Welcome to the About Words website. Below is a brief audio introduction to this site.
Did you know that one of the most popular words on the internet is God?
I begin by continuing a few lines from the prior exchange:
Let me focus on simple matters for a moment that will not be in a realm that confuses you. This will promote clarity and wisdom.
Electrical charge is important. Too much of certain charges can instantly kill any organism.
Also, electrical charge is what produces every “action” you experience, such as allowing your eyes to see this screen, my fingers to type out these letters, and hurricanes to form and create wind and so on.
Below are examples of what an electrical vortex can produce:
In regard to tornadoes, note that water conducts electricity and also that a spinning vortex of water creates a magnetic field. Why does water (including in a tornado) spin in a different rotation in the Northern Hemisphere compared to the Southern Hemisphere? Because of electromagnetics.
So, the above information is incomplete. The “funnel” is an electromagnetic vortex (like a whirlpool or water flowing out of a sink). Only in the proper electromagnetic situation (which PRODUCES a stormcloud) will hot and warm air make a tornado (like shown in the over-simplified info above).
Humidity and temperature variation are simply not enough. The real primary issue is electromagnetic charge.
To have a tornado, we need the presence of water, air, and earth, plus the electromagnetic imbalances between those 3 “substances.” Temperature imbalances can be created by the presence of the other 4 factors.
So, with concentrations of energy, sometimes it is very easy to access that energy and sometimes the energy is in a complex form that is very stable relative to “highly reactive” forms. Baking soda “has a loosely-bonded electron just hanging right out.” That means it produces a very gentle electrical reaction very easily.
In contrast, if you take some whale oil, it takes a lot to spark a release of the energy. You need a flame to burn the whale oil (like in a lamp) or a very complex metabolic process to convert the oil in to lots of something called ATP (through ketogenic metabolism). ATP is highly reactive, like even moreso than baking soda.
From fat or carbs, animals can get ATP and then get one electron from each molecule of ATP. That is a “very inefficient” way to go (even though ketosis is WAY more efficient than “anaerobic metabolism of carbs”).
A much more efficient way to produce energy (than ATP) is PPP. Any geeks can look that up and find out what I mean.
Ultimately, the issue is always electrons and protons. Another issue is storage and release of those electrons and protons (the electricity or electromagnetic “power”) in specific ways.
So, if you want a “burst” of energy, baking soda is not the way to go. Fats are great ways to store energy and then release it pretty suddenly.
If you want to promote alkalinity in general in an organism, that means increasing the balance of electrons (relative to protons). Different cells and tissues SHOULD have different electromagnetic balances. The brain (and heart) create powerful electromagnetic fields and they should. Note that “totally neutral” is basically “dead.”
Wearing rubber-soled shoes and living in structures that disconnect us from the vast supply of electrons of the earth is “unhealthy.” Those practices are okay occasionally, but not constantly. We need to “recharge” our electron balance.
Anyone who is asking about “getting more alkaline” and “should I eat baking soda” is a long way from the most direct approach. AV [Aajonus Vanderplanitz, a recently deceased nutritional consultant] may have dismissed certain methods or issues not as totally ineffective but simply as inefficient and distracting.
If you trust someone who tells you “never eat ______” and always eat ____ first thing in the morning,” so be it. Be cautious about who you trust though. Confidence and popularity are not the same as intelligence or accuracy or relevance, right? (See Luke 7:7.)
Caution or alertness are not agonizing. If you are interested in interacting with a competent specialist, it may be relevant to have something to offer them in exchange for their time and expertise.
If the inflammation is verycontained, like a little sunburn on your shoulders, then something topical like baking soda paste or aloe vera gel is relevant. For most people today, they have extreme systemic inflammation (electromagnetic imbalance) and need to ground themselves to the earth.
Most people have massive deficiencies of electrons and only after weeks or even months of resumed contact with the earth (like at least 12 hours a day), will their “allergies” (inflammatory repsonses) begin to disappear. You can construct your own “grounding device” for under $20. I show how in this video (though I now recommend that people use UNinsulated wires for greater surface area contact): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naSgbQUN674
Organisms who have major problems in those realms will die in seconds, minutes, hours, or weeks. Much less important to me (once the main “poisons” are removed from someone’s diet) is nutrition, including things like the use of iodine “supplementation” on the skin.
