Are we as a society being kept from discussing the big issues?

[54192&#cmy]

[video=youtube;VZZvPlGCt_8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZZvPlGCt_8[/video]
His speech...

 

[54192&#cmy]

1400 views of this thread...

 

[Barnabas]

Two things in this thread really caught my attention.

1) Most of the people who have any sort of complaints against Muir seem to be based around the fact the he post large amounts of information in threads potentially derailing them. The same people with this complaint proceeded to derail Muir's thread.

2) I don't really know anything about Muir as a individual

So [MENTION=1871]muir[/MENTION], any chance you'll tell me something about yourself. I stupidly curious right now, and if you feel like might be derailing the thread father let me know and I'll drop it. If privacy is an issue I'm open for PM's and I don't mind giving you any proof of who I am first.

 

[muir]

I don't think you watched the video, muir... just being aware of Chomsky's 'stance' isn't the same thing as actually considering what I'm saying... and if you're not going to consider what I'm saying, you're not going to pick up on the connection between that and what I originally said. If you don't want to consider the facts and just want to attack me, then feel free but it's not going to produce any sort of valuable discussion.

Watch the video again and concentrate especially on the parts that connect to what I'm saying.

Give me a serious post that isn't just trying to mock and i will take it seriously

Can you do that?

 

[just me]

Have to go visit with some friends and such, but have a small question. You know mw by now as not mocking. I understand a lot of what you say as truths(not truth). Tell me, why do so many obviously viable people walk away from this preposterous predicament? Do they know what needs to be done and just don't see themselves worthy of such a task?

 

[muir]

Thanks muir. Your video is interesting too, though I will take this opportunity to state that I am very hesitant to subscribe to the kind of theyism is you're suggesting in many of your threads. A lot of the information of that nature come across as very dodge-y at best. It doesn't have any real world context aside from a small few have interpreted it and are peddling as truths because the pieces can be arranged to look a certain way.

I think its when you start reading occult literature that you begin to realise how prevalent magick is in our society

By 'magick' i mean working with the subconscious mind

So for example the ritual depicted above. In the tarot deck the sword is a male symbol and the cup is a female symbol. These two itema are often used in rituals for example in wiccan ceremonies. These symbols often crop up in dreams....they are stright from the unconscious mind. Jung talks about a common dream theme being people having to fight with ineffective weapons.

The sword is placed into the cup in the wiccan ceremony in an overtly sexual symbolism. The people doing the ritual will also be stark naked and may well have taken some drugs. So there is a tension being built amongst the group. They are building up energies that they will then work with. Clearly a big part of that is sexual energies

So the sword and cups are really just props to help anchor things in the subconscious mind

It is all about affecting the subconscious mind in order to affect our physical reality

The sigil magick i mentioned above involves following the steps it says followed by a sexual act whislt the magician is focussing intently on the sigil. This is because the moment of sexual climax is a window into the subconscious mind through which the conscious mind can post the spell. The magician must then forget all about the request and in time it will manifest in their physical reality

This is a not very widely known occult secret

This might sound crazy under some people conception of reality....but quantum physics seems to be supporting the magicians view that this reality is not really solid but instead a sea of energy and information that has an illusiory solidity created by the senses

So yeah when you delve into the occult it all gets very weird.

The thing to bare in mind is that even if you don't beleive in any of it, very powerful people throughout history have believed in it and have been working with it

This magick is all derived from qabalah. Orders like freemasonry are about qabalah in the higher degrees. So lets take my country: scotland.

You can find out the grandmasters of scottish freemasonry really easily. You can just look at wikipedia lol: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Grand_Masters_of_the_Grand_Lodge_of_Scotland

Ok so now all you need to do is just scan down that list. What you will probably notice is all the titles....'lord', 'sir', 'earl', 'duke' etc

So we are talking about the aristocratic class here. Then when you take note of the names of the families particularly the ones that reoccur and you sutdy history you find that many of them have historic links to the knights templar. Further to that if you visit their chapels and their graveyards you will often find knights templar graves.

Then if you look at the members of the knightly orders created by the crown you will find the same families cropping up again. An example would be if you visit the 'thistle chapel' i st giles cathedral i the capital of scotland. This is a very ornate room tucked away at the back of the cathedral where the queen holds an exclusive audience with the knights of the order of the thistle when she comes upto scotland

Its when you do stuff like this....when you look a bit deeper that a 'they' begins to materialise.

