2003-06-10 04:01 | User Profile
Ruffin -- well, it almost worked.
Jews: "Bow down before us, stupid goyim!"
Christian churches: "Yes, master! Please don't call us 'haters'!"
Jews: "Well, ok, as long as your Pope kisses our asses and never mentions that Communism and leftism were invented by Jews. And, the Pope must apologize for the HoloSwindle every other month."
Christians: "OK, sure! Anything! Just don't call us 'evil haters'!"
And you say that this above is not worthy of ridicule?? Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha! :lol: :lol: :lol:
[edited]
2003-06-10 05:13 | User Profile
The majority of pagans in America (Wiccans, and the like) are extremely liberal socially and politically.
You have got to be 25 or under, Octo, since this is not the first time you have referred to 'Wiccans' as if this silly-ass affectation of maybe a few hundred goth chicks constitutes a growing public trend - if not an outright menace.
Me, I used to welcome the sight of a Wiccan back in the day, since you were almost guaranteed to get in her pants if you faked a little wide-eyed credulity at their mumbo-jumbo playacting nonsense.
2003-06-10 05:28 | User Profile
I would assume Franco doesn't bash pagans in America because they, unlike Christians, have virtually no political power. The National Council of Covens? Please....If Christians leaders started acting like true defenders of the faith/West, then I am pretty certain that Franco would be one of the first among us to praise them. Franco attacks Christianity in its current, emasculated state, but I don't think he is really attacking the religion itself [just how I see it, maybe Franco really does hate Christianity].
BTW, does anyone on here get The Wanderer? Is it worth getting? I recieved a sample issue today and it carried Sobran and Francis, looks to be decent.
Me, I used to welcome the sight of a Wiccan back in the day, since you were almost guaranteed to get in her pants if you faked a little wide-eyed credulity at their mumbo-jumbo playacting nonsense.
Yeah, il ragno, but, at least in my experience, Wiccan chix are total head-cases....
2003-06-10 06:32 | User Profile
**Yeah, il ragno, but, at least in my experience, Wiccan chix are total head-cases.... **
Exactly! But ya gotta have a Plan B for after last call/ arguments with the old lady.
2003-06-10 17:52 | User Profile
Originally posted by Franco@Jun 9 2003, 19:56 ** Christian: "Mr. Jew, do you have any rope for me to hang myself?" **
Silly, nonsensical, made-up dialogue does not suffice as an indicator of your understanding of the greater issues involved here. Perhaps it is best if you left the discussion up to committed Catholics who both understand and have a stake in the topic. This only appears as disruptive baiting.
Bwa-ha-ha-ha! Too funny, itz. :D
Actually, "itz" not. Not in the least.
2003-06-10 19:32 | User Profile
**BTW, does anyone on here get The Wanderer? Is it worth getting? I recieved a sample issue today and it carried Sobran and Francis, looks to be decent. **
Sobran's best writing is in The Wanderer. His Wanderer column is now also available at Sobran.com, but you have to wait three weeks to see it.
Unfortunately, I don't find the rest of the paper very useful. It's very repetitious week after week. I suggest The Remnant instead.
2003-06-10 22:17 | User Profile
Right. And Jew-tool George was elected by atheists and leftists. To say otherwise is, like, Christian-bashing. :lol:
Got that bar graph on Franco's posts ready? There're 27 pages worth.
And don't forget to investigate his other doin's:
[url=http://cptwc.matriots.com/index.html]http://cptwc.matriots.com/index.html[/url] [url=http://groups.yahoo.com/group/forafreedixie/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/forafreedixie/[/url]
Can anybody say "JimRob"?
AY, in your opinion, how distinguishable are Christians from conservatives, in American politics?
[url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=ST&f=9&t=2314]http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php...t=ST&f=9&t=2314[/url]
That's right Dinesh, there you have the essence of "conservatism" and "Western Civilization." Let's send our troops abroad to make the world safe for Dennis Rodman and Bimbo Spears. In any case, at least this clearly draws the battle lines by showing where the establishment stands and what they believe our nation should stand for. If this is what people are supposed to be fighting for, conservatives may as well either call it quits or convert to Islam themselves.
