The Instigator
truther1111
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
MysticEgg
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

Disney Illuminati Exist !

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
MysticEgg
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/6/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,977 times Debate No: 37414
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (14)
Votes (1)

 

truther1111

Pro

Latest Miley cyrus scandal once again confirms satanic brainwashing of our children courtesy of Disney . This classic tactic to reach the minds of innocent children with disney cartoons and other shows like Hannah montana shows a agenda to Sexualise children .
Think of disney cartoons , all have very sexy women like pocahontas and little mermaid .
Later it was found these cartoons have subliminal penises and other sexual objects hidden in the background of disney cartoons.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com...


http://4.bp.blogspot.com...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com...


http://2.bp.blogspot.com...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com...


http://2.bp.blogspot.com...



The next step of Disney was to get good looking young girls and put them under mind control, at some stage they go slutty and shave there hair off like britney spears and hannah montana.The young fans of these girls are then shown very bad examples of behaviour by their role models.
MysticEgg

Con

I accept the challenge, comrades! I'll debate you; and jump straight in.

My opponent makes only one contention, which I will outline:

P1: These images have sexual, subliminal implications aimed at children.
P2: The objects in these are from Disney.
C: Therefore, the Disney Illuminati exists.

For this argument to be refuted, I must demonstrate it to be invalid. For that, I need to show how it is either:
a) Unsound
b) False, or
c) Both.

Sound means that the conclusion follows logically from the premises; otherwise it's unsound. True means that the premises are correct; otherwise it's false. Valid means that the argument is both sound and true; otherwise it's invalid. So:
is it valid?
Let's look at both sound and truth separately.

Is it sound?
No. The conclusion would imply that Disney is perverted and immoral. However, to suggest that:

Disney is perverted, therefore, Disney is Illuminati is not logical. Otherwise:
x is perverted, therefore, x is Illuminati would work. But it doesn't. Perversion has nothing to with an 18th Century secret society. My proof is that the word perversion was in use before Illuminati[1].

This is argument is invalid, and thus, refuted. However, I will show how it is not true,

Is it true?
No. I will show you why. Premise one states that:

P1: These images have sexual, subliminal implications aimed at children.
Now, while one can see that some of these pictures imply as much, are they aimed at children? I don't see how they could be, when children do not look at zoomed in, grainy images that someone (who I think is much more likely to be perverted than Disney) has taken the time and effort to enhance and then show to adults. For something to be subliminal, the person has to (subconsciously) understand the message. Children won't and don't.


P2 is correct, I'll grant you that, but premise one is not.

Thus, the argument is unsound, false, and invalid. Your argument has been refuted.


I will leave it at that; and pass the ball to my opponent. I thank my opponent, the audience, and the voters for this...different...debate. See you next round!

Source(s):

[1]http://www.merriam-webster.com...



Debate Round No. 1
truther1111

Pro

First I must document that the illuminati planned this.

The protocols of Zion , a fraudulent document at the time was made by the illuminati , stating there own goals but blaming the jews.
The goals of the Illuminati are virtually identical to the protocols of zion.In the protocols of Zion Goal 3 states this agenda long before Disney and modern media.

3) Abolish marriage, family and home. Encourage sexual promiscuity, homosexuality, adultery, and fornication.

As you can see Disney follow this agenda.

According to monitoring by American Family Association, Disney has been one of the top sponsors of pro-homosexual TV programming.

walt disney freemason
http://www.phoenixmasonry.org...

DISNEY LOGO -
IF you look closely at the DISNEY logo it contains 666, with the first six being reversed , Reverse symbolism is the sign of the Illuminati, It has some mystical occult significance. So the illuminai take good symbols and reverse them such as the swastika , pentagram,upside down cross , pyramid with eye above instead of in the pyramid.

MysticEgg

Con

I thank my opponent for his argument, but I feel it necessary to apologise to the audience, because I fear this we be a short, if effective, refute.

I will break my opponent's argument down, one at a time.

"The protocols of Zion , a fraudulent document at the time was made by the illuminati , stating there own goals but blaming the jews.
The goals of the Illuminati are virtually identical to the protocols of zion.In the protocols of Zion Goal 3 states this agenda long before Disney and modern media."

My opponent gives no source for this claim, and thus I am allowed to dismiss the claim, because what can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

"3) Abolish marriage, family and home. Encourage sexual promiscuity, homosexuality, adultery, and fornication.

As you can see Disney follow this agenda."


If one of the Illuminati's goals is to encourage homosexuality (as in, tell people it's perfectly OK), then props to them for that.
However, we cannot see that Disney follows this agenda, in fact, if anything Disney works against it, as almost all of their adverts involve family groups having fun together[1]. My opponent again cites no source, and therefore I can dismiss the claim.

"According to monitoring by American Family Association, Disney has been one of the top sponsors of pro-homosexual TV programming."

Well, I congratulate them, and, even if that were true (again, no source has been cited) it appears to be my opponent's own opinion and nothing more. Therefore, I can dismiss within the grounds of
a) No source has been cited
b) Opinion does not equal argument.

"walt Disney freemason"
Here, my opponent does give a source to "back up" his claim, although I do find it quite amusing that from the very page you cited:
"walt disney was not a freemason" meaning that your argument is refuted.

The Disney Logo
This means nothing and is not logical. Otherwise, I can prove that the British Emergency Services are Illuminati, because their own number, 999, is just 666 flipped!

In any case,
a)I cannot see "666" on the Disney logo[2] (it is just written in a font called "Walter"). Also:
b)666 is only meaningful in a religious context and is otherwise just another number. It is also probable that is means "Nero"[3] and not the number of any beast.

My opponent's arguments have been refuted. Also, since he didn't address my refute in round one, I'll extend that, too.

I look forward to my opponent's response(s)!


Source(s):

[1] (See the video at the top)
[2]http://upload.wikimedia.org...
[3]https://www.youtube.com...

Debate Round No. 2
truther1111

Pro

protocol of zion
http://www.iamthewitness.com...

Protocols is a well known book published by Henry Ford.

I cant prove the walt disney was a part of any secret society, the very nature of secret soceitys is there secret and the members are unkown. This isnt the case with freemasonry but other more secret societys like the illuminati and skull and bones are.

Illuminati numerology is present in alot of things, emergency service numbers being one of them, like 911 is an important illuminati number and thats why they also did the attacks on 911. Multiples of 11 or combinations of 11 are illuminati numerology, so 999(9+9+9=19=9) or 666 is considered the same as 666(6+6+6=18=9) as its flipped. USA has 911 which is 9+1+1 = 11


Illuminati member Aleister Croweley was made the number 666 popular in satanic culture.It has to do with ritual magick .

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com...;
MysticEgg

Con

I thank my opponent for his responses; I will now respond.

My opponent gives a source to show the protocols of Zion; but once again it is an example of (thanks to Magic800 for providing the technical term in the comments) affirming the consequence fallacy. It is the idea that an attribute is uniquely attributed to the thing(s) one is affirming.

P1: Pink is uniquely attributed to young girls' toys.
P2: A book is pink.
C: The book is a young girl's toy.

While this is a sound argument; this is not a true argument, because the colour pink is not uniquely attributed to young girls' toys. So, the argument is not valid. Similarly:

P1: Perversion is uniquely attributed to the Illuminati.
P2: Disney is perverted.
C: Therefore, Disney is a part of the Illuminati.

Again, this argument is not valid, because it is not true. Perversion is not uniquely attributed to the Illuminati. (See my round one argument for the source, please). My opponent's argument is refuted. However, I will lastly point out a couple of other points.

1) Even assuming that Walt Disney was Illuminati, he is now dead and Disney is no longer his; therefore this is not an argument to help further my opponent's burden of proof.

2) Reverse numerology if another example of affirming the consequence, because other branches use it, too[1]. If you assume that all breaches that reverse numbers and letters are Illuminati; that begs the question and is therefore not logical.

I will eagerly await my opponent's response(s)!


Source(s):

[1]http://scrapbooking.about.com...

Debate Round No. 3
truther1111

Pro

While it is impossible to prove Disney is contolled by the illuminati, the actions of Diney correspond with those of the Illuminati .Whether or not they are controlled by the directly by the Illuminati or whether its staff and members are chosen because of their tendency to align themselves with beliefs or lifestyles that are close to the Illuminati's.

Disney clearly shows Illuminati numerology and symbolism.

Club 33 located on 33 royal st founded by 33 corporate sponsors all suspected of being illuminati controlled as well.
Disney Occultism in all its movies, magick,witchcraft , occult topics.
Disney perversion in its movies etc.
Disney stars like miley cyrus and britteny spears showing satanic behaviour .

MysticEgg

Con

I thank my opponent for his argument; I will respond - quoting as I go!

"While it is impossible to prove Disney is controlled by the illuminati" This sounds like a consent from my opponent, could he please clarify? If my opponent admits to his burden of proof being impossible; that is almost a direct forfeit. Please clarify.

"...the actions of Disney correspond with those of the Illuminati .Whether or not they are controlled by the directly by the Illuminati or whether its staff and members are chosen because of their tendency to align themselves with beliefs or lifestyles that are close to the Illuminati"
My opponent gives no source for this, I will thus dismiss the claim without evidence. (Please note, the protocols of Zion are not a source, because that is just a set of rules and goals - not whether Disney is following or not).

"Disney clearly shows Illuminati numerology and symbolism." This is another example of affirming the consequence fallacy. Numerology and symbolism is not unique to the Illuminati[1]; therefore this proves nothing other than the use of numerology (or maybe it's just the font) and potentially some accidental symbolism. Not the Illuminati.


"Club 33 located on 33 royal st founded by 33 corporate sponsors all suspected of being illuminati controlled as well.
Disney Occultism in all its movies, magick,witchcraft , occult topics.
Disney perversion in its movies etc.
Disney stars like miley cyrus and britteny spears showing satanic behaviour ."

My opponent gives no source for the "33" aspect, and as for:
a) These topics are affirming the consequence; it is a fallacy.
b) Perversion is affirming the consequence, too. It is a fallacy.
c) No source given for satanic behaviour, and this is also showing a religious bias.

All in all, I feel that I have refuted my opponent's contentions. I thus extend all my arguments and refutes.
I eagerly await my opponent's next argument(s) and closing statements!

Source(s):

[1]http://scrapbooking.about.com...;
Debate Round No. 4
truther1111

Pro

I have found evidence that disney members are part of the illuminati .
Disney CEO and other members of Disney visit Bohemian Grove(2), a Satanic illuminati ritual held every year(1)

The ritual is satanic or demonic in theme.
The ritual is kept secret from the public .
Very powerful people meet there to plan future events ( conspire )
The ritual is therefore evidence of a secret satanic conspiracy .
Because Disney members go they are also involved.

1.http://www.jesus-is-savior.com...

2.http://beforeitsnews.com...



The number 33 and illuminati/freemasonry
  • Pope John Paul I, the 33-day pope. One of the shortest reigns in papal history, and it resulted in the most recent 3-pope year.
  • 33 the highest degree in the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry.
  • Harry S. Truman. As the 33rd President, this 33rd degree Mason initiated the Nuclear Age, the crowning success of alchemy, when the first A-bomb exploded at the 33rd Parallel Trinity Test Site, (Almagordo) White Sands, New Mexico. He was responsible for killing of thousands of Japanese (the Yellow Peril) at two cities close to the 33rd Parallel, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.


MysticEgg

Con

Well, we come at last to the end of the debate - I will make my closing statements.

My opponent's sources:
One source is -
a) Clearly bias from Christianity which makes it
b) Only evidence if one follows Christianity. Satanism for example is fine for lots of people. Well, modern Satanism. Thus this is not evidence.

The other gives several other sources which do not mention the Disney CEO or other members. Thus, this source
a) Provides no evidence, just a wall of text and
b) Is also like Wikipedia, and is likely to be a troll who uploaded something linking various irrelevent (and in one case non-existent).
articles.

Therefore, my opponent's final contention is refuted.

That is all from me, as I want to give as little time as possible to further backing up - my counter evidence should be enough to convince the voters! :D

So, finally, I would like to thank my opponent, truther1111, for this entertaining debate. Another big thanks goes out to all the audience and the voters for taking their time to read through this debate. Good debating - until next time!

J

Debate Round No. 5
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by makhdoom5 3 years ago
makhdoom5
well if the bad hidden images like abstract art doest suggest its Illuminati than it also not suggest its not Illuminati.
it could be 100 percent and could not be.
well in my opinion it is.
but pro here fails to prove.
that's why i guess he got vote against it.
i haven't read debate much only two arguments.
but may be later arguments made this happened.
Posted by MysticEgg 3 years ago
MysticEgg
Same to you, truther1111.
Posted by truther1111 3 years ago
truther1111
good debate con, thanks for your open mindedness on taking on the debate,
a good fun open hearted debate , I dont know if disney is illuminati, I dont have any proof . Hes an extra treat a funny video about miley cyrus and illuminati accusations
Posted by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
Truthers arguments are just retarded in general....
Posted by Magic8000 3 years ago
Magic8000
Truther"s argument commits the fallacy of affirming the consequent.

1. If Disney is a part of the Illuminati, they will promote sexual imagery.
2. Disney does promote sexual imagery
3. Disney is a part of the Illuminati.

As mystic pointed out, having sexually suggestive images doesn't immediately mean you're in the Illuminati. Mystic has this one won.
Posted by MysticEgg 3 years ago
MysticEgg
I know, I'm typing up me argument now. I got this, guys! :D
Posted by TheEnergyHippo 3 years ago
TheEnergyHippo
Pro is making things up... He made a really bad argument and didn't use sources for all of his claims.
Posted by Magic8000 3 years ago
Magic8000
The argument is a non sequitur. Pro never linked sexual messages to the illuminati. Most of the images seem to be the result of pareidolia.
Posted by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
So the current tally over whether or not Truther is a retard is
yes-4
no-1
Posted by mrsatan 3 years ago
mrsatan
I would agree that the 5th link you posted is a rather disturbing design, which I'm really hoping was oversight and not intentional...

Other than that, ima hit the nail square on the head.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Mikal 3 years ago
Mikal
truther1111MysticEggTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Quite logically this goes to con. Con pointed out the fact that you could make the claim that there are perverted people in Disney itself, but to assume the fact the illumanti exists because of the fact that some people are perverted is a failure at logic. That point remained uncontested and the one time pro did attempt to counter this, it was illogical.