T2H, you now have produced your list of internal enemies (Doug, me, Yoxa, Darbikrash, mark reis, Windlord…) and your external enemy (the Zionists). You and some others here are one step closer to creating a microcosm of the world like the one we live in now.
It doesn't have to be this way, but it does take accountability, compromise, and a consistent standard if we want it to be worth inheriting.
[quote=HughK]T2H, you now have produced your list of internal enemies (Doug, me, Yoxa, Darbikrash, mark reis, Windlord…) and your external enemy (the Zionists). You and some others here are one step closer to creating a microcosm of the world like the one we live in now.
It doesn't have to be this way, but it does take accountability, compromise, and a consistent standard.
[/quote]
In your mind I have done these things Hugh. The thoughts you are projecting are a reflection of your own. I don’t care for enemies or the negative spiritual baggage they require. I do care for the objective truth.
I’d recommend you stand in front of a mirror for a good while and think deeply on this.
Hughk said,
It doesn't have to be this way, but it does take accountability, compromise, and a consistent standard if we want it to be worth inheriting.Your post would suggest that we could engage the true enemies of freedom (whomever they are) .. the elites who are behind evil and murderous false flags like 9/11, our loss of freedoms and Constitutional protections in the US, and our loss of equal application of the law (see:
The Veneer of Justice in a Kingdom of Crime by John Titus, on youtube.)
can be managed through, as you say, compromise. No way. It must be faced head-on, by an awake populace. From G. Edward Griffin's Freedom Force website;https://www.freedomforceinternational.org/Too many people are like cats. They are rightly concerned about their loss of security, freedom, and privacy, but they do little more than hiss and wail without knowing why these things are happening. In Freedom Force, however, we focus on the cause and then work to eliminate it.
The decline of civilization is not the result of blind forces of history operating beyond compre-hension or control. It is caused by a small but well defined group of people who believe this decline is necessary for what they fondly call The New World Order but which we recognize as modern, high-tech feudalism.
The identities of these elitists are known. They have names. They belong to organizations. They meet together to create strategies and they work jointly to implement them. Since they now dominate the power centers of society, our response is clear. They must be removed from their positions of power. Any other plan is doomed to failure.
That, however, is not enough. If we focus solely on the identities and personalities of those who are promoting the decline of liberty, we will be stumped by the fact that, even if we should succeed in removing them from office, there are many more just like them waiting to take their places.
It’s not the identities or party affiliations of these people that matters. It’s what they believe, what ideology they hold.
Their ideology has a name. It’s called collectivism, a concept that government is master and people must obey because it’s for their own good. It’s pointless to get rid of one collectivist only to be replaced by another.
It is time to stop acting like cats, stop being fascinated by the personalities and deeds of our leaders. We must be like dogs and focus on their ideology, because that is the cause of their deeds.The solution is simple. It is to reclaim control of the power centers of society, one-by-one, just the way collectivists captured them in the first place. Replace them with individualists, people who have no personal agendas except to defend freedom.
This will unleash the vast human potential for prosperity and
happiness that can be realized only in the absence of coercion and oppression by the state.
To reach that goal, however, those who cherish freedom must do more than complain. They must reach for power. That is the meaning of the Freedom Force motto: Impotentes defendere libertatem non possunt, which is Latin for:
Those without power cannot defend freedom.
The strategy can be further summarized as:
Don’t fight city hall when you can BE city hall.
It's going to take a movement..... not compromise.
[quote=Time2help][quote=HughK]
T2H, you now have produced your list of internal enemies (Doug, me, Yoxa, Darbikrash, mark reis, Windlord…) and your external enemy (the Zionists). You and some others here are one step closer to creating a microcosm of the world like the one we live in now.
It doesn't have to be this way, but it does take accountability, compromise, and a consistent standard.
[/quote] In your mind I have done these things Hugh. The thoughts you are projecting are a reflection of your own. I don't care for enemies or the negative spiritual baggage they require. I do care for the objective truth. I'd recommend you stand in front of a mirror for a good while and think deeply on this.[/quote]
T2H,
I'm far from perfect, and I do look in the mirror.
I am also all for trying to find objective truth, so we have that in common.
You accused several of us (see screenshots below) of being government disinformation agents, and included images from a GCHQ presentation titled Gambits for Deception. These were clear ad hominem attacks with the intent of giving the impression that we were government agents. I found posts you did for Wildlife Tracker (who has met some of people here at Rowe, so I'd think that one of you would have at least stood up for him), mark reis, Windlord, me, and Mikey R. I recall you also doing the same thing for Doug and Yoxa, but I couldn't find the page for that right now. I also recall you doing the same thing for Darbikrash, but I think I was wrong about that, so I'll retract that claim.
