Thursday, December 17, 2015

Leaden Feathers Painted White

Comedians round out the areas missed by rule of reason and law, wherein these areas are subject to the rule that human tragedy is better considered a result of ignorance, incompetence, or some other reason which falls short of real  malice in the responsible agent. It is to remediate tragedy, but this by some means so as to rightly demand responsibility in viewing the matter truthfully, so as to avoid such unnecessary and unwanted evil in the future.  It is like confessing the worst so that we may then get past it by facing it properly and trying to deal with it responsibly from then on. It is in the energy of tension that this releases, in the way that it rounds out the injustices of the human condition by making them something people can openly address without bullshitting themselves or each other. If it really accomplishes this task, then  that tension is released and things change everywhere that has influence, and people smile and laugh. But this has a dark side in that it may be inflated in its impact, and be a papier mache version of the real thing in some universes. I say that in this universe it precisely is this according to all evidence.

Some main grief about comedians is their tendency to get certain things completely wrong, but drag laughs out of the public. So in this act Bill Burr decides it's cute to become a little miniature Bill Gates on the issue of "overpopulation". It's just like listening to Bill Gates coated with an outer layer of hard-nosed stand up comic routine. And then he leaves politics alone and gets honest about what he knows and becomes relevant again (as soon as the Bill Gates bit is over). But it never exceeds the boundaries of pointing up human stupidity and underplaying the element of malice just enough as not to alienate the audience. It will never exceed that boundary, never again like it did with George Carlin. These shock comics are not very shocking nor about issues as substantive, albeit sometimes, as with his bit about Hillary and "someone wearing a goat head".

Same with female on male violence, same with misidentified "pedophilia", which is nothing more than the same fraternal affection any man feels for his own children. And yes, society is hideous in its deformity of values in these areas, and so yields the manifestation of an absurd cultural distortion of what constitutes sanity on those and other subjects where the facts completely contradict the common attitude or perspective, often both. There is a lot of important dystopic dissonance that he brings up in his work, and some of it has even novel psychological, scientific interest in that it can be quantified and generalized upon even by simple thought experiment. He might touch on some such issues in the form of questioning people's rationale for justifying female violence in their reactions to his jokes, and yet showing a contrary attitude when the same violence is perpetrated by him at random people for arbitrary reasons. This disproportion is shown as prima facie evidence of a fundamental absurdity in the human condition. He could go very deep into that topic just by saying the absurdity out loud as a suggestion.

Another example is when he insists that a straight man's revulsion at seeing a male homosexual act is unjustly stigmatized because it is both natural and non-malicious. He made allowance for context and manner, but that still just made his case. So he goes into another comfort zone of the masses and just takes another justified jab at social ignorance and hypocrisy. At the same time this issue really goes beyond his statement of it, as it is the case that in fact that heterosexual revulsion with homosexual activity is always stronger in nature than homosexual revulsion with heterosexual activity. 

The truth is, a properly speaking heterosexual male is revolted by both parties of the homosexual male couple's sexual activities. It is simply a natural revulsion, which is inverse to their attraction to their proper sexual object. It is almost as if this has to be explained.  So this revulsion, which is naturally stronger in the heterosexual when viewing a homosexual act, HAS TO BE THIS WAY because he cannot identify with either member of the activity, and yet the are both male (using the male example, as it may be asymmetrical across the sexes, although still polarized in the same general way). But if either a homosexual person or heterosexual person witnesses a HETEROSEXUAL act, then the heterosexual must still "edit out" the male in order or else distance himself from that (unless he's a pervert or perhaps the PDA police). Ruling out that, a person, in this case a heterosexual male, would prefer not to stare at this scene. He might even prefer to see two women kissing if they both might like his company. I think most heterosexual males would prefer to see that to a man and woman going at it. In the contrary case, it is like saying they prefer to see a naked man's body rather than two naked women's bodies, which is absurd.

The point is that in this regard, while the heterosexual male will have a distinct revulsion at the heterosexual couple's sexual activity (but only because the man must be displaced with effort in the mind which is contrary to the facts witnessed and so creates dissonance in him, even though he naturally identifies with the male's position: these complement one another synergistically). But when the homosexual male sees a heterosexual act, it is not a serious challenge for the homosexual male to "edit out" the female, because as a gay male he cannot seriously identify with her, but in the same situation the heterosexual male can more easily identify with his own "body double" and exercise an Oedipal fantasy through the act. He may fantasize taking the other man out of the equation and replacing him, literally. That can be subconscious, but it can underscore the whole tone of how he perceives an open heterosexual PDA. But the only physical way that a homosexual male could put himself in that relationship is to change his sexual orientation to replace the man, or else to fake doing so to fool the woman, and there is no sexual reason for him to do either. But there is a ready-made reason for the heterosexual male to place himself in the scene. But the homosexual male can only do so by changing his body's physical gender.

So this is more revolting for a gay man to contemplate (especially if body-proud) than it is revolting for a heterosexual male to have his Oedipal fantasies arbitrarily dredged up in his subconscious while he's trying to eat lunch, and for any other number of reasons. It is more revolting to the gay man, but it is still somewhat revolting to the straight man. But the degree of revoltingness to the gay man is not at all like the homosexual scene is for the straight man who happens to see it, and so the strong asymmetry. This is true in spite of the also unfortunate fact that men are taught that perversion is cool and masculine so many will act like this scene is all good for them, the same way the pickle their own brains with alcohol for decades. Out of sheer stupidity, nothing to do with being a man. So unless he has that perverted persona, he might often NOT want to have that displayed to him while hes having a meal. Perhaps he just finds it a distasteful behavior to display even at Denny's, which is like the Jerry Springer of places to eat food. But the revulsion is there in any event, and yet it doesn't require him to change his physical gender in order to see himself in there somehow.

So we see both straight and gay males have "decency revulsion" at their type of sexual displays in public, straight males have only sexual object revulsion, but more than double that which a gay man has looking at a straight interaction, plus it is indecent at the venue perhaps. But the homosexual male can place himself in as the female counterpart of the male by removing her from the relationship and pretending the straight man is gay. There is no similar recourse to the straight man seeing two men kiss, regardless of either one's sexuality.

That's why we seeing two men kissing is so obscene for straight males, as it is impossible even in la la land to place ourselves anywhere near that situation, and why it is not a fair comparison to speak of what revulsion gay men may experience when viewing heterosexual activity. They naturally experience less in that sexuality is physical, and the sexuality of the object can be projected in the subconscious fantasy, and so there may be compensatory activity to offset the revulsion in his case. But again, not so for the straight male in the complementary scenario involving two men, EVEN WHEN THEY ARE STRAIGHT MEN, as depicted in various scenarios where it is an expression of some noble sentiment, some form of insanity, or even just an alien getting confused about human rituals. It is still always revolting. There is no earthly solution but to be extremely, naturally revolted. So it's worse than Bill Burr expresses it, and he's nice about this issue because it is a sort of strange asymmetry that could be interpreted, and is so interpreted by some, as being not in favor of homosexuality as a natural psychological condition, biologically in many ways. So this is clearly a "limit" in what he can broach, or else he might.

