WHERE THE GIN IS COLD AND THE PIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANOSSSSSSSS HOT
Calm down, Garissa. We don't need you woman-childing up the place.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by gay sex
LISTEN while youre busy driving your cocaine submarine, i was out here defending the idea that all star survivor is better against scooter who thinks its a bad idea, JESUS CHRIST YOUR JIMMERY KNOWS NO BOUNDS
Quote:
Originally Posted by neverstop in a PM
. . .
But whatever, yes I can be a huge canadian faggot and you can be terrible yourself but theres no reason we shouldnt be able to co-exist at the very least, ya feelz me??
I don't mind the former but it seems to me you'd have to write it something like Rest-in-Peace'd them. Or Rest 'n Peaced? Rest in Peaced seems grammatically-challenged, at first blush. But I do believe I shall experiment with your suggestion and play around with it.
As to whether I have killed anyone, that's an impossibly complex and layered question. But it is a very good question, even if it can never have an answer. Perhaps that's why it's one of the best questions; because in this world of "No Comment" horror, the degree of Certainty is terrifying.
The argument over the insulting Catholic construct of mea culpa is only treated with legitimacy by those who do not believe in Free Will (because they love their 'human' urges), but they desperately want to convince the victims of their human urges that they had the free will to be a willing receptacle of the various bodily fluids that are released and relieved onto or into a "willing party" (no one likes to rape, the only way you can get into it is when you believe Rape is the name of the game being played, and the game that rapists imagine they are playing is called Free Will). If you find that hard to believe you should go to a strip club. It would blow your fucking mind.
Humans when they have been reduced to....sewerage, simply cannot distinguish between Fantasy and Reality. It's possible I'm so stupid it's embarrassing but after 3 decades of watching sub-beastly horror shows shrug at my presenting irrefutable evidence in support of Truth, and return to their Faith as a counter argument for what is Real and Sane, I only realised last month what fuels that most terrifying of all insanities. The Belief Systems of those who don't understand that their belief system is exploitable. I try to warn them about the insanity of the path they're racing towards. I explain to them the nature of their belief system's bleedingly obvious potential for abuse or misuse. If you believe something to be true, you can do or believe anything you want to. Imagine if everyone went around believing that they had the Right to do whatever they wanted to do.
It's insane. I appeal to considerations of Reason and Sanity and Logic. But then I don't do that anymore. You'd be insane if you failed to register their whimsical sighing that is the wistful dreaming of a vocal supporter of the importance of respecting the Law for the law's sake. The rules are very important, without rules there would be anarchy. Anyone who wants to kill with abandon can be forgiven for believing this. You should react accordingly when they assert and simultaneously reveal the Truth about their intentions and the way they perceive the Reality they are at odds with.
Anyone who is a firm believer in Rules or Law for the sake of rules / laws is motivated by one consideration; getting you to respect the laws and rules that don't apply to them. Not as far as they're concerned. They love the Law for you to respect. They will respect it only until they no longer have to. Rules are written not by those who want structure but by those who want anarchy under their control. If you're reading the rules, they're for you. If you break them, what is Power going to do? If it's in Power's interest, Power would have just done it to you whether you followed the rules or not. Because the Cardinal Rule of Law is that it is enforced by Power which means there is only one Law.
The First Rule of Law: Everything is against the Law.
Power will let you slide on most things, but the above is the Rule in the rule of law.
The rules are important of course; and anyone who tells you this truly believes as much but only in respect to you. There is no greater truth than this for those who love the Law and are willing to incarcerate innocents for minor breaches of legislation which is a major Crime Against Humanity. "They knew the rules. Hard to feel sorry for them. If you don't agree with the rules, then work to change them from within the legal structure."
Like the Germans who disagreed with the Final Solution.
"You must work to change the system from within. Bradley Manning is a traitor because there is a process that must be followed for reporting genocide. You must privately tell the genocidal killers that you disagree with their program. Don't embarrass them. Private business. It's personal. Imagine hanging our dirty laundry in public like that!"