So, if someone eats 4 ounces of juice from raw calf liver every morning and 8 ounces of raw celery juice every night (like in the classic Gerson method to “cure cancer”), is all of that enough daily hydration? It might be enough to survive- much better than none- but nowhere close to optimal.
If you have done nutrition “poorly” for decades and are still alive, that is a sign that it is not an URGENT matter for you. Maybe it is a good investment for someone to explore improving nutrition, but keep it all in perspective.
Agonizing is totally optional- which is easy to say. I consider it a signal of distress. If agonizing can help you to withdraw from interacting with an incompetent specialist (or to remain withdrawn), that is good. Beyond that temporary benefit, agonizing may be of little benefit.
Let it frighten off those who do not care or are incompetent to help. Be grateful for it’s purpose and value. When that value is fulfilled, other patterns of activi56ty are relevant becasue the behavioral pattern of agonizing.
The pancreas makes it toalkalyze the small intestine (to raise pH). Generally speaking, something alkaline onlyalkalyzes what it contacts / reacts with. It simply has a tendency to donate a small voltage of electrons to anything nearby.
So, if you bathe in water with baking soda, then electrons get “donated” through the skin to be distributed widely. If you drink something alkaline, especially if you swish it in your mouth before swallowing, that has another effect. If you get a bee sting and put wet baking soda as a paste right on the inflamed tissue, it reduces that local inflamation. If you use it in toothpaste and rinse it out after several seconds, that is yet a different effect.
To me, that is a psychological mechanism for avoiding what promotes health. It is agonizing. It promotes neither health nor comprehension of biology.
Ho hum. Nothing new here. Just a bunch of “idealists” waking up to what was never true, then claiming that “government has gotten corrupt since the 1990s [or whatever] when I was naive and believed that governments were less corrupt than I think they are today.”
Is it true that Free Masons in the US like Schiff and JP Morgan were the primary economic beneficiaries of the formation of the USSR? Clearly, Germany benefited strategically from the Bolshevik “revolution” and the withdrawal of pre-bolshevik Russia from World War 1. However, who actually received the wealth stripped directly from the Russian people (confiscated)?
Just like Dick Cheney and friends have “allegedly” used the conflicts in the middle east to embezzle billions of dollars from the US government, is it possible that Free Masons in New York and Paris and London were the ones who actually received all the valuables that went “mysteriously missing” (embezzled from the new Soviet government)? When Cambodian “leader” Pol Pot and is collaborators were trained in Paris by the Free Masons to use the slogans known as “communism,” is it possible that some of the massive amount of property confiscated from Cambodians was mysteriously embezzled from the new Cambodian Communist “Party” (“the new government”) and smuggled in to Paris (or Zurich)?
This has been happening recently in Iraq. See these articles
from 2005: http://articles.latimes.com/2005/may/05/world/fg-fraud5
from 2008: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-05-22-2130123016_x.htm
From the 1790s, the term began being used also for propaganda in secular activities. The term began taking a pejorative connotation in the mid-19th century, when it was used in the political sphere.“
Language patterns of leaders and loyalists
Humans are social animals. Within human social groups, we can notice different patterns of action. Human infants will perform a certain range of actions, while older children other patterns of behavior, and then a variety of behavioral specializations can be developed amongst the adult males and adult females.
One relatively complex form of social organization is the empire. The essential requirement of an empire is that there is a contrast between the actions of the leaders and the actions of the followers.
One form of action is communication, including the use of language. In regard to how language can be used in different patterns, should we be surprised to learn that the leaders in an empire use language in ways that are distinct from the ways that the followers use language? For instance, do military officers speak to low-ranking personnel the same way that low-ranking personnel speak to each other?
One typical statement of the masses would be “that should not be like that.” They do not just make such a statement to calmly note a contrast between their preferences and their observations. The masses practice a religion of hysteria. The hysteria is based on a thin, anxious clinging to ideals of how life should be, how people should be, and, in particular, how they perceive themselves to be.
When one of the masses say “that should not be like that,” they may be expressing distress, embarrassment, or even outrage. In contrast, one of the leaders might calmly say “that should not be like that,” and they could simply mean “there is a difference between what I am observing here and what I expected,” as in “that not does not fit my standards.” Or, they may mean “if you do not conform to my standards, there will be no rewards and may even be punishments.”
