This is a page requested by a reader in which (practically) any topic can be discussed. It will stay located up here in the pages section so you can access it easily. There is no topic to stick to, discuss and share what you will. But as I have stated before, and most of you should know them by now, there are things that I will not allow to be discussed on my website. “No victims on 9/11”, “Lying family members”, “Jews did everything”… that kind of stuff. For the most part, as long as commenters don’t threaten each other with physical violence, start ranting about racist crap, or selling shit (their books for one) it’s pretty much anything goes. We’ll try this for a while and see how it works out. Someone else suggested I start-up some kind of forum. I own American Everyman (dot) org now, so maybe if this works, we set it up there.

Anyway, enjoy.




221 Responses

  1. I like the idea of this Scott, but I don’t have a topic starter. I’ll drop by from time to time to see if anyone else has something to bounce off of.

    Lilaleo should have the first shot at giving a topic as this was his idea. Or maybe a list of concerns about what he thinks is wrong with the world today..whatever.


    • Thank you, HR1, for the sentiment and for holding the door for me. I feel that I have no choice now, but to walk right in. While I feel somewhat under pressure not to embarrass myself, I will try to do this opportunity justice.

      Before I give it a shot, I’d like to make a quick comment about HR1’s example about what is “wrong” with the world today:

      There’s absolutely NOTHING wrong
      With the world,
      Or ourselves today,
      Nor there has ever been….

      The world and everything in it
      And around it,
      Are always juuuust right…
      As they have always been.

      Thinking of it as being wrong
      is no different
      Than a fish not liking
      Being wet in the water it is in.


      Thank you, Scott, for adding a page for us to shoot the bull, and, who knows, maybe even to fix the world…

      • Lol, I like am intrigued by Lilaleo’s deconstruction/reconstruction of a portion of my epistemology.

        It is in fact only the Cartesian foundation that he has expressed here, and pretty well at that.

        “Je pense, donc je suis.”

        There are however many layers of consciousness built upon this to reach a level that is indeed ‘concerned’ with the destiny of the race I now characterize as Homo Vishnu Globalus. That is to say that there must be, to my thinking something essential in our being to have entered the Time-Space-Con Carne.

        While the correctness of the infinite universe is assured, our EXPERIENCE as meat, has some mysterious meaning that we each as individuals, must come to grips with.

        I would have nothing to say sociopolitically if I didn’t see that as the case.


        • Well, since you are declining to play my dictator game below, I will reply to your above comments, and see if anything bounces back. The whole point was to start a conversation, anyway.

          I do not subscribe to any Cartesian foundation, nor any other philosophical labels or schools of thought, nor any “layers of consciousness”, nor to the existence of a mysterious meaning (whether actual or merely “experienced”), nor to an inherent need for us “Homo Vishnu Globali” to figure it all out.

          If I must, at best, I can summarize this line of thought as “Je suis, donc je suis”

          The fact that, we, as a species, are smart enough to ask some seemingly pretty complex questions about ourselves, the universe and our place in it, but too dumb and ignorant to find an answer, have absolutely no bearing on whether or not our questions are even valid, or provide proof that an answer to our ignorant questions even exists.

          • Then let me get this straight: you Lilaleo believe in the material world as the basic fabric, that brain generates thought, that we live life here on earth, die__and that is the end of it?

            Or are you saying that you don’t know and don’t care? {Agnostic}


          • I am not saying either one of those options you are suggesting actually…

            I feel one of the biggest mistakes we make in our thinking about this kind of stuff is to see ourselves as a separate entity than the physical universe just because we are able to “think” (and only marginally more than other creatures around us at that), or just because we are able to imagine things in order to make sense of our existence.

            The idea that the body is a vessel to carry our consciousness from point A to point B (and beyond) with a pre-existing and pre-determined purpose that serves something much larger than ourselves is nothing but presumptuous and self aggrandizing on our part. It serves only to convince ourselves to the existence of a “meaning” to it all, which we seem to desire and require.

            In the micro scale, if anything is doing any “living” around here, that would be the planet itself, not us humans with our split second existence on a spec of dust in the cosmic scale…

            Even if we were to accept the existence of such a purpose and awareness on the part of the planet/galaxy/universe, it is an obvious logical fallacy to presume that the said purpose would be to yield “thinking creatures” like us.

            • I never said anything about “purpose” Lilaleo. You are arguing with someone other than I here. Purpose and awareness of being are not the same thing.

              “a pre-existing and pre-determined…” is again something you have read into things I have not said. I see no real “pre” to any of this.

              Is – will be – has been…all one eternal moment in my point of view.

              But this has little to do with the illusion of the melodrama of unfolding history. Are you detecting the ‘layers’ yet? This is ALL metaphor, we have no other tongue.


  2. I would like to provide a question-topic for discussion that is very similar to something I had asked, not too long ago, a smaller group of people which had turned out to be too small for the scope of the topic.

    Will keep the intro on the short side and let the finer points develop as the topic induces a wide range of answers (i can only hope) as we discuss the ins and outs of the following:


    May I Take Your New World Order, Please?

    Pretend, if you will, that you agree with some general sociological observations:

    It is becoming (or has already become) certain that the peoples of the world will no longer be able to maintain an existence independent of and disconnected from the rest of the world population, and that, regardless of how it might come about, the trend the civilization follows will certainly lead to some sort of world governance to maintain order, and rule of law, and, of course, resources.

    We all bitch and moan about the 21st century oligarchic quest for expansion and total domination of the regulatory and financial control of the world and its human and non-human resources. Most of us fear the seemingly inevitable tyrannical, oppressive regime we are facing in the coming decade(s), and the extreme dangers associated with it during the controlled demolition of the old and forging of a new world order.

    I would like to pick your brains a little about what you might think would be, could be, or should be an alternate world governmental and financial formation that will take the world in to the 22nd century.

    And a few quick follow up questions like:

    • Who will execute this alternate plan (persons, peoples, nations, organizations, religions, races, etc.)
    • How long would it take to implement this plan (years, decades, generations, centuries)?
    • How realistic is this alternate plan?

    • You have absolute authority and unlimited funds to execute your plan, but no magic wand. You still need to deal with the people, human psychology, geography, nature, etc.
    • Your reconstruction needs to adhere to the laws of physics as we know and observe them. No supernatural stuff, no aliens, no Messiahs, etc.
    • Your absolute authority started this morning. (better hurry up :-}})
    • Deadline: October 2113… (Extra credit for finishing sooner.)


    Thanks in advance to all who participate.

    • Hmmm…I’m sorry, I think I need that magic wand.


    • I am sorry if that first response seems a trivial quip.

      So I will say further, that I cannot/will not imagine such a thing for myself as having “absolute authority and unlimited funds to execute your plan..”

      I would not accept absolute authority if it were handed to me by the wishes of every single inhabitant of this planet. I cannot dictate my firm conviction that it is up to each and every individual to come to their own conclusions for themselves__come hell or highwater.

      But I can assure you with great confidence that this is ‘The Way It Is’.


      • I understand and sympathize with your noble sentiment of not wanting to be the dictator.I can also try to tempt you by calling you chicken [;-}} but I am not going to…

        Allow me to try a more piecemeal approach just to establish where we are hitting the wall of sentiments.

        First question: In a most general sense, do you agree with the premise of my question above?

        • Yes Lilaleo, in metaphorical terms, the world of man is all fucked up.

          Do you feel a lack of ease? A dis-ease as it were, in being human?

          And to the rest of the forum here. Is this to be Lilaleo and my private fairytale to weave? Perhaps one of you could step forward as dictator of the world with some answers to save this wretched/blessed race?

          Calling all angels…and demons…anyone out there? Any kind?


        • “Do you feel a lack of ease? A dis-ease as it were, in being human?”

          Sorry, I am not sure that I understand this question. Can you expand on it a little?

          • Okay…are you afraid of death? Is it scary being mortal? Or are you content that this is all there is.


            • Well, I can’t say I am too crazy about the idea of dying since I will miss the rest of this never ending movie…. But I feel it will be ok, since I won’t know that I am missing it, or that the movie is still going on.

              Am I content that this is all there is??? No, I am not! Because, I am not immune to the emotional side of things, and my socially conditioned brain obviously wants more, and my built in operating system that pushes me towards survival doesn’t want me to die.

              Also, content has a “satisfied, happy, fulfilled” side to its meaning, which is by no means the case in my case. Let’s just say I am “at peace” with it all.

              • So then you will be “surprised” if you find that death is but a segue between acts? That is if the curtain falls, and it rises again to another awareness of being.

                Any assurances then, you feel would spoil the play at hand. That is, any assurances given; you will now say is wishful thinking on the part of those who know different. Yes?


                • Obligatory break on my part… To be continued…

                • Am I aware of my previous conscienceless when I find that out?

                  What kind of assurances?

                  • “Am I aware of my previous conscienceless when I find that out?”

                    I can’t say, that will likely be up to “you” whatever that is was and will become.

                    The kind of assurances that can be given are only the kind that will be taken. I could tell you my personal story of ‘enlightenment’ of “seeing the light” of coming face to face with eternity, of KNOWING without doubt. But that would all be a delivery of metaphor, as this simply cannot be said directly in the human tongues. It would just be another tale of the many you have likely heard and read of.

                    There is no ‘dogma’ that comes with this, not when one is clear on what one has just experienced. And it is usually in the retelling by others that such dogmatic strictures are given to such revelations

                    I might tell you what it is like. But like is not. If you haven’t been there yourself, about the only thing you might relate it to is waking up after having some lucid dream, and realizing that it had alas just been a dream.

                    I can’t even tell you how to prepare for it, it was simply spontaneous in my case. And I would guess that whatever “preparations” others might claim are necessary for such a meeting with ‘the All’ is merely giving meaning to whatever previous actions one was concerned with before the event. Christians may claim they have met Jesus. Muslims may claim to have heard the voice of Allah…scientists may think they have had a psychotic episode…{grin}.

                    But it is not in the seeking that is the finding. It is in letting go.

                    And whether any of this makes a bit of sense to you…hahahaha

                    It is possible you will only ‘be there’ at segue. That is fine too.


                  • You are killing me with your circular argument. Perhaps it was meant rhetorically, but you did ask me if I would be “surprised” if I found out death is but a segue between act, and I replied back with a question that I felt was the determining factor.

                    For the “finding out” part to be even possible, in my next act, I would need to be aware of a “past”, or a “different” act, wouldn’t I? And, if neither act is aware of the other’s existence, then there is no point to concern one’s self with what will happen once the curtain falls at the end of my current act.

                    Unless you are suggesting that such a cross-awareness is indeed possible for people (souls, spirits, mind, consciousness?) who have come face to face with light and know without doubt? Because you also say whether or not I will be aware “will likely be up to “you” whatever that is was and will become”… Which makes me think that, in this paradigm, there is some kind of a conditional involved somewhere. What are my options as far as “me” is/was/will becoming? What does it depend on?

                    As second hand as it may be, I am quite familiar with the fulfillment and utter peace that the sense of “knowing without doubt” can bring to someone. And, for the record, I accept both the experience and it’s effects as absolutely genuine. And there is no question in my mind that, especially for someone who has been seeking it, even a momentary conscious and absolute awareness of being one with the infinite universe, or as you pointed out, with Allah or Jesus, would certainly alter one’s mind’s “state” and perhaps terminate their need to continue seeking.

                    No disagreement there…

                    Where we differ greatly, is the interpretation of this experience and the significance we assign to it. To me, it sounds like you accept it as the ultimate “it”. So much so that you know when “it” happened to you. Millions, yearn for it, but only a few get there… However, the veracity and the intensity of the experience and the discoveries and that come with it are not valid criteria. Perhaps we can agree at least about the one aspect of it all, which is that this type (or level) of enlightenment does not come to those who are not seeking it. I am yet to meet an enlightened soul who has not put in years and years in to thinking about it, studying it, learning it to try to develop a higher (deeper? More complex? Or perhaps more simple?) sense of consciousness. This aspect alone is sufficient to render the person predisposed to experience such a connection with the One and Infinite which they have developed in their minds. I do recognize that the type of enlightenment you speak of is the most complex, and the most difficult to achieve among other disciplines we might call spiritual. But it is fueled and framed by pre-knowledge of the “possibility” of such a thing, and quite extreme efforts on one’s part to rewrite our preinstalled software to make room for such an experience.

                    I am of the opinion that the “mind” that we seem to value so much, which some see as the carrier of the soul/spirit, and many accept it as the utter achievement of our species, as well as our connection to the rest of the universe, is merely a piece of software that a self replicating chain of protein (DNA) has developed for itself, alongside the “carne” part of our human package, to guarantee its own survival. If anything, it is this DNA that can be considered our ultimate connection to the universe, and not the meat and bones it builds for mobility and processing of energy (food), and certainly not the network of neurons it has developed which allows this sack of DNA to process environmental information for its own protection and the processing of external information. As complex as it may seem, for most part, this software operates on an if-and-then principle at the molecular level, and it is omnipresent in all self replicating “creatures”, from a single cell, all the way up to ourselves.

                    It could very well be true that one can, through learned methods, break his own mold and free his/her mind so successfully that a connection with our true selves at the molecular level can be experienced. But, the notion that this experience yields some “almost unattainable” ultimate and “beyond doubt” knowledge is pure speculation both on the part of the enlightened and the observer.

                    I am also wary of the catch22 argument that one can never understand unless one experiences it, and therefore it is personal and non-transferable knowledge and awareness, as you also state when you say.

                    But that would all be a delivery of metaphor, as this simply cannot be said directly in the human tongues. It would just be another tale of the many you have likely heard and read of.

                    I recognize this statement as a somewhat familiar argumentative and philosophical dead end I have been in more times than I can count, so I won’t even try.

                    I am aware that I have not managed to address all of your comments from yesterday’s “now”, as I couldn’t find a “now” last night to write back, and I am only able to “now”, but this is all the “now” I have for the moment and hope to continue in some future “now” ;-}}}

                    Please know that it is not my intention to antagonize you or your experience(s) or the philosophy behind and in front of it all with my discourse. What we are discussing is a major area of interest of mine, and you’ve gotta admit, there are not too many accessible enlightened (and intelligent, because I have met some dumb ones as well) people out there I can do this with. Not to mention that absolutely no one has bitten in to my dictator proposition above…. Which, believe it or not, did have a much larger point about “the ills of the world” I was trying to get to through discussion.

                    But screw it, I am content with the topic at hand. (Not that I think you would be too shy to do that anyway on your own accord, but please feel free to tell me to F off if and when you’ve had enough.

                    • When I ‘think’ about it in the rational terms of physical reality, Lilaleo, you are right in everything you say there.


              • Unsatisfactorily at peace. That is an intriguing proposition. A mixed metaphor as it were.

                I hope my observations here are not taken as taunts. The conversation is interesting thus far. You make me think, I will do my best to give back in kind.


    • Such thoughtful replies…. so much to talk about…
      I keep seeing a game called ‘football’…. it is a constant reminder of our beginnings….. and we seem to be stuck there.
      Violence, brains, and spiritual (the embracing huddle and cheerleaders) combine to make a deadly battle…. and separated by title and deed…..that is us…. when we see that we need to admire the human strengths… not fear them……and to use them totally together, then we will advance to our next level.
      World domination (violence) has and will create hatred .. because it is unequal and unbalanced. The cure might have to depend on our continued development of our brains and spiritual growth.

      Earth is alive…. I like that, hybridrogue1…. and I think I see what you mean by seeing humans as our total history…. we are all connected like a huge living web that is constantly moving and changing…. still one web….. like earth is constantly changing…. seemingly being destroyed and reemerging as something new….
      How many times have each of us participated? And could we remember?

      • Hi Jan,

        You say; “Earth is alive…. I like that, hybridrogue1”

        It is in fact Lilaleo that can take credit for saying that directly. Of course I agree, in fact I consider the whole of the Universe to be ‘alive’.

        I am glad we have another mind joining in here. And nice to finally meet you. We have never spoken as I recall, although I have known Scott for quite a few years now.


        • Hello hybridrogue1,
          and thank you…… I have greatly enjoyed the conversation between you and Lilaleo, on this thread…. and others.
          I am not much on the ‘mind’ part but I tend to get heavy on the spiritual and paranormal parts…… you might say I could be part of the unbalanced problem……. (as Lilaleo knows…. 🙂 )
          Your ‘enlightenment’ experience intrigues me. I hope tomorrow , you might reveal parts of it………

          • Hi Jan,

            I have been “spiritual” since I can recall. And I recall pretty far back.
            I didn’t have the language to say I was spiritual until I grew older. I always took it as part of being an artist. That connection to the Muse that was so natural and real.

            Anyway, I won’t go into a long autobiography here at this point. If you would like to read the story of my ‘enlightenment’, let me find it in a file where it is written down in rather complete form. For I find in recounting it over and over, it becomes ‘just a story’ to me as well. So since it is already written. I would rather just copy that and paste it here when I find it.

            As a singer, I always liked the first take of my vocal when recording. Even if the settings weren’t quite right according to the engineer. I don’t know if that makes sense to you, as far as my relating that tale of personal revelation to you – but there is something authentic in a first take that is almost impossible to reproduce.

            I think most of us writing on the blogs have experienced writing a reply or a comment that is “just right” only to find it disappear in some technical glitch…and how pale the rewrite might seem – if one is even up for a rewrite {grin}.

            In the meantime, perhaps some conclusions that resulted from that experience may be more fresh for the time being, that time being now..

            ‘I am’ is the only certainty. All else is supposition. All thought is metaphor.

            Even Time itself.

            We all experience ‘Now’ and realize we are in that moment, and if asked, “is it now?” will acknowledge that “of course it is” and it always is Now, but few have considered the deep timeless implications of this.

            So at a new ‘moment’ in ‘time’ I ask, “is it now” and yes it is still now. So to assert that Now is in fact the ‘eternal moment’ may seem paradoxical, but it is so: The paradox divides the whole – there is only one which cannot be divided: [1≡∞]


      • Hi jan10. Very nice to see you join in. I hope you stick around :-}}

        • Hi Lilaleo,
          yes, I did try to answer your challenge…. but I find it impossible to fix… ,domination is a power tool.. power over others…. it would create huge pools of ‘hate’ and also ‘greed’… both emotions would erupt into wars and a new ruler….. it will ruin nations and the people..
          if you have an idea,I would love to hear it…. 🙂

        • I am beginning to regret the way I set up the whole question. But I have an idea… I will just remove all of the question marks, and maybe start using it as an intro, and continue writing to expand on it.

          The argument was an attempt to loop the “ills of the world”, using the drastic measures that one would need to take as an example, back to the collective human mind by showing that any social formation of humans ultimately takes the same shape, just like a tiny acorn always grows to become a tree. The only difference being that the roots, or the lower branches do not complain about how unfair it is that they don’t get to reach the sky, the leaves don’t complain that they dry out and fall off while the tree stays… None of them post on blogs moaning about the ills of the tree, or the unarmed leaf that got shot by the secret service…

          We do not seem to be disturbed when we watch other pack animals in nature having a hierarchical structure which depends on a certain equilibrium. Hangers on are discarded, bloodlines protected. Strong survive.

          But, our overdeveloped and underused mind somehow has unnatural demands and expectations like equality and fairness… It pleases us to think we are all precious individuals, and our minds, spirits, souls are all so special, our existence as human race so unique (after all, we personally know the the guy who created the whole universe, and we are good friends of his son) that it becomes impossible for us to see that the human tribe is nothing but a school of fish that swims in a certain formation, which seems to have worked well enough so far to allow us to dominate and, in a sense, infest the planet.

          It’s a very common shortcut to call ourselves “slaves” since we feel our free will is being shackled, and our access to resources blocked to keep us in a state of perpetually dependency, at gunpoint when necessary… Nonetheless, I am sure that most of us (the subjects, the slaves), if given the chance and adequate knowledge, would prefer to be a free range slave in 2013 than any other kind of slave at any other time in history. The “free man” is an American myth, which was extended to its people as an incentive go clear out native populations, settle, and start producing… I am afraid that incentive has expired, and now the Americans can join the rest of the world where freedom has not existed for thousands of years, if not tens of thousands.