1. It's never your dirty lewd laundry that your government is hiding from you. There is no market for that shit you encrypt and lock up with passwords and surround with Fort Knox-like clues for interested parties which don't exist. It's the US government's dirty laundry. And the underwear's skids are little humans that were in the wrong place in the wrong time, like on the Continental US between 1861-1865 or in a paper mache tower that was on the brink of falling over when the next gust of wind caressed it and I can't make this up! A puff of wind literally ended up knocking the whole thing down. Would you believe it? And then to prove it wasn't a fluke, an encore! It was a flashy show, designed for impact. Maximum Impact is what the accidental friends of Osama bin Laden brought to your living rooms. CNN and FOX and the good old B.B. Corporation. You'd think they'd know better than to fall for OBL's crafty machinations. Tsk tsk.
Who terrorised you on 9/11? Unless you were at Ground Zero there were no jihadists involved in the process of bringing and producing Terror, packaging and editing it and then delivering it to you like the professionals in emotional productions that the mass media truly are. You never think about how it's packaged and when have you ever considered that all-important Why? I assure you that there were no jihadist sleeper cells in the decision-making process of the world's mainstream media broadcasters and this has implications for the nature of their deciding to do Osama's job for him and - in respect of OSL's incapacity to achieve the fantasy of his dreams - they stepped into the opening and terrorised you. Awfully decent of them wasn't it?
No jihadists and A-rabs (that weren't sufficiently vetted to care about things no jihadist could care about) were involved in bringing the Terror into your world. Americans made the executive decisions to enhance the emotional content of the already grossly inflated emotionally-charged Breaking News. CNN brought Terror to me 10,000 nautical miles away. My wry snide quipped "Osama couldn't have done it without them." - and then I realised the implications of that quip and I didn't think that dangerously insightful thought again for 10 years.
I am a vassal much like you. I try not to suckle quite as hungrily on the teat of Power though but you're cute when you do it.
CNN weren't that cute doing it. They were way too intense. Respectful. When they weren't amplifying the sound of bodies hitting pavements and so forth. Not sure that was very respectful but it was noted in horror by one person I'm aware of. Everyone in the media was so industriously inflating the emotional impact (i.e. Terror) that at some point I couldn't make heads or tails of who had been exploiting Terror for the purposes of Profit? Why else would you kill humans. But you're scoffing so I want to ask you something? How well can you structure and execute a plan that relies on key global media organisations to unwittingly play ball? I don't think Osama could do that shit. It would be very embarrassing for CNN if he could, wouldn't it? And if he couldn't, well...
I'm not sure it was appropriate news coverage. Did you know on that day in 2001, 30,000 innocent human children were slaughtered by corporations and religion and other sociopathic 'profiteers' who PROFIT from the blood sweat and misery of human children processed through the Limited Liability Machine of Capitalism? I don't mean to dictate to CNN how they should operate their business but when they become a proxy for Al Qaeda I kind of have the right don't I? The way I see it, on a day where 30,000 human children under the age of 5 were murdered and 3000 were killed to create terror, CNN should have led with the 30,000 innocent children Humanity could not afford to lose on that day.
Or on every day since. It's funny they don't lead with the 30,000 every day cause that's the NEWS every single day.
And the silence of building inspectors and construction engineers, architects and professional possessors of knowledge has echoed back in forth like a imagined Pong game that didn't boot. Mike is so far ahead of his time, it's a real shame for him that he isn't "standing up to bullies" right now. Because what 9/11 showed us is that we're not there yet.
Mike is where we need to be. If only we could hurry the rot already. Thinking minds. That's unpatriotic. Mike is so patriotic he will continue to tell you why he knows best about Thailand and what he's heard about it and what he thinks of the Thai girls he's never met but holds a volume of knowledge about - if you don't mind your opinion a little unfiltered and raw, of course. If you're not especially picky, Mike will make opinion happen for you. You can count on him.