When you call us disinformation agents for a regime that you - and most of the rest of us - clearly think of as a violator of rights and more, then it's an ad hom. attack, because you are not attacking our words, but you are attacking us.
My last post was not about projections. It was about your actions and your decisions to attack other people here in the community as government disinformation agents. And for whatever reason, Chris never saw it fit to step in with you and say something publicly, as he has with some of the rest of us for much less.
This is all objectively true and and here to see, just as someone could have easily debunked the Schulz attribution yesterday if they had cared to look carefully past their own beliefs - as we are encouraged to do here at PP, and for good reason - and try to learn the truth.
Cheers,
Hugh
That's not always how you come across.
[quote]
- Shame.
- Guilt.
- Stigma
If you think those things ought not to be used as weapons, make sure you don't dish them out yourself.
Your words Bud. Not mine. Calling someone out on bullshit is just that. Doesn't mean you hate them.
To whom should we be accountable? What else, exactly, should we compromise on? What standard do you feel we should we be held to? Do you feel that you are being treated unfairly?
Objective?
Perhaps your last post was not about projections. Perhaps it was about doing whatever you can to derail the topic at hand. Perhaps it was simply trying to persuade others to censor a frank discussion of one topic of many which just happened to swerve too close to material you prefer to be "off limits".
I didn't create that world Hugh. We were all born in to it. We all want to make it better, and many of us are doing our damnedest, thought some would most certainly differ on what that means. I believe that to do so requires honest reflection upon ourselves and on others. This means confronting unpleasant truths at times. And calling things as they are.
Example: "Collapsed due to fires caused by normal office furnishings".
Bullshit.
Perhaps we should all consider putting on one of these whilst the planet burns?
We agree on this part, and I'll leave it at that.
TTH-
I've noticed that when you are confronted with someone else that you feel is attempting to shame you for some opinion or action, you reject these attempts and react negatively.
And then you post this "man-with-box-head" photo wherein you seem to be ridiculing those who don't like being shamed.
Was the irony deliberate, or was it accidental?
If it was conscious and deliberate - man, my hat is off to you. 
OTTAWA - Canada will be at the head of one of the four battalions formed by NATO in Eastern Europe to strengthen defenses to face Russia, announces Canadian defense minister, Harjit Sajjan.Mr. Sajjan told The Canadian Press that the Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will reveal the extent of Canadian participation in the NATO summit in Warsaw next week.He says that this decision serves to demonstrate the solidarity of Canada to NATO's resistance to Russia.NATO strengthens its presence on the Polish and Baltic soil to deter Moscow attempting any aggression. Recall that Russia annexed the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea in 2014 and supports the separatist rebels of the east.The Minister Sajjan maintains that the ultimate goal is to revive the dialog between the alliance of 28 nations and Russia to appease what is described as the worst conflict between the West and the Kremlin since the end of the Cold War.On the occasion of his speech in the Commons on Wednesday, US President Barack Obama had urged Canada to provide a greater contribution to NATO. He argued that the alliance is more secure when each member country, including Canada, brings his "full contribution."
Yes Blackeagle, you have to be really highly trained to spot that when Putin is trying his best to be non-threatning, you see that's when he's at his most dangerous. But maybe you and I had better leave all that in the hands of smarter people than ourselves. And they're probably people who understand the value of money better too.
I came across this paper written by two Jewish University psychology professors on the “Siege Mentality in Israel.” Very strongly recommended. For anyone interested in how this works, please download the original paper.
It is widely considered a violation of social norms for an outsider to critically analyze another’s religion.
I also understand that ethnocentric identification runs very, very deep in the Jewish culture, and ANY criticism of ANY aspect of Judaism might be experienced as “a knife in the heart.” It is also painful to me personally to be viewed as an enemy by my Jewish friends and to have my honest attempts to understand the Jewish culture immediately characterized as bigotry. But, this is the very heart of that needs to be examined.
The RED/BLUE faction of Judaism (militant fundamentalist) is causing great harm in the world right now and I feel a deep moral imperative to evaluate it critically.
Daniel Bar-Tal and Dikla Antebi, two psychology professors at Tel-Aviv University, Israel, define siege mentality as a central belief held by a majority of a population with high confidence of certainty that “out-groups hold the intention to do wrong or inflict harm upon the in-group.”