It is not even a big point in itself, but rather it shows there is a fuller truth that he cannot bring out as it would be "too much" for the audience to be something he can make funny at this stage. The truth is too absurd for comedy, and yet that is exactly the content that needs to brought to people's attention.  That is where philosophers SHOULD have stepped in from their Ivory Towers and realized the Truth and expressed it but largely did not, although nowhere else in the totality of the fabric of human existence did there appear anyone who did this except for the philosopher. You can bet that the people in the American Philosphical Association are no better of a crowd among whom to pander blatant truths without vetting oneself as a brother in the cult of full-time truth obfuscation as an intellectual gatekeeper against people realizing the Truth. But since that's the case, there is nothing genuinely "philosphic" about that crowd, and I'm not going to care one whit for their attention, as it has no relevance to these matters about which they are so unqualified to discuss but rather have a lot for which to answer in their conduct.

So a good thing about his comedy is that he pushes in the direction of settling issues in favor of reality that society would, in its aberrant role of "ruling mob", prefer to keep ambiguous or hidden, as long as it doesn't have to face an unpleasant sense of its own fragile condition, getting nearer a breaking point as chemical, propagandistic, economic, social and psychological, even psychotronic warfare is being conducted against them should they vary from script, and scapegoats in all this villainy are veritably drafted from the pool of those who see through this facade and thoroughly refute it, ethically, morally, and spiritually. They don't like it when they're shown for what they truly are. And that is the minimum that we can say. Just as what people are prepared to listen to from the audience is a factor in how far Bill Burr will go with his material, and by extension even what he may consider or realize even apart from seeking material, so there are people who are listening in smaller audience who prefer to use the aforementioned "grid" of methodologies, and they will use pressures and coercion of their own, just ask certain popular yet estranged or dead comedians.

It stands as a case in determining with some sense of empirical and logical evidence what are the demonstrable boundary lines in popular consciousness, as well as in those who somehow pander to those limits to make a living. These boundary lines indicate with objective and quantifiable as well as subjective and qualified facts of experience by which to be assessed on all scales and  hence given a metaphysically significant evaluation. Bill Burr is not yet making the sort of headway that a George Carlin made, albeit mostly in his very last years of a long career...  It is not telling well for the world's future when this is the best it can do to make fun of its own absurdity, as this barely scratches the surface.  It has to go way deeper than these issues to hit paydirt.  But as he says in his interviews, in his own words as I paraphrase them, "as soon as you start to talk about stuff like 9-11 or the Patriot Act, people start looking at you like you're crazy".  And he feels this way as a comedian who thrives on making looking crazy work for his act.

When wisdom does not guide members of the community at large, they then fall prey as fools to those who merely wear the robes of wisdom, but simply wish to run a scam on the public. Philosophers become curators of a dead language, whether or not they act with discipline upon their own ethical proclamations, and vain sophomoric sadistic cowards lead the population into absolute corruption and inevitable glorification of their flesh and and soul's subjection to every tyranny and debasement imaginable. A firm diagnosis of a society can be obtained with the examination of what it takes to be valuable and true, and how it reacts at seeing itself in the mirror of its own actions. In the case of the present society, all of these outer symptoms which can barely be broached in comedy are handled only in the alternative (publicly shunned) media as in this article (with extremely good artwork, btw) or instead displaced into fantastically surreal horror genres of all artistic media, and yet this is not seen for what it is, as a reflection in the mirror. That's what George Carlin was closer to nailing, and which Louis C.K. is not able to reach. He also showed up the mirror to The Thing that Should Not Be, but then he revealed himself to be a head on one of the monster's manifold Lovecraftian anatomy, and so is more of a surreal shock gone wrong than anything like moment of dignity in the face of tragedy, which Carlin seemed to sense humanity needed and couldn't muster.

He was right if did hold that view, as since his time it has gotten worse, not better, and in all areas of human existence, worldwide.  The world is closing to its complete nullification, brought on by the heaviness of its heart on the Scales of Anubis.

Monday, December 14, 2015

Vitriol in the Right Direction is Misunderstood Kindness, and so says the Miscreant Foe

Zen Gardner and pals are always "just wondering", but it seems more like they are "just wandering". Not like wise and honest explorers of the world, but more like New Age sheeple, roaming in a single tight cluster in one favorite corner of their holding pens.
So I see this sort of hoohaah and I feel like I'm being baited by a troll. So I answer their illusory reality thesis.

"Ah but that means illusions are real, and all that are real (as author means it) and so even this insight… is an illusion.

This mantra contradicts itself, wastes time and energy, and therefore has negative karma. You should be doing something else with your time.

Not my problem, but plastering it as spiritual insight is a bit misleading, as it is self-contradictory, and therefore cannot be a genuine insight at all.

And that’s just on the “logical tip”. Shall we get onto the “empirical tip”? Besides being logically impossible to be true the way that it is meant, that makes all of its ethical implications equally dubious. That’s why there is a famous saying about illusions. Einstein, whose job was to study this illusion in detail from a mathematical standpoint, felt that it was a PERSISTENT illusion.

That part is not an illusion, apparently, even when you know that it is an illusion. It yet PERSISTS. That’s NOT an illusion. Now, waking up to reality is about focusing on that and dealing with it in real terms, not fancifully drifting away into evasive platitudes which aren’t even true. That’s enlightenment. Not this other stuff.


That’s all you need right there. You can judge the veracity of a belief or idea by the degree to which a person actually manifests reality through it IN ACTION. So how is this world your body is ambling around again so much of an illusion that you didn’t invest your focused attention to its ins and outs with complete absorption into each moment thereof? So if that’s an illusion, what was reality supposed to be again? Because I always thought that people treated that way only what they took to be earnestly real.

So I get the sense that this, and similar arguments will never be honestly addressed by New Agers. I expect no adequate or sensible rebuttal of the content. Just a flighty, arrogant and utterly avoidant dismissal as you continue to “create your own realities”."

And I'm sure I'll never get a proper rebuttal. EVER.

And what about the so-called "internet troll brigade"? What does it have to say?  Nothing about this yet, Zen does sort of put trolls in their place.  I suppose his New Age drivel prefers to troll the spiritual anguish of the few who see through it without being trolled themselves, an interesting double standard. No, the regular trolls are found on Youtube, of course, as in all chat rooms, all discussion forums, all over the shitternet, which is what they've made of it. It is a sewer, where they, the turds, are "at large and in charge".

Just take the occasion of severe bullying, which was really a group physical assault that was very violent. An evil thing, and even popular and less-than-ideal-minded sentiment is against it to the point of talking about shooting these people vigilante style.

Well, what does the retard, or the paid retard pretending to be the non-paid retard, say in reply? "Derp da derp" most of the time.  In this case his blather was phrased in an English sentence in a form where he takes on the voice offended sanity. Just a basic insult to the effect of "take your meds". But look at his profile?  He is completely anonymous. No guts, no purpose, no meaning in essence. Just a little blip on the screen, proof that someone somewhere can type.