If he doesn't know, he'll just push right on through. You will never spot the hiccup because Mike doesn't know anything. So the hiccups are smooth as silk. He only knows what he Needs to Know to Know Best. And he knows (or at some point he knew, he struggles a fraction these days when she gags him during soaps and shit) how to make his Mother feel he was super duper smart. She knew how to control him and manipulate him. It's as easy as making him feel super duper special and the way to do that is tell him. Had he bothered to make sense of the lie told to him, he'd be 1000x better off. But he didn't. He's Special. She told him. She lies all the time but he believes the pleasant lies and ignores the unpleasant Truths. Mike is a real piece of work of his own making. How culpable is he?
I don't think anyone exerts their free will to be Mike, right? So how is that not his Defence Argument? You wouldn't want to hand him a license to do whatever he wants to do because what he wants to do is dark and vile. But if caught doing it, you wouldn't get emotional. Just laugh at him in the zoo like the polar bear who isn't in control. It's not personal. Mike only cares about himself. If he attacks you, it's because your parents were happy for you to play with a wild bear who lacked the capacity to feed himself on anything but Mommy's teat.
It doesn't bother Mike because Mike gets by. Whatever he does becomes okay because it was Mike who had to do it and if it was you he'd kill you but him? for him it's okay. It doesn't need to make sense. It's just how Christian faith works. Mike knows he's Special and loved by the inexplicable and pure love of Christ who loves very selectively so why not use his love for you as a pretext to bend the rules? Toddlers get introduced to the sub-surface Obvious of religion and snicker so loudly they guffaw. Cause next stop, PRESIDENT OF THE WORLD. Of course they find out that some Christians ploughed the remnants of empathy out of most of the world, so it's either children or keep on keeping on. Mike keeps on. And the way he gets by is by not asking uncomfortable questions that might place his entitlement to the garage at risk.
It may not be much but at least it's home. Mike thanks God for his blessings. Tomorrow, you could be his big lucky break. Leech coming up, freshly sleazed. Be polite. Tolerate. Give him stuff. Do for him the value he would do for you. If he wasn't sub-worthless.
We're on the verge of something historic. I've never met someone so clearly incapable of exploiting for value; not since the Philippines where there isn't value to exploit in that God-embraced country unless you like raping children who'll rape you first because they're little whores who hold out their hand after they sleep with you. Did they forget to tell you when they were stalking you in lust? "Oh", they shrug. They're not big on logic because you don't need sense when you have the power invested in you by a Christian Hijacking maneuver. They'll wait until you tire of them. It's what they do.
2. When dirty laundry is hidden from you by your government, the skidmarks are going to be representative of you. Assange (and possibly Cpl Manning) live by virtue of their not airing the skid-marked dirty laundry in public. I know these things because I can do logic. I am not making a claim, or asking you to believe me. I am about to draw the dots for you. You wouldn't require such a thing if you were aware of the reaction of stakeholders prior to their discovering the relatively impressive and professional and not entirely uncomplimentary theme running through the (illusionary) cables ostensibly released to embarrass the US government. What Manning bravely stole and claimed for the American public - stuck a fucking flag in that shit or he would have, if he was a little more Netanyahu and a little less of his mother's victim (because if Lamo can fool you, you're a little bit of a Mike) has not been released to the Public-at-Large. I'm pretty certain that logically, this is a near proof.
I'm not saying you want to be a shrewd politician but you have to admit they know their fucking vassals through and through. You can't argue with the above argument. I mean, I would like to hear your counter argument. I would love to see how you'd respond to that argument.
Just consider some of what Wired concealed. First we have this, from very early on in the first Manning-Lamo conversation (emphasis added):
MANNING: uhm, trying to keep a low profile for now though, just a warning
LAMO: I’m a journalist and a minister. You can pick either, and treat this as a confession or an interview (never to be published) & enjoy a modicum of legal protection.
In a subsequent conversation, Lamo again promised him: “i told you, none of this is for print.”