“The beliefs that people have about the world, determine their reactions. People act and react to the world they believe exists. Therefore, an attempt to determine whether the world is actually hostile toward the particular in-group is irrelevant for the understanding of this group behavior. When group members believe that the rest of the world has negative behavior intentions toward them, they react accordingly.”Current Israeli culture includes the belief of perpetual and universal persecution (also sometimes called the perma-victim status). One example: Polls of young adult Israeli’s found broad agreement that “The Holocaust was not a one time event, it could happen again at anytime.” Many, many other examples are given from current Israeli culture.
Persecution woven into the fabric of the Jewish tradition
What was most important (and new) to me was that anti-Semitism is woven into the fabric the Jewish tradition dating from centuries before the Holocaust.
Jewish religious tradition differentiates between Israel and all the other nations. Every Saturday night a Jew recites the blessing saying,“Jewish tradition finds anti-Semitism to be the norm, the natural response of the non-Jew… Persecution is not simply a tragic consequence of being a Jew in a hostile world; rather it is build into the fabric of the Jewish covenant with history… integrated into the national ethos.”
In addition to the belief in Israel’s isolated status among the nations of the world, the Jewish tradition contains a deeply rooted belief in the other nation’s hatred of Israel and their intentions to hurt it. One example from the Passover Haggadah:“He who distinguishes between holy and secular, between light and darkness, between Israel and all other peoples.”
The Midrash (homiletic interpretation of the Scriptures) directly states that “all nations hate Israel” (Bereishit Rabbah, 63:7). As a commentary to this view Rabbi Shimon, one of the Tanna who lived in the 2nd century, suggested that the hatred of Israel is as a “rule,” meaning that the hatred of Israel is imprinted “in the Peoples of Esau [non-Jews] and cannot be uprooted.”“For more than once they (other nations) have risen against us to destroy us; in every generation they rise against us and seek our destruction. But the Holy One, blessed be he, saves us from their hands.”
…
“Pour out Thy wrath upon the nations that know Thee not; and upon Kingdoms that call not upon Thy names; for they have consumed Jacob [the Jews] and laid waste his habitation.”
“Peretz Smolenskin, the father of Spiritual Zionism, posited that anti-Semitism is an emotion rooted in the hearts of the other nations, which is handed down from one generation to the next.”
Theodor Herzl, the father of Political Zionism wrote in 1896“All of humanity among whom Jews live, is infected to the depths of their soul with the poison of anti-Semitism, from the illiterate farmer to the outstanding personalities of the current generation. (Briman, 1951, p.6).”
This paper surprised me by explaining that two Jewish academics understand that the belief that Jews are always persecuted is woven into the very fabric of the (RED/BLUE) Jewish culture and has been for thousands of years.“Whenever they [Jews] live in perceptible numbers, they are more or less persecuted….. The nations in whose midst Jews live are all, either covertly or openly anti-Semitic.”
Two issues:
-
Jewish culture is not this uniform thing. There are many different types of Jews, just as there are many types of Christians. The reform Jews are not RED/BLUE, no more than modern-day Christians are RED/BLUE. I'd encourage you to go read about the different flavors so you can get a sense of the diversity.
-
Israelis are in a class all by themselves. They are culturally vastly different from (say) American Jews. I've worked with both. Many more Israelis are RED/BLUE - but I believe it is about the environment there on the ground. Four wars in recent memory and an infinite number of skirmishes has that effect. And the latest: there is a knife-attack there almost every day. The following article suggested 100 attacks over a 3 month period.
I once asked an Israeli co-worker - are you religious? He laughed, and said, "simply living in Israel was Jewish enough for me." And the technical discussions? It always felt to me like someone would end up shot. It would always lead off with, "excuse me, we need to have this part in Hebrew." (Five minutes of shouting). "OK, it has been decided."
Grandfather may have been a zealot - or maybe was fleeing Russia, or Iran, or somewhere else and needed a place to go. The grandson today - he's just trying to survive.
Seriously. Go to Israel and see for yourself. I do not think it has anything to do with religion - except for the guys who (literally) wear the black hats - who are resented by their more secular countrymen because they don't work, they have a lot of babies, and often happen to be the swing vote in Parliament between Likud and Labor.
Siege mentality though - perfectly accurate. Doing everyday things in Israel is far more of a struggle than it is in other places. And my contract job there was only three months - and at a very peaceful time. No way you could get me there today, not for anything.
I was single, traveling alone on a one-way ticket. Leaving the country? A one hour interview at the airport. And that's with my Israeli boss by my side vouching for me. Everything there was difficult, in ways its hard to describe unless you've been through it. Armed guards at the malls searching everyone. I can only imagine how much more annoying it is today.
Here's a thought. Put a bunch of Christians in that same situation - I suspect you'd get the identical behavior. Like Blackeagle's poor city-dwelling Muslims: environment trumps everything. Its hard to turn the other cheek when the out-group are suicide-stabbing the in-group at random every day. Anyone drops into RED/BLUE in that environment, no matter where they started. (And of course the out-group is totally outgunned; stabbing a nearby target with your kitchen knife is about all that's left open to them).
US troops in Falluja responded to the four dead contractors back in 2004 with a massive military crackdown - which resulted in the creation of more terrorists. Did those American soldiers come from a RED/BLUE culture? Perhaps we should look to the bible for the source of the problem? Maybe there is some secret Christian plot to rule the world from…oh wait, we do that already. And its not all that secret.
I really think you're looking in the wrong place for the answer, when common sense and all the evidence points to something else. And - just perhaps - that's why your Jewish friends grow annoyed with you.
Dave,
Largely in agreement. Has anyone looked into the field of epigenetics? Fascinating stuff. I'm currently ploughing my way through Robert Sapolsky's Stanford lectures and about halfway through. It's seriously worth your time if you can spare 40+ hours for his 25 lectures.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNnIGh9g6fA&list=PL150326949691B199&index=1
The concept is really simple when you come to think about it; genes don't decide anything by themselves, nor does environment decide anything by itself - it's the interaction between genes and environment which is important. i.e. genes select for the environment that they are exposed to. For example, there is no 'submission gene'. They realised this by studying birds - if a chick were born with different colour feathers to the rest of the flock it attracted unwanted attention. The other chicks would peck away at their discoloured sibling until it developed social regression and viola! You have a submissive bird based purely on the set of feathers it received at birth in combination with an unforgiving environment! What would have happened if the chick were born into a more forgiving environment? I'm guessing any male chick subjected to this treatment would have his breeding opportunities, and thus his ability to pass on 'defective' feather patterns, severely diminished.
Siege mentally is a rather extreme environmental condition and highly likely to select a different set of genes to prosper than those exposed to tranquil lands and starry nights. Perhaps 2 - 3 Israeli generations isn't a large enough data set to conclude anything meaningful at the minute. Dare I say, 'watch this space?'
Sandpuppy,
I've been specific about why I think your attempts to understand have turned into bigotry. It's not a characterization. There is plenty of evidence that many of your posts have crossed over into bigotry, even if you don't intend this.
Here is some evidence that you have, for whatever reason, come to the point where you make bigoted claims, such as that the American media is controlled by Jews and therefore they forward the Neocon agenda. The implication there being that all - or almost all - Jews think alike.
-you say that Jews themselves can't speak against Israel for reasons that you cannot go into further.
-you say that the Jewish culture is fiercely ethnocentric. Is it more ethnocentric than American culture? Chinese culture? Russian culture? I can point to a lot of examples of how these cultures are also very ethnocentric and that their governments have manipulated weaker countries for centuries. Why the fixation on Jewish culture? This fixation is one aspect of the bigoted nature of your posts.
-you say that the end goal is one world government, based in Jerusalem.
I've asked you about the anti-semitic currents in Guyenot, and you've refused to address those. Why is it, for example, that Guyenot finds it necessary to speculate that Machiavelli's lineage may have been Jewish? Why does he post articles about how it really was the Jews who killed Jesus on anti-semitic French nationalist websites? This fixation on Jews suggests that far from simply trying to understand 9/11, anti-semitism motivates at least some aspects of his work. Even though it's plain to see, you never bothered to point any of this out in your book review. Discerning reviewers separate a book's wheat from its chaff. Did you believe and accept everything he wrote?
The fact that you trust the conclusions of openly white supremacist Kevin MacDonald - and are not even willing to explain how you distinguish which parts of MacDonald's work are reliable and which parts are not - is another example.
These are not immediate characterizations. The claim that your posts have become bigoted are borne out over months of evidence.
The reason that you have claimed that this is all so important, and that you - and the rest of us - really need to understand this issue - stems from your interest in the nature of the deep state, an interest that many of us probably share, although I don't think there's much I can do about it, and so have turned my energy towards more productive lines of inquiry.