As to any of the content, "it" had no rebuttal or answer, as usual for their tininess of mind and soul. They prefer to just be paid trolls. Life's good as a worthless troll, they believe. 

But I wrote this about that incident:

"Of course they and their parents should probably all be ostracized. But this is just the tip of the iceberg concerning sick shit that goes on in so-called society. Take a look at cointelpro type attacks on adults, covert harassment and gangstalking, and psychotronic trolling and attacking. The perpetrators of those crimes do it all, down to criminal mischief and actual attempts on the life of the person or people in their lives. These are the type of scum that I think by now makes up no less than 1/10th of the country in direct form, although in various groups and formats, not necessarily directly connected at even their middle levels, but probably closely networked at the top levels... so there is a secrecy within secrecy that is very strengthening for power. It might even be just that far to be on degree removed from assholes like George Soros or Henry Kissinger or David Rockefeller. Might be just like. It is conceivable, and with all their networking capital and all their history of practice in the techniques, being a cult dedicated to just that, and with all the modern methodology and technology at their disposal, well, with all that being true, then such a system would be preeminently possible, and given the characters of the people involved, extremely likely. There is even solid evidence that all the preconditions are met for saying it does exist in exactly such a petty yet powerfully coercive form. This is even leaving out the military industrial complex and wars-for-control and profit, as well as all the details of the various other vectors of attack as in suppressed technology for the "non-Elysian population", and massive money counterfeiting, embezzling, laundering, and outright theft and graft of all kinds in favor of their control."

Did this a-hole, whose screen name nor real name have any significance in the outcome of anything that matters in this world, did he ever do anything of value in the liberation of people from any oppression?  Not at all likely. But he's keen to throw  his weight in favor of the same by being an accessory to it. His worthless youtube channel has 14 subscribers, somehow, and zero content (like his mind and soul).

The only way that I can give him ANY grace is to believe that he is a 12 year old child.

So that's the big mess, a world of evil, idiotic, souless fleshbags.  It's overseen, managed by sheeple herding werewolves in shepherd's attire (which is an irony, as shepherds plan to eat the sheeple also, and do). And here I am, standing in the middle of it.  The assholes who manage this sham internet probably do create electronic bubbles to prevent much of what I'm saying from even getting out there. I'm sure it'd show up on any computer I accessed, but it won't show up on any from whom they choose to hid it. Instead, they just sprinkle troll activity into the bubble  and call it a day, feeling snazzy as they walk around in their faggotty capris pants, looking for a meth-head to bribe to go troll someone else on the actual street (or even coordinating both). They are known to conduct these activities against dissidents under all scenarios, but this seems more like an issue of damage control on their way toward total social engineering as their pet project, as they just can't resist to conduct "social experiments".  

Take this video about that very subject which I argue acts as a cover for this fiendish, Stasi-style Street Theater as social coercion and as a general mechanism of artificial injection of influence into the lives of private people (who as we know are completely surveilled).

Of course I must give the truthful and complete response, as much as I can in such a short space, given that these vignettes are critical junctures in a polytopic configuration of issues that is quite non-linear at its more organic and sophisticated, upper echelon levels of organization. I naturally must mark them for not only my own observation, but as Perseus did, leave a trail for others to follow (in his case his future self), in order to get back out. But in this process, it seems the Minotaur has arranged some pranks around that probably by setting up an electronic bubble round it, but nevertheless, I will continue to present my observations to assuage my own conscience that helped all honest people be better informed by blatant lies, as well as take a stab at the stupidity and unworthiness of those involved, even if they are setting such a bubble, which by the way is what surrounds them in their ignorance, and when THAT bubble is popped it will not be pleasant for them. The longer they tarry with me, the more they set themselves up for detection and action by those forces capable of popping those bubbles.  Just know that it is not as simple as a one way street.

Here's my response to that video about a supposed social experiment:

Well, interesting as these social experiments are, there are unfortunate consequences to doing this sort of thing literally TO people. What this is all about is STREET THEATER. That's all it really is. It is purported to be in order to study responses of people. But let's ask a simple question to the erstwhile scientists: 0) What were the observed phenomena leading to what question? 1) What is the hypothesis about an answer to that or some related question raised? 2) What are other researchers in the field saying, what about historically? 3) What is the method of data collection and analysis? 4) What were the conclusions? Otherwise, it is playing asinine games with people's time and their lives, putting them in situations which only happened because you wanted to capture their reactions on film, really for entertainment purposes while possibly creating very dangerous situations and disrupting people's lives for no good reason. Unless they signed up for some weird shit like this, it shouldn't be happening to them, period. There happen to be a cowardly group of people who do street theater for a fee in order to cause mischief and harassment of people for no other reason than ego and power games, and these scum probably like to pretend that they were filming social experiments. This might even be a way in which they train their craft. STREET THEATER, like any other action which artificially intrudes into people's lives, can be used as a weapon and then becomes criminal. With today's technology, rolling out cointelpro-style operations wherein street theater is an integral part of the process is not only doable, but in fact proven to be happening. Now THAT "social experiment" is way more involved and way more scientifically conducted, with many agendas in it and structured for manipulation of social behavior on all scales, and is also augmented by state agencies, extreme funding, and technologically advanced equipment which enhance all of their operations. These are facts. In a year and a half in L.A., I have NEVER ONCE seen a homeless person bullied AT ALL, but I have seen them make horrible nuisances of themselves without cause really, or else engage in mischief doing exactly the sort of Street Theater I already spoke about, probably for a crack of crystal in return in many cases. So that alone tells me the whole premise of this experiment itself is questionable. It doesn't relate to anything that is even happening (certainly not NEARLY to the degree shown).

I know that this sort of activity is a MODEL of how they try to reengineer society. Not necessarily in the form here where a bum and thug are involved.  Although it may come in such a form as that. But rather in the CONDITIONING.  In the real world they want to set up a program where the "beggar" is an UNWILLING PARTICIPANT in a social pogrom of ostracism set up by a REAL team of ACTUAL BULLIES who would set up situations which, all at once and intensely, or over time as a gradual process of aggression. It is a crucial observation in this situation. And the ability to hear of it, and see if it makes sense, is everyone's right. 

But just in case the scumbags haven't shut you out of a chance to hear it, I've put it together here in one place. As to the scum who attempt to circumvent it, you are condemned to hell, no doubt about it. Don't ever come to me or think to me for any absolution, forgiveness, understanding, or even pity. In the end, it will be avenged, for Reality is Just, and admits no wretches into Eternity, except in oblivion, and in the case of your wrongful actions, not even that will be granted before a long and appropriately horrific trip through hell.

