TruthSeeker24's anti-N.W.O. corner

Pro-God, Pro-Life, anti-New World Order, Anti-Secret Societies, Pro-Civil Liberties, anti-Torture, anti-National ID Card, Pro-Family, pro-Constitution, Pro-Republic, Anti-Neo Conservativism, Pro-Net Neutrality, Pro-Home Schooling, Anti-Voting Fraud, Pro-Good Israelis & Pro-Good Palestinians, Anti-Human Trafficking, Pro-Health Freedom, Anti-Codex Alimentarius, Pro-Action, Anti-Jesuit Order, Pro-9/11 Truth Movement, Anti-Genocide, and Pro-Gun. My name is Timothy and I'm from the state of Virginia.

Saturday, November 29, 2008

Security Blanket: Western Democracy and the Strategy of Tension

From http://www.prisonplanet.com/security-blanket-western-democracy-and-the-strategy-of-tension.html

Security Blanket: Western Democracy and the Strategy of Tension

Chris Floyd
Empire Burlesque
Thursday, Nov 27, 2008

The idea that a democratic government would deliberately create fake “extremist groups” then send them out to foment violence and terrorism — in order to discredit legitimate opposition to elite rule and to “justify” authoritarian powers — has long been derided in “serious” circles as that worst of modern heresies: “conspiracy theory.” Anyone advancing such a preposterous notion is instantly relegated to the ranks of the “lunatic fringe,” and dismissed with varying degrees of contempt and condescension.

And the woeful fact that millions of the ruminants out there in the vast public herd swallow these wild tales and believe that their betters are up to no good is also widely deplored in the higher circles of public discourse. As any fully-accredited, perk-laden, sinecured think-tanker can tell you, democratic governments are led by men and women devoted to public service. Sure, there can be fierce disputes over policies and approaches and outcomes and ideologies and competence. Sure, some people may step over a line here and there in their pursuit of what they believe is the nation’s best interests. But just as western democracies do not torture, do not launch aggressive wars, do not spy upon their own people or imprison them by the millions, they most assuredly do not create and support extremist groups and instigate acts of terror and chaos to advance authoritarian agendas.

It is indeed unfortunate that the general public is prey to these disturbing theories, which breed such a widespread distrust of the noble intentions and essential (if occasionally misguided or incompentently executed) goodness of our leading men and women. However, there is a very reasonable explanation for the credence given to these fringe beliefs:

They happen to be true.

(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)



We’ve written often here of the Pentagon’s plan to foment terrorism where needed to achieve the goals of the “National Security State.” This is but one of a staggering array of examples of the use of “the strategy of tension” by the “advanced” Western democracies of the modern world. This week came yet another. As Robert Mancini reports in the Guardian, the former president of Italy, Francesco Cossiga, let a great many cats out of the bag when he gave some sage advice to Italy’s current interior minister, Robert Maroni, on how to deal with the ongoing protests by students and professors over funding cuts for higher education. As Mancini notes, Cossiga — who had once been interior minister himself, as well as prime minister — told the Quotidiano Nazionale:
“Maroni should do what I did when I was secretary of the interior. He should withdraw the police from the streets and the universities, infiltrate the movement with secret (provacateurs) agents, ready to do anything, and, for about 10 days, let the demonstrators devastate shops, set fire to cars and lay waste the cities. After which, strengthened by popular consent, the sound of ambulance sirens should be louder than the police cars. The security forces should massacre the demonstrators without pity, and send them all to hospital. They shouldn’t arrest them, because the magistrates would release them immediately, but they should beat them up. And they should also beat up those teachers who stir them up. Especially the teachers. Not the elderly lecturers, of course, but the young women teachers.”
Mancini notes that Cossiga’s advice tracks closely with his own experience at the head of Italy’s security organs in the 1970s:
For students of Italian political history, the interview is fascinating for the light it sheds on Cossiga’s political views and in particular his activities between 1976 and 1978 when he too was interior minister, presiding over the police. In 1977, a demonstration by the Radical Party (partito radicale) was attacked by armed individuals who opened fire causing the death Giorgiana Masi, a 20 year-old girl.

Cossiga could not, or would not, explain what took place that day. More specifically, he was unable to shed light on whether the attackers came from within the police force….