          It’s a tough job to run the world… Most of us, like hybridrogue1, don’t wanna touch it with a ten foot stick even as a mental exercise. But, there are people, organizations, bloodlines, churches, who seem to feel entitled to the ownership of the whole enchilada… And they are going for it… And they are going for it “at any cost”… Whatchugonnadoboutit?

          • “Whatchugonnadoboutit?”~Lilaleo

            Laugh at their certain ultimate failure.

            Freedom is a state of mind my friend. For me to pity the enslaved minds of the TVZombies, is different than considering myself shackled.
            To recognize the despotism, to describe it and defy it, is to break it’s spell.

            All the metaphor, of the pack hierarchies of canines and lions, the herd instincts of herbivores, the schooling patterns of fish life… These analogies are only applicable from a certain, or particular framing and conscious construction.

            But let this not discourage such well put and a clearly expressed thoughts. I enjoyed the experience while reading it.


            • Well, wadayaknow… An email reply seems to post just fine…. I wish I knew this before…

            • I see that my handle appears different. It is me, lilaleo.

              Sent from my iPhone


            • No way jose1 and josephina10….

              Although your respective replies (which i appreciate) come from very different angles, they both share a certain level of dismissiveness. (I really don’t mean that in a confrontational way)

              Jan, the one main prerequisite for “disappointment” is “expectation”… And as far as humans are concerned, I have neither… My whole argument revolves around the premise that the main reason for our frustrations is delusion. Delusions that we impose on ourselves in order to make some sense of our existence. Even though, making sense of our existence is not really a prerequisite for existing. It is an artificial paradigm.

              And HR1, I really do not see “them” failing. What are the criteria to determine that they are failing?

              I understand how you might feel unshackled by subscribing to a greater truth… And in most aspects, you are probably right since you seem to have broken away from the limiting “human conditioning”. Even then, it probably took you a good 30-40 years to erase the original OS that was installed in you by society, parents, culture, etc… So, you are a victim of it all as well to a certain point. And, experiences such as yours, which are few and far between for humans as a whole, will certainly have an effect on the greater scheme of things in the long run by becoming a spice that flavors the human soup. But the soup remains a human soup regardless. The fact that Michael Jordan could dunk three balls does not mean that, one day, all humans will be able to do that.

              Yes, I do have dreams, jan10… Not the MLK kind, but just the kind where the brain gets busy with storing and categorizing information and experiences by firing up neurons between the pertinent synapses in our brains, during which the gates between conscious and subconscious are temporarily opened, which happens during the only period when it is not in use for more immediate matters like interacting with our environment.

              Just to finish up… Jan, I categorically refuse your observation of “bitterness” on my part. It is our collective desire of “there needs to be more to it than what there is” is what I react to… Because we seem to be prone to creating a meaning where there is none. It is a nifty way for the mind to avoid dealing with the unknown by packaging the unknown in a nice little made up philosophy or teaching or myth… And human history shows us that there has been absolutely zero philosophies or explanations, which are limited by the knowledge base of the era, that have survived the test of time. When the track record is a big fat zero out of god knows how many, I do not expect any of the current ones to have any validity whatsoever in the long run.

              I know that these are sensitive issues… So, I will finish by saying one more time… My obvious lack of “belief” should not mean that I sit in judgement of people who do subscribe to a belief system…. Douchebags like Bill Maher, Christopher Hitchins and Richard Dawkins not only look down on people who find solace in religion or spirituality and treat them as “dumb people”, but they also expect religion to just go away, if only everyone were as smart (their conviction, not mine) as they are… Which is the grandest of all delusions… Because, no matter how much more we find out scientifically about ourselves, the world and the universe, there will always be more unknown than known… And those unknowns will always need an explanation by some philosophy or another. In this context, we shall always have religion (aka collection-of-made-up-explanations-of-the-unknown)

          • Lilaleo, I hear a haunting bitterness in your comment…. so much disappointment….. in humans? or in the current government?
            You speak of the tree…. you do realize that the bulk of the nutrition (wealth) of the tree feeds the lower branches and leaves…. and when the sap runs .. it runs down… the top branches are starved first… the leaves do drop (depending on ‘what’ tree) off but they return in the spring…. it is the root system that spreads and fights for survival….. while depending on the leaves to gather sun energy….. if you limit the nutrition of the roots, you limit the entire tree… especially the higher branches….
            It’s a tough job to run the world…. oh well, I haven’t read where anyone wants to do that… they want to plunder the world and leave the people and nations in a poverty condition…. that is not ‘running the world’….
            like hybridrogue1 said………… just wait until ‘they’ destroy each other….and they will….. they always have..
            Don’t know about the perfect human… have never met one….
            Sorry you feel so angry about some people knowing that God does exist… live and let live… and some ideas about what God is, are wrong.. written by man and used by man….
            do you have dreams. Lilaleo?

            • I am not able to log in on my phone. WordPress mobile layout does not give me the option. So, this is just a test to see if a reply to the email instead will post as a comment… THIS IS IS JUST A TEST.

              Sent from my iPhone


  3. Seeing The Light – A Personal Story

    Van Nuys, California – 1976
    I was laying in my bed propped up reading a book. It was about the history and development of different sects of Buddhism. I had read half way through the book, having read more days going by. At this point I had become disappointed, more like disgusted really. I sat up and slammed the book down on the nightstand to my left thinking, ‘this is no better than Christianity, just a bunch of myths being worshiped while the main point is missed.

    My eyes scanned the room as I was thinking this. Across the room sat a dresser facing me. It had a large mirror atop, it was just at the perfect level that I could see myself sitting in the bed. I caught a glimpse and looked into my own eyes, the thought came into my head, “oh, there’s that animal,” {strange thought on reflection}. With that suddenly the room became a negative of itself, the dark’s were light the lights were dark the colors mixed up, and then it was normal, and then negative…and it flashed back and forth from one to the other with a pulsing sensation like pressure and release in my eardrums, all of my senses…

    Suddenly a huge breath filled my lungs, as if some celestial lifeguard had put its lips to mine giving me mouth to mouth resuscitation. With that I fell back into my pillow into a deep bright pool of light. My whole consciousness was light. There was a definite sensation – a paradoxical one of great peace and a rush of intense excitement. It was like the feeling of being in a roller-coaster just as you top the highest peak, the rush of looking down just before the plunge – but at the same time a stillness like laying in some serene meadow.

    I have no idea how long in physical time I lay there like that, I just recall at some point hearing my own inner voice saying “I did it…I am there!” – and then, of course I wasn’t, I was back laying in my bed, my head on my pillow, my arms crossed like an Egyptian mummy, and with a sense of great wonder as I sat up and looked around at the familiar surroundings of the room. All seemed the same, but everything was different. I knew something inexpressible, something that I had only guessed at before. I knew eternity, and in that knowing knew I had always known it. I had just then remembered it…

    And many thoughts came rushing through me, excitedly and serenely at the same time. At times now, when I relate, it is like it just happened a moment ago. In a sense, it has never stopped, in a sense it was so many years ago. ~W.D.Whitten


    • Thank you for sharing, hybridrogue1,…..I don’t know what to make of it…. like maybe your thoughts dropped you deep into your consciousness….you briefly remembered a time between your mortal lives…. maybe?! Exciting experience !

      True story from one of my experiences:
      During the early 80s, two cousins from Baltimore visited me and my mother (we shared a house in Virginia) …. after talking, eating, and laughing for several hours, I got very tired and excused myself for a nap…. I went upstairs and laid down on one of my children’s beds….. ( I had given up my bedroom for the convenience of my cousins (both women)….. I had just began to drift off to sleep when I heard two women talking and giggling as they came up the stairs….. I raised my head slightly up …thinking they were my cousins….. the two women came to the bedroom door (where I was) and started to enter… I looked up at them… they froze when they saw me….. they seemed shocked to see me…. and I was certainly quite shocked to see them…. they wore long old fashioned dresses… I remember browns and small flowers in the print…. long sleeves… buttons down front….. their long hair was worn up in a twisted pinned knot … some sort of decorated ribbons were in their hair….they were young… maybe in their late 20s…..Out of the corner of my eye I saw the air waving in ripples… I looked and saw very old fashioned furniture…. a huge standing wardrobe…. and large pictures on the walls… and heavy drapes covered the windows….. the air rippled quickly until the room was back to normal (my children’s room)…. I looked back up at the two women and they were gone….. I was not afraid… just amazed…. I got up immediately and went downstairs and told my mother and cousins what had happened.
      I felt that somehow, a temporary lapse in ‘space’ occurred…. maybe between spirits and mortals…. .it was soothing to think that energy continues….. in one form or another……..

      say what you please, guys, but this did happen. 🙂

      • Thank you for sharing that Jan,

        Quite an interesting, and surely unforgettable experience there in “your children’s room”.

        Was this house in Virginia, old enough to have been occupied by people from the era you describe? Not that that would be essential, there may have been another dwelling on that property in the past.

        I have had, and continue to have a lot of weird experiences in the near sleep consciousness either just waking up or just falling off. Some are so bizarre I can’t bring myself to write about them.

        But one strange aspect that links many of these is the ceiling lamp from my room as a teenager. I will wake up – usually because I have to pee – and if I am laying on my back the first thing I notice in the dim lit room is that square [about 12 in sq] glass fixture. But I have no ceiling light here, nor in several past bedrooms where such visions occurred.

        Other times I wake up to see “portals” in the ceiling…often having the feeling that I just dropped into my bed from above. The portals are quite distinct, and look like the iris on a camera lens that is closing when I notice them. I have watched for long moments as they close and then fade leaving the ceiling texture as it really is. This has happened waking from dreams of walking through neighborhoods, going right through doors into and through houses, places I have never been – seeing people see me with wide eyes as I pass through their rooms.. I have no idea of what any of these lucid dreams mean. But they always leave me in a state of wonder when I fully awake.

        Dreams are marvelous things in themselves, even if they are nothing more than movies from our subconscious.


        • hybridrogue1, the house was built in the 40s….. so not old enough …. yet it had the old claw and ball footed iron cast bath tub… the builder may have tore down a previous older dwelling and built new house on same property…. and used some wood and items from old house…. you might be right about that… would be interesting to be able to check it out… but I never thought about it..
          other ‘things; happened in that house … like the porch light turned on and off sometimes by itself… it was checked out and nothing was found to cause it…. sometimes strange noise at night….. I always felt safe …. I will not go into much of it…. I wrote a book about it and turned it into a fiction where I added a fictional adventure….
          dreams can be a communication from another sphere…. I believe that..
          your ‘dreams’ may have been ‘out of the body’ experiences …. were the houses you walked through from your current time or an older time?
          I do not believe our subconscious makes up ‘stories;’…. it may bring up previous ideas or experiences and move the views in a strange way but to actually show startled images of people who you passed by would be a real leap for the subconscious….. would not be honest… unless it was based on an actual experience…. subconscious tries to tell us things….. sounds like you were actually (spiritually ) travailing
          like dreaming of running down a strange street…. fearing and looking for something…. when you wake up… if you think about it… there is a worry in your current life that you might wish to solve ….
          I don’t think you were dreaming.

          • I understand what you are saying about the subconscious, and how it can be viewed as a ‘superconscious’ that is only sublimated by lack of conscious access – wherein access becomes more available in dream sequences.

            But then in that sense the ‘dream’ is more real than what we refer to as waking reality, for it is generated directly by the superconscious. And there we set up the gyre of the swirling perhaps mobile. Which is real? Which is memorex?

            I am more of the notion that we are dreaming right now, in this supposed wakened state of consensus reality. The “Dream Within a Dream” template. The Particle/Waveform paradox.


            • Maybe…. we are dreaming while awake….. if it means we let our thoughts ‘dream’ while doing mundane duties (like house cleaning, racking a yard, etc) ….. so, when we drift to sleep, sometimes we also ‘thought dream’ until we dream ourselves to sleep where later, our sleep dreams might develop a more direct and honest dream. ?
              “A dream within a dream”….. so be it….
              I believe our conscious is always talking to us…. awake or sleeping…. we tend to ignore it during the wake periods unless we are caught in a quiet moment … like ‘not thinking…. just watching and taking in our surroundings…. like halting…. then sometimes we get an insight that might astound us…. we will probably just shrug it off as our imagination working over time….. and then in the sleep dream, the conscious can give us visual clues ….
              maybe even allow a messenger to visit….. like another spirit….. to communicate..
              why can’t our sleeping mode allow our brain,,, which never sleeps, to do other duties ? We heal better during sleep…. magic? No… just using energy for other things besides day time duties…. so we also have our inner self that sends out sleeping-mode signals and our conscious acts as security …allowing only input that may not harm us.
              Some individuals can handle stronger input… like you being allowed to visit other places….. you need to direct the direction?

              And I do not think that the metaphysics of any discussion will ever reach a limit…. 🙂
              We are all so different and yet so alike… so strange….are we…..

  4. Lilaleo,

    You put a lot in that last comment that came in that narrow right hand band… I made just a very short reply under it, so that we could carry on further with wider margins here.

    You mention preparations and seeking. Yes no doubt there are those, whether conscious or subconscious. Those seeking the “GodHead” certainly do so with some sense of purpose however focused or vague that might be.

    I came across a symbol in a book on physics in the library of a neighbor I was babysitting for when I was around 11 years old. Something about it intrigued me, it seemed important for some reason I didn’t seem to have yet. That symbol is this: ≡ , which means :
    “Is Exactly”. Many people upon first encountering it in my ‘equation’ think they are seeing the equal sign; =.

    It is also so that I came to the intellectual place of understanding this some years before the actual Experience. I had formulated that equation around 1968 after an argument/discussion about the Urantia book with a good friend of mine.

    That was when it dawned on me what the importance of the symbol, ≡ is for a means of expressing my then developing philosophy/theology/ cosmology — world view, how ever you chose to characterize it:

    Paradox divides the whole – there is only one which cannot be divided: [1≡∞]

    This is admittedly devised from an intellectual standpoint, prior to the enlightenment experience.
    + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

    Now as far as “circular argument”. I warned you at the beginning of this discussion, that this is NOT an argument. That in dealing with paradox there are bound to be intellectual ‘contradictions’, that human language is not sufficient, etc. The bottom line is I am telling you what I know, I haven’t the slightest expectation of you “getting it” from anything I say.

    A seed just might be planted however, and you may seek for yourself.

    As far as having had “enough of it” {your questioning}…Lol

    I have all the time there is and will never have had “enough of it”.


    • “You put a lot in that last comment that came in that narrow right hand band… I made just a very short reply under it, so that we could carry on further with wider margins here.”

      Now, THAT is what I would call smart…. The way wordpress laysout replies and sub-replies is indeed annoying and limiting… I have even read replies on my phone that were literally a single character wide….

    • “Now as far as “circular argument”. I warned you at the beginning of this discussion, that this is NOT an argument. ”

      My bad for using the word “argument”

      But you have to admit that it is not too easy to navigate through the lexicon of this topic, since conventional notions are far from being sufficient to explain or express one’s self.

      • Yes Lilaleo,

        The lexicon is somewhat ‘dense’ I suppose you could say. I would advise that you always keep in mind while discussing these extraphysical notions, that we are stuck with metaphor.

        Once this is grasped, I think that it will become more and more obvious that our interior constructs of “the world” are metaphor as well.

        Are you aware of, or have you read Julian Jaynes, THE ORIGINS OF CONSCIOUSNESS IN THE BREAKDOWN OF THE BICAMERAL MIND?

        I mention this, as it is this notion of the “world as metaphor” that becomes central to his developing thesis.

        And if nothing else, it is an utterly fascinating read.

        As far as the term ‘argument’… I know the classical definition includes simple dialog as communication. But there is an aspect of ‘making a proof’ to the word nevertheless. I cannot offer ‘proofs’ I can merely describe my view of the the universe. So I do prefer the term, ‘discussion’ over ‘argument’ using those definitions. No ‘bad’ called here.


        • Yeah, i know Julian Jaynes… He is an idiot!!!!

          (No, no, just kidding… I had not read it, and I just downloaded it and looking forward to reading it)

          • That’s funny: “Yeah, i know Julian Jaynes… He is an idiot!!!!”

            The reason I find it funny is I got the book when I was around 30 years old. I read the first couple of chapters and put it down and thought to myself, “He is an idiot!!!!” hahahahaha…

            I read the book again just a couple years ago, and became so intrigued that I couldn’t put it down…and finally ‘got it’. So much depends on our state of mind when introduced to new thinking and ideas.

            A similar thing happened while watching the film AMERICAN PSYCHO just recently. The first time I watched it, I was in such a mood as all the overboard violence hit me too hard and I hated it. I slept on it, and something in my dreams came to me. I watched it again the next day and got it. That the whole thing took place in this psycho’s mind. He only imagined himself as this psycho-killer, and the kitsch and absurdity of the whole thing gave it an entirely new meaning for me.

            I know that may seem a strange comparison…{grin} some kitsch art film and a serious study of psychological history.


  5. Also Lilaleo,

    Your thoughts on DNA are interesting and I have been thinking of things on those terms as well…that is as far as the con carne/time aspect is concerned.

    There is certainly more to DNA than the simple physical architectural schemata. The ‘alignment’ of Kristos is, I think at the cellular level, or deeper at the Particle/Wave Form nexus.


    • Why stop there? Don’t let particles/waves block your in-volving journey. As you keep shrinking they quickly become empty space filled with probably little more than differing and changing “potentials” or more accurately “information”; John Wheeler’s “it from bit”. But as always, this is all rendered metaphorical by the mystery of “just what is mind”? There is no convincing evidence of anything else but mind, and that evidence is evidence completely sequestered in one’s consciousness’s own inherent solipsism. Yet a conscious mind does not seem to be completely in control of all its experience, so why not? Is the un-willed part just a moire pattern of dimensional matrices crossing through each other in N-space and perceived by mind in it’s role as a graphic user interface for something like an N-space “true” reality? Is there any problem calling the whatever-that-is “god” or “the force” or whatever phoneme string one cares to assign it? There is likewise no convincing evidence that time exists.

      Problems all around, so best just to do one’s best to be good and stay active, whatever the heck one thinks that is.

  6. Perhaps the limits of the metaphysical discussion has been reached. If so, coming back down to earth and the temporal issues here, let me describe the situation as I see it:

    The world is run by a global organized crime syndicate, and their bottom line is raw and absolute political power. To suppose that this apparatus “cares” about anything else is suicidal naïveté. The maxims of this cabal are; “Might makes right” and “Ends justify means.”

    The essence then is pathological.

    Does the forgoing metaphysical discussion have no bearing on this?
    Hardly, for at the core of pathology is moral error based in the fear of death, which is the spawn of the general neurosis that manifests.


  7. “This is a world of chance, free will, and necessity-all interweavingly working together as one: chance by turn rules either and had the last featuring blow at events.”~Herman Melville — Moby Dick


  8. What are; “our democratic rights”? And how do they differ from our natural rights under Liberty?


  9. Natural rights are assumed rights under the notion of “god given and inalienable” and do not require (at least technically) any written laws.

    Democratic rights are demanded by the people and written in to law by governments.

    Both are imaginary.

    • “Both are imaginary.”~Lilaleo

      I will give you that, with the caveat that an adjunct would reasonably follow that ‘nature’ is imaginary as well.

      As it is not simply “god given” that prequals the ‘inalienable’ aspect, but the reflection of what is seen in nature as physically manifest as well. That is why the term is “natural rights” rather than “divine rights”.

      To be clear at what I suggest:

      Nature is imagined, physical reality is imagined – the term being Maya in the Sanskrit; Illusion projected by mind.


    • Personally, when it comes to nature as we experience it, I would prefer to use the term “perception” instead of illusion… Although, admittedly, the two overlap more often than not.

  10. Sorry to leave you dangling having posed an interesting topic Lilaleo , but whilst I usually follow the recent articles here I had missed the recent comments and the discussion in this thread.