2003-06-10 22:27 | User Profile
** AntiYuppie wrote:
Does anybody else get the impression that Franco's real purpose here isn't so much to fight the Jewish establishment but to slander and smear Christians (especially those nasty "Papists")? It strikes me that Franco is taking advantage of anti-Jewish sentiment as an excuse to bash Catholics and other Christians. **
Nope. No way. The fact of the matter is this: had various churches from Florida to California, and also the Pope, named the Jew as the major problem starting in, say, 1950, America would not be in this awful mess in the first place. And if ya think that Jews ain't the major problem, read KMacD.
What about the "atheists" that Octopod always mentions? Who cares? Most of them are leftists and so will never be 'on our side' in the first place. See? The onus is on 'the Right side' of the political spectrum.
Christians dropped the ball [bounce, bounce, bounce]. Big time. They need to admit it instead of saying "oh, that evil Franco is suuuch a hater!"
Just as my [former] Methodist minister called me a racist when I tried to give him a J.P. Rushton book, so do ministers all over America condemn any honest person who tries to warn Christians about race and Jews.
I have EVERY RIGHT to be mad at Christians. In fact, I pull my punches on that topic. :taz:
2003-06-10 22:54 | User Profile
Octopod --
Yeah, you talk a good game.
Rev. Billy Graham has [or had] the biggest audiences in the world -- both on TV and in person. He can reach MILLIONS of people in ONE broadcast.
Did I EVER, EVER hear Graham say a word edgewise about Jews in those broadcasts??? I watched many of them growing up. So did a lot of friends and relatives.
Graham's DUTY was to at least mention Jews. Maybe not in a mean-spirited way, but at least that Jews pushed leftism, invented Communism and feminism, etc. That was HIS DUTY. Yet, he did nothing. He knew about Jews, because we read the Nixon Tapes. But he did not bother to tell his MILLIONS of followers.
Treason? Close to it.
Don't try to put the bad-guy hat on me, Octopod. Your pals sat there and did nothing while Jews sacked America. Admit it.
[edited]
2003-06-11 03:27 | User Profile
"Graham's DUTY was to at least mention Jews."
Is it?
.....What if he were one? His real name is Billy Franks; is that a clue? It isn't true Christians that are deserving of your scorn, Franco; it is "judeo"-Christians, (no such thing)... They are in apostacy to Christ; they know not that they know not... deserving only of pity...
2003-06-11 03:52 | User Profile
Patrick --
Ok, "Judeo-Christians," then. Still, you are talking about 80% of all Christians, and most major Christian leaders. Same diff'.
2003-06-11 04:12 | User Profile
Franco...
.....Please understand that I am not attempting to take an adversarial position with you; I agree with much of your position, in fact... that said, that 80%, (it's actually more like 99%), speak as the whole, and in their profound deception, actually castigate that other one percent; I'm one of those one-percenters... Scripture declares that "straight is the path, and narrow the gate, and few there be that find it"; this proves the majority will always be wrong...
.....It has also declared their deception, and that which you and I both rail against is not Christianity, but deceived Christianity; they bought the lie... the fact that you haven't, and that you speak against their charade, puts you way ahead of them; as a Christian, I am more of a Christian "basher" than those dabblers... it isn't Chriastianity that I "bash", though, but those that partake of the abominations that Scripture has warned against all along...
.....Between you and I and the fence post, you sound more like a Christian than those of whom you direct your well-deserved scorn toward; perhaps you just have yet to know it... :)
2003-06-11 04:57 | User Profile
Franco is like the John Carradine of cyberspace. He never simply makes his point, he has to refer to himself while doing so.
"Just when you thought than Uncle Franco was full o' beans about his claims that Christians aid The Jew daily, and just when Uncle Franco MIGHT have been thinking he was a little harsh on Christians..."
