Women of the world, take over

[marmot]

My Goddess, this is live entertainment!

[populistindependent]

Because then it's not public.
Also, it wouldn't be evolvable like a message board thread.
(Is "evolvable" a word? )

I have been involved in a lot of discussions over the years with fellow board admins about these issues.

Here are some things that work - have a section on board for flame wars (talking points etc.) and just move posts there and let people fight it out - that way no censorship or banishments, and minimal disruption to serious discussions; ignore off topic posters - hard to do, or hard to get started - it tends to gather its own momentum once people have a taste for it. The problem is that the more inflammatory, the more spontaneous, and the more antagonistic a post is, the more attention it gets, and of course any member can get top and center with any post in just a few seconds. Subjects that take time to develop are at a disadvantage as are serious more detailed posts. But a handful of core members can, through persistence, set a tone for the board.

[orz]

I don't know of ANYONE else besides myself who -

That's where you lose me. There's no one I could take seriously who would say I'm the only one who gets it.

YES

[AlicetheKurious]

Prove me wrong.

Leave your hut and hijack a plane to the US (try not to fly it into any buildings).
Then go to any Walmart in teh country and count the number of SUVs (and try not to blow up any synagogues or buses on the way).

Then declare jihad on all the men who are obviously forcing their women to buy these SUVs and shop at Walmart.

Then get therapy and discover that what you really hate is your Daddy and have yourself committed.

You think I live in a hut? (You'd be surprised at how lovely my "hut" is, and even better, that no war crimes were necessary for me to acquire it).
Why do you think that?

You think I want to blow up synagogues and buses? Why do you think that?

You think I want to declare "jihad" on anybody? Why do you think that?

You think I hate my wonderful, kind, funny father (God rest his soul)? Why do you think that?

Take MY advice: answer those questions, take a hard look at the squirmy reality of your ugly, racist, zionist mind. Then YOU seriously think about that therapy.

[FourthBase]

Good post, pop.

If Jeff decides the subforum/ignore buttons ideas aren't viable...
I'll try to become one of the tone-setters who takes the high road.
But it's going to be a struggle for me.

[AlicetheKurious]

Jeff said:

There's no one I could take seriously who would say I'm the only one who gets it.

I have to disagree. Hugh makes his arguments and presents his evidence, and frankly, just as Jeff's own analysis has opened my eyes to previously unsuspected layers of meaning and connections, Hugh has done exactly the same thing.

I am grateful for both Jeff's and Hugh's fascinating insights, and especially for Hugh's prodigiously thick skin.

The fact that Hugh is not aware of someone else doing the exact same thing merely makes his work more precious, and in no way invalidates it.

[FourthBase]

I agree. If someone is the only one (or one of the only ones) saying something, I'm far more likely to pay closer attention to it for that very reason. The only thing that grates is Hugh's over-the-top absolute certainty and unrelenting insistence on posting his absolutely-certain theories in almost every thread.

[sunny]

I

especially for Hugh's prodigiously thick skin.

Indeed. I quite admire Hugh's resolute good humor.

[populistindependent]

But it's going to be a struggle for me.

LOL if I can be reformed, anyone can.

[marmot]

Jeff said:

There's no one I could take seriously who would say I'm the only one who gets it.

I have to disagree. Hugh makes his arguments and presents his evidence, and frankly, just as Jeff's own analysis has opened my eyes to previously unsuspected layers of meaning and connections, Hugh has done exactly the same thing.

I am grateful for both Jeff's and Hugh's fascinating insights, and especially for Hugh's prodigiously thick skin.

The fact that Hugh is not aware of someone else doing the exact same thing merely makes his work more precious, and in no way invalidates it.

ditto

[Joe Hillshoist]

Some of what Hugh says should be taught to kids in "grade school", well early in high school anyway.

Some of it is, IMO, not rigourous enugh. In that he doesn't try to disprove his own ideas.

Hugh i hope you are reading this. Your work is awesome, but sometimes gets bogged down in detailks that may or may not be right. Also sometimes there are bizarre coincidences. You may think that these, and other woo woo examples are the result of psy ops, and misdirection, but they are not always the case. I have had enough bllshit coincidences (not bullshit as in false, bullshit as in wtf did that just happen) completely independant of any psy op agenda to accept this happens, especially when focusing on things in detail.