    Much of what I have to say on the matter has a fair bit of supporting backstory which I elaborated on in the two following threads here , commenting as Allende Admirer, some of it in reply to Lilaleo at that time.



    Forgive me for not rewriting the whole shebang again here but it would take me a few hours if not days to explain it all again otherwise.

    In short I pretty much agree with your premise here Lilaleo, in that some sort of world order is probably inevitable to prevent theft exploitation and imperialism of one region’s resources by another. It is also to be noted that existing world powers have been unconcerned with the destruction / management of the environment , and something needs to be done pretty quickly to avoid premature self destruction if any sort of future is to be anticipated. I suspect that the new model has to be concerned with sustainability and conservation over established models of economic growth.

    I dont subscribe to any notion that this would lead to globalization or monoculture, as I dont see why maximum diversity can’t be encouraged through localized communities practicing and believing whatever the hell they want as long as it does not step on the toes of others. In fact my faith in the Lewontin Campbell hersutic prescribes this approach.

    Much of my previous opinion has to do with the fact that to understand human psychology or “Truths”, we have to look at evolutionary psychology and see what 6 million years of evolution designed us for and that was to be living in independent social groups of about 150 people max. With civilization, and “leadership” a whole load of crap was dumped on the masses making them largely obsolete in decision making terms, and their exploitation by an elite who pull the strings largely in their own interests was inevitable by the available logistics of organization .

    However going back to the design, I doubt if all the social groups were necessarily hierarchical in groups of 150. There must have been many that were , but I suspect that many were also democratic, some matriarchal, some were obviously also going to become thieves and raiders. Whatever worked would have survived so I would expect more diversity than hierarchy alone.

    I also think that in groups of 150, it is harder to ignore your starving neighbor than in the cold logic of civilisation and imperial exploitation, so I would expect that there was a pretty healthy community spirit or altruism keeping most communities together.
    With a smaller community, the relevance of one persons opinion/ experience is of much greater significance than in a civilisation of thousands, and also if things were unfair it would be a lot easier to change the power structure in 150 than going against the state.

    I just have an instinct that most people would co operate so that the interests of the community/ masses as a whole would (in most cases) trump the preservation of an all powerful oligarch with all the available resources of the group at his her personal disposal.

    I think this principle is inherent in evolution itself, and the democratic/ co-operative/fair nature of mankind can be counted on unless distorted by propaganda / elite interests poisoning / misrepresenting the will of the masses for their own benefit.

    Therefore I do not see a massive obstacle in achieving this new world order based on diversity and co operation etc, you just have to eliminate the propaganda , and make selections for change based on the will of the masses. The technology for such organisation (Interweb thingy) has only been with us for a minute time, and for the first time since civilisation allows us to organise without an elite leadership. Though we see many teething problems already- Sock Puppets for one, electronic voting fraud etc. But I am sure these can be overcome if desired like some kind of bitcoin (Supposedly untamperable) democracy .

    Finally in the spirit of disclosure of life changing revelatory moments I will tell my tale:

    My quest for truth started shortly after my first encounter with digital electronics

    The first digital thing I touched was a pong machine in a working man’s club in Fareham .Beneath my fingers was one of those things that we had been told was going to change the way we lived our lives.

    Later, the first digital product was marketed to the public of Portsmouth

    It was summer and the Gemini Man was the thing to watch on TV at that time.
    Although the first digital thing on sale in any shop did not offer the facility of temporary invisibility, the watch was nevertheless the object of my desire.

    It WAS the digital revolution and it looked it. Set in shiny steel a dark red LED display carved a path of tiny red lights to digital quartz time. A tiny steel button was visible on either side, and I was desperate to know what they did.

    But I was resigned to the fact that the begging campaign hadn’t worked and that my parents would not be giving me that watch I wanted so much for my birthday. It was expensive and I secretly knew my parents did have a point in that I had not been looking after my things recently.

    Joyous day when I opened the hard green plastic cube and saw the object of my desire was after all in my possession.

    Utter despair when three weeks later I finally accepted the fact that I had lost it .I must have left it after sunbathing on the pebble beach near south parade pier. (Soon to be burnt down during the filming of Ken Russell’s ‘Tommy’)
    Anyway I had searched my room several times to no avail, and I had just taken the most desperate step of going back and searching that well used part of the beach that I had been in, as if such a desirable object could still be there!


    It wasn’t there and I was back, lying on my bed thinking. I had accepted it was gone, and I was pondering how to tell my parents, Surveying the perpetual disaster zone that was my bedroom, I spotted strewn in the corner the school hardback bible required for compulsory RE lessons.

    With a half prayer (as I had then and have now no faith) I made the unusual step of going to pick it up- I was going to open it randomly and hoped to read something to comfort me.

    Have no fear ,
    I have no truths to offer you here, but the watch was under the bible, lost then found.
    Now, I have a better explanation than divine intervention.
    Now, I would argue that finding something in a place where you had already (albeit hastily) looked for it three times, is surprising not an uncommon experience.
    Now I can explain it in the chaos my room perpetually descends to and possibly in fallible searching methods on my part.

    Then I accepted it for divine intervention

    I do not remember the moment at which I lost my faith, there were no dramatic incidents to remember it by. But as I learned more about our world’s recent humanitarian ‘ achievements’ I found very little to have faith in and embarked on a lifelong interest in the fallibility and elusiveness of “truth” instead.

    • Thank you for joining the discussion Allende Admirer.

      I went back to the threads you linked to to see what was said, and they seem to have been good threads all around.

      The one question I got left with after reading it all quickly was whether or not methylamine still visits and reads American Everyman. He did say he was enjoying it.

      As for your watch-hiding bible story… I feel you have already come to the right conclusion about the incident, especially considering that the watch revealed itself before you even had a chance to read that random prayer in order to suck up to God so that he would save you from an impending grilling by your parents.

      If I may extrapolate, you would not have become a scientist or a professional liar either, had the watch been hiding under a math textbook, or a copy of Penthouse Forum (c’mon, you know you had a few of those ;-}})

      Welcome to Evergreen.

      • I am afraid that the initial consequences of the bible incident involved a dunking at a baptist church a few months later, so I was not as wise as perhaps my retelling has led you to believe. I was however fairly concerned with improving the world for some reason. Probably more through exposure to world cinema than religion, the loss of faith was largely due to the observation that faith was largely a substitute for and deferring of actions which could actually change the world for the better.
        Faith became a dirty word for me and my loss of it was one consequence.

        As for the possibility of other reading materials, although they would have been entirely possible (probably) it was only the juxtaposition of the half prayer with bible coincidence that made an impression. Anything else would have been insignificant and forgotten quickly.

        I am afraid the event did not lead to a change for tidiness hybridrouge.
        In fact the next thing that impressed my greatly was evolution, followed by the second law of thermodynamics perusing a chemistry degree.

        I believe this to be the truest thing I have ever found in that everything burns (Descends into chaos) as time progresses. All life, cosmology etc seems to exist only to burn. However to extrapolate this to a meaning of life would be to blow up the planet in one fowl swoop, which was clearly not a valuable conclusion.

        The second law was still a big influence on me however. I observed that many people seemed to spend their entire lives tidying & homekeeping in an effort to hold back the inevitable onset of chaos or disorder.

        I was only “saved” if that is the right word by my wife who has a lot higher ‘threshold of cleanliness’ than I do. In other words, she will act to stem the tide of disorder way before I even notice it. If she is away (went away for a month this summer) the three of us (2 kids) were quite happy to let the disorder pile up to garbage angel levels until the required tidyup in preparation for the homecomimg.

        • Hahahaha…Allende Admirer,

          As far as ‘tidiness’ we are on the same wavelength. I sure am no ‘Nancy Homemaker’ — my desk is testament to the theory of “Pile it High’ — although I seem to know where everything is amongst the chaos.

          Wives are no longer an option after having 3 – as in “strikes and you’re out”.

          I am interested in, and have studied many of the topics of science, mainly anthropology, cultural {sociology} and physical. I also like physics a lot, especially the leading edges, such as quantum theory and “string theory” and the derivatives that have followed. I did a lot of ‘jamming’ in Newtonian Mechanics to keep up with the dialog on 9/11.

          Anyway, it is nice to have you on this particularly wide open conversation.


  11. So Allende Admirer,

    Do you keep a tidier abode now that you have seen your way by divine intervention?


  12. “An organism shapes the environment as the environment shapes the organism.”~Lewontin

    Ah … this is a view that I have held for a long time, even though this is the first time that I recall hearing of Lewontin.

    At any rate Allende Admirer, I am curious as to whether you have devised some way of effectively sorting out humanity in your approximate ‘150 person lots’? And as this would be via varoom digitalis, and physically they would likely be in diverse regions…

    Any ‘Organizational’ idea’s here?


    • There are two major advantages that a social structure of 150 (or fewer) humans has over larger groups:

      Unity (shared goals. shared consequences of defense/offense, shared bloodline, shared myths, relatively even physical and mental agility, etc)

      Transparency (Good structure of checks and balances due to the small number of interdependent individuals)

      As hybridrogue1 pointed out, no matter how small, how unified or how transparent the society, you still had the shaman/medicine man, the hunter, the fighter, the wise, the idiot, the lazy one, the brave one, etc.

      The moment the ruling class of any society no longer has kinship, direct ties, common interests and a perceived or real responsibility towards the “ruled classes”, is when things start getting really hairy…

      Multiply that hairiness with a factorial of 40,000…. That is what we have now…

  13. The Structures of Deception

    The world of man has been a world of intrigue from the time that Homo Sapiens first came upon the Earthly scene.

    The archaeological discoveries of the physical anthropologists have given the cultural anthropologists a treasure trove of not only skeletal remains, but all manner of cultural artifacts with which to piece together a very full picture of their rituals and beliefs. Man has remained essentially the same creature all the way to the present, only his technologies have changed.

    The same sorts of hierarchical structures have persisted from prehistorical to present times. The same types personalities that took the roles of shaman and chief in the tribal era’s as in the times of the city states with their philosophers, priests and kings. Only the appearances and metaphors have shifted with each paradigm.

    What is called the ‘cult of intelligence’ can be traced back as far as history itself. The seeds to such organization is in the secret societies, that were already part of human activity as far back as tribal societies. ‘The Warriors of the Sacred Circle’ are an example from the Native Americans, a lodge where secret ceremonies and induction into sacred ritual was practiced.

    That the ‘cult of intelligence’ is organized on a global scale at this time should be no surprise. The era of nation states is undermined by such global structures and a new paradigm has emerged which is only now becoming generally recognized. The New World Order is arisen and is reaching for fruition.

    “Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster, And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”~Friedrich Nietzsche


    • Hybridrougue. I am afraid I am missing the reference point for these two comments, not knowing what ‘varoom digitalis’ means or the reference to ‘structures of deception’.Google was not too forthcoming on either.

      The former I can guess at, and need to clarify that I do not prescribe a return to communities of 150 as an answer, but that seems to have some significance to humanity- the Dunbar number – also happens to be the average number of contacts on facebook apparently?

      It seems to be the number of people that we are able to interact with and maintain a social relationship with although for me it is probably about 5 !!!

      I dont advocate the decommissioning of civilisation or cities unless better studies than mine advocate them. I just observe that within society there are structures like sports clubs etc where people self organise in such numbers largely without hierarchy and privilege and have respect for all members regardless of ability.

      If that correlates to a worldwide knitting forum for example of 100 people with knitting in common who respect each other and discuss their world experience and ideas then their interaction and community is as valid as withdrawing to an isolated local community IMO.

      It is the process of interaction sharing challenging and honing of ideas which is of importance to me and fits with what we are designed for- interaction in manageable social groups. If those people all live in metropolises I dont see a problem with that per se unless sustainability etc become problems.

      I am afraid that again Structures of Deception does not mean a lot to me . is that all from Nietzsche or was that just the end quote? or was it your opinion/ beliefs. In terms of evolutionary psychology I would argue that anyone is on very shaky grounds to make the emphatic claims you make here. In fact the good thing about evolutionary psychology is that you can say pretty much suggest anything you want as the evidence does not exist yet. However if the information you give here is verified based on evidence then I would like to read the sources, and even if true I would be disappointed but not deterred by that fact as catering for the unknown must have been a big part of ancient community.

      However as far as I know the british barbarians for example replaced by roman civilisation were a largely egalitarian society and probably matriarchal- Bodicea, pagan celebration of the mother etc.

      The problem is the romans came and erased that history so it is hard for us to know now. History belongs to the victors. How anyone can confidently describe the belief system and psychology of pre civilized groups based on the incredibly sketchy archeological record is beyond me.

      One fact- we have recently observed/ proposed that all the neanderthal primitive cave drawings were made by women. What that proves or signifies I dont know.

      I suspect that the work you refer to is providing convenient ‘evidence’ to support its own conclusions and argument. but what do I know, and It is not really significant to my theses actually.

      • Allende Admirer,

        Nietzsche was just the end quote. The rest is from my original thinking.

        I do disagree that the archaeological evidence is “sketchy” as you say here. As far as burial ritual is concerned, it tells us much as to the belief systems of such peoples as analyzed thus. The living sites of the peoples and their technologies is also part of the puzzle, especially their works of art – weapons, container vessels, adornments etc.

        As far as using the modern term “psychology” to define such belief systems of the past, wouldn’t you agree that this is a projection anchored to Modern Belief Systems? Meaning, we should more ‘imaginate’ through the eyes of those we are investigating, and not press our current templates on them.

        I thought that those paintings were by Cro-Magnon . Are you positive about the Neanderthal portion of your comment?

        Note: Like many anthropological terms “Cro-Magnon” is being eased off the lexicon. Even the clear distinction of pithicoids, that between apes and humans is being blurred, and “Homo” seems destine to the dust bin of the scientific lexicon.

        At any rate, I stand by my allusions to the Shaman/Priest and Chief/King characterizations in that short essay on human social structure. You ask for ‘Sources’ – they are so many and varied that I am not sure what would satisfy you. A complete bibliography is simply out of the question in this limited discussion.


        • Guilty, I tend to write quickly and unchecked on details from the hip rather that fact checking. Of course the early cave art was not neanderthal- I knew that!

          Cro magnon art is still only 40,000 years old in its first appearance, but mainly prolific from 17-10,1000 years ago.

          What I am mainly concerned with is the 6 million years of evolution between Lucy and the modern Human 10,000 years ago.

          Psychology is just a word for me I accept it may have modern connotations, but I use it in the absence of any other easy alternative.

          The best work I have read on the subject is Steven Mithen’s The pre history of the mind. In evolutionary terms the modern mind is indistinguishable biologically from the modern human mind of 10, 000 years ago, so I am mainly concerned with an evolutionary process which honed the modern mind over those 6 million years pre art. There the archeological record is patchy and we have no cultural artifacts to illuminate the path. What I am mainly concerned with is the fact that to understand human psychology we can look at the design of the tool and what it evolved for- pre civilisation local communities.

          What I observe in us and what must have been the design is a thirst for knowledge/learning refined by experience then passed on through sharing of opinions in communities based on selection of the advantageous. It is the social group and the interaction of the individuals within it which led to the incredibly ‘Successful’ modern human mind (Honed by the Lewontin Campbell hersuitic).

          Since civilisation the contributions of the masses has been made redundant largely and it has led to a reversal of the hersuitic preventing advantageous change. But still today everyone craves information and passes on their opinions on everything. The fact that it is largely redundant and mainly concerns the likes of X factor is a failing of and probably the intention of the ruling elite. Using propaganda/ mass communication and the absence of discussion on alternatives people substitute the elite’s opinions from media for their own and repeat those memes short circuiting the design.

  14. Is that Salvador Allende that you admire? The nemesis and victim of Pinochet…?


    • Yes Salvador Allende.I find him particularly interesting as he was equally concerned with democracy and socialism. His vision was a development from the Marxist violent overthrow approach to socialism and believed it should be a gradual democratic process. He never declared his government to be socialist but a government that was working towards democratic socialism in a gradual process. The contradictions and pitfalls therein are for all to see in that he was greatly concerned with not arming his people to defend against overthrow and coup which was probably the downfall of the regime, but at the same time it has been said by Kissinger etc that they saw Allende’s model of democratic socialism as much more of a threat to American hegemony than violent overthrows like Castro. If anyone got wind of the possibility of a government working with democratic consent in the interests of the masses rather than the corporate elite it would truly be a threat compared to the “rather dead than Red ” dictatorship meme propaganda that was employed to dismiss socialism within the American Psyche.

      I was most impressed by the Battle of Chile film Particio Guzman which documented the struggles of the Allende regime to combat and overcome all the obstacles that were put in place by the Us government to make the movement fail.It is the most complete on the streets realtime record of a destabilization campaign to date, a lot of the strategy’s have been employed over and over again elsewhere, but
      Allende and the impressively knowledgeable and motivated Chilean people managed to overcome all these obstacles one by one until violent coup was the only and fatal answer.

      Allende himself was only the figurehead for the movement and was of square, unimpressive appearance, and a dogmatic ‘inclusive’ leader in contrast to the photogenic revolutionary Che etc.

      • So then Allende Admirer,

        Would you consider yourself a “socialist” on the same terms that you characterize Allende?

        It would seem to follow – but one is never sure until one asks.

        I am dubious. I have a problem with statism of any kind, that is what it must eventually evolve into – in that dialectical cycle that is so persistent historically.


        • The problem is ism’s if all you have to go on is the handful of examples we can discuss all of which had advantages and disadvantages. To adopt an ism would be an endorsement of truth or utopia which is wrong and inevitably must change over time.

          I can see the advantage of a carrot (Or a certain amount of meritocracy)in the system as opposed to enforced equality, but you have to ensure equal access to opportunity/ education for all and then let society find merits and disadvantages wherever they lie. The main problem after ensuring diversity and discussion of a wide range of alternatives (Not allowed by an elite) is then selection of good ideas to propagate. This selection has to be made by as many as possible in the interests of as many as possible or the hersutic is compromised and change is prevented.

          • Expanding a little, it is a constantly regenerating reappraising system for advantageous change based on conditions at the time.

            Allowing and assessing change is the key, not working towards a utopian truth or ism. Furthermore the system should include diversity , evolution never put all its eggs in one basket.

          • Ah… Admirer,

            It seems that I am going to need an interpreter to follow you on this.

            Are you talking about hairy women? “hersutic”?

            Disambiguate if you would.


            • Sorry meant Heuristic meaning formula/ equation . I was referring to the Lewontin Campbell equation of
              Change = Diversity x Selection x Amplification

              It is a well used formula that explains Evolution mathematically but also applies to any form of change including economic cultural etc.
              It was always referred to as their ‘Heuristic’ but now people mainly say formula or equation instead.

  15. New topic.

    I was doing some reading on psychological experiments and found that many of the most enlightening experiments could never be performed today, because of ethical guidelines by governing bodies.


    Whilst I accept the animal cruelty issues, and can understand these experiments are slightly to moderately unethical, the reward for having done them is to give us defenses against manipulation by propaganda and state control which are invaluable to humanity IMO. I still think that if ever there was such a thing as a citizenry class lesson one would have to be Milgram, and the Asch Conformity experiments , the Stanford Prison Guard experiments and the bystander experiments would closely follow. I was greatly impressed at how these social psychological experiments expose and neutralise those in the know against misinformation and control techniques.

    I am disappointed that they are so little known amongst the general public and assume the lack of exposure is intentional.

    From Edward Bernays work, :

    Bernays’s vision was of a utopian society in which individuals’ dangerous libidinal energies, the psychic and emotional energy associated with instinctual biological drives that Bernays viewed as inherently dangerous given his observation of societies like the Germans under Hitler, could be harnessed and channeled by a corporate elite for economic benefit.

    In Propaganda (1928), Bernays argued that the manipulation of public opinion was a necessary part of democracy:[14]

    The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society.
    Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.
    …We are governed, our minds are moulded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. …In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind .

    Bernays also was the godfather of advertising introducing ideas and methods which spurred the post war consumer society, satisfying the public with products rather than involving them in societal policy.