But, if you really do see understanding 9/11 and the deep state as a pressing need, then why, so far, have you not mentioned any other accounts of the deep state? Why almost no time and energy looking into other elements of it, such as white nativism, American corporations, the military-industrial-intelligence complex, American imperialism? Why are you so fixated on the Jews?
My speculation is that some part of your psyche is attracted to narratives with clear good guys and clear bad guys, and that this desire to simplify is shared by some others sympathetic to your work. However, that may be wrong; I don't know. That would certainly fit with Dan Ariely's analysis, where people are more motivated and energized by threats that have a face than by threats that do not.
What is clear is that some people here continue to to be lured into assigning blame for this or that. But a better way forward is to acknowledge that our most pressing predicaments are not caused by any one person, ethnic group, political party, or cabal.
Even if everything you claimed were true - and it's not - it wouldn't account for our civilization's dependence on depleting fossil fuels or the fact that we face climate change and other environmental limits to growth.
These big-picture problems are far more threatening than anything you're talking about, and yet, because they are the consequences of a unsustainable civilization, i.e. faceless threats, they don't appeal to most people's emotions. This is why people here are essentially distracted when talking about Clinton, Trump and Obama, or about Putin, Janukovitch, Xi, and Netanyahu.
This desire to assign blame and designate evil - whether it's the Jews as a whole or the just the bankers - are distractions from the fact that this civilization - and all of the political regimes within it - is unsustainable and prone to contraction or collapse. The way forward is simple, and involves building local communities and resilient homesteads, neighborhoods and local economies.
This is something we all agree on, and there is a lot of work to be done on that front. But even here, people sometimes prefer the circus to plowing their own fields.
Hugh
During my training in history as an undergrad, I was always told to "understand the source" when reading some bit of material. Who was the source and what motivated him? If you just read the document without the writer's back story, you couldn't adjust for the biases and you might be tempted to take it all at face value.
Lectures from the best professors always included the backstory of the writer of a given document we were reviewing. It was my first introduction to thinking critically about history.
And so Hugh brings up a great point. If one of your writers posts on white supremacist sites, it is at least possible that's where some of his sympathies lie.
And of course, constructing a fake backstory for someone else ("you work for the bankers", "you're employed by the state of Israel") is an attempt to discredit what someone else is saying through fraud, without addressing them directly. But nobody here would do this.
The amount of weight a particular writer puts on a specific factor depends largely on his underlying philosophy. How much does an underlying religion account for a given action? Well if you hate people of the Muslim faith for whatever reason, you are likely to assign a larger percentage of "blame" to the religion and less of a percent to environment. And if the work is not grounded in data, its much easier to do this.
Tom and I have had this with Islam certainly. Not saying he hates or anything - but he's convinced that Islam in and of itself is bad - and furthermore, may be the weightiest factor in assessing danger. I think environment is the weightier factor, but I'm definitely willing to agree that the concepts of Jihad and getting into paradise by killing people is definitely problematic.
Certainly the recent event in Bangladesh where a group of rich kids killed a bunch of foreigners at a bread shop shouting You-Know-What suggests a certain flaw in the design of Islam that can end up in violence - points for Tom. There was no personal environment-o-poverty to motivate these kids. But what then about the dad's horror over what his son has done? Same religious background, wildly different response.
In the US plenty of kids were radicalized in the 60s and 70s - and not just the poor ones. Was that about Christianity? Or just a phase sweeping through the culture? Anyone remember the Symbionese Liberation Army? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbionese_Liberation_Army
Luke- Epigenetics is fascinating stuff. I haven't gone through these lectures, but I was introduced to the material by another lecturer. I'd be willing to bet there is an effect here. If a depression can have such an effect, certainly a siege could as well. Then let's add in surviving the camps. What does that experience end up passing down to the kids and grandkids?
Found a better place for the post.
information that he has posted over many months, I have placed HK on my ignore list.
The web's 'echo chamber' leaves us none the wiser (Wired - May 2013)By rights, the internet should be doing more than anything else to open our eyes to new perspectives and experiences. We're moving away from that: as the web becomes increasingly tailored to the individual, we're more likely than ever to be served personalised content that makes us happy and keeps us clicking. That happy content is seldom anything that challenges our viewpoint, and there's a risk that this distorts our view of the wider world outside our browser.
We have reached the stage where someone offering a contrasting opinion is viewed as deliberately trying to wind up others. Ironically, highlighting a dissenting voice as "trolling" is another possible example of the echo-chamber effect in action: it's assumed that this voice is so outrageous that it can't be genuine, and the orthodoxy of the community continues unchallenged.