[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Try a Google sometime - even if the results might provide information that challenges your views (gasp!).[/quote]
I asked about the investment portfolio. If the best you can do is his TIAA-CREF involment, I fail to see how you can claim that his portfolio is worse than that of the next guy. We’re all aware of the Hoover report, and that’s no mystery. But the way you framed the “investment portfolio” bit, made it sound as if he was directly financing Al-Qaeda or something.
I asked about the investment portfolio. If the best you can do is his TIAA-CREF involment, I fail to see how you can claim that his portfolio is worse than that of the next guy. We’re all aware of the Hoover report, and that’s no mystery. But the way you framed the “investment portfolio” bit, made it sound as if he was directly financing Al-Qaeda or something.
Clear?[/quote]
An investment portfolio, dear moron, is the sum of his investment holdings. No more, no less - assuming you can read. There is no framing of the phrase.
You are beyond an embarrassment to your own cause. And now you try and qualify Chomsky’s acts because your precious hero is a hypocrite.
One more thing Lixy doesn’t have a clue about: finance!
And don’t give me the whole deflection “I knew of the Hoover article” - that is crap, because if you knew about it, you would know exactly what an “investment portfolio” is. What a hack.
It doesn’t matter if Chomsky’s portfolio looks like a “regular guy’s” - the stock market is the unalloyed engine of capitalism that you and your dim-witted ilk say is inherently evil. Chomsky says the same, then gladly profits from the “evil”.
In TIAA-CREF, he could opt out and put money into a money market, which doesn’t participate in the capitalist machine of funding defense companies, banks, etc. But nope, Chomsky likes the growth of blue chips…how does that make himany different than anyone else who profits from the evil?
Poor Lixy.
A rule you should learn, Lixy, when it has become painfully clear you have made a fool out of yourself: stop typing.
It just makes it worse as you pathetically try and defend yourself.
Just to pick a nit on the Chomsky issue… it is certainly possible that his opinions are heartfelt, such that he believes systems should be changed, but that does not absolutely require that he refuse to manage his money in a way that benefits him.
Is Chomsky suggesting that people should voluntarily avoid using the financial system they find themselves in or is he saying the system should be changed?
There is a big difference between the two statements. One makes him a huge hypocrite, the other is simply an opinion which may or may not have merit.
In this day and age, in the rush to discredit anyone who says something we don’t want to hear, it would be good to clearly figure out which it is.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
You are beyond an embarrassment to your own cause. And now you try and qualify Chomsky’s acts because your precious hero is a hypocrite.
One more thing Lixy doesn’t have a clue about: finance! [/quote]
Do you ever give arguments that aren’t ad hominems? The ratio of your consistent arguing vs. downright ranting is very low.
I know exactly what an investment portfolio is. Matter of fact, I have the Chomsky criticism Wiki’s page on my watchlist. I’m very familiar with it and that is why I called your slanderous lie. Here’s your claim:
You should see Chomsky’s investment portfolio - it puts us regular guys to shame.
I asked you to back that up. I mean, reading your post, one would think that he has stocks in the baby seal business. So far, you failed to provide any evidence to prove that your assertion is anywhere near the truth.
WHHH-AT? (in a Jon Stewart’s voice)
Now you say it doesn’t matter, when that’s exactly the point I raised. I take it you’re giving up at this point.
[quote]the stock market is the unalloyed engine of capitalism that you and your dim-witted ilk say is inherently evil. Chomsky says the same, then gladly profits from the “evil”.
In TIAA-CREF, he could opt out and put money into a money market, which doesn’t participate in the capitalist machine of funding defense companies, banks, etc. But nope, Chomsky likes the growth of blue chips…how does that make himany different than anyone else who profits from the evil? [/quote]
Blah blah blah…
Nice try to divert my question.
Did I ever say he was a saint, a recluse, or someone who lives out of fresh water and wildberries? No! My question was clear. I’ll reiterate if you’re too dumb to recollect:
[i]lixy wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
You should see Chomsky’s investment portfolio - it puts us regular guys to shame.
Do share proper references instead of throwing baseless accusations.
Where do you fish for such things as investment portfolios anyway? [/i]
Note that I challenged you on a particular issue, NOT that he made money out of his prolific writings or career as a distinguished scholar (easily the most distinguished linguist). Look carefully at the part I quoted and called slander.
You don’t have squat to back it up, so say it already and don’t try to weasel out of it by saying that “It doesn’t matter if Chomsky’s portfolio looks like a “regular guy’s””. That exactly the part I raised concern on, and challenged you to prove.
[quote]Poor Lixy.
A rule you should learn, Lixy, when it has become painfully clear you have made a fool out of yourself: stop typing.