If the leader has an ideal of how something should be, then they simply notice when that ideal is only partly matched or totally matched (or totally violated). Leaders also may present to the masses many ideals of how various things should be. The specific ideals presented will correspond to the leader’s interests as well as to their perceptions of their audience.
A leader may train the followers to learn an ideal and then present rewards for those who loyally repeat the ideal. Even larger rewards may be offered to those who conform to the ideal. Of course, punishments are also typical for those who do not conform to the behavioral ideal (including behavioral patterns of speaking).
So, after a follower learns an ideal from their leader (and expects rewards and punishment relative to their continued display of loyalty), then there may be some chronic physical tension for the follower in regard to one or more ideals. There may be a lingering trauma or terror.
If the follower is terrified of the possibility that a particular ideal might be inconsistent with reality, a sudden panic can result from an apparent disparity between the worshiped ideal and actual observations. Especially if other people are present to witness a possible disparity, then a variety of unusual behaviors are possible, including fight, flight, and pretense.
The terrified loyalist (loyal to the programmed ideal) may attempt to repel potential skeptics and dominate an interaction, including through methods of distraction. The curiosity of a skeptic, such as a child, may be targeted with animosity and condemnation.
If the loyalist perceives a potential threat, then they may attempt to humiliate those who are curious or skeptical (or even who show inadequate enthusiasm for the worshiped ideal). If they seem unable to intimidate a skeptic, then they may attempt to confuse any witnesses.
If you fail to display loyalty to an ideal that someone worships, what responses are predictable from a loyalist? If you show a type of attentiveness or curiosity that a loyalist interprets as a threat to their self-image, what responses are predictable from the loyalist? If you directly challenge the fragile self-image of a loyalist, what responses are predictable from the loyalist?
Does a leader rescue loyalists from their loyalties? Or, does a leader have respect for loyalty as well as for leadership?
Loyalty is the natural trait of followers. Within a social herd, there will always be some fanatical loyalists, some loyalists who are much more relaxed, and some leaders who are not terrified about whether or not ideals “should” be worshiped.
Some people may sometimes worship certain ideals. Leaders respect that. Leaders also respect that they may have some influence over which ideals are worshiped and how they are worshiped. Leaders are open to leading (to being followed).
To be a leader, it can be useful to have experience as a naive, terrified follower. It can be useful to understand the typical patterns of hysterical loyalist.
Some may react in a panic and shout that “there should not be so much hysteria.” I completely agree. There should be exactly the right amount of hysteria, and certainly no more and no less.
Add to this, where are all the phone pics of bloody victims? Africans all have phone cameras. We are a fully wireless world. If people were really dying of Ebola, it’s much worse than vomit and diarrhea….the link I posted earlier about the Ebola test (created by Nobel prize winner who describes it’s short comings) is hardly reliable….so….in the absence of actual evidence, the US is now doing a PR campaign to convince people? I would think dead people would be more than sufficient….unless they haven’t died from Ebola….
Most people (around 90% according to the research that I have read) have deficiencies of oxygen in their brain cells. This is very easy to resolve. There are many testimonials and research papers on the methods used and the results produced.
But if it is your intention to avoid health, then intention does matter. Most people are too terrified of learning something new to explore any established science that could result in the experience of humility.
aerobic exercise USES UP oxygen. That is why it is called aerobic. People may think that is always good, but if they do not replenish the oxygen, using up a lot of oxygen might not be as good as they hoped.
I assume that no one is really interested in the actual data because there is a lot of “yes, I already know all about that.” Really? Do you?
Maybe you already know all that you are already comfortable knowing.
I get that you do embrace things once you understand them. I just am clear that you do not understand certain things yet.
I bet you know the word hyperventilation but not the word hypoxia. Basically, the vast majority of people that we know have a brain that is usually starving for oxygen (because of chronic hyperventilation). Hypoxia means, basically, starving for oxygen.
Many people are familiar with acute hyperventilation (as in a “panic attack” or “asthma attack”). Chronic hyperventilation is typical in a modern population (over 90% of people experience chronic hypoxia).
Most of us breath about twice as much as would be considered “normal” or “healthy.” That “over-breathing” (such as “apnea”) causes CO2 levels in the bloodstream to collapse, which prevents the right amount of oxygen from getting out of the bloodstream and in to the cells.
