Time Man of The Year

Originally posted by yeahright

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Y'all are funny.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

I'd like to know how did you become a moderator with this style. Take an example of Crakeur. At least he is defending his point (And personally I can agree with his points at some place as he explained them very well). But he is not insulting ATS members, because they have different point of view.

Although if people's vote doesn't count, then why do they asking it? TIME award has the same zero meaning as other awards in the 21st century. Most of them are rigged to push some agenda.

Adolf Hitler was also Times "Man of the Year". With that being said, who gives a crap? I haven't read an issue of Time since I was in a dentist waiting room in 1998.

i was watching the today show this morning getting ready for work, and the managing editor of Time magazine was on there, and he said that it was ultimately up to him who gets this title. he stated the board sit together with the correspondents and they listen to suggestions and 'hash it out', but in the end he has the say, so you are correct in believing your votes do not count... according to Richard Stengel

today.msnbc.msn.com...

i'm not sure how to embed this since it's not youtube...

The good thing that we can see here is that we can now pinpoint those companies that are clearly under the control of the government/illuminati. That will be Paypal, Mastercard, Visa, Time, Amazon. You can add more here.

Originally posted by yeahright

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Originally posted by Sentinel412
Although if people's vote doesn't count, then why do they asking it?

It's a POLL. As in, "the editors are going to name a Person of the Year, but we'd also like to know what our readers think". Then they show the results of the poll. How you can get something nefarious, disingenuous or conspiratorial out of that I have no idea, but I find the knee jerk reaction to it amusing.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

You may find it amusing, but do you know how can you learn it's completely rigged and the TPTB doesn't want even want people to discuss? When they're shutting down the forum at places like CNN which is reporting it. CNN is usually using open DisQus forums, but when a sensitive material is on the table, something rigged and fishy, they're using SoundOff forum, so they can censor everything. Right now, CNN Time's forum is working again with SoundOff instead of DisQus, so they can moderate every comment. So if you believe we're wrong, check the facts. Heavy censor is existing to stop people to even discuss this. If you check other media sites, the same goes there. If there is a topic what the TPTB doesn't want you to discuss, the forum is offline or accepting comments only after a brief censor. So much about free speech, right? But this is a sign where you know, what they're telling you via the media is rigged and manipulated.

BTW. If you find people's reaction and comments amusing, regardless you're a moderator, I'd like to welcome you on the conspiracy site, AboveTopSecret.com. Here, people are working on this way. Get used to it.

reply to post by yeahright

Everything is starting with little issues, little conspiracies. This is just a partial conspiracy to push an agenda further. But a lot of little conspiracy is equal with a big conspiracy. What Time is doing is simple mass manipulation, nothing more. They've chosen a known face, who actually did nothing in this year, other than he was on the front page of few newspapers, because there was a movie about him. Other then that, Zuckerberg, while I don't have anything against him, doesn't deserve this prize at all as he was a Celeberity in this year, but nothing else. But if TIME is giving award to Celebrities nowadays, well, okay, but tell this to the people when they're creating a big hype around the ultimate nothing. On this way Chuck Norris could be the Time of the year, because he also appeared million times on YouTube and people created a legend around him.

I must say that I'm slightly confused by this.

What exactly has Zuckerberg particularly done in 2010 to be awarded 'man of the year' ?

Facebook were already big in 2009, as they were for a few years before that.

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
I must say that I'm slightly confused by this.

What exactly has Zuckerberg particularly done in 2010 to be awarded 'man of the year' ?

He did nothing. He had a movie, he was a well known celebrity in this year, but that's all. But it seems TIME is giving celebrity awards nowadays. Well, it seems one more award what cannot be taken seriously (Movie awards, Game awards, Music awards are on the very same level nowadays.). But thanks to TIME, here is one more award that people can't take seriously anymore.

Originally posted by yeahright

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

reply to post by Sentinel412

 

You still don't get it.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

I believe you don't get it. Being in the TIME, be the TIME person of the year was a huge prestige in the past. Now it's just a Celebrity newspaper, nothing more. Please compare the old TIME person of the year with 2010. I believe you'll see the difference. The people of the past did something real great. Comparing to that Zuckerberg did nothing in this year to get this title. If he would win this title in 2006, I would say, okay. He deserves it. But in 2010, he did nothing at all.

Originally posted by yeahright

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

reply to post by Sentinel412

 

Then why do you care who they name or how they go about it?

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

Because I hate lies and mass manipulation. Plus it's making Zuckerberg less serious then what he is in the reality. It's just like the Nobel Prize for Obama what was also rigged to push his agenda further (Even without his knowledge as he also was surprised on that as the vote wast BEFORE he even became the President of the United States and had a chance to do anything which would explain that prize.).

ummm.. again, it doesn't matter anyways, poll, title, award, etc... no one ultimately made this decision other than Richard Stengel, managing editor of Time. his interview this morning with Matt Lauer clearly states that HE had the final say in it, so any polls, votes, etc. didn't have any effect in the end... it was one man's decision...

www.nbc.com...

Originally posted by InfaRedMan
TIMES chose a manipulative, sociopathic, megalomaniacal, narcissistic thief over a hero who is changing the world into a truthful, transparent democracy?

Wow! Just Wow!

IRM

edit on 15/12/10 by InfaRedMan because: (no reason given)

wait, a, huh?

I think both men fit that description.



This years choice is stupid though , I agree.

This is the same guy who made the comment regarding how he can use their information, and is purported to have hiested the essential concept, if not the actual code for this thing from his college buddies

Report: Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg Doesn’t Believe In Privacy

www.wired.com...
neither does the CIA, the FBI, the TSA, the DHS, the schools that use lap tops to spy on children in their bedrooms, google, ETC

Regardless of what you think about Assange, you can't really refute that he should have won.

I guess we can all be thankful that Lady Gaga didn't win.

Who?

Never heard of him.

Wow.