It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Round 2. FreeThinkerIdealist v SkyFloating: The Manchurian Voter
page: 14
share:
The topic for this debate is "The use of mind control on a nation-wide level is a real and likely threat to democracy.".
FreeThinkerIdealist will be arguing the pro position and will open the debate.
Skyfloating will argue the con position.
Each debater will have one opening statement each. This will be followed by 3 alternating replies each. There will then be one closing statement each and no rebuttal.
A post may not be any longer than 5,500 characters, using the ATS character counter.
Closing posts may not be any longer than 3,500 characters.
This character limit includes all board code, links, etc.
Extra characters will be deleted from the end of your post. Please notice that the character counter counts backwards.
Editing is strictly forbidden. This means any editing, for any reason. Any edited posts will be completely deleted. This prevents cheating. If you make an honest mistake which needs fixing, you must U2U me. I will do a limited amount of editing for good cause. Please use spell check before you post.
Opening and closing statements must not contain any images, and must have no more than 3 references. Excluding both the opening and closing statements, only two images and no more than 5 references can be included for each post.
Responses should be made within 24 hours, if people are late with their replies, they run the risk of forfeiting their reply and possibly the debate. Limited grace periods may be allowed if I am notified in advance.
Each round that a member participates in is worth 1 ranking point in the Debate Forum Challenge Ladder. Winning the final round is worth an additional 1 point.
The Member-Judging System is in effect. The total number of stars awarded to each member by readers (counted at the time of judging) will be counted to determine a winner. Each debate will have one judge. The decision of the judge is worth 5 stars.
We have ways of determining when a member has multiple accounts. Any member who attempts to use multiple accounts to influence the outcome of a debate will be barred from the debate forum in perpetuity and will face additional consequences as well, possibly including a permanent ban from ATS.
FreeThinkerIdealist will be arguing the pro position and will open the debate.
Skyfloating will argue the con position.
Each debater will have one opening statement each. This will be followed by 3 alternating replies each. There will then be one closing statement each and no rebuttal.
A post may not be any longer than 5,500 characters, using the ATS character counter.
Closing posts may not be any longer than 3,500 characters.
This character limit includes all board code, links, etc.
Extra characters will be deleted from the end of your post. Please notice that the character counter counts backwards.
Editing is strictly forbidden. This means any editing, for any reason. Any edited posts will be completely deleted. This prevents cheating. If you make an honest mistake which needs fixing, you must U2U me. I will do a limited amount of editing for good cause. Please use spell check before you post.
Opening and closing statements must not contain any images, and must have no more than 3 references. Excluding both the opening and closing statements, only two images and no more than 5 references can be included for each post.
Responses should be made within 24 hours, if people are late with their replies, they run the risk of forfeiting their reply and possibly the debate. Limited grace periods may be allowed if I am notified in advance.
Each round that a member participates in is worth 1 ranking point in the Debate Forum Challenge Ladder. Winning the final round is worth an additional 1 point.
The Member-Judging System is in effect. The total number of stars awarded to each member by readers (counted at the time of judging) will be counted to determine a winner. Each debate will have one judge. The decision of the judge is worth 5 stars.
We have ways of determining when a member has multiple accounts. Any member who attempts to use multiple accounts to influence the outcome of a debate will be barred from the debate forum in perpetuity and will face additional consequences as well, possibly including a permanent ban from ATS.
In this debate, my argument is to show the likelihood and reality of a nation-wide attempt at mind control that may be used as an attempt to threaten
democracy perpetrated by foreign and/or domestic enemies of the state.
I will use past examples of this being accomplished successfully against a nation and its people. I will find and show examples of it being executed on foreign nations by domestic agencies and groups, to show they are fully capable of executing such a plan, so would be fully capable of executing it on domestic soil.
There are many avenues available for such an attack on a nation in today’s advanced technical world. I find it should be apparent if one only looks at things with a clear, unbiased mind.
I will admit, mind control only works if people have stopped paying attention, become distracted, or have been deprived a certain level of education and of facts/truths. You would need to have control of certain resources, either by coercion or culpable accomplices. It would need planning, organization, and setting up of systems and networks to reach the masses.
I will argue that the resources, systems, and networks are already established, and controlled by a select few. Some of these resources come from the very people they wish to control (taxes of the people), others come from people who have established power and control through purchase and ownership of the world’s leading companies and media groups. The education system is failing. More and more of the populace are working longer for less than every before ... distracting them from being more directly involved in the democratic process. A large percentage of the video and audio medias are owned by a few companies.
We know propaganda is real. Is it being used on the people of today? I believe it is evident by following the stories covered by any of the news channels, and listen and watch how many times these stories are repeated over and over. Some are more blatant than others. These resources can be and are used to slowly hypnotize the people into believing they are better off or 'safer' if they just give up a few more rights.
Select words are used to add a sense of authority to public servant positions and support these people's decisions over the wish of the majority of a nation ... until that nation gives up and lives with it ... thinking there is nothing they can do, just 'ride it out' until next election, then wait it out again if the replacements have gone astray on their promises. A great example of how far we have fallen from the last presidency is we impeached Clinton for a sexual deviancy ... we haven't touched Bush for lies and breaking a treaty, which is a direct violation of the constitution to which he has sworn to uphold.
We are shown what we are intended to see and handed our opinions of how to view the world. If they want to make a country and its people look bad; we see only the worst video they can muster ... if it is even video from the supposed location. You don't see the schools, the museums, the zoos ... you don't see the families, the pets, the houses ... nor do you see the stores, malls, businesses. You see nothing that can connect you to them. They get labeled a 'third' world country because it creates an image of starvation and flies, dirt roads, no electricity nor running water.
With current debates, statistics will verify that only a select few of the nominees are given adequate airtime and allowed to field questions ... and third party candidates are usually scoffed at and ridiculed.
We are divided, dumbed down, and then told to focus on spending money while at war. Look at the shiny cars, listen to what Britney, Paris, and Lindsay did this week or some other form of gossip, if you are not with us, you are against us, how can you be a patriot if you don't wear a pin on your lapel ...
There is actually so much evidence to show that we are being manipulated it is almost too obvious and it cannot be! Isn't that careless? How can they be so reckless? It is easy, since people are worried about buying a PS3/XBox 360, or whether hybrid technology premiums are recoverable, if they should buy Blu-ray or HD-DVD and which HDTV screen looks the best, after worrying about bills and stress from work ... a lot of people don't wish to do much thinking afterwards. They tune into Fox or MSNBC and ask them to tell them all the good stuff in the news.
ATS is the exception to the rule. We are the clear-thinkers and unbiased news source ... because we regulate ourselves. We debunk, disprove and research any post. We consider all angles. That is what a group of intellectuals do to come to a sound conclusion and discover whatever truth is out there.
It is a shame, really. We are the real news here. People need what this site has to offer. Mainstream media does not usually come close to investigating and covering all aspects of a story. They read their lines and do their job, which is to sell the story the money tells them to. They are controlled by their paychecks ... something this site doesn't have the worries over. They worry about bans by agencies. They concern themselves with status quo and assassinating the characters of those with passion and fail to buy into something just because it is repeated enough times, while a real story like deciphering the Patriot Act is ignored.
The use of mind control on a nation-wide level is a real and likely threat to democracy
I will use past examples of this being accomplished successfully against a nation and its people. I will find and show examples of it being executed on foreign nations by domestic agencies and groups, to show they are fully capable of executing such a plan, so would be fully capable of executing it on domestic soil.
There are many avenues available for such an attack on a nation in today’s advanced technical world. I find it should be apparent if one only looks at things with a clear, unbiased mind.
I will admit, mind control only works if people have stopped paying attention, become distracted, or have been deprived a certain level of education and of facts/truths. You would need to have control of certain resources, either by coercion or culpable accomplices. It would need planning, organization, and setting up of systems and networks to reach the masses.
I will argue that the resources, systems, and networks are already established, and controlled by a select few. Some of these resources come from the very people they wish to control (taxes of the people), others come from people who have established power and control through purchase and ownership of the world’s leading companies and media groups. The education system is failing. More and more of the populace are working longer for less than every before ... distracting them from being more directly involved in the democratic process. A large percentage of the video and audio medias are owned by a few companies.
We know propaganda is real. Is it being used on the people of today? I believe it is evident by following the stories covered by any of the news channels, and listen and watch how many times these stories are repeated over and over. Some are more blatant than others. These resources can be and are used to slowly hypnotize the people into believing they are better off or 'safer' if they just give up a few more rights.
Select words are used to add a sense of authority to public servant positions and support these people's decisions over the wish of the majority of a nation ... until that nation gives up and lives with it ... thinking there is nothing they can do, just 'ride it out' until next election, then wait it out again if the replacements have gone astray on their promises. A great example of how far we have fallen from the last presidency is we impeached Clinton for a sexual deviancy ... we haven't touched Bush for lies and breaking a treaty, which is a direct violation of the constitution to which he has sworn to uphold.
We are shown what we are intended to see and handed our opinions of how to view the world. If they want to make a country and its people look bad; we see only the worst video they can muster ... if it is even video from the supposed location. You don't see the schools, the museums, the zoos ... you don't see the families, the pets, the houses ... nor do you see the stores, malls, businesses. You see nothing that can connect you to them. They get labeled a 'third' world country because it creates an image of starvation and flies, dirt roads, no electricity nor running water.
With current debates, statistics will verify that only a select few of the nominees are given adequate airtime and allowed to field questions ... and third party candidates are usually scoffed at and ridiculed.