So Lamo lied to and manipulated Manning by promising him the legal protections of a journalist-source and priest-penitent relationship, and independently assured him that their discussions were “never to be published” and were not “for print.” Knowing this, Wired hid from the public this part of their exchange, published the chat in violation of Lamo’s clear not-for-publication pledges, allowed Lamo to be quoted repeatedly in the media over the next year as some sort of credible and trustworthy source driving reporting on the Manning case, all while publicly (and falsely) insisting that the only chat log portions it was withholding were — to use Poulsen’s words — “either Manning discussing personal matters . . . or apparently sensitive government information.” As BoingBoing’s Rob Beschizza put it in rejecting Wired‘s claims: this passage “reads like a deliberated attempt to manipulate or even entrap Manning, on Lamo’s part, and seems quite important to understanding what Manning thought he was doing by talking to him.” There are multiple passages for which that’s true.
The full chat logs also prove Lamo lied to Yahoo! News when he told them “that [Lamo] spelled out very clearly in his chats with Manning that he wasn’t affiliated with WikiLeaks or acting as a journalist,” nor is there any mention in the logs of this story Lamo told to the BBC:
I did tell [Manning] that I worked as a journalist. I would have been happy to write about him myself, but we just decided that it would be too unethical.”
And Lamo’s statement in my interview with him — that Manning’s “intention was to cripple the United States’ foreign relations for the foreseeable future” — also appears to be a complete fabrication; Manning talked endlessly about his desire to trigger worldwide reforms, not to cripple American foreign relations.
If you reconcile the reaction of the US government and the public calls by prominent US senators and Presidential hopefuls for the murder of Assange and the hanging of Manning in the national media before the ink has finished drying on the warrants they still haven't fancied their chances of taking to court - you'd understand something doesn't add up. No doubt they're doing the old trick that involves an ear and playing it and if you're wondering what this has to do with your question about killing, obviously you need to realise the ear = you.
But something doesn't add up.
Or more accurately, nothing adds up. I know where the books might be reconciled and that's in the cables that hang like Damocles Sword over I'm not exactly who but I wouldn't like my chances of survival against the machine that is the US State think-tanking and brainstorming and geniuses burning the midnight oil thinking about how to negate the unpleasantness that is you. And you need to understand that running a country is not the job you imagine it is. Their first and primary role is self-preservation of their Protection Racket that they've imposed onto their vassals. The entire machine is rumbling slowly and historically the machine flattens.
Again if you're confused about what this has to do with killing, you must understand that when you are a citizen imagining the Government is your homie, the killing you never hear about is all over your bloodied hands. Your ignorance isn't an excuse that the deceased can clutch onto for value.
But no one except the US government, Wikileaks and Manning knew what is in those cables. So we can surmise from the hysteric reactions of the former and their failure to act with a yawn in their capacity to take out the latter, that Assange's "mother lode" threat is taken Very Seriously by the guys who have everything to hide because professionalism and competence doesn't get the First Amendment abrogated by shadowy powers that terrify a power like Amazon and embarrass it into tearing up the First Amendment. It was cute how all the little snivelling rats allowed that to happen.
It will be indecent when the rats scream, as they do; oblivious to the fact that their suffering is guaranteed but what's more their filthy shrewd aligning themselves with Power is the murdering that is genociding the entire globe.
But I have a theory that fits everything inexplicable piece of the unreconciled puzzle. It's going to be in the "mother lode" that hits when Assange goes "poof". And it might be titled: Collateral Treason.
It has a nice ring to it. I'm not sure the US State Dept would concur but we all have a right to our opinion unless we're dabbling in Truth.
My point being, whilst it's easy to fall into the trap of binary thinking "Kill or be killed." - of course the Truth is that nothing murders as efficiently as our denial and ignorance we imagine exonerates us from the slaughters conducted no just in our names but only via our proactive enabling and support of killers and liars. But then I repeat myself. "Have I killed? No my hands are clean. I like cheap products and any company which doesn't compete for my custom loses it."