That is… very bad. It is like a constant state of a mild panic attack… like a borderline panic (or anxiety / hysteria) that is always just a few seconds away from serious neurological chaos.
Concentration plunges. Anxiety and irritability rockets. Cognition “stalls.” In extreme cases of sleep apnea, oxygen levels get so low that the brain interrupts the sleep to wake up the organism so as to slow down the constant gasping (and keep the organism from dying).
These effects have been documented for a very long time, but in the US the health care business is not set up to promote health inexpensively. Government regulations protect the immense profit of the “disease management” industry from the threat of inexpensive methods to promote health.
The solution to chronic hyperventilation & hypoxia is simply to slow down breathing. There are a variety of devices (such as masks) and exercises to assist, but they all slow down the breath (to increase CO2 levels in the blood and thus increase O2 levels in the cells).
Mr. Humility himself
It is easy enough to breath instead “in to the stomach” or even to “fill” both the stomach and the chest. However, if that is done rapidly, that only makes the symptoms of the hyperventilation more severe than with the more “shallow” breathing of the chest only.
“Chest breathing is the mechanical ramification of over breathing. Breathslim [a fancy $30 "brown paper bag"] strengthens your belly breathing muscles so effectively that most patients are able to reverse years of habitual chest breathing within a month.”
You see the exact same thing amongst the AV [Aajonus Vanderplanitz] “ultra-loyalists.” Most people are so hampered by social hysterias that it compromises their cognitive capacity to recognize simple principles.
I occasionally present a “conspiracy theorist” idea that the elite (or CIA, KGB, etc) plan that mainstream medicine be regulated in a way that keeps the health of the masses within a certain range- not too low and not too high. However, the conspiracy aspect is mostly trivia. What matters most is how to improve health. For some people, to vent contempt and rage is also healthy, so in those cases it can be more relevant to reference conspiracy theories amongst select audiences.
I do not think that AV was a CIA “asset.” I think he was sincere and just unaware of certain principles of physics. He observed amazing results in numerous cases and may not have known why the same methods worked differently in different cases.
However, his lack of attention to language or apparent lack of emotional development in regard to not taking political wars so personally was a drawback. I think he was sincere and insightful within his specialization.
Jack Kruse, MD (who is in one of the videos above) did a demonstration to show how the ketogenic diet enthusiasts are too focused on diet and not enough on health, in his opinion. He had two periods of time in which he had the exact same diet (like for several months) along with no change in exercise, but he intentionally varied the CO2 in his bloodstream for long periods of time.
The difference was that with hypoxia (too little oxygen from too much CO2), he gained significant weight. Diet is not the only determinant of metabolism. Jack is also famous for manipulating metabolism through things like cold, lgiht, and EMFs (like from wifi and cell phones). He has a tendency to use language “inefficiently”, but he his is “a real scientist” and a holist. He’s very excited about what he is in to and naturally there are other issues which he seems not to be as familiar with.
Anyway, metabolism and mitochondrial efficiency are a big deal, but diet is not the only factor. If the energy available form diet cannot be used, it is like having a battery available but not being plugged in to it (disconnected).
For people with horrible diets, it makes sense to transitionally focus on improving diet, but that does not exclude other influences. The spirit of exploration and experimentation tends to result in learning. We can all relate to that, right?
Bob wrote that “Ebola is a hoax.” He was joking. He was making fun of hysteria.
Ebola is not a hoax. It is a real river in Africa. In the 1970s, some people died in the area near that river and then the way they died was named after the Ebola river.
Since then, an average of about one hundred people per year have died from the medical process called “Ebola” (at least that is what has been reported and publicized). Is that a lot of people? It is a lot more than a dozen, right?
I have seen reports showing that around 20,000 people commit suicide each year in the US. If you do not stop what you are doing right now to donate a few hours of your time every week to a campaign for suicide awareness & prevention, then you are probably… an American.
But back to the disease process called Ebola, it can allegedly be spread through very limited ways, like involving certain bodily fluids. In that respect, it is similar to the HIV virus & the medical label “A.I.D.S.”
But should people ever be skeptical of new information? What about skeptical of old, familiar presumptions?
I recently read medical research from 1991 establishing that simple breathing exercises were 100% effective in promoting the health (reducing the symptoms) of people with HIV/ AIDS. The same kind of exercises have “cured” people of asthma and panic attacks and many other diagnostic labels.
