Economic Totalitarianism

[TPTB_need_war]

Can you go to Vigilant Citizen site. Here http://vigilantcitizen.com/category/pics-of-the-month/

But you got your taxonomy wrong. You link to evidence of using mass media to mind program the masses into w(h)or(e)shiping them, humanism, and idols.

Whereas the Denver airport and the Georgia Guidestrones are the banksters hubris. This is their way of saying, "we are going to do this, and even your God can't stop us". And yet God formed a star of Jesus from their hubris monuments. Satan is allowed to run amok and his hubris will be greatest before the mass cleansing that comes to the earth.

God is again showing that no Tower of Babel or humanistic philosophy will stand.

Europe lost 60% of its population in the Black Death. And it is preparing to repeat this again, because (most) Europeans hate God and they love and worship man.

Realize the banksters will succeed every where that the people have adopted humanism and followed their evil.

Even a child instinctively knows that a gargoyle is evil, yet apparently not all children raised in Europe (I can't find the link to that YouTube that showed Europe's children being taught to be homosexual, for boys to wear skirts, for 5 year olds to play with toys in the same of genitalia).

Look at how some Americans are reacting to this:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/watch-angry-parents-stand-up-to-school-board-over-lessons-on-gay-marriage-room-erupts/

And watch to the end where the school board passes the curriculum in spite of the angry parents.

The blood of the Americans is starting to boil.

[BitcoinForumator]

Since you know the Bible, you know what God forbid. From the Bible perspective and from the perspective of what morals  are from the regular atheist person I'd say that fits into the "satanism" perspective quite easily. What the link above shows is basically a description of everything that was considered "wrong" in the Old Testament.

[TPTB_need_war]

Since you know the Bible, you know what God forbid. From the Bible perspective and from the perspective of what morals  are from the regular atheist person I'd say that fits into the "satanism" perspective quite easily. What the link above shows is basically a description of everything that was considered "wrong" in the Old Testament.

I do not disagree. My point is only that if we are going to make strong, cogent arguments, we need to not mix categories when supporting an argument.

I do not think anyone will disagree that the powers-that-be are indoctrinating the masses through the mass media, etc..

But I was raising the point that these monuments appear to be hubris (not intended for indoctrination at all, rather just boastful). Robert Edward "Ted" Turner has such high pride that he used his real first name when he allegedly created the pseudonym "Robert C. Christian". That "white haired man" reportedly said he chose "Christian" because he is a christian. That is the ultimate hubris in defiance of any fear of God whatsoever.

Subtle indoctrination is not the same category as blatant boasting.

I have an eagle eye for categorizing. It is very important for logic when programming. Separation-of-concerns is a critical skill for robust programming. (now if this damn chronic illness would just get out of my damn way!)


P.S. As I have stated in the past, my personal faith is private. I don't need to share it with anyone. If anyone assumes I am a devout Christian, then they are probably wrong. Some years ago, I realized that bragging about faith was the sure sign of needing confirmation from others and not consistent with any solid faith. We are on a journey of learning. I am very skeptical of those who claim to know everything or have everything figured out (I certainly don't think I do).

[tabnloz]

Pretty obvious to me the US has a problem with violence; not a big surprise for an empire of perpetual war, combined with a society perpetually medicated (for profit) and perpetually propagandised (legally).

The rest of the world does not have these problems on such a scale. But, I will say all this with one caveat - most of the western world lives in relative peace (despite being continually at war), but if our 'system' ever completely implodes maybe the reptilian brain within us all will again take over.

Why do you Europeans all have this myopia about the USA? Because you've been fed this propaganda by your European masters. You follow like a good slave to disarmament and thus you will experience another holocaust. All 17 of the prior holocausts have been preceded by disarming the citizens.

Did you forget the 1 million Jews you Europeans exterminated in a few short years. How about the Inquisition holocaust and tortures.

You've had a period of "peace" because you bought off everyone with humanism (man is greater than God) and debt socialism. So you all were too busy promoting women to have sex with each other, promoting the death of God, while simultaneously increasingly your religious devotion to humanism.

Now comes the reality and the pay back... Stay tuned for your education...

Edit: the USA has been so infiltrated by drugs, broken families, and other dysfunction, that indeed there are ample nutcases to do mass shootings. But if the people were armed, these mass shooters would be dead long before attaining the fame they desire. And this would probably put a damper on it. You certainly don't see mass shootings at ranches in Texas, because you would only have dead psychopaths as a result.

Your bolded comment is more what I am referring to. While I understand you think I am being short sighted, I'm not ignoring that throughout history the advantage of weaponry has enabled some terrible things to have been done. Is that a risk of happening again? Perhaps, but the price being paid in the meantime are these multiple mass shootings. For Americans, for reasoning, I know you need look no further than the Revolution. But today I see the population being placated by the media and the dominant narrative of corporations & governments of never ending 'wars on something', which is a tyranny is ever there was one. It's a kind of fascism, yet no revolution.