Anyone who functions as an element of the Market that rewards the 'winning' corporations which find more and more 'optimality' and 'profit' and 'price slashing' (in a world where prices are skyrocketing, which is cute) - all of us who BUY the cheaper product in a "zero liability" global "dead man's land" (where corporations thrive)....All the Deaths are belong to us.
If you think otherwise you'd be wrong and it would be a matter of perception which has been skewed by religion. 30,000 children under the age of 5 die every - single - day and that number is just going to keep on skyrocketing because this is a world where our 'human' species of Sociopaths have been reduced to the point where it's picking up terminal velocity nearing impact with the thud that will make a few billion superfluous leeches scream for the last time in their miserable lives. Nothing about the inevitablity is remotely complex or even challenging game theory. "Limited liability corporations" in an unregulated capitalist excess-driven competitive environment? That means only one thing, in our bloody and grizzly practised Reality. Cheap products, if you want to limit your implausible ignorance of your culpability to your entitled good fortune. Whatever you want but you're not shrewd. It's not going to be sustained and the deaths are on you whether you imagine you're the lucky little piggy who had roast beef and that your lottery in winning Roast Beef meant it was sane or optimal to snicker at the unlucky little piggy that has none.
Because in Theory (the practised Reality outside the bubbles of our denial), there is no laughing going on. The other little piggies get none because we take it ALL. There is no market left to be sent to and literally not a single little piggy has ever gone gone whee whee all the way home. Whee = joy. In Reality, roast beef isn't happiness. But if you're very confused you'd be a rich entitled version of Mike imagining you're smug and pleased because you got some and the other piggies weren't as special. Who gives a fuck? The non-replenishable mines where roast beef is dwindling (never to be renewed) aren't worth killing entire communities over. To what end? The extension of our Unsustainability? This is insane.
But a Toddler wouldn't concur. All that matters is the now. So get used to mushroom clouds. None of this is predetermined but that doesn't mean we have free will. Mike is insane. His incapacity to want to allow happiness to exist if it requires him to display some decency is non-negotiable. He won't permit it. So he will be the guarantee that everyone gets to lose but it's a 'win' for his insanity. At least in the end, he'll get his prized illusion of equal status.
It's his lifelong dream you know. Just to be treated with respect, like an equal. Is that too much to ask? Why do we hate him?
He's so pathetic. The truth is so much more traumatising for him than hate or contempt. He's a bug that needs to be put down or placed in a disturbing zoo. How can you hate a beast who does what the beast is programmed to do?
From the blog written by one of the leaders of the Reason v Religion movement that is underway and picking up steam (because those fucking morons fucked up the God v Gay gameplay so badly, they are fucking toast), Sam Harris. He also happens to possess the sharpest mind on the face of the planet.
The feeling that people are deeply responsible for who they are does nothing but produce moral illusions and psychological suffering.
Imagine that you are enjoying your last nap of the summer, perhaps outside in a hammock somewhere, and are awakened by an unfamiliar sound. You open your eyes to the sight of a large bear charging at you across the lawn. It should be easy enough to understand that you have a problem. If we swap this bear for a large man holding a butcher knife, the problem changes in a few interesting ways, but the sudden appearance of free will in the brain of your attacker is not among them.
Should you survive this ordeal, your subsequent experience is liable to depend—far too much, in my view—on the species of your attacker. Imagine the difference between seeing the man who almost killed you on the witness stand and seeing the bear romping at the zoo. If you are like many victims, you might be overcome in the first instance by feelings of rage and hatred so intense as to constitute a further trauma. You might spend years fantasizing about the man’s death. But it seems certain that your experience at the zoo would be altogether different. You might even bring friends and family just for the fun of it: “That’s the beast that almost killed me!”
Which state of mind would you prefer—seething hatred or triumphant feelings of good luck and amazement? The conviction that a human assailant could have done otherwise, while a bear could not, would seem to account for much of the difference.
