By JC
Recent Comments
Dysfunctional Writers
Age of Reason Gives Way to “Connect the Dots”
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
JCBlogroll
Esoteric
Global Indy News & Analysis
- Anti-Media
- Counterpunch
- Fort Russ
- Free Thought Project
- Global Research
- John Helmer
- John Pilger
- Land Destroyer Report
- Middle East Eye
- MintPress News
- New Eastern Outlook
- nsnbc ìnternational
- Oriental Review
- Signs of the Times
- South Front
- Strategic Culture Foundation
- telesur
- The 4th Media
- The Duran
- The Fifth Column News
- The Greanville Post
- The Intercept
- The Saker
- The Unz Review
- Voltaire Network
- World Socialist Website
Political Economy
Propaganda
- Al Jazeera
- Asia Times
- CCTV
- China Daily, European
- Drudge
- Epoch Times, China News
- EU Times
- EuroNews
- Haaretz – Israel News
- Macleans
- New Straight Times
- NY Times
- People's Daily
- PressTV
- RT
- Spiegel International Online
- Sputnik International
- The Economist
- The Guardian
- The Hindu
- The Moscow Times
- The Times of India
- Wall Street Journal
- Washington Post
Twitter: @madpoet19
My Tweets
Can’t deal in specifics or actual evidence, so you retreat into ad hominem? Isn’t that what a weasel would do?
Passive agressive.
You’ve got no “evidence.” You just come up with a pre-arranged conclusion and figure out how to get there. You’ve never even given a single photo credit, nor shown an original, un-retouched photograph in all of your work.
An ad hominem attacks? You’re the king.
Mark wrote this this today regarding Bill Hicks….
“Hicks is still with us. He is still a public figure. He goes by the name Alex Jones.”
Mark’s delusional claims have suddenly started accelerating far into the land of Occam’s Duct Tape. If I knew the guy I’d be worried about him. The line between genuine proposition and the trolling of a bored retired accountant has disappeared.
Ultimately, he has walked himself to the epistemic no-mans-land of the Great Pumpkin Objection. That being, “If we believe that, we can believe anything.”
a circuitous route
Occam’s, it’s not
he’ll ferret it out
the elaborate plots
death isn’t real
the sun doesn’t shine
the chapel’s not perilous
the world’s just fine
so don’t fret over “news”
don’t sweat “climate change”
no chemical imbalances
plague human brains
the emperor’s not naked
in fact, he’s a hoax
from an empire of agents
wearing infinite cloaks
Sweet.
I am not “passive aggressive,” Swede. I am openly confrontational. Quite a difference.
Conclusions are not “pre-arranged,” JC. That is what people like you, who come in a package with mindsets do. Not me. Your mindset confines you to conventional outlook. You are boring. Not stupid. Just boring. My eyelids feel heavy one sentence into your comments.
Nameless, oddly, I have a little more respect for you than the others, don’t quite know why, but I will expand. I did not do the research on Hicks/Jones, as I did on the McCartney twins, and so did not lay it out as if I did. Anyone with a functioning brain can Google. Instead, I chose to do a groundwork piece on how such a hoax can be pulled off. I went into the background of the JFK assassination, and how Bill Hicks played it. The suggestion was that those who laid the original hoax were using Hicks to suggest a magical lurking force, an Illuminati thing, where people who openly question official truth are murdered. That is deeply layered propaganda, and the easy answer was that Hicks did not die. Then when I saw the photographic analysis between Hicks and Jones, I realized we had our man.
Skink, I once thought of you, like JC, as more than you are. To both of you: come and get me. I don’t see any occult force at play that makes me fear you. You’re just a couple of welterweights. You’re smarter than run-of-the-mill Democrats, but on a scale not that much advanced. Miles to go ,,,
Kailey, see Swede above about passive aggressive. It is the coward’s trademark. Right, Skink? Oh, yeah, as the Monty stunt demonstrated, you are most likely a sociopath.
you say bring it, then I comment, then you say leave me alone.
