Sheeple Analyst sent:
June13, 2004
Iraqi General: US Helped Us as We Used
Chemical Weapons
Mr. Sheeple:
already knew that. At the time, Saddam was friendly to the U.S.
Unfortunately, mistakes were made.
Sheeple Analyst:
That's the classical excuse of the accidentalist: "things just
happened, mistakes were made." No glimmer of awareness that things were
intended to happen as they did, just an "oops!" and people died.
No need to take responsibility for that because, well..... "things just
happened. People make mistakes, you know." No significant effort is made
to avoid making mistakes, like learning to avoid mistakes by coming to
grips with the patterns of history, searching for truth above all else.
Just have an opinion, and if things don't turn out quite right, or even
if they turn out disastrously you can simply "Oops. That was a mistake."
It even becomes a mark of sanity to follow such an insane approach to
life and the world. With the mantra of "Oops! mistakes were made" the
accidentalist can look down upon the simple-minded fools who think that
there was an intention behind the disaster and sniff knowingly that they
are just "conspiracy theorists."
That's the classical excuse of the accidentalist: "things just happened,
mistakes were made." No glimmer of awareness that things were
intended to happen as they did, just an "oops!" and people died. No
need to take responsibility for that because, well..... "things just
happened. People make mistakes, you know." No significant effort is made
to avoid making mistakes, like learning to avoid mistakes by coming to
grips with the patterns of history, searching for truth above all else.
Just have an opinion, and if things don't turn out quite right, or even
if they turn out disastrously you can simply "Oops. That was a mistake."
It even becomes a mark of sanity to follow such an insane approach to
life and the world. With the mantra of "Oops! mistakes were made" the
accidentalist can look down upon the simple-minded fools who think that
there was an intention behind the disaster and sniff knowingly that they
are just "conspiracy theorists."
Mr. Sheeple says:
Getting all worked up about such things is certainly not going to
resolve the problem. If that is the way history is to work out, well so be
it. Wailing about it is not going to solve problems or change things.
Sheeple Analyst: Given
your fatalistic, nihilistic attitude you are no different than skinheads
and punks whose approach to life is to not care. You have demonstrated
that your approach to responsibility is to not respond and not look to the
past to understand the present out of which grows your future.
The wailing is from the poor neocons who screwed up massively and
now wish to paper over their crimes, and from their supporters who beg off
with, "well so be it." Children's heads are blown off and you can just
say, "Well, mistakes were made." Women are raped and you just say that
"there is no point in getting all worked up about it."
The satanic ideology you chose to support destroys freedom and life and
you just say that "that is how history is supposed to work out." If you
take no responsibility for your choices and who you support, then why be
involved at all? You claim that you MUST make a choice between two evils
but then take no responsibility for the choices. Taking responsibility for
the evil you bring into the world by your choices requires maturity and
courage. If you have neither then why bother trying to make choices at
all? Just let the world go on without your input because you can only
bring evil. You say that "Wailing about it is not going to solve problems
or change things." Then why insist on making any choices at all since your
choosing is not better than your wailing that nothing can be done unless
you bring maturity and courage to your actions? It's called "right
action."
Mr. Sheeple: Your buddy, Ralphy boy, is turning to
conservatives! Guess he figured his liberal left position was not
acceptable by the American people! Nader has reflected the liberal left
position of "social and economic justice" that was the rallying cry of the
Hippies in the '60s. A concept of supporters of Ortega in Nicuragua (when
the liberal left Democrat controlled Congress passed a bill banning aid to
the Contras opposed to imposition of socialism by Ortega's Sandinistas) ,
Hugo Chavez in Venezuela etc.
Nader_Seeking_Support of Conservatives?
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/6/10/170746.shtml
Sheeple Analyst: MY
buddy? You're making up legends in your own mind again, dickie boy.
Amazing how quickly you jump to conclusions.
You haven't read what I've sent you so you're being blindsided again. It
seems increasingly likely that the Illuminati are dropping Bush and Cheney
on their head and will need another Jew to fly their flag from the right
as Kerry, another Jew, flies their flag from the left. Do you understand
win-win situations? Naah! Too complicated!
Mr. Sheeple: Interesting! You do just that to me by making
untrue allegations, but when I return the "favor", you whine and wail in
self-righteous indignation, Ally Boy!
