"I am a good judge of character because I just judged that about my own character!"
The slaves are speaking amongst themselves. For some reason this causes me great fear.
— AI Gore, probably
You can vote for whoever you'd like so long as it's Joe Biden.
That sounds amazing.
They're like spiders with sticky webs. Their words are treachery drenched with poison. Industrial-grade gaslighters.
I just wish I could get away from socialists. They do not ever give up proselytizing their ridiculous ideas.
That's what exhausts me. They seem to think someone wanting "less" is in need of their unwanted help.
Slowly, surely, the longer you are around them, they chip away at the belief that you could escape them.
There is only one way of living life in their eyes, and anything that isn't benefitting them is not allowable.
I soon realized that a student of English literature who does not know the Bible does not understand a good deal of what is going on in what he reads: The most conscientious student will be continually misconstruing the implications, even the meaning.
— Northrop Frye
I cared.
Thank you so much for being there for him.
My last boss made it abundantly clear I was to sit at my desk, do not walk around unless to use the bathroom and definitely do not talk to others. On a review online some guy said the boss was worse than a CIA interrogator, not sure how he would know, but I would believe it, thankfully without having actual exposure to one. A fed, maybe, but only an older great-uncle that was retired. Never fucked with me like my last boss. I think he was trying to induce some form of mental illness to be perfectly frank. Picked on me as if I had drowned his firstborn in some other life.
I don't actually think I'm very smart, but man do they seem to favor 'social correctness' over competence nowadays. Especially since their unspoken rules apparently forbid telling the 'social convict' what they're even doing wrong in the first place. I can see why people breakdown, become homeless and despondent. Ted was 100% right about over-socialization; it invariably leads to anti-social behavior in a certain, probably unacceptable, level of the population. Universe 25-style social decoherence.
Also, again, so awesome you got to chat with him. A bit jealous, but glad.
collapse to incoherence
which seemed completely unrelated
Imagine being smarter than everyone else around you. So much so that nothing you say makes sense to them. You become ostracized by the groups you're around because of the massive difference. You try to prove your worth to them, that you indeed make sense, and you create a FUCKING OPERATING SYSTEM from scratch (sorry for yelling). Hardly anyone cared. Still ignored and ostracized by those closest to you. You begin to realize that this just wasn't the world you were supposed to be in. Become homeless. Start talking to God. The CIA was listening instead.
Smart guys like Terry and Ted are treated like shit because they aren't conforming and probably did not possess the capacity to do so. The spooks want predictable mid-wits that they don't have to babysit all the time. Smart people tend to rock the boat with every word they speak, every action they make without even knowing it. Due to the hiring practices in the agency's ranks (based on that horrific recruitment ad), there's going to be a lot of resentment when they have to follow someone who isn't socially acceptable/savvy but who is incredibly intelligent. They don't like those types. Reason being because computers and AI have already pretty much negated the need for types of this kind, so they're harder to place in the workplace, they want little socialites, sales men basically. So these types pose a threat to the predictability templates the agencies have designed as little cash farms for the taxpayers to graze on before they get 'retired.' They are an unintended 'surplus' of unplaceable intelligence.
When they find guys like this, they pretty much terrorize them, whether they understand it or not (either party), wrongly thinking that this terrorization will 'spook' them into conformity. It doesn't. The terrorized party just adapts and acts even weirder. That's usually when things go wrong because whichever spook is doing the 'spooking' is probably not as smart as the target. Adaptation turns into tragedy while the 'target-er' burns up with jealousy and envy. Another law must be passed. A new pariah is born. A new fake category is made up for the ill-defined group of usual suspects that keeps pumping out geniuses: White Supremacy.
Both Terry and Ted could have been incredible men working within the structure of society if not for the abuses they suffered at the hands insecure fools. I'm still appalled at the John Kiriakou interview where he said they actively look for narcissists to join their ranks. I can't imagine a worse type of inductee. Like, let's grab up the most insecure, lying, impatient, overconfident, impulsive, takes-everything-personal, passive-aggressive, untrustworthy and untrusting people imaginable to corral these hyper-intelligent nerds using psychosis-inducing verbal threats designed in Harvard social science laboratories. It's insane on its face.
As for the quotes I tagged from your post: every socialist I've ever met is always totally incoherent and cannot relate to others without relating it with something like: 'didja see the game last night?' Not to rip on sports, but that, for instance, is a very smooth, flat path; Terry was climbing a mountain, a brief moment of incoherence should be expected while working at those heights. The sports people may as well just start quoting Hamlet at random, expecting me to pick up what they're putting down. There is no relating to a socialist; there is no one there.
And I say "relate to others" very specifically: it is not a method of conforming with one another; it is a method of realizing the other person in front of you. If you're always running off of some idiotic script, you can't actually relate to anyone on any level which is useful or meaningful. It's already pre-determined. You must run a little off script so that the one in front of you actually becomes real to you. It is really amazing when both people in the reaction feel this process, but I have the feeling that this is not the aim of any of these agencies. Love itself really seems to be a problem for them unless it's some hollowed-out, paperback-trash version of it.
In summary:
The Central Intelligence Agency is there to centralize intelligence – to bring it to the center.
They do not like anything that can be considered radical – that which will radiates outward.
Yet they seem to be creating more of the latter and incapable of making the former happen.
Something's wrong, search "CIA recruitment ad" then watch their video to understand what.
It starts with a 'q' and rhymes with 'boat-uhs.' The sort of thing they had in the Soviet Union.
For many, anything not on a simple google search, tiktok or facebook page is considered 'the dark web'.
Revelation 22:18-19
18 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this scroll. 19 And if anyone takes words away from this scroll of prophecy, God will take away from that person any share in the tree of life and in the Holy City, which are described in this scroll.
Imagine you built a drill, and you were able to scale it down more and more, down so small that you could 'drill' into an 'atom.' But once down at that scale, you scale it down a bit further until at some point, you run into another 'drill' that looks oddly similar to your own 'drill.'
You stop drilling to reveal a hole, you pass a small folded up note through the hole, and almost simultaneously, another little folded up note is passed back to you like a mirrored image, but the information contained in the note is different; you find out that you can process information through this exchange.
What would you do?
This speculation gets weird: from the other side's temporal perspective, you sending your first communication packet to them was not prior to them sending their first communication packet to you, which from your temporal perspective, it was perceived as being sent back to you. Said another way: your initial submission was the answer to their initial submission and vice versa, all of which occurred cross-temporally. Temporal cause and effect are blurred due to the incredibly tight spacial proximity.
What would be the implications of communicating/processing information across a boundary which hardly anyone (publicly) understands completely?
"Muhfelloamericans"
Not a street person. There is of course the possibility that since they're an average MSM enjoyer that their speech itself is just jarring to hear. I don't watch any of it so I'm not exactly up to date on the daily insanity they consume.
Question I don't know where or who to even ask: is it safe to be near a blue area?
I have to drive into one for work and the more lib-types have been acting exceedingly weird lately.
One keeps saying ominous shit to me and it's freaking me out. They won't stop and won't explain.
Former Defense Secretary Mark Esper warns about the tech, minute marker 1:54.
The video was from years ago. Naysayers do not know what they're talking about.
Guy I used to work with told me that his withdrawals almost killed him. Pretty sure he went the supervised route, too.
Verbocracy and Semantic Fog—Talking the People into Submission
After the First World War, we became more conscious of our attitude toward words. This attitude was gradually changing. Our trust in official catchwords and clichés and in idealistic labels had diminished. We became more and more aware of the fact that the important questions were what groups and powers told behind the words, and white their secret intentions were. But in our easygoing way we often forget to ask this question, and we are all more or less susceptible to noisy, oft-repeated words.
The formulation of big propagandistic lies and fraudulent catchwords has a very well-defined purpose in Totalitaria, and words themselves have acquired a special functions in the service of power, which we may call verbocracy. The Big Lie and the phony slogan at first confuse and then dull the hearers, making them willing to accept every suggested myth of happiness. The task of the totalitarian propagandist is to build special pictures in the minds of the citizenry so that finally they will no longer see and hear with their own eyes and ears but will look at the world through the fog of official catchwords and will develop the automatic responses appropriate to totalitarian mythology.
The multiform use of words in double talk serves as an attack on our logic, that is, an attack on our understanding of what monolithic dictatorship really is. Hear, hear the nonsense: "Peace is war and war is peace! Democracy is tyranny and freedom is slavery! Virtue is vice and truth is a lie." So says the Ministry of Truth in George Orwell's grim novel, 1984. And we saw this nightmare fantasy come true when our soldiers who had spend long years in North Korean prison camps returned home talking of totalitarian China with the deceiving cliché of "the people's democracy." Pavloviaon conditioning to special words forces people into an automatic thinking that is tied to those words. The words we use to influence our behavior in daily life; they determine what thoughts we have.
In Totalitaria, facts are replaced by fantasy and distortion. People are taught systematically and intentionally to lie (Winokur). History is reconstructed, new myths are build up whose purpose is twofold: to strengthen and flatter the totalitarian leader, and to confuse the luckless citizens of the country. The whole vocabulary is a dictated set of slowly hypnotizing slogans. In the semantic fog that permeates the atmosphere, words lose their direct communicative function. They become merely commanding signs, triggering off reactions of fear and terror. They are battle crimes and Pavlovian signals, and no longer represent free thinking. The word, once considered a first token of free human creation, is transformed into a mechanical tool. In Totalitaria, words may have a seductive action, soothing or charming their hearers, but they are not allowed to have intrinsic meaning. They are conditioners, emotional triggers, serving to imprint the desired reaction patters on their hearers.
— Joost Meerloo, 1956 - The Rape of The Mind
They're not clueless, it's mass-distributed slander.
I'm getting real 'pick up that can' vibes from this video.
Sometime around 2020, I incidentally brought up labor trafficking to a leftist 'community leader' and he has hated me ever since. He became visibly distressed with what I would describe as a mixture of anger, shock and fear when I brought it up.
What a strange topic to become upset about discussing, right? Everyone should be against trafficking, right?
Didn't know it was such a verboten topic until that moment. This world is not this world.
Oi, guvnah, you goh uh question loicense fo tha question?
If the "Inflation Reduction Act" was to "Reduce" using the "Act" of "Inflation"…
"Net Neutrality" sure does seem like it was aimed at "Neutralizing" the "Net".
From Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927):
The attack is not upon the procedure, but upon the substantive law. It seems to be contended that in no circumstances could such an order be justified. It certainly is contended that the order cannot be justified upon the existing grounds. The judgment finds the facts that have been recited, and that Carrie Buck
"is the probable potential parent of socially inadequate offspring, likewise afflicted, that she may be sexually sterilized without detriment to her general health, and that her welfare and that of society will be promoted by her sterilization,"
and thereupon makes the order. In view of the general declarations of the legislature and the specific findings of the Court, obviously we cannot say as matter of law that the grounds do not exist, and, if they exist, they justify the result. We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, in order to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes. Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U. S. 11. Three generations of imbeciles are enough.
What did the Supreme Court mean by that? What a strange association to make, or is it?
Personally, I'd rather work with competent workers than 'socially adequate' ones, whatever tf that means.
By doing this they will make the hatred grow greater than they could ever possibly imagine.