John Kaminski Goes Off the Deep End

[domi]

Here is John's reponse.

We do what we believe, Dominique. What we call American culture is
responsible for the destruction of the planet.

I read the Bramley book 15 years ago and loved it, except for the bad
footnotes. Jews have preyed upon and destroyed many cultures over time,
and they're doing it again. They say one thing but do another. I don't
have to prove that to you. It's obvious.

I suggest you are refusing to see what is obvious.

Still working on an answer.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

Here is John's reponse.

We do what we believe, Dominique. What we call American culture is
responsible for the destruction of the planet.

I read the Bramley book 15 years ago and loved it, except for the bad
footnotes. Jews have preyed upon and destroyed many cultures over time,
and they're doing it again. They say one thing but do another. I don't
have to prove that to you. It's obvious.

I suggest you are refusing to see what is obvious.

Still working on an answer.

I'm a Jew. Does that mean that I'm contributing to destruction of many cultures and say one thing but do another? If you want, tell him you have a Jewish friend, and ask if all that applies to him as well? Is he any different than your Christian, Muslim, Atheist, Black, Indian, South American, and Chinese friends?

If he has ANY sanity left he'll say "of course not, if your friend was not brainwashed by Israeli culture and nationalistic propaganda!". Then you can say "Well, then the problem isn't the Jewish people, it's Israel - the Jewish people were herded into it and brainwashed en-masse right? You say American culture destroys the planet, but are you going to blame the average American for this just as you blame the average Jew for crimes of Israel?" He's confusing what is the tool and what is the source. The pathocracy is the source, the jewish, american, russian, chinese, north korean, muslim (and so on ad infinitum) peoples are the tools, and always ALWAYS throughout the entirety of history have been.

If he looks at history, basically every nation, every culture of the world, has been involved in some sort of totalitarian and tyrranical system, invaded and killed and ravaged other nations, and had an idea to take over the world. Why not take every person from every nation, and punish them for what their ancestors have done? That wouldn't leave anybody in the world left unpunished, take that to the bank.

He seems to not get that - I wonder if there is a specific approach, specific questions that can be asked that can make him figure it out for once? I'd start with that question about me being your Jewish friend, and if that applies to me, and hopefully he's not totally insane yet :|

But dude, seriously, I'm preying on your culture as we speak. See that white stuff in the air? Yeah, that's your culture being sucked right out of you! Creepy huh? That's my Jewishness acting up again o_O

 

[anart]

Good points, SAO, and points that have been made clear to John time and time again over the past year - still he can't see it, or doesn't want to. It is a shame, in many ways, but I have to stand by the idea at this point that his mind is indeed mush.

 

[Laura]

If he has ANY sanity left he'll say "of course not, if your friend was not brainwashed by Israeli culture and nationalistic propaganda!". Then you can say "Well, then the problem isn't the Jewish people, it's Israel - the Jewish people were herded into it and brainwashed en-masse right? You say American culture destroys the planet, but are you going to blame the average American for this just as you blame the average Jew for crimes of Israel?" He's confusing what is the tool and what is the source. The pathocracy is the source, the jewish, american, russian, chinese, north korean, muslim (and so on ad infinitum) peoples are the tools, and always ALWAYS throughout the entirety of history have been.

SAO, I've said all that to John over and over again. I've tried saying it different ways. I've sent him links to our psychopathy articles; I've sent him a free copy of Secret History and Ponerology; he just can't get past that "mind-lock." He even talks about it in OTHERS:

Have you ever tried telling one of your neighbors about what you think
really happened on 9/11, or in Iraq, or in New Orleans, as opposed to
the way your local TV news reported it?

Observe the stress on the faces of people considering these questions?
Pain, followed by evasion, and a shuffling of the feet. Most people
know, but are afraid to say it.

Welcome to the gatekeepers' perceptual gap, better known as the
mindlock. As our thoughts become frozen by ambivalence and fear, no one
can really answer the question of why we choose to believe lies when
the truth is right in front of us.

The question is: Is John Kaminski's mind frozen by ambivalence and fear? Or is it something else?

I think that Lobaczewski has a much better explanation and it describes Kaminski (and many others) exactly:

Unconscious elimination of data which are, or appear to be, inexpedient gradually turns into habit, and then becomes a custom accepted by society at large. The problem is that any thought process based on such truncated information cannot possibly give rise to correct conclusions; it further leads to subconscious substitution of inconvenient premises by more convenient ones, thereby approaching the boundaries of psychopathology.[...]

...a typical product of conversive thinking: subconscious selection and substitution of data leading to chronic avoidance of the crux of the matter. [...]