I said that once, just to mock you, as you asked me not to comment here. You were bringing all your occult shit to my place, so I paid you back. That is all that was.
So again, bring it. I don’t care. You’re not scary. You’re not Satan.
Both interesting and enlightening, as if you’d recognize Satan if you saw him.
I’d always thought you were slightly possessed. After reading Barnhardt I’m assured.
“DNs* want to drag everyone else down into their demonic emotional palate of anger, hatred, jealousy and fear. Since the DN has freely chosen to purge himself of love, and the happiness that flows from love, he is determined to see to it that happy people are deprived of the ability to be happy. Hence the hyper-passive-aggressive pouting fits, passive-aggressive silent treatment campaigns, temper tantrums, bitchy (queeny) behavior, and the premeditated plots – such as the example above of the father luring everyone to a dinner out and then sabotaging it at the last minute by obviously picking a fight. Oh yeah. They plan it in advance. They fantasize about it. And saddest of all, they get off on it.”
*Diabolical Narsistics
Good to know. I am glad Bernhardt assures you.
Actually, Conspiro, the only things proven by your “Monty stunt” are these: 1) You don’t know how the Internet works, 2) You don’t actually follow evidence, you make it up as go along. And 3) JC’s chart and Lizard’s poetic description of your cognitive abilities are exactly spot on.
I actually feel some degree of responsible shame. Since I didn’t smash your delusional mental ass into the dirt when you pulled what I considered a fairly harmless prank, you have metastasized into an online paranoid loon, seeking lies to embrace as truth everywhere you go.
Monty, you and I both know who Monty is. One of us has some decency in him, one is a flagrant liar, loser, sociopath, and book store clerk.
From “Narcissism and the Dynamics of Evil”
He cannot allow others to see what he sees in himself, for they will reject him. What they see will be as repulsive to them as it is to himself. So he must create a highly likable and acceptable image that will procure the affirmation he requires for himself, an affirmation that he can only get from others who do not know him as he really is. Thus begins the fundamental lie of the self-loathing egotist. For an image is a reflection. One can only see a reflection if it is mirrored in some way. The egotist must see his reflection through the eyes of others, and so others become a means to his own affirmation, a means to his own conviction that he really exists. For the deeply depraved have created a void, a nothingness in the heart of their character. But a person cannot detect the presence of nothingness. Hence, the egotist desperately needs to be convinced of his own existence. He needs to feel that he is. If he will not achieve this through the pursuit of virtue, he will do so through the affirmation, praise, and adulation of others, or through their fear of him….
The more intense the conflict between the experience of his nothingness and his emerging egotism, the more radical his manipulation of others. The more intelligent the egotist, the more able he is to hide his depravity by means of a clever reflection, and thus the more able he is to successfully convince others that they are loved and revered for their own sake. The longer he persists in his depravity, the more deeply he falls into the void that is de-created by the choices he continues to make.
From a purely moral point of view, this is how the narcissistic character disordered are created.
Christ swede. Maybe you should look in the mirror. i am not narcissistic, you’re latched on to a kite there. I am pretty normal.
“Nothingness” like perpetual chaos and hopelessness. No solutions, no remedies only wave after wave of distortions. No one to trust but if one is mentioned his credentials fall solidly in the all things conspiring without plans for ferreting or remedying the truth.
These traits fall solidly into the “no vote” mentality. They also coordinate with the lack of endorsement. You’ve slid into this mire from once supporting Nader to “none of the above”. Making choices gives hope and direction and you want that hope eliminated.
That why you post. To sow seeds of unworthy nothingness.
Related.
This quote from Theodore Dalrymple is popping up more frequently, as it deserves:
“In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”
Or, perhaps, communism was a big joke?
I hesitate to suggest that I live a really happy life, family and friends and all that … I have all the trappings. It just makes you suspicious.