I don't care that I am right...I care that a truth is being covered up that helps our enemy hide and continue its madness.
These are opposite statements. "You don't care that you are right" and "You care that the truth (what you believe to be true) is being covered up". There is substantial debate about "that truth" that is "being covered up." I suggest you are not necessarily right about that truth and thus you can't "cover up" something that isn't necessarily right. That you CARE that it is covered up assumes that you are right.
Again, I am not saying you are wrong. That is why we engage in debate and bring evidence.
If I listen to people like you, that I should keep my mouth shut about history, is it right that I keep quiet?
Where did I say ANYTHING LIKE THIS??? You are completely ignoring what I am saying, or otherwise hearing things I am not saying.
Here is what YOU said:
Just posting this alone without context is absolutely wrong. What's your agenda?
You are insisting that others tell your beliefs your way, and if they don't, they are doing it wrong. I never once said that YOU shouldn't tell your story. I never even suggested I wouldn't listen. In fact I am intrigued. I am pointing out your insistence that others are telling it their way is "what is wrong." I am suggesting that YOU are the one trying to censor others with this (explicitly stated) insistence of others supporting your controversial "truth".
I am additionally pointing out how using small red-pills to deprogram is a path more likely to work than a hammer which may or may not be true.
By me saying, "I don't care that I am right...I care that a truth is being covered up that helps our enemy hide and continue its madness," is NOT a contradiction. It's only a contradiction to YOU because you think you know what's in my head. What I was saying is that my desire for the truth to fully exposed is more important to me than any benefit to my ego to be right.
You claim that what is proposed about Germany is controversial, or debatable. If you were aware of all that's been written and discovered over the past seventy years, you wouldn't make that claim. The reason you think it's controversial or debatable is because those in charge of the courts have made it a crime to even say out loud the truth, and many people have been imprisoned for speaking the truth.
I would caution you against psychoanalyzing someone as you have attempted to do to me. Someone standing in front of you may not be as open-minded.
It's only a contradiction to YOU because you think you know what's in my head.
100% incorrect. It has nothing to do with your beliefs, however, anyone who is 100% sure they are correct can't see anything outside of the scope of that certainty. That is the problem with being so sure of your beliefs. It limits the scope of all other inputs to fit that belief. All input is tainted by it.
They were a contradiction precisely because on the one hand you stated you didn't care about being right, and on the other hand you assumed that you were right.
If you didn't care about being right, you would allow for the possibility that you are not right. I have seen no evidence to suggest, from your words, that you allow for the possibility that you are not right, thus you care a great deal. To the exclusion of all other possibilities in fact.
You claim that what is proposed about Germany is controversial, or debatable. If you were aware of all that's been written and discovered over the past seventy years, you wouldn't make that claim.
We live in The Matrix. The Matrix has been around for a very long time (thousands of years at least). You thinking that because documents have been around for 70 years means it somehow isn't a part of The Matrix is not supported by the evidence. The PTB control all sides of the narrative. EVERTHING is suspect. When you stop suspecting everything, you are doing exactly what The Matrix wants.
I would caution you against psychoanalyzing someone as you have attempted to do to me.
Not once have I done this. I think you are once again misconstruing my words to mean something they have not. What I have done is look at your words. All of my responses have been based upon those words, nothing more. If you think I projected my ideas of your thoughts that you did not say onto what you did say, point them out.
Someone standing in front of you may not be as open-minded.
A person who knows with 100% certainty that they are right is the exact opposite of someone who is "open-minded."
These are opposite statements. "You don't care that you are right" and "You care that the truth (what you believe to be true) is being covered up". There is substantial debate about "that truth" that is "being covered up." I suggest you are not necessarily right about that truth and thus you can't "cover up" something that isn't necessarily right. That you CARE that it is covered up assumes that you are right.
Again, I am not saying you are wrong. That is why we engage in debate and bring evidence.
Where did I say ANYTHING LIKE THIS??? You are completely ignoring what I am saying, or otherwise hearing things I am not saying.
Here is what YOU said:
You are insisting that others tell your beliefs your way, and if they don't, they are doing it wrong. I never once said that YOU shouldn't tell your story. I never even suggested I wouldn't listen. In fact I am intrigued. I am pointing out your insistence that others are telling it their way is "what is wrong." I am suggesting that YOU are the one trying to censor others with this (explicitly stated) insistence of others supporting your controversial "truth".
I am additionally pointing out how using small red-pills to deprogram is a path more likely to work than a hammer which may or may not be true.
By me saying, "I don't care that I am right...I care that a truth is being covered up that helps our enemy hide and continue its madness," is NOT a contradiction. It's only a contradiction to YOU because you think you know what's in my head. What I was saying is that my desire for the truth to fully exposed is more important to me than any benefit to my ego to be right.
You claim that what is proposed about Germany is controversial, or debatable. If you were aware of all that's been written and discovered over the past seventy years, you wouldn't make that claim. The reason you think it's controversial or debatable is because those in charge of the courts have made it a crime to even say out loud the truth, and many people have been imprisoned for speaking the truth.
I would caution you against psychoanalyzing someone as you have attempted to do to me. Someone standing in front of you may not be as open-minded.
100% incorrect. It has nothing to do with your beliefs, however, anyone who is 100% sure they are correct can't see anything outside of the scope of that certainty. That is the problem with being so sure of your beliefs. It limits the scope of all other inputs to fit that belief. All input is tainted by it.
They were a contradiction precisely because on the one hand you stated you didn't care about being right, and on the other hand you assumed that you were right.
If you didn't care about being right, you would allow for the possibility that you are not right. I have seen no evidence to suggest, from your words, that you allow for the possibility that you are not right, thus you care a great deal. To the exclusion of all other possibilities in fact.
We live in The Matrix. The Matrix has been around for a very long time (thousands of years at least). You thinking that because documents have been around for 70 years means it somehow isn't a part of The Matrix is not supported by the evidence. The PTB control all sides of the narrative. EVERTHING is suspect. When you stop suspecting everything, you are doing exactly what The Matrix wants.
Not once have I done this. I think you are once again misconstruing my words to mean something they have not. What I have done is look at your words. All of my responses have been based upon those words, nothing more. If you think I projected my ideas of your thoughts that you did not say onto what you did say, point them out.
A person who knows with 100% certainty that they are right is the exact opposite of someone who is "open-minded."