We are divided, dumbed down, and then told to focus on spending money while at war. Look at the shiny cars, listen to what Britney, Paris, and Lindsay did this week or some other form of gossip, if you are not with us, you are against us, how can you be a patriot if you don't wear a pin on your lapel ...
There is actually so much evidence to show that we are being manipulated it is almost too obvious and it cannot be! Isn't that careless? How can they be so reckless? It is easy, since people are worried about buying a PS3/XBox 360, or whether hybrid technology premiums are recoverable, if they should buy Blu-ray or HD-DVD and which HDTV screen looks the best, after worrying about bills and stress from work ... a lot of people don't wish to do much thinking afterwards. They tune into Fox or MSNBC and ask them to tell them all the good stuff in the news.
ATS is the exception to the rule. We are the clear-thinkers and unbiased news source ... because we regulate ourselves. We debunk, disprove and research any post. We consider all angles. That is what a group of intellectuals do to come to a sound conclusion and discover whatever truth is out there.
It is a shame, really. We are the real news here. People need what this site has to offer. Mainstream media does not usually come close to investigating and covering all aspects of a story. They read their lines and do their job, which is to sell the story the money tells them to. They are controlled by their paychecks ... something this site doesn't have the worries over. They worry about bans by agencies. They concern themselves with status quo and assassinating the characters of those with passion and fail to buy into something just because it is repeated enough times, while a real story like deciphering the Patriot Act is ignored.
The use of mind control on a nation-wide level is a real and likely threat to democracy
We will not bow down to Mind Control
You can fool some of the people some of the time but you cant fool all of the people all of the time - Abraham Lincoln
I look forward to both sides of this debate being useful and informative for all readers.
I am no expert on mind control, though I have read the books "Operation Mind Control" by W. Bowart, "Psychich Dictatorship in the U.S.A." by Alex Constantine, the HAARP Book by Nick Begich, Jim Keith and a few much weaker books such as "Tranceformation of America" and even the Fritz Springmeier stuff which is, in my opinion, not credible. The more credible works shall serve as my references.
These books have shown me that many attempts at Mind Control have indeed been undertaken by the Government. These attempts not always succeeded. Some of them succeeded temporarily. The Conspiracy Theorist speculates that such attempts may be undertaken on a nationwide scale. There is talk of Extra-Low-Frequency waves, HAARP, Remote Influencing. None of these attempts have had a nationwide influence yet.
To keep it short and simple: Attempts at Mind Control have been made. They are difficult enough to sustain on individuals. It is hardly likely that they can be enforced on a nationwide basis and undermine democracy and freedom…two concepts which have been deeply embedded into our psyche.
Another way to approach this is by changing the Definition of what “Mind Control” means. If it is defined to mean “Indoctrination of the Masses Belief-System” then this type of Mind-Control has already taken place to some extent. In this sense, even the implementation of the Value-System of “Democracy” could be viewed as successful mind-control.
But you can never get everybody to believe the same thing, you can never force everybody on their knees at the same time. This has never happened in the history of humanity and to argue this notion is the absurd fever-fantasy of a paranoid. Throughout history human nature has displayed a strong will and rebellion (in m opinion a spiritual quality). There will always be the odd man out, the whistleblower, the guy who doesn’t fit into society, the anti-movement, the freedom-fighter, the unconforming senator, the occasional honest politician.
No doubt there is a dream of mass-mind-control by a few misguided individuals. Attempts at world control there have been many in history. The Romans wanted it. The Nazis wanted it. Russia wanted it. And now, to some extent, the U.S. wants it. But its always failed in the end due to the reasons above.
I have no idea how my opponent wants to make us believe that Mind Control can be applied on a mass-scale, but I wish him all the best at it anyway.
ATS is a shining example of many individuals questioning, multi-viewpointing and rebelling against the consensus. May it always be that way.
You can fool some of the people some of the time but you cant fool all of the people all of the time - Abraham Lincoln
I look forward to both sides of this debate being useful and informative for all readers.
I am no expert on mind control, though I have read the books "Operation Mind Control" by W. Bowart, "Psychich Dictatorship in the U.S.A." by Alex Constantine, the HAARP Book by Nick Begich, Jim Keith and a few much weaker books such as "Tranceformation of America" and even the Fritz Springmeier stuff which is, in my opinion, not credible. The more credible works shall serve as my references.
These books have shown me that many attempts at Mind Control have indeed been undertaken by the Government. These attempts not always succeeded. Some of them succeeded temporarily. The Conspiracy Theorist speculates that such attempts may be undertaken on a nationwide scale. There is talk of Extra-Low-Frequency waves, HAARP, Remote Influencing. None of these attempts have had a nationwide influence yet.
To keep it short and simple: Attempts at Mind Control have been made. They are difficult enough to sustain on individuals. It is hardly likely that they can be enforced on a nationwide basis and undermine democracy and freedom…two concepts which have been deeply embedded into our psyche.
Another way to approach this is by changing the Definition of what “Mind Control” means. If it is defined to mean “Indoctrination of the Masses Belief-System” then this type of Mind-Control has already taken place to some extent. In this sense, even the implementation of the Value-System of “Democracy” could be viewed as successful mind-control.
But you can never get everybody to believe the same thing, you can never force everybody on their knees at the same time. This has never happened in the history of humanity and to argue this notion is the absurd fever-fantasy of a paranoid. Throughout history human nature has displayed a strong will and rebellion (in m opinion a spiritual quality). There will always be the odd man out, the whistleblower, the guy who doesn’t fit into society, the anti-movement, the freedom-fighter, the unconforming senator, the occasional honest politician.
No doubt there is a dream of mass-mind-control by a few misguided individuals. Attempts at world control there have been many in history. The Romans wanted it. The Nazis wanted it. Russia wanted it. And now, to some extent, the U.S. wants it. But its always failed in the end due to the reasons above.
I have no idea how my opponent wants to make us believe that Mind Control can be applied on a mass-scale, but I wish him all the best at it anyway.
ATS is a shining example of many individuals questioning, multi-viewpointing and rebelling against the consensus. May it always be that way.
My opponent has some interesting viewpoints. One thing that stands out is … “Another way to approach this is by changing the Definition of what
“Mind Control” means.” Hmmm, I guess we could argue on the definition of words, even some presidents have done it Changing the definition
to suit needs is quite a unique approach.
A problem with the definition proposed by my adversary is it relies on a group manipulation. Mind control and the undermining of democracy don’t need to trick everyone into believing the same thing or the same way. It just needs to manipulate enough people in such a way that it accomplishes that goal.
Each section of a country can and will be approached with a different tactic tailored for each sub-group. To be most effective, that is the ONLY way a massive mind control campaign will work. Identifying the differences, magnifying them, and then using the best technique to conquer them; by preying on their weaknesses and fears. What would work for a mid-western conservative, would not work for a southeastern conservative. What works for a west coast liberal will not necessarily work for an east coast liberal.
There are many different classes and sections of society; each one gets a special ‘program’. What one group picks up on, the others may not. This way a national program can reach out and do its damage. When you factor in regional and local programming, usually still supported by the same advertising and owned by the same parent company … it can be as focused to what demographic watches/listens to certain channels at certain times.
To believe that mind control has never been implemented before is to forget about Germany’s history in World War II. Adolph Hitler and his minions use propaganda and even a false ‘terrorist’ attack to manipulate and motivate the people into believing lies. The people took up arms and fought against evil nations that they were told attacked them. This mind control inspired blind nationalism which led the people to think whoever wasn’t with them, was against them. It is a tragic past event and what led to such horror should never be forgotten.
We are not arguing whether anyone succeeded at controlling the world. Rome did have quite a large influence for a long time. Nazis believed in what they fought for. U.S.S.R. was quite a powerful nation that wished to spread communism throughout the world, and the people believed it was the right way to live.
Just because there is an odd man out, doesn’t mean they succeed. Sometimes going against the grain gets you into trouble. The Dixie Chicks learned first hand, Rosie O’Donnell has as well. Unpopular views usually get you shunned and forgotten.
My opponent states that nothing can undermine the ideal of democracy and freedom that has been etched into the citizens' minds … if this is so engrained in our society, then why is our voter turnout so low? Less than 40% of eligible voters turned out for the 2006 elections. Our freedoms become trampled on when our rights are violated. Warrant-less wiretapping is a great example. We also have plenty of laws that restrict people from doing things on their own property or ban things that do not harm or affect other individuals. In Garnerville, NY … you are not allowed to drink any form of alcohol on your own porch, even if it is screened in.
I do want to note that my opponent has already conceded that mind control does work. “Some of them succeeded temporarily.” It doesn’t matter how long they succeeded, it is the fact that you admit they have worked in the past. Practice makes perfect. Mind control does not need to be permanent to accomplish its agenda. Take the Iraq war for example. There were opponents to it before we went. Dennis Kucinich was one, and he even wrote up a paper why. Years ago in the last Gulf war, Dick Cheney claimed how much of a nightmare a mission like this would be. The point being, there was an agenda. They sold us the evidence they wanted us to believe, with the media at their beck and call. There are still people to this day that believe Iraq had WMDs and Saddam was linked to Al Qaeda … when the CIA has conceded there wasn’t. I would say that was a pretty good execution (bad pun not intended).
I have never implied exotic devices needed to be used (ULF/HAARP). Current technology goes above and beyond all that is required. Repetition is the best asset … and less of a liability than an attempt at subliminal messages.
The CIA has come out recently admitting to torture, undermining governments, and other such activities. Our own intelligence agencies are masters at deception and mind control for more than half a century. They could easily do it on us, since most would never think of such a betrayal. The thing is, implementation is quite easy here. ClearChannel owns most of the radio stations. A few networks run a majority of the tv stations. It isn't as much of a intelligence nightmare as one would think.
Bush is a great example. He used a tragic event to push an agenda we know he and his crew had wanted before his assignment by the supreme court. He repeated himself enough times, and people were so distraught, it sunk in. Stay the course. With us or against us. Evil terrorist/regime. Third world country. Fight them there to not fight them here. WMD. Living in caves.
Hook, line, sinker. Now it is Iran ... whatever happened to Bin Laden and Afghanistan? Don't think, just listen.
A problem with the definition proposed by my adversary is it relies on a group manipulation. Mind control and the undermining of democracy don’t need to trick everyone into believing the same thing or the same way. It just needs to manipulate enough people in such a way that it accomplishes that goal.
Each section of a country can and will be approached with a different tactic tailored for each sub-group. To be most effective, that is the ONLY way a massive mind control campaign will work. Identifying the differences, magnifying them, and then using the best technique to conquer them; by preying on their weaknesses and fears. What would work for a mid-western conservative, would not work for a southeastern conservative. What works for a west coast liberal will not necessarily work for an east coast liberal.
There are many different classes and sections of society; each one gets a special ‘program’. What one group picks up on, the others may not. This way a national program can reach out and do its damage. When you factor in regional and local programming, usually still supported by the same advertising and owned by the same parent company … it can be as focused to what demographic watches/listens to certain channels at certain times.
To believe that mind control has never been implemented before is to forget about Germany’s history in World War II. Adolph Hitler and his minions use propaganda and even a false ‘terrorist’ attack to manipulate and motivate the people into believing lies. The people took up arms and fought against evil nations that they were told attacked them. This mind control inspired blind nationalism which led the people to think whoever wasn’t with them, was against them. It is a tragic past event and what led to such horror should never be forgotten.
We are not arguing whether anyone succeeded at controlling the world. Rome did have quite a large influence for a long time. Nazis believed in what they fought for. U.S.S.R. was quite a powerful nation that wished to spread communism throughout the world, and the people believed it was the right way to live.
Just because there is an odd man out, doesn’t mean they succeed. Sometimes going against the grain gets you into trouble. The Dixie Chicks learned first hand, Rosie O’Donnell has as well. Unpopular views usually get you shunned and forgotten.
My opponent states that nothing can undermine the ideal of democracy and freedom that has been etched into the citizens' minds … if this is so engrained in our society, then why is our voter turnout so low? Less than 40% of eligible voters turned out for the 2006 elections. Our freedoms become trampled on when our rights are violated. Warrant-less wiretapping is a great example. We also have plenty of laws that restrict people from doing things on their own property or ban things that do not harm or affect other individuals. In Garnerville, NY … you are not allowed to drink any form of alcohol on your own porch, even if it is screened in.
I do want to note that my opponent has already conceded that mind control does work. “Some of them succeeded temporarily.” It doesn’t matter how long they succeeded, it is the fact that you admit they have worked in the past. Practice makes perfect. Mind control does not need to be permanent to accomplish its agenda. Take the Iraq war for example. There were opponents to it before we went. Dennis Kucinich was one, and he even wrote up a paper why. Years ago in the last Gulf war, Dick Cheney claimed how much of a nightmare a mission like this would be. The point being, there was an agenda. They sold us the evidence they wanted us to believe, with the media at their beck and call. There are still people to this day that believe Iraq had WMDs and Saddam was linked to Al Qaeda … when the CIA has conceded there wasn’t. I would say that was a pretty good execution (bad pun not intended).
I have never implied exotic devices needed to be used (ULF/HAARP). Current technology goes above and beyond all that is required. Repetition is the best asset … and less of a liability than an attempt at subliminal messages.
The CIA has come out recently admitting to torture, undermining governments, and other such activities. Our own intelligence agencies are masters at deception and mind control for more than half a century. They could easily do it on us, since most would never think of such a betrayal. The thing is, implementation is quite easy here. ClearChannel owns most of the radio stations. A few networks run a majority of the tv stations. It isn't as much of a intelligence nightmare as one would think.
Bush is a great example. He used a tragic event to push an agenda we know he and his crew had wanted before his assignment by the supreme court. He repeated himself enough times, and people were so distraught, it sunk in. Stay the course. With us or against us. Evil terrorist/regime. Third world country. Fight them there to not fight them here. WMD. Living in caves.
Hook, line, sinker. Now it is Iran ... whatever happened to Bin Laden and Afghanistan? Don't think, just listen.
Back to Reality
Dear Reader,
The more conspiracy-literature & ATS I read, the more I realized how important it is to discern between serious investigation and paranoid delusions. In this field of research that line must be drawn.
Picture someone walking up and down the street holding a huge banner that says "MIND CONTROL is a threat to democracy!" You be the judge: Is this a serious invegator or a case for the psych-ward?
My opponent refers to events past & present as examples of "mind control". But these events are not the results of "mind control", but of other means:
* Coups
* Military Force
* Propaganda (which is not "Mind Control" as defined in the classic literature on the topic, but the Art of Persuasion!)
* Political Conspiracies
* A lazy and unquestioning populace (which are not "mind controlled" but simply lack interest in educating themselves in our areas).
Even IF the examples my opponent mentions were "Mind Control", it is easy to see that they have FAILED (Nazi Germany Lost the war).
Imagine you are a prisoner of war. You are forced to read the enemies philosophy on a daily basis. You are required to read it again and again and again until "brainwashed". Such attempts have reportedly been made throughout history. But they havent proven to "stick". Once you come back home and re-integrate into society, the brainwashing, that you might have temporarily submitted to under pressure, wears off.
Succseful mind control on individuals therefore requires techniques of pressure, torture, drugs, and the use of reward-punishment methods. Some researchers even claim that the mind-control can only be sustained through a mixture of hypnosis-drugs-personality-splitting....and not even then it will stick long! Research indicates that it will leave the victim highly traumatized, but by no means will he be a zombie for the rest of his life.
My opponent does not provide any evidence of mind control on individuals because it is very rare. Claiming that this has been done or will be done on a nationwide-scale is a scenario from science-fiction (where every citizen gets his brain hooked up to a brainwashing machine) but hardly likely in reality.
I will now specifically adress some of the baseless claims my opponent made in his last two posts:
"A large percentage of the video and audio medias are owned by a few companies"
My response: People use media by choice, not because they are mind-controlled. You can make good or bad choices concerning the media you feed yourself with.
"ATS is the exception to the rule. We are the clear-thinkers. We are the real news here"
While ATS is an excellent alternative, dozens of posts in the sound of "Hillary Clinton Reptilian Shapeshifter" are not evidence of clear-thinking but of having "crossed the line" mentioned at the beginning of my post.
"It just needs to manipulate enough people in such a way that it accomplishes that goal"
Thats called marketing-tactics, not mind control. Mind Control is the Zombification of a human being.
"When you factor in regional and local programming, usually still supported by the same advertising and owned by the same parent company … "
...and factor out concepts such as "free choice" your theories might work. But they dont. Try telling this George Bush. He`d be pleased by your ideas. If your ideas were true, Bush would have up to 75% support. He currently doesnt even have half that support. Gosh...he doesnt even have support from his own party anymore...he must have forgotten to use his techniques of mind-control then, yes?
"I do want to note that my opponent has already conceded that mind control does work"
Yes, I admit that propaganda as well as mind control work...to a certain extent. And just like you, I oppose them. But I am not going to start walking around making claims of mass-mind-control just yet. Most people I have met in my life still have some critical thinking towards the government. I dont see much of ANY evidence that they are "mind-controlled".
"Repetition is the best asset"
said Goebbels, I know, I know. Marketing-Experts now say that people become "satiated" by reptition and that they have to come up with new marketing strategies. I also know plenty of people who have tried repetition of "Positive Affirmations" in an attempt to brainwash themselves...didnt work. The Method has been used so often, its wearing off.
Of course the powers that be would love to have us believe that we can all be mind-controlled ("on a nationwide basis"). That could cause fear, and fear is the true enemy. Fear of a government...fear of an enemy...fear of mind control.
I thank my opponent for this challenging debate and the reader for investing time and attention.
Dear Reader,
The more conspiracy-literature & ATS I read, the more I realized how important it is to discern between serious investigation and paranoid delusions. In this field of research that line must be drawn.
Picture someone walking up and down the street holding a huge banner that says "MIND CONTROL is a threat to democracy!" You be the judge: Is this a serious invegator or a case for the psych-ward?
My opponent refers to events past & present as examples of "mind control". But these events are not the results of "mind control", but of other means:
* Coups
* Military Force
* Propaganda (which is not "Mind Control" as defined in the classic literature on the topic, but the Art of Persuasion!)
* Political Conspiracies
* A lazy and unquestioning populace (which are not "mind controlled" but simply lack interest in educating themselves in our areas).
Even IF the examples my opponent mentions were "Mind Control", it is easy to see that they have FAILED (Nazi Germany Lost the war).
Imagine you are a prisoner of war. You are forced to read the enemies philosophy on a daily basis. You are required to read it again and again and again until "brainwashed". Such attempts have reportedly been made throughout history. But they havent proven to "stick". Once you come back home and re-integrate into society, the brainwashing, that you might have temporarily submitted to under pressure, wears off.
Succseful mind control on individuals therefore requires techniques of pressure, torture, drugs, and the use of reward-punishment methods. Some researchers even claim that the mind-control can only be sustained through a mixture of hypnosis-drugs-personality-splitting....and not even then it will stick long! Research indicates that it will leave the victim highly traumatized, but by no means will he be a zombie for the rest of his life.
My opponent does not provide any evidence of mind control on individuals because it is very rare. Claiming that this has been done or will be done on a nationwide-scale is a scenario from science-fiction (where every citizen gets his brain hooked up to a brainwashing machine) but hardly likely in reality.
I will now specifically adress some of the baseless claims my opponent made in his last two posts:
"A large percentage of the video and audio medias are owned by a few companies"
My response: People use media by choice, not because they are mind-controlled. You can make good or bad choices concerning the media you feed yourself with.
"ATS is the exception to the rule. We are the clear-thinkers. We are the real news here"
While ATS is an excellent alternative, dozens of posts in the sound of "Hillary Clinton Reptilian Shapeshifter" are not evidence of clear-thinking but of having "crossed the line" mentioned at the beginning of my post.
"It just needs to manipulate enough people in such a way that it accomplishes that goal"
Thats called marketing-tactics, not mind control. Mind Control is the Zombification of a human being.
"When you factor in regional and local programming, usually still supported by the same advertising and owned by the same parent company … "
...and factor out concepts such as "free choice" your theories might work. But they dont. Try telling this George Bush. He`d be pleased by your ideas. If your ideas were true, Bush would have up to 75% support. He currently doesnt even have half that support. Gosh...he doesnt even have support from his own party anymore...he must have forgotten to use his techniques of mind-control then, yes?
"I do want to note that my opponent has already conceded that mind control does work"
Yes, I admit that propaganda as well as mind control work...to a certain extent. And just like you, I oppose them. But I am not going to start walking around making claims of mass-mind-control just yet. Most people I have met in my life still have some critical thinking towards the government. I dont see much of ANY evidence that they are "mind-controlled".
"Repetition is the best asset"
said Goebbels, I know, I know. Marketing-Experts now say that people become "satiated" by reptition and that they have to come up with new marketing strategies. I also know plenty of people who have tried repetition of "Positive Affirmations" in an attempt to brainwash themselves...didnt work. The Method has been used so often, its wearing off.
Of course the powers that be would love to have us believe that we can all be mind-controlled ("on a nationwide basis"). That could cause fear, and fear is the true enemy. Fear of a government...fear of an enemy...fear of mind control.
I thank my opponent for this challenging debate and the reader for investing time and attention.
My opponent once again admitted to mind control working.
My opponent says it is persuasion, but, isn't persuasion a form of mind control? To think all forms of mind control must be negative or abusive is a fallacy. I hate to admit it, but I myself have used persuasive tactics to control and manipulate others in my past (which coincidently supports my last debate's stance). We all know the statement, 'you catch more flies with honey than vinegar' ... you control more minds without being the punisher than the direct source of torture and violence. Persuasion is coercion without the threat.
Yes, we all have free will, but, if the majority of our information is loaded, then you have free will to choose where you get the same information, or to completely shut it out. If you were to study the definitions of mind-control, I am sure anyone of the readers can find most of that applies to the majority of our news in the past 6 years.
The president's approval rating has nothing to do with the bigger picture. Look at how heavily debated the president of Iran's statements are. A mistranslation used for an agenda is still brought up as fact, and has to be refuted by giving the proper translation and put into context ... and even if they do accept the proper translation, the anger is so strong, it doesn't matter. We have members here, despite how well of critical thinkers the majority are ... talking about nuclear weapons like toys against people we don't have any constitutional right to attack.
I find it amusing that my opponent considers the Nazis losing the war to mean the mind-control failed. In fact, it succeeded against its own nation, just because the nations they took up arms with didn't submit, doesn't make the mind-control a failure ... and it did destroy that nation and its people for a long time.
With an example from my opponent's post ... he tries to paint those who have different opinions and are willing to use their 1st amendment right as nut-cases ... which in itself is an example of how his mind has been controlled! It is our right and our duty to point out injustices and peacefully protest with signs. Would you lock up anti-war protesters? What about the UAW strikes? Are they not crazy for going on strike against a company that the average worker's pay is close to $30/hour, while their company is suffering declines in the market? No, they are voicing their opinion, not matter how unpopular. That IS the freedom and democracy that is being slowly manipulated in the minds of the people as being ridiculous.
I will quote a song by Kurt Cobain from Nirvana 'Just because your paranoid, doesn't mean they're not after you' ... Paranoia doesn't necessarily equal delusional. As long as you take the time to understand why you are paranoid and find out if it has any basis or not, then you are doing the logical thing. I agree; if you are running around screaming that aliens are probing you, but, you do nothing to try and document or prove it, or your documentation shows nothing so you claim the evidence was manipulated, you might be delusional or drugged.
My opponent says to imagine being a POW ... well, that is something I cannot. What I can give you is what I saw in my father leftover from serving in Vietnam. He would have flashbacks. He can't sleep for more than an hour or two at a time. Any noises wake him up. There was even a time when I came home from school early and I was met with a gun because he was in a flashback and thought the enemy was coming. He snapped out when he got a good look at my face, and that was a rare occurrence ... but his sleep to this day is not the same. We have a local called sun man. He looks up towards the sun thinking the helicopters are coming to pick him up from 'Nam and walks around in army style clothes. If these are people who only served in the jungles, how much more affected would a POW be? Again, I cannot fathom the permanent effects. Manchurian candidate indeed.
Ah, but let us remember that mind-control doesn't need pain as a reinforcer. One of the best methods is to use something that exists in all ... FEAR. This is the main weapon used today. A color coded alert chart that has no level where there is no threat, no matter what, there is always danger. Watch out, someone’s travel shampoo might be a bomb. They can strike any time, any where. This method is working too. A bridge collapses ... people jump to terrorism. A pipe bursts, was that a bomb? No, an old steam pipe. Watch out, someone was irresponsible with a gun; you better give up that 2nd amendment right to defend yourself bearing arms and forming militias that can stand up against a corrupt government.
Fear is the primary weapon today. All the other methods are just supplemental. Any one of them used alone cannot work very well, but when you add them all up in small amounts, the effect is the same. I don't have enough room to fully do this side of the debate justice. 5500 characters run out fast. I could show you line by line examples of the definitions of mind-control, but space doesn't allow it. I must hope that the reader takes some initiative and puts together some of it for themselves, from what they have seen. In fact, this should prove it more, if you can come to the conclusion on your own.
I will leave off that propaganda is under the definition of both persuasion and mind-control.
My opponent says it is persuasion, but, isn't persuasion a form of mind control? To think all forms of mind control must be negative or abusive is a fallacy. I hate to admit it, but I myself have used persuasive tactics to control and manipulate others in my past (which coincidently supports my last debate's stance). We all know the statement, 'you catch more flies with honey than vinegar' ... you control more minds without being the punisher than the direct source of torture and violence. Persuasion is coercion without the threat.
Yes, we all have free will, but, if the majority of our information is loaded, then you have free will to choose where you get the same information, or to completely shut it out. If you were to study the definitions of mind-control, I am sure anyone of the readers can find most of that applies to the majority of our news in the past 6 years.
The president's approval rating has nothing to do with the bigger picture. Look at how heavily debated the president of Iran's statements are. A mistranslation used for an agenda is still brought up as fact, and has to be refuted by giving the proper translation and put into context ... and even if they do accept the proper translation, the anger is so strong, it doesn't matter. We have members here, despite how well of critical thinkers the majority are ... talking about nuclear weapons like toys against people we don't have any constitutional right to attack.
I find it amusing that my opponent considers the Nazis losing the war to mean the mind-control failed. In fact, it succeeded against its own nation, just because the nations they took up arms with didn't submit, doesn't make the mind-control a failure ... and it did destroy that nation and its people for a long time.
With an example from my opponent's post ... he tries to paint those who have different opinions and are willing to use their 1st amendment right as nut-cases ... which in itself is an example of how his mind has been controlled! It is our right and our duty to point out injustices and peacefully protest with signs. Would you lock up anti-war protesters? What about the UAW strikes? Are they not crazy for going on strike against a company that the average worker's pay is close to $30/hour, while their company is suffering declines in the market? No, they are voicing their opinion, not matter how unpopular. That IS the freedom and democracy that is being slowly manipulated in the minds of the people as being ridiculous.
I will quote a song by Kurt Cobain from Nirvana 'Just because your paranoid, doesn't mean they're not after you' ... Paranoia doesn't necessarily equal delusional. As long as you take the time to understand why you are paranoid and find out if it has any basis or not, then you are doing the logical thing. I agree; if you are running around screaming that aliens are probing you, but, you do nothing to try and document or prove it, or your documentation shows nothing so you claim the evidence was manipulated, you might be delusional or drugged.
My opponent says to imagine being a POW ... well, that is something I cannot. What I can give you is what I saw in my father leftover from serving in Vietnam. He would have flashbacks. He can't sleep for more than an hour or two at a time. Any noises wake him up. There was even a time when I came home from school early and I was met with a gun because he was in a flashback and thought the enemy was coming. He snapped out when he got a good look at my face, and that was a rare occurrence ... but his sleep to this day is not the same. We have a local called sun man. He looks up towards the sun thinking the helicopters are coming to pick him up from 'Nam and walks around in army style clothes. If these are people who only served in the jungles, how much more affected would a POW be? Again, I cannot fathom the permanent effects. Manchurian candidate indeed.
Ah, but let us remember that mind-control doesn't need pain as a reinforcer. One of the best methods is to use something that exists in all ... FEAR. This is the main weapon used today. A color coded alert chart that has no level where there is no threat, no matter what, there is always danger. Watch out, someone’s travel shampoo might be a bomb. They can strike any time, any where. This method is working too. A bridge collapses ... people jump to terrorism. A pipe bursts, was that a bomb? No, an old steam pipe. Watch out, someone was irresponsible with a gun; you better give up that 2nd amendment right to defend yourself bearing arms and forming militias that can stand up against a corrupt government.
Fear is the primary weapon today. All the other methods are just supplemental. Any one of them used alone cannot work very well, but when you add them all up in small amounts, the effect is the same. I don't have enough room to fully do this side of the debate justice. 5500 characters run out fast. I could show you line by line examples of the definitions of mind-control, but space doesn't allow it. I must hope that the reader takes some initiative and puts together some of it for themselves, from what they have seen. In fact, this should prove it more, if you can come to the conclusion on your own.
I will leave off that propaganda is under the definition of both persuasion and mind-control.
The Souls Rebellion
The wikipedia-source my opponent referred to in his last post has as one of its opening statements "This page contains unverified claims". Lovely, isnt it? I thank my opponent for posting sources in my favour.
Also, equating marketing-tactics with mind-control is a far-stretch. Are we to label the CIA-led MKUltra Project was a "marketing tactic" or "persuasion"? I dont think so.
But lets not mince words and instead get to the heart of this debate, its meaning and in which way it may be of service to the ats-reader.
In essence my opponent argues that mind-control will take away democracy. I take it democracy is here defined as "freedom of speech", "freedom of thought", "right to vote", multiple-party-system, and so on. I take it that mind-control is defined as outside forces having control over ones mind so that freedom of thought, human rights, etc. no longer apply.
It therefore follows that I will argue the following position: We will continue to have freedom of thought, freedom of speech, a multiple-party system, debates, different views, and a comparitevely free country and so on.
The barometric question of this debate is: Which is more likely?
Due to the following reasons it is more likely that in the near to mid-term future we will continue to have freedom of thought, freedom of speech, multiple choices, different views and a comparitavely free country:
1. Internet & The Information Age
We have entered a new age of Information in which the populace can educate itself at speeds unthinkable only 20 years ago. The very existence of this VAST RESOURCE OF INFORMATION AND DIFFERENT VIEWPOINTS makes it extremely unlikely that theres any way back to the dark ages of consensus-conformity of information.
2. General Worldwide Agreement on what is Right and Wrong
Never before in the History of Mankind have Nations been as close as they are now. A few conflicts remain: The religious conflict of muslims, christians and jews, the China-Russia-US race to be a superpower, fights for oil and resources. But in general we have, as a humanity and by the charters of the U.N. defined that oppression, killing and war are, in general, WRONG. Any nation who engages in such acts (including the U.S.) is FROWNED UPON by the majority. How likely is it that a country will ever again be allowed to exercise complete mind-control on its populace? North Korea might be one of the last examples of this we ever see.
3. Human Nature strives toward freedom and growth
No matter if you call it "soul", or "spirit" or "human nature" or "will"...there is something inherent within humans that rebells against oppression. There are billions of curious, peering eyes that look at what is going on in the world today. I trust my fellow humans to get their act together and continue to strive for freedom. To assume yet another mind-control-scenario would mean that nothing was learned from Nazism and Communism. Actually my opponents claims assume that people are inhrently stupid and weak and do not strive for freedom and growth.
If you want to know the future of this world, look at yourself:
Can you choose what to think? YES.
Can you choose where to go? YES.
Can you choose what to look at? YES.
Can you choose what to listen to? YES.
Can you choose who to support? YES.
Do you see a world in which many different belief-systems are debating? YES.
Are you mind-controlled? NO.
The wikipedia-source my opponent referred to in his last post has as one of its opening statements "This page contains unverified claims". Lovely, isnt it? I thank my opponent for posting sources in my favour.
Also, equating marketing-tactics with mind-control is a far-stretch. Are we to label the CIA-led MKUltra Project was a "marketing tactic" or "persuasion"? I dont think so.
But lets not mince words and instead get to the heart of this debate, its meaning and in which way it may be of service to the ats-reader.
In essence my opponent argues that mind-control will take away democracy. I take it democracy is here defined as "freedom of speech", "freedom of thought", "right to vote", multiple-party-system, and so on. I take it that mind-control is defined as outside forces having control over ones mind so that freedom of thought, human rights, etc. no longer apply.
It therefore follows that I will argue the following position: We will continue to have freedom of thought, freedom of speech, a multiple-party system, debates, different views, and a comparitevely free country and so on.
The barometric question of this debate is: Which is more likely?
Due to the following reasons it is more likely that in the near to mid-term future we will continue to have freedom of thought, freedom of speech, multiple choices, different views and a comparitavely free country:
1. Internet & The Information Age
We have entered a new age of Information in which the populace can educate itself at speeds unthinkable only 20 years ago. The very existence of this VAST RESOURCE OF INFORMATION AND DIFFERENT VIEWPOINTS makes it extremely unlikely that theres any way back to the dark ages of consensus-conformity of information.
2. General Worldwide Agreement on what is Right and Wrong
Never before in the History of Mankind have Nations been as close as they are now. A few conflicts remain: The religious conflict of muslims, christians and jews, the China-Russia-US race to be a superpower, fights for oil and resources. But in general we have, as a humanity and by the charters of the U.N. defined that oppression, killing and war are, in general, WRONG. Any nation who engages in such acts (including the U.S.) is FROWNED UPON by the majority. How likely is it that a country will ever again be allowed to exercise complete mind-control on its populace? North Korea might be one of the last examples of this we ever see.
3. Human Nature strives toward freedom and growth
No matter if you call it "soul", or "spirit" or "human nature" or "will"...there is something inherent within humans that rebells against oppression. There are billions of curious, peering eyes that look at what is going on in the world today. I trust my fellow humans to get their act together and continue to strive for freedom. To assume yet another mind-control-scenario would mean that nothing was learned from Nazism and Communism. Actually my opponents claims assume that people are inhrently stupid and weak and do not strive for freedom and growth.
If you want to know the future of this world, look at yourself:
Can you choose what to think? YES.
Can you choose where to go? YES.
Can you choose what to look at? YES.
Can you choose what to listen to? YES.
Can you choose who to support? YES.
Do you see a world in which many different belief-systems are debating? YES.
Are you mind-controlled? NO.
Yes, my link may contain unverified claims, but, that doesn't negate the models and methods listed out.
I asked for the readers to go and seek out the truth for themselves. I did not push my theory, although, I do find that when you read the 'theoretical' ways of exhibiting mind control, the readers will find that they match what they see on television.
I have enough faith in the readers to know I wasn't referring to the commercials, but the news and how it is presented ... not to their favorite episode of 'Friends' or 'Aqua Teen Hunger Force'. So no, I was not using 'marketing tactics' as a comparison to mind control techniques or relating their methods to the CIA projects ... that is another topic for debate altogether
Democracy. It is more than just our rights and freedoms. It is a due process. My frame of reference is the United States of America. A democratic republic. We the people use a democratic procedure to elect representatives to work as public servants. A system that was never intended to rely on only two parties. A system that never intended a person to be forced to rely on funds from lobbyists and raise millions of dollars just to be placed on the ballot of every state. I wonder why our politicians are bought and they sell their dignity. How many third party primaries have you seen national coverage of? How many of the candidates get equal coverage? How many questions get re-directed, never answered, or not asked ... then pushed aside and forgotten? We had an election where MY vote didn't count, I live in FL. What happened to my verified recount? Right, the supreme court voted for me.
What mind control does is give you the illusion that this system is still working. It creates the image by tweaking your thought processes to where you elect the people they wish. You want the things they want. Their agenda becomes your agenda. It is much like a magician. They can fool you while you are watching ... slight of hand, distraction, and illusion. You believe you have the freedom of choice, but your choices are like that between almond joy and mounds ... they are pretty much the same; just one is a bit nutty.
Again, my opponent slipped. Even in their argument, they projected only the near to mid-term future, which means they see the pattern of freedom and democracy slipping away, just at a much slower pace than some may argue. Why would the powers that be need to be so near-sighted? You are only limiting their goals. Look at the names that have been consistently in the mix for a long time ... generations. Bush (dating back to WWII), Rockefellers, Clintons. Coincidences? How many 'coincidences' do you need before it becomes a pattern? How many years and generations must be involved before suspicions are considered valid?
If total control is desired, they will bring it on slowly. For true submission, there is no other way. You get the people to ask for their rights to be suspended 'for safety'.
If you cannot tell already, they do as they please at this moment. The perfect example is; Iraqis want blackwater out of their country. To even hesitate to contemplate shows total lack of respect. The people living there don't want them, they are a private firm, and they should be gone. It is that simple, but, not if they are there for purposes they wish not to divulge.
Let me counter some of the points made by my opponent ...
1. Internet. We all know that some countries have bans on what they allow in. This is a very reason certain subjects on ATS are taboo and the topics are closed and/or deleted, even if they are news stories. This way those countries still get ATS. Our own troops, serving for freedom, were banned from watching YouTube or visiting MySpace. If they restrict our troops who serve the country honorably, what would stop them from one day deciding to censor the citizens? How do we know some things are not already censored? If you never know about it, how can you know you are missing out on it?
2. It is funny the points made here, because, they are opposite to what is happening. States that killing and war are wrong, yet, my country is at war ... on terrorism, on drugs, has 1.5 million troops on foreign soil. We don't sign treaties for a cleaner environment (if not to just be responsible), we violate current treaties. He even lists things for me! Thank you. Do nukes mean mind control? Why else would you mention N. Korea? The U.N. has nothing to do with covert mind control by a nation over its own people, unless you have some information that would aide my side of the debate
3. I wish I could agree, honestly ... but if you look through the past and current affairs of humans ... conflict, war, discrimination, and genocide ... the problem isn't being stupid and weak ... it is greed, power, corruption and what it can do to the majority when it is in control. They keep people divided and segregated, by whatever means necessary, since when we band together, we are strong and collectively smart. They have people fighting over opinions. If you agree, you are with us; if you don't you are the enemy. Look a how France was treated until recently. 'Freedom' fries? Just because they had their doubts about WMDs, that weren't there!
Finally, you may be able to say yes to most of those questions ... but who controls most of the available information? Remember the protesters were laughed at on Fox, as if standing up for your beliefs are foolish. A little at a time, you believe.
I asked for the readers to go and seek out the truth for themselves. I did not push my theory, although, I do find that when you read the 'theoretical' ways of exhibiting mind control, the readers will find that they match what they see on television.
I have enough faith in the readers to know I wasn't referring to the commercials, but the news and how it is presented ... not to their favorite episode of 'Friends' or 'Aqua Teen Hunger Force'. So no, I was not using 'marketing tactics' as a comparison to mind control techniques or relating their methods to the CIA projects ... that is another topic for debate altogether
Democracy. It is more than just our rights and freedoms. It is a due process. My frame of reference is the United States of America. A democratic republic. We the people use a democratic procedure to elect representatives to work as public servants. A system that was never intended to rely on only two parties. A system that never intended a person to be forced to rely on funds from lobbyists and raise millions of dollars just to be placed on the ballot of every state. I wonder why our politicians are bought and they sell their dignity. How many third party primaries have you seen national coverage of? How many of the candidates get equal coverage? How many questions get re-directed, never answered, or not asked ... then pushed aside and forgotten? We had an election where MY vote didn't count, I live in FL. What happened to my verified recount? Right, the supreme court voted for me.
What mind control does is give you the illusion that this system is still working. It creates the image by tweaking your thought processes to where you elect the people they wish. You want the things they want. Their agenda becomes your agenda. It is much like a magician. They can fool you while you are watching ... slight of hand, distraction, and illusion. You believe you have the freedom of choice, but your choices are like that between almond joy and mounds ... they are pretty much the same; just one is a bit nutty.
Again, my opponent slipped. Even in their argument, they projected only the near to mid-term future, which means they see the pattern of freedom and democracy slipping away, just at a much slower pace than some may argue. Why would the powers that be need to be so near-sighted? You are only limiting their goals. Look at the names that have been consistently in the mix for a long time ... generations. Bush (dating back to WWII), Rockefellers, Clintons. Coincidences? How many 'coincidences' do you need before it becomes a pattern? How many years and generations must be involved before suspicions are considered valid?
If total control is desired, they will bring it on slowly. For true submission, there is no other way. You get the people to ask for their rights to be suspended 'for safety'.
If you cannot tell already, they do as they please at this moment. The perfect example is; Iraqis want blackwater out of their country. To even hesitate to contemplate shows total lack of respect. The people living there don't want them, they are a private firm, and they should be gone. It is that simple, but, not if they are there for purposes they wish not to divulge.
Let me counter some of the points made by my opponent ...
1. Internet. We all know that some countries have bans on what they allow in. This is a very reason certain subjects on ATS are taboo and the topics are closed and/or deleted, even if they are news stories. This way those countries still get ATS. Our own troops, serving for freedom, were banned from watching YouTube or visiting MySpace. If they restrict our troops who serve the country honorably, what would stop them from one day deciding to censor the citizens? How do we know some things are not already censored? If you never know about it, how can you know you are missing out on it?
2. It is funny the points made here, because, they are opposite to what is happening. States that killing and war are wrong, yet, my country is at war ... on terrorism, on drugs, has 1.5 million troops on foreign soil. We don't sign treaties for a cleaner environment (if not to just be responsible), we violate current treaties. He even lists things for me! Thank you. Do nukes mean mind control? Why else would you mention N. Korea? The U.N. has nothing to do with covert mind control by a nation over its own people, unless you have some information that would aide my side of the debate
3. I wish I could agree, honestly ... but if you look through the past and current affairs of humans ... conflict, war, discrimination, and genocide ... the problem isn't being stupid and weak ... it is greed, power, corruption and what it can do to the majority when it is in control. They keep people divided and segregated, by whatever means necessary, since when we band together, we are strong and collectively smart. They have people fighting over opinions. If you agree, you are with us; if you don't you are the enemy. Look a how France was treated until recently. 'Freedom' fries? Just because they had their doubts about WMDs, that weren't there!
Finally, you may be able to say yes to most of those questions ... but who controls most of the available information? Remember the protesters were laughed at on Fox, as if standing up for your beliefs are foolish. A little at a time, you believe.
They only thing they cant control is your mind
Dear Opponent,
congratulations to a tightly held debate. I am enjoying this a lot.
Dear Reader,
the very fact that my opponent can make the observations he made and see through all the BS of this world...and not only that, but can even post it for all to read and debate...is the strongest piece of evidence that mind-control is not likely to happen on a mass-scale.
This is why he has offered no proof whatsoever that would hold up in court. Instead words are minced and meanings twisted. You, the reader, seeing through my and my opponents word-plays means you are not mind controlled either.
Two examples: 1. He says "my opponent admits that mind control exists!" as if this were an advantage to his side, although our discussion is not about whether mind control exists or not. 2. My statement "I see democracy in mid-term-future" was twisted to mean "I dont see it in long-term future". What I actually meant by that statement was: I dont pretend to be an all-knowing prophet of long-term-future events. I stick to the debate topic by merely saying: Mass-scale mind control is not LIKELY to happen in the future. Its the LIKELY that is the debate here.
Go through the entire debate and you will discover many instances of attempted "mind-control" by both sides of the debate...but you are not that easily fooled, right?
I agree with most of what was posted by my opponent. I also agree that it is important to remain aware of plots, conspiracies, manipulation. The very act of remaining aware and discussing and looking into mass-mind-control-attempts prevents them.
I do not feel that my opponent convincingly refuted my point on the Internet being a powerful tool of information and awareness to prevent mass-scale mind control. Neither will he be able to refute the following which is common knowledge and fact:
Do you realize how many…
agencies, organisations, eyes, societies, religions, representatives, leaders, business people, journalists, movements, websites, officials, senators, researchers, protestors, foreign officials, media, foreign media…
…how many eyes are looking at each other, competing with each other, checking on each other? So many that the idea of a mass-scale-mind-control-programm becomes not only UNLIKELY but nearly impossible.
We have established that mind-control exists, we have established that some forms of persuasion and media could be interpreted as “mind control” (although my views differ slightly). And we have established that it is unlikely to be effective on a mass-scale due to the reasons mentioned in my last post and this one.
When looking at this thread in retrospect, the reader will see that the case for mass-scale mind control amounts to…nothing. If media-persuasion-tactics are to be equated with mind-control, then there will always be a counter-mind-control and another counter to counter that. We live in a country of free debate…to refute this fact is delusional. Free debate implies that mind-control is not working.
My opponent brings forth Nazi-Germany as evidence of mass-scale-mind-control. But even in Nazi-Germany there were plenty of citizens who did not conform, if not in action, then in thought. They might have said “yeah, yeah”, but THOUGHT something entirely different.
By which we come to one of my final arguments against mass-scale-mind-control. MIND-control is THOUGHT-control. Thoughts cannot be controlled by an outside force. Even if we loose all of our freedoms, our thoughts remain free. Even if forced into submission by an outside force, we can still think whatever we want. Nobody can force us to think in certain ways.
My mind can be influenced (if I allow it to)
My mind can be persuaded (if I am tired)
My mind can be convinced (by facts or experience)
But never can my mind be entirely controlled by others.
My mind is mine.
The countless examples my opponent brings forward for mass-mind-control are actually a sign of diversity. Conflict and Disagreement is actually a sign that diverse opinions and lots of reason for debate and discussion exist. A sign that we have problems that need to be solved. Mass-scale-mind-control would not have this diversity. It would have a lot of conformity,, and so-called "peace". But I hope this is not the kind of "peace" we are striving for. Id rather have a few international conflicts than a dumbed down conforming all-the-same unquestioning, unrebelling populace
If there is any threat to democracy then it would be the Tyrant or Dicatator and not a "mind-controlled populace".
Dear Opponent,
congratulations to a tightly held debate. I am enjoying this a lot.
Dear Reader,
the very fact that my opponent can make the observations he made and see through all the BS of this world...and not only that, but can even post it for all to read and debate...is the strongest piece of evidence that mind-control is not likely to happen on a mass-scale.
This is why he has offered no proof whatsoever that would hold up in court. Instead words are minced and meanings twisted. You, the reader, seeing through my and my opponents word-plays means you are not mind controlled either.
Two examples: 1. He says "my opponent admits that mind control exists!" as if this were an advantage to his side, although our discussion is not about whether mind control exists or not. 2. My statement "I see democracy in mid-term-future" was twisted to mean "I dont see it in long-term future". What I actually meant by that statement was: I dont pretend to be an all-knowing prophet of long-term-future events. I stick to the debate topic by merely saying: Mass-scale mind control is not LIKELY to happen in the future. Its the LIKELY that is the debate here.
Go through the entire debate and you will discover many instances of attempted "mind-control" by both sides of the debate...but you are not that easily fooled, right?
I agree with most of what was posted by my opponent. I also agree that it is important to remain aware of plots, conspiracies, manipulation. The very act of remaining aware and discussing and looking into mass-mind-control-attempts prevents them.
I do not feel that my opponent convincingly refuted my point on the Internet being a powerful tool of information and awareness to prevent mass-scale mind control. Neither will he be able to refute the following which is common knowledge and fact:
Do you realize how many…
agencies, organisations, eyes, societies, religions, representatives, leaders, business people, journalists, movements, websites, officials, senators, researchers, protestors, foreign officials, media, foreign media…
…how many eyes are looking at each other, competing with each other, checking on each other? So many that the idea of a mass-scale-mind-control-programm becomes not only UNLIKELY but nearly impossible.
We have established that mind-control exists, we have established that some forms of persuasion and media could be interpreted as “mind control” (although my views differ slightly). And we have established that it is unlikely to be effective on a mass-scale due to the reasons mentioned in my last post and this one.
When looking at this thread in retrospect, the reader will see that the case for mass-scale mind control amounts to…nothing. If media-persuasion-tactics are to be equated with mind-control, then there will always be a counter-mind-control and another counter to counter that. We live in a country of free debate…to refute this fact is delusional. Free debate implies that mind-control is not working.
My opponent brings forth Nazi-Germany as evidence of mass-scale-mind-control. But even in Nazi-Germany there were plenty of citizens who did not conform, if not in action, then in thought. They might have said “yeah, yeah”, but THOUGHT something entirely different.
By which we come to one of my final arguments against mass-scale-mind-control. MIND-control is THOUGHT-control. Thoughts cannot be controlled by an outside force. Even if we loose all of our freedoms, our thoughts remain free. Even if forced into submission by an outside force, we can still think whatever we want. Nobody can force us to think in certain ways.
My mind can be influenced (if I allow it to)
My mind can be persuaded (if I am tired)
My mind can be convinced (by facts or experience)
But never can my mind be entirely controlled by others.
My mind is mine.
The countless examples my opponent brings forward for mass-mind-control are actually a sign of diversity. Conflict and Disagreement is actually a sign that diverse opinions and lots of reason for debate and discussion exist. A sign that we have problems that need to be solved. Mass-scale-mind-control would not have this diversity. It would have a lot of conformity,, and so-called "peace". But I hope this is not the kind of "peace" we are striving for. Id rather have a few international conflicts than a dumbed down conforming all-the-same unquestioning, unrebelling populace
If there is any threat to democracy then it would be the Tyrant or Dicatator and not a "mind-controlled populace".
This debate seems over too soon. I am sad this is my conclusion, for I have only 3500 characters this time; I already felt there wasn't enough.
Through mind-control ... a real and likely threat to democracy is made. Whatever form it takes is irrelevant; it is the end result that matters.
If it is inaction despite knowing the injustice, then you have been successfully neutralized. It makes no difference if it is fear, apathy, or indifference.
If you act on their behalf, it could be for nationalism, blind hate, defense, preemptive protection ... as long as their goals are being realized.
I know that the people of this site are above average citizens. Most think ahead of the curve and can cipher through the rhetoric. In fact, we continually help each other do so.
The majority trust in the media. They believe in the news. They trust strangers more than the people in their own city. Add to that, most people don't know the capital of their own state. They cannot tell you the names of the first and last five presidents. They can tell you why Britney doesn't have her kids and how many days Paris spent in jail.
When people stop thinking for themselves and rely on external sources without verification ... how easily they can be fooled. They no longer have the capacity for critical thinking. I understand. They are worried about affording health and dental for their child. They are trying to figure out what their homeowner's insurance actually covers when they need it. Such wonderful prey.
Life itself has become distracting, and our focus is no longer on democracy, but getting through another day. How much time is spent on voting records of the people in D.C.? What about earmarks? How many people did you tell about the presidential directive and they already heard about it? Why are people not appalled at the fact the current administration is violating checks and balances set forth in the constitution? How many people are writing their congress complaining that they voted them in and they have reneged on the promises?
It is the illusion of democracy that we have. We are told to choose a side when the coin is flipped, but it is a two-headed coin. We are told these people are 'officials' now, not public servants. They are our 'leaders', not our representatives.
Our freedoms are slowly being whittled upon, just slow enough not to cause a disturbance. With each event, a push is made. Our youth grow up with police in the schools, made to conform and agree. I don't have room to cite personal examples, or I would. We hear terms like 'lock-down' and 'less-than-lethal'. College students (unarmed) arrested for posing a question or being in a library but forgot their ID. Babies are being hit with mace, pregnant women a taser in the stomach.
My opponent would have you believe that everything is fine. Just take a deep breath and smile, nothing to see here folks. Tell yourself that enough times, you might just feel comfortable. Remember, AQ is defeated, now we just have to watch out for 'nuclear' Iran, that evil Saddam is gone, we should've never put him in control and gave him weapons. What about Afghanistan and OBL? -cough, cue smoke and mirrors- Don't worry, Israel just attacked a nuclear facility in Syria ... btw, who is going to win the World Series (of only american teams).
That is right, as long as you believe they have our best interests in mind, all will be well. Remember, 'america's got talent'
Through mind-control ... a real and likely threat to democracy is made. Whatever form it takes is irrelevant; it is the end result that matters.
If it is inaction despite knowing the injustice, then you have been successfully neutralized. It makes no difference if it is fear, apathy, or indifference.
If you act on their behalf, it could be for nationalism, blind hate, defense, preemptive protection ... as long as their goals are being realized.
I know that the people of this site are above average citizens. Most think ahead of the curve and can cipher through the rhetoric. In fact, we continually help each other do so.
The majority trust in the media. They believe in the news. They trust strangers more than the people in their own city. Add to that, most people don't know the capital of their own state. They cannot tell you the names of the first and last five presidents. They can tell you why Britney doesn't have her kids and how many days Paris spent in jail.
When people stop thinking for themselves and rely on external sources without verification ... how easily they can be fooled. They no longer have the capacity for critical thinking. I understand. They are worried about affording health and dental for their child. They are trying to figure out what their homeowner's insurance actually covers when they need it. Such wonderful prey.
Life itself has become distracting, and our focus is no longer on democracy, but getting through another day. How much time is spent on voting records of the people in D.C.? What about earmarks? How many people did you tell about the presidential directive and they already heard about it? Why are people not appalled at the fact the current administration is violating checks and balances set forth in the constitution? How many people are writing their congress complaining that they voted them in and they have reneged on the promises?
It is the illusion of democracy that we have. We are told to choose a side when the coin is flipped, but it is a two-headed coin. We are told these people are 'officials' now, not public servants. They are our 'leaders', not our representatives.
Our freedoms are slowly being whittled upon, just slow enough not to cause a disturbance. With each event, a push is made. Our youth grow up with police in the schools, made to conform and agree. I don't have room to cite personal examples, or I would. We hear terms like 'lock-down' and 'less-than-lethal'. College students (unarmed) arrested for posing a question or being in a library but forgot their ID. Babies are being hit with mace, pregnant women a taser in the stomach.
My opponent would have you believe that everything is fine. Just take a deep breath and smile, nothing to see here folks. Tell yourself that enough times, you might just feel comfortable. Remember, AQ is defeated, now we just have to watch out for 'nuclear' Iran, that evil Saddam is gone, we should've never put him in control and gave him weapons. What about Afghanistan and OBL? -cough, cue smoke and mirrors- Don't worry, Israel just attacked a nuclear facility in Syria ... btw, who is going to win the World Series (of only american teams).
That is right, as long as you believe they have our best interests in mind, all will be well. Remember, 'america's got talent'
Summary of Facts & An Excercise
When starting this debate I admit that I was actually hoping for my opponent to uncover some interesting new information that points to evidence of Mind-Control on a nationwide scale. This did not happen though. Instead the only source he referred to was a wikipedia-link. In addition, he cited a few events from recent news as "evidence" of mass-scale mind-control. While I agree with him that we live in challenging and difficult times, the points argued do not suffice to build a theory of doom and gloom in the sense of mass-mind-control.
A summary of facts for my case
* In 1987 the American Psychological Association denied the credibility of Mind-Control-Theories (as brought forward by Margaret Singer) after extensive expert research (Source: Abovementioned Link)
* These Mind-Control-Theories were also repeatedly excluded from legal trials (Same source)
* The CIA has admitted to attempting mind-control in Projects such as MKUltra. The reason they admitted to the attempts is because they didnt prove effective, which is why MKUltra was abandoned in 1974
* Democracy, which is constitutionally safeguarded and has proven comparitively effective over many decades, will likely continue and even grow stronger. And even IF there is a threat to democracy, it is unlikely that that threat should be mind-control. More likely threats to democracy are vote-fraud, conspiracy, tyranny, coups and so forth.
* The emergence of Internet & The Information Age make it nearly impossible to control information in a way that would be required for mind control
* Most of the "evidence" cited by my opponent are not examples of mind-control but examples of marketing-tactics.
* We are free to choose what to think, what to believe and what to invest our attention in. Denying this is denying what makes us human.
* In 1998 the Enquete Commission issued its report on "So-called Sects and Psychogroups" in Germany. Reviewing Hassan's BITE model, the report said that:[10] Thus, the milieu control identified by Hassan, consisting of behavioural control, mental control, emotional control and information control cannot, in every case and as a matter of principle, be characterised as "manipulative". Control of these areas of action is an inevitable component of social interactions in a group or community. The social control that is always associated with intense commitment to a group must therefore be clearly distinguished from the exertion of intentional, methodical influence for the express purpose of manipulation. (Source: same as above)
* The news events my opponent refers to have nothing to do with mind-control but with conflicting opinions among politicians. The mere existence of a site like ATS is evidence that we are not all mind-controlled sheep. In fact, not even MOST of us are. According to several surveys, the amount of people who believe that the "official version of 9/11 events" are inconsistent, faulty or suspicious ranges between 25-60%! (Source: Hundreds of Polls found throughout the media and internet). Hollywood produces hundreds of conspiracy-related or politically critical films every year, seen by millions. This is hardly evidence of a dumb, weak and "unknowing" populace. ATS alone has Millions of Members...not to mention Millions of additional information sources. In the light of these facts, would pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez someone tell me how nationwide mind-control is supposed to undermine democracy?
These facts, and all other evidence cited in earlier posts do make it quite clear that it is indeed highly unlikely that mind-control (not other threats but MIND CONTROL) will do away with democracy. I would be genuinely surprised if the readers of this debate see it differently.
To End on a more Optimistic Note I would like to share an exercise with you with which you can train your ability not to be manipulated.
Anti-Manipulation-Exercise
1. Turn on the TV to a news channel. Listen to what is being said. Say out loud: "I dont know if this is true. It might be, but I cant say for sure until more facts are gathered and BOTH sides of the story are heard".
2. Turn on the TV to a news channel. While the newsspeaker is talking, turn your attention away from his hypnotic voice and the pictures to something else in your surroundings. Pick an object and stay focussed on it no matter what the speaker is saying, no matter what the pictures are showing.
3. Read an article in the newspaper or internet. Then, look for an article that contradicts the opinion of the first article. ONLY THEN form an opinion.
4. Choose something you would like to think about next. Then think about that deliberately. Imagine it.
5. Notice when a figure known as an authority or leader is using words, symbols, pictures and rhetoric that either induce great fear or great desire in the audience. Remain aware of how fear/desire mechanisms are used to manipulate.
Thank you.
And thanks to my opponent for the tough debate.
And thanks to Vagabond for setting it all up.
When starting this debate I admit that I was actually hoping for my opponent to uncover some interesting new information that points to evidence of Mind-Control on a nationwide scale. This did not happen though. Instead the only source he referred to was a wikipedia-link. In addition, he cited a few events from recent news as "evidence" of mass-scale mind-control. While I agree with him that we live in challenging and difficult times, the points argued do not suffice to build a theory of doom and gloom in the sense of mass-mind-control.
A summary of facts for my case
* In 1987 the American Psychological Association denied the credibility of Mind-Control-Theories (as brought forward by Margaret Singer) after extensive expert research (Source: Abovementioned Link)
* These Mind-Control-Theories were also repeatedly excluded from legal trials (Same source)
* The CIA has admitted to attempting mind-control in Projects such as MKUltra. The reason they admitted to the attempts is because they didnt prove effective, which is why MKUltra was abandoned in 1974
* Democracy, which is constitutionally safeguarded and has proven comparitively effective over many decades, will likely continue and even grow stronger. And even IF there is a threat to democracy, it is unlikely that that threat should be mind-control. More likely threats to democracy are vote-fraud, conspiracy, tyranny, coups and so forth.
* The emergence of Internet & The Information Age make it nearly impossible to control information in a way that would be required for mind control
* Most of the "evidence" cited by my opponent are not examples of mind-control but examples of marketing-tactics.
* We are free to choose what to think, what to believe and what to invest our attention in. Denying this is denying what makes us human.
* In 1998 the Enquete Commission issued its report on "So-called Sects and Psychogroups" in Germany. Reviewing Hassan's BITE model, the report said that:[10] Thus, the milieu control identified by Hassan, consisting of behavioural control, mental control, emotional control and information control cannot, in every case and as a matter of principle, be characterised as "manipulative". Control of these areas of action is an inevitable component of social interactions in a group or community. The social control that is always associated with intense commitment to a group must therefore be clearly distinguished from the exertion of intentional, methodical influence for the express purpose of manipulation. (Source: same as above)
* The news events my opponent refers to have nothing to do with mind-control but with conflicting opinions among politicians. The mere existence of a site like ATS is evidence that we are not all mind-controlled sheep. In fact, not even MOST of us are. According to several surveys, the amount of people who believe that the "official version of 9/11 events" are inconsistent, faulty or suspicious ranges between 25-60%! (Source: Hundreds of Polls found throughout the media and internet). Hollywood produces hundreds of conspiracy-related or politically critical films every year, seen by millions. This is hardly evidence of a dumb, weak and "unknowing" populace. ATS alone has Millions of Members...not to mention Millions of additional information sources. In the light of these facts, would pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez someone tell me how nationwide mind-control is supposed to undermine democracy?
These facts, and all other evidence cited in earlier posts do make it quite clear that it is indeed highly unlikely that mind-control (not other threats but MIND CONTROL) will do away with democracy. I would be genuinely surprised if the readers of this debate see it differently.
To End on a more Optimistic Note I would like to share an exercise with you with which you can train your ability not to be manipulated.
Anti-Manipulation-Exercise
1. Turn on the TV to a news channel. Listen to what is being said. Say out loud: "I dont know if this is true. It might be, but I cant say for sure until more facts are gathered and BOTH sides of the story are heard".
2. Turn on the TV to a news channel. While the newsspeaker is talking, turn your attention away from his hypnotic voice and the pictures to something else in your surroundings. Pick an object and stay focussed on it no matter what the speaker is saying, no matter what the pictures are showing.
3. Read an article in the newspaper or internet. Then, look for an article that contradicts the opinion of the first article. ONLY THEN form an opinion.
4. Choose something you would like to think about next. Then think about that deliberately. Imagine it.
5. Notice when a figure known as an authority or leader is using words, symbols, pictures and rhetoric that either induce great fear or great desire in the audience. Remain aware of how fear/desire mechanisms are used to manipulate.
Thank you.
And thanks to my opponent for the tough debate.
And thanks to Vagabond for setting it all up.
As of 2:04 PM Pacific Oct 20, the star count is 13-13 even.
The one judge has found in favor of Skyfloating, making the final count 18-13 in favor of Skyfloating.
The judge had this to say:
You've both done a tremendous job and deserve recognition as well for your dedication to the debate, which resulted in this debate being the first to conclude by a substantial margin. I believe we will see plenty of you both in future tournaments.
The one judge has found in favor of Skyfloating, making the final count 18-13 in favor of Skyfloating.
The judge had this to say:
While both opponents attacked the issue with intellect and enthusiasm, they both continuously missed opportunities to strike at the heart of the matter.
Freethinker based his argument on the supposition that mind control was and is happening all the time in the form of persuasion.
Skyfloating stuck to his guns more and easily dismissed Freethinkers position as just that, persuasion and not true mind control; the topic of the debate.
Freethinker spent far too much time arguing that it was in fact happening now. This was not the core of the debate. That it could happen, was all that Freethinker needed to show...
In his closing, Skyfloating was able to bring the debate together and substantiate his position referencing actual mindcontrol experiments and documentation.
As such, I feel the debate went to Skyfloating although this was a very well fought debate and it was close
You've both done a tremendous job and deserve recognition as well for your dedication to the debate, which resulted in this debate being the first to conclude by a substantial margin. I believe we will see plenty of you both in future tournaments.
new topics
-
The mysterious death of Aileen Conway
General Chit Chat: 2 hours ago -
Half-Life 2 is 20 Years Old - its Also Free on Steam until the 18th
Video Games: 6 hours ago -
Does the Trump win mean No More Taylor Swift??
Politicians & People: 10 hours ago
top topics
-
Don't cry do Cryo instead
General Chit Chat: 17 hours ago, 12 flags -
Does the Trump win mean No More Taylor Swift??
Politicians & People: 10 hours ago, 12 flags -
Trump-appointed judge blocks Biden administration overtime rule
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 12 hours ago, 8 flags -
The mysterious death of Aileen Conway
General Chit Chat: 2 hours ago, 5 flags -
Half-Life 2 is 20 Years Old - its Also Free on Steam until the 18th
Video Games: 6 hours ago, 1 flags
active topics
-
President-elect TRUMP Picks MATT GAETZ for his ATTORNEY GENERAL - High Level PANIC Ensues.
2024 Elections • 86 • : RickinVa -
President-Elect DONALD TRUMP's 2nd-Term Administration Takes Shape.
Political Ideology • 210 • : WeMustCare -
The mysterious death of Aileen Conway
General Chit Chat • 4 • : DAVID64 -
How can you defend yourself when the police will not tell you what you did?
Posse Comitatus • 90 • : WeMustCare -
Does the Trump win mean No More Taylor Swift??
Politicians & People • 47 • : Flyingclaydisk -
Russia Ukraine Update Thread - part 3
World War Three • 6813 • : Freeborn -
WATCH LIVE: US Congress hearing on UFOs, unidentified anomalous phenomena
Aliens and UFOs • 100 • : DaydreamerX -
Tariffs all around, Except for ...
Dreams & Predictions • 29 • : KnowItAllKnowNothin -
Mike Tyson returns 11-15-24
World Sports • 67 • : argentus -
The art of being offended
Social Issues and Civil Unrest • 52 • : argentus
4