IMHO Revelations is easily the least spiritual book of the bible, but here's the passage for those who can't stand the bible:

Re 14:9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:
11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

Re 13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

when they take your internet domain names, when they start a global bank that can de-fund wikileaks in an instant,
when gold prices have gone up for 11 years straight, when police use military tactics on dissident college students

oh wait, those things already all happened. maybe he's not so full of shit

Nice find marinara, similar to that anti-wikileaks info that was leaked a while back.

>> ^hpqp:

Aww, you edited out the "Please provide me with an example of what you're talking about." part. You knew I was going to refer you to almost any of your posts, didn't you?
By all means, have your opinions (after all, there are stupider ones even more widely held, e.g. the invisible skydaddy one), just don't try to pretend they come anywhere near the facts of reality.
>> ^marbles:
>> ^hpqp:
@marbles
Being skeptical of what one sees/hears/reads is a good thing indeed. There is a difference, however, between critically assessing information with regards to evidence, and trying to fit it into a narrative of paranoid delusion.
It's amusing (in a sad, pathetic kind of way) how conspiracy theorists will berate their opponents for not being skeptical/questioning of media/information, while turning to sources of information TRUTH that cannot hold up against the slightest skeptical inquiry and critical assessment.

You got it backwards pal. "Conspiracy theorists" are the ones berated for their opinions, and yes it is sad and pathetic.



No, I edited it out because it's a baseless claim. So refer away. And keep pretending you base your bias against conspiracy theories on anything resembling the "facts of reality".

Aww, you edited out the "Please provide me with an example of what you're talking about." part. You knew I was going to refer you to almost any of your posts, didn't you?

By all means, have your opinions (after all, there are stupider ones even more widely held, e.g. the invisible skydaddy one), just don't try to pretend they come anywhere near the facts of reality.

>> ^marbles:

>> ^hpqp:
@marbles
Being skeptical of what one sees/hears/reads is a good thing indeed. There is a difference, however, between critically assessing information with regards to evidence, and trying to fit it into a narrative of paranoid delusion.
It's amusing (in a sad, pathetic kind of way) how conspiracy theorists will berate their opponents for not being skeptical/questioning of media/information, while turning to sources of information TRUTH that cannot hold up against the slightest skeptical inquiry and critical assessment.

You got it backwards pal. "Conspiracy theorists" are the ones berated for their opinions, and yes it is sad and pathetic.

>> ^hpqp:

@marbles
Being skeptical of what one sees/hears/reads is a good thing indeed. There is a difference, however, between critically assessing information with regards to evidence, and trying to fit it into a narrative of paranoid delusion.
It's amusing (in a sad, pathetic kind of way) how conspiracy theorists will berate their opponents for not being skeptical/questioning of media/information, while turning to sources of information TRUTH that cannot hold up against the slightest skeptical inquiry and critical assessment.


You got it backwards pal. "Conspiracy theorists" are the ones berated for their opinions, and yes it is sad and pathetic.

>> ^hpqp:

Do you ever see something in the news and NOT see a conspiracy? (rhetorical question btw)
>> ^marbles:
>> ^cosmovitelli:
@marbles
For me you miss the point.
On a fundamental level allowing mastercard and visa and paypal to decide which organisations are allowed to exist is so INSANELY DANGEROUS that it makes most of the arguing about the constitution for the last couple of centuries redundant. If this stands, it's all over.

allowed to exist? facepalm
You're missing the point. Assange is a government pied piper.
You even claim now "The effectiveness of their actions is irrelevant". Then that means this whole ruse is irrelevant.



Considering "the news" is a mass propaganda machine, one should be skeptical of anything it says. (concise answer btw)

Do you ever see something in the news and NOT see a conspiracy? (rhetorical question btw)

>> ^marbles:

>> ^cosmovitelli:
@marbles
For me you miss the point.
On a fundamental level allowing mastercard and visa and paypal to decide which organisations are allowed to exist is so INSANELY DANGEROUS that it makes most of the arguing about the constitution for the last couple of centuries redundant. If this stands, it's all over.

allowed to exist? facepalm
You're missing the point. Assange is a government pied piper.
You even claim now "The effectiveness of their actions is irrelevant". Then that means this whole ruse is irrelevant.

>> ^cosmovitelli:
The bottom line is rogue elements inside the US Government are commanding private companies to interfere with the expression of constitutionally protected rights in order to destroy an organization that is proving politically awkward for them. What you think of Assange or WL is not the issue: unilateral extrajudicial besieging of lawful political groups is, well, roughly Germany at the start of the 30's.


I completely agree with your assessment here, but the condemning is being directed at VISA,MC,etc and not these neolibs and neocons inside the government. While I no doubt hold VISA,MC,etc in contempt, giving the government a pass is ridiculous.

And if you do your homework, wikileaks and Assange stink of a CIA psyop. Further reason to question the motives of these recent announcements and actions.

>> ^marbles:

>> ^cosmovitelli:
@marbles
For me you miss the point.
On a fundamental level allowing mastercard and visa and paypal to decide which organisations are allowed to exist is so INSANELY DANGEROUS that it makes most of the arguing about the constitution for the last couple of centuries redundant. If this stands, it's all over.

allowed to exist? facepalm
You're missing the point. Assange is a government pied piper.
You even claim now "The effectiveness of their actions is irrelevant". Then that means this whole ruse is irrelevant.


The bottom line is rogue elements inside the US Government are commanding private companies to interfere with the expression of constitutionally protected rights in order to destroy an organization that is proving politically awkward for them. What you think of Assange or WL is not the issue: unilateral extrajudicial besieging of lawful political groups is, well, roughly Germany at the start of the 30's.

>> ^cosmovitelli:

@marbles
For me you miss the point.
On a fundamental level allowing mastercard and visa and paypal to decide which organisations are allowed to exist is so INSANELY DANGEROUS that it makes most of the arguing about the constitution for the last couple of centuries redundant. If this stands, it's all over.


allowed to exist? *facepalm*

You're missing the point. Assange is a government pied piper.

You even claim now "The effectiveness of their actions is irrelevant". Then that means this whole ruse is irrelevant.

I'm not holding my breath...I don't give a shit about pretty much anything. Unless they tried interfering with not giving a shit...then that means war.>> ^cosmovitelli:

The effectiveness of their actions is irrelevant.
Their intentions and assumption of international authority demands urgent criminal prosecution. Or would you rather wait till they start ideological interference with something you do give a shit about?

>> ^rottenseed:
I wish that there were some way to put a check or money-order in some sort of enveloping package and send it to them through some sort of courier service. If only there were a way...

The effectiveness of their actions is irrelevant.

Their intentions and assumption of international authority demands urgent criminal prosecution. Or would you rather wait till they start ideological interference with something you do give a shit about?


>> ^rottenseed:
I wish that there were some way to put a check or money-order in some sort of enveloping package and send it to them through some sort of courier service. If only there were a way...

Which is probably why their funding dropped 95% rather than 100%.>> ^rottenseed:

I wish that there were some way to put a check or money-order in some sort of enveloping package and send it to them through some sort of courier service. If only there were a way...

Your video, Financial Sector Shuts Down Wikileaks, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.