What is asthma? It is a process involving hyperventilation and a lack of oxygen in the brain cells.
In fact, when there is a lack of oxygen in brain cells, then that interferes with the brain’s ability to generate electromagnetic current (“energy”). So, there are a few consequences of a “starving” brain and also a few mechanisms for remedying that.
If someone is underwater with no oxygen-rich air to breathe, that could be a problem. However, the more common problem in modern medical contexts is that 90% of people do not have “enough” carbon dioxide in the bloodstream (from too much breathing AKA “mild” hyperventilation). I speculate that it is because they are chronically stressed/ tense/ scared/ traumatized/ zombified.
How is the “behavior” of asthma replaced with the behavior of “healthy breathing?” There are some simple exercises to gradually strengthen certain muscles and to slow down the breathing enough to raise the CO2 levels in the bloodstream. (Check out http://www.intellectbreathing.com or http://www.normalbreathing.com for more info.)
Since 90% of people that were measured have been observed to breath at least twice as heavily as would be considered healthy or “normal,” that percentage is far too high (relative to the tiny fraction of people with HIV) to then say that HIV causes mild hyperventilation or that mild hyperventilation causes infecton by HIV. However, if all of the symptoms that are called AIDS disappear because of a simple short breathing exercise, then we can conceive of AIDS as one type of complication of mild hyperventilation (among many others).
As long as somone has adequate oxygen levels in the brain, what if the presence of the HIV virus itself has NO MEDICAL CONSEQUENCE? When oxygenation of brain cells is too low, there are a variety of problems- from mild to severe. However, because of the worship of diagnostic labels like AIDS and Ebola by the western masses, they may panic at the sound of those words. They do not conserve their breath. They do not keep calm.
So, when millions or billions of people have low oxygen levels in their brains, then isn’t it obvious that they make demons out of words? They worship AIDS like it is a living demon that possesses organisms and causes illness or death. Is that true? Or, is HIV just one of many viruses that, when an organism’s cells are starving for oxygen due to mild hyperventilation, the presence of the virus can complicate the already compromised health of that organism (such as by produing the EFFECT labeled as A.I.D.S.)?
(Note that the most well-established method for promoting health is called “the placebo effect,” which is basically a reference to any method of tricking a patient in to relaxing their normal level of distress/ hyperventilation. Why doesn’t the placebo effect work in every case? Because some people are not actively sabotaging their immune system with unconscious habits of compromised breathing.)
Here is where we start to get to some interesting issues involving language. People tend to think that there are fundamentally distinct realities, like the reality of carbon and the reality of oxygen. That is absolutely false.
Carbon can change in to something else. “Brain-dead chemists” may be unaware of physics, but it is still common knowledge amongst nuclear physicists that carbon is a relatively stable compound. By compound, I mean that it is made of smaller components.
“Carbon fusion” is the name for the process of carbon combining with hydrogen to form nitrogren. Nitrogen is not a carbohydrate made of some atoms of cabron and some atoms of hydrogen. When nitrogen is created out of carbon and hydrogen, the two stable compounds that were present at first are later absent. They transform in to a new form (creating a new compound through a significant re-organizing of the components of the two prior compounds).
First, there are two distinct stable fields of energy (forms of energetic matter) called carbon and of hydrogen. Then, the two distinct fields (compounds) “fuse” to make a new field (compound form) that displays certain qualities which chemists like to label as “nitrogen.”
So, nitrogen is just a label for one distinct stable pattern of… energy. By the way, the pattern of Nitrogen can shift to Oxygen, then back to Nitrogen, then back once again to Carbon.
Next, where does most hydrogen on the earth come from? From solar radiation. Because we think of waves and particles as two isolated realities, we can get confused about the radiating of hydrogen, but that is actually kind of odd that it would be confusing.
Let’s simplify. Waves and particles can be thought of as two distinct types of behaviors.
Carbon and oxygen can be thought of as a two stable patterns of energy. If you add a certain kind of energy to carbon in a certain way, then the new pattern is called nitrogen.
In other words, there is nothing fundamental or eternal about the pattern of energy behaving as carbon. Carbon is just relatively stable (and Carbon-13 is distinct from Carbon-14 in part because one is more stable than the other).
Those two types of carbon decompose at different speeds (with different half-lives). By decompose, we mean to say that they are composites. They are compounds. They are stable compounds made of stable sub-atomic fields of energy (such as electrons, neutrons, and protons).
