Gloria Steinem: How the CIA Used Feminism to Destabilize Society

No. It isn't. I'd rather be correct along with the majority (which I am), than be incorrect just because it makes me look like a "non-sheep". The majority isn't ALWAYS wrong, you know...and while far from perfect, is correct much more often than your lunatic fringe websites are.

True freethinking doesn't just involve picking a commonly-held belief and automatically adopting the opposite position. It involves objective comparisons of the evidence...which discredit almost all of your conspiracy theories.

 

No, you're just a sheep. Period.

Even most of the people in this forum (many of whom I don't agree with) think that of you.

No, the majority isn't always wrong. You're right about that... like on what car is the best, or what coffee has the best flavor. As a matter of fact, I agree with most people that Tropicana orange juice tastes better than the generic store brand.

True thinking does not just involve picking a commonly held belief and adopting the opposite position. You're right again. True thinking also doesn't entail automatically accepting everything you're told. Actually, that's not thinking at all. It's just mindlessness.

Everything I claim is based on facts and evidence.

Lastly, I don't visit "fringe" websites. I visit Rense, and most of the other ones are sites like worldnetdaily.com, newswithviews.com, americanfreepress.net, infowars.com, worldaffairsbrief.com, lewrockwell.com, salon.com, guardian.uk, as well as a slew of other independent, alternative and mainstream websites.

You don't know what you're talking about, and you certainly know nothing about me, so shut up.

 

Maybe if you say it enough, I'll change my mind and start buying the National Enquirer and voting for Lyndon LaRouche. No, that's not likely to happen.

I don't accept everything I'm told. I accept very little of what I'm told without confirmation. But in the absence of personally infilitrating the feminist movement or going to Iraq myself and investigating things, I'd rather trust mainstream news sources (which have good track records) and eyewitnesses, than your anti-semitic sensationalist "news" websites.

You pasted an article that claimed the KGB was running the New York subway system. You pasted an article that claimed the moon landing was faked. You have to do some very creative interpretation to find any "evidence" of these things at all...and the bottom line is they're just plain stupid.

Which CONSTANTLY has links to bizarre websites about crop circles and the like. Rense's policy seems to be to give credence to any theory, no matter how stupid it is.

I don't know much about worldnetdaily.com, but at the time I'm writing this, WorldNetDaily's headline is "Syria: Jews used hot pokers to gouge Palestinian's eyes."

But Rat, why do you use mainstream websites like The Guardian (and even Salon) if they're just mouthpieces for the New World Order?

The point is that while you may use websites with some degree of credibility (like the Guardian) to actually get your news, the only stories you ever cite are ones from fringe websites that promote sensationalist conspiracy theories. You seem to love ignoring websites that tell you what you don't want to hear, while heralding those that do.

 

1) I don't follow Lyndon LaRouche. I've only said this about a dozen times now after being accused by you of being a follower of him. I've read some of his material, but I wasn't all that crazy about it.

2) I've never read -- let alone bought -- the National Enquirer. I don't read tabloids, which are ridiculous pieces of garbage and a waste of money. They are also all establishment-owned. Just one person owns all the major tabloids, which are pure disinformation.

The mainstream media has a good track record? What does that mean? The media and the people holding the track records are cut from the same piece of cloth.

An outright lie. Post the article.

I might have posted something about the moon landing being faked, which was based on one person's opinion, not mine. Is there something wrong with looking at different sides of the story, or are you just a Nazi? Maybe I'd better check with you next time before I post something, to see if it meets your journalistic standards.

Are you talking about Rense.com? That's just one of the many sites I visit. I never said I agree with everything on the site. I don't agree with even half of it. But there are a lot of great articles posted there, many of which originated from ordinary mainstream, independent and blogger sites. The fact is, it offers an outlet for alternative news which is too far-out and/or opinionated for the mainstream.

Rense lets his audience decide for themselves what is truth and what is bullshit. Nobody says you're supposed to believe everything you read on these sites.

OH MY GOD!!

How dare they present the news! They said Jews! Oh dear. How anti-semetic! How shocking!

Most news originates from the mainstream. There is nothing wrong with mainstream sources, as long as you don't mindlessly believe everything you read or hear without questioning it yourself, and you balance it out with more independent, non-establishment sources. The mainstream media is a mixture of truth, disinformation and spin, as is the independent and alternative media. If you are mindful of this, as I am, it's not as harmful.

I have posted articles in recent days from American Free Press, News With Views, the Boston Globe, and the Toronto Globe and Mail. Are these fringe sites?

 

Rat, I'm sorry you have to fight so hard to make your opinion understood. It seems what you are saying is very threatening to a few people. I found your article another place to find interesting information that I could weigh up in my own mind. As you do with so many of your own news reaping excercises. Learning is only possible once you have clearly defined the boundaires of the information you are trying to digest. I guess your little can of worms has vast boundaires that cannot be addressed purely in one article. I look forward to some more brain ticklers from your direction.

 

Still protesting for family values,,,huh?

So,
Government worries you?
Bankers worry you?
CIA worries you?
Feminists worry you?

If a conspiracy of mere whores worries you, how do you hope to deal with their bad ass pimp?

Let me open the drapes for ya.

Look, there they are, there's Government, the Bankers, the CIA, the Feminists, all bent-over and getting fucked in the ass by the 'primal impuse' of SEX and Death!

Oh,,,but there YOU are!
With Death-Fear's cock up YOUR civilized anal-retentive ass.

"I think thou protests too much!"

 

I belieive Mark Twain said something about if you find yourself agreeing with the majority, then it is time to change your views. (or something to that matter)

That being said, just because the "majority" beleive something doesn't mean it is true.

The majority of parents beleive it is ok to let a new born infant "cry it out" because you have to show them you are boss, and they are "controlling" you by crying. which is so far off base that it is frightening folks beleive this.

as for the name calling. that is usueless and typical of "programming". People are not going to respond to being called a sheep or a conspiracy nut. both are extremely disrepspectful. need to break out of this paradigm. It is harmful to all. those awake and those not so awake.

we are all on the same side in this battle for our very souls and live's against the forces of evil that rule our lovely planet. some folks just don't realize it yet. for those of you who seem to be in the know, what are you doing to oppose the powers that be? just running off at the mouth? a certain # of people have been programmed to do just that. So that others can see "just how crazy you are" with your theories. Make sense? break out of it. Do something about it!

read www.educate-yourself.org

 

I believe Mark Twain said if you find yourself agreeing with the majority it's time to rethink what you believe...not a verbatim quote either but oh well! I think if you worry about the majority one way or the other while you're coming up with your *personal* views then there is a major problem. As a general rule the general public isn't that bright however...(or haven't you noticed anyone who's ever had to work with customers???) so I'd be cautious about jumping on a bandwagon...but if you believe it, don't say you don't because you don't want to be part of the majority! ...As for there being a conspiricy at the heart of feminism, so what? The government tries to control our every waking thought...are you going to let them? I'm what some might call a feminist and I don't know what the official statement from NOW is or anything. I'm called a feminist by some, because of what I already think, what I came up with on my own. Whether or not it was started as a evil plot by the CIA, it's still caused some good. We should be glad that a woman has more choices than just staying at home with the kids! As the women got more into the workforce the men were supposed to get more into family life....Why is it that only feminism is blamed for the breakdown of families? What, we can't expect the daddies to help keep the family unit tight? Women go to work now too...the economy demands it for a lot of families. (and it wasn't really feminism that forced women into the workforce you know...it was WW2) Now for those families the husband and wife should share the household and child-related chores. I don't see why this wouldn't work...except apparently women are still doing most of the household stuff, according to studies...so THAT would be a problem maybe. OK, listen, modern feminism may have started as a conspiricy (if it was one I'm not committing to anything lol) but it doesn't mean that all the ideals are null and void now. It became popular because it's what a lot of women wanted...and still want. I love my son and spend a lot of time with him, just because I really enjoy being around him, not because I feel like it's my "career". That didn't chage when I started to go back to work! Sure, my family is a very lucky statistic, my son can stay with Gramma while we're at work, so I don't have to deal with the daycare issues. But I mean if it was a case of him going to daycare, only I'm responsible for making him feel safe and secure? Kids only feel like their mom isn't dependable if both parents are gone a lot? What a double standard! Seems like *some* men like to say Feminism ruined the family unit because they don't like it that they actually have to be hands on with their kids or *gasp* help with the housework...yes geniuses, if men don't help at all and women have to go to work too, then obviously something's not working right

 

leigh I agree with a LOT of what you said. I am a feminist, but I have problems with 70s style, "kids are a burden" wing of feminism. This type of "feminism" is hopefully dead. This is, a lot of womyn who do not consider them selves feminsts have had to leave their kids to work. I am a self employed SAHM. I think the "If we all get jobs (ie "careers") then we well be considered equals." Is illogical. It didn't work, and now the economy is SO bad, that many mothers HAVE to work, just to make ends meet.

As for the article, I'm gonna get my aluminum foil hat, so those crazed feminists will STOP broadcasting propaganda into my head!!!!

 

So everyone is wrong......except you. And no one is smart enough to understand it........except you. OK.

 

The assasination of franz ferdinand was a conspiracy, the black hand was definitly a group of people planning towards an end, ww1 was not however a conspiracy, there were pressures that made it happen, that was just an excuse, women wer going to have a movement, they just needed an excuse, blame whoever you want but it happened, it doesn't matter why it happened because it would have anyway, at that point the cia had their heads so far up their asses that I can't imagin them being able to do anything succesfully (except for the vietnam elections, miracle) these are the people, the generation who brought us watergate, just something to think about