Hence the interest in the recent interview, which sheds light on one of the most secretive periods of Italian history - the so-called “strategy of tension” that began with the 1969 bombing of Banca Nazionale dell’Agricoltura in Milan (carried out by the far-right and blamed on anarchists) through to the events at the G8 summit in Genoa in July 2001 where the mysterious right-wing “black-blok” group created the mayhem and destruction which brought forth the police violence against thousands of anti-globalisation protestors.
Yes, the story of terrorist creation, chaos and murder by Western governments is an old one — especially in Italy, the epicenter of Operation Gladio, which I outlined in a Moscow Times column some years ago:



“You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple: to force…the public to turn to the state to ask for greater security.”

This was the essence of Operation Gladio, a decades-long covert campaign of terrorism and deceit directed by the intelligence services of the West – against their own populations.
Hundreds of innocent people were killed or maimed in terrorist attacks – on train stations, supermarkets, cafes, offices – which were then blamed on “leftist subversives” or other political opponents. The purpose, as stated above in sworn testimony by Gladio agent Vincenzo Vinciguerra, was to demonize designated enemies and panic the public into supporting ever-increasing powers for government leaders – and their elitist cronies.

First revealed by Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti in 1991, Gladio (from the Latin for “sword”) is still protected to this day by its founding patrons, the CIA and MI6. Yet parliamentary investigations in Italy, Switzerland and Belgium have shaken out a few fragments of the truth over the years. These have been gathered in a new book, NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe, by Daniele Ganser, as Lila Rajiva reports on CommonDreams.org.

Originally set up as a network of clandestine cells to be activated behind the lines in case of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe, Gladio quickly expanded into a tool for political repression and manipulation, controlled and funded by NATO and Washington. Using right-wing militias, underworld figures, government provocateurs and secret military units, Gladio not only carried out widespread terrorism, assassinations and electoral subversion in democratic states like Italy, France and West Germany, but also bolstered fascist tyrannies in Spain and Portugal, abetted the military coup in Greece, and aided Turkey’s ferocious repression of the Kurds. All of this in the name of “preserving democracy” and “defending civilization.”

Among the “smoking guns” unearthed by Ganser is a Pentagon document, Field Manual FM 30-31B, which detailed the methodology for launching terrorist attacks in nations that “do not react with sufficient effectiveness” against “communist subversion.” Ironically, the manual states that the most dangerous moment comes when leftist groups “renounce the use of force” and embrace the democratic process. It is then that “US army intelligence must have the means of launching special operations which will convince Host Country Governments and public opinion of the reality of the insurgent danger.” Naturally, these peace-throttling “special operations must remain strictly secret,” the document warns.

Indeed, it would not do for, say, the families of the 85 people ripped apart by the August 2, 1980 bombing of the Bologna train station to know that their loved ones had been murdered by “men inside Italian state institutions and…by men linked to the structures of United States intelligence,” as the Italian Senate concluded after its investigation in 2000.

The Bologna atrocity is an example of what Gladio’s masters called “the strategy of tension” – fomenting fear to keep populations in thrall to “strong leaders” who will protect the nation from the ever-present terrorist threat. And as Rajiva notes, this strategy wasn’t limited to Western Europe. It was applied – with gruesome effectiveness – in Central America by the Reagan-Bush administrations. During the 1980s, rightwing death squads, guerrilla armies and state security forces – armed, trained and supplied by the United States – murdered tens of thousands of people throughout the region, often acting with particular savagery at those times when peaceful solutions to the conflicts seemed about to take hold….

And as we have often noted here, similar operations — the “El Salvador option,” death squads, “High-Value Targeting,” etc. — have been an integral part of the Anglo-American subjegation of Iraq. Indeed, they are a pillar of the “counterinsurgency doctrine” proclaimed by the other president-in-waiting, David Petraeus, and now avidly embraced by the War Machine. As Tara McElvey reports in The American Prospect, the Pentagon is eager to apply “High-Value Targeting” and refinements of the “Phoenix Program” — in which U.S. forces and local proxies murdered more than 20,000 people — and the whole panoply of “psy-ops” to imperial imbroglios around the world, applying them “to Afghanistan, then Pakistan, the Philippines, Colombia, Somalia, and elsewhere.”