So Stu mentioned above the bankers, the global investors and the big oil companies and i asked him ''ok but who are behind all these groups''. When you do that you find out that it is the same group of people! Books like dean hendersons book name many of the key players (if anyone wants specifics). They really are a small band of people

You know the TED video you posted above? That shows how few corporations control the global economy. When you look into who is behind those corporations you find the same people again and again

When you also see how those people are involved in qabalistic groups such as freemasonry (once again books like dean hendersons will provide specific links) then you have a small group of cabalists. They own and share businesses with each other, their families intermarry, they socialise, work, live and play together. It then becomes reasonable to describe this small group of cabalists as a 'cabal'

Now, I do not deny that there is a possibility that there could be a group of Lex Luthor types meeting clandestinely behind closed discussing Saturday Morning cartoon villain-esque plots for world domination over cigars and a glass of scotch.

Its more about controlling the flows of money

To really understand the cabals success over the last few hundred years its probably best to look at the central family 'the rothschilds'. If youre interested Bills Still's (possible INFJ) films are great such as 'the money masters'. This film looks at banking history and how this ties into the history of the US and the UK

Here is a section of the documentary dealing specifically with the rothschilds:

[video=youtube;9hK0EgAGHis]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hK0EgAGHis[/video]

The aim of this group is to bring together the countries of the world under a global government.

They have never really cared about national borders. For example mayer amschell rothschild had four sons in germany and he sent each of these to the major capitals of europe where they set up branches of the family bank. They then lent money to all the governments and royal families of the day often funding both sides in a war....which is really profiting on blood money....that money has blood on it

So first thing to realise is that they don't care about national boundaries....that's not a bad thing in itself...i don't much care for national boundaries either. they have no nationalistic loyalty....they just want to make profits

The second thing to realise is that as governments and royalty became more and more in debt to the rothschilds they becomes more and more subserviant to them as the debtor is always beholden to the creditor. The bankers had already been able to pursuade the governments and royals that a central bank would be necessary to manage the debts they were all in after various imperial wars. The central 'Bank of England' was created in 1694. This is a privately owned institution, owned by various banking families.

Ok so this is all well before the creation of the USA in 1776

In 1913 the federal reserve act was passed which brought into existence a central bank in the USA. This bank is also privately owned by the european central bankers and their agents and allies in the USA.

The aim is to control the money supply to as many countrie as possible. this is not a cartoon plot they ahve actually already helped create the UN which is a prototype world government. The land for the UN offices in New York were donated by the Rockefeller banking family. You can find quotes by these guys online saying they are doing all this. They believe that a global government run by bankers and technocrats is better than a world of individual soveriegn nations.

Why this is a bad idea is that whenever power centralises there is corrutpion and exploitation. If people think the corruption and exploitationis bad now under national governments then it will be far worse under a single even more centrlaised global government. Just think how far the power would be away from the average person in the street. if you think you have little say over things now imagine how little say you would have over a global government!

I want to see things move in the other direction and see power pushed down to the workers and for the workers of the world to unite in one giant community

Here are some quotes from David Rockefeller:

Some even believe we [Rockefeller family] are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - One World, if you will.If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it || David Rockefeller |

| We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a World Government.The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries |

| David Rockefeller to Trilateral Commission in 1991 |

And another quote from someone else:

''If a nation values anything more than freedom, then it will lose it's freedom; and the irony of it is that if it is comfort and security that it values, it will lose that too. Unknown Americans must decide: Are we to be governed by Americans or by an International organization ? I, for one, owe no allegiance to the United Nations nor will I give it any. I obey only the U.S. Constitution. You had better think about this issue, for if the U.N. can violate the Sovereignty of Haiti, Iraq and other countries, it can violate ours...The United States may not be the top dog 15 years from now. U.N.security council resolutions, backed by say Chinese soldiers, could be aimed at us |

| Charley Reese [ Orlando Sentinel ] |

I also do not deny the possibility that maybe some of them think Halloween should be a monthly occurrence and that maybe ritual sex magic is a cool, edgy thing that people outside their fraternity shouldn't participate in because they're just not cool enough. I, however, have a very hard time believing these people would engage in occult magic because they actually believe it works. This whole cabal lasting generations upon generations dating back to Ancient Egypt or Atlantis (or whatever version of the theory you'd like to ascribe to) sounds a bit of a stretch to me. I also have a hard time justifying why on earth this alleged small group of people would go through all the trouble of trying to take over the world beyond the fact that they'd just want to live a comfortable, elite existence.