    After the 2nd world war the Nurenberg code banned human experiments the Nazi’s had undertaken and in fact domestic propaganda was banned in the US in 1948 under the Smith Mundt act.

    However IMO the role of propaganda and manipulation of human psychology by authority were largely retired from the historical record, as many of the scientist were exported to the US to further their research in human control. The Nazi’s operation Monarch was closely reincarnated as the CIA’s MKUtra project, and Operation Mockingbird covertly introduced domestic US propaganda by embedded CIA Journalists (banned by the Smith Mundt act).

    The scope of Project MKUltra was broad, with research undertaken at 80 institutions, including 44 colleges and universities, as well as hospitals, prisons and pharmaceutical companies. The program engaged in many illegal activities.

    When the Church Committee exposed MKUltra and Mockingbird in the mid 70’s both operations were officially shut down and although the methods of MK Ultra were largely illegal in any case, a code of ethics for Psychological experiments was introduced banning the likes of the Milgram experiment which was considered controversial and unethical.

    For example the British Psychological society’s ethical principles for conducting experiments with Human participants would not now allow any experiment that would alter or challenge the beliefs or values of any participant. They will not allow any participant to be deceived, and there must be a debriefing after the experiment to neutralise any effects on the participant.

    My paradox is this: Given that Psychology is in a large part concerned with the art and science of persuasion, and that the top two vocations for psychology undergraduates are Sales representatives and in Advertising , how does that square with the fact that you cant challenge or alter values, deceive and must debrief in Psychological experiments.

    What is worse, how do those principles apply to the repealing of the Smith Mundt act of 1948 in NDAA 29 Dec 2012 now allowing the use of propaganda on Domestic US citizens.

    Seems to me the code of ethics hampers research and defenses against propaganda and sales techniques whilst the advertising and propaganda industries are unrestricted.

    Bernays would be very proud of what we have come to.

    • “Bernays would be very proud of what we have come to.”~Allende Admirer

      Yes indeed he would. And what is it we have come to?

      Collectivism on both sides of the coin of state.

      You may not like the term “ism” but it is simply a combining addition to the root word. Collectives are described and analysed by the handle of “collectivism” — and part of what you are talking about when you speak to Bernays, and his techniques of PR, and social engineering, especially the understandings unearthed by Milgram; it should be a clue as to what all of this “scientific knowledge” is put to as far as the agenda.

      It is the key to obedience to instill conformity, group-mind, distrust in “the individual”, overbearing trust in authority, going along to get along, and in fact; life in a constant electronically induced trance.

      In a a nutshell, a “mass mind” controlled like an army of puppets.

      So we, who have studied this ‘Social Engineering 101’ understand what is happening. The question remains. What does one DO ABOUT IT?

      It is my assertion that one remains an individual first and foremost. What does this entail? It means taking care of ones own consciousness. It means not joining in the mass hallucination of the state. In practical terms it means you are on your own.

      “Jai Guru Deva…Om”

      You cannot change the world, only yourself.


  16. Orwell in 1984 – buried in the plot as the manual for the Big Brother system, written by the exiled archenemy and original framer of their system Emanuel Goldstein. His book was titled:

    The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism.

    What is the ultimate aim of this system, in its rawest form? It is later answered by O’Brien, as he tortures Winston:

    “The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from all the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps even believed that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship.”


  17. What you have above, in the Orwell quote is a Master Heuristic, one that has come to fruition in the last 50 years. This is the “Might is Right” – “Ends Justify the Means” formula of the Protocols. Predicted and come to pass.

    So what do you propose, beyond remaining free of mind yourself?

    For myself, I can only write about what I see and how I interpret the world before me. As far as influencing any major change…

    Anything is possible, but likelihoods being what they are…heh.


  18. “For myself, I can only write about what I see and how I interpret the world before me. As far as influencing any major change…”

    For me that is the change. The advantages of an interweb type thingy over the previous one way system of mass communication media (tailored by an elite in their own interests) are devastating to their power base.

    If you consider the old system in terms of the change formula,

    Diversity is minimised as control over publishing and media prevent the discussion of alternatives (in the main -notable exceptions exist 1984 e.g). All that biased opinion is fed to the masses to be spewed out again the next day socially as their opinions, and with little exposure to alternative ideas the feedback loop is completed.

    Selection is narrow and only in the interests of and by the elite. The public’s influence is merely to vote red or blue once every 5 years after the debate has been skewed on TV and in the papers, and the candidates were only selected by the elite in the first place in their own best interests. Then the public has elected a representative to make all decisions on their behalf wrapped in a myth that the people have chosen. Chosen what ? – Red or blue ! no issues.

    Amplification is maximised by all media outlets singing the same narrow tune and the whole process recycles.

    Feed a diversity of zero into the equation, a selection made by and in the interests of the 1 percent followed by blanket media support for their policies along with censoring of dissenting opinion and you have NO CHANGE.

    Consider what we have now. A two way system of mass communication open to every citizen. Anyone can publish their own ideas to the world. Everyone can be involved in assessing criticising honing rejecting or promoting those ideas based on their own knowledge and experience passing on that opinion in manageable social groups (Forums possibly). Good ideas with a lot of support will flourish, and could be amplified worldwide potentially to the level of the old media monopoly via you tube etc.

    It is extremely rare for one person like you or I to come up with the paradigm shift by themselves. Usually the good ideas are a mixture of bits of ideas from others seemingly unimportant in isolation but when combined and awarded support from large numbers of people there is the change. If you don’t come up with a partial idea yourself, you are still involved in the selection process by opining on other’s ideas and maximising the usefulness of change to the greatest numbers ie selection in the interests of the many.

    The tool is now only 20 years old or so (in mass implementation) sure there are teething troubles but unless the tool is clipped to render it useless (A possibility)
    it will reap great changes, and possibly has already.

    Though much less important than the above, if you want to ask my humble opinion on what we should prioritize in the short term?

    1. Protect the net , probably go to some sort of P2P system to minimise state control.

    2. Outlaw propaganda and powerful privately owned media organisations or at least break the monopoly. This is for me the no 1 poison in the well of humanity. To do it quickly and effectively something like the exposure of 911 truth would help massively. In fact until that is done I have no faith in any solution because the people will always be manipulated further.

    3. take the money out of elections and candidate selection.

    4. Instead of pumping all the money printing to the banks channel it into wages/ job creation instead.

    5. let an initially token amount of law making votes (5%?) be decided by public votes (On actual issues) This would be needed to increase interest participation in and understanding of political issues by the masses. The future will only be secure by bringing the oversight of citizenship to government. It works for X factor why not government?

    • Allende Admirer,

      All your points, 1 through 5 entail changes in current law. Changes in current law must take place within the system wherein it is the law. The fallacy of the approach is that it is a closed system ruled by the mechanisms that you suggest altering through the system.

      Don’t you see the catch 22 here? This is the dilemma. The system cannot be changed from within.

      The system has already gone global — there is therefore nowhere on Earth that is outside of the system.


      • Rules
        • You have absolute authority and unlimited funds to execute your plan, but no magic wand. You still need to deal with the people, human psychology, geography, nature, etc.

        You want to play a different game?

        No 1 . Ever heard of Tor, Bitcoin, Torrents, Usenet ?
        What law created those. All that’s required is a need for an alternative and Psyop or not, the NSA provided that need.

        No 2 . No law required, just hi profile journalists or artists spreading 911 truth without jumping the shark could do it. We may already be at the tipping point it just needs a few cahooneys to pull it off.

        3-5 I accept require the powers Lilaleo granted me UNLESS the system is already collapsing either economically or through the total distrust of the government by an enlightened critical mass.
        If it is not already it will in the next 20 years IF the new tool is left in our hands. How smooth that collapse and transition is and what is placed in its path is pretty much up to the American people.

        General strikes might be a good idea.

        • Allende Admirer,

          You are forgetting the Law of Force, the primitive and brutal law as detailed by Orwell — as well as previously by the learned masters.

          When I speak to the closed system and its law, this is the law I refer to, one of diktat and fiat.

          As far as there being anywhere near 20 years before the crushing jackboot…good luck with that. Until then let your daydreams sustain you in a spirit of good will.


          • After all that, answering all your points with valid counterpoints I still get a big red cross and Fail mark anyway.- A bit patronizing and condescending for my tastes !

            May your spirits sustain your daydreams too!

            • Opinions may very according to taste.

              I am indeed looking forward to my spirit sustaining my daydream.

              Like my humanities classes, you grade your own papers, or comments here. I would point out however that in my view my final counterpoint is broad enough to be considered valid as per your seeming answers.

              Take it for what it is Allende Admirer, a discussion on a blog, as temporary as any fleeting moment in the time-space continuum.


              • Methylamine/Hybrid

                I have faced a similar act many times online. I usually consider it to be a technique for disinformation. That clever, well versed , I can quote in 5 languages thing.- It’s nice, and refreshing- unless accompanied by a refusal to engage in point exchange and a freewheeling nail jelly to the wall approach. On the face of it engaged and interested , until the dismissive and condescending curb at the end to terminate and belittle the supposition having not actually argued any of it substantively . Oh well at least you did not correct my spellings that is often done . Oh wait you did, well at least you did not correct my punctuation that has also happened before.

                You have a lot of interesting things to say, but why the need to patronise people in the process? Yes, I do understand that opinions differ. I can comprehend that what I say is my opinion, and what another says is his, and that they don’t have to be the same thing, and actually I had not forgotten force , I thought that was implied in the final comment I made ” How smooth that collapse and transition is and what is placed in its path is pretty much up to the American people.”

                Was it something we said in a previous life waiting to be avenged or was it that final comment which sparked your dismissal ? Ie I cant blame the American people because if they do anything they will be stomped with Jackboots?

                Oh BTW did you mean that your humanities class students have to mark themselves, (That would be laying the superiority trick on a bit thick IMO) or that when you go to a humanities class you have to mark yourself? (Sounds commendable).

                • “Methylamine/Hybrid”?

                  My you are testy here aye.

                  Interesting that you would use the term “Methylamine”. Are you clever enough to have put my initials together as WW, being the same as Walt Whitman…or, Walter White and his chemistry fun?

                  But seriously my man, I don’t know what got your bowls in such an uproar–and in the long run it don’t mean shit to me. I have this terrible characteristic wherein I get bored with certain types of chit chat. I am sure it is a reflection on me, a black mark on my character. So let us say that I surrender to your greater intellect, and admit that you are right, and I am wrong. So now you can be Crusader Rabbit and save the world, and I will watch in awe from my humble ashram.

                  Oh but damn me, there I go being “patronizing” again…

                  So I end up with damned if I do and damned if I don’t.

                  So be it…Fair enough.

                  Watch out for peptic ulcers they are no fun.


                  • So you are denying that you were posting here under the pseudonym Methylamine in May this year?

                    If I am tetchy it’s not you. I have to commit my ailing old alcoholic father to a home today and my wife’s snoring is preventing me sleeping!

                    Actually I find this all quite interesting, and am looking forward to a round or two of spot the difference/ similarity between you and Methylamine when back in town. Double or quits? if you win that game I’ll admit you’re the superior intellect ?

                    • Just so you know… back when you and I were talking and sharing info on WTCdemolition, hybridrogue1 and I were doing about the same on another site. I’ve “known” him for years as I have “known” you. He’s not Methylamine. He may be full of himself and lacking in tact at times, but he doesn’t post under other names that I know of. as you all know, that is frowned upon here.

  19. Jacques Ellul – PROPAGANDA

    “A related point central in Ellul’s thesis, is that modem propaganda cannot work without “education”; he thus reverses the widespread notion that education is the best prophylactic against propaganda. On the contrary he says “education” or what usually goes by that word in the modem world, is the prerequisite for propaganda.

    In Fact, “education” is largely identical with what Ellul calls “pre-propaganda”—the conditioning of minds with vast amounts of incoherent information, already dispensed for ulterior purposes and posing as ‘facts* and as “education” Ellul follows through by designating intellectuals as virtually the most vulnerable of all to modern propaganda, for three reasons:

    (1 ) they absorb the largest amount of secondhand, unverifiable information;
    (2) they feel a compelling need to have an opinion on every important question of Our time, and thus easily succumb to opinions offered to them by propaganda on all such indigestible pieces of information;
    (3 ) they consider themselves incapable of judging for themselves.

    They literally need propaganda.”~Konrad Kellen – Introduction 1965


  20. Allende Admirer,

    I am replying here rather than just under your last comment of October 30, 2013 at 4:01 am. Which concerns the strange accusation that I was posting here back in May as “Methylamine”…

    Hmmm…now this is an interesting twist on things. Actually I never heard of the word until the beginning of September when after two people on the www mentioned the TV series BREAKING BAD.

    I through out the last TV I ever owned in 1984…carried it out to the curb rather than shooting it with my 38 sp. {I wasn’t sure it wouldn’t explode – it was one of those fat cathode ray kind of the day}
    I was pissed off at TV for a long time leading up to that. .. too long a story to go into here and now.

    So anyway, first one guy then another mention this TV show, and the second guy is an old artist pal from CA, we think alike on most things, have pretty much the same tastes. So I mentioned something about this person on a blog talking about seeing the latest episode of the show, and how it had ruined his mood, bla bla bla.

    Steve, my artist friend, says “you kidding me? You never heard of Breaking Bad??” He raved on and on about what genius this show was. I read the synopsis on the web, and thought to myself…WTF??
    It just sounded kinda dumb. But being intrigued I went to the local Video store and found the first season DVDs and rented the set.
    I ended up watching the first episode the same night the finale was aired live on TV…

    A lot of strange coincidences happened surrounding this TV show.
    So yea, I have a wide flat screen, and a DVD hook-up, but still no television connection.

    I am only assuming you know what I am talking about. The lead character’s name in the show is, Walter White, a HS chemistry teacher who is diagnosed with cancer and ends up cooking meth to pay for the medical bills…The show is amazing…one of the best things I have ever seen, including feature movies. I was hooked and just finished the 5th season part 1 yesterday.

    So that is how I came across the term “Methylamine”…I am pretty sure it is one of the ingredients in cooking meth…although I only heard the word said and never saw it written on the show.

    But to clear this up, Scott knows who I am, that is Willy Whitten, we have known each other from the days we were commenting on OEN.
    We both got excommunicated from that site just after the elections of 2008, so we have known each other for more than five years.

    This is a long rambling post I know. I just woke up when I started writing, and it is still dark – was 3 AM when I first looked at the screen here. Huh, I woke up throwing a roundhouse kick at a specter. I heard a noise that made me open my eyes. I was laying on my right side, I saw some figure in the half darkness slinking past my bed…I through the kick and saw my foot flash right where the guys chin would have been…if it was real. Fortunately it was just the shadows playing tricks on me. No spook in the room. But it filled me with a jolt of adrenaline. That’s why I got up…having a cup of coffee. Which is okay, I can go back to sleep easy after a cup…

    But I was also revved up…I saw your gravitar at the top of the lineup and thought…’Oh boy, I’m going be ragged on again by this guy…’
    Then what a surprise…this Methylamine trip you just laid on me. Very strange…and how I am all jazzed having just watched the DVDs of the 5th season and like talking and thinking about this show…
    Have you seen it? Totally great, everything about it.

    Now, what should have led this off with if I were civilized, I am sorry to hear about your father. Must be a real heartbreaker. I can understand why you might be in a less than congenial mood.

    I assure you, I have never posted here, or anywhere else in the last five years as anything but my current aka of hybridrogue1, and most people I talk to know my real name, as I am not shy about identifying myself…I think it futile to try to hide from the prying eyes of the state. Plus I often talk about my career as a special effects artist in film, and refer to work I’ve done in the field.

    Good luck, I hope everything turns out okay, and you feel comfortable with the place your dad is going to be staying. And good luck getting your head back on even keel.

    Now I am going back to bed…just an hour or so before dawn, and my parrots are going to wake me up soon as I drift off I’ll wager…


    • Hybridrougue1, Scott and all other readers and participants at American Everyman.

      Firstly my sincere apologies for my recent accusations. I got it wrong and retract both my accusations of sock puppetry, and my final comments to HR1 in this thread.

      Secondly, my thanks to you HQ1 for your kind comments regarding my external family problems.

      Thirdly an explanation of my misguided reasoning because I think I owe you one as I clearly undeservedly unsettled you based on your recantation – which is in no way to continue or excuse previous aspersions.

      It was very kind of you to allow me an ‘Out’ for my outburst based on external factors, but in all honesty I expect that without hindsight I would do the same again tomorrow based on flaws and triggers within my own conditioning and it is they which have to be exposed and explained.

      Firstly the obvious mistakes- making impulsive judgements , shooting from the hip without employing the ‘Red Team’ to re evaluate and fact check in the cold light of next day before pressing the send button. Mistakes I have made before and really should have learned from by now.

      Secondly the triggers. After committing to 911 truth in about 2006 , I spent about 3 years lurking in every related forum – Jref- Truth action , 911 blogger getting a depth of understanding of the subject, and more importantly an understanding of disinformation techniques used by detractors. One of the first ones I identified was the jref / popular mechanics establishment of intellectual superiority deception.
      This usually entailed about 30 pages of the most complex particle analysis arguments etc to come to some emphatic conclusion unintelligible by most, even those fairly grounded in the sciences but on face value impressive.

      Luckily soon others came along to point out what total waffle the arguments were, and that the persuasion ‘value’ came by length of waffle alone- the longer the argument the more sound it must be etc. (Remember I had some grounding and experience in social psychological experiments, and sales techniques which fascinated me as did these disinfo tactics)

      The problem was that this scam could only be pulled off by bullshitters with fairly advanced pseudo science to pull it off, however the next revision of the strategy widely deployed in my observation was to establish intellectual superiority early in any discussion , to not engage in any substantive arguments over any facts whatsoever but to freely associate the conversation to other sidelines maintaining the superiority illusion, until a final dismissal of the poser and his argument as ridiculous, fanciful conspiracy, whatever. The brilliance was they could never be proved wrong because they never actually ever argued anything. Refinements included spelling and punctuation corrections as I alluded to before.

      When I finally became public as Allende Admirer at 911 blogger. it was in horror and revulsion at attempts by Jon Gold &Loose Nuke to “change the movement away from damaging CD evidence” and promote Gold’s 150 pages of boring LIHOP terrorists were involved crap instead. I had enough understanding of the tactics and methods of 911blogger which I had come to believe had as it’s primary purpose to put people off 911 truth and piss off everyone else so much that they fk’ed off and let the Gold’s etc redirect the movement towards more ineffectiveness. Entering into that fray was intense , and I had more that my fair share of intellectual bullying which often triggers me into pitbull mode. However I was grounded enough to stick to my convictions calling for a poll on whether others believed an overemphasis on CD had harmed the movement etc -winning overwhelming support until the counters were reset and I was banned without explanation

      HQ1 what I think happened in our above conversation was that I was initially impressed by your eclectic and in depth knowledge on many subjects, but when the conversation followed the above pattern I jumped to the wrong conclusion.
      I can now perfectly understand that someone with genuine intentions and confident in their education and proud to show it, becoming bored with a lengthy exchange just terminated it as you did, and that I misinterpreted those signals according to my triggers.

      On top of that I had linked to a thread where I had been engaged in a previous telling of my thesis here which I linked to (for the sake of not having to bore everyone with the same crap over again although crap I am primarily interested in and sought constructive criticism on ) and had re read the comments of Methylamine in the process. Unfortunately upon my assumption that you had been using the superior disinfo tactic I built circumstantial evidence of similarities between your comments and beliefs – Ie a tendency no quote and make references in Italian/ Latin /French
      an overwhelming anti statist anti collectivist conviction, a seeming dismissal of socialism , references to Rand etc . What can I say I added it up wrongly! I could not be sure (As I never am , always preferring the balance of probability to conviction of ‘truth’) and felt that I had enough probability for it to be worth testing that hypothesis with an accusation.

      Note to self ‘ Real life is not Cluedo’!