A person’s conscious thoughts, intentions, and efforts at every moment are preceded by causes of which he is unaware. What is more, they are preceded by deep causes—genes, childhood experience, etc.—for which no one, however evil, can be held responsible. Our ignorance of both sets of facts gives rise to moral illusions. And yet many people worry that it is necessary to believe in free will, especially in the process of raising children.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you make prose your bitch. When you want it to sing without stinging the bee stinger readers away (where they will go and play, alone; and their children don't have a choice in the matter because children at their Christian Core, exist to replace the Needy's needed and Please the inherently Creepy's whims).
I've been talking in other ranted essays about the conspiratorial manufacturing of trauma by the creepiest fucking sons of exploited bitches and exploited bitches imaginable (you may know them as Dad, and Mom). They do this filthy shit so fucking nonchalantly they often forget to process their denial and forget to play dumb. They're stupid, it should be easy but unless they psyche themselves up to represent dumb, they inadvertently give you the Truth and it's a little more horrifying than stupidity. They imagine that they're culpable but they don't feel guilt; merely shame at having their malice illuminated.
Don't think for a second the brightest mind on the planet is confused about parents' motives for manufacturing trauma and their religious obsessive drilling of free will into the conceptual consciousness of those they're simultaneously pouring emotional faeces into the minds of, by design. Intended. Aware. Not free. They just imagine they're free. No one with free will handicaps their child to please. They just think they're being impossibly evil and shrewd. Teehee.
But Sam Harris just Knows somehow what is important and what can be rephrased so that it passes through the obstructed bowels that serve as the conscious processing of vile snivelling Toddlers. He's amazing and he gets Toddlers better than anyone I've ever read, even le Carre doesn't seem to have Harris' appreciation of the Toddler Condition. Toddlers love to read things that make them feel smart (especially if they believe it will give them an advantage over other Toddlers). But no Toddler wants to read Truth. And have to exert extra effort to hurdle that emotional crap like guilt and shit? Fuck that.
Truth is a deal-breaker for Toddlers. Sam manages to thread it all through. He's amazing. Toddlers would worship him like the Golden Calf. Whatever power is trendy, that's the God for Toddlers. There are no religious people on the planet. The sooner you accept the exceptions are too negligible to bother with the closer you'll be to the Reality that is the horror only a sociopathic race of deceit-obsessed denialists could even manufacture.
But the Tipping Point has been reached and this could all swing around so much faster than I think anyone can realistically imagine after 4000 years of emotional bracket creep. The End Game is here. We're picking up speed in order to 'wind' down. We're at the fucking crossroads of history and I know this because you cannot exploit the most insanely manufactured (for that purpose) vassals I've seen yet. Name the last people to get value out of Jewdonk or Mike. Seriously they're not exploitable. That's not a compliment but then you have to understand, they've been working towards this. They think they're going to capitalise with their undefeatable 'edge'. They have no value.
Uh oh for anyone that does. It'll Christian Hijack time and they will clean up in their minds. But with nothing to manipulate or exploit they know they have nothing to lose. They're the first truly non-exploitable tragics alive. There's nowhere left for Reductive Exploitation to go. We've hit the wall and there's only one direction to bounce (assuming we don't just settle here and continue feeding on our children's exploitable 'naivete').
____________
But in your lifetime you might see this ship turned around. You might also see Sam Harris assassinated or his light aircraft fall mysteriously out of the sky as so many do. It seems a long stretch to imagine that billions of insane emotional crybabies imagining that others are hurting them inside the minds their mothers sucked clean of brain matter (in order to reconstitute each mind for a lifetime of operation on emotional fecal fuel) are suddenly going to turn around and be sane but the alternative is Boom.
Or you might see billions of excess unexploitable ballast get splashed. They'll get culled by their billions because it's not that the world is overpopulated (as if such a demented construct as "over-population" could even be possible); we merely have an excess of worthless emotional screaming leeches who aren't worth the feeding. Their pyramids are shit. We can make the food worse but then we're spinning around in circles and we have to bite our untenable options and cut the ballast loose. They're emotional slaves; so they will suffer a great deal but like fish who struggle they have no nervous system to feel pain. Well not anyone elses so who gives a fuck. I don't. Fucking their filthy trauma.