It’s true, of course, that the American people — and Europeans, as well — are showing signs of growing weariness and wariness of the heavy-handed security regimes their governments have imposed upon them. There also seems to be little enthusiasm for plowing ahead in the various killing fields opened up by their elites to reap the enormously profitable blood fruits of war. Public toleration for this extravagant adventurism will be even more diminished as the cratering of the global economy — caused by the greed and deceit of those same elites — continues to deepen.

But more war is exactly what we’ve been promised by our agents of change. More war, an even bigger War Machine, “tougher” security measures, national ID cards packed with personal data and tracking devices, more surveillance cameras, new “preventive detention” laws — and more unbounded authority to use public money to bail out the elite. Yet how to make this happen in the current atmosphere of exhaustion and anxiety? How to catalyze the public into continuing to support the Security State? How to discredit the rising chorus of opposition to neocolonialism, elite cronyism, rampant militarism and growing authoritarianism?

Elite elders like Francesco Cossiga know the answer: the strategy of tension. The Gladio way. Was this the kind of thing Joe Biden was talking about, when he said the “young president” would be tested by a crisis, and forced to take unpopular measures in response?

It seems our “interesting times” are going to continue unabated in this bold new era.

11 Comments:

  • At 08:10 , Blogger Andrea Murrhteyn said...

    Tim, Frankly this is my perspective...

    Quite clear Chris Floyd's got a very airy fairy new age definition of 'strategy of tension'.

    But then it is the airy fairy new agers who will not only suck the Democracy Elites dicks, but will endlessly swallow. No wonder their brains are scrambled with toxic semen.

    They ain't got Lorena Bobbit's guts; and they wouldn't recognize Christian Fletcher, if he slapped them through the face (unlike Billy Wimsatt).

    I may not live in a nation state republic; elite demockery is alive and well in ANC demockery African KAFFIR land.

    But I sure as hell live in a human tube republic; where heart, mind and spirit agree; and act as one united Homer Lea Army. I might only be an army of one, but in this body there arn't any mob cells.

    What do you call someone who has a gun and can use it to acocmplish his task, but prefers to use threats of physical violence or torture? I call them a gutless fucking coward two-faced hypocrit pharisee.

    Why is it do you think that such a person possibly cannot take a look in the mirror and think the person he is looking at, is worth knowing?

    Until he does consider himself worth knowing, and accordingly has a core -- a nuclear heart, mind and spirit core, that functions as a republic, not an intellectual demockery over the rest of his body -- how the hell should he expect another republic being to recognize him for being an republic being?

    As a former Colonel in the South African Defence Force's Military Intelligence, who had plenty of connections in the CIA, MI6, Mossad, etc; told me one day over Coffee and Icecream, in St. George Square:

    "I did many things out of some sense of ideology, because I was told it was the right thing to do.

    "One of the things I probably learnt most from the whole experience is the horrible truth about what we as human beings are capable of doing to others and ourselves. Worse of all I learnt what I was capable of doing to another human being, and that was one of the most frightening, and still is one of the most frightening realities I have to live with.

    I don't want anything more to do with that kind of life, the secrets, the people who disbelieve you, things you do to gather information. The rest of my life I am dedicating to finding some peace for myself, finding myself, who am I.

    Most of my life has been lived taking orders, never questioning who I am, what do I want to do, do I agree with what I am being asked to do?

    Now it is my time to find myself, the person I hid deep inside. It's taking some time, but the silence of the mountains, singing of the birds, early morning sunrises, the quite time helps. Maybe one day I will know who I am, I will have found myself."

    This man, unlike plausibly the entire Jesuit Order of Military Intelligence FUCK UPS has the goddamn fucking balls to tell himself, THE TRUTH ABOUT WHO THE FUCK HE IS.

    YOU CANNOT FUCKING FIND YOURSELF, UNTIL YOU ARE WILLING TO CONFRONT THAT YOU DON'T KNOW WHO THE FUCK YOU ARE, OR WANT TO BE, OR WHY YOU ARE DOING WHAT YOU ARE DOING....

    Only people who DON'T KNOW WHO THE FUCK THEY ARE, AND WHO CERTAINLY COULDN'T TAKE A LOOK IN THE MIRROR AND LOOK THEMSELVES IN THE EYES, are interested in playing subprime farming demockery political games.