      On reflection I must admit I got that assessment badly wrong, but I hope that you can at least appreciate that the process was in some way flawed rational rather than batshit crazy!

      Anyway respects to you all,sincere apologies and keep up the good work.

      PS Yes I am a big fan of Breaking Bad too . Whilst ticking every box for TV exceptionalism, it also managed to sustain it’s quality and reinvention over all 5 series and also make bold excursions into the surreal, existential, absurd- usually only accomplished by obscure and hard to watch world cinema which is also one of my greatest pleasures.

      • Allende Admirer,

        That was a very interesting comment, I can understand where you were coming from, it’s not hard to stack things up like that and reach beyond it with a few suppositions that seem to fit. It is when we lean on those suppositions that the carefully stacked information can slide off of its foundation, that is when a shift can occur that sets us off balance.

        I accept your apology. I didn’t feel it as necessary as you may have from your point of view, but I appreciate it nevertheless.

        As per the ‘spelling error’ that you felt I corrected you on. That was a misapprehension on your part. I really didn’t know what you meant by the term with that spelling. That was something I simply forgot, the word “Heuristic” was from that philosopher you were speaking to. So I looked up the misspelled word, and really all I came up with was something about women with extra hair or something…it was bizarre. So I wasn’t correcting ‘spelling’. I usually don’t deal in such trivia, as long as I can make out what is being said.

        Anyway. There is no harm done, and you have time to reassess some things and move forward with a fresh point of view.

        Good luck with all of your pursuits.


        • You are right, it was not a spelling mistake but a malapropism.

          I had the hairy word hirsute in my vocabulary, and the two words got confused phonetically straight from thought to print.

          • ah come on… you were calling him a girly primate and you know it. take credit for it! it was slick. (honestly, you guys were more fun when you were fighting.)

            • “honestly, you guys were more fun when you were fighting”

              Definitely!!! :-}

              But still good to see a peaceful ending… I feel a lot of people get pissed off after some mudslinging and stop visiting or posting… Most of them, I wouldn’t really care if they stayed or left… But with these two, it’d be a damn shame if either one bailed imo.

              Maybe we can try to rekindle the friendly fighting..

              Hey, Allende Admirer… hybridrogue1 told me privately that he thinks you don’t no jack about 9/11 or chemistry…

              Hey, hybridrogue1…. Allende Admirer told me privately that he thinks you don’t no jack.



              Happy pumpkins to you all.

        • ok. that’s all sweet and everything… I’m going to start weeping with joy. kissy kissy, smootchy smootchy… back to work, all of you… or, to quote my favorite free market zone sweat shop floor boss, “youuuu no talky talky! youuuu worky worky!”

  21. Expendable People: Economics, a “Murderous Science”

    By John Kozy
    Global Research, October 29, 2013
    Url of this article:
    “The English who settled America brought English culture with them. The colonies were nothing but little Englands. When the colonists revolted, they were merely trying to get free of the tyrannical English monarchy, not trying to change the culture. They were perfectly happy with the English way of life. They carried on its practices and adopted the English system of common law.

    That sixteenth century culture is alive and well in America today and is why America is in many respects a backward nation. Americans are living 500 years behind the times.”

    Kozy has an interesting take on Amerika in this article. Enjoy.


  22. Allende Admirer,

    If you are still reading here, I wanted to address something. As I understand it, you are in the habit now, have learned to deconstruct the words of debate partners in search of ‘complex words’, as these are often used in what is called; Argument from Intimidation.

    This is valid to a point. It is helpful, especially when such language seems contrived. But one must consider that building ones vocabulary, is in itself not necessarily for “intimidation”, but a key to more precise expression as well. So parsing that distinction becomes more complex than automatically seeing intimidation as the root of such usage.

    More telling is the use of “Argumentum verbosium”; a form of Argument from Intimidation — being incredibly verbose, using a plethora of such complex words to make one’s case. It is the length and complexity of this type of argument that is more telling than simply looking for big words. This type of argument is what is at the bottom of the popular phrase; “if you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit”.

    To sum up, the ‘bullshit’ is more often in the convoluted and long twisted paths the argument takes, and only partially the use of specific terms. Like I said, if the language seems forced and sprinkled with big words in a clumsy fashion, that is what to look for as well.



    • I accept what you are saying, but I would not say I am deconstructing the words of debate partners.

      In this case it was a hunch based on a large number of factors.
      The eclectic vocabulary and referencing displayed by you in the exchange and elsewhere was not in itself a factor.

      What seemed odd was that you kept asking me questions which I replied to, but you never commented agreed or disagreed with anything I said, and instead tended to change the subject or nit pick details like Cro-Magnon / Heuristic instead. Again valid points, but in the absence of any engagement whatsoever in the logical argument I was proposing.

      When that logical argument was eventually suddenly dismissed as daydreams without having engaged in it, mixed with the intellect on display, the nit picking, the suspicions I had listed above that you were a sock puppet based on superficial similarities in content and outlook to another’s comments- in particular the tendency to quote and make references in multiple languages.

      Again I do not want to reignite this exchange, or criticize you in any way. I accept the pattern I saw could have been also triggered by a genuine well educated bloke happy to express himself and display the breadth of his knowledge, not really interested in the subject that was being discussed, so asking tangential questions rather than engaging.

      Eventually when I conclusively won the exchange proving you wrong about the requirement for legislation you got pissed and terminated curtly. (I am messing with you of course here, just playing to the stalls who seem to enjoy a brawl !).

      It was the final comment that seemed to suggest you teach a humanities course and get your pupils to mark their own papers which tipped the balance for me. It could have been a clever comeback to the point I had just made about getting an F without discussion or redirection, and the “superior intellect” tactic on display, but I took it to be more of that tactic.

      In my experience, when exchanging ideas with genuine others online and not the alternative coghsunsteinshitcough, there is usually a mutual respect among peers, constructive criticism type melting pot along the lines of both my evolved psychology exclusively for small groups , and the compatibility of internet interaction with that design.

      I suppose you could say that is my hope my fantasy, my optimism about humanity. I know for others internet baiting can just be fun/ sport and not necessarily disinfo tactics.

      I know one thing, that I have no right to criticize anyone else’s beliefs or attitudes or choice of words as long as they are genuine.The assumption that you were not was my mistake here.

      The biggest challenge to my optimism about the future of humanity learning to communicate and become watchful citizens comes from large scale organized subversive infiltration along the lines of Sunsteinshits, sock puppetry, control & misdirection and leading of social media etc. These are the teething troubles of the new tool I was referring to.

      • More directly addressing your points above.

        It would be interesting to see how many of us could spot genuine knowledge in a correspondant, or someone of average education armed with a Penguin-Hoyle book of quotes trying to insert a relevant one into a conversation as often as possible.

        The problem reminds me of those tests to determine whether an internet correspondant is a person or computer. The difference is getting worryingly slight.

  23. A couple of things about this site. Firstly how do I give myself an Allende haircut rather than the green Slime icon I represent?
    It is not doing my inferiority complex much good against hybridrouge’s bronze bust !

    Secondly is there anything i am missing regarding functions to search / index this site especially comments other than the search facility which only seems to concern your articles Scott.

    I am thinking of something like the track options there used to be on WTC Demolition & blogger which made it easy to refind debates.

    I find that here once the recent comments section is exceeded by the dozen or so posts it lists , everything is lost into obscurity on potentially very old posts . In any case finding something that happened in May here for example not remembering the lead article is a bit of a task.

    • as far as I know, when you log on as Allende Admirer, you are given an option to revise your profile. That means, you use the “log On’ button on the right side (bottom of the list) to Log onto WordPress when you come to the site, rather than simply signing your comments as Allende Admirer.

      I think when you do that you are given an opportunity at the bottom of the comments you leave to have WordPress send you an update to your email address when someone answers your specific comment or, in another option, when they leave a comment on that specific thread.

      HR1 would be better suited to answer those questions those. The WP account you have to create is pretty simple, email address, name, that stuff (name being Allende Admirer)

    • Allende Admirer,

      Have you set yourself up with a gravitar? You should have a permanent one that appears on all WordPress blogs, and many other RSS fed accounts. Do you see the icon with the light blue circle and white “W”? click on that, I think that will lead you into the process, which should send you to Gravitar.com where you can choose from amongst any of your own jpgs to load as your perm gravitar…
      Perhaps simply searching the word “Gravitar” would be quickest..[?]


  24. Anyone want to play “If I was a Sunsteinshit what would I do ?”?

    The Rules. well actually the rules would be part of the Modus Operandi debate anyway, so the rules themselves are hypothetical and up for revision but I would propose.

    1. The whole purpose of my job is to undermine the effectiveness of any online group that exposes and provides evidence for alternative interpretations of Official explanations of events, particularly if widespread adoption of those views would be damaging to the Status Quo.

    2. I would have to make minor concessions towards the truth movement I am trying to infiltrate by supporting controversial but plausible and non disprovable theories within the movement. This would allow me to appear a truther, but in fact since the theories I support are contentious and not widely accepted by the movement, promotion of them would only prolong arguments and disagreements and not really cause any further damage to the integrity of official explanations.

    3. My primary purpose is to put people off the site I am infiltrating. This can be accomplished by any number of tactics like being boring, being offensive and bullying people, being superior and belittling people , nit picking their arguments without addressing their substance , maintaining endless circular arguments and many other tactics. One of the main objectives must be to give the impression that the truthers are all arguing amongst themselves and not promoting any viable widely accepted evidence.

    4. I must never myself promote any viable widely accepted evidence as that would be damaging to the official explanation or promote or adhere to any proposal or idea that would encourage or facilitate change to the system .Furthermore I could instil fear of change by constantly referring to the jackboots and boot camps in our near future and the totality and supremacy of the system against us. This would again put people off action and even commentary through fear of retribution.

    5. I would have to consider the historical context that site was operating under. For example if there was widespread support at the time for criticism of the 1% in whose interest most government policies operated, I would fear some sort of public mood that would fuel interest in the site I was infiltrating and I would include within my MO a diatribe against any form of socialism , so that the two issues can not overlap on my site.

    6. If anyone else promoted mechanisms for change which could actually be effective I would have to dismiss those ideas, so that if anyone mentioned a widely accepted and useful theory on change which was in actual fact an expression of evolution itself i would take a dim view of any simplistic philosophical cure-all the takes a blanket view and refuses to apply the particular facts involved. I would certainly not want to discuss the idea further , or allude to the fact that the simplicity of the theory in its barest form is one of its strengths, and that the idea could in fact be taken to extreme depths like these articles which I have not read or endorsed myself personally as they go a little too deep for my attention span. However any genuine brainbox with an interest in potential change might want to take a look before dismissing it out of hand .





    Please, anyone feel free to add/ detract criticise or contribute

    • [edit: “beechy” is the same individual I banned multiple times last week. His comments will removed again and again no matter how many new names he comes up with. He’s a professional shill and this new little pitch of his failed like the last ones. It’s obvious he’s the same guy. So this comment is edited and all “beechy” comments, removed.]

  25. I have a comment here awaiting moderation.

  26. Hybridrougue1 and any other interested parties.

    I would like to invite you to a respectful point for point discussion on ideas that seem to be of interest to us both. I am genuinely seeking criticism/revision of my ideas, and you seem to have overlapping areas of expertise on which I would greatly appreciate your opinion.

    For example on your blog I have seen you argue that there have only ever been two forms of government, Oligarchy and first generation revolutionary. On the whole I would agree with this statement and a made the point myself that since civilisation the logistics of organisation has overwhelmingly favoured hierarchy/leadership, and rendered the opinions and contribution of the masses re their government largely obsolete. I say on the whole, because I do not dismiss the idea that new South American Democratic Socialist ‘experiments’ Like those of Allende and Chavez’s governments could fall outside those two options- but I don’t expect you to agree this given the dismissal of socialism on your blog and appreciation of Ayn Rand elsewhere.

    However the point I have made many times is that the reason for this lack of diversity in government has been the logistics of organisation, which have all tended towards centralised control, and that ONLY now with internet connectivity there is the POTENTIAL for alternative forms of decentralised truly democratic alternatives. Though I accept there are obstacles to that potential, not least the need for the existing oligarchy to prevent alternatives from fruition.

    I accept that the system is set to prevent change however I do not accept that change is an impossibility and suggest there are indicators that change is underway, and it is the exploration of those possibilities which is the primary concern of my minimal probably pointless efforts.

    My primary argument is that if change is to occur, it must come from a tipping point where a large proportion of the population decides that it is in their best interests to seek an alternative to the closed system which is failing them, and seek alternatives.
    (The social contract-Rousseau)

    When a large (If not the largest) part of the operation to maintain the closed system
    is propaganda through mainstream media (We both seem to have an interest in Bernays and Psychological experiments that expose mechanisms of control), Is not an excursion into epistemology a useful tool to discuss the effectiveness of alternative news outlets or ‘Truth’ movements?

    To which end I have an interest in the Lewontion-Campbell Heuristic in it’s specific application to truth movements and the POTENTIAL of internet communication.

    I accept your point that to take the idea as a cure all without looking at specific systems is possibly futile, as also argued in the final article I linked to above regarding Sunsteinshits. but have I not specifically applied the idea to both the effectiveness of truth movements and the potential of internet ? How that leads to change in a closed system is another discussion we have not had yet.

    You indicated above that my interests bored you, which is why you did not engage discussion of them. If there is a possibility that the breakdown in our discussion was fueled by lack of mutual respect instead , then perhaps there is still an opening here for discussion in a rejuvenated discussion encompassing such respect ?

    I endorse Scott’s work here which is why I comment at this site, and this conversation originated here, so I do not accept any need to relocate it elsewhere. No one has yet shown any particular interest in this topic anyway, and I am sure you will not be hounded if the discussion is kept respectful.

    • Allende Admirer,

      I appreciate your invitation to dialog. And I will gladly exchange ideas with you. You say you have been reading some of my thoughts on my blog, and I appreciate that as well. If you are most comfortable here on this site, that is okay by me, although you know there were some tensions recently. But I can let that go for the sake of a new direction here.

      You made this statement, and I picked up on it, so I thought I would clarify this misapprehension first of all:

      “but I don’t expect you to agree this given the dismissal of socialism on your blog and appreciation of Ayn Rand elsewhere.”

      It isn’t an opposition to socialism, so much as an opposition to the concept of government. I am not however a libertarian ‘small government’ promoter, and as far as Ayn Rand… I seriously cannot fathom how you come up with the idea that I “appreciate” her, or her ideas in any sense….{???}

      To be frank, I think Rand was a psychopath, at least a sociopath if she didn’t actually have the physical brain anomalies of the former. If you care to point out what may have led you to this idea that I appreciated Rand – any aspect of her philosophy, I would be glad to clear it up for you.

      Rand is the darling of the libertarian ‘small government’ types, who are actually little more than fascists in disguise. They only want enough government to enforce corporate rule by the monopoly of force that is the defining characteristic of ‘government’.

      Now to flip the dialectical coin, it is my same argument with ‘socialism’. In that this system wants enough ‘government’ to enforce “Equality,” as to certain “rights” to substance, health, housing, etc.
      The fact is that in order to guarantee such mythical “rights” total government is again a necessary integer to the equation.

      Now disputing the idea that “equality” is one of the natural rights of Liberty is a complex argument. The rights of Liberty are individual, personal rights that only have social bearing when it comes to ‘agreement’ between such individual humans. The idea of ‘equality’ is obviously by context, an idea defining social bearing. It is the ASSUMPTION that individuals have an un-bartered, unspoken, naturally manifest agreement amongst themselves at birth.

      So perhaps this is enough as a beginning.

      You don’t have to address this in detail, assuming that I will now set the terms of the conversation. You can merely digest this and get to some points that you would like to make, or attempt to convince me with. What I have said here should give you a frame to consider how you might approach something like that.


      • Many thanks for your reply HQ1

        I have been reading a lot of material very quickly from many sources and so it might take me a while to pin where my Randian suspicion came from. Suffice to say that I accept your suggestion this must have been a misapprehension on my part.

        I tried to explain somewhere above that it is not ‘socialism’ which I endorse, because it has a very loose set of connotations ranging from state ownership of industry to enforcement of equality which I also do not condone.

        As I said , I have no problem with a carrot or a certain amount of meritocracy within the system. Is a wish that governments would act in the interests of the many rather than the elite an expression of socialism or a demand for equality ? I would argue that education to a certain level should be an entitlement though, but whether that education is brainwashing or preparation for oversight as a citizen is of course another problem.

        Got to feed the troops so will continue later. Cheers.

  27. Allende Admirer,

    What is it that you might need to convince me of?

    That it isn’t in fact those very actions that people take to try to “change the world” that are in fact the actions that have fucked it up in the first place.

    I would posit that if we paid a lot less attention to the business of other’s, and focus on our own path, that the larger world would be better off for it.


  28. I certainly am not trying to convince you of anything nor do I believe I could if I wanted to.
    I must say your expression of nihilistic existentialism (if that is what it was ?) if truly genuine (and not a posturing for a discussion with a bloody naive do good er) has wrong footed me.

    Is it your position that any struggle against the system is completely futile, and that no changes should be made anyway because any change would inevitably make things worse? There is no reason to attempt to stop imperialistic wars, environmental pollution, totalitarianism, or debunk propaganda etc? Is that an argument why there should never have been state power, or does it also apply to people finding themselves already at the mercy of it?

    In fact I was trying to ask if you could give me examples that disprove the a fore mentioned Heuristic. I accept that it is possibly unprovable, but I and others consider it to be observably useful and until I see arguments or examples that disprove it I would be inclined to keep it up.

    What we are talking about I suppose is some sort of Universal Darwinism by another name, although I don’t argue it to be universal,
    & I think Wallace should have got a mention too. However in certain contexts like evolutionary psychology, Cultural and political development , epistemology (all within the human domain) it appears to me to be a valuable tool.

    There is a common sense aspect that seems to support it, like how propaganda & advertising work, why a one party system fails to produce change, you don’t put all your eggs in one basket, the lack of change under fundamentalism or censorship of ideas. etc.

    I can now understand your revulsion (from a nihilistic point of view) , and concede that we are not talking about science but philosophy, but are there arguments you can site which disprove it ?

    If the whole idea is so repulsive to you that you could not engage, then do you have any opinion on the suggestion that internet two way communication COULD offer an alternative form of government tempering or at least allowing citizen oversight of the ails of Leadership.
    (It is my contention that the short sightedness and cronyism of leadership is the problem you describe in the ineffectiveness of imposed changes not the attempt to make improvements in itself)

    Otherwise I wanted to ask if there is anything at all that you advocate or propose outside the confines of Lilaeo’s game rules above, or is your nihilistic conviction telling you that the only use of your education should be to debunk others trying to induce change?

    I am not being critical, just trying to understand what your position is?

    • Yes, I suppose my last comment was framed in philosophy. However one based in my understanding of history and human psychology.

      It is not that there is “no hope” in my position, it is that this “hope” lies within knowing ourselves +| in full measure |+, BEFORE we attempt to move the world.

      Bilbo was in fact lured from the Shire by wisdom. {if you will try to appreciate such an analogy}.

      In other words “the quest” must be accompanied by complete conviction and inner strength based on inner knowledge of ones true limits and strengths.

      I do not attend the world, such as these forums, for mere entertainment nor to escape boredom. I too see the error of the current path.

      But I also see that this error is maintained by human choice, the choice to prefer delusions, temporary comforts and convenience. The seemingly innate instinct to go along to get along.

      So how do you save a world when the vast majority are seemingly bent on suicide?


      • Until the assertion that the error is maintained by human choice I am in complete agreement. To argue that point I need to explain and invite you to criticise my understanding of History and Human psychology . I make no claims that any of this is original work as much of it is derived from other’s but I have yet to see anyone link it all together in this way.

        The first problem is the evolution of truth itself.

        Forgive me but I will just paste a previous attempt to explain my hypothesis
        it could be better written more concise/ edited. but it will take me a long time to rewrite it otherwise.