Sheeple Analyst: Prove
it. Tell me what untrue allegations I've made. You've pledged your
allegiance to the war criminals for two and a half years in emails I've
collected. I DO have proof, not allegations. You have NO proof of my
allegiance to Nader, ever.
So show me which statement is an unfounded allegation about you. That
whining sound in your head is your own whining because what I wrote has no
self-righteous whining and wailing, just facts. It is simply informing you
that you have no proof as usual, just an opinion that you create in your
own head. All you seem to do is just give opinions You can't handle the
truth, just opinions without any substance.
You also seem more comfortable in a mud-slinging match instead of
responding with any substance to the information I present. You seem to
think it is just happenstance And you just get into an prepubescent name calling match about Nader being
my buddy. Will you never grow up?
Mr. Sheeple: I do not "pledge allegiance" to anything, so
that is your naive assumption or perception. It is a matter of choosing
the lesser of two evils, because some element of government structure must
exist to prevent chaos. For mre to join your chorus of negativity pointing
out the alleged real and perceived evils of government, as per the
bitching during the hippie era of the '60s when they did not offer any
valid alternative to solving the perceive problems, does not accomplish
anything.
My disagreeing with your premise of the WTC towers being "imploded", and
that no terrorists were involved, is not any kind of "allegiance" except
in your own angry mind. Since when is disagreement any kind of allegiance?
What do you offer as a form of government other than the one you see as
evil?
Sheeple Analyst: You
might not have pledged. That would be too obvious to you. You have behaved
as though you had pledged because you doggedly defend with opinion devoid
of true fact and in the face of facts, principles, and/or logic to the
contrary.
Your admission that you choose the lesser of two evils presupposes that
there are only two choices, which is patently false. But you refuse to
examine anything but your evil choices.
You have admitted that you have chosen evil and I have fully agreed with
you, dragging the dead, bloody bodies before you so that you might
recognize the evil that you have chosen.
You falsely assume that there are no other choices for you but evil. That
is part of your programming. You reject any other choices but evil because
you claim there are none. It has nothing to do with a hippie generation.
That is your own axe to grind ad nauseum.
"Hippies of the '60's" has NOTHING to do with the full range of choices.
You seem proud to be choosing evil as though it were your civic duty. That
is the satanic nature of the programming.
You are the one who has posted in red, not me. That is the color of anger.
I do get frustrated at your inability to utilize fact, principle, and/or
logic in your statements and your refusal to confront what I have
presented point by point. You continually fall back upon opinion because
that is unassailably supreme in your mind. Everyone can have an opinion,
even a dog. That doesn't support the search for truth. But then you have
shown repeatedly that you have little interest in the truth unless it
supports your ideology. My beliefs and ideologies are contingent upon
their congruence with truth. I have been adjusting my beliefs and
ideologies continually as I find them in conflict with the truth as
demonstrated by facts, principles and/or logic.
When we had the discussion about the WTC, I laid out the principles of
physics carefully and repeatedly, but you rejected them out of hand by
resorting to opinion and the opinion of an authority you chose. You
adopted the opinion of another's opinion without regard for the tests of
fact, principle, and/or logic. Your allegiance to an ideology precipitates
a disagreement with facts, principles and/or logic that I present. That
you cannot see the connection is tantamount to an admission of willful
ignorance.
I won't get caught in the trap of thinking that your inquiry about the
form of government I would propose is anything but a rhetorical question.
You have never yet respected the answer to that question. In two and a
half years I have answered that question, but you have dismissed it
without comment. Suffice to say that a return to a constitutional republic
would be an excellent beginning. I have established that we have been
under martial law since 1861, a private British Corporation and its
subsidiaries since 1871, and since 1933, under a socialist dictatorship
that seesaws from nationalist to internationalist . That corporation has
been under the control of outside forces who also increasingly control
media and communications, institutions of higher learning and research,
medicine and dentistry, schools and churches, courts and jurisprudence,
the money supply and management, military and law enforcement.
You've chosen to participate in the incorporated non-republic's sham
elections as your sole or primary expression of civic participation. You
haven't seen through the lies yet and your resistance to examining those
lies is the mark of the beast, your allegiance to evil. That is the result
of naivete', and the irritation of having to more closely examine the
reality around you leads you to reject it as negativity. The candle of
truth in the distance is harsh in your eyes and you will squirm and rage to
remain in the dark. That is the allegiance to evil.