Emotions = Trauma. By definition, trauma is but an emotional residue like a scar or some other reminder that your perception of Reality was at odds with it and you paid the price. But trauma is not natural. It doesn't benefit or aid anyone do any purpose but create perpetual exploitation of generational slaves who inherit their parents' chains. Let me put it this way - do you think Nature Selects Mike and kills off the other vassals who are superior by virtue of their (tiny but existent) value in dying for the State? Mike isn't valuable enough for the state to use up in battle. I'm not sure how much lower you would need to fall drop to get the hint but I'm certain it's a long way below the lines where slaves register such subtleties.
Emotions > Trauma. No other result is possible when you're skewing perceptions of Reality. Corrections will occur. Screams. Shock. Residue. The sun wouldn't rise and set with more predictability. If you're unemotional, you cannot have your lies brought rudely and violently into Sync with Reality. You will be safe from Trauma. Period. This is why the insane infect the sane maliciously. So that they can traumatise with their setup existential scarring of suckers that Trusted them. Emotions are used to manipulate and there is no other virtue or function they serve. They are, by definition, a distortion of the victim's perception of Reality. The unemotional view Reality in largely unpolluted clarity.
The emotional perceive Reality is rather sub-clear fashion. How do you imagine JewDonk views his Reality? Or Ape? When were those two screamers last in the bubble of Sanity and therefore Reality? Do you think those screamers are nailing the important insights, taking away the valuable information that is to be gleaned for relevance and actioning? Or are they just shaking their bewildered face at yet another 'insane' person who didn't do what they ordered them to do. Or else.
Or else they'll call you insane. OH NOES! Big mean words. Oh how they burn so!
Mike's emotional turmoil and childhood weren't what you'd bring a kid into a world for but compare if you will one Cpl Manning's actions for one Sub-human vasaal who is too lazy to work so he trades his way through life on emotional currency imagining he's a real honey pie. Manning's childhood was infinitely worse. He became a hero for Humanity. Mike used his misfortune as a shrewd excuse to afford him t he right to gum his stealthy way all over everything and scream whenever he feels the ned to realease. Shiver. As long as he's releasing here.
I'm not entirely sure what my argument is except to say that Sam is right about Free Will and that doesn't have anything to do with Determinism nor What is Humane (in terms of drawing up a response to the misery created by those who don't need an excuse to be who they are but they sure get nauseating when they justify their pissing all over the world with a largely embellished and sanctified version of their own degree of filthy dependency). Could my sister have been forced to study?
No. She already knew everythiing when her legs were splitting every Red Sea obstacle that prevented her from doing what she wanted to do. She only leaned on me with her Caring when things were tough for her. When things were rough for me, I went and slept in her apartment because I couldn't take the street for another night. Her junkie b/f stole everything I owned. It was my fault of course. I might even have been to blame for her losing her b/f. She didn't really think so, I was asleep. It's just emotional manipulation; storing up some collateral so she can use it to tip the scales back in her favour when she takes advantage of her little brother. Good luck with that. I went home.
The drunk men who urinated on me in the park (because I was little and it's funny!), my sister and Mike all have the same Power invested in them. And Society had better get very humane quickly because these beasts love their miserable pasts. It's their most powerful pretext.
They'll never let go of their suffering. Why would they? Their pasts (embellished or truthfully disclosed) afford them the capacity to do whatever they want to do. Isn't that the dream of every Toddler? To write rules that don't apply to them? They don't have a problem with rules. They have a problem with you judging them when they break the rules that apply to you and not to them. They'll judge you. How dare you judge them. They have suffered a great deal you know?
No? Well they'll keep plugging away in their suffering. It's the Christian / Manilian / Catholic thing to do. Act like you're horrified that someone wouldn't automatically want to give you a pass / fuck you / respect you / treat you with the respect you swear black and blue you would give them when you're incapable of listening to your Self spew vomit all over the room.
Look, maybe you get fooled by their bum hurt offence at your not taking their Word as their bond. This is what they're saying and if you know Christians like I do, all they do is talk about the good things they're going to do; just you wait and see! It's why I slap his moronic verbal promises away. He's talk talk talk. Anything you want, Mike will make that happen for you if you're a demented fool who takes Christians in "good faith". They invented faith for that reason. To trade on it's illusion for your value. Score!
They get bum hurt so much that "getting bum hurt" (offended) should be grounds for instant euthanasia. No exceptions. Your trauma is your problem if your offence is even real. If it's not real, your screaming is my problem or it would be for a humane person who must end it or allow the insanity to scream children insane. When a Christian gets offended, and you are offended by the insulted first offender (always the Christian), pay heed to how much they respect your emotional suffering that they have inflicted. Then kill them because this isn't a fucking game.
They have been running this demented two-faced emotional bullshit con for so long almost everyone is immune to their insane game. But they get the odd sucker often enough to fistpump and thank God for their ability to take rather than create, to destroy rather than build, to profit from your efforts rather than contribute, to dream the leeching dream!
Maybe you're stupid enough to fall for that Christian classic shrewd? If not, freeroll innit. The trick is that they have nothing you can take. It doesn't work if they have something to lose. The best Christian hijackers have to be prepared to take you down with them. That's their edge. They're worthless. You have value. You'd be insane to go down with their dragging you down. You'd be more insane not to remove their existence from the equation prior to inevitability.
But you see countless examples of this irrefutable truth I'm outlining, in Mike's insane screaming. The rules of Decency do not apply to Mike. He is indecent. He is gleefully aware of this. That's why he will demand you treat him decently. This is how his mind processes 'winning' on paper. He imagines he can only win. He doesn't believe he's capable of losing. No it's not a great strategy. The guy has sexual relations exclusively via the Rape game. He's not exactly flying high, he's just beating the fuck out of you.
All his rules are for you. They're not for Mike. They apply to you; just ask Mike; he'll explain why you should be preached at. He will bristle in outrage that you didn't treat him with the respect he believes is his due. How dare you! It's not relevant to these screaming women that the world doesn't want to do what they want them to do. That's what their Christian edge and shrewd power is for. To force people to do whatever the hell the dementedly pathetic cannot persuade them to do. Hahahahaha.
Ape has never had power. This is why he craves it. He's too disassociated from reality to be permitted near Pretty. But it's a free country and how lucky are Pretty for such 'liberty'? They'll literally hit the pavement.
Marty has never had influence. That's why he craves it. He gets emotionally validated and most of you who are doing this to him are responsible for anything he does and doesn't tell you about and I'm sure he's a real hero in his Private moments. He's too disassociated from reality to realise it's all a snickering charade and he doesn't blame you; he pities you. He's beating you and don't you forget it. He won't.
Toddlers want what Toddlers want and the idea that they should respect what others want or have a right to will never be something that resonates with Toddlers. "Why does it matter what others want", the Toddler screams. "I'm selfish. I'm a little demon. I'm the King of doing bad things. Har har. All that matters is me."
They fail until they day they die but they ruin any chance of having fun in their vicinity along their miserable way. The world must do what they demand. But with no power, they will settle for gnawing at you. He'll gnaw and niggle and attempt to engage you until you are forced to validate his existence. And voila Mike has beat you. See, he has value. He'll prove it to you if only you'll give him another chance? Come on dude!
He won't see fit to leave if you want him to fuck off. The rules just don't apply to him.
In any case, he simply has too much respect for you.
It's the Christian Hijack of Emotional pretexts that don't fool anyone. Their sleazing their emotional sludge onto children is THE Christian thing to do.
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Christian Rape Logic for 2000 years and counting. But then they'll rape everyone with the Golden Rule. They're real winners. We need a Final Solution and I have one.
World, meet Mike.
The End. Oh we'll screech on for a bit trying to squeeze blood out of a valueless stone but make no mistake. The Christian Era has come to an end. We cannot be reduced any lower and be exploited for value. Hurrah! Mike is your proof.
Linear Mode