        The recent discovery and analysis of Ardi means that she now replaces Lucy as the earliest known bipedal human ancestor dated at 4.4million years ago. Surprisingly, differences in her anatomy compared to living apes suggest that the point at which our species separated from our closest relatives must have been around 6 million years ago, much earlier than thought previously.

        Over those 6 million years, evolution sculpted the workings of the human mind until the emergence of the modern human about 10,000 years ago, which signalled an explosion of social, technological and artistic ‘achievements’ over subsequent millennia.

        However the last 100 years have been the bloodiest, most inhumanely cynical and
        environmentally damaging era in our unimaginably long evolution.

        I believe the reasons for our success and now demise can be found in the perception, fallibility and illusiveness of ‘truth’ to the human mind.

        By examining the nature and mechanisms of individual truth in our own minds, and observing how differing individual truths interact within social groups today , it may be possible to suggest why it was advantageous for the human species to evolve a perception of truth in the first place and draw conclusions about the nature of ‘truth’ in the modern world.

        Specialisation vs Adaptation
        For the first 3,800 million (3.8 billion) years of the evolution of life on Earth, evolution mainly drove a huge diversity of species to become specialised (in both physical attributes and behaviour) within distinct ecological niches until the late emergence of higher primates and the evolution of consciousness around 10 million years ago(a rough guess). Through all these billions of years, because of the diversity of life, any random environmental or ecological changes would benefit some specialized species because their distinct set of attributes would enable them to exploit the environmental change.

        However it seems that with the prototypes of man, for some reason evolution reversed its 3.8 billion year old trend, and in the newly emerged higher primate species tended to de-specialise our physical attributes and genetically inherited instincts and behaviour, giving us instead a set of general all purpose body tools, greater intelligence, and a highly developed capacity for adaptive learnt behaviour. This enabled us to colonise a wide range of different ecological niches and adapt to any dramatic new environmental changes. On face value therefore, it seems that evolution changed direction, but in fact this is incorrect.

        There is a widely accepted model for evolutionary change which goes by the catchy title of the Lewontin-Campbell Heuristic. It says that the process of evolution contains three distinct concurrent repeating phases; diversification, selection, and amplification. It appears to apply to not only biological evolution, but any form of advantageous change, including cultural, economic, and political.

        We can see then why evolution spread its bets over an amazing diversity of species, but we can also see that if a species within itself became highly adaptive (diverse) and had social interaction within its groups that selected behaviours or skills advantageous for the social group as a whole, and then, if it replicated and amplified that knowledge through education to others and the next generation, then you have a much more accelerated and efficient form of the same process for advantageous change.

        It took millions of years for an amoeba to grow an extra leg (unfounded). Change was extremely slow, but since the emergence of the modern human, the rate of change to the way we live has increased exponentially, so that now within a decade, modern human life changes to be barely recognisable from the decade before. However, biological evolution is still an extremely slow process, and the design and working of our brains, shaped by natural selection over many millions of years, will have remained relatively unchanged in the last 10,000. This means that the design of our conscious brains honed over those million years of evolution was tailored towards a particular sociology of human life that changed fairly slowly in all that time, but has since changed rapidly in the modern human to be unrecognisable from the social environments evolution designed it for.

        Because of our intelligence and supreme adaptive behavioural capabilities, we were able to overcome the complex logistics of civilisation. However, my suggestion is that there is one area where the design of our species has been outdated by modern life, and that is in our perception of truth, and how that can be easily exploited.

        Social Cohesion and The Dunbar Number

        It is obvious that individual truth or personal specialisation is only a small part of the picture, when examining the design of our brains. The ultimate advantage must have been the survival of the species, and so the larger picture must encompass how differing, and often conflicting personal truths interact and compete to influence social groups, and effect lasting observable cultural changes to the way we live.

        It is likely that complex social interaction within small groups of primates was one of the most important random cards evolution dealt us that led to the ascendancy of mankind as a species. As demonstrated by studies of primates, within the hierarchy of a group, there are extremely complicated relationships between all the individuals which have to be respected, reinforced, or challenged. Each animal must have a sense of who is a threat to it, and who its allies are. It must also be very aware of what other members of the group are thinking and predict how they will act in certain situations. This could even be the evolution of consciousness itself, as animals start to put themselves in the other’s shoes, mixing in stored observational information
        to make predictions about what would X do if I did this…..and decide if it is a good idea or not.

        In Prehistory Of The Mind, Steven Mithern argues that the prediction of cause and effect leaked from social interaction into all other areas of human activity and by applying it to hunting or scavenging for example it enabled us to start making tools
        which gave us great advantages over other species.

        This was relatively complex stuff and we needed bigger brains to do it, and so we come to the Dunbar number which has many aspects relative to this theory

        Interestingly it has been noted that the average number of friends people have on facebook conforms to the Dunbar number.
        The Evolution of Truth

        The course of evolution of the modern human mind was steered by a complex interaction of social behaviours, intelligence, physical attributes, diet and the environment over millions of years. What we inherited was a capacity for learning immense amounts of extremely diverse information and an ability to think up ways to combine it and apply it in our lives. Ingeniously though, avoiding the pitfall of making each of us jack of all trades and master of none, evolution also catered for the advantages of specialisation within cultural diversity.

        I suggest that this is the origin and purpose of the perception of ‘truth’ to the human mind.

        With cultivation and civilisation freeing many of mankind from the daily task of food procurement, the diverse skill base and technology of humanity accumulated rapidly. With ever more sophisticated language and record keeping, the knowledge base of humanity rapidly outgrew the capacity for an individual to learn it all, and so some selection and prioritisation of information had to occur within each individual. The summation of what they felt to be the most important things in their education to date, churned with refinements from personal experiences would form their ‘personal truth’, and the individual’s subsequent actions, interactions, and opinions would likely be highly motivated by, and aligned to, that truth or skill set.

        Within social groups, you would then have a collection of individuals with differing specialisations and motivations likely to be contradicting each other from time to time, but with our advanced social interaction skills we could usually settle arguments or agree to differ rather than coming to blows about it. Within a social group of on average approx 150 people ( as predicted by the Dunbar Number from our brain size and confirmed by typical archaeological findings) each person would

        This then is the mechanism for the melting pot, and coincidentally, we seem to have conformed to the Lewontin-Campbell Heuristic, where

        Change= Diversity X Advantageous Selection X Amplification

        Within this cultural ‘natural selection’ of ideas methods and skills, there is little use for universal truth. Instead there is a hypothetical set of ‘best ideas yet’ in use by that culture until a further refinement or better way comes along to amend or replace them.

        However to the individual, the perception of truth is noticeably very real, and it is highly motivational for what the individual then decides to try and achieve with their existence.

        The Illogical Arrogance of Truth
        There is something about personal truth that has always bugged me though.
        It is to do with the observation that along with the perception of truth, there seems to be an arrogance, or an unwarranted self confidence associated with it in the individual that drives them to be evangelical about it and propagate it at every opportunity.

        Everyday, we are confident enough to pass on our opinion on everything, regardless of our relative ignorance of the subject matter. How can we be so confident in of the value of our truths to wish to propagate them, when:

        a. We must realise that an individual’s specialized truth is merely the summation of all the things they know so far, and excludes all the things they don’t know yet.
        b. We know very well that personal truth changes over time, and also that truths adopted by societies are ever shifting, and must always have been that way.

        Logically therefore, we must know that individual truth is fallible, and yet we still have arrogance/ self confidence to argue for our truths regardless.

        The only thing for me that can explain this illogic, is that there is a subconscious instinct hard wired within the human mind, akin to a sexual or survival drive, that makes us compete for the survival of our current ‘truth’ within social groups. Maybe it is just a hangover from social interaction whereby we seek and establish status through our ideas/conversation rather than grooming. For whatever reason , the design of the modern human dealt us this trait, and coincidentally or by design, thereby maximised our potential for diversity under the L-C Heuristic by making us all pursue different interests and then, just as importantly, have the illogical self confidence and arrogance to air them at the table of their peers.

        Although the intention in expressing their opinion may have been to beat the competition and achieve peer status, they may well actually be proved wrong by the contribution of another participant in the discussion, who holds information they had not yet assimilated themselves. This would then force them to refine their opinion to incorporate the new information leading to an improvement in the validity and usefulness of their personal truth.

        There is also another advantage to the illogical arrogance of personal truth, in that the diversity and total input of ideas into the cultural process is maximised if people are ready to share their opinions/experience before they are fully developed. If everyone waited to complete their lifelong research before publishing it, there would be very few contributions, and they would be mostly out of date already.
        As demonstrated by James Burke in his tv series Connections, apart from very few notable exceptions, all the major technological advances in human culture have come about through the collisions in time and location of a number of much smaller seemingly unrelated steps. Often the value of those smaller steps would not have been apparent to the instigator until they combined with the ideas of others, and then made a huge impact on cultural progress.

        Advantageous selection and Amplification of good ideas.

        Although an individual might not instigate cultural change with the brilliance of their own ideas, they still have a part to play in the democratic assessment , selection, and amplification of valuable ideas, observed from the viewpoint of their own personal knowledge and existence. In fact if an idea is a good one, and particularly beneficial to the shrewd observer, it would likely be assimilated into their personal truth, and be taken away to be propagated in the next arena/social interaction. The more beneficial a change would be to the greatest number of people, the more support and amplification the idea would gather.

        Coincidentally, this of course again maximises the efficiency of the L-C Heuristic which all biological evolution has conformed to.

        So it is it becomes apparent, that my contention is that it was not in fact coincidental, and that the pressures of biological evolution ,and conforming to the LCH shaped the modern human to deliver 2 discernable traits.

        1 We are good receptors of other people’s information (eager to learn), and have an advanced capacity to evaluate, select, and prioritise information tailored to our individual perception ,education, and experiences
        2.We each , individually, have an arrogant and illogical perception of ‘truth’ and a drive to propagate it

        So back to my current comments, I suggest that the delusional arrogant and illogical perception of truth in individual leaders or boards of similar minded thinktanks mixed with corruption and cronyism is the cult of intelligence you referred to before, but that their free reign has eliminated the other half of the design which was moderation of ideas within manageable local groups. This started with the dawn of civilisation due to the logistics of organisation of larger communities, and it was made much worse with the advent of mass communication which limited the diversity of ideas in the masses through suppression of alternative arguments.
        The last century has been the bloodiest most cynical and environmentally damaging period in our history coinciding with mass communication.

        My argument is that evolution never saw civilisation or mass communication coming and humanity has little defense against domination by the cult of intelligence based on the evolved design of human psychology . Ignorance and redundancy have led to the apathy or choice you refer to, but there is still hope for a quick fix through enlightenment/ exposure of control mechanisms.

        Anyway, will be away for a day, but there should be enough here for you to take a red marker pen to- feel free.

  29. Evidence can prove a theory wrong, by establishing facts that are inconsistent with the theory. In contrast, evidence cannot prove a theory correct because other evidence, yet to be discovered, may exist that is inconsistent with the theory.


    • So please feel free to prove it wrong . I hate the idea of universal truth, but I can’t seem to shake this hunch.

      • Okay lets throw something new into the mix…the idea that ‘conscious man’ did not evolve in the primate eras, that in fact these were fully human city building people that were still not ‘conscious’ in the terms that we live it.


        In the meantime. You have offered an encyclopedic post above that will take a while to digest point by point…give us a couple moments.


        • Ok if that is convincing it would throw a spanner in the works. I will check it out. Got to say skeptical as consciousness in other higher primates too, so unless they all independently developed it over a short time (for biological evolution) in the same period. Anyway thanks for this .

          • Well AA,
            I think you need to read the book…you might come to a new conclusion as to “consciousness in other higher primates too” — once you understand the critical difference between simple awareness and the totality of the inner world of consciousness.


  30. First let us attend to lexicon. Are we agreed to the follwing definition?

    encouraging discovery of solutions: relating to or using a method of teaching that encourages learners to discover solutions for themselves.
    involving trial and error: using or arrived at by a process of trial and error rather than set rules.


    • That is agreed, although in this case the heuristic specifically applied to adaptive behaviors of a social group as well as an individual’s learning. It is also the best and most used model for evolution, so to name it themselves as a heuristic was modest, but also multi layered as the equation is also an epistemological theory that suggests that learning is a heuristic process for individuals and groups.

      Obviously the suggestion in universal darwinism is that the process of evolution developed a human psychology tailored to the process of advantageous adaption within social groups, so it is also relevant to organization, politics , cultural adaptation etc.

      I referred to a ‘universal truth’ recently, but of course the whole point of the idea is the lack of truth except as perceived and upheld by individuals individual

      • “I referred to a ‘universal truth’ recently, but of course the whole point of the idea is the lack of truth except as perceived and upheld by individuals individual.”~AA

        I know this may sound confusing at first, but this ‘universal truth’ is actually defined by the Cartesian model; in that all certainty boils down to one proposition, anything else is speculation from one individual to the other.

        Your leaving out the Cartesian assumption is one individuals presumption, and yet it is you, aware and conscious of yourself that is doing the assumption. This is what I see as a break in the logic. You can see the individuation clearly, but it is because you are that you can think of it.

        I know this sounds like some sort of word game until you “grok” it…

        “I can go walking in circles while doubting the ground beneath my feet.”~Ryuichi Sakamoto


      • You can accept that you are yourself on an individuated specific local in the time-space continuum. You think that you are, yet do not grasp that it is this which is your only certainty. All else is supposition. And you recognize that all individuals have their own unique sets of supposition, and that this is due to their individuated specific perspective from their local in the time-space continuum.

        Can you say with as much certainty as you know that you are, that that YOU that you are, is a human being on planet Earth? Can you honestly say you are certain of this? You may be experiencing any number of possible scenarios, from being comatose and living in a dream, to being a plugged-in electrical generator ala The Matrix, or any other of the legions of altered state realities that individuals have postulated.


  31. What we call consciousness, is oft confused with being ‘knocked unconscious, and coming to, to “consciousness”, or being aware. But what we are talking about is the core structure of consciousness, and that is the allegorical landscape of the inner being.

    Allegory is the talent of the human race due to complex language, and the concept of, ‘what is like’. An orange is like a tennis ball in a certain context. And this is where the product of story comes from. And ‘story’ in the very particular way told when as ‘first person’.

    Janes spends a great deal of time documenting the change of consciousness from the earliest writings that developed largely out of tallying. Even the great Grecian Epics can be seen as a form of tally..of stating the score, of ranking the gods, demigods and mortals; told in the second and third person.

    The earliest first person accounts recorded come much later, after the great collapse of the civilizations of the bicameral era.

    The documentation Janes presents is most compelling.


    • The mistake I have made , (that you have illuminated) is the use of the word consciousness . There is no widespread agreement on a definition of consciousness , and its presence or the lack of it is something notoriously difficult to test for. The added discrimination of meta consciousness in Janes’s proposition further compounds the problem.

      I will get the book and read it, primarily because I am interested in his interpretation of early literature and think that he is making interesting arguments there. I have obviously only had time to examine an extensive summary and quotes of the work from this site
      but already , without a specific redirection of the application of elements his theory to the hypothesis I outlined above, If I substitute the word Consciousness for the term adaptive behavior, I cant see how the two ideas are mutually exclusive.

      Specific mention is made of the fact that Janes proposition is concerned with the software of the brain and not the hardware. I am talking about the hardware, and the implications to human psychology of an evolutionary development towards adaptive behavior within limited social groups that occurs before the lineage of man and other higher primates separates at a point about 6 million years ago. The adaptive behavior shown by the other high primates still living suggests that this hard wiring occurred before that split.

      With the earliest stone tools dated at 2.6 million years ago, spearheads dating from 500,000 years ago, and the advent of agriculture 8,000 years ago, the time period Janes is concerned with is to my initial assessment a separate proposal and can not relate to mine due to the slowness of biological evolution (hard wiring of the brain).

      The second mistake I made was (as you also corrected) my omission of the Cartesian model in a subsequent comment about universal truth. It was an oversight, but the point was valid in that the epistemological theory of adaptive change in humanity is a heuristic process not concerned with the holy grail of ‘truth’.

      The Cartesian model in relation to mathematics, physics etc is very precise and the best approximation of truth. I say approximation because we are told we live in a world of 12ish dimensions and we can only experience four of them so what the implications of the others are , who knows?

      In any case the Cartesian model applied to wider human experience outside of mathematics is a complete failure. Cartesian thinking therefore suggests anything outside it’s universal truths is irrelevant. But it can also be said that it is a failure of the model and a somewhat arbitrary decision to edit out anything that can not be explained by the model as irrelevant. The vast majority of human experience is not concerned with Cartesian thinking and I am talking about something else which is.

      In any case I cant help feeling that these ‘obstacles’ that I asked for and you duly provided (Thanks given and refinement of language accepted) are somewhat tangential to the substance of the proposition I have advanced.

      I do not deny the validity of existential arguments and alternate theories, but the ultimate test of any hypothesis is how useful it is. Hawking tells a story of a heckler saying he was wrong and that in fact the universe was a big stack of turtles going all the way down (Presumably to infinity) Hawking makes the point that he may well be right but his theory does not have any useful application in making predictions or finding solutions , which are the concerns of a ‘useful’ theory.

      I contend that the Lewintin Cambell heuristic of


      has many useful real world applications , makes predictions , offers solutions to problems , explains observations of and failures in a vast range of very important areas of human experience.


      How propaganda & advertising work,
      Why a one party system ?lack of diversity)fails to produce change
      You don’t put all your eggs in one basket
      The lack of change under fundamentalism.
      The lack of change under censorship of ideas.
      Divide and conquer.
      Signal to noise Ratio
      The tower of Babel problem
      Unions and solidarity
      the ‘failure’ (Moot point) and inefficiency of Occupy and truth movements.
      Practically everything to do with the internet.

  32. “Cartesian thinking therefore suggests anything outside it’s universal truths is irrelevant.”~AA

    There is only ONE truth that is the core to Cartesian thought. It is in actually grasping this truth that one sees that “anything outside it’s universal truths” – is not “irrelevant,” but rather conjecture. As the entire world of man is constructed and comprised of conjecture, it is hardly irrelevant.

    While I agree with your list of, “many useful real world applications,”
    I am not satisfied with the definition of “real” in the subtext of your usage. And this is why the twain is not meeting here in this conversation.

    To illustrate; you say that:

    “Janes proposition is concerned with the software of the brain and not the hardware.”

    My contention is that both terms, “software” and “hardware” are allegory expressed in a dialectical. The origin of the term “real” is in the Latin > Spanish term for ‘path’ or ‘road’. It’s metaphysical aspect, the context you give to it when you speak to “reality” rather than ‘realty’; that is the adjacent mental properties on the path/road/real.

    Why this feedback loop? Why do I keep refining towards this view? Because as I have stated clearly; you cannot change “the world” but for a change in your consciousness, for it is your allegorical landscape that defines “your world”. This is what I mean by our personal responsibility is to adjust ourselves. We cannot adjust others. They must also adjust themselves.

    So, rather than seeing this as rejecting your plan and strategy, try to see it as an attempt to help you focus on your own center to strengthen your strategy. Because I agree with your list of “real world applications” that makes predictions , offers solutions to problems , explains observations of and failures in a vast range of very important areas of human experience…but only in so far as it is an allegorical internal landscape that you must adjust with the power of your own thinking.

    jai guru deva…..om.


  33. Let my just put this straight forward;

    What are you going to do AA? Are you going to go out and grab people physically and try to shake them awake?

    Or are you going to use idea’s?

    That is what I am talking about here. Ideas. Refining your allegorical structure to the purpose of sharpening your ideas.


    • I dont accept that my proposal was in the main allegorical. I used the software analogy in one subsequent comment only to differentiate between what I am saying and what Jaynes is saying. Or to be more precise what the explanation of what Jaynes is saying on that one site I have read . I now have the pdf cheers and to be fair Jaynes does not use that analogy (on the evidence of a wordsearch for ‘software’ anyway) .