I am not trying to write off your ideas as coincidence, the associative universe or whatever, but I think you need to test for that in your theories to really give them some serious staying power.

For eexample the camo thing. Whatever you say pre gw1 people were army surplus stuff, why cos it was cheap, durable and cheap. this generated cool that created a feedback loop leading to more exposure of camo clothing in the mainstream.

This would have happened anyway. However there is also room in there for your theory of psy op intervention and cultural control. You have got me wondering about post GW1.

"Urban" and "Desert" camo gear seemed to appear everywhere after GW1, especially outside surplus sources. I have no doubt it was diue to the war, andI have no doubt that it kind of made people in military clothing, and by extension military people "cool".

But until some real definite structure of process, ie this happened then this and it ties in with this (insert necessary document) is shown then no matter how accurate your assessment, it can't be taken further.

I would also urge you to try to take it further. If you can be your harshest critic, and mercilessly attack your own ideas then you will find them, well those parts that survive, more robust and more powerful.

It is always harder for someone to discredit your arguments when you have spent significant time trying to do it yourself.

Some of us are aware of things like cointelpro, and how discourse is shaped, but also IMO in that sense you don't take it far enough. Instead of sitting on the surface with names and dates, and attempts to discredit ideas, look deeper.

A classic example of real "keyword hijacking" at a deeper level is what I smart arsedly pointed out on Clamour's Liberal v Leftist thread. (Wdll, in my deluded opinion.)

Right wing vs left wing.

Immediate associations, right and wrong.

Also left, aka "sinister", ie (in todays mindset) maliciously wrong.

So built in to the use of language is a political concept, right is right, left is wrong, and evil to boot.

How does that suit a fascism?

Sorry 4B getting a bit off topic here.

[FourthBase]

Sorry 4B getting a bit off topic here.

Don't worry about it, Joe! Hugh is often capable of pure brilliance, but he desperately needs advice like yours, and both he and the board (hell, maybe the world) would benefit if he put it to use.

[blanc]

strongly object to overtly racist personal attacks
request the moderators look at this.

the blinkered attitudes on women in general being responsible for global warming and suppression of wages and working rights in walmart based on limited personal experience was mildly funny, and just made me want to take the michael. but its gone way past amusing.

[velvetrut]

Speaking of anecdotal evidence re: gender and biological sex, one of the most fascinating books I've read in the past couple of years is Max Valerio's memoir _The Testosterone Files_.

Max is FTM and writes very eloquently about the experience of coming on to testosterone. His book changed the way I think about biological sex.

Max's blog: http://maxwolfvalerio.typepad.com/wolf_man_howls/

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

Some of what Hugh says should be taught to kids in "grade school", well early in high school anyway.

Some of it is, IMO, not rigourous enugh. In that he doesn't try to disprove his own ideas.

Hugh i hope you are reading this. Your work is awesome, but sometimes gets bogged down in detailks that may or may not be right. Also sometimes there are bizarre coincidences. You may think that these, and other woo woo examples are the result of psy ops, and misdirection, but they are not always the case.

(Er, sorry for this moment about me off topic. )

Thanks for this, Joe. I appreciate your very thoughtful comments. I am working on HMWv3.7 with fewer glitches but it still doesn't come in camo, just midnight blue.

And I appreciate the feedback from all, some more than others. lol.

I grate some through persistance and even *gasp*displays of certainty so I have to have thick skin to keep stepping in front of the dart board. But it's worth it.

Warning: I will continue to point at psy-ops tactics and the inside job of 9/11 so build your ignore button if you need it. Some things need to be said repeatedly or developed outloud, not just told once like a joke.

Speaking of which and I do--
I just met a former military intelligence guy standing in front of a movie theater poster by commenting on what I thought it was as a psy-ops device.
We talked on the street for two hours sharing information.

I learned something about Panama, CNN, air traffic control, and what he hears from contacts on the ground in Afghanistan. He's very concerned about teachings in the Koran, knows the media lie, and wishes we heard more about the US soldiers building shelter for women and orphans in Afghanistan.

He learned about the inside job of 9/11, CIA in the media+drugs, oil war history, and how Jesus' teachings are related to psychological warfare.

He didn't know about the NORAD excercises on 9/11 and told a funny story about his early career that confirmed for both of us how those war games could go live under people's noses.

That's what comes from opening my big mouth - discussion. Dig it...