There are an unbelievable number of similarly themed shootings in the US. This is undeniable. People shouldn't have to go to school or church or work strapped just in case an inadequate person decides to take their 'frustrations' out on others. And no one knows when and where these events will occur: a church, a theatre, a school, anywhere. Point is that unless by complete chance, there will be no armed citizens on the spot to stop someone getting a few rounds off. The People already have the ability to be armed, but this is not stopping the acts from occurring. There are no mass shootings on ranches because the shooters are inadequate and choose public places they associate with their failures.

And as I said, if we go total Mad Max / Totalitarianism, then it is a different story and the humanism of most of the developed world (for themselves really - not the people who have been bombed for a generation) will come back to bite us.

No one forgets the atrocities of the WW2 and I take your point that these things happened under the nose of Europe. I also don't forget the Allied atrocities (hiroshima & nagasaki), the Russian atrocities, Japanese (against the Chinese, Pinoys, Malays, Australians and Dutch) etc etc. The nature of man does not change, especially in war, because a necessary conditioning for war is a hatred of the enemy.

I suppose at the end of the day, it comes down to the choice between tighter gun laws to hopefully lessen the amount of gun death and maintaining the constitutional right to bear arms in the event of the government / bad guys over running the country / your land.

[TPTB_need_war]

tabnloz, the shootings are perfectly fit to those who deserve them:

As the muslims start shooting more and more in Europe, you will understand. The shootings are occurring exactly where they should, amongst those idiots who have disarmed themselves. And their reaction will be to further disarm themselves, thus making their problem even worse.

It is so amazing that people are incapable of seeing the generative essence of an issue, and instead opt for increasing the poison that caused the problem in the first place.

Making guns illegal will not stop the nutcases from shooting. They have the powerful incentive of feeling totally empty from the drugs they've abused, and the fame and loveattention of going out with a bang.

Europeans will soon experience this from Muslims who have a very strong incentive to go out shooting and bombing to the paradise of virgins awaiting them in heaven. As someone wrote upthread, the gun control in Europe doesn't prevent these people from having possession of AK-47s in Europe.

The modern world is totally devoid of real interaction and real love. It is filled with drugs, addictions, etc.. It is no wonder that the modern world is destroying itself. The banksters are leading these idiots to their destiny.

If you don't want to be part of that, you have to break away.

Your European media will indoctrinate you to think the solution is the cause of the problem. And not having good critical thinking skills, most people fall for it.

Edit: I want to do some more research on this issue of why Europeans have lower incidence of school shootings.

[TPTB_need_war]

Look at how some Americans are reacting to this:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/watch-angry-parents-stand-up-to-school-board-over-lessons-on-gay-marriage-room-erupts/

And watch to the end where the school board passes the curriculum in spite of the angry parents.

The blood of the Americans is starting to boil.

I will postulate it is our native American blood that is causing the Americans to fight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_Alcatraz

Although the Alcatraz inspired many other Pan-Indian movements to occur, it also showed how gender played a part in Indian activism. Mainstream media had an obsession with documenting the stereotype of the male Indian warrior and as such it was the men that were highlighted as being the leaders and creators of movements.[24] Women such as LaNada Means, Stella Leach and the other women at Alcatraz receive little attention for contributing to the movement. As a result, the many women who had initiated movements such as Wounded Knee Incident would never be as well known as Russell Means and other AIM leaders, even though, in the case of Wounded Knee, of the 350 occupiers, just 100 were men.

I know one thing for sure about filipinos (native peoples). These are normally very peaceful people, but cause their blood to boil and there will be bolo knife slitting someone's gut open. I must admit one of my faults, is I have that same trait. If I am not careful, I can lose my cool head and logic and become a ball of fury. I have tried to control this over the years, but it is just innate. A force swells up inside me and the adrenalin rush is extremely strong. I don't know if this exclusive to native peoples or if pure Europeans also have this trait?

Never ever criticize a filipino's family or tradition. They will never forget it. And you will pay for it one day.

I am going to do some Google searches and see if I can find similar attitudes in Europe, especially European women.

[TPTB_need_war]

Edit: I want to do some more research on this issue of why Europeans have lower incidence of school shootings.

Well a quick Google search reveals that Europe has worse crime than the USA:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html

However this may be a classification error:

http://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/01/12/fact-checking-ben-swann-is-the-uk-really-5-times-more-violent-than-the-us/

And even when viewing a chart such as this only on homicide:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Bear in mind that the majority of those homicides in the USA are occurring in ghettos, not in the white, suburban communities. I think I read that the incidence in ghettos is roughly 20 times higher.

Another interesting set of charts which show there isn't a direct correlation between widespread gun ownership and gun violence:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2012/12/14/schoo-shooting-how-do-u-s-gun-homicides-compare-with-the-rest-of-the-world/\

Harvard study said gun control doesn't reduce murder:

http://www.theacru.org/harvard_study_gun_control_is_counterproductive/

[P]er capita murder overall is only half as frequent in the United States as in several other nations where gun murder is rarer, but murder by strangling, stabbing, or beating is much more frequent. (p. 663 – emphases in original)

As I alluded to above, the socioeconomic factors and the megadeaths point to USA being less violent in homogeneous regions and Europe as being much more violent:

http://cogitansiuvenis.blogspot.com/2012/07/is-america-really-more-violent-than.html?showComment=1359473517231#c3892892713949375532

You are right on your first assesment, the socioeconomic factors, and wrong on your second. Europe, like the US, had much less restrictive gun control regulations decades ago but murders by firearm were still very low. Moreover, there has actually been a study conducted and published by Harvard, looking at the US and European nations, that showed no correlation between gun control and violent crime.

