Two Views of History

[TheSage]

Basically, you can believe everything happens randomly or else that the elite throughout history have worked towards preplanned goals. I know what makes more sense. Can YOU be honest?

http://www.threeworldwars.com/intro.htm
Two Views of History
There are two fundamental ways to view history: We call one the catastrophic or accidental view of history, the other we call the conspiratorial view of history.

Accidental History
In the catastrophic or accidental view of history we are led to believe that historical events, such as wars and revolutions were the direct result of some sudden or surprising event. While the catastrophic view is accurate for weather, volcanoes and earthquakes, it does not always provide a realistic view of humanity and events influenced by man.

Young, malleable American and other Western minds are sadly taught the Accidental view of history in the government school systems. This view is reinforced throughout their lives by the controlled mass media. As a result, when most discover the Conspiratorial View of History, the immediate reaction is shock, disbelief and a refusal to accept something other than they've been taught to believe.

Conspiratorial History
Conspiratorial history studies that part of history that is a product of man's planning. In conspiratorial history we are led to believe that events, such as wars and revolutions, are the result of planned events. While the conspiratorial view is not accurate for weather, volcanoes and earthquakes, it is a realistic and accurate view of the interrelationship of man and nations. Since the planning for most of these events was done in secret, we use the term conspiratorial history. That is; this history is the result of plans constructed in secret, which by definition is a conspiracy.

[Mr. P]

Basically, you can believe everything happens randomly or else that the elite throughout history have worked towards preplanned goals. I know what makes more sense. Can YOU be honest?

I reject both….

I like history based on verifiable facts myself.

[TheSage]

I reject both….

I like history based on verifiable facts myself.

So you have verified every fact you believe about history? Yourself? Personally? I reject your impossible claim.

[Mr. P]

So you have verified every fact you believe about history? Yourself? Personally? I reject your impossible claim.

Called research.

[TheSage]

Called research.

What about facts which are correct but which only tell half the story? WHat about facts which come out later and reveal something different? Do you factor those in, or just keep believing what you previously believed?

[Mr. P]

What about facts which are correct but which only tell half the story?

What about them? How would you know its ½ unless you research?

WHat about facts which come out later and reveal something different?

New facts add to history, they may or may not change the overall event.

Do you factor those in, or just keep believing what you previously believed?

Many times opinion and beliefs change with more facts.
Only idiots and liberals shut their eyes to the reality that new facts may reshape history.

[TheSage]

What about them? How would you know its ½ unless you research?


New facts add to history, they may or may not change the overall event.



Many times opinion and beliefs change with more facts.
Only idiots and liberals shut their eyes to the reality that new facts may reshape history.

Works for me!

[Dilloduck]

Basically, you can believe everything happens randomly or else that the elite throughout history have worked towards preplanned goals. I know what makes more sense. Can YOU be honest?

As I have aged there are facts that have come out regarding events in my past. I gotta admit--I was pretty damn pissed at what went on behind my back. Still am for that matter. Especially when it's true. The Truth will never set us free if we are not allowed to probe for it or discuss it.

[Gaffer]

Truth will always come to light if you dig deep enough into the actual facts. But it takes a little effort. Just because facts are buried doesn't imply a giant world wide conspircy. It usually implies some beaucrat is trying to cover his ass for his incompitence.

[Dilloduck]

Truth will always come to light if you dig deep enough into the actual facts. But it takes a little effort. Just because facts are buried doesn't imply a giant world wide conspircy. It usually implies some beaucrat is trying to cover his ass for his incompitence.

That's the point---there is an effort to withhold the truth-whether it be incompetence or something more sinister. When you get a whole mess of people to agree to cover someones ass, you got trouble. I don't give a shit if the truth hurts--we need it--badly !

[Gaffer]

I agree with that. I have to wonder about the silence in certain cases, but at the same time it could be for national security reasons and to protect the lives of military and intelligence personell. But that would be the only reason for such secrecy.

[Dilloduck]

I agree with that. I have to wonder about the silence in certain cases, but at the same time it could be for national security reasons and to protect the lives of military and intelligence personell. But that would be the only reason for such secrecy.

I don't have any problem with secrets for the sake of national security---un fortnately what falls under the heading of National Security is becoming quite vague.

[Gaffer]

I agree Dillo, but it has been that way for the last 40 years. Its not just Bush, I think its the beaucrats in washington doing a lot of covering because they are all incompitent.

Beaucrats are a very entrenched part of our government. They are extremely hard to fire and can't be voted out. They each have their own agenda and have to continually justify their position of power in order to keep that power. A lot of the secrecy comes from that group and I'm sure the president and congress can't do alot with or about them. I wonder how many things go on even the president is not aware of.

[Dilloduck]

I agree Dillo, but it has been that way for the last 40 years. Its not just Bush, I think its the beaucrats in washington doing a lot of covering because they are all incompitent.

Beaucrats are a very entrenched part of our government. They are extremely hard to fire and can't be voted out. They each have their own agenda and have to continually justify their position of power in order to keep that power. A lot of the secrecy comes from that group and I'm sure the president and congress can't do alot with or about them. I wonder how many things go on even the president is not aware of.

I hate em all equally.

[Gaffer]

Me too