Information selection and substitution: The existence of psychological phenomena known to pre-Freudian philosophical students of the subconscious bears repeating. Unconscious psychological processes outstrip conscious reasoning, both in time and in scope, which makes many psychological phenomena possible: including those generally described as conversive, such as subconscious blocking out of conclusions, the selection, and, also, substitution of seemingly uncomfortable premises.

We speak of blocking out conclusions if the inferential process was proper in principle and has almost arrived at a conclusion and final comprehension within the act of internal projection, but becomes stymied by a preceding directive from the subconscious, which considers it inexpedient or disturbing. This is primitive prevention of personality disintegration, which may seem advantageous; however, it also prevents all the advantages which could be derived from consciously elaborated conclusion and reintegration. A conclusion thus rejected remains in our subconscious and in a more unconscious way causes the next blocking and selection of this kind. This can be extremely harmful, progressively enslaving a person to his own subconscious, and is often accompanied by a feeling of tension and bitterness.

We speak of selection of premises whenever the feedback goes deeper into the resulting reasoning and from its database thus deletes and represses into the subconscious just that piece of information which was responsible for arriving at the uncomfortable conclusion. Our subconscious then permits further logical reasoning, except that the outcome will be erroneous in direct proportion to the actual significance of the repressed data. An ever-greater number of such repressed information is collected in our subconscious memory. Finally, a kind of habit seems to take over: similar material is treated the same way even if reasoning would have reached an outcome quite advantageous to the person.

The most complex process of this type is substitution of premises thus eliminated by other data, ensuring an ostensibly more comfortable conclusion. Our associative ability rapidly elaborates a new item to replace the removed one, but it is one leading to a comfortable conclusion. This operation takes the most time, and it is unlikely to be exclusively subconscious. Such substitutions are often effected collectively, in certain groups of people, through the use of verbal communication. That is why they best qualify for the moralizing epithet "hypocrisy" than either of the above-mentioned processes.

The above examples of conversive phenomena do not exhaust a problem richly illustrated in psychoanalytical works. Our subconscious may carry the roots of human genius within, but its operation is not perfect; sometimes it is reminiscent of a blind computer, especially whenever we allow it to be cluttered with anxiously rejected material. This explains why conscious monitoring, even at the price of courageously accepting disintegrative states, is likewise necessary to our nature, not to mention our individual and social good.

There is no such thing as a person whose perfect self-knowledge allows him to eliminate all tendencies toward conversive thinking, but some people are relatively close to this state, while others remain slaves to these processes. Those people who use conversive operations too often for the purpose of finding convenient conclusions, or constructing some cunning paralogistic or paramoralistic statements, eventually begin to undertake such behavior for ever more trivial reasons, losing the capacity for conscious control over their thought process altogether. This necessarily leads to behavior errors which must be paid for by others as well as themselves.
People who have lost their psychological hygiene and capacity of proper thought along this road also lose their natural critical faculties with regard to the statements and behavior of individuals whose abnormal thought processes were formed on a substratum of pathological anomalies, whether inherited or acquired. Hypocrites stop differentiating between pathological and normal individuals, thus opening an "infection entry" for the ponerologic role of pathological factors.

Generally, each community contains people in whom similar methods of thinking were developed on a large scale, with their various deviations as a backdrop. We find this both in characteropathic and psychopathic personalities. Some have even been influenced by others to grow accustomed to such "reasoning", since conversion thinking is highly contagious and can spread throughout an entire society. In "happy times" especially, the tendency for conversion thinking generally intensifies. It appears accompanied by a rising wave of hysteria in said society. Those who try to maintain common sense and proper reasoning finally wind up in the minority, feeling wronged because their human right to maintain psychological hygiene is violated by pressure from all sides. This means that unhappy times are not far away.

"Unhappy Times are not far away." And Kaminski is certainly doing his part to contribute to World Revolution and mass destruction.

 

[Lisa Guliani]

Our website is back online after being completely wiped out for 2 days this weekend by the cowards that continue to hack us.

Today's show is very important.
Please listen if you can get the chance.
This relates to what has been discussed in this thread, in the Bollyn thread, in the Rense thread and to the crap being peddled by Jeff Rense's buddies Vinnie Bridges and Jay Weidner, who have engaged in viciously attacking Laura, Ark & SOTT for the last 5 years.

Tuesday show online now.
http://www.wingtv.net/todaysshow/humancheck_check.php

Get it while it lasts...))

 

[Mark]

Today's show is very important.
Please listen if you can get the chance.
This relates to what has been discussed in this thread, in the Bollyn thread, in the Rense thread and to the crap being peddled by Jeff Rense's buddies Vinnie Bridges and Jay Weidner, who have engaged in viciously attacking Laura, Ark & SOTT for the last 5 years.

Tuesday show online now.
http://www.wingtv.net/todaysshow/humancheck_check.php

Get it while it lasts...))

