The masons should not be considered a terorist organization.
Vote Here
The voting period for this debate does not end.
| Started: | 4/17/2009 | Category: | News |
| Updated: | 4 years ago | Status: | Voting Period |
| Viewed: | 2,765 times | Debate No: | 7874 |
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (105)
Votes (5)
|
http://itwasjohnson.impiousdigest.com...
If you read the above web you will see they are a brotherhood protecting their brothers.
who says the masons are a terrorist organstion ? but if they are what you say theyare then of course they should , we cant have an "underground community" running the country can we now ? i will leave you to prove me wrong or something ... |
![]() |
|
You can and have ; not an underground, but a masonic rothschild hidden in plain view community.
The masons should not be considered a terorist organization; they are a controlling organization; by controlling the money supply of most countries, using the IMF and the world bank, and all other banks they control. By controling the money supply of countries ,they control the governments of the countries who belong to the IMF..
hold the phone thats a pretty ourageous claim you are making their which will requre some evidence as im pretty sure that pretty much every country in the world is in the IMF , excluding north koera , cuba etc but countries like america and the uk , russia , china , japan , france so on are in the IMF you claimed the masons control the IMF , therefore controling the goverment... i think i will need some proof from you that the masons control the world ... but if they do , and do so without the consent of the people , and certain countrys have particapated in terrorists acts , therefore if that country that was in the IMF has commited a terrorist act , the masons surely must be terrorists. |
![]() |
|
thefact forfeited this round.
rangersfootballclub forfeited this round. |
![]() |
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by MTGandP 3 years ago
| thefact | rangersfootballclub | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | ![]() | - | - | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | ![]() | - | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 4 | 0 |
Vote Placed by MistahKurtz 4 years ago
| thefact | rangersfootballclub | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | - | ![]() | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 0 |
Vote Placed by pcmbrown 4 years ago
| thefact | rangersfootballclub | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | ![]() | - | - | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | ![]() | - | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | ![]() | - | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | ![]() | - | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | ![]() | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 7 |
Vote Placed by alto2osu 4 years ago
| thefact | rangersfootballclub | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | - | ![]() | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 0 |
Vote Placed by wjmelements 4 years ago
| thefact | rangersfootballclub | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | ![]() | - | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 2 | 3 |
















Conduct: Both sides forfeited. TIE.
S&G: Neither was great. Con was somewhat worse. PRO.
Arguments: Neither side had any real arguments, but it seems that Con had more of a burden of proof, and failed to meet that burden. PRO.
Sources: Neither side had any. TIE.
Why are there 104 comments but only five votes?
so anti-Arb is in fact anti-semite ; why is it only a jewish problem all the time?.
Semite one of a people of Caucation stock, now represented by the jews AND Arbs.
so why only predudiced against thouse who are of jewish heritage; or are all Arbs jews?
why such dificulty getting the post?
Rothschilds the Israel supreme court building.
Read and understand.
Semite-one of a people of Caucatian stock,...
I am against members who belong to a secret order or fraternity who worshiper lucifer, and are planing one world government.
Search for the supreme court building of Israel..