    Such games are pointless -- in my opinion -- BECAUSE THE INDIVIDUALS PLAYING THEM DON'T MEAN WHAT THEY SAY; I'M NOT EVEN SURE THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE SAYING. AND IT APPEARS VERY FEW KNOW THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HELL THEY ARE SAYING.

    So, you are more than welcome to take take any BS about 'strategy of tension' theories seriously; I just consider it more of the BS sexually frustrated jesuits, and moronic imbecile men, who think that what they are on the planet for is just to spread their toxic 'demockery' seed, do...

    The fact that what they insist on continue doing is making themselves less and less happy, less and less free, appears to be a reality their small little minds, are incapable of confronting; let alone acknowledging.

    It appears quite clear that penis rule, is not interested in penis freedom, and certainly not in penis happiness. And furthermore vagina's who ascribe to the penis rule posterity procreation paradigm, also are not interested in vagina freedom; and vagina happiness. They think they got a vagina to procreate children; they never asked themselves why they got a clitoris?

    Such penis's and vagina's think its more important for posterity to sow their toxic semen seed, and build the conformity prison that denies them any sensual freedom and happiness; just so their genes can be contributed to some future posterity gene pool. Fuck that.

    The genes in my body live in a mind, heart and spirit republic, not an ego-driven patriarchal paradigm demockery.

    So, maybe the pundit elites in the western and eastern demockery's will find out they don't know, they don't know themselves, and may wonder whether they may wish to find themselves... and maybe not.

    As far as I recall I've met a very, very few men who had the balls to consider the reality that they didn't know who the hell they were, and somewhat seriously wnated to find themselves: Jon Michael Dye, Johan de Jongh, Michael Martin, James Meyer.

    Prison gangs, and their emotionally, psychological and spiritually insecure gangleader fuckups, whether they are in some african prison, or more 'sophisticated environments' (sic) are all interested in one thing: DOMINATION; and almost 99% of the time they will use the threat of violence to maintain their dominance.

    Their 'opposition' does the same and it's an escalation of violence, who can inflict more violence and deception on the other; and manipulate their slave and cannon fodder with bullshit fake second hand religion ideologies.

    They are 'fake' sides; fake options, fake oppositions, because both of them support the demockery status quo; choosing either one side above the other is A FAKE CHOICE, it doesn't MEAN ANYTHING, besides a CHOICE FOR THE STATUS-QUO.

    The status-quo being tube beings, who are ruled not only nationally , but internallly by fake second hand religion oligarch demockery's, and ideologies.

    They cannot understand, that anyone is interested simply in a conversation and relationship of peers, not in domination, whether that is physically, intellectually (being right) or emotionally and spiritually.

    An example: On 19 July I was escorted to the court jail cells, by a black policeman who thought he was quite the macho stud, how he wanted to 'give the ladies a bit of the real thing'. So upon arriving at the cell, I said to him: Mr. Policeman, seeing as you think you have such macho stud capabilities, why not come and drop your pants, here infront of all of us, and give it to all of us. Come on, we are all waiting.' All the women in the cell shut up and looked at him. Total silence. He shut his mouth and left to inform the Magistrate that I had insulted him. The Magistrate's enquiring capacities being zero, he believed whatever any policeman says has to be the truth (didn't you know policemen never ever lie (sic)).

    So tell me what 'court' I was defying? If a country's courts require I defy my own humanity to myself, to be honest to everyone I meet, asshole or saint; should I respect my own republic laws, or the demockery courts laws?

    A court either wants to hear the truth, the whole truth and nothign but the truth, or it's run by a demockery oligarch who wants to hear lies, pretending it to be the truth, and worse pretending what their status-quo is dispending is JUSTICE (sic).

    So, if the entire country is too petrified to face reality and listen to what the fuck you are saying, and prefer the status quo -- and accuse you of insanity; should you lie to yourself, in order for them to consider you 'sane'.

    Fuck their status quo definitions of insanity. Why the fuck should i be bothered about what people think, who -- like Colonel James Meyer -- have NEVER ASKED THEMSELVES WHY IT IS WHY THEY THINK WHAT THEY THINK (BECAUSE THEY WERE ORDERED TO THINK THAT WAY, AND THEY HAVEN'T GOT A CRITICAL THINKING BRAINCELL IN THEIR GODDAMN FUCKING BRAINS).