"Those fools at the Medical Academy - they said I was mad! They called my experiments a perversion of nature, and barred me from practice! They'll soon see which of us was mad, bwa-ha-ha..." (turns up voltage knob)
This is all so silly. The whole point of 'there is no intelligent opposition to White Nationalism' is that no 'recruitment' efforts are actually needed....given enough time, deterioration of society and proximity of the onrushing brown tide of subhumanity, the survival reflex will kick in. Liberals and Christians who insist on greeting their predators with open arms and 'understanding' and 'God's love', even at the very end, will be devoured. Those who smell smoke and move quickly are going to fare a lot better than those who need the confirmation of the house up in flames all around them. End of story.
Now I know that this will upset a lot of folks who aren't liberal or excessively-religious-to-the-point-of-blindness, who believe recruitment is important. I even tried it for a while, but so long as Whitey thinks he's safe and refuses to rock the status-quo boat.....even if he agrees with you, he's going to hem and haw and hedge and add a million pointless riders to the contract language.
The wake-up call comes from within. People [u]make[/u] themselves cattle and only they can debovinize themselves.
There is no generation more 'lost' than the present one: indoctrinated in self-hatred and Jew and negro-worship (with a hammer) from the cradle. So then why are so many ODers - so many WNs in general - under the age of 30? Yes I know a lot of these kids say things like "then I came across (VNN, the NA, Stormfront, ADV, etc) and my awakening began." No. Something happened first. Something more personal and real-time than reading a pamphlet or hearing a speech that made you receptive to hearing the message in the first place....before you even heard it.
You saw with your own eyes the nature of the Jew, the black, the System in general. You looked with your own eyes and followed the path of the treadmill you were placed upon and noticed the abbattoir at the end of the line. The 'message' merely articulated and codified your own dawning realizations. But no message and no messenger can bring the truth to someone who won't face it. The most efficient message-delivery service we have is a flat tire in Niertown, period. Or the Jew who tries to make you the bad guy for never wanting to endure another blowout like it, should you survive the first one.
2003-06-11 05:27 | User Profile
Originally posted by Patrick@Jun 11 2003, 00:12 ** .....Please understand that I am not attempting to take an adversarial position with you; I agree with much of your position, in fact... that said, that 80%, (it's actually more like 99%), speak as the whole, and in their profound deception, actually castigate that other one percent; I'm one of those one-percenters... Scripture declares that "straight is the path, and narrow the gate, and few there be that find it"; this proves the majority will always be wrong... **
I'm very glad you mention this about the majority always being wrong. Yours is a welcome insight and a useful corrective to the mob mentality that the conned neocons over at Free Republic indulge in. Many a FReeper would ask me, "Have you considered that maybe all of us are right and you might be the one who's wrong?"
You see, the FReeper asked me that because he/she/it can't believe that "all of these people...so many Americans" are on the wrong track. I wasn't sure if the FReeper's motivation was just the arrogance that comes from the illusion of being part of the "winning team," or if it was the unconscious fear that if Americans really are on the wrong track, then there just might not be fun and games ahead.
One FReeper was quite angry with me for pointing out that "a majority" of Americans elected Bill Clinton to office twice. Of course, FReepers are anti-Clinton in theory (and that sadly represents the full depth, or shallowness, of FReeper political thought), but my inconvenient observation was taken as one that "insults" the American people. Well, if the shoe fits....
I am pleased to see that you recognize that truth is not determined by majorities.
2003-06-11 05:43 | User Profile
Originally posted by il ragno@Jun 11 2003, 00:57 ** There is no generation more 'lost' than the present one: indoctrinated in self-hatred and Jew and negro-worship (with a hammer) from the cradle. So then why are so many ODers - so many WNs in general - under the age of 30? Yes I know a lot of these kids say things like "then I came across (VNN, the NA, Stormfront, ADV, etc) and my awakening began." No. Something happened first. Something more personal and real-time than reading a pamphlet or hearing a speech that made you receptive to hearing the message in the first place....before you even heard it.
You saw with your own eyes the nature of the Jew, the black, the System in general. You looked with your own eyes and followed the path of the treadmill you were placed upon and noticed the abbattoir at the end of the line. The 'message' merely articulated and codified your own dawning realizations. **
I believe you're right, IR.
In my own case, it wasn't so much a physical confrontation with "diversity" that set me on my road. I was someone who for whatever reason was interested in political ideas at an early age, and I discovered some important things about "the System," or rather "the mainstream" that set me on course to where I am today:
1) It's true what they say about liberals: they always argue to protect the interests of the other guy and are incapable of taking their own side in a debate.