Well then step onto the perception mountain at whatever level you are comfortable....but the important thing to realise...whcih you clearly already have...is that ther is something untoward going on. From there it is a case of tentativel yexploring these posiblities whislt keeping one foot firmly on the ground.

So maybe an uncomfortable level for the majority of people at this time would be what David Ike is going to be discussing in his new book 'the perception deception' which will explain what he thinks is going on. Its worth baring in mind though that Ike has gone from being laughed at in public to now speaking to packed stadiums and large venues around the world. more and more people are climbing the perception mountain to be able to see what he can see. I'm there...i can see it, but i can't talk about it here (except with a few people on this forum) because it is hard enough getting some people to believe the stuff that is already documented without being called crazy!

But perhaps a comfortable level for more people would be to say that it is an ideological struggle. So we have all heard of various ideologies right? You know: communism, fascism, capitalism, consumerism and so on.

So after world war two there were attempts to create a global government under the UN. This fizzled out with the cold war....stalin wouldn't let the bankers in to 'liberalise' USSR markets; instead he threw up what churchhill called 'the iron curtain' which was a big fence/wall across sections of europe.

There had even been attempts before WW2 with the creation of the 'League of Nations' but this had preoved useless.

So one group....the central bankers....think they are best qualified to run our world. their ideology is that there should be a centrally planned global economy under their control

Going back into the occult side of things this would be akin to platos political ideas where the state is run by 'philosopher kings'. the cnetral bankers see themselves as the philospoher kings that should rule us all. Perhap a more accurate description would be to call them magician kings because that is exactly what they are. They even put their magickal symbols on the money...you know the eye of prividence...yeah?....that's an ancient magickal masonic symbol...it wasn't put on the dollar bill cos it looks pretty...you know?

Now, I know you're going to jump on the idea of programming a nation with mass psychology. I also don't deny its possibility. We have the technology. We have the knowledge and there are billions upon billions of dollars being pumped into psychology and marketing research as we speak. The mind is a metaphor. When we change what we represent to ourselves, you can change our thinking and behaviour. Symbols and archetypes have a profound effect on our subconscious as well, even when we are not consciously aware of their meanings. I know, because I have witnessed that power first hand in myself and in others. I also am aware that you can change the minds of the masses by indoctrinating certain ideas as social controls that dictate how masses should or shouldn't respond akin to the concept of the panopticon. Foucault talked extensively about the new type of power structure emerging (by the way, did you ever watch the stand off between Foucault and a young Chomsky? Fascinating!) and with the increasing amount of surveillance, social and otherwise, in our daily lives it's getting increasingly difficult to ignore his ideas. We also have the Milgram and Asch conformity experiments that demonstrate frightening implications for our education system and the nature of social media.

Well you put that better than i could! Yeah i've seen that interview....intersting stuff!

yeah youre bang on...its all there. It is about controlling us on a conscious AND an unconscious level. The only way to break that spell is to become consciously aware of the manipulations then you become immune.

Magicians talk about having a 'strong circle'. This is about having the right anti-virus software for your mind and body (your biological computer...information decoder) to protect you from negative outside forces. We all need to make the upgrade as terence mckenna said!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-tY6hmKcms

Indeed, I think most people inherently understand the powerful influence of the mainstream media. Our current cultural diatribe proves it. The hot topic of the day is the representation of women, gays, and people of colour in media outlets.

For me that stuff is all a given. Women should have equal say, gay people should be free to do what they want to do and who gives a damn how much pigment someone has in their skin?

They harp on about this stuff to keep us all distracted....seriously we need to grow up as society and move past these petty issues...live and let live. But the controllers want to keep us infantalised and divided. prejudice is just one way they do this. Who do you think are behind racist organisations like the KKK? Its all masonic. You know secret paswrods and hand shakes, hooded cloaks, grand masters and all that crap...

Its time now for the focus to switch to what is behind it all. You know the wizard of oz...where dorothy pulls back the curtain to find the booming voice is a frightened little man? Its time to do that

We need to identify and hold to account the engineers of our culture...the engineers of perception

decades ago J.P.Morgan got an agent to look into whcih ewspapers where the most widely read. In those days the newspaper was king! he then bought a controlling interest in all those papers. Its in ways like this that the cabal took control of the media. they use their vast banking wealth to buy up media so that they can control the flow of information into our information decoding minds

How you perceive reality is a filter. If they can control the flow of information to your mind they can decide what that filter will be.

Most people seem to intuitively understand that what we consume on screen, on billboards and in music has an impact on not just the individual, but society as a whole. The call for us to take control of those images is growing louder and louder every day and in doing so, we're also acknowledging a society that control can be taken in these venues by re-framing meaning and presentation. Indeed, look at the way society's perceptions have change about LBTQ community in just the last decade alone. There has been a HUGE amount of social progress in an astonishingly short period of time. Whereas before it would take decades and even entire generations to change a social narrative, now it can occur in the matter of a few months with the right media coverage and exposure and by pin-pointing the right 'tipping point.'

yeah there needs to be some caution though as well. Sometimes things are not as they seem. Once again its a case of following the money

So for example the womens lib thing. before i start i want to reiterate that i believe that women SHOULD HAVE EQUAL SAY IN OUR SOCIETY

However i also believe that this should be in a moneyless society where power is exercised from the bottom up. But looking at what is going on in the context of the current capitalist society this thing is problematic

On the surface in theory it all seems great: women getting equal rights and job opportunities and so on. But in reality we all know that women haven't got equal opportunites.....hence the whole 'glass ceiling' argument and disparity in pay between men and women

What they are really doing is two fold. One they wanted to expand the number of people in work. This in turn has two effects. One it increases the number of people they can tax. The inland revenue service came into creation at exactly the same time as the 'federal' reserve bank....no coincidence. And two it means that more women are returning to work and needing to put their chidlren into childcare. One aim for the global governmen is that children will be raised by the state. They want the children in the class room as quickly as possible so that they can begin to indoctrinate them

The other thing it does is that it increases the number of workers. Any student of business knows the law of scarcity. So if their are more workers for the corporations to choose from the value of the individual worker goes down. This means they can pay them less and treat them worse

So what happens is whereas before only one member of a couple had to work and an average family could have a home, a car, a white picket fence etc now the average family needs both parents to be working all the time because wages have stagnated

So i want to be clear...i want women to have equal rights...but it needs to be in a society that is equal i the first place...you see? Otherwise it actually just serves as a disadvantage to the workers in general. Not to mention the tensions it causes with loss of identity and 'battle of the sexes' and all that crap. How many women are happy in their work? have they entered a new paradise or are they beginning to realise the well is poisoned?

The cabal will fund various campaigns (for example you can easily find info online about the various campaigns george soros has funded) that it thinks will forward its agenda towards global government. So what do you need to do that? Well you need to erode the constitution, you need to erode national soveriegnty, you need to break down the fabric of society itself. All cultural identity must be eroded and replaced with a shallow psuedo culture, community must be broken down to keep everyone isolated and individual, the family bond must be broken down, more and more powers need to be handed to the UN and so on

All the bonds that hold a republic together must be broken before a new society can be fashioned......like moulding something from clay...except their toys are us not lumps of mud

So lets take a look at who the people are behind the 'feminist' movement. Theres been a lot of discussion on this forum about feminism which i have stayed out of because frankly i don't know a great deal about it. But anyway i came across the following video on youtube and found it interesting. Its a video that explores if anyone culturaly defined group has played a disproportionate role in the 'feminism' movement.

I ask anyone watching it to look at it objectively and to not allow their ego to start screaming things in their head because its cosy view of reality is being challenged....just put ego aside and look at the facts. Remember this is an ideological thing...a difference in ideas over how society should be structured and run. it is not a race thing...at least not at my end...that's not to say that other aren't treating it as a racial issue. What i would like is to see ALL the workers of the world get to run affairs in their communities as part of a larger community. And when i say ALL i mean ALL. buckle in...we're going into taboo territory here!

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

So like I said, I get all that and I have a very healthy respect for the power of the complex, global networks and the roles of corporations and media and how they might benefit to go war-mongering for the sake of resources. What I don't get is the whole purpose of this so-called cabal that you keeep mentioning. Why are they doing the things they're doing? If they had all this technology and this occult knowledge, why hadn't they seized total control sooner? What are they waiting for? How do people even know what they believe or what they intend to do? How do you know that what you've learned through all your research is what they want you to believe? You completely lose me at this layer.

Ok so you have a pretty solid base there with understanding that ther is a corproate elite weilding vast influence over the global economy. they don't run the world though....they only hold power over the neoliberal countries. there are many countries that don't recognise their authority. These include the BRICS nations, the entire majority world (known insultingly as the 'third' world) etc. Some example sof countries that haven't recognised the authority of the central bankers would be: venezuala (leader chavez died before his time), Libya (leader qadafi died before his time), iraq (saddam died before his time), afghanistan (leadership currently in hiding), syria (leader currently being threatened). Iran (leadership also has been threaetend), cuba (leader has survived dozens of assassination attempts) and so on

If you think of the greatest illusion they have pulled its fiat money. paper money that is not backed by anything. It has not value except the value accrued to it by the confidence of the people.

It is an illusion of value...an illusion they change all the time by printing more money....they will carry on with quantitative easing until the whole house of cards collapses

 

[sprinkles]

Have to go visit with some friends and such, but have a small question. You know mw by now as not mocking. I understand a lot of what you say as truths(not truth). Tell me, why do so many obviously viable people walk away from this preposterous predicament? Do they know what needs to be done and just don't see themselves worthy of such a task?

Simple: the majority of people are not concerned. They disagree that these things are important - or at least disagree that it's so important that they must set aside more immediate issues in their personal life. This seems to ironically apply the most to the working class. I live in a predominately working class area and NOBODY here wants anything to do with this stuff when they have enough stress just trying to feed the family.

The propensity for caring about this stuff seems to increase in proportion with personal life stability and affluence. Basically the better somebody has it, the more energy they have to direct towards 'current events' either for the sake of social networking because it's 'in' to be interested in something, or out of rare genuine interest.

Most people honestly do not care. Most people do not read TIME or Wall Street, or watch CNN, or whatever. Most people get annoyed at the Presidential Address and such, and this is their prerogative because if you try and force them to care, you become the oppressor.

 

[muir]

Simple: the majority of people are not concerned. They disagree that these things are important - or at least disagree that it's so important that they must set aside more immediate issues in their personal life. This seems to ironically apply the most to the working class. I live in a predominately working class area and NOBODY here wants anything to do with this stuff when they have enough stress just trying to feed the family.

The propensity for caring about this stuff seems to increase in proportion with personal life stability and affluence. Basically the better somebody has it, the more energy they have to direct towards 'current events' either for the sake of social networking because it's 'in' to be interested in something, or out of rare genuine interest.

Most people honestly do not care. Most people do not read TIME or Wall Street, or watch CNN, or whatever. Most people get annoyed at the Presidential Address and such, and this is their prerogative because if you try and force them to care, you become the oppressor.

I think many people are kept in a subsistance living just scraping by from one month to the next. This is possible to do if you can control interest rates and various other mechanisms

Also as Huxley said the aim of the elite is to get the slaves to love their slavery. Give them comfy sofas (couches to you amercians!) lots of stuff to watch on the googlebox, computer games, cheap fast food, blockbuster movies, lots of gadgets etc and it becomes very easy to switch the mind off and not think about more important issues

People have become complacent but as their livelihoods and homes get threatened they tend to pay more attention. This economic crisis has certainly got a lot more people looking into financial matters hence the success of the whole occupy movement and tea party movement etc

 

[the]

Can you explain to me why you think this is? I am personally not bothered by it. I don't know about you, but I constantly have to take in information without having any idea who is presenting it. Do you know any of the people writing the articles you read when you open up a newspaper in the morning? What about the statistician providing the reports on market conditions on the daily news? What about the movie critic giving their opinion on that movie you were curious to check out with your buds this weekend? Did you have to get to know Albert Einstein over a cup of coffee before you could accept his theories?

I'm sorry, I just find this such an absurd argument. Information is information. The onus is on you to verify it using your own logic, common sense and access to resources. Why on earth would you need to know anything about the person presenting the argument other than to adopt some kind of personal bias in your evaluation?

Yes I do want to know that the people I am learning from (via books, research papers, etc.) are trustworthy and competent. I might rely on Einsteins legendary reputation to know that what he is saying is true, or I might rely on my knowledge of the person who recommended a book to me. Does Roger Ebert like the same movies I like? If he doesn't I'm not going to care about his opinion on Spiderman 4. I'd rather know something about the person telling me info than nothing, is that not why there are notes about authors on the covers and in the introductions, etc? Of course there are times when I have to evaluate something with no knowledge of the person telling me, but I'd rather keep it to a minimum.

Do you often go to liars, manipulators, and just generally malicious people to get your information? I mean you are going to evaluate the information only right?

But muir is a relative nobody, so I how do I know that he is not a plant or just a troublemaker? (Considering his subject matter its a possibility)

 

[muir]

Have to go visit with some friends and such, but have a small question. You know mw by now as not mocking. I understand a lot of what you say as truths(not truth). Tell me, why do so many obviously viable people walk away from this preposterous predicament? Do they know what needs to be done and just don't see themselves worthy of such a task?

At the moment we are all just at the waking up phase

We are learning a lot from the internet but it hasn't been around all that long so this is a process in its infancy

Once we are all awakened to the reality of what is going on and what forces shape our world the next phase is to strategise ways to get involved in trying to bring about the world that we as individuals would like to see

This is the 'organising' phase

“An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity.”
- Martin Luther King Jr.

I think individuals generally can't do a lot on their own.....they need to work toegther. So for example if one person takes their money out of one of the cabal's banks it won't change much. If many people take their money out of their banks it changes a lot

If one person stops watching the mainstream media and withdraws their political consent for war it won't change much. if many people do it it changes a lot.

So you see awareness is key because these changes in behaviour need to be amplified

The internet offers a perfect means to communciate this around the world and amplifiy the effect. Anyone can be a journalist and spread ideas

It is quite possible that the cabal will try and close down the internet in a big way; they'll say they are doing it for 'cyber security' or to combat pornography or to enforce copyright law or some such excuse but really they want to stop the flow of information...so this might be our window to get this info out there

 

[muir]

Yes I do want to know that the people I am learning from (via books, research papers, etc.) are trustworthy and competent. I might rely on Einsteins legendary reputation to know that what he is saying is true, or I might rely on my knowledge of the person who recommended a book to me. Does Roger Ebert like the same movies I like? If he doesn't I'm not going to care about his opinion on Spiderman 4. I'd rather know something about the person telling me info than nothing, is that not why there are notes about authors on the covers and in the introductions, etc? Of course there are times when I have to evaluate something with no knowledge of the person telling me, but I'd rather keep it to a minimum.

But muir is a relative nobody, so I how do I know that he is not a plant or just a troublemaker? (Considering his subject matter its a possibility)

I think you need to look into what i'm saying and evaluate it for yourself.

Then you will be able to determine if i am telling the truth or not. its the only way. I could tell you all sorts of stuff about myself but it still won't tell you whether or not what i am saying regarding current affairs is valid or not...only by looking into it and cross referencing info from many sources can you check if it is valid and build a more accurate picture over time of what is happening

 

[muir]

Two things in this thread really caught my attention.

1) Most of the people who have any sort of complaints against Muir seem to be based around the fact the he post large amounts of information in threads potentially derailing them. The same people with this complaint proceeded to derail Muir's thread.

2) I don't really know anything about Muir as a individual

So @muir , any chance you'll tell me something about yourself. I stupidly curious right now, and if you feel like might be derailing the thread father let me know and I'll drop it. If privacy is an issue I'm open for PM's and I don't mind giving you any proof of who I am first.

I'm not interested in discussing myself. i'm interested in discussing the issues

If you want to get to know me you can listen to what i say

 

[muir]

Have you watched the youtube of Gaddafi telling them one of them was next. Now that they got Saadam? From what I can gather Gaddafi wanted to make gold the standard not American paper for a barrel of his oil. And I have heard that he had a lot of gold and oil in his country. Who gets control of those resources now that he is dead. I have seen vid of him driving around waving at his citizens from a sunroof. I would like our president to show us that kind of trust. We all know why he won't do it. I can't say if he was good or not. I did not suffer under him. No matter how good or bad him being gone has caused instability. Instability that someone wants to use I feel to do what serves them not the general population. Who from as far as I can tell just wants to live a decent life without threats of the USA or other terror organizations causing war on them.

Yeah the cabal controls the central banks and the global reserve currency ''the dollar''

The cabal want to control the game so they control the currency and they want to control the major commodities: oil, weapons and drugs

Gaddafi was threatening their control of the game so they took him out

The cabal are basically a very powerful mafia

 

[muir]

Wow! The last 3 pages of this thread looked like muir was up in the proverbial stocks whilst getting cabbages thrown at him. Although Stu was debating...and ... I see efromm was trying to have a decent conversation too. Hi @efromm ! :wave:

I have to say muir has been doing an excellent job of honestly trying to respond to all of the stuff thrown at him.

I admire your cool head in a heated situation....I'm not sure I would have been able to do so. I might have reported a couple of those posts made by others about/to you. Cheers @muir ! :tea:

While I feel it is important to raise awareness to those I care about - it is another to get swept away into the fear of the Cabals agendas.

It is more important to be aware of one's fear at what one sees going on the world....and it is no wonder we feel our fear. We...as the boomer generation grew up with more freedoms and a safer private world than those half our age. They are used to what they see and think it's normal. We know it's not. To us it's easier to see the dramatic changes that have occurred in our lifetimes and they're shocking to watch.

So the challenge becomes - how do you impart another perspective to a person who grew up eating strawberries grown in a greenhouse under artificial conditions? How does one convey the concept that the cardboard flavor they taste is nothing like strawberries grown in luscious soil with sunshine and rain?

I often find the ones who argue with me the most are the ones who need an answer to their fear.

Yes you're right fear is central to the whole thing

I don't believe fear rules my life....i feel the more informed i am the more of an active role i can play....the more i am the master of my own destiny

Thats's not to say i don't feel fear...it's more that i can know it, acknowledge it, understand it, manage it and channel it

I will think some more about what you are saying here about answering fear and try to adjust my posts accordingly

 

[muir]

Okay, I just finished reading a few of the objections to your posts, @muir, and there have been some valid points made about the way you present your arguments. I suppose it can be best summarized in the fact that you're dumping a lot of information on top of us all at once. Not only is such a load overwhelming, you frequently take for granted that people will not make the same connections that you've made over years and years of research. People need time to process what you're telling them. That, and the data you present comes from so many different sources and disciplines (psychology, sociology, politics, occult, religion, global economics) that when, mashed together, it's just a hodgepodge of seeming interconnected information, kinda. Depending what angle we're coming from, some of it appears true but some of the information is outside of our normal, every day understanding. We don't feel comfortable just accepting something as fact when we haven't had to time to research or ascertain the truth of it for ourselves.

Unfortunately, we don't have time to do that before you bombard us with more information.

What I would suggest you do is maybe ease your readers in one step at a time. Perhaps do it by discipline. For instance, what would we need to know about the nature of psychology to step onto the same page as you and the beliefs you hold? What would we need to understand about the occult? What would we need to consider about about global and economic history in the last 50 years in order to approach it from the same perspective? Give us a summary of Noam Chomsky's philosophy and what you think is important to understanding the view you're presenting.

Obviously, you're very passionate about what you're trying to tell us here, muir, but you're always going to have your points sidelines and derailed when you don't present the information in a coherent, logical way. I would actually encourage you to put together a guide. Maybe put together a blog. Every week, you can maybe post a Intro To Subject X and present only the most essential, coherent information and then let people discuss it among themselves and you can participate critically in the discussion instead of just posting more info on the subject. In fact, I think that would be very interesting! If we can take things apart, look at them, observe them, absorb them, I guarantee the message you're so desperately trying to communicate wouldn't fall on deaf ears and maybe some of us can seriously consider what you're putting forward here.

I think most people are just hung up on the fact that it's difficult to verify any of this information because it's posted in bits and pieces and fragments and it's all just coming from you. That and you're not always explaining yourself very clearly because you're presupposing that people have read all of your previous posts.

Perhaps it would be a good idea to try a different approach? What do you think?

This thread could potentially fulfill that function

I might post some of the possible actions people can take as well that i have been posting in lerxsts 'alternatives to capitalism' thread

 

[muir]

@efromm

that was such a good video you posted i'm going to post it here again in case anyone missed it the first time!

Thanks for posting, solidarity brother!

[video=youtube;THlaMUq6MKU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THlaMUq6MKU[/video]

 

[Gul Dukat]

1) Most of the people who have any sort of complaints against Muir seem to be based around the fact the he post large amounts of information in threads potentially derailing them. The same people with this complaint proceeded to derail Muir's thread.

That wasn't it.

The point I was trying to make was that whenever someone posts as much information at once as muir does, it becomes impossible to respond to it and a waste of time to try to disprove it. Does anyone here have enough time to watch multiple videos and verify all kinds of quotes and factoids and narratives... so many that even if you know they're all bullshit you would need to scour the internet and spend hours and hours 'proving' that they are? And even if you were to prove that every single piece of information he's presented has been misinterpreted and proven wrong and debunked, the response would always be MORE misinterpreted facts and half-truths, and you would have to start all over again. It's not a discussion... it's like brainwashing. He pummels you into submission with waves and waves of information... seeing as muir is so concerned with empowering the people, I thought it might be a good idea to point out that this is the case.

I did 'derail' the thread because just explaining this concept wasn't working... I was just being hit with more ad hominem and accusations and names and narratives... so I was trying to demonstrate how muir's own tactics suppress and defocus actual discussion... NOT because I have a problem with muir, but because I have a problem with this kind of debate style.

It was all futile, though... because since that time there have been so many names and events and narratives dropped into this thread that the only possible way out of it is to admit defeat.

 

[the]

This thread could potentially fulfill that function

I might post some of the possible actions people can take as well that i have been posting in lerxsts 'alternatives to capitalism' thread

I would appreciate an actions thread. Solutions to the problems are 99% nevrr mentioned in my experiences.

 

[the]

I think you need to look into what i'm saying and evaluate it for yourself.

Then you will be able to determine if i am telling the truth or not. its the only way. I could tell you all sorts of stuff about myself but it still won't tell you whether or not what i am saying regarding current affairs is valid or not...only by looking into it and cross referencing info from many sources can you check if it is valid and build a more accurate picture over time of what is happening

I have my peeferences and I think you will accomplish more if you tailor your essays to your audience.

 

[sassafras]

Yes I do want to know that the people I am learning from (via books, research papers, etc.) are trustworthy and competent. I might rely on Einsteins legendary reputation to know that what he is saying is true, or I might rely on my knowledge of the person who recommended a book to me. Does Roger Ebert like the same movies I like? If he doesn't I'm not going to care about his opinion on Spiderman 4. I'd rather know something about the person telling me info than nothing, is that not why there are notes about authors on the covers and in the introductions, etc? Of course there are times when I have to evaluate something with no knowledge of the person telling me, but I'd rather keep it to a minimum.

Do you often go to liars, manipulators, and just generally malicious people to get your information? I mean you are going to evaluate the information only right?

But muir is a relative nobody, so I how do I know that he is not a plant or just a troublemaker? (Considering his subject matter its a possibility)

Hmm. You still didn't get my point. How do you know somebody is a liar or a manipulator or a generally malicious person? Are they going to tell you? ("Hey dude, before you hear my opinion on American politics, you should know that I like candy apples, long walks on the beach and lying to people on the internet") I think not! You still have to depend on what they say to make up your own mind. How do you know muir is a liar or a manipulator? Because someone in this thread insinuated it? How do you know that person wasn't angry because muir was telling the truth? Because you at least know that person's favourite colour and you talked about video games that one time and you haven't with muir? I hate to break it to you, but familiarity does not equate to trust, much the same way authority doesn't equate to accuracy or truth. People flip their scripts all the time. Family lies to you, friends lie to you, girlfriends lie to you. But you don't know it until you examine the information the give you.

That and people bullshit on the internet. All. The. Freakin'. Time. How would you even know if muir was telling you the truth about himself? How do you know any of us are who we say we are? Does it matter?

Bottom line is, you always, always have to depend on your own noodle to evaluate any kind of information. If you sit back on your haunches as soon as you recognize authority, you're building yourself a gullible existence brick by brick. Source doesn't mean shit. Everyone laughed at Copernicus when he proposed Heliocentrism and history is peppered with examples of people who were discredited by the critics, the church, the politics of the day, etc. What remained was information they produced because that was the only thing that could be verified. I mean, you can check muir's sources. You don't have to swallow everything you're spoonfed. You can check for logical inconsistencies. You can research what he's saying. You can read alternative perspectives. We have the technology.

And by the way, you certainly do not keep evaluating information from unknown sources to the minimum. None of us do. Please do not kid yourself. We're constantly bombarded by information everyday from unknown, impersonal sources and we don't even pay it any mind. Advertising. Music. Movies. News anchors. Guest lecturers. TED talks. Random people on the internet. And that's not even the kicker. Most of the time, you're absorbing information subconsciously from unknown sources. You don't even get a chance to evaluate it.

People's skepticism in this matter is, on the contrary, very encouraging. It means that you're not just passively letting yourself absorb information. You're thinking critically about it and critical thinking is a good and rare thing these days.