    So, what the fuck does it matter if a country in denial thinks I am insane? If a predominant black and white majority of the country wants to continue BEING KAFFIRS, THEY ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO BE KAFFIRS. IF BEING KAFFIRS MAKES THEM HAPPY, IF BREEDING CHILDREN FOR SLAVE AND CANNON FODDER IS WHAT THEY CONSIDER 'LOVE'..... THEN I AM NOT INTERESTED IN THEIR GODDAMN FUCKING DEFINITON OF 'SANITY'.

    Every child I ever had an agreement with to take responsibility for, our relationship was built upon the foundation of a republic. Not demockery domination, but republic reciprocity and justice.

    If that makes me INSANE, SO FUCKING BE IT. FUCK THEIR PSYCHIATRIC OBSERVATION. ANYONE WHO HAS NOT BEEN CAPABLE OF OBSERVATION OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF HATEFUL PROCREATION BREEDING, AND WHO ENDORSES KAFFIR 'LOVE' PROCREATION, AIN'T A GODDAMN FUCKING PSYCOHOLOGIST TO ME, WHETHER THEY HAVE A GODDAMN FUCKING PIECE OF PAPER FROM EVERY UNIVERSITY IN THE ENTIRE FUCKING MILKY WAY.

    I DO NOT, AND WILL NOT BREED A CHILD WITH A FATHER THAT THINKS FATHERHOOD IS ABOUT SPREADING HIS GODDAMN FUCKING SPERM; AND I WILL NOT BREED A CHILD WITH A FATHER WHO DOES NOT INTEND TO BE THEIR FOR HIS CHILD, EMOTIONALLY, INTELLECTUALLY, SPIRITUALLY AND PHYSICALLY.

    SO IF THAT MAKES ME INSANE, SO FUCKING BE IT.

    THESE GODAMN FUCKING PSYCHOLOGISTS DON'T EVEN LISTEN TO THEMSELVES, SO IF THEY DON'T THINK THEY THEMSELVES ARE WORTH LISTENING TO; WHY THE FUCK SHOULD I LISTEN TO THEM?

    It's all language to endorse, via BULLSHIT OR FALSE LEFT VS RIGHT HORSESHIT, TO MAINTAIN THE KAFFIR SLAVE AND CANNON FODDER BREEDING STATUS QUO.

    Accordingly what the fuck does it mean when a KAFFIR SAYS 'STRATEGY OF TENSION'? It means sweet fuck all but endorsing the KAFFIR SLAVE AND CANNON FODDER BREEDING STATUS QUO.

    That that slave and cannon fodder breeding status quo appears to be building higher and higher emotional, psychological, spiritual and physical walls around their demockery oligarch status-quo ideology; as is in direct conflict with ECOLOGICAL REALITY they don't want to confront. No instead anyone who points out these realities, is accused of INSANITY.

    Explain to me how someone who has never lifted their hand to another human being in anger, whose opinions on politicial issues are considered INSANE, and who REFUSED TO INTIMIDATE THE FIVE YEAR OLD CHILDREN SHE NANNIED, EVEN WHEN THEIR PARENTS ENDORSED INTIMIDATION OF THEIR CHILDREN, can INTIMIDATE A POLITICIAN WITH THE ENTIRE SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE FORCE, JUDICIARY AND ARMY AT HER DISPOSAL?

    Explain to me, how asking for the right to an attorney, and refusing to appear in a court system that has ruled you to be insane, without an attorney is 'abusive and hostile'?

    Explain to me what is fucking sane about supporting the slave and cannon fodder breeding of hated, unwanted, unloved, neglected, abused slave and cannon fodder bred children, and calling it LOVE?

    So, that's my perspective. Unlike William Wilberforce I have yet to find anyone who is remotely interested in discussing it, let alone perhaps agreeing with it.

    Lara

     
  • At 08:35 , Blogger Timothy said...

    The K is highly wrong. That's uncalled for in my mind. Black people lived in Africa before any European colonialist. I will read the rest the rest of your words to see what points you are trying to make.

     
  • At 09:51 , Blogger Andrea Murrhteyn said...

    What exactly is highly wrong about the "K"?