Saturday, December 12, 2015

Metaphysical Deduction of Evil's Doom (both as sui generis and as omnibus et singularis)

By the integration of logic and fact in a way that is fundamental and complete in unity and harmony, we can obtain, by deduction, Understanding of Reality. That is the objective of Metaphysics.  An example is in that even the most subtle facts in logic can be extremely relevant to the most "everyday" way of thinking about "everyday" issues.  It is a relevant aside, by the say, that the fact that these subtleties exist "simply in the minds" of those who think them is a strong argument that they existed before the fact of being thought, because it turns out that these principles are metaphysically deductive.

Among these relevant subtleties in logic there is the matter of where an issue exists in the form of deciding between two or more equally possible means of categorizing of a thing.  It may be that they are very distinct, such as the distinctions between aspects of an entity versus different forms of entity, and even to the point that within one of those categories may be many issues just as diverse as between the two categories which are higher in order, and that this may go on ad infinitum.

There is a great distinction between an attribute and a substance.  An attribute is that which is rooted in a substance but from which is distinct in being a mode of that substance and not the substance in re aeternalis .  That is not necessarily a feature of the way reality is in itself, but it is a function of how the human mind must experience it cognitively, and on some levels even sensorially (e.g. pain and pleasure). We may, for example, attribute the same quality as being rooted in essentially distinct substances.  There is a big difference between things in themselves, which is called their essential distinctions. These are substantive features, deeper than modalities, and are simply the principle elements of a being's very existence while being nothing less nor more than the defining features of that being's form. This collection of elements is included in what is meant by the term "essence".

When the essences of two entities may each hold the same attribute, that is not a surprise at all, if only the essences of the two entities bear the same ontogeny, that is, have a common metaphysical ancestor, the same lineage of substance. But if these beings have opposing substances, this will make us wonder how a primal substance could be in opposition with itself.  Is it in a state of poverty and cannot render the same peace to its progeny as it has in itself as a fundamentum realis? IS REALITY THAT POOR?  Then wherefore the wealth of Virtue?  Is it merely a show performed by despots?

But surely the primal essence does not conflict with itself, and yet we may encounter beings who bear all manner of  resemblances to one another in forma, but demonstrate actions and qualities which may be found in one of these beings  but not the other in every case.  Sometimes it may be about matters which are "worldly" and "material" as well as questions of attitude about such matters, but then it may also pertain to the reflective self-acculturation of individual and private personhood, a vocation of perspective unique to each individual. When these are in fundamental opposition, it begs the question of whether these beings are really of the same kind at all. It is so radical of a departure from commonality.

The reason is that if the world of facts is shared in common by both, and if the stated principles of tradition and polity are the same, and also if in fact their bodily forms and their actual conditions per specimen are the same, then it is a wonder that identities could be formed in their personalities which are capable of forming mutually destructive conditions on the basis that they see the world differently.  It makes no prima facie sense.  It makes sense only if we add some additional cause for their conflict.

The cause may be empirical.  It may be that they are under some sort of malevolent control by forces they do not understand which control them behind the fault lines of their opposition.  It may be that these are simply conditions "of the human soul".  Regardless, these forces must be in opposition in order for such overwhelming similar beings to bear such antivalent relations to the point of extreme potentials for destruction of one another and even both.  It begs the question of how fundamental that similitude really is.

That is why we can understand that by appearances things may be extremely alike, but in substance they can be no less different in direct proportion to those appearances of sameness. That is why "as if" behaviors exist, this is why people's behaviors are intelligible at all, and this is why there is evil in the world.

Because substances may be FAKED in their appearance and presentation to the world of observers. This is the basis of all fraud, all crime whatsoever.  All wrongs committed, either through petty and only slightly culpable  negligence or else to the point of the strongest and clearest  intent, and on all points in between. This is only possible because of the presence of sensations which can be distorted, perceptions that can be altered, and thoughts and feelings which can be conditioned.  All of which is conducive to the engineering of public norms through institutions in which people are perversely malconditioned into trusting, believing and obeying.  But it seems that this lifestyle, one of slavish adherence to habitual socializing forces, is the norm as accepted by human nature itself.

So in a world where "everyone's human" (or is it the case?), we have people who may appear quite the same as to all attributes, but in fact make entirely different choices about how to live and how to live among others, and this such that these decisions are absolutely incompatible. Good people will not allow you to walk all over them and humiliate them, neither outwardly nor inwardly. Evil people will willfully attempt to do such things wherever they can get away with it.  Good people are humane, evil people are inhumane.  Good people are honest and truthful, evil people are liars and deceivers. So while outwardly they are the same being, inwardly and in way s far more fundamental to being human in the fullest sense of the term, they are absolutely different kinds of beings.

And that is what morality is all about, the absolute distinction between Good and evil. These categories are not invented out of thin air, they are not made up out of obsessions, they are not proper targets of obsession.  They are principles which reflect substantive differences in beings, even to such a degree that they are different kinds of beings no matter what other evidence to the contrary, just so long as this difference in their being can be determined to be in existence, as manifest by the fruit of their moral action and inaction.  Where these are different in kind, they are only antivalent in kind, and it is a difference which makes for the gravest of implications to consider and judgments to make.

As  these beings are so different in kind, and yet as they appear so much the same outwardly, it is only a matter of time before essence overrules accident, and all their outward bonds are broken and all their inward integrity is manifest plainly, and in just such a way that they will not abide each other outwardly, just as inwardly they never did. For the logical reason that opposing substances cannot fundamentally agree, therefore where they appear to, it is only superficial, and as a means to the end of inevitable conflict.  Just as honest men cannot tell lies (or they're not honest), so dishonest men cannot tell truths (or they're honest).  But we see honest men tell lies to their sworn enemies in order to defend greater truths, and we see dishonest men tell truths to make their lies believable. Yet the more fundamental and logical truth is the absolute foundation for the relative distortions in appearances which manifest only in a conflict between those absolutes, and hence depend upon them for their existence as effects depend upon causes. In this case, contrary causes.

And that is an empirical method  of demonstrating a logical tautological fact, which if were not possible (though empirical evidence proves it it is possible), then it would not be thinkable. But if it were even thinkable at all (even if no one ever thought it), then it must be actual in reality, because the meaning of the terms thought requires, by the nature of the terms, a world where such thought is intelligible, and such a world must have such antivalence within it or it would be unthinkable (for nature does nothing in vain is the common notion here). THE ONLY WAY THIS IS NOT TRUE IF THERE IS NO EVIL IN THE WORLD AT ALL, and so NEVER COULD BE and NEVER WILL BE, and this IS THE WAY WHICH THE WORLD HAS RULED OUT BY ITS MANIFEST ACTIONS THROUGHOUT HISTORY AND IN THE PRESENT! That world was not, and is not, but will be.

But this undermines the worldly appearance concerning commonality of religion on a fundamental level, as those who said The Good cannot produce evil willingly or wittingly, then how could it have produced it at all unless 1) accidentally or 2) by coercion or deception of another party! Yet in spite of these facts, it seems unthinkable that Good had the power to do evil either. And while the mystery of the evil will is mysterious indeed, it doesn't impinge at all on the possibility that The Good has the ultimate power to destroy evil "for good and forever", and that The Good will. But while this is completely understood by some few, others seem oblivious to its thinkability (being essentially different from those who can and especially those who do; different  in essence, and belonging to essentially different origins, manifesting essentially different worlds).