Matter is an aspect of these energetic fields (which are sometimes referenced as “particles”). Matter is not independent of energy (not a distinct isolated reality).
Mass refers to the amount of attractive energy (gravitational force) created by a certain field. So, we can measure the mass of an energetic field (such as an electron “particle” or an atom of Carbon or a molecule of Carbon Dioxide).
Mass is once again not a fundamental reality. Mass is an effect. Mass is even a process or “behavior” (as in an effect that causes other effects).
Let’s briefly address the issue of “particles” appearing and disappearing. For instance, when neutrinos and anti-neutrinos “appear and disappear,” that is because they are unstable fields (unstable patterns of behavior).
Carbon (such as “carbon-12″) is a much more stable field. So, carbon-12, carbon-13, and carbon-14 are similar but distinct aggregates of energy. They have similar yet distinct properties. For instance, the property of mass (or material stability) is slightly different for carbon-12, carbon-13, and carbon-14.
Again, mass is just a property of lasting energetic fields. Some energetic fields can last for a decade (if not disrupted) and other types of fields would never last for an entire second because they are so unstable.
All that finally brings me back to carbon dioxide. That is a label for a molecular compound made of one part carbon and two parts oxygen.
In other words, carbon dioxide always contains oxygen. They are not fundamentally distinct realities. The conceptual model of distinct realities is in fact hysterical (as in unintelligent or delirious).
There are a variety of dimensions, such as length, height, weight, density, temperature, and so on. There are also a variety of distinct perspectives, such as physics and anatomy.
When a biophysicist looks at living tissue, they might note “there is a pH of 6.94 in that tissue, which of course totally impairs the tissue’s ability to utilize oxygen because the electrons that are needed in order to form new electromagnetic valance bonds are too strongly attracted to the excess of protons (which we have measured to be excessive at the precise level known as a pH of 6.94).” That is a valid interpretation. That is very measurable. Every part of that statement can be tested for accuracy.
When someone who is not very competent in physics but very familiar with anatomy looks at the same tissue, they might say “that is a cancer tumor.” That is also a valid interpretation. However, it lacks the precision of the statement of the physicist.
If someone were to translate all of that in to a few different languages, all of that could still be valid constructions in language. They could all be useful in some way.
Every perspective is also limited. One perspective may be concise but vague. Another perspective may be precise in one aspect but misses a lot from the bigger picture.
The interpretation that produces the most profit for a business may not be the interpretation that promotes health with great efficiency. Each perspective naturally creates interpretations (and mesaurements) that are in accord with the motives and presumptions of that perspective.
Modern medicine is reasonably effective at identifying various kinds of symptoms through precise testing. One possible problem with modern medicine is the low level of competence in the science of physiology. (Most MDs will be not just ignorant but confused by why a certain biochemical effect will happen 90% of the time but not the other 10%.)
If they simply did not know, that would be mere ignorance. However, if they thought that they knew something (something which observations were clearly contradicting), that misperception or misinterpretation produces confusion. That is precisely what happens that often leads to hysterical arguing: “Your little theory that cholesterol is made by the liver to promote health is insulting because it contradicts my vilification of cholesterol as a demon that must be worshiped with attention and then ritually attacked.”
An MD may experience confusion, shame about the confusion, and then hysteria. What appears simple to a physicist may be a mystery to an MD- or even confusing and threatening. Since biochemistry is really just a specific subcategory of physics, a physicist may look at the same data (or same patient) and instantly recognize what is “really” going on. An MD may be “blinded” by their conceptual model of worshiping cholesterol as a demon.
So, in addition to the issue of incompetence in physiology amongst the medical priesthoods, there is also the related issue of arrogant hysteria. They may be distressed at the idea of learning something new, especially if it contrary to some religious dogma that they have believed and also have publicized for decades (sincerely but inaccurately).
When a person says “that effect is incurable,” they may mean that they are ignorant of how to stop producing that effect. However, most MDs do not even relate to diagnostic labels as effects. They may presumptively relate to certain diagnostic labels as causes. That simple error can lead to a lot of confusion, a lot of embarrassment, and, eventually, a lot of learning.
Lisa started by sharing this image. After a few other comments, I added the one below and the rest of the conversation is shown after that.
