THE DERAILING ROOM

A place to relax and socialize - to muse, think aloud and suggest
Post Reply
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

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

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Thu Oct 08, 2015 8:07 pm

I would appreciate if everyone could read what I write without assuming an ulterior motive right away. Especially people who have come to understand over the years that I am a pensive person, a caring person (if overly careful sometimes) and I have a sense of humor. Please do not take anything personally, nor take this as an attempt at steering the conversation. These are simply my natural thoughts about this topic after giving it some thought these last few days of (slightly stressful but largely beautiful) cross-America travel that I am undertaking now.

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:
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?
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.

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.)
:P

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 6999
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

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

Unread post by simonshack » Thu Oct 08, 2015 8:35 pm

hoi.polloi wrote: Never before in person did Simon express worry to me about himself or friends being arrested or jailed or any sort of threat.
Well, that's just because I'm such a cool and relaxed guy, Hoi. :P

Seriously now, I hope that the utter crassness of the laws made by the JPM's in Europe - in order to quell / silence / suppress any discussions about the Oh-locust - will be evident to all Cluesforum readers. These laws EXIST - they are not fictitious - and they are the most outrageous "thought-crime" laws ever stipulated in the history of humanity. Not even George Orwell went so far as to prefigure them. I have very little patience with those who talk their way around the very EXISTENCE of these laws - clearly meant to shove into a corner intelligent / critical-thinking people.

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

And yes, Italy (where I live) has recently (February 11 of this year) also passed such "thought crime" laws.

jumpy64
Banned
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 12:44 pm

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

Unread post by jumpy64 » Thu Oct 08, 2015 8:58 pm

I admit I always need some time to assimilate Hoi's extremely articulate posts. But one sentence struck me right away in his latest dialectical effort.

"I think many Jews are simply comfortable rather than evil plotters."

I totally agree with this ingeniously enlightening statement!

I disagree, instead, with the invitation to other members to "step aside" and let my "genius" provide for all the necessary research, because I've already stated that I don't think that initiating a thread implies a duty to do most or even all the research. When I started this thread I thought this was going to be a collaborative effort (and in fact it has been so far, especially lately, with very interesting contributions from several fellow members), as any other thread I see in this forum.

For example, Hoi himself initiated a thread on Miles Mathis, and then posted very little (if anything) in it, leaving just a cue for whoever was interested in developing it. I have contributed several posts myself in that thread, and with pleasure, because it interested me a lot. It never crossed my mind to "step aside" and "make way" for anybody else's (and especially the "initiator"'s) "serious research".

So I don't understand why anybody here would want to stifle other members' contributions, instead of encouraging them.

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

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

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:06 pm

jumpy64 wrote:So I don't understand why anybody here would want to stifle other members' contributions, instead of encouraging them.
I don't understand why every time I suggest something positive, you spin it into a negative suggestion, allegation or insult of your own invention. It's an amazing skill we have together. I was trying to sarcastically refer to my own "being in the way" in the beginning of the thread, and my own obstinate needs in having people understand everything that's going on. I guess I am not sure what else to say to you after multiple pleas for others to not misinterpret me in a negative way. Perhaps I should add that you in particular should please try to make a special effort to interpret me in an at least neutral way, which I have been doing for you since we met.

simonshack wrote:
hoi.polloi wrote: Never before in person did Simon express worry to me about himself or friends being arrested or jailed or any sort of threat.
Well, that's just because I'm such a cool and relaxed guy, Hoi. :P

Seriously now, I hope that the utter crassness of the laws made by the JPM's in Europe - in order to quell / silence / suppress any discussions about the Oh-locust - will be evident to all Cluesforum readers. These laws EXIST - they are not fictitious - and they are the most outrageous "thought-crime" laws ever stipulated in the history of humanity. Not even George Orwell went so far as to prefigure them. I have very little patience with those who talk their way around the very EXISTENCE of these laws - clearly meant to shove into a corner intelligent people.

Countries with laws against Holocaust denial
Image
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_agai ... denial.png
They are awful, but if I recall correctly, I am the one who brought up the question to you a number of times and you acted so cool about it, I only assumed it was not an issue for you. I really had no idea they could cause trouble; it's horrible and backwards to have such laws anywhere. You have to forgive me for just not knowing and for — by default — therefore wanting the usual CluesForum standard of citation. I don't need it, I believe you, but just a hopefully understandable excuse for my behavior in this thread.

Moving on to the topic at hand, haven't we already established many times over that Jews clearly benefit from this law the most? And if so, shouldn't we be asking ourselves how the multiple non-Jew powers in the world decided to give this sick European power to them? Are we to believe that the Power Maniacs of the world are all simply "fooled" by the Holo-hoax? It seems to me to be some sort of trade deal, and each PM group has its agreed-upon place in a push-pull for greater control.

Selene
Banned
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:59 pm

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

Unread post by Selene » Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:11 pm

Whooo... calling a "Jewish conspiracy" is one thing, but "Holo-hoax"?? You imply to claim that "nobody got killed" (cf. 9/11) in the Holocaust??!

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

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

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:15 pm

Selene wrote:Whooo... calling a "Jewish conspiracy" is one thing, but "Holo-hoax"?? You imply to claim that "nobody got killed" (cf. 9/11) in the Holocaust??!
I was definitely not aware that "Holo-hoax" refers specifically to the notion that no Jews died in World War II. Are you making that connection? I definitely wasn't trying to.

What is a better term, then, to allow us to question the whole thing up and down? "Unknown-caust"? I don't believe the Jewish Holocaust (which always vies in academia for privileged use of a special understanding of a genocide more important than other genocides) is above questioning, but I don't think we need to turn this thread into that topic. Simon specifically mentioned his wariness about that just now, for the umpteenth time. If you please, we have a thread for that already: http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=1079

Selene
Banned
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:59 pm

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

Unread post by Selene » Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:22 pm

It may be me, but "Hoax" after "Holo-" hints to a... hoax, right? So to a story that isn't true?

There are a lot of fakery points made in the holocaust thread I read on the forum, but no mentioning of "it didn't happen". That's a bridge farther, I'd say.

If the holocaust were to be a hoax, all victims would be either still alive in/after WWII or never existed. When it's direct ancestors of living people, that idea becomes a bit problematic...

Holopropaganda may be a good word? Or anything that doesn't involve a (100%) hoax, that would spoil the vast research here before that claim is made...

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 6999
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

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

Unread post by simonshack » Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:24 pm

Selene wrote:Whooo... calling a "Jewish conspiracy" is one thing, but "Holo-hoax"?? You imply to claim that "nobody got killed" (cf. 9/11) in the Holocaust??!
Selene,

Nobody? No. Six million?

Over to you.

jumpy64
Banned
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 12:44 pm

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

Unread post by jumpy64 » Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:27 pm

hoi.polloi wrote:I don't understand why every time I suggest something positive, you spin it into a negative suggestion, allegation or insult of your own invention. It's an amazing skill we have together. I was trying to sarcastically refer to my own "being in the way" in the beginning of the thread, and my own obstinate needs in having people understand everything that's going on. I guess I am not sure what else to say to you after multiple pleas for others to not misinterpret me in a negative way. Perhaps I should add that you in particular should please try to make a special effort to interpret me in an at least neutral way, which I have been doing for you since we met.
I think I'm doing the same thing. In fact, in your previous post, you just recognized my patience. It's just that sometimes you seem maybe a little too interested in testing its limits... :P Seriously, I'm sorry if I misunderstood you. Won't happen again (I hope!).

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: The Holocaust: propaganda, censorship and media fakery

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:28 pm

Selene, I just asked you to move the discussion here. Since you could not do that, I am manually doing it for us.

To answer your musings, you — so far — are the only one suggesting "nobody died" in the Holocaust.

A hoax can also be used to cover up real events, and in the case of fbenario's figure of fewer than 400,000 for a Jewish death toll, the 6-million invention on top of that could easily be described as a hoax.

Hoax
1. something intended to deceive or defraud
-http://dictionary.com
A deliberately fabricated falsehood made to masquerade as truth.
-http://hoaxipedia.com

If you prefer "scam" or something else, suggest a better term rather than accusing me of derailing while you start unnecessary controversies.

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

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

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:33 pm

I am sorry if I misunderstand you, too. Or anyone for that matter. Misunderstanding is one of my greatest fears, which is why it might cloud my own thinking when trying to clear it up. I hope we can see eye to eye on this tendency of ours. I don't intend to test your patience. Be well.

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 6999
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

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

Unread post by simonshack » Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:35 pm

hoi.polloi wrote: I think many Jews are simply comfortable rather than evil plotters.
Yup. Agreed. Some are both though.

Selene
Banned
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:59 pm

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

Unread post by Selene » Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:35 pm

simonshack wrote:
Selene wrote:Whooo... calling a "Jewish conspiracy" is one thing, but "Holo-hoax"?? You imply to claim that "nobody got killed" (cf. 9/11) in the Holocaust??!
Selene,

Nobody? No. Six million?

Over to you.
I have never claimed "6 million".

89 % of my Jewish family has been wiped out, according to the historical documents in Auschwitz and Sobibor. Would you say that those people didn't die or never existed? They attribute to the numbers, being 6 million or any other figure...

Hoi, I didn't see a message to discuss this point here, thanks for moving.

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: The Holocaust: propaganda, censorship and media fakery

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:38 pm

With all due and earnest respect, did you know these people that existed before they became statistics? I would like to go about asking questions of Jewish families in a respectful way and I mean no offense. However, this does seem to be an important part of the story. Gravestones. Books. Anything else that stands out to you as proof?

jumpy64
Banned
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 12:44 pm

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

Unread post by jumpy64 » Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:42 pm

hoi.polloi wrote:I am sorry if I misunderstand you, too. Or anyone for that matter. Misunderstanding is one of my greatest fears, which is why it might cloud my own thinking when trying to clear it up. I hope we can see eye to eye on this tendency of ours. I don't intend to test your patience. Be well.
Thank you, Hoi. You too. And please, always remember that I greatly admire and respect you. You'd be my hero even if the "Vicsims Report" were the only thing you ever did. And of course it ins't, so can you imagine?

I hope you will feel inspired soon to enrich this thread with your masterful research, maybe on crucial subjects you just hinted at in a previous post, like Jewish Mafia and Jewish role in the exploitation of slavery.

Post Reply