Here are some things to consider:

1) One thing I notice many gun control advocates, especially those from Europe, fail to take into account is government instigated murder and wars. Factor those in and the violence rate between America is not even close. Ultimately there is a reason why Americans love their guns, and it isn't for sporting or hunting.

2) Most European nations are far less multi-culturally diverse than the United States, however, European nations that have greater ethnic and cultural population differences have seen much more systemic violence. Does that play into this? If you look at the homocide rates in America, in areas were there is a relatively homogenous population, even with a proponderance of guns, murders are near nonexistant. In areas were it is culturally fracturious, and even with strict gun control laws, murders are astronomically high.

Now the cultural point may be overstated, it simply could the difference between urban and rural. But I can attest, after much study into the matter, gun control has nothing to do with violence.

http://cogitansiuvenis.blogspot.com/2012/07/is-america-really-more-violent-than.html?showComment=1357066786020#c5783643493416310812

Countries like switzerland have far more high powered rifles per capita than America yet negligible firearm violence. 2) The US has banned high powered firearms in the past and the effect was nill. I am firmly a believer that crime is largely a social issue. Legalizing drugs would certainly help, as well as doing a better job assimilating immigrants. And this is why I think Sweden has been trending higher than other scandinavian nations; I have read a lot of reports at the inability of the Sweds to assimilate their muslim immigrants.

http://cogitansiuvenis.blogspot.com/2012/07/is-america-really-more-violent-than.html?showComment=1411156648003#c5185238789511109252

But if that were to hold true then why is that some of the most heavily armed states in America are also the states that have the lowest crime rates? It is a socio-cultural issue, however, guns don't impact that at all. Firearms are tools, nothing more, and nothing less.

Here is the thing though, even if I were of the opinion that it was, I would still be for firearm ownership. The reason being that civilization, like a persons survival rate, trends to zero on a long enough time frame. Eventually there is a collapse event, be it small like with Hurricane Katrina, large like the civil wars in Syria or Ukraine or catastrophic like the collapse of Rome. Firearm ownership is the ultimate insurance plan.

http://cogitansiuvenis.blogspot.com/2012/07/is-america-really-more-violent-than.html?showComment=1389140514314#c1382119413711000986

The key word is Atlanta. You live in a city, that until recently, had been among the worst cities in America for violent crime. My city of Seattle has a violent crime rate half of that of Atlanta and a murder rate that is 1/5th. But even when compared to Big cities Atlanta doesn't fare well. New York has a murder rate a 1/3 of Atlanta. Even LA, which I personally would never want to reside, has a murder rate about half of Atlanta.

There are cities in America that have violent crime that are equal to are less than many European countries but those cities are generally less than 250,000 and reside in rural conservative states.

Long story short, there are plenty of cities where you can see 16 year old girls walking out late at night and feel safe, but it comes as no surprise that it wouldn't be that way in Atlanta.

And I bet you that the ownership of guns by the general law abiding population in Atlanta is lower than in those smaller towns where violence is nil.

[trollercoaster]

http://crimeresearch.org/2013/12/murder-and-homicide-rates-before-and-after-gun-bans/

[rpietila]

Who says the goal of society should be to reduce murder?


I am content in the society where authorities do not practice murder (Finland is good example, USA very bad in this regard)

When someone murders, he should be put to fair trial and if found guilty, executed (Trial has many issues everywhere, and speedy one can be criticized but a slow one is even more of triumph of law over justice).

If someone chooses to murder, it is in my opinion his choice, and does not belong to the government any more than if someone chooses to inject heroin or drive 200 km/h. Unlike the two other examples, because murder infringes another's right to life, it is a crime. What belongs to government (if such exists in the area) is to coordinate the justice.

My raising level of understanding has now lead me to question implicit socialist biases such as "it is good to reduce the occurrence of murder" (without regard to human rights) or "it is good to reduce the traffic deaths" (again, same). I also believe "it is good to reduce antidepressants" but it does not go as easily as just leaving them out, the individual reasons for using them are many, and the different "good goals" are at odds (traffic safety may cause depression, while reducing traffic deaths and potentially not affecting murder rate).

[TPTB_need_war]

Apparently there is no statistical advantage for gun control:

http://www.mintpressnews.com/the-facts-that-neither-side-wants-to-admit-about-gun-control/207152/

I was preparing to write something similar to what rpietila has written, except I would phrase it as man wants to believe he can perfect nature (stomp out every last incidence of violence with a gun for example, similar to the extreme of a 100% vegan diet, trying to squash out the last diminishing returns and in the process squashing out the life). But nature is already perfect in the sense that it is diverse and thus resilient (able to evolve and adapt to provide fitness to the changing environment). See man really wants a uniform distribution (wants everything insured, safe, and perfectly stable with no variability of outcomes), but a uniform distribution mathematically does not allow for any variability and thus it is dead. So man really prefers to be dead. The closer man can get to be walking dead, then more contented he will be. And thus the new world order proceeds, because this is what humans want.

