I don't think I'm "supposed" to give a response but I kinda did. Well, hot dang. HN seems to be about sharing information and discussion, I merely did the form

I don't think I'm "supposed" to give a response but I kinda did. Well, hot dang. HN seems to be about sharing information and discussion, I merely did the former, also, an ideology is a belief system, religions are basically a set of values. If you read the text you should see it's just snippets of facts (historical in nature, and yes those two people have their agendas for the interview as far as illumination and answering questions go you can get a sense of it from watching them, arguably nothing malicious whatsoever for the masses, quite the contrary.) mostly from the links with quotes. The links themselves are fact dense from experts in their fields. Writer/scholar/researcher, and KGB defector. "Eugene Michael Jones is an American writer, former professor, media commentator and the current editor of Culture Wars magazine. Jones is known for his writings from a perspective which defends the Catholic Church in American society and overviews the decline of the Catholic communities which were assimilated into the secular American mainstream after the 1950s." "Yuri Alexandrovich Bezmenov (Russian: Ю́рий Алекса́ндрович Безме́нов; 1939 – 1993), known by the alias Tomas David Schuman, was a Soviet journalist for RIA Novosti and a former PGU KGB informant who defected to Canada." -W I'd say the one who flagged the posts is the real problem, no idea what the hair up his ass was, problems with certain facts I guess. Looking at your posts, there seems to be a systematic problem with how the site works, wouldn't it be better if there wasn't this proclivity to censorship and knee-jerk flag/downvoting. It seems to lead to an echo-chamber effect. From whoever is arguing, this ideological battle thing though doesn't seem to have much of an argument regardless, 1-2/7 posts he would feebly at best as I don't see an argument, accuse me for it, weak stuff. The point about how ideological "battle" destroying curiosity, I don't understand frankly, people interested in the truth wouldn't be hands off, rather they would engage, those who want to of course, when "ideologies" clash I think there's a "the axe sharpens the sword" effect and ultimately the more useful or truthful argument prevails, people with weak beliefs surely tend not to seek confrontation, not that I was or wasn't doing that. Not sure If I get it, I'm not an ideologue in general, I'm not sure what that would even mean, everyone has ideals and values, changing as they may be, sure I have "I have approximate answers and possible beliefs and different degrees of certainty about different things." But that doesn't say much, as surely the same applies to you and most people, ugh guess there's no escaping the echo chamber of acceptable ideas in this format, as long as it has centralized authorities. Subjectivity rules.