I'm listening to it, 11 minutes 50 seconds into the show now, and I have to stop right there to write this. I find Victor Thorn to be arrogantly offensive. He's already belittling people and calling people names (presumably his listeners), using terms that don't do you any favors. So much for respectability. In fact, I can't believe you sat right there next to him and let him use the P word repeatedly.

To be aggrevated is one thing, but to act like that is a pure display of lack of self-control and consideration, and it's degrading to women. He's not reaching out to anyone. He's batting people away.

 

[foofighter]

I'm listening to it, 11 minutes 50 seconds into the show now, and I have to stop right there to write this. I find Victor Thorn to be arrogantly offensive. He's already belittling people and calling people names (presumably his listeners), using terms that don't do you any favors. So much for respectability. In fact, I can't believe you sat right there next to him and let him use the P word repeatedly.

To be aggrevated is one thing, but to act like that is a pure display of lack of self-control and consideration, and it's degrading to women. He's not reaching out to anyone. He's batting people away.

Also listened through it now. Thorn also mentions that you guys are "not part of a network". As if that was a good thing. The devil, as you know by now, is in the details. What we have here, the forum, the SOTT team, the QFG/QFS groups, and other related work groups, is a network. This is our strength. We know that we cannot trust our own minds, which is why we stay awake and watch each others backs if one of us falls asleep or loses focus. As a group, as a community, as a network. This is our method, and the only one that will ever work. Don't forget that.

I also noted that you mentioned this as the thread where Judy is exposed. I understand why you said that, but as we both know, that is not the entire truth of it, now is it? Is Kaminski a sacred cow for Victor perhaps?

 

[Mark]

I also noted that you mentioned this as the thread where Judy is exposed. I understand why you said that, but as we both know, that is not the entire truth of it, now is it? Is Kaminski a sacred cow for Victor perhaps?

I sort of cringed when I heard mention of SOTT, given Victor's overall delivery and manner. Victor would do well to get himself under control because loose emotional horses could readily damage what you do, and we do here. We've battled enough of that already. Experience shows us that well-meaning people often do incredible damage in the process of trying to do some good, usually because either their intellect isn't awake or their emotional center is out of control -- which is ironic because an out of control emotional center leads to being controlled, ala Arlington Road style. I think he means well, and not having heard him before, today it's clear that his horses have bolted from the stable and are stampeding over anything and everything.

 

[anart]

I just finished it, and, yes Victor is a bit hard to listen to, but when he gets emotional, he tends to rant this way and he is emotional about this issue. I'm not excusing his language - at all - but after listening to WINGtv for months now, I've come to the realization that this is how Victor comes across. With that said, I thought it was a good show that brought up some very important points to an audience that may not be used to listening to the brutal truth of these issues.

I tend to find myself focusing more on what Lisa says than Victor, mostly due to Victor's style, but that's purely a subjective, personal thing and not meant to mean that there is anything inherently 'wrong' with Victor's style. I'm sure there are many people out there who prefer his style to Lisa's - but perhaps focusing on the information they presented might be more on topic in this case.

The fact is that over the past year, Lisa and Victor have realized that there are far fewer genuine truth seekers 'out there' than is presented by these CoInTelPro 'alternative media' outlets. It's a hard lesson and one that ensures that those who learn it, learn it the hard way. With any luck, that clear message will sink in for a percentage of their regular listeners - and a few more well-intentioned people will avoid the lies of the controlled alternative media.

While Rickard's network and group points are valid, from our perspective here, I think that from the perspective of their show, that they were simply trying to get across the idea that their listeners should start to think for themselves, and stop following along behind these 'leaders' who have proven themselves to be liars, manipulaters and psychological deviants - and in that singular context it works. I'm not saying that those words can't be used in a much more negative way down the line against groups like ours, but in the context in which they were presented, I understood what they were trying to say, FWIW.

I think it was an important show simply because they laid out in an upfront fashion exactly how desperate the situation is with the 'alternative media' - it needed to be said and hopefully their audience will get that point - we shall see.

 

[Laura]

I just finished it, and, yes Victor is a bit hard to listen to, but when he gets emotional, he tends to rant this way and he is emotional about this issue. I'm not excusing his language - at all - but after listening to WINGtv for months now, I've come to the realization that this is how Victor comes across. With that said, I thought it was a good show that brought up some very important points to an audience that may not be used to listening to the brutal truth of these issues.

Indeed.

I have a somewhat different view of Victor's style and delivery than some of those above. While I would like for him to realize that, without a network, NOTHING is possible - as Gurdjieff said, no one can escape alone - I also know that Victor has a real talent and ability to appeal to a WIDE audience. We, here, are almost like monks, toiling away at illuminating manuscripts. