didn't realize that you were such a special snowflake about "your" disinformation (propaganda) thread. If it will soothe your hurt feelings and improve your self-esteem, I'm happy to quit posting in that thread.
I Am going to defend B@ffled here. Generally he seems like a pretty reasonable and open guy even though we disagree. You are what you eat, and sometimes you eat something you shouldn't have, and it gives you gas. No lasting harm.
You're a mind reader now? Not sure why that thread as anything to do with the rest of the discussion group. I'm commenting on your hit and run posting style. Where you make posts and then when others try to engage you in debate you make flippant responses and/or run away. Seems to me you are the snowflake hiding behind a computer keyboard. Unwilling to share your actual views and debate sincerely. Instead you talk about my self-esteem which I assure you isn't in trouble and also not your concern (but thanks for your interest).
well, that's certainly a substantive contribution!!! if you're trying to lead by example you're off to a bit of a slow start
I like this guy. The story as it was, as it was told to me probably over 15 years ago, was that a Russian defector testified in front of congress and that's where the 45 things came from. What's even more sad is that I half heartedly tried to look it up thru Snopes but didn't bother to dig much further because some did actually testify and it's on the record. Count on Major to quickly blow it up. Everyone could use some Major in their life...lol. He's pretty solid voice of sanity around here. He needs an app. WWMD ehhh I sound like a kiss ass. Major, you suck....j/k. There is no graceful way out of this is there?
Yeah. My point was that WE...both sides slept on the Russian Bear. (of course I didn't...I've been diligently fighting for the last 15 years....hahahaaaa)
I disagree with you on a lot of things, but you deserve props for this. In all seriousness, well done. Many threads are full of pages and pages and pages of pissing in the wind because most here cannot find the strength & humility to do what you've done.
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights. If someone stated in the 60s, for example, that the enforcement of civil rights weakens basic American institutions, then it was likely a white supremacist. There might be some innocent ways to make the above statement, but I can't think of any. 43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government. This one is pretty naked in its racism. Doesn't need much explaining. I believe that racism is better defined as thoughts, words and actions than as concrete identity (i.e., as a verb rather than a noun) so I'm not necessarily saying this "makes you a racist", but you asked if there's anything racial in it, and I think the above are.
I think I can agree to your point on 16. On 43 it doesn’t jump out at me. Given the time it was authored these things certainly had a different context then when I look and apply them to, say the 90’s when I first became aware of this document or whatever it is. M