J R Fibonacci Hunn re [what Lisa wrote;] “We are supposed to have a representative political system for “expediency” to work on behalf of the common good…when it’s operating according to design, it’s the best collective political system out there.”
Don’t all political systems advertise themselves as “being for the common good?” Noah invented coercive systems with the specific design of a worldwide single government. Why? To save humanity from the threat of another apocalypse by an insecure God?
Moses ordered the slaughter and rape of the Midianites. Why? Because their women had been tempting the men of the Hebrew tribes, so that was their punishment.
(Feel free to correct me if you think that I misquoted the books of Exodus or Numbers in any significant way.)
Clinton Wensley Most people see only what they want to Believe . . . for the simple reason that they wouldn’t be capable of seeing or comprehending or wrapping their brain around what is actually going on.
In 1998, I had the privilege of meeting a man who was a dear friend of my girlfriend at the time … he came over for dinner one night with his wife… and we all had a nice dinner together.
After, we stated talking about world events, and the conversation eventually drifted to his former work (he was 55 yrs old, & retired)…. to make a long story short, this man was one of the nicest people I have met to date, and my girlfriend thought the world of him (he and his wife took care of her before I came into the picture, as my girlfriend was trying to recover from cancer)
This guy worked for a group of people that were above US Gov’t (probably in Europe) … and not even he knew exactly who his employer was by name. He told me things that made my hair stand up on end regarding politics, space, Medical, ET’s, etc… stuff that people think is conspiracy, but is actually going on in plane site …. as well as told me some things that would be going on in years to come (and they are happening as we speak).
He explained that he and his wife have to move 1-2 x’s every year, as there have been several attempts on his life (one that happened in a restaurant in Japan, where his best friend died in front of him) It was a lot to take in at the time.. and rearranged every thing that I thought I knew about the world, and what was going on.
Forget what you see and hear on the news if you trying to figure it all out … for its only 10% of the Truth…. and even if you were told the Truth, you’d dismiss it, and say, “that’s impossible, that was in a movie, that can’t be true” !!
I for sure don’t know the entire picture … but, what I DO know for a fact is that 9/11 didn’t happen because of 19 kids armed with box cutters …. Oswald never shot kennedy (much less even fired a shot) ……. there have been to date at least 5 cures for cancer starting as far back as 1930 that aren’t shared with the public ……. and Obama is about as much in control of the US, as a president, as Charlie Sheen is with his addictions.
I DO admire Marianne’s letter though … she comes from the heart.
Nelson Mandela is a very famous communist but in the US we generally do not identify him as a communist or terrorist, but as a “freedom fighter.” Some will argue that he was only funded by communists, but if you research the communist political platform and what Mandela supported, are they identical or nearly so? Here he is (in 1990?) giving a classic communist “solidarity” gesture (in front of a flag with a classic Soviet communist symbol).
J R Fibonacci Hunn Some readers here may know Marianne W. as a champion of forgiveness. However, to me, she is not only naive but operates in condemnation and hysteria.
She judges plutocracy (if she is hysterically sincere as I expect) as “wrong.” She is disappointed. She is frustrated. She is guilty. (I could go on.)
J R Fibonacci Hunn What Marianne W. seems not to understand is repentance. Of course, that is rather off-the-subject. However, that issue is huge and the lack of repentance does not address her guilt (her guilt from “first world privilege” I presume) and that guilt is driving her guilty liberal perfectionism to save the world from people like Hillary Clinton.
The government of Mexico “disputes his claims.” They says that he is a variety of insulting things like a criminal tax evader. They send thugs to arrest him, to take his belongings, and to kill him in a public ritual of human sacrifice.
Jack says “come and get me because I am protected by the ink of the US Constitution, you buttfaces!” So, soon Jack is killed.
Then, the USA gets mad that Jack was killed. They send some cavalry in to “annex” Texas from Mexico by force. (Of course, they were planning to annex Mexico anyway and they recruited Jack to be sent to Texas to stir up a dispute and be a “victim” of the Mexican government so as to justify a “retaliation” to “protect innocent settlers like Jack.”)
Then, some native american family whose forefathers have been living in the area for 900 years return from their summer vacation. The governments of Mexico and the USA flip out and say that these trespassers have a mental illness called “being an Apache” and send some more cavalry to protect the “innocent settlers” from the “bad people.”