please read and comment

by **slimmouse** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:23 am

Youve won me over again by making a great point. Your soul or your family ? The ultimate leap of faith. I dont have a family to speak of, so in my case, theres no contest. But of course, to those with families and regularly mortal committments, this is how the general game is played. Save to say, that how do you "square the circle" in 20 years time, given the clear direction as to where this is going ?

by **Rigorous Intuition** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:27 am

Honestly Floyd, I don't know about the liability under Canadian law, since the board's not hosted in Canada. But it's never been a concern, because as I've said, I agree with the law. And there's no One World commissar making me say so.

by **Hugh Manatee Wins** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:29 am

Jeff wrote <blockquote>Quote:<hr>I'm not an absolutist with respect to free speech. I believe speech has a cost, and irresponsible speech can be costly. So I measure my own words.<hr></blockquote> Jeff, you are right to remind us yet again to 'respect an implied social context.' BamaBecky, I've been in your position and learned from it. DE, thank you for admitting how large a target Larouche is. You and I had an argument once over Larouche but I learned something about being more careful with my posts and also about focus, as in, >readers only have so much bandwith for discernment and discrediting chaff is going up so focus and get cogent.< Principle of psychological warfare: 'People need visible targets for their frustrations.' And we all fall into this pattern so easily. (I swear this board is an ideal cointelpro training ground. "Watch this, I'm going to randomly alternate using the terms 'Jew,' 'Israeli,' and 'Zionist.' Just watch them go at each other. Yeehaw!") Don't you all think false-flag 'neonazis' showed up to poison the atmosphere? I do. I recall without a grudge, DE, you and I had a curfuffle over Larouche when I was unregistered as 'Watchful Citizen.' You accused me of being way too approving of Larouche in a post (naive, actually) and challenged me to deny being in his organization which you or a friend had some terrible personal experience with involving baseball bats. Gawd, that got messy and complicated. I hesitate to bring it up but the episode is quite illustrative of how easy it is for different levels of education/understanding/vocabulary/emphasis to be a vehicle for sowing distrust and division. Isn't this, in fact, exactly how the elite keep the lower and middle classes from uniting against them?The GOP-CIA-CFR play this card to their advantage leaving college-educated liberals wondering how they became the bad guys to so many of the less-educated. So this thread seems to be yet another time to clear the air at this over-informed and over-vigilant board. I hope you (DE) would have a healthier respect for avoiding personalized accusations against BBecky. I now certainly have a healthier respect for being clear about what I embrace as opposed to what I'd like to analyze. I'm not so laissez-faire about where info comes from since our go around and warn people of the dark side of a website like truthseeker.co.uk when they present the light side, just as you did with Larouche albeit with a higher heat-to-light ratio than I thought warranted. Guess baseball bats will do that to your perspective. So I don't accuse a poster of being a bullshit artist or scorn them for having only part of the recipe. I merely warn them of the turds I've seen at the bottom of the soup they want to share with us. Like- Greg Szymanski at ArcticBeacon.com recently revealed his stripes as a disinfo artist by garbling the Bush-Nazi connection and I warned a local alternative paper running Greg's 9/11 articles of this tricky discrediting tactic. So, BamaBecky, I sympathize with your Eustace Mullins situation where you were interested in the economics history and ended up getting demonized for the stuff you didn't know. By posting a lengthy 9/11-related Larouche essay and commenting on what I thought his EIR group "got right" about cryptocracy and its driving history of economics along with how the Bush CIA locked him up, I got identified with the uglier side of him -gay and Jew-bashing. And because I knew (or could articulate) about some of it, there was distrust that I didn't know ALL of it. This plays into the hands of those who don't want us to know anything on a topic. Worse, DE's accusation and the post-neoNazi visitor vigilant atmosphere led another board member to view my postings as 'code words' and accusing me of even worse so it snowballed terribly with me uncorking in capital letters in frustration just like you. I even put off registering to 'own' my postings because I didn't want have to change usernames (as DE did by trying the 'veritas' route) and thereby affirm the unfounded accusations. Instead I remained as unregistered 'Watchful Citizen' for a couple of months to exonerate myself. What an energy drain. COINTELPRO accomplished! Which I think is is the useful learning part of the episode. At the time this board had been visited by people touting neo-Nazi pro-Zundel attitudes and the atmosphere was a cointelpro wet dream, suspiciously vigilant. Bama, you accurately illustrate the effect of suspicion when you are hesitant to even broach a topic. That is exactly the intended effect of professional disruptors and we can innocently fall in to the same trap without spooks pushing us. The Mossad, ADL, CIA and Chip Berlet have used this fear of being labeled anti-semitic to their advantage and we all must be less knee-jerk judgemental about others and less thin-skinned ourselves to not play into their hands. DE is very knowledgable and I always enjoy reading his posts but he is also extremely judgemental about other board members (not uncommon here as you might have noticed) even to the point of being quite hard on himself if he misstates a fact. That gave me some insight into the intellectual rigor DE ascribes to and his impatience with even hearing about Larouche. Well, alright. DE, please lighten up on those of us who only know part of a story, ok? There's a steep learning curve to parapolitics and many discrediting booby traps have been set for newbies who pick up a topic. And just getting info is a major accomplishment these days no matter how it is gotten. So encourage it and help it along by warning of pitfalls you've learned. I admire your knowledge base and benefit from it but getting chewed up for not knowing as much as you is unneccessary at the same time that I share your frustration with wading through the half truths, muddled thinking, and disinfo traps. With the Pentagon attacking the internet and discussion boards we should probably respond two ways: 1) by counterintuitively being LESS inclined to ascribe guilt-by-association in general since this is exactly how info and whistleblowers get neutralized in the info war 2) while still attempting to use the most credible source for info we want to share to avoid further debasing the credibility of info the Powers That Be want discredited. Fight paradox with paradox, I suppose. end DE Larouche redux. There is the built in paradox of partisan interest/hate producing critical information on a topic which is partly valid and partly skewed due to predisposition. As in, dirt on Dems comes from Repubs dirt on Repubs comes from Dems. So info on banking is out there from those who see 'Jewish' bankers. The Mullins problem. So info on Mossad is out there from those who see 'Jewish' New World Order. The Paul Irving problem. (I think.) I think this site can maturely handle weeding out the good info regardless of where it comes from without going into the 'Code Word Spins.' AS LONG AS WE DON'T GO COINTELPRO ON EACH OTHER. oops. My capitals key accidentally locked. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"> Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=hughmanateewins>Hugh Manatee Wins</A> at: 3/1/06 9:40 pm