      We seemed to have an agreement on the fact that the individual only refines his own ideas but you seem to deny the mechanism whereby those ideas are formed and shaped largely by exposure to the ideas of others. Are your ideas not shaped by those of Descartes? Or a large number of others by propaganda?

      Furthermore, I think we agree (It is hard to tell sometimes) that what happens outside the formation and expression of our own ideas is beyond our own personal comprehension.
      However , are you using that position to refuse to accept or to refuse to discuss or hypothesize about how adaptive change within society can occur when a large number of people have common interests?

      • >”However , are you using that position to refuse to accept or to refuse to discuss or hypothesize about how adaptive change within society can occur when a large number of people have common interests?”

        No not at all, I am merely pointing out that most people have no idea of what their “common interests” are.

        >”I dont accept that my proposal was in the main allegorical.”

        And this is the stickler, because my position is that all proposals, all thought and all language to express that thought is allegorical.

        Quasi: as if, is not as it is. (Like is not.)

        Conjecture can be put in very precise terms in a language such as mathematics – however it still remains conjecture, allegory, {quasi} as if.

        “Full Definition of REALITY 1 : the quality or state of being real 2 a (1) : a real event, entity, or state of affairs ”
        ~Webster’s Dictionary

        In other words the definition of “reality” is circular; that which is ‘real’ is called ‘reality’ and ‘reality’ is composed of that which is ‘real’… classic circular reasoning.

        “Ontology is the study of being, and the central topic of the field is couched, variously, in terms of being, existence, “what is”, and reality. The task in ontology is to describe the most general categories of reality and how they are interrelated. If a philosopher wanted to proffer a positive definition of the concept “reality”, it would be done under this heading.”~Wiki


  34. Listen AA,

    We have agreed that this is not an argument. You are simply saying what you think, I am simply saying what I think, and neither expects to change the other’s mind.

    My position is that human beings are ‘conditioned’ into accepting “reality” on the terms of the dictionary definition. In other words, the foundation of their opinion is firmly based in a circular reasoned proposition: “This is reality, if you do not accept it you are a daydreamer”.

    I reject that proposition.

    I am not saying that there is no ‘objective reality’ I am saying there is only ONE OBJECT, one being, that has divided into an infinity of being via time-space. To put it in trite pop language: “I am He as you are He as you are me and we are all together. A ‘wave/particle paradox’.

    Thus, this manifest “reality” can only be ‘described’ via analogies and allegory, because what is like is not.
    What is, is necessarily perfect, for it is as it is. It only ‘APPEARS’ imperfect from a material, mortal, time-space perspective.

    What does it all mean? That is your task, to figure that all out in your time here.

    What are the elements of a good story? How do these differ from the elements of a good life?


    • I was not seeking an argument merely trying to understand your advice to me. In any case I think I get it, the exchange has been valuable to me, and I thank you for your contribution.

  35. I visit Puffington Host periodically through the day just to see what the propaganda machine is pushing….

    The headline right now is about this insignificant “porch shooting” of an african american woman.

    Irrespective of the details of the story, it seems highly likely that this was either a manufactured incident, or an organic incident that the msm will jump on and push somewhere with all their might, a la Trayvon.

    The details of the incident are somewhat ambiguous, but the tone of the article suggests that the top billing of the article might be about two main issues:

    1. Killing of a black woman in a predominantly white neighborhood (I couldn’t find out if the killer is white just yet) which shall be used to the ullest for race baiting and race wars…

    There is already a poster with a portrait of the woman in the style of the iconic Obama poster of 2008 being circulated that reads “I am Renisha McBride and my life matters”

    2. And, about self defense, property lines, etc…. Also, a la Trayvon.

    “Under Michigan law, there is no duty to retreat in your own home, however, someone who claims self defense must honestly and reasonably believe that he is in imminent danger”

    link to article
    Theodore Wafer Charged With Murder In Shooting Death Of Renisha McBride

    so… heads up… it’s coming.

    • confirmed

      “Wafer is a white male. Civil rights groups are calling for a thorough investigation to determine if race was a factor in the shooting.”

      Let the games begin…

      Read full list here:
      Everything We Know About Theodore P. Wafer, The Man Who Killed Renisha McBride (LIST)

    • ok… last tid bit, and then I’ll stop…

      From the main page, the article’s link doesn’t take you to their crime page, or nation page, or any of their local state pages… No… It is featured in the BLACK VOICES page…

      it probably won’t end up being a riot worthy racial story, but it is plenty good to push that wedge a little further in, or at least prevent it from being dislodged by the people once and for all… One day…

    • “The Detroit News obtained a recording of the Dearborn Heights dispatcher who took the call around 4:45 a.m. from the homeowner saying he had just shot a woman on his porch. Listen to the audio, edited to remove silences and unrelated communications

      Nice. Starting off right out of the gate with edited 911 calls.

      hmmm… let me see… does that sound familiar? Oh yeah, they edited the Zimmerman tapes as well didn’t they?

  36. Everyone is going “Uh!!!” “Ah!!! “Finally!!!” “Biggest fine in history!!!” etc. for the seemingly enormous 13 billion in fines that JP Morgan is being made to pay.

    Ha, f’n ha!!!

    They received 391 billion zero interest loans from the fed and 28 billion (officially) bailout from the treasury in 2009… The following year, they received 1.4billion tax refund… And they have 80+ off shore subsidiaries saving them an additional 5 billion per year in taxes, which adds up to 20 billion in dodged taxes since 2009….

    13 billion!!!! It’s nothing but chump change. And i is definitely not going back in to the people’s coffers….

    So, let me ask you all:

    If I allowed you to cheat, steal, scam, launder 60-100 billion, would you be willing to give 13 billion of it back?

    Actually… Scratch that… I’ll rephrase the question:

    If you were allowed to lie, cheat, swindle, steal, scam, launder 60-100 billion, would you be willing to give 13 billion of it to another entity that also lies, cheats, swindles, steal, scam the people’s money?

    Too big to jail, these f’n crooks!!!

    • that’s too say nothing of the fact that the liar loan subprime mortgage crisis they helped create pocketed them billions and billions on the front end making the loans, in the middle betting against them and in the end via bailouts after bailouts and the consolidation of the banking industry.

      My guess is there is some kind of timeline stipulation for the fines as well.

      And that also to say nothing of the lack of criminal prosecution for these crimes and laundering drug money.

  37. Alrighty then. I’m jumping in with a book recommendation whose title does not do justice to the scope and breadth of the astoundingly strong, fact based case the author makes for what we are seeing and why we are seeing such extraordinary ( negative ) changes take place on all fronts, economic, politically and socially within this country today (as well as abroad but this nation is the focus.)

    The book is this:

    Credentialed To Destroy: How and Why Education Became a Weapon.-Robin Eubanks

    It is the LEAST boring thing you will read this year or next. I guarantee it. ( No disrespect Scott. You are never boring either! )

    The author has no political agenda. She is not loyal to any side. She is a truly independent thinker and investigator in the tradition that made this country grow in the best ways over the course of most of its 200 year plus history.

    I truly wish I can get some people to read this so that we can discuss it and hopefully have them recommend it to other thinking humans. I feel it is THAT vital.

    The author also has a website: http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com which is worth perusing as well. It does not replace the book however which was published September of this year. While you can jump into her blog at any point her articles do build on themselves and so moving chronologically from the beginning is not ill advised.

    But still. GET THE BOOK! And no! I don’t get any kickbacks for this impassioned plea…hehehehe…I just like seeing smart people who truly want humanity to thrive and not thrive in the current Newsspeak way of global, BS, sustainability, get their due.

    Thanks for hearing me out.


  38. I stumbled on your site about an hour ago – interesting, so far. I put “Sibel Edmonds + Glenn Greenwald” into my search engine just to see if anyone was talking about her recent, scathing piece, regarding Greenwald and the Snowden leaks.

    It’ll probably take me a decent effort not to throw the baby out with the socialist bathwater but I’m slowly getting better at being able to separate signal from noise, so I’ll probably drop by to see what you have to say from time to time.

    With regard to the topic of the previous post, “Credentialed to Destroy”, interested parties may also appreciate John Taylor Gatto’s work (if they’re not already familiar). His epic, “The Underground History of American Education” is, imo, essential reading (it can also be found for free as an audio, online. I think it may even be read by a socialist 😉 ).


  39. It’s over a year old… So, many of you may have already seen this. But for those, like me, who had not:

  40. Just FYI, for some reason you have someone from an apparent porn review site commenting on a 2008 article about Biden – go figure.

  41. Scott… I know you can’t possibly cover every flying piece of turd in this shitstorm of a world we are living in… But there’s a lot going on in Turkey for the past month… Which has tremendous effect on the stuff you are covering: Syria, Egypt, Ukraine, etc.

    At face value, it’s a clash between Erdogan and Fethullah Gülen, who is a Turkish cleric who lives in PA and owns and operates over a thousand charter schools around the world, with 600+ schools here in the US… (actual number of schools not very fear… Let’s just say many many schools)

    Some claim that Erdogan is being punished for his failure in the get Assad operation, as well as the gold-for-oil deals he has cut with Iran… All of a sudden the Gülen implants in the government and the judiciary have risen to expose Erdogan administration’s and his son’s billion dollar corruption schemes… Agents of MIT (Turkish intelligence) have been caught on Syrian border smuggling arms in to Syria just a few days ago…

    There’s also a good chance that these two entities (Erdogan and gülen) are in a controlled and managed spat to distract the turks long enough for Erdogan to win the upcoming (but crucial) local elections, as a huge slice of the anti-erdogan citizens have now positioned themselves behind him against a perceived threat “from outside”, practically undoing the damage he had suffered from after his iron-fisted reaction to public protests this past summer, and his policies and secret actions to funnel funds and arms to the so called “Syrian rebels”.

    Whether the Erdogan-Gülen conflict is real or manufactured, it seems like the chess masters have “checked” Erdogan, who was “one of our closest allies”… Just like Mubarak used to be…

  42. …. and, after the flames died down and enough of the surviving people dispensed with the bullshit about seven-headed, seven-eyed beasts and some non-existent asshole with 666 tattooed on his forehead, the enlightened finally screamed in unison “FUCK YOU GAWD, YOU GOD-DAMNED (or you-damned in this case) FUCKING HYPOCRITE! YOU SAY “Thou shalt not kill”, AND THEN WE HAVE TO EAT TO SURVIVE. AND WHAT IS THE FUCKING DIFFERENCE BETWEEN “MURDER” and state-ordained “JUSTICE”, or WAR??? THOU SHALT NOT STEAL? THOU SHALT NOT MAKE GRAVEN IMAGES? (art?) THOU SHALT NOT COVET .. (but ambition is good?) Can you say 2000+ year old psyop? Good Lord! if there were a good Lord, he would at least let people know that there is no good Lord – It’s all pure bullshit folks.

    • Pg.38 – Principia


      One day Mal-2 asked the messenger spirit Saint Gulik to approach the Goddess and request Her presence for some desperate advice. Shortly afterwards the radio came on by itself, and an ethereal female Voice said YES?

      “O! Eris! Blessed Mother of Man! Queen of Chaos! Daughter of Discord! Concubine of Confusion! O! Exquisite Lady, I beseech You to lift a heavy burden from my heart!”


      “I am filled with fear and tormented with terrible visions of pain. Everywhere people are hurting one another, the planet is rampant with injustices, whole societies plunder groups of their own people, mothers imprison sons, children perish while brothers war. O, woe.”


      “But nobody wants it! Everybody hates it.”


      At which moment She turned herself into an aspirin commercial and left The Polyfather stranded alone with his species.

      • I have to confess a secret: I pick and choose the commandments I adhere to according to which ones fit me best. For example, I follow the “Thou shalt not kill” one primarily because I’m a lazy chickenshit and I want neither the danger nor effort in the original act nor the potential for all the downstream ” … You shall be avenged!” (by Grabthar’s hammer) crap. I kinda tossed out the “thou shalt not covet” one because nobody can seem to determine I’m coveting all the time. Especially at the gym with the modern workout-wear these days (Holy Moly, that stuff’s hot!). Also the graven images one is totally lost on me – I used to be an artist but the lazy part of lazy chickenshit got the best of me, so I might not be in violation anyway. Stealing’s there with killing, because of potential danger to me, but “Thou salt have no gods before me?” What if one butts in front in line or something? Am I supposed to be God’s placeholder to say, “you can’t sit there – that seat’s taken”? I don’t have time for that! I’m busy! Now from the Discordia, I religiously follow the commandment to have a hot dog on Fridays, and include a bun just to spite one of the other Discordia’s commandments, which I think is an act of holding up the Discordia’s principles, but I’m not sure because they confuse me.

        • III – A Discordian is Required during his early Illumination to Go Off Alone & Partake Joyously of a Hot Dog on a Friday; this Devotive Ceremony to Remonstrate against the popular Paganisms of the Day: of Catholic Christendom (no meat on Friday), of Judaism (no meat of Pork), of Hindic Peoples (no meat of Beef), of Buddhists (no meat of animal), and of Discordians (no Hot Dog Buns).

          Now you may well be Transgressicuted for your insolence!

          IV – A Discordian shall Partake of No Hot Dog Buns, for Such was the Solace of Our Goddess when She was Confronted with The Original Snub.

          V – A Discordian is Prohibited of Believing what he reads.


        • I guess I should have listed all IV commandmwnts of the Pentabarf so here is I and II:

          The PENTABARF was discovered by the hermit Apostle Zarathud in the Fifth Year of The Caterpillar. He found them carved in gilded stone, while building a sun deck for his cave, but their import was lost for they were written in a mysterious cypher. However, after 10 weeks & 11 hours of intensive scrutiny he discerned that the message could be read by standing on his head and viewing it upside down.


          I – There is no Goddess but Goddess and She is Your Goddess. There is no Erisian Movement but The Erisian Movement and it is The Erisian Movement. And every Golden Apple Corps is the beloved home of a Golden Worm.

          II – A Discordian Shall Always use the Official Discordian Document Numbering System.

          • The EPISTLE OF THE PARANOIDS has something useful to say.

            45 years or so ago, people could see that people in all their paranoia about the so-called puppet masters creates their power for them. Seems the internet has allowed a growth in that power because of the infectious spread of negativity and paranoia. Simple magician’s trick. FREE YOUR MIND. Ignore the so-called puppet masters and enjoy your life. Play. Let ’em fuck off and die. Just because “conspiracy theories” are often probably true doesn’t mean it’s always worthwhile to see them all as giant scary negative doomsday scenarios. It’s all a game. It’s the game of asshole. If we are the assholes, we have to figure out how to play with cards we’ve got. But we have more than cards. There are also the rules of the game. If the rules are stacked, grow a brain and change the rules. Stack new rules, ignore old ones. Be ignorant of the rules. Cheat. Why do games come with cheat codes? Even the rules of life can be changed. It’s happening all around all the time. Genetic engineering is pretty straightforward now.

            In chaos lies opportunity.
            The nature of existence is chaos.
            Everywhere lies opportunity.

            Below – From the Principia Discordia:

            Chapter 1, THE EPISTLE TO THE PARANOIDS

            –Lord Omar

            1. Ye have locked yerselves up in cages of fear–and, behold, do ye now complain that ye lack FREEDOM!

            2. Ye have cast out yer brothers for devils and now complain ye, lamenting that ye’ve been left to fight alone.

            3. All Chaos was once yer kingdom; verily, held ye dominion over the entire Pentaverse, but today ye was sore afraid in dark corners, nooks, and sink holes.

            4. O how the darknesses do crowd up, one against the other, in ye hearts! What fear ye more that what ye have wroughten?

            5. Verily, verily I say unto you, not all the Sinister Ministers of the Bavarian Illuminati, working together in multitudes, could so entwine the land with tribulation as have yer baseless warnings.

            • I agree.Out trick the tricksters at their game.I think this is why people are fighting CISPA and TPP.The internet is a powerful tool.The avg.citizen knows more about the workings of Government (good and bad)and treacherous Oligarchs as a result of the internet and thus,can effect some change accordingly.

              Part IV continued:If you can master nonsense as well as you have already learned to master sense, then each will expose the other for what it is: absurdity. From that moment of illumination, a man begins to be free regardless of his surroundings. He becomes free to play order games and change them at will. He becomes free to play disorder games just for the hell of it. He becomes free to play neither or both. And as the master of his own games, he plays without fear, and therefore without frustration, and therefore with good will in his soul and love in his being.

              And when men become free then mankind will be free.
              May you be free of The Curse of Greyface.
              May the Goddess put twinkles in your eyes.
              May you have the knowledge of a sage,
              and the wisdom of a child. Hail Eris.

              • Sounds a bit like Neo from The Matrix. Besides Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, I wonder if there wasn’t a like inspiration from the Principia Discordia in the Wachowskis’ backgrounds.

                • I assume that after Icarus crashed and burned there existed a void and along comes Zarathud the Apostle in the Fifth Year of the Caterpillar who then discovers the Pentabarf carved in gilded stone,but their import was lost for they were written in a mysterious cypher. However, after 10 weeks & 11 hours of intensive scrutiny he discerned that the message could be read by standing on his head and viewing it upside down.

      • Oops! Maybe that should have been “Though shalt salt no gods before me”. So much for modern spell correctors. they only seem to replace legitimate words with other legitimate words when they get it wrong. I wonder if gods taste better salted than not?

      • Hey, thanks for the Principia reference man! I didn’t even realize that Yaweh Jehova got fired! (page two past 00004) I think publicly they may have announced that he “… went on to pursue other entrepreneurial activities”.

      • The Principia Discordia … Perhaps the last hope of the sick of mind (games) and light of heart.


    • I can’t believe this shit works so well! I was just making a bet with a buddy at the bar about how gullible people are and the next thing you know I’m rolling in it! I became rich like almost overnight. It’s FUCKING AMAZING MAN!!! And my followers can’t even drink!! That’s like the funniest part! There’s like little white-shirted, black-tied zombies running all over the place regurgitating crap me and my buddy made up over a shit-load of beer and a lot of laughs. Hell, you almost had a president that believed that crap.

      I think next I’m going to spring my resurrection on everyone so I can keep making up new revelations, prophesies and, most fun of all, RULES!

      • P A R T F I V E



        The human race will begin solving it’s problems on the day that it ceases taking itself so seriously.

        • Hey, I wasn’t being serious. For heaven’s sake, man, I stuck my face in a hat and pretended that an angel whispered to me from inside the hat bringing forth God’s word. I was drunk. How was I supposed to know people would take me seriously? I was surprised as anyone. But, being a quick thinker and possessing of an entrepreneurial spirit, I ran with it and became a prophet (a rich one – NOT a non-prophet variety). At least I think I was rich (was I rich? My church is now, but was I rich then?) Ahhh … who cares! I was having fun! Sorry about all the poor saps wearing magic underwear and ringing your doorbell at inconvenient times, denying tenure to qualified professors in Utah, and running for president though – didn’t see that one coming. I would have been happy with my bible rewrite in hotel rooms.

          • Oh nonsense and quit your whining.At least your adherents get summers off to travel(via bicycle no less) and spread the “truth” to the unwashed masses while stockpiling favors in the afterlife!But my guess is that most are just in it for the majic under wear,black ties,and fitness.Regards,Worthy Keeper of the John

            • Thank you my good and pious child. What do you think about my resurrection idea? Think I could pull it off? Just to give the church a little shot of adrenalin. Maybe we could take the next election then. Maybe I could re-emerge from the same hat the angel lived in who whispered God’s words to me. Better yet, Bullwinkle the moose could pull me out of the hat to surprise Rocky the squirrel to amusing complaints of “Not again!”.

              • Thine hallowed prophet or non prophet -it is written in the good or bad book that no such APOSTLES shall pull Rocky the squirrel from the hat without conjuring up the wrath of the great one!The ancients acted more piously by climbing the Sacred mount and beheld the flaming stock car that descended from above only to depart with the IV commandments of the Pentabarf!Thus be it!
                DIED FOR
                YOUR SINS
                What did Bullwinkle the Moose ever do besides play tricks with poor Rocky the Squirrel.A proper “resurrection” may be in order to enlighten thine adherents and dissolve the current order of the Golden Apple Corps.KING KONG LIVES AGAIN!