2) Mainstream conservatives who claim to resist this altruistic/suicidal impulse aren't ideologically consistent, and often implicitly buy into the very ideology they are fighting against.
In other words, I started out as a relatively "mainstream" "Goldwater conservative Republican" and quickly realized that the whole thing was a sham. I saw through the inconsistencies and the sell-outs and lies and compromises of the National Review crowd and the Republican National Committee and all the rest.
I also could tell from the general tone and direction of the media and the public schools that they certainly weren't on my side, or on the side of those most like me (that is, other White American males who make up my embattled demographic category). I can tell when people are trying to sell me a bill of goods. And I saw that NR and such weren't resisting the "PC" trend, but only half-heartedly pretending to do so. So I went out in search of "the real deal."
And, along the way, I discovered more "missing pieces." I learned "forbidden" facts including how the Jews are a highly-self-conscious minority that has tremendous influence over said media and schools, and that they are packaging the content in such a way that molds society to best suit themselves (and at my expense). Needless to say, access to that kind of information and insight can really change one's priorities and perspective--I never looked at the names that roll up the screen in the credits at the end of movies and TV shows the same way ever again. And the behavior of the Senators Feinsteins and Schumers of the world became less mysterious....
2003-06-11 06:10 | User Profile
I also could tell from the general tone and direction of the media and the public schools that they certainly weren't on my side, or on the side of those most like me (that is, other White American males who make up my embattled demographic category). I can tell when people are trying to sell me a bill of goods. And I saw that NR and such weren't resisting the "PC" trend, but only half-heartedly pretending to do so. So I went out in search of "the real deal."
Exactly right, Paul. All the "missing pieces" and "forbidden facts" would have stayed missing and forbidden without you making a conscious decision to seek them out first.
Nobody was propagandizing you to take this path you'vre taken. Just the reverse: you have been relentlessly propagandized to cleave to the massmind. And I don't think your questioning was born of a natural contrariness, a developmental disorder, a lack of education, or poor role models....the standard sociological horse-puckey they trot out to explain racial dissidents.
The Propasphere is building what they believe to be a better machine, with foolproof programming. But men are not machines. They cannot be programmed, only coaxed (or coerced) into accepting the programming. If this weren't so, there would be no need to subtly-but-constantly remind us of the price society extracts for the transgression of rejecting the programming. (Ummm...but if the programming is 'foolproof'...then why...?)
We're not going to be able to rehabilitate and reclaim every white person; we all know that already. But don't make the error of assuming - like Team Shmuel does - that whites are cattle who can simply be steered onto the killing floor. They are only choosing to be cattle, out of comfort and convenience.
As the black clouds continue to gather, there are going to be many more 'converts' than missionaries exhorting them to repent. And a lot of them will be Christians who are going to shoot first and work out the small print of Salvation afterwards (thank goodness).
2003-06-11 07:25 | User Profile
Originally posted by il ragno@Jun 11 2003, 01:10 **Nobody was propagandizing you to take this path you've taken. Just the reverse: you have been relentlessly propagandized to cleave to the massmind. And I don't think your questioning was born of a natural contrariness, a developmental disorder, a lack of education, or poor role models....the standard sociological horse-puckey they trot out to explain racial dissidents.
The Propasphere is building what they believe to be a better machine, with foolproof programming. But men are not machines. They cannot be programmed, only coaxed (or coerced) into accepting the programming. If this weren't so, there would be no need to subtly-but-constantly remind us of the price society extracts for the transgression of rejecting the programming. (Ummm...but if the programming is 'foolproof'...then why...?) **
Well said, IR.
** And a lot of them will be Christians who are going to shoot first and work out the small print of Salvation afterwards (thank goodness).**
Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.
:gun: :hyp:
2003-06-11 15:17 | User Profile
ââ¬ÂI'm very glad you mention this about the majority always being wrong. Yours is a welcome insight and a useful corrective to the mob mentality that the conned neocons over at Free Republic indulge in. Many a FReeper would ask me, "Have you considered that maybe all of us are right and you might be the one who's wrong?"ââ¬Â
PaleoconAvatar...