    FOR YOUR INFO:
    As per the decisions of South African Goverment Legal Aid Attorney Anton Marx, and all those who subsequently agreed with Anton Marx, as per MENS REA & ACTUS REUS: THE CASE FOR MENTAL HEALTH
    RE: AIDS Disclosure Bomb Threat Case to George Airport on 18 June 2002; Re: Psychiatric Evaluation ‘Report’ issued to court by Ms. B. Boon in the AIDS Disclosure Bomb Threat Political Protest Criminal Case of Lara Johnstone.


    Can anyone tell me why I should listen to an attorney who thinks I am insane, when he hasn't ASKED ME ONE GODDAMN FUCKING QUESTION?

    What kind of university gives you a law degree, when you don't ask your clients one goddamn fucking question about their case, but decide they are insane?

    What kind of country hires you as a Legal Aid Attorney, when you don't ask your clients one goddamn fucking question about their case, but decides they are insane?

    What kind of justice system expects to be respected, when it is not interested in the opinions, or reasons of the accused individuals brought before it's courts of law?

    Explain to me how it is possible for anyone in any criminal justice system to understand another, when they DO NOT KNOW HOW TO LISTEN?

    They hear what they want to hear, even if you say the exact opposite; they will decide what it is you are saying; and you know that because they are too petrified of showing that they don't know what you are saying, by asking you a question to clarify what you are saying.

    They will say whatever their bosses demand they say, just for a paycheck; and they cannot understand how someone like me will decide for myself what I say, how I say it, and how much I mean what I say, even if it means that I won't change what I have to say and how I say it, if you put a gun to my head and blow my brains away.

    Lara

     
  • At 11:27 , Blogger Timothy said...

    The K word was popularized by Muslim racists to demonize non-Arabic people and non-Muslims specifically. That's my problem with it. I don't respect the word at all.

    I said that because you can express yourself better without using degatory. You being sensitive tells me something about you. That's not acting like a lawyer. That's being very considerate. Also, you words are basically slick words in support of Malthusian policies. Just because I support my views on population doesn't mean people like us believe in coercive pregnancies.


    Also, no one is manipulating you to prevent you from fully expressing yourself. I'm just making a suggestion. Your rest of words outline that the world a isn't place and some of your experiences are definitely not justified.

     
  • At 14:13 , Blogger Andrea Murrhteyn said...

    I don't understand anything you were trying to say in your last post, could you rephrase it, and clarify yourself please?

     
  • At 14:59 , Blogger Timothy said...

    My words in my previous post are easy to understand. I said the K word represent what radical racist Muslim said centuries ago. That's why it's popular now. I also mention that your experience in jail was unjustified. Yet, there is still no excuse to use an extreme amount of profanity in your responses. I also commented that people like you who love population growth don't want use coercion at all in forcing women to be pregnant at all. These are my points.

     
  • At 15:50 , Blogger Andrea Murrhteyn said...

    You may think your words in your previous posts were easy to understand; and you would be correct if everyone shared the same interpretations for your words as you do.

    I suspect I do not.

    Which K word are you talking about, and how do you define it; and how do you think I define it?

    Put differently what does hearing the 'K' word mean to you; and what do you think it means to me when I say it? And if our meanings are not the same, are YOU HEARING WHAT I MEAN WHEN I SAY THE K WORD? If not, ARE YOU LISTENING?

    And perhaps you may explain what do you mean by LISTENING?

    Do you think it is 'LISTENING' if someone decided for you what YOU SAID OR MEAN, when you DID NOT MEAN WHAT THEY SAY YOU MEANT?

    So, perhaps we may start there, before we delve into the rest of your critique, otherwise we definitely will not be listening to each other.

    These are my points.

     
  • At 17:24 , Blogger Timothy said...

    Your sacrasm is interesting to me. You know full well of what I've said. There is no need for a further explanation of my words. My words are very easy to comprehend. Your words sometimes spread into subject matter that have nothing to do with the topic. Also, I don't only listen to words that I want to hear. I said the K word (which ends with a r. I won't say the whole word) was a Muslim radical slur against people. The rest of my words outline other points you've made simply about other things (like you supporting population control, but people who reject it reject coercion in pregnancies, you over usage of profanity isn't necessary in your responses, etc.).


    You need to realize that completely.

     
  • At 17:42 , Blogger Andrea Murrhteyn said...

    Should you be interested in my perspective to me, my intentions: your interpretation of sarcasm is not an accurate description. I am well aware that for you it is your accurate description of what and who you think I am, or maybe whom you wish to manipulate me to be, or what your intentions are, I haven't a clue.

    Got that: I HAVENT A CLUE, I DON'T KNOW, I AM AN IGNORANT MORON IMBECILE.

    If I knew full well what you said, I would not have asked you to clarify it.

    If you do not want to provide a further explanation of your words, you don't have to. Accordingly I shall conclude your answer is 'NO I DON'T WANT TO PROVIDE A FURTHER CLARIFICATION. I DON'T WANT TO CLARIFY THE MATTER FOR YOU.

    If so, FINE, don't.

    My apologies that I AM SO MORONICALLY DUMB THAT I DON'T FIND IT EASY TO EASILY COMPREHEND YOUR WORDS.

    Do you realize that completely?

     
  • At 20:25 , Blogger Timothy said...

    You are obviously not a moron. You are very smart because of the words you utilize and your analyzing skills.

    I've clarified what I wanted to say in my many responses. In simple terms, I critiqued your response about the Democracy article. My clarification is this: I don't believe that you need to over use profanity in your responses and I believe what you experienced in jail was immoral.

    Also, the rest my critique was about your views on child birth. I want to make it clear that I disagree with some of your views on population. Just because I believe in population growth doesn't mean that I want to force women to have pregnancies at all. In essence, my response was a critique of your message in this blog.



    Certainly, my regret in this exchange is that I've should of used a less aggressive tone in my answers.

     
  • At 18:04 , Blogger Andrea Murrhteyn said...

    My clarification is this: I don't believe that you need to over use profanity in your responses and I believe what you experienced in jail was immoral.

    Your attachment to what you interpret as 'profanity' and your attachment to attempt to coerce me to refrain from using words that you define as 'profanity' have been noted.

    If you considered yourself any type of 'speak with forked tongue' professional, whether a doctor, psychiatrist or lawyer, then your choice of demand, based on your attachments and rules required for relating to you, it appears your choice, to relate not as a peer and co-learner, but as an operator and prescriber (p13).

    Consider this, in the context of the forces of political correctness creating this situation:
    "We shall not be able to deal intelligently with violence unless we are first ready to see it as part of human nature, and then we shall come to realize the chances of discharging violent tendences are now so severely curtailed that their regular and safe draining-off is not possible anymore."

    You'd be forgiven for not wondering whether it was their explicit intentions to exacerbate anger and violence, and terrorism; only to subsquent to such violence, parade their 'self-righteousness' (never mentioned that it is their intention to create the conditions for the 'evil' they benefit from).

    But if that makes them happy; as it clearly appears to -- why else would they do it, if it didn't make them happy?

    Perhaps because they are so used to being obedient to 'normality' and 'political correctness' that they never ever stop to ask themselves, what their own preferences are; and why they are so obsessed with political correctness, and submissive obedience to normality; to wipe their asses with the constitution, over a few little 'profane' words.

    Clearly, not constitutional republicans, such people are; but, at the very least, it is a very quick way to quickly learn what individuals ownining or managing what blogs, are constitutional republicans, and which one's are political correct oligarch demockery freaks. So, that the latter may be avoided.

    As one of my favourite social scientist and wild and wacky Admirals says:

    “As a commander, I want to listen to different views. If everybody is singing the same song, the same key, the same cadence, I start to wonder what’s going on here.”

    If you ever sat in a Radical Honesty or GreenPeace Brain Storming Session; you would appreciate: "An idea that is not dangerous is unworthy of being called an idea at all."

    Anyway, I hear your opinion, and I appreciate that you have shared it with me. I am unclear if you are making it a requirement for me to post comments to your blog. Are you?

    I appreciate you for saying: "Certainly, my regret in this exchange is that I've should of used a less aggressive tone in my answers."

    And I do not have an expectation of you to be more or less aggressive; only to support you in being yourself; however you may be in any particular moment. And I want to be more sensitive to you; to hear you better, and understand better; and that is difficult with written words; and easier in person. Perhaps one day, we shall be able to do so; and I shall be very happy.

     

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

 
src="http://www.prolifeblogs.com/prolifeblogs6.gif" border="0">
 
Vote For TruthSeeker24's anti-NWO corner
at Conspiracy Top Sites

TopSiteList

Powered by Blogger

Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]