by **Floyd Smoots** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:35 am

C,mon here, host Jeff! Moonies and Loonies (like tom Cruise-aroony? Hell, even I'm not afraid of them. They only manage to intimidate their own former members and those who desperately wish to leave those cults. But the so-called hate crime laws of your homeland, and too Godforsaken many other countries, especially Israel's, are nothing more, in the eyes of freedom-loving people everywhere, than a fascist form of stamping out freedom of speech. If a gay person pisses me off, it is nowhere civilized or polite to call them a fag or a queer. We all agree with that, even thought I have used those words myself in intemperate moments. Does it hurt their feelings? Yes, of course. Should I go to prison for "hate crimes"? In Israel, Canada, the U.K., Australia, Germany, the answer, sadly, is YES YOU HATER!!! <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/devil.gif ALT=":evil">

by **NewKid** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:39 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I don't understand why, since I've written critically of deep power structures such as Scientology and the Unification Church, I should then be expected to embrace Holocaust revisionism.<hr></blockquote> Way to avoid the question, Jeff. It's Holocause revisionism, sure enough, but not that Holocaust. It's the 1000 year Elvin Holocaust that you insist on revising. My friend in Canada who had this great book on the ancient dragon bloodlines and the NWO tells me that he shopped it around and Dundurn wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole. C'mon Jeff, maybe you're just protesting a little too much? What say you??<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/roll.gif ALT=":rollin">

by **MASONIC PLOT** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:42 am

Jeff, thanks for the response. I am not accusing you of anything, lets be clear on that. I am just taking a look at what is there and connecting some dots. Personally I am not what one would called a "Holocaust Revisionist." However, I do question the official story of all events, including 9-11, the JFK murder, the Iraq War and many many other things. That is just who I am and I pray each day that others would become more like me. The ability to question the official party line is a crucial aspect of a free nation. Jeff, I am simply trying to understand why it is called FREE SPEECH to publish hateful and spiteful cartoons about Muslims, but it is HATE SPEECH to do the same regarding the Jewish People. I have nothing against Jewish People or Muslims or anyone else for that matter. While we agree on many many things, Jeff, it seems you are being a bit of a hypocrit on this matter. Why is it ok to call into question the motives of christians, pedophiles, muslims, moonies, scientologists, freemasons, templars, gun runners, drug dealers, politicians, fascists, communists and "high weirdos" but mention the slightest thing about the Jewish People, the legitimacy of their State of Israel, the high crimes against humanity by people like Sharon and others, the deceptive polices of the Mossad etc and you get lumped with the same morons who shave their heads, wear jackboots, brown shirts and declare their love for the Reich? + Why is it this way Jeff? More importantly why do you lend it your support. As smart as you are you mean to tell me you do not get it? Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=masonicplot>MASONIC PLOT</A> at: 3/1/06 9:56 pm

by **antiaristo** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:43 am

Floyd, slim, I absolutely agree. We all have to make our own judgements on this. I've said before that I've thought it all through, and my conscience is clear. If current trends continue, I see no future for my children. They feel I have abandoned them. They have no idea of how things were for the working class in Britain all the way up to World War II. They were truly horrible. And I see those times returning. I see those times being brought back by the person that lived them. By the person whose own life spanned the entire century. That scares the shit out of me. Do you really believe I'm not aware of the derision I lay myself open to when I try to explain what is going on? From the ignorant, taking their easy shots. From the complicit, laying their traps. But I now see the people here in Spain waking up. There are lots of things that tell me so, that they are finally reacting to my warnings. But nobody ever helps me in return. That is our weakness. Love, true love for one's fellow man, is dying with the rush for personal enrichment. I got a letter from my eldest daughter to my mother asking why I was unable to help her buy a warm coat for the winter. Can you imagine how that feels? And that is just a sampler. And all I ever see on television is how wonderful these royals are. How glamorous, how caring, how decent. When they have literally stolen the food from out of the mouths of my children. In their efforts to starve me into submission. And all I ever get on this fucking board is "You're an anti semite". Or more recently, Stormfront. From those who claim the high moral ground. Yet I cannot give in to despair. For to do so is to give up hope. And then I am dead.

by **slimmouse** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:48 am

Jeff ; Is it reasonable ...... Ive asked the question previously, and I trust you read it. On edit . Forget that question. We all have our crosses to bear I suppose. And it makes for an interesting forum, where the weight of logic is plain for all to see. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=slimmouse@rigorousintuition>slimmouse</A> at: 3/1/06 9:57 pm

by **professorpan** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:03 am

First, the whole non-issue about Qutb putting a fucking COMMA in the wrong place does not constitute lying or twisting someone's words. I feel compelled to speak about this because it keeps coming up, and Qutb was rightly criticizing Anti's bizarre questions about whether I was a Jew and/or a Mason. Get the fuck over it, guys. The fracas is utterly inane. I think anyone besides the supposedly "aggrieved" and his defenders can see how bizarre it is to keep beating that dead horse. And Slim, my man, there is a serious streak of paranoia in what you have just written. If you think the crap that gets slung around here is bringing in outside provocateurs from the "ADL and similar teams," then I think you put too much stock in this particular echo chamber/monkey house. Too many of the regular posters here think they're on a holy crusade, and that each incisive sentence they write or angry letter to the Queen they paste sends shivers through the PTB Illuminati headquarters, and that teams of provocateurs spend hours scouring this board in order to bring discord into their ranks. Sorry, dudes, it might make you feel good, but it ain't true. How much really dangerous information is presented here? Little to none. Posting to a bulletin board with 400-plus regular users, most of whom peddle recycled and regurgitated nonsense, does not rattle the men behind the curtains. But feel free to continue slandering people who don't buy into your BS, and accusing anyone who doesn't buy into your brand of groupthink as provocateurs. It sure is a hell of a lot easier than having rational discussions. The easiest defense against an argument you can't win is to imagine anyone who doesn't agree with you is out to get you. Professor Provocateur, secret agent of the ADL, JDL, Mossad, Opus Dei, and used Talmud salesman

by **smithtalk** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:03 am

this is chasing tails, theres so much going on out there, and in here, were all getting giddy, repeating the same old script, jews, religion, freedom of speech, why is it so effective?

by **Dreams End** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:08 am

This is what it sounds like when a board dies.... (Apologies to the artist formerly known as the artist formerly known as Prince)

by **Rigorous Intuition** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:08 am

"I am simply trying to understand why it is called FREE SPEECH to publish hateful and spiteful cartoons about Muslims, but it is HATE SPEECH to do the same regarding the Jewish People" Naturally it depends on who's speaking, and who's framing the terms of reference. Your examples could just as easily be inverted. I call them both hate speech. And seriously: "Why is it ok to call into question the motives of christians, pedophiles, muslims, moonies, scientologists, freemasons, templars, gun runners, drug dealers, politicians, fascists, communists and 'high weirdos" but mention the slightest thing about the Jewish People" I can't think of an instance when I've called into question the motives of billions of Christians and Muslims. But more importantly, is it not okay to "call into question" the motives of pedophiles and gun runners, and can such associations be equated with a people - any people? "The slightest thing" - what might that be? Holocaust denial? I've stated repeatedly that Israel's place in the parapolitical world, including the crimes of the Mossad, are valid topics here, and I've never shut one down.

by **slimmouse** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:08 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>How much really dangerous information is presented here? Little to none. Posting to a bulletin board with 400-plus regular users, most of whom peddle recycled and regurgitated nonsense, does not rattle the men behind the curtains.<hr></blockquote> Couldnt agree more Prof. Pan. The God of the physical, the earth, the negative, and all that. Thank the divine, Ive got work tommorrow, where I can talk to some real people, and make a real difference. Not that this will affect the outcome either, right Pan ?

by **Rigorous Intuition** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:12 am

I've been trying to juggle this thread, putting kids to bed, meeting a magazine deadline and my next blog post tonight. I didn't intentionally not answer your question, it just kind of slid on by. I'll go looking for it.

by **antiaristo** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:15 am

pan, If it's all so irrelevant, why get so agitated? If it's all so irrelevant, why the need to cheat?

please read and comment

Re: Great point floyd.

Re: A Sad, But Simple Posit....

Re: See how DE brings out the Mullins stuff word for word

Addendum

Re: Great point floyd.

JEFF

Re: Great point floyd.

Re: And meanwhile.......

Get over yourself

Re: And meanwhile.......

Re: And meanwhile.......

Re: JEFF

Re: Get over yourself

slimmouse

Re: Get over yourself

Who is online