.....Thank you for the kind remarks; when one considers the indoctrination in just the ââ¬Åeducationââ¬Â system, you have the same thing, (on steroids, no less), in the ââ¬Åreligiousââ¬Â sphere... on top of that, they attempt to figure it out with the woefully inadequate ââ¬Åeducationââ¬Â they had never received...
.....True Christians donââ¬â¢t listen to these baââ¬â¢al priests that stand in the pull pit today, who donââ¬â¢t know Scripture, yet presume to teach; these are a portion of the ââ¬Ålocustsââ¬Â, or, that army that comes bearing the lies... I mentioned in another thread here that one cannot isolate their Scriptural studies to the ââ¬ÅEnglishââ¬Â, (which I refered to as bastardized); a classic example is the ââ¬Åpestilenceââ¬Â referred to in the Book of Ezekiel... when referenced initially to the Strongââ¬â¢s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, it comes to a word meaning ââ¬Ådestructionââ¬Â, ââ¬Ådestroyââ¬Â, et. al., but one must always go further to the prime root of the word, when so directed; the initial reference is the ââ¬Åflavoringââ¬Â, so to speak, of the prime/primitive root... in this case of Ezekielââ¬â¢s ââ¬Åpestilenceââ¬Â, the root word is ââ¬Åspeechââ¬Â; so he is referring to that ââ¬Åspeechââ¬Â that ââ¬Ådestroysââ¬Â... What kind of speech is destructive? Lies; this is that ââ¬Åflood, (of lies), poured out after the womanââ¬Â of Revelation twelve...
ââ¬ÂYou see, the FReeper asked me that because he/she/it can't believe that "all of these people...so many Americans" are on the wrong track.ââ¬Â
.....Donââ¬â¢t let them fool you; I read just a bit of Freep a while back and found little more than noise; political naiveteââ¬â¢, sans Historical grounding, and any mention of Scriptural tie-in was of the powderpuff variety... at the time, I had been too busy in other areas to wade into such a morass...
ââ¬ÂI wasn't sure if the FReeper's motivation was just the arrogance that comes from the illusion of being part of the "winning team," or if it was the unconscious fear that if Americans really are on the wrong track, then there just might not be fun and games ahead.ââ¬Â
.....It was more than likely abject ignorance of the important matters resultant from a ââ¬Åjewishââ¬Â communist indoctrination their entire lives; itââ¬â¢s a wonder anyone finds their way out of the fog...
ââ¬ÂOne FReeper was quite angry with me for pointing out that "a majority" of Americans elected Bill Clinton to office twice. Of course, FReepers are anti-Clinton in theory (and that sadly represents the full depth, or shallowness, of FReeper political thought), but my inconvenient observation was taken as one that "insults" the American people. Well, if the shoe fits....ââ¬Â
.....You wonââ¬â¢t find me playing the two-party game these days; they are two sides of the same team, and their opponent, in reality, is the constituency... it matters not who is in the office, the global, antiChrist agenda rolls forward; as long as most Americans believe them valid, and continue to slug it out with those preordained parameters, the globalists will continue to have their way... Hegel gave them the mechanism, and it has been their stock in trade for our entire lifetime; the two ââ¬Åpartiesââ¬Â are the thesis/anti-thesis, enroute to an unacceptable synthesis... When we stop being ââ¬Ådemocratsââ¬Â, ââ¬Årepublicansââ¬Â, or even ââ¬Ålibertariansââ¬Â, and begin to see ourselves as Americans, that will be a strong first step...
2003-06-11 16:37 | User Profile
Originally posted by il ragno@Jun 11 2003, 02:10 Nobody was propagandizing you to take this path you'vre taken. Just the reverse: you have been relentlessly propagandized to cleave to the massmind. And I don't think your questioning was born of a natural contrariness, a developmental disorder, a lack of education, or poor role models....the standard sociological horse-puckey they trot out to explain racial dissidents.
Of course, the 60s-era dissent of David Horowitz & Co. couldn't have been motivated by developmental disorders or poor role models and the like. :lol: