Crazyguy - Tacitis only refers to Christ never mentions the name Jesus. Josephus mention two guys named Jesus , one is a guy on the wall calling down bad things on the people of Jerusalem and then he writes that he was killed by a rock. The other mentioning of a Jesus most experts agree this texts was a forgery.
Not sure where you learned that nonsense.
Firstly, you say that "most experts agree this [mention of Jesus by Josephus] was a forgery." Not at all. Most experts agree that this mention was tampered with but that the core of it is original. Check your sources next time. Here is the text from Antiquities of the Jews XVIII.3.4 (likely interpolations in bold):
Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of paradoxical deeds, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. he drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
Louis H. Feldman surveyed 52 scholars on this subject and found that 39 of them (75%) considered the passage to be partially authentic. Then, Peter Kirby also examined thirteen books that touch on this passage and found that ten of them (77%) also considered it to be partly genuine. The other three books, quite "coincidentally," argue that Jesus did not exist.
The other mention of Jesus... Oh my God, do I even have to argue that? Where the heck did you get your information? "A guy on the wall calling down bad things on the people of Jerusalem and then he writes that he was killed by a rock"? Where the heck did you get that from? I'm serious... Here is the passage you're referring to in Antiquities of the Jews XX.9.1 (the important part in bold):
Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so [the High Priest] assembled the Sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Messiah, whose name was James, and some others, and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned.
Josephus here mentions James who was stoned. He also identifies James as "the brother of Jesus, who was called Messiah." It's pretty clear to whom, as in which Jesus, Josephus is referring here. We know from ancient sources that at that time in Jerusalem, James, Jesus' brother, led the Jesus sect, and we also have a non-dependent account of James' execution by the Jerusalem priesthood. It couldn't be clearer.
Now, let's consider Tacitus. You say he never mentions the name Jesus... But is it all that matters? Here is the passage from Annals XV.44 (the important part in bold):
Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition [Christianity], thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil [Christianity], but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular.
Here, Tacitus calls Christianity "a most mischievous superstion." This is an important detail which shows that Tacitus utterly despised Christianity. Instead of mocking the religion—a Jewish cult at the time—for having spurious origins, Tacitus, a historian, acknowledges that it comes from Jesus. He mentions Jesus, though by his title Christ (Christus), in detail. He says he suffered at the hands of Pontius Pilatus during the reign of Tiberius. Sounds pretty familiar to me...
I wasn't planning on debating that, but I was really curious where the heck you got your "facts" from. I really, really hate when people don't check their facts and spread false information.