It just makes it worse as you pathetically try and defend yourself.[/quote]
Does it take more than two IQ points to notice that the “balanced” commentary about Muslim extremism or Muslims in general, comes ENTIRELY from a JEWISH point of view in our media?
Gee, I wonder if Jew #1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 are giving me a balanced opinion about Muslims?
[/quote]
And yet, the point still stands. In all of your anti-Semitic rhetoric you still haven’t addressed why peaceful Muslims do not stand up publicly against the extremists? If the majority of Muslims did this the extremists would literally be outcasts and recruitment for their cause would cease to exist.
So since this conflict is perpetuated by Muslim violence, it is up to the rational Muslims to fix it. Or a least stand up publicly against it.
[quote]Lorisco wrote:
So since this conflict is perpetuated by Muslim violence, it is up to the rational Muslims to fix it. Or a least stand up publicly against it.
[/quote]
Here’s me standing up publicly against it.
Dig up a bit and you’ll be amazed how much is done by Muslims to counter the hijack of our religion by the extremist scumbags.
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
What a bunch of crap. Like there have not been white, black, American Indian, Asian other villians in movies.
You clowns make me sick.
How many movies can you think of where the hero (or otherwise “good guys”) was/were Arab? Especially in a movie that did not have other Arabs as the “bad guy(s)”?
I’m not a big movie buff, so I cant really think of any.
But I can certainly think of movies that have made whites, blacks, Native Americans, and Asians the “good guy” (while not also making other the bad guys).[/quote]
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
What a bunch of crap. Like there have not been white, black, American Indian, Asian other villians in movies.
You clowns make me sick.
How many movies can you think of where the hero (or otherwise “good guys”) was/were Arab? Especially in a movie that did not have other Arabs as the “bad guy(s)”?
I’m not a big movie buff, so I cant really think of any.
But I can certainly think of movies that have made whites, blacks, Native Americans, and Asians the “good guy” (while not also making other the bad guys).[/quote]
Just a few off the top of my head.
Alladin (Disney)
Robin Hood (Morgan Freeman’s character)
The warriors in that movie The Rock was in (Scorpion King maybe)
Lawrence of Arabia
That other movie (Hilgado maybe)about the horse race across the desert
So if their is a sterotype that arabs are terroists and suicide bombers and the whole radical islam thing has only been growing since 1948, I’m gonna tend to believe.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Ok, fine, I lied. But, the below Protocol quote was just too funny. JTF, do you realize the Protocols are a bald faced plagiarism? It’s heavily plagiarized from the French, “Dialogues in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu.” This was written in 1858 by Maurice Joly, and had nothing to do with Jews. Nothing. Watch your protocol quote below. Then look at the passage from Joly’s novel.
[/quote]
Found by “Mr X” a white Russian – knowing the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution thats not surprising.
It almost sounds like a plausible explanation once you separate it from REALITY.
As Ford noted, he wasn’t so concerned with WHO wrote it – his concern was that it matched perfectly with real world events…
“The Protocols are a World Program - there is no doubt anywhere of that - whose program is stated within the articles themselves. But as for outer confirmation, which would be the more valuable - a signature, or six signatures, or twenty signatures, or a 50-year unbroken line of effort fulfilling that program?”
Also written by Henry Ford in 1921:
[i]"Though Jewish nationalism exists, its enshrinement in a state to be set up in Palestine is not the project that is engaging the whole Jewish nation. The Jews will not move into Palestine just yet; they will not move in at all merely because of the Zionist movement. Quite another motive will be the cause of the exodus out of the Gentile nations, when the time for that exodus fully comes…
The methods adopted to get the land of Palestine away from the Arabs in the early days of the Zionist invasion were such as will fill the world with indignation once the world is permitted to know what was done…
This spirit which obtained at the beginning of a movement, which the innocent Christian world has been taught by propaganda to regard as a profoundly religious and respectable exodus, explains all that has happened in the years since the Zionists took over Palestine. It staggers the imagination to forecast what will be done in a period of full and unquestioned rule.
It is very clear that Jewish nationalism will develop along the line of enmity to the rest of the world…
Americans do not understand the delicate racial situation in Palestine. Zionist propaganda has always been accepted on the assumption that Palestine is the Jews’ land and that they only need help to go back. It is an historical and political fact that Palestine has not been the Jew’s land for more than 2,000 years - and then for only a brief while.
At the close of the 1914-1918 war there were in Palestine over 600,000 Arabs and only 50,000 Jews. Neither numerically nor industrially have the Jews held the land. Yet as the result of a “war bargain” it is handed over to them as regardless of the native inhabitants as if Belgium had been handed over to Mexico. Many of the natives are Semites, like the Jews, but they do not want the Jews among them. The Balfour Declaration, as well as the terms of the Mandate, recognized the rights of the native races. Everyone who knows about the people who have been native to Palestine for thousands of years recognizes their right, everybody except the Jews."[/i]
So WWI allowed the Jews to obtain Palestine, and out of WWII was established the state of Israel.