Those others are of a different spiritual kind, per definitionem… 

And since these are on moral matters fundamental to existence itself, so their spiritual nature, which is manifest by the thoughts and feelings on these matters, must also be completely different in kind.  And since the one kind which is prevalent today, and which mostly always was, was the kind which slaughtered the other kind at every opportunity, and yet the kind which was slaughtered was never in such an evil bent, it shows both empirically that they are and were different in kind (from the manifest hostility), and also, per deductionem, in that antivalent diffferences in outward manifestations are the direct expressions of substantive, inward and essential distinctions in kind in mutually direct proportion as the appearances are the same and the actions are antivalent.  And what could be more antivalent than if one seeks utterly to destroy the other?

History shows that, in this world unfortunately, the malevolent and hence the evil sort have the upper hand.  The forces of the "demonic" are ascendant here, as all appearances are concerned, and therefore, by deduction, as far as all substantive facts and essential truths about the world would have it, as they express through these appearances in antivalence to Truth and Justice.

This shows that fundamentally different and yet fundamentally thinkable world conditions are possible, and it shows which one in which we exist now.  It shows also the logic by which the world presents its norms, such that they are sustained by cultural inertia, reinvigorated only by a highly-controlled supply of positive and negative conditioning, and all of which is traced to tyrannies of conventional and unconventional forms, of ancient and modern methodologies, and of blatant and extremely real actuality.  They are manifest in mundi , they are not mere ideas about the world. It is like this: talking about great white sharks while swimming of the coast of Florida in an area known to have frequent shark attacks.

So in this situation, the least one can do is express one's true nature; the only question is "what is that nature, essentially?"  This will determine only the form of the inevitable, but the fact will be in the same form every time and every where.  The form is a dance of pretense of friendship from one side, a spurning of that fraud by the other, and if the odds are in its favor a lashing out against the latter by the former.  But no matter how it appears to turn out, here in this material existence, in the actual and eternal reality, where the consequences of such an antivalent distinction between beings here will manifest there in perfected and completed form without any distractions of false appearances, there will be destinies which by definition are ultimate and eternal Likewise, those destinies will be antivalent in kind, suitable to the natures of their recipients.

Those involved with covert surveillance/harassment of the Good and innocent, who attack them merely because of their own ignorance or their culpability for intentional mischief and aggression, including and especially those who utilize weapons in the form of chemical and psychotronic weapons, especially those who do so covertly and under false pretenses, are criminals anywhere the Honest and the Just exist.  And on the ultimate and inevitable levels of these consequences, and on the basis if the facts and natures involved, it is proper and fair in all lights to say to those fiends that:



Friday, December 11, 2015

Apologists for the Old World Order wear New Clothes, but with an Old Style

Here is a video on youtube concerning several interrelated topics, but focusing on "planetary agendas" vis-a-vis mind control, and attempting to set a "benevolent aliens" narrative based upon first of all this individual's own experiences, which when analyzed look exactly like those of a victim of Project Bluebeam. Then additionally, he demonstrates features of unspiritual consciousness in that his consciousness confesses a need to be monitored and guided by EXTERNAL FORCES in order to operate efficiently in moral and cognitive ways. Well, those forces are in place right now in the psychotronically weaponized covert social network control grid, and that is something that is true with or without malevolent aliens.  Frankly, malevolent aliens and evil demons are just as good as the people who operate this control grid, who may as well be the freaky extradimensionals in the movie "They Live" as far as their being "alien" from my understanding of what a Real Human Person is.

So, here.
Here is what I had to say about the essence of these issues which I posted just one day before the Scotts interview was published, back in April 2015.

The following section is what I have had to say about this video, which I also put in the comments section below it, but which I believe will be edited away by the video poster, we'll see:

This story that Scott tells suggests a sort of evasion of the issue, because if you look at the BLATANT COMPLICITY of most on this planet, even psychotronics and other technological, situational factors do not exculpate them from Judgment. The only way this Earth can be "saved" is if most of its life forms are removed from it. But what is happening here, with Scott, is an instance of someone being suckered into a "good cop" version of the psychotronic control grid. It is a Hegelian Dialectic. I would bet that a significant part of this process is run from the famous entity seen above, "in our skies" called "La Luna". Anyone contolled by this grid, no matter how benevolent they seem to be, or think it is, is in fact controlled by the same source as the thugs and evil forces which are involved in the tyranny in this realm. But as to "saving the planet", that is crux of what this whole "good cop" narrative. But in fact, the TRUTH is that this is just a subdomain of Demiurge's control, and it cannot be condoned or favored, and any forces claiming to be here to in any way "save this place" are not to be trusted, because that is not a valid option for such an evil world. You will be walking into an episode of the Twilight Zone, one entitled "To Serve Man". I'm not saying Good Beings don't exist, but in fact I know that very well. But just because you think they are doesn't mean they are the people you think they are, and if they have an agenda which is contrary to True Freedom, then they have exposed themselves as evil, but not if you have already bought into trusting them, mainly because of 

1) How you feel around them, 

2) The desirable-sounding nature of their expressions. 

The first can be seen as a form of positive reinforcement so as to reinduce control (it is a fact that this is a method of control used in brainwashing and interrogation, as well as torture). The second is hot air until it is truly demonstrated, and it has not been. Therefore, there is Good Evidence to doubt the veracity of this man's narrative at the point of its source, the credibility of those who triggered his message in him. And finally, belivin' in Cleetus isn't the genuinely contrary alternative to being gullible, either. Replace "Cleetus" with any trusted authority without proper qualifications. 

As for myself, I AM from another dimension of existence, and what I have seen here, I blame it on the people here, and the beings who are in ascendancy over them. I don't see a world, or a race of beings, that can be salvaged. And when I return to my own Realm, that is the report that my very essence will bring back. The stains of evil that this world has sprayed out into the ethers will be recorded and demonstrated, and in all the holographic clarity of "a world within a grain of sand," and delivered back to those who will take that report very seriously. There is nothing "on Earth, above it, or below it" that can prevent this. That's MY narrative. And it is corroborated by logic and fact. 

As to Scott's narrative, TOWARD THE END, he finally outs himself as a complete patsy of the psychotronic control grid, a major meme of which in its diverse programming protocols is to convince a subject that as an individual being they haven't the internal resources to make their own best decisions, using a "dummy authority" like "the rest of the universe" as a stand in for that devalidation of the Internal Essence of a Divine Being. RIGHT THERE, in your face, at 52:33 for about the next minute or two.  

He literally justifies the control grid with a flimsy story about its benign purpose, in effect to justify it ever having existed in the first place in any form, which narrative requires the rejection of Inherent Moral Authority in human beings! It is rejection of Free Will in essence. This technology exists ONLY TO DISARM A PERSON BY CONTROLLING THEIR DELIBERATIVE AND HIGHER COGNITIVE ABILITIES BY DISABLING THEM in various ways, both by coercion and deception, which involves as one methodology both the positive and negative reinforcements  existing in conventional forms, covert forms, and especially as catalyzed by chemical and psychotronic weaponry.