  43. Scott, at this time I hope you can return to your work here soon and foremost that you find stable living conditions which likewise allow you to perform free from being hassled to much.

    I have scrolled down your site in search of something and noticed that a great number of your more recent posts are left ¨uncategorized¨. That is very unfortunate as I believe many of the posts would hold a place in existing categories and that adding new ones is in keeping with the scrolling space available without the need to renewing to a next page.
    Categories facilitate research and ad trust as to the sincerity of the posts.
    If you could give it some mind when your back up and running.

  44. I don’t know if anyone else has posted about this yet, but here is an interesting story- last year, snipers took out a substation in California. Here’s the original article : http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304851104579359141941621778#printMode
    Sorry it’s behind a pay wall. While some sources are trying to spin it as a wake up call- look how vulnerable we are to those nefarious terrorists- I found two things of interest in the original piece. One, the FBI says they are convinced it was not a terrorist organization responsible, and Two, military special ops experts examining the scene said it looked like how they would carry out an attack. So who did it? And was it a dry run for something bigger?

  45. The New York Times “Whose Turkey Is It?”

    It’s been filled with stuffing for forty years, and is already golden brown… Now they will carve it and divvy it up… Some shall have white meat, others shall have dark… Most will end up just with the carcass. Everyone will wonder who ate the heart that went missing. A lot of cranberry sauce will be spilled….. The Orient gravy Express has just departed.

    Welcome back, Scott. Missed you.

    • thank you. I’ll look into that. the narrative has been shifting on Turkey hasn’t it?

      • Big time…

        Local elections in a month, presidential election (previously elected by parliament, but this year by a first time general public vote) in 2014 and general elections in 2015.

        It is expected that Erdogan will attempt to plop himself in the presidential post (and gain absolute immunity in the meantime) and get one step closer to the US style presidential system he has been working to establish.

  46. Here we go, the fascist internationalists deflecting: HITLER!

    “Bearing witness, collecting the stories, recording them and putting them there for future use can sometimes bear fruit a little later.”

    But first, a heavy rains a gotta fall.

    Anybody see it coming yet?


      • Oh yeah … I see it coming all right. The globalists are probably hell-bent on leading the world into another world war. Could be in the end though that the US is being groomed to be the ultimate bad guy. The “real Hitler”. The imperialist country that needs to be brought down “for the sake of global peace.” This would make martial law and the final decimation of that inborn expectation of freedom enjoyed by Americans much easier as America is brought into the global union. Who knows where the next evolution in fake reality will come from. Crazy thought? probably, but the neocons and globalists have proven that they are truly crazy, so anything goes. They are certainly clever.

  47. War Made Easy

    The following is a very short article considering the outrageously broad implications it contains:

    ¨(…) and next year the U.S. is projected to overtake Saudi Arabia as the biggest producer of oil on earth.¨

    Who’d have thunk?

    The article is based on a ¨Center For A New American Security¨ study:

    The CNAS think tank is connected to just about every other think tank you ever heard about. Contributors extend to a long bipartisan list of elitist hawks and stop at nothing corporations. The 0.001% of the global community are all in the know… and maybe some of you to, but this is news to me and I had to find out by way of dingy little piece written up somewhere in the corner of TIME – and not even in the ¨Most Read¨ section where ¨The Smartest Thing Jimmy Fallon Did on His First Tonight Show¨ takes the lead.

    Lets pick out a few of the more telling lines found in the CNAS study, executive summary report – lets start with (the) premise:
    ¨(…) new domestic oil supplies have supported a surge in the refining sector, and the United States is now a net exporter of refined petroleum products for the first time in over 60 years.¨
    The reason for this is shown to be ¨unconventional oil and gas extractive technology to shale rock formations¨ in other words fracking.

    The summary report follows up to tell us of major global trends emerging due to this domestic upsurge and of a ¨a dynamic new map of energy trading partners and supply routes¨ coupled with ¨a reformulation of political rela- tionships¨.

    The hawkish composers having gained a considerable vantage point:
    ¨In the United States, leaders are contemplating the possible use of new energy supplies to pressure or support international actors and underscore strate- gic policy. They are also considering how political relationships, and associated security commit- ments, with traditional oil suppliers should adapt to the changing energy market.¨

    Because? – Well even tough:
    ¨(…), some policy leaders (isolationist, pacifist dupes) hope that a push toward energy isolationism will insulate the country from insta- bility in the global energy market. Such hopes are unfounded. Hoarding energy at home, neglecting bilateral relationships with major global energy players and forfeiting economic opportunities to export energy would leave the United States less secure. Moreover, policymakers would then be unable to use energy as a tool of economic state- craft to coerce or benefit other countries.¨ Got it?

    You see:
    ¨Playing a strong international leadership role is essential to ensure continued free trade (…) Such a role would also facilitate the international coordination needed to success- fully implement tough energy-related sanctions or punitive financial measures targeted at major energy producers.¨

    Its really good for all, its a boom:
    ¨Executive-branch policymakers, legislators and military personnel will all have roles to play in policy and planning
    in these arenas and will be key to securing and advancing U.S. economic and security interests in the decades ahead.¨

    I don’t know about you concerned fellow travelers, but things just might be starting to click for me …

  48. Scott… This place is beginning to feel weird without you … Hope you are well, and hope you come back soon,.

  49. Liliaeo: You might see this from the recent comments. If you open it, I stated I wouldn’t post on the Thomas Brinkley thread anymore because I think it’s spiraled and anything I post be it explanation, apology, fact or opinion can only make it worse. I wasn’t implying that you said anything one way or another about me being a turd – only that I’m trying to avoid adding more to that particular turd bowl. Any more discussion along these lines in that thread can only make that worse. I certainly did not mean to contribute to chasing Aris off. I have no problem with him or her. I apparently made him or her very suspicious but I’m not sure how, other than putting a K in the middle of my fake name. Just as an aside, the name Winston Smith was (obviously) taken from Nineteen Eighty Four. After reading Scott’s explanation of why he uses the name “willyloman”, combined with the site’s name “American Everyman”, the name Winston Smith made sense to me in the context of our world’s steady progression into something that feels very much like Orwell’s depiction in Nineteen Eighty Four, my personal experiences in the professional world, and the fact that Winston Smith is described as an “everyman”:


    Funny thing to me is the K is totally random and I had no idea it would lead someone to think I was having a fake back and forth about an obscure topic.

  50. Lilaleo: I’m not “in character”. If I was, I’d probably be on different sites or working for Glenn Greenwald or something. Actually probably not, because I actually am not that good. I just don’t think this forum is intended to be about that stuff and is instead about recent news and what is true and not so true about it. That Brinkley thread just got a bit odd. Funny thing too, because you posted the fist question about it and I predicted that if it went anywhere it would be about the need to do something about monitoring the mental stability of people active on the internet. I didn’t think it would go the way it did. If there is anything to the potential notion that the kid was intentionally murdered, which I don’t really think is likely but really don’t know, I don’t want to get involved any more in conversations within the thread that distract from people who may offer viable information. Likewise, if it’s just a psyop, which I also don’t think is likely, I do not want to detract from verifiable information by adding noise to the discussion.

  51. Saw a post on the “The Very Odd Story …” thread by a commenter going by the name of “K”

    I responded to one of his/her comments where a reference was made to “magic” by saying it was incoherent. I just noticed a follow-up comment by him/her though that impressed me when I considered the perspective it was coming from:

    “It’s not the kind of magic that people should worry about if they’re keeping it real, but if you’re against keeping it real by starting witch hunts against everyone who tells you when you’ve done something stupid, or you scapegoat everyone who cusses because it’s harder to brainwash folks from the rough side of town, then it’ll eliminate you, because it’s the magic of normal people who’ve been pushed too far (aka the 99%) Brinkley’s scapegoats are very real people who’ve learned about life from living, not from watching TV, and there are probably billions who’ve seen too much of the kind of scapegoating that Brinkley was into to let it go unpunished.”

    That use of the word “magic” actually makes sense to me. It’s the same as the concept of Karma.

    And BTW: I am not “K”. The K in my phony name is random and is coincidence.

    • I didn’t know that was gonna turn out looking like spam…sorry.

      • don’t worry. we know why you posted it. He did an article for Bloomberg yesterday as well.

        • Since you are obviously confused and prone to believing awful things about your benevolent leaders, Cass has, with a great heart and heavy sigh, agreed to take it upon himself to help you learn how to think correctly. In his wonderfully enlightening book, according to Amazon, Cass will help you understand the following list of troublesome things (and much more!). I especially like the sixth item, where he will explain to you what kinds of losses are just fine (for you). Without having read it, and regardless of the words actually written, I think you know what kinds of losses are just fine (for you). Let’s see, those would be 1.) Your money, 2.) your job, 3.) your health, 4.) your family, 5.) your future, and 6.), your life. You don’t need these things. They are mere burdens and rightfully the property of your benevolent leaders.

          • Why perfectly rational people sometimes believe crazy conspiracy theories
          • What wealthy countries should and should not do about climate change
          • Why governments should allow same-sex marriage, and what the “right to marry” is all about
          • Why animals have rights (and what that means)
          • Why we “misfear,” meaning get scared when we should be unconcerned and are unconcerned when we should get scared
          • What kinds of losses make us miserable, and what kinds of losses are absolutely fine
          • How to find the balance between religious freedom and gender equality
          • And much more . . .

  52. Why can’t we have leaks like this in this country????

    Here Is The YouTube “Start A False Flag War With Syria” Leaked Recording That Erdogan Wanted Banned

    Here’s the youtube video (as Erdogan bans youtube after having banned twitter) but it does not have subtitles. But the conversation, which revolves around using a Gleiwitz style false flag attack in southern Turkey on a religiously symbolic site to go in to Syria, is simply priceless.

  53. Good news on the cinema of politics front.
    After Last year’s neutering of Cloud Atlas for the screen adaptation, we have a genuine contender in Snowpiercer.
    By Korean director Joon Ho Bong who has already chalked up 3 masterpieces with Memories of Murder, The Host , and Mother, this is mainly English language and an A list American cast (Chris Evans, Ed Harris ) Supported by a who’s who of character actors.

    The film portrays class warfare directly in a way I cant remember since Animal Farm. As the last of humanity battle it out on a train in perpetual motion as a metaphor for modern societiy and Noah’s arc.
    Similar in feel to Terry Gilliam, especially Brazil, it wont be for everyone, but I think there is enough common ground to find popularity with a wide audience except those on IMDB who seemed to miss the point that it was a metaphor and were obsessed with plot unbelievabilities.

    Interestingly thou released over a year ago it has a USA release in June 2014 and a UK release still unscheduled. This was supposedly due to Weinsein insisting on cutting 20 mins of character development to make the film more Action film stereotypical. Now apparently after long disagreements, the director has won out and the release will be the full 2.5 hour version, but only a selected premier with role out, aiming it now at an art and not mainstream audience. It is going to be interesting to see how this film is received and fares in both countries.

    I think I must have seen the cut version at just over 2 hours, and it did feel like some big cuts (Character)had been made. It is not perfect and probably a lesser film than the aforementioned 3 masterpieces by this director, but it is pretty good by hollywood AND international standards, and its depth in portraying the subtleties of class warfare are as well though out as Ken Kesey’s brilliant One flew over the cuckoo’s nest was as an expose of why revolution always fails.

    Finally a rare film for the 99%. RECOMMENDED!

  54. Mass stabbing at Pennsylvania high school injures 20

    OK… The message is finally crystal clear… They do not want just your firearms… But they want all of your knives, machetes, hatchets and any and all sharp objects…

    From the machete attacks in London, to the Thomas Brinkley stabbing story…

    We might as well start changing our diets and eating habits now, because we will son be allowed to have only spoons to eat with… Even chop sticks can be dangerous…. Campbell’s might be behind this…

  55. I don’t expect these 28 missing pages off the 9/11 commission report to contain the “truth”…. Nonetheless, these comments by congressman Thomas Massie, upon reading them in a soundproof private room as all congressmen are allowed to do, are noteworthy:

  56. Not pertinent to anything on this thread, but what do you think of this Ebola hysteria, Scott?

    • distraction. selling more vaccines like the H1N1 scare. take you pick.

      • Thanks for the clarification. Storm Clouds Gathering, one of my (usual) reliable sources, just released an uncharacteristic, almost-Alex-Jones-esque scare piece about the recent “outbreak,” and I was uncertain whether his fears were grounded. The video is below, should you want to watch it:

      • Nah – Unfortunately Ebola is real. No hidden agenda is very likely here. There is no vaccine for Ebola (for any of the major strains – Zaire [current outbreak], Sudan, Bundibugyuo, Ivory Coast, nor the related Maburg virus), actually, and financial incentive here is pretty limited. The antibody treatment coming out of California is far too expensive with limited production capacity to support treatment of a third world outbreak. The attempts to contain it are not going terribly well and there is quite a bit of disorganization in trying to screen, quarantine and contain the spread. Tools for testing are not adequate and require power and refrigeration, which is not available or limited in many areas, transmission modes are not 100% understood despite a fair amount of research, and other tropical diseases endemic to the area confound decisions about when to quarantine people because putting uninfected people into an an infected quarantine gives them a high probability of getting the disease.

      • This is, however, not to say that the Ebolavirus outbreak will not be used as a distraction. The puppet administration will use anything timely as a distraction to divert attention from something needing a cover-up, but the disease itself is quite real and needs real attention to contain it.

      • One more clarification: I did not watch the StormCloudsGathering piece on Ebola (nor do I intend to). However, considering the source, I’d expect it to be unrealistically alarmist and fear and anxiety-promoting as opposed to scientific and rational. Ebola is a contagious disease passed through direct fluid contact, most efficiently at immune-privileged entry sites such as the eyes – primarily blood although reports have shown high transmission through saliva and possibly semen, and no transmission through urine, sweat or vomit. It’s a negative-sense RNA virus with an extremely high fatality rate (although the current outbreak is actually displaying a lower fatality rate than past, smaller outbreaks). It is bad and there is no vaccine nor cure at this point. It is no more likely to usher in Armageddon than Bacillus anthracis, Yersinia pestis, Francisella tularensis, Coccidiodes immitis or Brucella spp, all of which are considered “select agents” that can kill you. It’s another biological reality that we live with, albeit a bad one.

        • exactly, so you have to ask yourself why are they hyping it like they are and I’m not talking about the Di$info Jone$ (who are definitely hyping it like Russian bombers coming over the north pole on New Year’s Eve) I’m talking about the regular media in support of the blown way out of proportion Obama administration reaction to it.

          Whenever ObamaGod sends 3,000 U.S. soldiers and a bunch of money into ANY African nation, my spidey sense goes off. How many troops did they send into Africa all those decades the Catholic church was telling people over there to not use condemns because it makes Jesus sad while AIDS was expanding exponentially with every sermon?

          Uh… no. Is there an outbreak? More than likely. Is it an odd coincidence that it comes at a time when Obama needs YET ANOTHER pretext to send troops to some nation in Africa? KONY 2012 ring any bells? How about #SaveOurGirls?

          • There’s an outbreak. I can tell you that with certainty. I can also tell you with reasonable certainty that there are a lot of good people in our own government who are worried and are working hard to contain it. I don’t have any evidence for the contrary, but it would not surprise me if some groups will also try to take advantage of the situation, and I hope that does not create an out-of-control situation.

            As far as the MSM, I don’t know what their point is. Sometimes they have a coordinated agenda – on orders from the news owners. Sometimes they are just hyping anything they can for ratings. The only thing that doesn’t factor in anymore is the truth of the information. I don’t watch news and canceled my television long ago. I only read snippets of MSM and news sites like yours because I can compare what’s being said and follow-up with research without the artificial, emotionally-targeted vocal modulation used by people trying to influence through speech, which colors the message.

            BTW, I just saw your writings from the last couple of days. I can imagine (sort of) what it must be like trying to keep up what you do. I would not be able to do it. I am scientist (and a pretty good one), but I do not have the ability to synthesize the amount of information you do in the time frame, make sense of a lot of semi-connected information without clear question-test-result data to look at (controlled hypothesis testing – I’m a pretty simple thinker), nor do I have the guts to give up my life, career and hope of making a decent living. However, I’d like to know how I can contribute anonymously to your efforts. Let me know if there’s a straightforward path to getting you a donation that will at least pay your internet bill for a few months. If you can, just post the reply here, maybe someone else will see it and donate anonymously too. The email address I use to post doesn’t actually exist.

            One thing is clear – if you truly get black-listed from employment for telling the truth, we are living in a broken system. If you are willing and able to do a job well and the only reason someone does not hire you is because someone else is afraid of things you write about, we do not have the level of freedom we should as citizens who are supposed to own their government (not the other way around – we pay for the government with our taxes after all). We are not supposed to be sheep standing in line for our annual shearing. If it is dangerous to tell the truth as you see it, then the balance of authority (state and corporate) to personal liberty is too far out of balance and can only shift more away from personal liberty. In full-disclosure, I have been visiting your site off and on for a few years now and I have never made a donation. I have posted comments occasionally, but I am aware of the potential consequences of curiosity. Regardless of whether I believe or take for granted everything you write, I agree with your approach of calling out bullshit, lies and illegal motives as well as staged events that hurt or kill people to create pretexts for more illegal activity. I also appreciate your objective approach to reporting on what you thin is true. I do not consider you a conspiracy theorist or alarmist in any way, and I don’t think anyone who reads beyond the titles of your articles would either. Alex Jones is a conspiracy theorist. Bill Cooper was a conspiracy theorist (although an honest one and I think he was right on some things). You appear as an objective reporter with titles that look conspiratorial only because the material you research is from a relatively narrow topic (lies, corruption, illegal gov activity, phony events, NWO, faked news stories) rather than sprinkled with comic strips, trendy recipes and the funny things Uncle Barney did last weekend.

  57. Latest mass shooting reports more than one shooter- thought I’d post this here before it disappears down the memory hole.


    note the disclaimer at the bottom of the page- we can change our story later.

  58. Scott, thought this was interesting and worth forwarding… >> Is Erdogan’s Mosul Escapade Blackmail For Another Qatar-Turkey Pipeline? http://www.moonofalabama.org/2015/12/is-erdogans-mosul-escapade-blackmail-for-a-new-qatar-turkey-pipeline-project-.html

  59. […] Evergreen […]

  60. Scott, I would have sent a IM, or email but could not find a link. Did you see this?


    Exactly what do you think the chances are that a Blue Angel or a Thunderbird plane would crash at all? Let alone both on the same day? The F-16 crash lands, but the pilot ejects, after overflying Obama? The F-16 is a very stout aircraft, but if the plane landed… then why did the pilot eject? No way in hell this is a ‘coincidence’.

  61. Baton Rouge police shooting is currently being called the work of multiple shooters, possibly wearing masks and fatigues- wonder how long before that changes?

    • yeah, the got two in custody changing clothes in Walmart. Like our 3 hobos from Dallas (1963 and 2016) they will probably simply drop off the radar.

      But this one looks slightly different. Seems like witnesses say some guys were shooting each other in a bad section of town when the cops showed up, one was already down and the cops shot at the ones still standing who then returned fire. This turns into an ambush according to official reports.

      It looks like it might be a hearts and minds target of opportunity op.

  62. FYI. active shooter at Ohio State U.

  63. Re: NK military parade RT Español stream and the CNN live coverage
    Is the CNN reporter on greenscreen? Is the entire broadcast primarily CGI? One of the tanks looked strange to me, and when I started looking at the crowd, everyone in it started to look unnatural. Anyone else?

  64. Regarding “what’s really wrong with the world today,” and how to fix it (what bigger topic is there?), I’ve been researching the work of Anna Von Reitz. Could she have found the core, the motherlode, the answer to everything? Could be… take a look at annavonreitz.com. She doesn’t want to be a guru (and no one should be), but this could be that silver bullet we’ve all been hoping was out there somewhere.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: