My only "complaint" with the thread has nothing to do with a desire to see the research stop in any direction. Go go go. The problem to me is still the inarticulateness. Where multiple interpretations seem to baffle Simon and jumpy64, to me it seems all too clear that — from the outset — their desire to make the topic more vague has led to miscommunication problems that could be averted if my moderation advice were adhered to. Normally, we ask people to be very clear. All of a sudden, it seemed as though a shifty and deliberate lack of clarity was the new strategy. I am on board to help humanity win over misconceptions, but I like to understand why these shifts may suddenly happen. It was explained to me as a kind of fear but my plea to not fear and just continue posting fearlessly, as we usually do, seems to have been seen — through the lens of fear — as a dismissal of some problem worthy of fearing.
With no addressing of that topic, I tried to move on to the miscommunication issue that this reticence seemed to develop. That is, if something could be interpreted multiple ways, it is best to describe as immediately as possible what ways you did not intend to mean something. This will make the topic more effective at getting people on board. Also, it was strange to me that there seemed to be a switch-er-oo happening between reticence to communicate well and abuse of miscommunication to gather support where better arguments would serve better.
For example, when jumpy64 just writes:
I would question it in the sense that "JPM values" may be interpreted to mean at least either that JPM values are communistic and hopeful for all people or that Bolshevism is the same. In my understandings, Bolshevism and JPM values are not the same. Indeed, Bolshevism is only one horrible scam of many "intellectual products" sold by the JPM to the other power-mad of the world, who happily use a variety of products (of their own invention or not) on their population in order to destabilize and control them.Does anybody here question the fact that Bolshevism was mainly, if not totally, the product of JPMs' values put into practice on a grand scale?
That is to say, JPMs also may not actually believe what they preach. Bolshevism should be defined. And so on. So to be more clear, when starting statements that begin, "Would anybody question ... ?" or "Surely you will not deny that ... " do not finish on multiple interpretations unless you really are trying to rope in as many interpretations as possible and account for them with patient explanation. In that case, I find it a bit like pre-populating an argument based on the arguments' abilities to be interpreted multiple positive ways and then getting mad and virtually 'head slapping' when people suggest that just one of the ways may actually be really quite wrong.
On the other hand, of course writers cannot be expected to know all the ways they can be misinterpreted. That is unfair. Only, know it's possible. I think snits on the forums are often a language and communications issue. That's all. I didn't question anyone's motive in making or contributing to this topic, and I was disappointed to find that I did not receive the same courtesy. I was instead accused of being disingenuous almost immediately, even though I simply exercised a power that normally had not been challenged. I guess I overstepped my bounds at last, but it was a surprising way to find out!
This makes the topic and the arguments look like they are not self-aware of how they will be interpreted by intelligent persons who are native English speakers, or who have more "American" experiences with so-called "hate" topics that may not actually be such.
My only recommendation has been to try to make users of all skill levels more aware of their own fear, their emotional reaction to questions about how an argument is built, the method of questioning and so on. I just think that everything you say in Religious topics, where things that can be seen as "hate" speech (intentional or not!) really is a thing that happens between different cultures, must come with the notion that distrust and dislike of one another is a human issue we won't solve by presuming evil from the start. Understanding is called for, even in cases of what we deem Psychopaths. And my attempt at that (in the "cycle of abuse" thread) was to introduce us to the idea that while we should not be afraid of discussing things, we must also not act as though we are as morally weak as those we are criticizing. Please, again, please, do not take offense and do not immediately interpret what I'm saying as an accusation.
I am perfectly familiar with and utterly sick of twisted groups like the ACLU crying wolf where a simple discussion of difficult topics is being had. Simon just about nailed it when he pleaded, 'Is this what religion does to people?'
Yes. Yes, it really does. And the first thing we must all admit is that we have biases that can be construed as just as irrational as those we find in Religion. If we don't admit this, we are essentially comparable to zealots of some kind or another that cannot accept the idea that humans are both rational and irrational beings.
There, now that that is out of the way. Please let me continue on topic unless Simon protests and wishes to put this in the "Derailing Room" for trying to contain too much of my own intuition rather than merely those of him and his friend.
There is a problem with the subtleness of the title — this conspiracy doesn't seem very "open" at all. It seems as nuanced and subversive as conspiracies are usually assumed to be. Perhaps the "open"-ness (in quotes) is a direct reference to the irony in the way we are not meant by the JPMs to recognize the sick and twisted core of a power-tripping world-famous cult like Judaism (excuse me for comparing Religions to cults, since the former is possibly far more distressing and troubling to humankind). We are meant to see it as an "open and shut" case straw man — The Jews — while its true devious core goes free. Since we see through this, and we title the thread sarcastically, borrowing their own "open" term (a sense of humor I clearly share since my own user handle is a term from the Greek inventors of contemporary and highly problematic Statism — more on that topic, soon, when I have a chance) the problem is a bit moot once you dive into the topic. However, it will still be lost on most people, I think, and I really would like everyone to understand what we are talking about.
Unlike how I have been unfairly characterized as someone who has a "gut distrust" of the thread, I have only been surprised that Simon and his friend acted as though I do. This, especially, was confusing to me after the last warm farewell I shared with Simon as he dropped me off on a train home and I sorrowfully but optimistically bade him good-bye. The next thing I knew, my normal moderation habits (as aggressive as I know them to be) were being targeted, I am told, because of a deep and unfamiliar distrust of me or my intentions or something about me I didn't get, which I had not ever encountered in Simon before. Never before in person did Simon express worry to me about himself or friends being arrested or jailed or any sort of threat. Yet, here comes jumpy64 seeming to pretend to be afraid about the topic and seeming to make Simon defend that fear or wanting to inspire it in others.
I have witnessed over many years of research that fear binds us most especially to confirmation bias because we are not acknowledging the root cause of our so-called distrust of something. Am I being clear or obtuse here? I really hope I am making sense to people.
Missing from this conversation, to me, is still the way in which the JPM offers its power to various criminal cabals. Not to share too much about myself, but I felt more comfortable critiquing Christianity because I have had a somewhat holistic picture of a "White" "American" "Christian" life and I've been able to compare it to a more ritualistic "Catholic" life, an atheistic "Jewish" life and the lives of ethnicities of people I am close to — as well as directly witness the attitudes of pedophiles with power as they go about their normal practices, perfectly respected (nigh followed) in various Religious communities despite the juxtaposition of their words to their behaviors. Jewish, Catholic and Muslim practices I have only come to understand through asking Catholics, Jews and Muslims I know (and who are dear to me) about the details of their lives. Again and again, I have come across similar frustrations in their cultures with the Power Maniacs who sit at the core of a conspiracy/Religion they benefit from, even though they'd rather not receive any such tainted "benefits". That's why I keep coming back to this thought about the meaning of "pacifism" and how we define evils in our society without looking at the whole web of what "good thing" benefits what "bad thing" and vice versa. I live in America, which is arguably the heart of a twisted and evil empire, and I live in peace because I live in a complex of communities (cities, States, super-States, neighborhoods, professional circles, etc.) that have had little choice in going along with the evil empire's ambitions.
I would encourage omaxsteve, as much as he can stomach it, to stop processing this topic as an attack on a broad description of world views that fall under "Jewish" and instead help us by using his connections within Jewish circles to try to discover any truth to what jump64 is concerned about. If omaxsteve is too far "outside" the seriously religious Jewish community (or Jewish mafias of various world cities, or Hasidic zealots, or whatever) to delve deeper, then it would be useful to know.
It would be nice if we could 'fish out' more Jews with experience in the Jewish community, so that we could use their expertise in discerning JPM tendencies from JPM leadership. I suspect many Jews are in Hollywood because the JPM have hopes to convert Jews to their particular "inner circle" rather than others. I think many Jews are simply comfortable rather than evil plotters. I also am skeptical of the notion that the JPM is the only Power Mad group with experience in psychologically manipulating themselves and others with ritual abuse, tricks, "magic" and so on. And I also suspect non-Jews who show interest in the Power-Mad "Nutwork" are referred to other non-JPM inner circles so that they can become a part of the core technofascist cult: "invited" by a Mason, children slipping out of responsible care for crucial moments of abuse/trauma/hypnosis and so on.
Those are my thoughts. Now, since jumpy64 is acting very patient with everyone misunderstanding him (including myself at the beginning, though I don't think I can be entirely blamed, for reasons explained in this post) I think we should step aside and make way for the serious research that his genius may lead to. We may discover just why Jews often openly boast about their involvement in sinister hypnotic skills above those of others. Simon claims it is obvious. I am more inclined to go with jumpy64's assessment that if a killer claims to have done the crime, you definitely don't dismiss it and indeed it's the first place we should all look.
I would just like the results of the investigation to be very convincing indeed. And in the meanwhile, I will continue to look in other places rather than what I suspect may be a hang up on one small piece. (Pun absolutely intended.)