As Ford had predicted back in 1921 – “Quite another motive will be the cause of the exodus out of the Gentile nations”
And not just Ford – it seems Churchill was predicting the future back in 1920…
[i]"Zionism offers the third sphere to the political conceptions of the Jewish race. In violent contrast to international communism, it presents to the Jew a national idea of a commanding character. It has fallen to the British Government, as the result of the conquest of Palestine, to have the opportunity and the responsibility of securing for the Jewish race all over the world a home and a centre of national life…
Of course, Palestine is far too small to accomodate more than a fraction of the Jewish race, nor do the majority of national Jews wish to go there. But if, as may well happen, there should be created in our lifetime by the banks of the Jordan a Jewish State under the protection of the British Crown, which might comprise three or four millions of Jews, an event would have occurred in the history of the world which would, from every point of view, be beneficial, and would be especially in harmony with the truest interests of the British Empire." http://www.codoh.com/zionweb/zionchurch.html
So the “Event” that ended up being the “motive for exodus” and the establishment of Israel as a Jewish state – “would from every point of view, be beneficial, and would be especially in harmony with the truest interests of the British Empire.”
[quote]vroom wrote:
JTF, didn’t nostradamus make some real world predictions?[/quote]
Not only him, but a number of “preachers” make good money “demonstrating” how signs in the book of Revelations are being fulfilled today. They take Revelations and compare passages with reporting you’d find in today’s news. Of course, those types have done so for centuries.
Now JTF, well, he uses a proven fraud as some prophetic source. And, I guess because Henry Ford said so. I suppose he’s ignored that his prophetic material is a satirical attack on Napolean III.
[quote]JustTheFacts wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Ok, fine, I lied. But, the below Protocol quote was just too funny. JTF, do you realize the Protocols are a bald faced plagiarism? It’s heavily plagiarized from the French, “Dialogues in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu.” This was written in 1858 by Maurice Joly, and had nothing to do with Jews. Nothing. Watch your protocol quote below. Then look at the passage from Joly’s novel.
Found by “Mr X” a white Russian – knowing the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution thats not surprising.
It almost sounds like a plausible explanation once you separate it from REALITY.
As Ford noted, he wasn’t so concerned with WHO wrote it – his concern was that it matched perfectly with real world events…
“The Protocols are a World Program - there is no doubt anywhere of that - whose program is stated within the articles themselves. But as for outer confirmation, which would be the more valuable - a signature, or six signatures, or twenty signatures, or a 50-year unbroken line of effort fulfilling that program?”
Also written by Henry Ford in 1921:
[i]"Though Jewish nationalism exists, its enshrinement in a state to be set up in Palestine is not the project that is engaging the whole Jewish nation. The Jews will not move into Palestine just yet; they will not move in at all merely because of the Zionist movement. Quite another motive will be the cause of the exodus out of the Gentile nations, when the time for that exodus fully comes…
The methods adopted to get the land of Palestine away from the Arabs in the early days of the Zionist invasion were such as will fill the world with indignation once the world is permitted to know what was done…
This spirit which obtained at the beginning of a movement, which the innocent Christian world has been taught by propaganda to regard as a profoundly religious and respectable exodus, explains all that has happened in the years since the Zionists took over Palestine. It staggers the imagination to forecast what will be done in a period of full and unquestioned rule.
It is very clear that Jewish nationalism will develop along the line of enmity to the rest of the world…
Americans do not understand the delicate racial situation in Palestine. Zionist propaganda has always been accepted on the assumption that Palestine is the Jews’ land and that they only need help to go back. It is an historical and political fact that Palestine has not been the Jew’s land for more than 2,000 years - and then for only a brief while.
At the close of the 1914-1918 war there were in Palestine over 600,000 Arabs and only 50,000 Jews. Neither numerically nor industrially have the Jews held the land. Yet as the result of a “war bargain” it is handed over to them as regardless of the native inhabitants as if Belgium had been handed over to Mexico. Many of the natives are Semites, like the Jews, but they do not want the Jews among them. The Balfour Declaration, as well as the terms of the Mandate, recognized the rights of the native races. Everyone who knows about the people who have been native to Palestine for thousands of years recognizes their right, everybody except the Jews."[/i]
So WWI allowed the Jews to obtain Palestine, and out of WWII was established the state of Israel.
As Ford had predicted back in 1921 – “Quite another motive will be the cause of the exodus out of the Gentile nations”
And not just Ford – it seems Churchill was predicting the future back in 1920…
[i]"Zionism offers the third sphere to the political conceptions of the Jewish race. In violent contrast to international communism, it presents to the Jew a national idea of a commanding character. It has fallen to the British Government, as the result of the conquest of Palestine, to have the opportunity and the responsibility of securing for the Jewish race all over the world a home and a centre of national life…
Of course, Palestine is far too small to accomodate more than a fraction of the Jewish race, nor do the majority of national Jews wish to go there. But if, as may well happen, there should be created in our lifetime by the banks of the Jordan a Jewish State under the protection of the British Crown, which might comprise three or four millions of Jews, an event would have occurred in the history of the world which would, from every point of view, be beneficial, and would be especially in harmony with the truest interests of the British Empire." http://www.codoh.com/zionweb/zionchurch.html
So the “Event” that ended up being the “motive for exodus” and the establishment of Israel as a Jewish state – “would from every point of view, be beneficial, and would be especially in harmony with the truest interests of the British Empire.”
You’re life is based on a lie JTF. “Maybe they’re not real after all, but they sure are prophetic!” Damn man, wake up. Someone could have turned a work about Napolean III into anti-Christian propaganda. And, here we would find you, selectively picking through history, until you got the Protocols of the Elders of Christ to line up with your conspiracy theory.
Hell, Dan Brown makes a living concocting plausible Catholic conspiracies. Just enough narrow vision, just enough omission, just enough spin, and viola! You could do this with so many groups of people. That is, turn them into some kind of behind the scenes manipulators of significance.
[quote]vroom wrote:
JTF, didn’t nostradamus make some real world predictions?[/quote]
Funny you should mention that, I almost wrote that Nostradamus had nothing on the Protocols – except the Protocols aren’t “predictions”.
As Ford noted, “They are as cool as a legal paper and as matter-of-fact as a table of statistics.”
Stuff like: “We will force up wages, which, however, will be of no benefit to workers, for we at the same time will cause a rise in prices of prime necessities, pretending that this is due to the decline of agriculture and of cattle raising.”
“We will surround our government with a whole world of economists. It is for this reason that the science of economics is the chief subject of instruction taught by the Jews. We shall be surrounded by a whole galaxy of bankers, industrialists, capitalists, and especially by millionaires because, actually, everything will be decided by an appeal to figures.”
[i]"On no account should so much as a single unit above the definite and freely estimated sums be retained in the State Treasuries, for money exists to be circulated and any kind of stagnation of money acts ruinously on the running of the State machinery, for which it is the lubricant; a stagnation of the lubricant may stop the regular working of the mechanism.
The substitution of interest-bearing paper for a part of the token of exchange has produced exactly this stagnation. The consequences of this circumstance are already sufficiently noticeable…
Economic crises have been produced by us for the GOYIM by no other means than the withdrawal of money from circulation. Huge capitals have stagnated, withdrawing money from States, which were constantly obliged to apply to those same stagnant capitals for loans. These loans burdened the finances of the State with the payment of interest and made them the bond slaves of these capitals… The concentration of industry in the hands of capitalists out of the hands of small masters has drained away all the juices of the peoples and with them also the States…"[/i]
"We shall soon begin to establish huge monopolies, reservoirs of colossal riches, upon which even large fortunes of the GOYIM will depend to such an extent that they will go to the bottom together with the credit of the States on the day after the political smash…
On the subject of the press:
[i]"NOT A SINGLE ANNOUNCEMENT WILL REACH THE PUBLIC WITHOUT OUR CONTROL. Even now this is already being attained by us inasmuch as all news items are received by a few agencies, in whose offices they are focused from all parts of the world. These agencies will then be already entirely ours and will give publicity only to what we dictate to them.
If already now we have contrived to possess ourselves of the minds of the GOY communities to such an extent the they all come near looking upon the events of the world through the colored glasses of those spectacles we are setting astride their noses"[/i]
I’d be nice if they were predictions – Nostradamus is a lot easier to dismiss.
[quote]JustTheFacts wrote:
Funny you should mention that, I almost wrote that Nostradamus had nothing on the Protocols – except the Protocols aren’t “predictions”.
[/quote]
JTF,
At worst, your protocols sound like some fairly naive (early) end game analysis of what were probably at the time interesting ideas concerning societies and social organization.
Systems, or processes, can have a way of exerting pressure over time towards some type of results. For example, simple greed will have a way of forcing people to find ways to maximize their money or their profits.
You can, and may very well, spend your whole life railing against something that does not even exist. Perhaps instead of accepting it on faith, as if it was a religion instead of a conspiracy, you should stand back a bit and give things a bit more analysis.
It is VERY difficult to organize people. It is VERY difficult to get any quantity of people to keep secrets for any serious length of time. Are there people with money and power? Sure. Would all the people with money and power have the same ideals and goals? Not a chance.