Monday, December 7, 2015

Absolute Truth, Absolute Non-sense, and Non-sensical Relativity

Absolute Truth, Absolute Non-sense, and Non-sensical Relativity

It is just as though they have no idea how to disguise it better! So the jetset, the famous, the publicly adored... you know, the ones that the socioeconomic fraud that is our so-called modern civilization hold up so peculiarly high, as any true system of just social polity would never permit the fraudulent system of Janus-faced absurdity which is the mainstream media, or government, or finance, or religion, or any other social institution.

On the outside they pretend to care about all of the greatest ideals. But in their essence, they have nothing to do with such. In an accidental way, they have everything to do with the greatest ideals, because they are in the market of making sure no one else does. Yes, I'm talking about the standard, everyday, casually pompous mainstream authorities.

You'll note that I have already given general proofs of the logical and empirical reasons for deciding steadfastly on the corruption of these mainstream systems. I don't trust any earthly entity as a TRUE VESTIGE of Virtue.

But we can see from the way that these world powers play poker with one another concerning the bluff of who is going to be more evil for the next 40 years or so...

It is a bit laughable, on the larger "Hegelian" scale of analysis. But on the micro-scale of the immediate few years, it is clear that there are sharp enough distinctions to be drawn, in enough areas of personality, action, policy, and character especially, to cleanly and consistently differentiate a tendency between these two men and their governments such as would at least parallel in some way the distinction between Good and evil as such.

It could be that two horrible pool players were opponents at the same table, and one of them was so much more horrible than the other that he just stole the show on sucking at pool. It could be this is the case. I am sure that it is. I suppose the Russian Federation is controlled by beings no less evil than those that control the Western Hegemony. The same goes for the New Chinese Empire to the East. These domains may all be controlled by perfectly evil beings (and are, from the evidence), but it is just that some are far smarter, wiser, more cunning than than the other ones.

Why? Because that is the nature of the evil realm. It is a neverending struggle to the death. As a whole, evil dies to the Good, but in this realm, some evil dies to other evil, and in spirals going up and down throughout the realm, although all these spirals converge upon their complete annihilation by the Righteous Mind of the Divine Supreme Being. That is assured. But in the meantime, the evil beings put on a show before one another as to who is the "better villain".

Look at how in our own "Land of the Free", many strong factions and particularly influential individuals want to literally take away your right to proper self-defense against anyone, to include the government if necessary (according to our own founding principles). That is not a minor point, as the government was sworn to serve those founding principles as espoused and articulated in the Constitution of the United States of America and the Bill of Rights. I mean do you need to look around for a more comical absurdity?

But on the other hand, look at Mr. Putin, who crushes the terrorists that our "Secret Services, Inc." foster around the world. He refuses to let in the GMO filth that our agra-pharma monster of a plutocracy wants to shove down everyone's throats, and this while emphasizing it by proclaiming Russia to have its eyes on being the world's major exporter of non-GMO food. Note that he didn't say "products', but spelled out "food". He has a point to make here. Namely that all nations who weren't scrambling to do the same would be both biologically and economically foolish. As to this NWO agenda of take poison and oppression and like it, Mr. Putin is "not having it".

There are many other issues but those spell out a enough of a spectrum so as to include, on a scale, every sort of human evil. The reason is that evil, on all scales requires, in order to be put into effect, the actions of sabotage, whether passive or active. In passive form it comes as covert poisoning, deceptive economic activities and cultural manifestations, and subtle forms of violence, such as psychotronics entrainment, delivered both individually and en masse.

All the evils we see emphasized in one part of the world, are vehemently opposed in another, and treated either indifferently or with mixed extremes alternating between sensibly benign and outright tyrannical. Those are differences in KIND which lend to the one when mixed, and to the other when separated. Let the the readern discern the distinction.

Let me just say that in these previous descriptions, you can literally deduce which I'm talking about in each case from the facts and an honest mind, reasonably thoughtful and at least broadly informed, to include a sensible diet of information coming from outside mainstream and merely status quo channels. By these balanced and reasonable factors, any person could basically just churn out the conclusion from the premises, and know exactly which major countries manifest which qualities which, if analyzed according to their morally, demonstrate what polarity toward evil or less so, or even to the point of seem "good". I don't have to tell such a person, they can figure it out just by being honest and decent.

But in the end, this doesn't mean that any place on Earth is truly a safe-haven for honesty and decency. It merely means that such a person can sift out the evidence of the relative fluxuations of evil power in this world enough to determine that they reflect, by their brazen mockery, by their street theater of pretense and mutual out-performance which varies by degree rather than quality, by these traits they reflect a greater Truth which is Absolute, and which explains the distinctions of degree, as well as the proper distinction in kind which is far more substantial than the fluxuation of appearances before the relativized perspectives of fleshly observations. A complete and eternal distinction, that generates distinct beings marked by their choices, actions, and urges, and which also harvests them toward their proper destinies.

To emphasize the point of the way that all members of a set can be evil while still putting on a show of superficially beneficent and benign distinctions from one another, look at how all world civilizations espouse the most base judgments about what is Right and wrong, what is worthwhile and what is petty. All their economic and social markets and clearinghouses reveal a concern for the baroque flesh, and if anything of the Spirit, then by mere tradition handed down it is about something substantial, but in the individual's relationship to it, entirely facile and decorative! All nations of the world that have any voice and power on the global stage have this trait, and so do the legions of their lessor, impish satellites!

While other buy into facile stories of their conditioned and relativized mentalities, and who demonstrate that they can do nothing else, the Righteous yet choose to gain Immortal Moral Lessons from these events by taking a stand on their own Integrity and Conscience before bothering with worldly, external narratives which are as rife with deception as our own Nous is Pure with Sincerity.

On the whole this world intersects with the domain of the Spiritual in conflicting way, no matter in what waveform of relative, and superficially moral variations. And so therefore the Spiritual person treats the world accordingly, while preferring to esteem his own Conscience.

Tuesday, December 1, 2015

Prognosis: Apocalyptic

Greeings to those capable of honesty, rationality, and propriety, and who bring such qualities into their daily lives.

I speak here only facts which are undisputed on the record of reason and common sense, as properly defined. They are also readily at hand to be discovered, these facts, by anyone with good enough sense to look around themselves and form an opinion, but one which is constructed by way of sound observation, accurate perception, truthful assessment, valid logic, and appropriate response. I have rarely to meet a man who combines in himself even the most superficial of "appropriate response" to common situations except that where he does he leaks evidence of a great lacking in any serious propriety, nor any of the other traits of a sane mind in good faith operating within reason. And where I have, he has not had ALL of these traits combined. And to have even one missing is dangerous to the whole spirit.

As to those who know these facts and truths but simply rely on them so as to aggrandize themselves, you are scum and so you couldn't possibly do more than EMULATE and DISSIMULATE the True Person upon whose assumed authority you wield any influence of anyone whatsoever. That's a necessary conclusion drawn from the aforesaid facts, and by accurate syllogism.

It's just that society has not caught on to the illusion of its own authority being a hollow one because it is well-trained to accept a superficial version of moral and mental existence as dictated by their fear and lust as the "alpha and omega" of all that they say, think, and do. They are in some means really "monkey minded", but not without a great many civil, legal, moral, and yes spiritual implications. Which is why I've bothered to think them out, out of moral duty to my own conscience. And I can rightly say now, in ipsa causa, that my conscience is clear. There is a quality which associates with such a fact, and that is "non-negotiable, non-transferable, and unique". It's like a Divine Serial Number. You simply cannot pass off something else for it. It is unmistakable. Therefore it is IMMUTABLE.

It was long ago said: "Neca eos omnes. Deus suos agnoscet." This is what executor of the actual Divine Judgment says at the end of the alotted time for this wretched dominion, except that it is delivered in Truth and Judgment, and it is rendered valid by a Proper Execution of its Office. These are things that a "funny house of mirrors slaughterhouse" like this world cannot claim to be true about itself. Rather, it is defined as the necessary occasion of apocalyptic judgment by being "a realm of sufficient magnitude that viscious schemes among evil minds are sustainably plotted and enacted by some groups of minds over others, whether in hierarchically unified or opposed manner, and all with the net result that the Truly Righteous are subject to corruption no matter what they do.

Worse, this is PROVEN TRUE if there is ever a development of biology and social behavior that solidifies it or codifies it into a system of the existence of individuals in a community, one which shows that even with the resort of "evolution", the system finds ways to prefer the wickedest schemes of parasitism and predation.

Finally the Machiavellian understanding of human power turns out to the be more accurate, and there is a demonstration in that of the gulf between the text presented and how it is interpreted by the "public figures" and the "public consumers", and how it is properly interpreted based on what is further also true but is kept from public scrutiny. Such truths explain my disdain for and opposition of will against those involved. Criminals. The same stick which could have been used beneficially and publicly was kept private and used seditiously against the public as recognized in its supposed values, and also against the herd of people involved who are apparently unable to get themselves up to facing reality properly, but still want to breed and be fed until they die of old age.

So this evil hierarchy reveals itself to be evil even to itself. But the worst of it is that it requires for its actual metaphysical existence the energy supplied to it by those virtuous who act within it, and who misguidedly have striven to perfect it, but mainly because there is a critical feature of it that the covert and subtle features of it which govern it do so in a way that makes the firm loss of reason and conscience seem somehow normal and standard.

That I say, in the case of the Best Souls, to be a feature of just how forceful these environments are, and just how desperate this system is for energy. It is a total "lost cause". The reasons are both material and spiritual.

Need I mention Fukushima? Need I mention war? Need I mention statist panopticon? Need I mention utter depravity and primitivity of society and culture, to the state of tribes of angry baboons in stature? Have I failed somehow to underscore how psychotronics, especially as a covert social engineering weapon, has coopted all human affairs and made a travesty of what is called human life on Earth, not least because of aggravating all previously existing forms of evil and corruption and solidifying their hold on the totality of human existence?

So no, it is a complete mockery of what the proper form would be, but it acts as a complete and closed system to information about what such a system would be (hence the veil, the wall, the "in-between" you should never want to be destined to become). Even matter itself seems somehow to blame, being so poorly configured to do anything except create pain-bodied life-forms of parasitic depradation even worsening as life's crowning flowers reach greater and grander forms, even in the form humanity, wherein such unlighted blight reaches its worst nigrendo.

So surely the facts as they are

It is important to know that "society" is a construct, a subtext that people use in their speech and behavior to justify actions to be taken and held accountable to the judgment of whoever uses that construct "with authority". Well, yes, there are intelligent ways to demonstrate that this is an actual fact "in real life". Anthropology demonstrates this to be a fact worldwide and since ancient times, and with persistence until now, and is never likely to change.

The problem is that this "construct" is utilized in certain ways which are not revealed to the public. This is an egregious asymmetry of power. It is not right utilize technology in covert ways which may directly influence the way people choose to live their very lives in their own privacy. To literally invade the bodies of people with energy forms that "piggy back" off the signals of electromagnetic fields which we all take for granted exist in our homes from the wiring and appliances. So that has been used as leverage by those with access to these devices and methologies, and have actively researched their implementation on native populations (natives of our own country, but also those found on remote islands and deep in jungles, yes literal "natives").

All of which is supremely unethical and immoral in ways unconscionable by decent people of any and all ways of thinking that do not absolutely embrace evil activity.

At least the myths of ethicality as entertained by the "slave classes" of these societies. These are the ones who labor in circles with backward technology and truncated forms of "education". These awkward masses BELIEVE that THEY know right from wrong. Yet upon inspection, they are largely deluded in that, as well as a great deal of other things to do with the factual world.

These deluded folks, even when they mean their very best, end up being slaves to what is worse. And in the hierarchy of being that we are shown by thinkers like Dionysius the Areopagite, we know that where there is a kind of substance, there is a hierarchy in its structure, and such that the lower of its kind are controlled, which also means "governed" by the higher of their own kind. There is a boss for all of this, one who exists in spiritus mudi. But of course this is logically demonstrable from first principles, but short of being told of its existence by someone like Dionysius most would have to go without such a notion no matter how many lives they ever lived.

So, I call that a gulf of distinction between them and those who in se can realize such things in se.

These are to be morally opposed in the Spirits of all True Beings. Instead what do most people do? They MOCK THESE VERY BEINGS.

Therefore, by direct refutation, they REFUTE THE POSITION THEY CLAIM PUBLICLY. You cannot "govern" what you refute. Truth and Justice are too hard for you? Then you cannot claim to be their adjudicators or administrators, respectively.

Know then, that you are judged by the same judgement you mete out. THAT JUDGE administers the Greater Reality. How will you escape that domain? Impossible. But you do NOT administrate Truth and Justice, nor do you even administer a respectable deformity of the same.

Psychotronics would be deplorable if used by Dr.Goldfinger. But if the said villain operates directly adjunct to and in cooperation with the authorities of the public, then that is a nightmare scenario which was described in the popular science fiction which has sprung up around the dystopian scenario in "1984".

All evidence suggests we are in such a scenario, that is to say all empirical and logical evidence demands this hypothesis be actively put forth at the expense even of other equally conceivable yet in fact less likely scenarios, EVEN IF THEY BE MORE AGREEABLE.

It is that brand of scenario for the world which is bandied about by the "upper classes" of your societies. Yet their lifestyles, worldviews, and those of their growingly influential associates in all fields, including in government and finance, enables a lockdown of direct social pressure to augment any such technological "soul rape".