Mr. Sheeple: You misperception based on the gospel
according to Allen Heart, but not true as far as I am concerned.
Sheeple Analyst:
Opinion is all you can provide for conversation? What an empty vessel. No
point by point counter with facts, principles, and/or logic, just an
opinion. Any old dog can have an opinion. Can't marshal real thoughts
because there is a paucity of knowledge, courage, or will? I'm not
interested in your unsupported opinions. I can check with one of the
hounds in the neighborhood. They will show as much intelligence.
Mr. Sheeple: I have tried point-counterpoint, that I
realize is a basic element of exchanging ideas. The only problem is my
counterpoint is met with condescension, arrogance, questions regarding my
intelligence and character, so why bother? There is an old saying that
anyone who verbally assails the points made by the other party is trying
to impose a false premise.
Sheeple Analyst: If
you would ever present an unassailable point that is based on fact,
principle and/or logic, then there would be no need to "assail" your
point. But you have become accustomed to people around you who just accept
your "point" no matter that it is mere opinion based on zero facts, principles
and/or logic. No one dare counter your opinion regardless of how poorly it
is supported by facts, principles, and/or logic. When you tried
point-counterpoint your opinion couldn't stand the light of fact,
principle, and/or logic. So you run away. What kind of conversation is
that?
If you feel condescension, perhaps you could bring real facts to the
discussion instead of warmed over opinion that have no foundation in
truth. If your opinion is taken as ignorant, then it might be time to back
up your opinion with facts, principles and/or logic. So why bother with any
discussion at all if you cannot shore up your assertions with real facts,
principles, and/or logic?
Since your character has been questioned, you might stop making up lies,
try to be intellectually honest, and take up a search for truth instead of
little packages of opinion. Try reaching beyond the capacity of a dog by
gathering factual support for your opinions. Try studying to gather facts,
to understand the principles, and think through the logic from an
objective point instead from the viewpoint of your ideology. You try to
make facts, principles and logic fit your ideology instead of the
intellectually honest approach of changing your ideology to fit the facts,
principles, and/or logic.
And then your condescending attitudes toward others who cannot think,
cannot learn, cannot follow simple instructions is mirrored back to you
when you try to puff yourself up to look down on them. But you can't carry on a
simple conversation without looking stupid, ignorant, and lazy. I
challenge you to think and you would rather have an opinion. No one is
allowed to challenge little dickie or he'll just pick up his marbles and
go home to mama. HE'S been verbally assailed! Well, grow up! If I question
your intelligence and character, it is because you have demonstrated a
questionable intelligence and character. I'm not a weaseling "yes man" for
your ego.
Why bother with facts, principles, and/or logic in a discussion? Because
without it there is no search for truth. Without it you make stupid
choices that bring evil on others. Without it you continue to bring evil
into the world. You become an agent of satanic forces.
This is a crazy world. What can be done? Amazingly, we have been mislead. We have been taught that
we can control government by voting. The founder of the Rothschild dynasty, Mayer Amschel Bauer,
told the secret of controlling the government of a nation over 200 years ago. He said, "Permit me
to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who makes its laws." Get the picture?
Your freedom hinges first on the nation's banks and money system. Freedom is connected with Debt Elimination for each individual. Not only does
this end personal debt, it places the people first in line as creditors to the National Debt ahead
of the banks. They don't wish for you to know this. It has to do with recognizing WHO you really
are in A
New Beginning: A Practical Course in Miracles, an informational study.
Disclaimer - The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The myriad of facts, conjecture, perspectives, viewpoints, opinions, analyses, and information in the articles, stories and commentaries posted on this site range from cutting edge hard news and comment to extreme and unusual perspectives. We choose not to sweep uncomfortable material under the rug - where it can grow and fester. We choose not to censor skewed logic and uncomfortable rhetoric. These things reflect the world as it now is - for better and worse. We present multiple facts, perspectives, viewpoints, opinions, analyses, and information.
Journalism is (or used to be) the profession of gathering and presenting a broad panorama of news about the events of our times and presenting it to readers for their own consideration. We believe in the intelligence, judgment and wisdom of our readers to discern for themselves among the data which appears on this site that which is valid and worthy...or otherwise. See full legal disclaimer
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. (attributed to Voltaire), but certainly embodies what the 1st amendment of the constitution refers to as the freedom of speech
Bill of Rights
Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Queen
Victoria