(Edit: Armstrong has mentioned a similar theme numerous times, stating that socialists want to end the business cycle and turn the economy into a stable state without any oscillation, but the fact is that without cycles there can't be inertia and friction, and without friction there can't be any past and present and future, because the speed-of-light would infinite and thus the future would coincide with the present and past. For anything to exist, we must have variability, cycles, imperfection, diversity, friction, etc. For macsga, pure indeterminate chaos would require an infinite speed-of-light and infinitesimal Planck's constant for there could be no cross-correlations, i.e. friction, and everything would need to be perfectly disordered. This is one of the concepts I want to attempt to formalize with math or find others who have already done so, if ever I am healthy enough again to have the free time)

And so the socialists will soon get their mortal wish.

Europeans seem to be very proud of their heightened levels of perfection. They believe they are more civilized. More educated. More advanced from the savages of nature. They really believe that utter nonsense government and man can coordinate a better world. Why nonsense? Geez, did the Europeans even study history when they were in school.  

What I can say about Americans is many are dumb, oblivious, and fatten cows ready for the slaughter. Give them their daily junk food and mass media (facebook) fix, and they are good compliant cows. But there are some Americans (probably not a majority, perhaps not even a super minority) who understand the importance of independence from the government.

(Edit: speaking of independence and Thomas Paine's Common Sense, what sort of psychosis or hubris does it require for Robert Edward "Ted" Turner <owner of CNN and promulgator of public calls for eugenics and reproduction control> to claim Thomas Paine as his hero, based on a misquote that leaders must lead and the sheep must get out of the way. Just because he achieved great wealth leveraged on the human addiction to billboards and then television, how did he calculate that gives him supreme insight into all matters that humans diversely decide for themselves in a diverse free market that has billions of trades per day. The speed-of-light isn't even fast enough for him to receive real-time knowledge of each of those trades, much less be able to correctly decide the optimum fitness for all of them. Any man this insane shouldn't be given the keys to even his own private nursing home.)

Other than rpietila (from Finland and who was defiant of government when I first met him on another internet forum in 2007ish), I don't know what percentage of Europeans understand that. I've never knowingly seen another European in these forums argue for stark independence from government. Are there any?

As for the government coordinating justice, the Bible is clear (Romans, etc) that we get the government we deserve. If we follow the 10 commandments, we don't even need a government to rule over us. The size of the government is proportional to the evil in the society. I had many long arguments with Marshall Swing (from the same forum where I met rpietila) about the Bible not stating that we must have a government to apply justice (1 Samuel 8 ) and rather that Romans is stating we get these governments because we are unable to follow the Lord's plea in 1 Samuel 8. I've also had arguments with some caustic atheists who support the argument that the Lord wanted to kill babies in 1 Samuel 15, when in fact 1 Samuel 8, the Lord told the people what would happen to them (natural destiny) should they desire to have a government (King) to rule over them.

(Edit: The theme of the Bible from the very start is that we were given everything we needed as Adam and Eve. We were already in the Garden of Eden as naturally created. Yet we were not contented with nature and due to the whispers in the ear of Satan, the female was the first one who partook of the forbidden fruit. And Adam followed the temptation of his rib. Okay that all sounds unscientific and looney, but yet I have been able to see that all man's great ills come back to being unsatisfied with the natural variability. Even all this anthropocentric climate change <global warming> and peak oil and all these other religious nonsense <unscientific> faiths stooped in junk science, are all founded in man's innate temptation to think man is in control. Man is so easily hoodwinked because he can't accept how powerless he truly is. Take for example my health. Although I could on one hand argue to myself that probably if I had never traveled to the Philippines, maybe I would not have gotten infected with what ever has caused my body to be chronically ill for the past several years. But can I be sure of that when so many others who haven't traveled out of their Western countries also have similar chronic illness. And what would I have not learned and not experienced, by not taking my diversified path through this life. Nature is diverse with many experiments, because this is the way fitness works in the statistical model of "simulated annealing" where the dynamic model of the optimum fitness is always changing as a moving target and can't be known a priori nor even in the present nor in the past. For example, the real GDP. What is the optimum measure of GDP? The answer is there isn't one, because every person's basket weighting of the price deflator can be distinct.)

P.S. I have posted in the past on the Bible being a regurgitated theme from the Sun gods of pagan societies which preceded the Bible. So I am not ignorant of cogent arguments that the Bible could be a regurgitated faith. As for delusion, I find truthful ideas where ever I find them. The power of discernment is one of the key capacities we are on this journey to develop. As I sit here today, uncertain whether my death draws near or a miraculous cure will rescue me, I contemplate what if anything can or did I do that has any meaning whatsoever. Would it really matter if I just pulled this plug on this arduous pain and struggle. What am I striving for at this point? I think it is a love for people who want to follow 1 Samuel 8, whether there is a God or not, the point being they don't want to idolize man, government, nor evil actions that will hurt themselves as outlined in the 10 Commandments. A love and appreciation for the natural diversity. Is it even possible or synergistic to help men achieve this. I always reminded of the Parable of the Talents, and that we are not to bury or waste our core talent that was entrusted to us. Every time I have tried to step away from the one thing I do really well, I usually fail. It seems we were really made unique and each of us has some unique talent. And then there are these psychopaths that believe that only they are unique (or maybe it is a subconscious realization and fear that they are not in control that drives them) and everyone else is a stupid sheep or cow. Yet it seems so many of us bury our talent. In my case, I feel so dejected about being sick and unable to produce. Maybe there is some reason I've had this bad luck. Maybe I am supposed to learn something from this. Perhaps it is about learning to appreciate more or to accept that I am not in control. I found it interesting that Robert C. Christian wrote in "Common Sense Revisited" that the elite are not in control, implying they can only offer what the masses will accept. Again this comes right back to the lesson of 1 Samuel 8.

[TPTB_need_war]

After editing the prior post, I entertained a thought I had in the past which I assume many of you have also had, which is how ironic it is that everything has been sold to the Europeans on the virtues of enhanced peace (e.g. the formation of the EU to end wars in Europe, the disarmament of the population, the caricature of the USA as a violent war machine that stomps on other countries and has severe violence), yet as all lies are eventually revealed when the tide goes back out and we can see who wasn't wearing underwear, Europeans have deceived themselves.

The power of discernment. After 2000 - 3000 years, Europe still hasn't gained this? Is there no teaching of experience handed down through generations? Did Hitler burn all the books? What happened to the study of history and the failure of every government, currency, and civilization that ever existed?

I must admit I didn't learn much from my ancestors. And didn't really make these insights about world or US history while I was studying it. It was only as I matured and began to look at everything holistically that I assimilated the data that had been presented to me in school. Reading Armstrong further advanced some percolating assimilation that was brewing in my mind since at least roughly 9/11. Perhaps your experiences are similar?

[generalizethis]

OMG. Not this again. The murals at the Denver airport depict a unification against Russia--notice no Russian kid in the peaceful flag waving ceremony and the scimitar in the hands of the gas masked boogie man, and when did a gargoyle mean Satan? As for the pentagram, if you mash together enough landmarks you'll get a pentagram. There's probably dozens upon dozens the tin foil hat brigade missed since they stopped at the first (most convenient) one.

You will pull illogic from the bowels of your religious devotion to debunking anything that would lead any credence to faith. Yet you don't look in the mirror at your own religious faith in doing so.

All I can say is continue on to your destiny. You won't have to wait long.

The banksters worship the Great Pyramids because they both believe they are a superior race that comes from alien visits, they also view these great structures as Kings triumph over God. Obviously the Denver airport and Georgia Guidestones are the only 2 significant landmarks constructed in the USA by the ruling elite to tell us their plans.

And it is so ironic that the locations happen to form a star over the USA that are symbolic of Jesus Christ's 5 wounds (hands, feet, and forehead).

Even Robert C Christian did not plan to build the Georgia Guidestones at the location they were built. The location was suggested to him by a christian.

Edit: why the hell would you take images of global death and destruction with a subsequent peace where there is a woman holding the hexagram star wrapped around the blades of war, and pigeon hole that to some obscure interpretation about Russia. Because you want to fit the facts to your confirmation bias. You don't go with the common sense interpretation.

Edit#2: everything that conflicts with your hate of God is tinfoil conspiracy, yet you take what is a common sense imagery depicting death and destruction and form some tinfoil conspiracy involving Russia. Where is your consistency in logic?

Edit#3: who had the incentive to do this? Even the runways form a Nazi swastika:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Denver_Airport_conspiracy_theories

Edit#4: http://www.crystalinks.com/gargoyles.html

Often gargoyles were used to assist the Church in conveying messages to the common people. Due to literacy being uncommon, images were the best way to constantly convey ideas. Gargoyles were used as a representation of evil. It is thought that they were used to scare people into coming to church, reminding them that the end of days is near. It is also thought that their presence assured congregants that evil is kept outside of the churchÕs walls. However, some medieval clergy viewed gargoyles as a form of idolatry.

Gargoyles represent evil. They are also symbolic of the human weaknesses of idolatry and inability to fear evil.

Why are there so many gargoyles in Europe and so few in the USA. Hmmm.

The first time I saw a gargoyle as child, I inherently knew it was evil. And I wasn't seeing them regularly on my church or other buildings.

I have no hatred for god (I don't believe in a god to hate), so save the sermonizing for another thread. Gargoyles are commonly known to help with water run-off and to ward off evil (i thought everyone knew this)--maybe your encounter with one as a child should be reevaluated with that in mind.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gargoyle When I was a kid I was bored at church because I knew the preacher was full of shit, but that's me.

As for the airport, who's to say my crappy theory isn't better than any of the other crappy theories? Why is your crappy theory that you pigeon hole around your Revelation's inkblot beliefs any different than my pigeon holing it based that it was built during the cold war and could possibly have been funded by pro-democracy anti-communist who asked the artist to convey a certain political message--but I can't be certain (nor be bothered to care that much) because i don't have god on my side.  

[TPTB_need_war]

I have no hatred for god (I don't believe in a god to hate), so save the sermonizing for another thread. Gargoyles are commonly known to help with water run-off and to ward off evil (i thought everyone knew this)--maybe your encounter with one as a child should be reevaluated with that in mind.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gargoyle When I was a kid I was bored at church because I knew the preacher was full of shit, but that's me.

As for the airport, whose to say my crappy theory isn't better than any of the other crappy theories? Why is your crappy theory that you pigeon hole around your Revelation's inkblot beliefs any different than my pigeon holing it based that it was built during the cold war and could possibly have been funded by pro-democracy anti-communist who asked the artist to convey a certain political message--but I can't be certain (nor be bothered tocare that much) because i don't have god on my side.  

Debate can bring out the truths and falsehoods, so it is good you replied.

Just remember logic is one of my super strong suites, so be prepared.

Did you consider that a gutter and drain of any form also accomplishes the same function. So obviously the main distinction of the Gargoyles is not the water draining function, but rather the evil that it depicts. Of course if I did a Google search, I already reviewed all the arguments about Gargoyles. The other one being that they were thought to scare off evil spirits, but that wouldn't make any sense either because evil spirits would obviously not be fooled by a inanimate statue. So the only rational explanation for the existence of evil depictions on the outside of churches (afaik mainly in Europe), is as I explained in my prior post that these were used to remind the church goers of the evil that lay outside the church and also as a form of idols (symbolism) for those too unstudied to appreciate the lessons of the Bible in earnest. One of the 10 Commandments is do not have idols (the Europeans have idolized their social system, the power of the European man and system to create more peace than the savage beasts of the USA, etc). The Gargoyle in the Denver airport is apparently not functional as a water drain.

So again to distill it for you, the logic is that the only unique purpose for which you would use an elaborately sculpted (and thus more costly) depiction of evil instead of a normal gutter or abbreviated aqueduct (as I assume the Romans did), is because there was some marketing purpose.

As for the theory of the purpose of some of the Denver airport murals (and some other eccentric features), again you seem to not have grasped the logic I stated. The murals depict all human races/cultures (go look again!) and countries of the world undergoing war, death, and destruction. So this obviously not something specific to Russia. We don't need any theory whatsoever. We just need to open our eyes.

As for whether those murals correspond to anything in the Bible, I don't think that was my point at all. My point and theory was the powers-that-be that run this world are being boastful about their plans for the near future. It can also serve as a forbearing so the elite can take he high ground of having warned humanity of their impending doom if they did not change their habits. So we won't have to wait long to test my theory. My common sense logic is who would have the motivation to fund and produce such exorbitant displays of evil? They aren't in a place in the mass media where they can be used to indoctrinate the masses, thus their purpose can only be hubris (or insanity). Somehow you conflated my latter posts wherein I wrote about Biblical parables, and seems you've also conflated that I am a christian when in fact I wrote that anyone who assumes I am a devout christian would probably be wrong.

You are just all over the place with conflation and illogic. You may be a good poet, but you do not apparently have the logic skills to be a good programmer.

Edit: you claim you have no adverse reaction to those people who express any words about Biblical parables, even if reviewing them for the truth they might espouse independent of any claim that a God exists (and even what God would entail, i.e. some people might only claim that God is the Universe as natural). Yet I see you ridiculing and conflating when ever you see any such words. It as if your primitive, post-paleozoic, hunter-gatherer emotions overtake your pre-frontal cerebral cortex.

[generalizethis]

I have no hatred for god (I don't believe in a god to hate), so save the sermonizing for another thread. Gargoyles are commonly known to help with water run-off and to ward off evil (i thought everyone knew this)--maybe your encounter with one as a child should be reevaluated with that in mind.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gargoyle When I was a kid I was bored at church because I knew the preacher was full of shit, but that's me.

As for the airport, whose to say my crappy theory isn't better than any of the other crappy theories? Why is your crappy theory that you pigeon hole around your Revelation's inkblot beliefs any different than my pigeon holing it based that it was built during the cold war and could possibly have been funded by pro-democracy anti-communist who asked the artist to convey a certain political message--but I can't be certain (nor be bothered tocare that much) because i don't have god on my side.  

Debate can bring out the truths and falsehoods, so it is good you replied.

Just remember logic is one of my super strong suites, so be prepared.

Did you consider that a gutter and drain of any form also accomplishes the same function. So obviously the main distinction of the Gargoyles is not the water draining function, but rather the evil that it depicts. Of course if I did a Google search, I already reviewed all the arguments about Gargoyles. The other one being that they were thought to scare off evil spirits, but that wouldn't make any sense either because evil spirits would obviously not be fooled by a inanimate statue. So the only rational explanation for the existence of evil depictions on the outside of churches (afaik mainly in Europe), is as I explained in my prior post that these were used to remind the church goers of the evil that lay outside the church and also as a form of idols (symbolism) for those too unstudied to appreciate the lessons of the Bible in earnest. One of the 10 Commandments is do not have idols (the Europeans have idolized their social system, the power of the European man and system to create more peace than the savage beasts of the USA, etc). The Gargoyle in the Denver airport is apparently not functional as a water drain.

So again to distill it for you, the logic is that the only unique purpose for which you would use an elaborately sculpted (and thus more costly) depiction of evil instead of a normal gutter or abbreviated aqueduct (as I assume the Romans did), is because there was some marketing purpose.

As for the theory of the purpose of some of the Denver airport murals (and some other eccentric features), again you seem to not have grasped the logic I stated. The murals depict all races (go look again!) and countries of the world undergoing war, death, and destruction. So this obviously not something specific to Russia. We don't need any theory whatsoever. We just need to open our eyes.

As for whether those murals correspond to anything in the Bible, I don't think that was my point at all. My point and theory was the powers-that-be that run this world are being boastful about their plans for the near future. So we won't have to wait long to test my theory. Somehow you conflated my latter posts wherein I wrote about Biblical wisdom, and seems you've also conflated that I am a christian when in fact I wrote that anyone who assumes I am a devout christian would probably be wrong.

You are just all over the place with conflation and illogic. You may be a good poet, but you do not apparently have the logic skills to be a good programmer.

Dude, using inanimate objects to scare off ghosts isn't logical, it's that special way some people think. Or else the idea of ghosts or bad spirits or charms or cursed dolls wouldn't exist at all.

Also, for my theory, I said it was races uniting to destroy Russia (an American fantasy). And it is as good as your revelations dependent theory--I didn't say you were a christian (more that you succumbed to the Revelations ink blot) but you did say I hated god with no evidence.   At heart I don't even think our theories are that far off. The major difference is switching banks and America and the world for Russia. But seeing as it was put on American soil at the height of the cold war, I give mine the edge.

[rpietila]

Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.

Given a world population of roughly 7 billion, the above sentence means a holocaust exterminating 13 of every 14 people on earth. The above phrase sounds so upstanding, and most people won't even bother to calculate its true meaning.

Oh the irony - If I go about calling for holocaust to those I feel stupider than me, I will actually be caught and sentenced. (Happened to my friends for much less than calling for mass extermination...)

These guys inscribing such in stone, they apparently feel they are above others ... That's some high stakes game dudes, in front of the Great White Throne 

[TPTB_need_war]

Dude, using inanimate objects to scare off ghosts isn't logical, it's that way people think. Or else the idea of ghosts or bad spirits wouldn't exist at all.

Again my point is the only purpose for Gargoyles was marketing. And your retort is confirmation that a Gargoyle represents evil (to the people the marketing is targeted towards). Do you have any logic?

 I had already completed all of these analysis before I wrote my first post that launched our debate.

Also, for my theory, I said it was races uniting to destroy Russia (an American fantasy).

There is no such fantasy in the USA. I am from the USA and that was never presented to me nor anyone I know. I have no idea where you got that misinformation. Must be another of those propaganda that your European masters indoctrinate into you.

We defeated Russia. Why would be at all concerned about needing to destroy Russia? Americans have always had a concillatory policy with past enemies, helping to rebuild Japan and Reagan and Gorbachev forging peace. (I later learned from Armstrong what a fraud that was, but we are talking about the popular American perspective here).

The murals depict the war machine attacking all the races. So if it turns out that Russia instigates WW3 (as it may be doing by starting bombing in Syria on precisely Armstrong's ECM turn date of 2015.75), then such a theory would be entirely consistent with the obvious visual depictions of a world holocaust and then a victory for the united world with an occult 6-pointed hexgram star (foisted on the Jewish state by the zionists) on one of the flags (note I had originally thought this was the only flag on the mural perhaps but I now see that is not the case). It appears to be a United Nations peace. It doesn't seem to depict Russia as the enemy.

And it is as good as your revelations dependent theory--I didn't say you were a christian (more that you succumbed to the Revelations ink blot) but you did say I hated god with no evidence.   At heart I don't even think our theories are that far off. The major difference is switching banks and America and the world for Russia. But seeing as it was put on American soil at the height of the cold war, I give mine the edge.

My theory had nothing to do with Revelations. You decided to conflate my orthogonal posts. I didn't tell you to do that. My theory is (and I repeat for the 3rd time), that the murals depict the plans of the global elite for a period of global war, death, and destruction (and from Armstrong I intuit starting roughly 2018). Revelation is a theory about the end of the world as we know it. I didn't write that in the post about the murals. There may be a connection to Revelation, but I wasn't making that claim in my theory about the minimum purpose of the murals. I did write that the elite may have thought they outsmarted "God"[1] but their landmarks also form (under one interpretation) a 5-pointed pentagram star which is typically representative of Jesus's 5 wounds. The irony of the serendipity (strange attactor of chaos) should be instructive to them what they don't control. Or stated another way, "you can't do just one thing" (the Butterfly effect is always in force and Armstrong wrote about that this week).

Again you assumed I succumbed to anything because you are incapable of separation-of-concerns. You are mismash everything together in your brain and unable to keep concepts orthogonal.

Yes our theories might not be far apart actually as I noted above, except stating the theory in context of Russia as the enemy is very myopic. The evil is omnipresent and it is inside of us the humans and our insatiable desire to void nature.

The Denver airport was constructed in the mid-1990s. That was not the height of the cold war.

If your thinking is that these murals were a creation of culture in the USA, I know of no culture in the USA what would fund and create such other than the possibly the super secret elite. Who would have the power and funds to get that done with the permission of the local government? It just doesn't make much sense to argue this is some artifact of the Cold War and exempifies that you are very ignorant of the USA. Even the baby boomers when they went through their anti-war phase in the 1960s would not have created such depictions.

[1] Again "God" doesn't have to be a white bearded man in the sky. It could for some people just be the natural order of the Universe. I am not willing to ignore information. Remember Chaos Theory teaches us there is hidden information in noise. You seem very willing to lump everything together and toss the baby out with the bathwater.

[generalizethis]

Dude, using inanimate objects to scare off ghosts isn't logical, it's that way people think. Or else the idea of ghosts or bad spirits wouldn't exist at all.

Again my point is the only purpose for Gargoyles was marketing. And your retort is confirmation that a Gargoyle represents evil (to the people the marketing is targeted towards). Do you have any logic?

 I had already completed all of these analysis before I wrote my first post that launched our debate.

Also, for my theory, I said it was races uniting to destroy Russia (an American fantasy).

There is no such fantasy in the USA. I am from the USA and that was never presented to me nor anyone I know. I have no idea where you got that misinformation. Must be another of those propaganda that your European masters indoctrinate into you.

We defeated Russia. Why would be at all concerned about needing to destroy Russia? Americans have always had a concillatory policy with past enemies, helping to rebuild Japan and Reagan and Gorbachev forging peace. (I later learned from Armstrong what a fraud that was, but we are talking about the popular American perspective here).

The murals depict the war machine attacking all the races. So if it turns out that Russia instigates WW3 (as it may be doing by starting bombing in Syria on precisely Armstrong's ECM turn date of 2015.75), then such a theory would be entirely consistent with the obvious visual depictions of a world holocaust and then a victory for the united world with an occult 6-sided star (foisted on the Jewish state by the zionists) being the only prominent flag in the victory ceremony on the final mural.

And it is as good as your revelations dependent theory--I didn't say you were a christian (more that you succumbed to the Revelations ink blot) but you did say I hated god with no evidence.   At heart I don't even think our theories are that far off. The major difference is switching banks and America and the world for Russia. But seeing as it was put on American soil at the height of the cold war, I give mine the edge.

My theory had nothing to do with Revelations. You decided to conflated my orthogonal posts. I didn't tell you to do that. My theory is (and I repeat for the 3rd time), that Revelations is a theory about the end of the world as we know it. I didn't write that in the post about the murals. There may be a connection to Revelation, but I wasn't making that claim in my theory about the minimum purpose of the murals.

Again you assumed I succumbed to anything because you are incapable of separation-of-concerns. You are mismash everything together in your brain and unable to keep concepts orthogonal.

Yes our theories might not be far apart actually as I noted above, except stating the theory in context of Russia as the enemy is very myopic. The evil is omnipresent and it is inside of us the humans and our insatiable desire to void nature.

The Denver airport was constructed in the mid-1990s. That was not the height of the cold war.

Go edit the wiki page to fit what you want gargoyles to be and I'll go edit the Denver airport page to fit the height of the cold war 

If you don't want me to think you are talking about revelations, don't mention or cite it. I gotta confess i skim past most of your text as it is long winded and doesn't get to the point.

Again, the murals are an inkblot for every tin foil hat to throw whatever meme they are currently harboring at. It's weird and vague enough to entice suspicion and grant the imagination its wildest fantasy. But I guess we'll find out 2018, won't we.

Next time type, "the murals depict the plans of the global elite for a period of global war, death, and destruction starting roughly 2018." The rest is indulgence.

[rpietila]

Satan and his angels know and believe the Bible, and they can themselves read that they will be thrown to the lake of fire.

(If you pity them, consider that they have made their choice, and we should respect it)

All the ones analysing these messages are working in compartments. They seldom know or even have any idea of that. The U.S. terror forces have more transitioned to use metadata instead of the actual contents of communication (when selecting targets for assassinations), perhaps because they are facing so much (potential) defection among the ranks of those people who will need to read so much Christian and liberty-centric speech. Better designate upcomers to "terrorists" simply based on their connections.

[TPTB_need_war]

I just noticed something quite peculiar on the final Denver mural. It appears the Russian flag and the USA flag are merged!

[trollercoaster]

Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.

Given a world population of roughly 7 billion, the above sentence means a holocaust exterminating 13 of every 14 people on earth. The above phrase sounds so upstanding, and most people won't even bother to calculate its true meaning.

Oh the irony - If I go about calling for holocaust to those I feel stupider than me, I will actually be caught and sentenced. (Happened to my friends for much less than calling for mass extermination...)

These guys inscribing such in stone, they apparently feel they are above others ... That's some high stakes game dudes, in front of the Great White Throne 

Ted and Co. have laid the foundations for the useless eaters to voluntarily exterminate themselves, that is the difference.