That means, for example, you are in the same world as before, but it is now "augmented" by such invasive means which are then kept secret FROM you (unless you "initiated into the knowledge" of their control structure, as can be logically surmised by even an outsider). It is kept secret from you, but even if it were not secret, it might still be absurdly justified as being the "best means of national security", among many other excuses of being that it is of "wide public benefit". I mean these have obvious examples. Spying on and stalking citizens for the former, fluoride in your tap water for the latter. Just a mere two HUGE ones, among many others that have been expressed to the public on many forums for a very long time.

There are forces of aggression, immorality, and great corruption found on the "upper layers" of society, and this is seen in all sectors of society as diverse as to make up the entire American nation, if there truly "be" such a pixie which is not actually just a stylized version of the "initiated" groups, often used in Hegelian dialectical ploys... (problem, reaction, solution anyone?).

So because of this, we see the work of psychotronics as the necessary catalyzing force to enable these hideous programs to take place, literally being poured down their throats and also down into their souls. This is because these categories of corruption, which are poisoning (for any reason), their bodies with what is put in the food and water, even the very air, and at the very least corrupt their purity in ways unjustifiable by any true benefit widely received by the public (and this is shown to be true in fact). Without psychotronics, this would have been unthinkable, this Soviet Gulag phenomenon which is American "society" and "culture". They are on the face of it commodities of influence which are wielded by the manifestly least moral and respectable of its members, or else in an even worse scenario (which is proven true already), that they also wield influence with those who "push the buttons" of the psychotronic weaponry.

Alas. All this is fact. None of it is fun. All of this is real. Deal with it. I do in that I firmly despise it. I despise anyone that is in on it, and anyone who has benefited from it, whether knowingly or not, wittingly or not, with or without a guilty conscience. You are varying degrees of SCUM to the exact extent that you have benefited from such evil and soul-debilitating modes of "social existence". To submit to such UN DIVINE behavior, but to go to church on Sunday like that means anything, are hideous.

Those on the bottom there, ever notice you buy into a hierarchy of evil in which you are on the bottom of the pecking order? Bottom of the food chain? Ever notice that did ya?

So "YEEE HAWWW, we gonna just be primitive, that's how weeeeel solve it!". Well, with unstable minds like that it would be "no wonder" if you were unwitting, unknowing, even "barely cooperative base stones" on a very large pecking order which has somehow learned to steer you to accept massive fraud and mass soul/body rape through aforementioned and other crimes you lay down and take (and try to force on others who have better judgment and wherewithal).

The rest who are witting and knowing are more culpable, but these here are still despicable.

In the end, I see no spiritual value in this group "as a whole". They have debased even the most rudimentary values which can hold a society together in good faith. I'm sure therefore that it is a logical deduction that their churches, cathedrals, mosques, and other spiritual centers are devoid of those who Love Truth and Justice.

They might kill and rob and rape and war and corrupt and so forth, but they don't go to church except as a means to carry on the pretense that all is "right" with their world. What a laughable mockery, were it not by some appendage of the wicked manipulators that I referred to at outset as being "associates" of those we publicly see in "upper crust" social classes. Those we do see are for the most part initiated, but needn't be. The collective effect of at least 2 versus 1 is their strategy in person, but on scales involving mass influence (media, psychotronics, pharmaceuticals, chemicals through various vectors, classical authority officialdom at their disposal, etc). There is a large berth here for monkeys who don't see, but do...

Well, they get friendly with monkeys who don't do, but see, but also don't say either.

These monkeys are in association with those who say, but say falsely.

You get the picture. Business, Government, Media. Simple, direct, straightforward and empirical fact that is in your face if you didn't know, and right there on the table, with a silver plate under it of logic and empirical evidence you can take to the bank, and feel whenever you're pulled over.

If you're too stupid to see that, then you're too stupid to be a citizen.

So in situation like this, where the construct of social and institutional authority is wielded in the hands of "Dr. Goldfinger", who's in bed with "Mr. Public Man", you add up to a mad scientist with some charm and a switchblade, all I can feel like saying to people who have their heads up their asses and go along with all this is "piss off".

If you're in this system wittingly, you're already every decent person's problem (including Heaven's Progenitors), but if you're ignorant and unwilling to even face the situation on two feet, then god-damn if you aren't subhuman already.

But to the rest who have the intelligence to see and yet not the moral fiber to do and say what is right, curse you and never pretend to be common stewards with me concerning wisdom or dignity of any kind. The same pertains to any "entertainment whores of great wealth" who think that this entitles them to class in the presence of Truth and Justice, its Offices and Entitlements. VANISH.

That's de rigeur. Just show me the sign so I can include you in that unillustrius club of worthless scum and its hierarchy of pimps and "tops". Persons of rank, any talent, any acclaim, any wealth, any status, any privilege can qualify. Daringness to do so needn't require it be centuries after your leaving the dust of the earth. I'm issuing this assessment to the moral and spiritual worth of all people, in all places, at all times.
It is required by logic and fact, but most importantly by conscience. With these I am sufficiently informed as to the character of my opponents, as would be any good man. But many a fool who just thinks himself good might easily hate a man who is truly good and never have that "dagged gum sense" to know it until it was Judgement Day, when all of a sudden they run to their prayer beads (sad "yeehaww" here, in fading tones). These are "spiritual hicks". I don't mean that they are hicks who are spiritual. I love those people.

I mean they are but hicks in the big city of reality. And so look, alas, I have insulted my good friend the spiritual hick. I'm sorry, brothers, but most of your "bretheren" are haters of Truth and Justice. I'm sure you knew that from experience. I'm from Oklahoma CIty, and grew up pretty much with hicks that were barely transmitted into the city, so only the best and worst traits made it through. Yee Haw.

That's why sometimes I slip into a drawl. Not because I ever developed it, but because as a Pisces, having lived among anyone long enough I can emulate their essential qualities because, Karmically, I've "learned it all". It is in a life that remember it all, but it was at The Beginning that I Knew. It is in my unforgetfulness that I saw the Truth of Justice and Justice of Truth and demonstrated them against the grain of all opposition of the worst kind.

And to what end? To the end that through that fire, no less than a confirmation of the Truth has been established yet again. Upon such confirmation depends the balance of a Judgement underway which results finally in Destiny. What takes place here is symbolic of what takes place in Eternity Future. When bearing that in mind, along with all that was shown before, one is confronted with the immediate gravity of their situation, if they have that substantia in re by which such a concern is possible in every case.

The world IN TRUTH resents and resists that Spirit and the Origin thereof, and actively makes a mockery of it so as to attempt to degrade and belittle the reality with a absurd, deranged, deformed falsehood in its place, and deceive the righteous to take good for evil, evil for good, and to confuse or become blind to them altogether, and be shaped like men but ensouled by minds fit to be animals or demons.

NO WONDER they have resorted to such actions which demonstrate as a part of a perfect proof that they have ontologically evil status. And therefore no wonder such absurdities of this world are sustained, and by such means as we know they use. No wonder "nothing good will come of it, for anyone, but that he BE GOOD, and COME (away) FROM IT.

Most alive today, most who read these words perhaps, probably almost all capable of doing so, are in great likelihood not going to "make the cut".