THE DERAILING ROOM

A place to relax and socialize - to muse, think aloud and suggest

Re: Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on A Very Open Conspi

Postby Selene on October 2nd, 2015, 4:28 pm

Excellently elaborated and nuanced post, hoi. My sincere compliments.

Two highlights from your outstanding set of reasonable and cautious arguments:

hoi.polloi wrote:....

I believe we could try to understand the location of the Zionist, Jewish, Talmudic, Masonic, Gnostic, Catholic, Christian, Islamic, Sufi, Shriner, Pagan, Ba'Hai, Scientologist, Mormon, Buddhist, atheist, agnostic and other "fraternal order" entry points to the core sect of psychopaths. And if we did, I believe we would find a universal problem with humanity applying once again to a particular historic time period (in which we now live) where a particularly large portion of the Jewish minority ethnicity happen to be the latest iteration of a fucking long lasting problem with how we fail to design ourselves better as a species.


Exactly the problem I have with "the Jewish conspiracy", "the Muslim conspiracy", "the Irish conspiracy", "the black conspiracy" and even the "US American conspiracy NWO theory" or any similar "one-solution-for-all-problems/one-ring-to-rule-them-all-theories".

The common denominator of conspirators, hoaxers, liars is psychopathy; lack of remorse, constant lying, manipulation fetishes, lack of self-reflection, arrogance and a deceptive smile or other illusionary methods. It is not religion, culture, race, skin colour, community or country. It is a psychological problem which x % of the human population suffers from (personally psychologically; the damage to others would make that percentage 100...). Cross-border on all of the by you and many more deceptive diversion tactically proposed "common features".

To state that there's a world-wide conspiracy from one of these propagandised "groups" (collections of individual humans based on nonsensical common factors) is like saying that the motive for the conspiracy is coming from such a "group".

What we see in the world, however, is a "psychopathical playground" of warfare and politics, media hoaxes and antiscientific lies, spread as info, disinfo, contra-info, misinfo, non-info and whatever other method these psychopaths share. Psychopaths everywhere, from all kinds of backgrounds, religions, countries, social classes and families.

The only reason why a topic like this should be anywhere outside of the "musings category" (people know which topics I see fitting there), is if jumpy could make a strong evidence-based case that:

1 - psychopathy and similar psychological handicaps are devastigingly more abundant amongst "Jews" (1: Judaists?, 2: Jews "by birth" (from a Jewish mother), 3: non-Jews according to "Jewish maternal laws" but ancestors of Jewish "blood"?, 4: "Khazarian-type"/Fake Jews who claim to be genealogically related to the "Jewish bloodline" -if that even exists-?) to have a statistical causal-relation case between "Jewry" and conspiracies/psycho behaviour.
2 - clear and rational arguments confirm that these conspiracies can be called "Jewish"; that they are coming from/based in a specific culture, religion or set of "rules" that can only be found amongst "Jews" (from each of one of the 4 "groups" mentioned before).

If this "Conspiracy" or "Hiding" were really to be "in Plain Sight" and "A Very Open" one (note all the capitalised letters in the title chosen by jumpy :rolleyes: -no capital there- ), it would be a piece of bar mitswah cake to present these arguments in a concised manner, not? :huh:

We cannot allow any form of prejudice to take over our clear rationale and focus on evidence, ...
Has it occurred to nobody that agreeing to be enemies with a group (that collects enemies as a form of twisted pleasure) is a form of strengthening the fucked up mentality within that group?


Very much agreed.

And the more one refrains from media influence and meets people from all religion, race, colour, and zillion other non-rational common denominators, the more one sees how much humanity is alike and that the split is not within those groups but between moral, self-reflecting, remorseful, sincere individual Homo sapiens and the lying, manipulating, power-hungry, hoaxing, deceiving psychopaths who want to create, maintain and spread the irrelevant separations; divide & conquer tactics.

Selene

PS: personally I see no fit for this musings topic on Cluesforum, but you're the admin.
Selene
Member
 
Posts: 195
Joined: January 19th, 2015, 8:59 pm

Re: Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on A Very Open Conspi

Postby jumpy64 on October 2nd, 2015, 6:10 pm

Dear Hoi Polloi,

I must confess that I had to read your post a few times to understand what you meant exactly in some parts, and I'm not sure I succeded. Maybe because of personal limitations I can't seem to overcome right now, but i found your prose, usualy much more brilliant, a little convoluted here and there. I hope you won't take it as a personal offense, because it's not meant as such, it's just the honest opinion of an avid reader, and admirer, of many of your posts. Maybe it's just that your dialectic capabilities are superior to mine, also because you're using your own language and I'm not, so I can't understand certain subtleties yet.

Anyway, here I'll try to respond as clearly as I can to the observations I think I understood better. Here we go.

What is obviating about our threads that directly question the so-called "Jewish Holocaust", that openly point out the number of self-proclaimed Jews in the media and that constantly make plain our suspicion of names associated with the Jewish religions (Talmudic, Jewish atheism, etc.) and their naming conventions?


It's not my intention to obviate (I had to look this word up, I admit) anything. I know about at least one thread you mention (the one about "propaganda, censorship and media fakery"), so I wanted as little overlapping as possible. I wanted to confront the topic from a what seemed to me a more general and different perspective.

I understand the "artistry" of acting conspiratorial and whispery about something you identify as a censored topic, but on our forum I think what we could really use is something that shows faith in the mods, and more specific contentions.
Please, help us rename your thread to something less paranoid. How about "Reflections on Jewish influence" or something? Or, if you are trying to tell us "the ethnic group" you won't mention is because you don't know what it is, say that. And help us narrow it down instead of taking on the "alternative mainstream" position of setting up the "all Jews are so bad we can't talk about it" straw man.
If the name of the group is not something you have yet identified because it's hiding within the Jewish population, largely using the Jewish position, which in turn protects the conspiracy for a mutually-beneficial arrangement, that makes more sense to me. But then, it goes against your point that the conspiracy is "open".


I identify the topic in question as censored? It is a censored topic, if not the most censored one, at least in my country (but in others too), where people ended up in jail for speaking their minds about it in a critical way. But I've already said this in a previous post, so I can't understand why it doesn't sink in. And I hate to quote myself, but it seems necessary here: "if I'm being even blatantly overcautious here, it's to make the censorship that exists strikingly more evident, because I consider it a very telling anomaly in itself. It speaks more eloquently, I believe, than any more specific words I could use". I believe in what I said, and I can't but confirm it here. And of course I know that in other threads you use freely the specific terms I'm avoiding here, so I'm not saying that you censor them on Cluesforum.

So call it provocation, "artistry" (as you say), personal protection or even cowardice if you like (but everybody here understood what I'm talking about, so I'm not really protecting myself much; on the contrary, probably I've exposed myself even more, at least to criticism), but this is the way I've chosen to speak about this matter in this thread, and I've specified the reasons why. So if what I'm doing doesn't conform to this forum's standards, you can take any measure you deem necessary. You can eliminate the thread, if you want.

I'm not adding "and I don't care" because it's not true. I'd be sorry and disappointed if you did it. But I guess you can do it, either because you and Simon run this forum and have a recognized authority that I'm not questioning here (on the contrary, I think myself that your authority is totally legitimate) or because the majority of members would agree with you (as Selene and brianv are already saying while I'm writing this post).

But please, don't rename the thread, because if you did I feel it would lose its nature as I intended it. Really, I'd rather you delete the thread. I'm serious. I hope I have the authority at least to ask you this, since I "created" this thread, as you say yourself. I guess it wouldn't even be a big sacrifice for you, since you don't seem to find it very useful. It would be just ironic for me to be censored in a "conspiracy site". But mind you: I'm not looking forward to such an eventuality, nor I consider it probable. I'm just considering a "worst case scenario" to see what I'd be willing to accept. Not happily, of course, but my high esteem for you and Simon would prevent me to be a "sore loser" in any case.

As for the rest of your post, this is where you lost me a bit. We're probably on different wavelenght about certain things. It could very well be because I'm naive, misguided, or whatever you want. I'm not admitting to this, because I don't feel this way now, but maybe, I'll realize it one day, who knows. Or maybe you'll realize something too. We're all trying to grow and progress, so things can change at any moment for anyone.

But for now, after also having read Selene's last post, I must say that I don't buy into the "psychopaths" theory. Of course most people who run the world in the way we see here must be psychopaths, but this is not a psychiatric issue.

To me saying, like Selene does in her post, that the world is a "'psychopathical playground' of warfare and politics, media hoaxes and antiscientific lies, spread as info, disinfo, contra-info, misinfo, non-info and whatever other method these psychopaths share. Psychopaths everywhere, from all kinds of backgrounds, religions, countries, social classes and families" just muddles the water, creates confusion and leads nowhere. If this "psychopathical playground" theory is true, then we don't need investigators into media hoaxes and New World Order. What we need most would be a team of psychiatrists and psychologists. Is anybody here of that profession? Let's gather them quickly, what are we waiting for?

We don't even have to look any further, because Selene seems already positive about who's responsible for the current state of affairs. Like brianv too, although he prefers to blame other elusive and mysteriously generic groups like "Aristocrats, Banking Dynasties", and such. Yeah, let's tell it like it is to these bastards! After all, there's no laws against criticizing them, right?

What I was trying to do is identifying a kind of conditioning (cultural and religious) that I think could reasonably create a psychopathic mentality. And I see it as "open" because it's actually been in front of people's eyes for many, many years. I consider my attempt, however imperfect, much more constructive than chasing phantomatic entities like some seem to prefer to do here.

Really, some people here seem to me all too eager to close this thread. Could there be, even remotely, the possibility that I struck a nerve?

Please continue to improve your expression and keep going. It seems like you are onto something, but you are using our forum as a place to practice your writing rather than presenting your best efforts. Maybe, gather your thoughts, come back to us with a more focused title for your thread and also some cohesive research that fits under that title.


Thank you for your suggestion, Hoi. That's not what I feel like doing right now, but one day, who knows... I feel your good intentions towards me, anyway, and I won't blame you and Simon for anything you will decide.
Last edited by jumpy64 on October 2nd, 2015, 6:20 pm, edited 2 times in total.
jumpy64
Member
 
Posts: 288
Joined: June 27th, 2013, 1:44 pm

Re: Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on A Very Open Conspi

Postby brianv on October 2nd, 2015, 6:15 pm

Jumpy, never mind all the flowery talk! Why haven't you started a blog somewhere? Why did you bring this garbage here?
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3959
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 11:19 pm

Re: Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on A Very Open Conspi

Postby hoi.polloi on October 3rd, 2015, 12:32 am

jumpy64, I think the thing we are generally butting heads about here is your artistic use of self-censorship, which you call provocation. We don't like provocation and emotional ploys. You'll see quite simply that we do not use them so often on CluesForum unless we truly suspect we are cornering a shill or team of shills.

"if I'm being even blatantly overcautious here, it's to make the censorship that exists strikingly more evident, because I consider it a very telling anomaly in itself. It speaks more eloquently, I believe, than any more specific words I could use".


You're right that I hadn't process this. My bad. But to censor yourself and then say you are being censored (in a passive voice) really smacks of hypnotism, manipulation and deceit. The kinds of stuff we are combating. To make an accusation while claiming you aren't making one just doesn't work for me. I'm sorry.

I do mean well. If you don't mind, I won't close or move the thread but I will just rename it slightly. If you consider this an affront to your artistic reasonings, we will just have to accept we are at cross-purposes (in naming conventions only). Please reconsider your desire to have the thread deleted in that case. I truly believe it serves everyone to be open. By feigning cowardice, we endorse cowardice and that doesn't make the heart brave to talk about censored issues.

Let's just speak plainly. There is a Jewish conspiracy. Definitely. It's powerful, and it hides well, even while making brazen "accomplishments" against humanity and (I would argue) even against their own purposes. Why is this necessary for you to play hide-and-seek with? Do you have something to hide on this matter? I doubt it. Please look within yourself and ask why it is you feel the need to do this. You could just be open and plain. Don't be afraid.

If you are afraid of being questioned by intelligent people, which it seems is part of the problem here, you will definitely have issues posting at CluesForum, whose goal is to encourage intelligent discourse. Not being as direct as possible in this scenario (especially when asked about something as directly as we have) is definitely something CluesForum will continue to shun in the future. We ban people for not using their own heads, for parading some preconceived notions that haven't received adequate questioning, but you are not guilty of any of that. You may have indeed "struck a nerve" but I'm not sure it's the one you don't like to talk about. It's more like you are conflating self-attack with censorship on purpose and, no offense meant to you (nor is any so-called "racism" intended), but that seems like a very Jewish thing to do.

I agree with brianv that you should probably just start a blog or something, somehow. Especially since you seem to be confused about ideas that ask questions of your theory you aren't allowing yourself to talk about. You said yourself you are having trouble articulating what you want to say. I am sorry for that, but I am sure if you spend time on it you will be able to speak to readers more plainly. That's what we need. A blog is not an insulting suggestion; it is a great technology that many people use to develop and hone their thoughts before going on to write very powerful works on their topic(s) of choice.

Also, we should really ask ourselves which stories about people being fined or sent to jail for talking about "Holocaust" issues in an intelligent way have actually occurred. Is it possible those stories are more of the same scare tactics we see bandied about in the "war on terrorism" vein? This thread may be used, or another thread could be started about that topic. I think we have had some posts about it in the past, too, which may be found if you search for "Holocaust" in our forum.

Your answers to the challenges about many ethnicities having similar problems to Judaism/Jewishness/Zionism/Jews are not strong. If you really believe Jews are the main black hats (hey, wait, they do wear black hats!) in the world picture, you're going to have to be very convincing to all the people that have experienced and noted all the non-Jews fucking people over constantly.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5028
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Re: Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on A Very Open Conspi

Postby fbenario on October 3rd, 2015, 2:12 am

jumpy64 wrote:It would be just ironic for me to be censored in a "conspiracy site".

It should be obvious to you, and everyone else, that Cluesforum is NOT a conspiracy site.
fbenario
Member
 
Posts: 2200
Joined: October 23rd, 2009, 2:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

"Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspiracy"

Postby jumpy64 on October 3rd, 2015, 8:02 am

OK, Hoi Polloi, I'll have time to process your latest post during the weekend, since I won't have time to post anything at least in the next couple of days. I hope you guys won't miss me too much :D

As for the thread, you can do what you want with it, if you think it can be useful. And if that's the case, I'm glad to have contributed something, after all.

What bothers me about renaming it is that also the title of my first post should be changed. And in fact I see now that you've already changed it. Well, I think that title is (or I should say "was" by now) an essential part of the whole post, if not the most essential. In fact, the whole post kind of collapses if we see plainly in the title what I try to avoid saying in it. And I also think that it is the main characteristic of the conspiracy to be "very open", at least for being a conspiracy. And it's also a reference to H.G. Well's "Open Conspiracy", but I'm sure everybody here got that.

So can I at least add to the post the following statement, right after "a huge elephant in the room here":

The original title of my post is "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on a Very Open Conspiracy". It's been found inadequate by the administrators of this forum, who have changed it to what now appears above.

And then I would begin the following phrase with "By the way, I salute the many", etc.

I'm asking you to do it, please, because it seems that I don't have the option to change that post anymore. I hope you will do it.

One last thing for now: of course the suggestion of opening a blog wasn't the insulting part of the message you're referring to. Come on, you can't have missed the "garbage" part. That denoted aggressiveness and desire to offend. Not that I got offended at all. It just gave another confirmation that I "struck a nerve" in some people here.

But never mind. Thank you and have a nice weekend everybody.
jumpy64
Member
 
Posts: 288
Joined: June 27th, 2013, 1:44 pm

Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspiracy

Postby simonshack on October 3rd, 2015, 12:48 pm

hoi.polloi wrote:Also, we should really ask ourselves which stories about people being fined or sent to jail for talking about "Holocaust" issues in an intelligent way have actually occurred. Is it possible those stories are more of the same scare tactics we see bandied about in the "war on terrorism" vein?


Sorry Hoi, but you're completely missing the point here - and I will (somewhat reluctantly) respond to your appeal to "talk about" this tiresome, taboo-by-legislation issue in an intelligent way"- since you clearly have little or no grasp of the seriousness / gravity of the subject at hand. To be sure, I have no desire to enter an intellectual / internecine feud over this and, as a matter of fact, I am intervening here in the hope of defusing any such useless quarrels 'in their cradle'. However, please know that for me to even "talk about" this issue on a public website, I am possibly exposing myself (and perhaps even this forum) to undue aggravation - in one form or another, ranging from petty /unnecessary / 'random personal troubles' and all the way to - believe it or not - 5 years of imprisonment. To my best knowledge, some uncowardly folks around Europe have indeed been jailed for the 'thought crime' of simply questioning the official holocaust narrative - and credible (in my book) stories of such 'freedom-of-speech' martyrs abound. By suggesting - without a shred of evidence to back it up - that these stories may all be fake (and just part of the same scare tactics we're all familiar with), you are doing exactly what you just accused Jumpy of doing:

hoipolloi wrote:"To make an accusation while claiming you aren't making one just doesn't work for me."


Regardless - and as I said - whether these sad stories are true or not is NOT the point here. The point is the following, undeniable, disturbing and very tangible reality that (citing Wickedpedia) "Holocaust denial, the denial of the systematic genocidal killing of millions of ethnic minorities in Europe (including Jews) by Nazi Germany in the 1930s and 1940s, is illegal in 14 European nations." As it is, that figure should now be "15" - since the Italian Senate recently passed such a law - on February 11 this year (with an overwhelming majority 234 /vs/ 11 vote !!! ) - which introduces penalties ranging from one to five years of imprisonment for said "thought crimes". Please translate this Italian news item for yourself:

"Anche l'Italia avrà la sua legge contro il negazionismo. Ieri, in tempi record, la commissione Giustizia del Senato ha approvato quasi all'unanimità un emendamento che modifica l'articolo 414 del codice penale, quello riguardante l'istigazione a delinquere e l'apologia di delitto, aggiungendo appunto il reato di negazionismo, punito da uno a cinque anni di carcere."
http://www.polisblog.it/post/163659/ddl-negazionismo-accordo-al-senato-negare-lolocausto-sara-reato


Countries with laws against Holocaust denial
Image
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_agai ... denial.png


As you can see, no such unspeakably outrageous 'special' laws have been passed in the USA or the UK, so it would seem entirely inappropriate for you - from the safety of your national 'comfort zone' - to insinuate in any way or form any 'cowardice' on the part of Jumpy who, like myself and MOST European citizens, put our very personal freedoms at stake - only for expressing our thoughts on these matters on a publicly accessible website.
hoipolloi wrote:By feigning cowardice, we endorse cowardice and that doesn't make the heart brave to talk about censored issues.

I must say that I'm quite appalled / disconcerted by your 'treatment' of this good, thoughtful and particularly intelligent Italian friend of mine whom you have even met in person - ffs - here at my house. Yes, you do owe him an apology right away (in Italy, to call someone a 'codardo' - or even hint such a thing - is perhaps the most degrading of insults) - and please do not arbitrarily rename any threads submitted by entirely legit / trustworthy forum members anymore. Yup, I'm quite upset - and no, I don't expect you to feel 'hurt' by this post of mine.



*****
EDIT ! Ok, so I now re-read your post, Hoi - and realized that you were not implying any cowardice on the part of Jumpy (but only that if this thread were deleted - it could be interpreted as such). Sorry - I duly retract, my bad!
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6528
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on A Very Open Conspiracy

Postby simonshack on October 3rd, 2015, 4:25 pm

omaxsteve wrote:Here is an interesting, albeit long. article written by a Muslim ....

By: Dr Farrukh Saleem

Why are Jews so powerful?

(............bla...................
..............bla...............
..............bla...............
..............bla...............)


So, why are Muslims so powerless?
Answer: Lack of education.

All we do is shout to Allah the whole day !!! and blame everyone else for our multiple failures!!!!!


Omaxsteve,

Just in what way, if you please, is that article 'interesting' - or relevant to the present discussion? :wacko:

Oh wait - I take it that the 'lesson' you're proposing here is that education is the key to becoming powerful? And that if 'uneducated people' are powerless - it is just due to their 'inferior education'? And that if (so many) Jews are rich & powerful - it is simply to be ascribed to their 'superior education' ? Good grief.

Excuse me, but just because that pathetic piece is authored by a Muslim writer doesn't make it sound any less crass than your average, shallow and condescending imperialist 'think tank' twaddle - as might just as well have been put together by your typical, gloating Jewish supremacist. So let's see who this Farrukh Saleem guy is - and what he's up to.


Image
"Dr. Farrukh Saleem is the Pakistani Executive Director of the Center for Research and Security Studies, a think tank established in 2007, and an Islamabad-based freelance columnist - [ cum-economic theorist, financial analyst writer, and television personality]."
http://www.aish.com/authors/111846219.html

"The Center for Research and Security Studies (CRSS) is a Pakistani independent non-profit think tank founded by civil society activists to conduct research and advocacy on democratic governance, regional peace and security, human rights, and counter-radicalization. The head of the think tank is Imtiaz Gul, a strategic analyst, writer, and journalist. Besides writing for national and international magazines, he is the author of books such as The Unholy Nexus: Afghan-Pakistan Relations under the Taliban Militia, The Al-Qaeda Connection, The Most Dangerous Place, and Pakistan: Before and After Osama bin Laden."

"Saleem extensively writes on Jewish people, Israel and its geopolitical policies. In his recent article, Saleem advocated for directing a friendly-foreign policy for Israel. In his notable article, "Why are Jews so powerful and Muslims so powerless?", Saleem argues that, for every single Jew in the world there are 100 Muslims. Yet, Jews are more than a hundred times more powerful than all the Muslims put together. Concluding the article, Saleem pointed out that, the Muslim world is failing to diffuse knowledge".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farrukh_Saleem


Aha! So it is KNOWLEDGE - and not EDUCATION - that's the real problem here. Well, come to think of it, our Farrukh "think tanker" guy may actually have a great point after all: just imagine what would happen if the entire Muslim world were properly informed with the knowledge we have gathered over the years on this very forum. See, something tells me that the folks controlling the world's media outlets are working very, very hard to keep this knowledge from reaching the Muslim world.
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6528
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby hoi.polloi on October 3rd, 2015, 5:40 pm

simonshack wrote:
hoi.polloi wrote:Also, we should really ask ourselves which stories about people being fined or sent to jail for talking about "Holocaust" issues in an intelligent way have actually occurred. Is it possible those stories are more of the same scare tactics we see bandied about in the "war on terrorism" vein?


Sorry Hoi, but you're completely missing the point here


Sorry Simon. I didn't know you felt so strongly about it until now. Literally every other time we've talked about, we talked about it calmly and peaceably. We even speculated together that some of the more famous stories may have been faked. I guess you forgot that.

I trust you and your friends definitely feel threatened by such horrible laws, and I would not want to be in your place, that's for sure!

To my best knowledge, some uncowardly folks around Europe have indeed been jailed for the 'thought crime' of simply questioning the official holocaust narrative - and credible (in my book) stories of such 'freedom-of-speech' martyrs abound.


No offense meant at all, and I trust your judgment, but if you don't mind, let's post some credible stories about it, then? Isn't that consistent with the site? Being an ignorant American who visited Europe several times, I never once heard or saw a story in the news about someone going to jail for "antisemitism" or holocaust denial.

By suggesting - without a shred of evidence to back it up - that these stories may all be fake (and just part of the same scare tactics we're all familiar with), you are doing exactly what you just accused Jumpy of doing:

hoipolloi wrote:"To make an accusation while claiming you aren't making one just doesn't work for me."


I don't think it's the same thing. I really am standing by my stance that all the stories could be fake but I am just asking the question. I don't know. If you say they aren't all fake that's fine, that's your prerogative and it shows the double standard on our forum that many have accused us of. But if you read me as hiding my opinion, you're wrong. Sorry.

Regardless - and as I said - whether these sad stories are true or not is NOT the point here.


Well then why get so upset with me about it? :lol:

"Anche l'Italia avrà la sua legge contro il negazionismo. Ieri, in tempi record, la commissione Giustizia del Senato ha approvato quasi all'unanimità un emendamento che modifica l'articolo 414 del codice penale, quello riguardante l'istigazione a delinquere e l'apologia di delitto, aggiungendo appunto il reato di negazionismo, punito da uno a cinque anni di carcere."
http://www.polisblog.it/post/163659/ddl-negazionismo-accordo-al-senato-negare-lolocausto-sara-reato


Well, that's certainly disturbing. Someone said at the bottom of that article that the "crime of opinion" is nearer to reality with the passing of such laws. It reminds me of "crimethink" from 1984.

... to insinuate in any way or form any 'cowardice' on the part of Jumpy who, like myself and MOST European citizens, put our very personal freedoms at stake - only for expressing our thoughts on these matters on a publicly accessible website.
hoipolloi wrote:By feigning cowardice, we endorse cowardice and that doesn't make the heart brave to talk about censored issues.

I must say that I'm quite appalled / disconcerted by your 'treatment' of this good, thoughtful and particularly intelligent Italian friend of mine whom you have even met in person - ffs - here at my house.


Sorry to you and your friend Simon. Gianpiero is a cool dude for sure. But do you know the meaning of the word "feign"? :P

Jumpy64 said this:
So call it provocation, "artistry" (as you say), personal protection or even cowardice if you like (but everybody here understood what I'm talking about, so I'm not really protecting myself much; on the contrary, probably I've exposed myself even more, at least to criticism)


What does this mean? How do you read this? I'll tell you how I read it. I read it to say, "You may call me all sorts of names that you did not in fact call me but everyone knows what I mean."

He basically invited and instructed us to call him a coward, while also basically admitting nobody called him that. But I don't think he is one, which is why I would say I rather think he's a really cool guy who is writing on a difficult sensitive topic; so I wrote: "By feigning cowardice, we endorse cowardice." What does that mean? It means I am saying jumpy64 has a brave heart and he doesn't need to make other people afraid. He was pretending (feigning) to be afraid of this issue solely as a point of the argument he just used that he won't suffer name calling. I didn't call him the name you think.

If you disagree, and you think he is afraid, you owe your friend an apology yourself!

Anyway, I understand why it makes you upset. It's a really horrible series of laws. I just feel as though your "offense" came out of nowhere and was read in haste. Don't be so "jumpy" man! B)

You changed the topic back from "Jewish Conspiracy" which this topic is about even though our forum is chock full of things that paranoid customers will call "antisemitic" remarks. So, really no offense meant to your sensibilities, but what's the point of doing the same thing as jumpy64?

If people search "Jewish conspiracy" they will get to this thread anyway. I don't understand what you think you are hiding by not calling it what it is. And mark me, I am not calling you a coward. I just don't understand your logic.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5028
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby simonshack on October 3rd, 2015, 6:11 pm

All well, Hoi - I now realize that I misread a few lines of yours and have duly retracted my request for apologies (see my EDIT of my post on previous page).

I thank you for clearing it up. Only one thing: I don't think it is right for us administrators to change the titles of any threads submitted here (unless they are grossly misleading / wrong / misspelled) - especially since Jumpy expressly asked you not to do so. That's all.

hoi.polloi wrote: Don't be so "jumpy" man! B)

That was actually quite funny ! :lol:
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6528
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby hoi.polloi on October 3rd, 2015, 6:32 pm

Okay, I get it. Well, I like the "quotes" — it personalizes the writing, since it really is jumpy64's thread.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5028
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby jumpy64 on October 5th, 2015, 1:57 pm

Some twists have stirred up this thread over the weekend. I just want to say that I’m glad to see that this forum is administered by two brilliant and independent thinkers who deeply respect each other even in disagreements, and I’m thankful to both for the good things they said about me.

I’ll try and live up to their esteem, although I certainly can’t compare to them, and to many others here, as a researcher, both because I admit to being not very experienced yet, and because I tend to form my opinions starting more from intuition than from meticulous research.

In fact, this thread arose from an intuitive feeling, but I’m trying to back it up with some findings that I consider revealing or at least interesting. And of course, being this forum a collaborative effort, I’m also counting on the help of everybody here who’s interested in exploring the subject.

As a start, I’ve already mentioned a couple of times (here and on the Miles Mathis thread) the violent, traumatic and dangerous nature of a ritual CIRCUMCISION, in which an eight days old male baby has his foreskin cut without a medical anesthetic by a circumciser (Mohel) with bare, ungloved (and who knows if really clean or disinfected) hands, who then proceeds to suck some blood from the desperately screaming baby’s intimate parts.

On Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brit_milah - they call it Metzitzah (orMetzizah B’peh).

So far I’ve found only an explicit (and pretty graphic) video of a ritual circumcision in the Judaic tradition. Unfortunately it doesn’t stand by itself, but it’s contained - from minute 18,50 to minute 25 - in this controversial and very long (almost 4 hours) video, which you can’t even access in some parts of the world (including Italy):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHfUUage4eQ

I’m not endorsing the whole video here, although I think it contains several interesting parts. I’m just suggesting that you watch the circumcision scene, which is also accompanied, for the most part, by the pretty angry comments of a famous chess player, the late Bobby Fisher, a former world champion who, maybe partly Jewish (there, I said it, at last! :o ) himself, ended up being considered anti-semitic and had to seek asylum in Iceland.

Since I’ve just used another charged word, allow me a brief digression here. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary online, the word “Semitism” means “policy or predisposition favorable to Jews”. In this sense, the word anti-semitism should indicate just the position of somebody who doesn’t think that people from a certain ethnic group should be favored at the expense of others. It doesn’t mean that they should be disfavored either; it denotes only a neutral attitude that considers them neither more nor less important than other races or religions. So it should be a perfectly legitimate and even favorable attribute, instead of being used as one of the worst stigmas in contemporary society. And it’s also interesting to note that in Italian we don’t even have the positive word “semitismo” in the most famous dictionaries. We’re allowed to know only its negative counterpart “antisemitismo”. So we can't even know what the word exactly means!

Back to the main subject of this post, of course there are examples of ritual circumcision also in other cultures and religions (like the Islamic faith, for example) in Africa, in Asia, in the Middle East and even in aboriginal Australia. But in all these cases it tends to be practiced more during puberty, if not in adulthood.

And in any case, genital mutilation at an early age is considered a violation of the human rights of children in the West. UNICEF, for example, strongly condemns it when it’s done to girls with practices like infibulations, but adopts a totally different standard when dealing with the circumcision of males, saying that
“While strongly opposing female circumcision, called genital mutilation in this case, UNICEF advocates medical male circumcision as beneficial for the prevention of HIV. Circumcising infant boys is a relatively straightforward procedure and if properly carried out, complications are very rare. However, infant circumcision on reducing the HIV risk will only pay off when the boy has grown up and starts to become sexually active. However, given the enormous challenges of HIV prevention and the uncertainty that better prevention measures, such as a vaccine, will be available some time in foreseeable future, public health experts consider that the introduction of widespread medical male circumcision for infants would be a good investment in African countries with high HIV-prevalence”.

So it doesn’t represent a “good investment” in modern, industrial societies! Not for UNICEF, and so even much less for those who, like us, suspect AIDS being at least partly a hoax. And anyway, only “medical male circumcision” is mentioned here.

Nevertheless, Jacqueline Smith, writing for the Netherlands Institute of Human Rights, reported that male circumcision is an obvious violation of the human rights of the child, equivalent to female circumcision (Male Circumcision and the Rights of the Child. In: Mielle Bulterman, Aart Hendriks and Jacqueline Smith (Eds.), To Baehr in Our Minds: Essays in Human Rights from the Heart of the Netherlands (SIM Special No. 21). Netherlands Institute of Human Rights (SIM), University of Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands, 1998: pp. 465–498. http://www.cirp.org/library/legal/smith/ ).

Therefore it can be said that although ritual, religious circumcision is not approved in our western society, it is not openly criticized when it comes to its Jewish version. And I wonder why, since it seems to me definitely a barbaric practice (or better a form of infant torture) that is either "just" traumatizing for the child if everything goes well, or even very dangerous in case something goes wrong. Although I couldn’t find exact and dependable statistics on this, many cases are reported of genital herpes, sepsis and other forms of infection, and there are even cases in which the child remains badly mutilated (in fact, there’s even the appalling case of David Reimer who, having had his penis accidentally destroyed in a “botched circumcision” as an infant, underwent a sex-reassignment operation and eventually committed suicide in adulthood).

So I wonder why there’s so much reluctance in speaking about against this particular practice, and also a tendency to mix it with its medical, cleaner version, whose beneficial qualities I even suspect being exaggerated to further confuse the issue.
jumpy64
Member
 
Posts: 288
Joined: June 27th, 2013, 1:44 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby Flabbergasted on October 5th, 2015, 4:09 pm

jumpy64 wrote:"Circumcising infant boys is a relatively straightforward procedure and if properly carried out, complications are very rare [UNICEF]."

No surprise the UNICEF/WHO is whitewashing circumcision.

To properly address this topic requires an understanding of what rituals and sacraments are, in Judaism and elsewhere, why they exist and what they effect (or do not effect).

The only point I want to make here is that, despite lack of personal experience in this regard, it may be safely affirmed that circumcision causes a significant loss of sensitivity in the glans (which has to be made up for some other way).

The foreskin also acts as a mechanical lubricant during sex. The penis is not designed to slide in and out of a woman, but in and out of its own skin during sex. Without a foreskin, a man has to build friction to feel pleasure.
- David Richards (on Makow).
Flabbergasted
Member
 
Posts: 725
Joined: November 12th, 2012, 1:19 am

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby hoi.polloi on October 5th, 2015, 4:31 pm

Yes, Flabbergasted. Thank you for bringing it back on topic. The psychological effects of circumcision and how it ties to media fakery must be discussed if we are going to not just make a hate thread. I have heard arguments that it increases pleasure but I would have no idea until I do more research on it.

Female genital mutilation, from the perspective of numerous non-males in my culture (who don't necessarily do as intensive research as we do), is a more horrendous practice because it is done specifically to rob those people of sexual pleasure and control them. I highly suggest not comparing the two practices very casually, or if doing so, finding females and/or non-males who have experienced it, to ask of their experiences. Then, find mutilated males and ask them their experience. I think you may find some key differences. Just a suggestion, and not to get even more off topic than this thread already is.

Thank you for the compliments jumpy64. I appreciate you doing more solid research, but I am still confused about why we have a thread with a particular attack against the bad practices of Judaism, but not those of other equally stupid religions. Shall we start threads which expose the disgusting practices of every religion the world over? There are tons of human rights violations the world over, but when you focus on one belief system, you start to sound like the perps that constantly talk about the various human rights violations of Muslim people. "Cast not the first stone" and all that, no?

Is this a thread about a conspiracy, or is it a thread about a religion? Please focus on how these problems relate to media fakery.

Also, are you sure your "intuition" isn't just some kind of prejudice that you are using CluesForum as a platform for? You sound to me a bit like one of two things:

1. Someone very suppressed on a topic due to scary (and perfectly horrible) laws that ban rightful criticism of Jews, therefore feeling the need to make your voice heard somewhere.

or, what I really do not want to believe you are, but which you sound like

2. Many perfectly nice people who have a deep mistrust or hate of some cultures, which they call an "intuition" rather than a simple prejudice

I gather it may be suggested once more that it's wrong of me to say this because I don't live in Europe. Well, I'm sorry but I do come from a different culture. Perhaps, arguably, a more tolerant one, for better or worse.

I really like your discussion of antisemitism. I can now, thanks to you, proudly call myself a non-semite since I certainly don't condone favoring one person type over another as a rule. I am not sure I would go so far as you in saying the word "anti-semite" is a valid word for those that wish to treat everyone equally or at least equitably. To me it seems as though "anti-semite" is specifically a hate word used by Jews against everyone else. And unfortunately, many cultures have picked up on this and now use it on each other and themselves. I would say it is a hate word and I will not label myself a hate word easily.

Anyway, good research for some sort of anti-Jew blog, but please remember to tie it in to the subject of the forum rather than simply targeting a religion you dislike. Otherwise, we start to look a bit "David Icke"-ian or "God Like Productions"-esque.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5028
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Postby brianv on October 5th, 2015, 4:49 pm

"Circumcision" is, of course, unheard of in the jeziz zombie religion. Get your own house in order jumpy!
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3959
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 11:19 pm

PreviousNext

Return to THE LIVING ROOM

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests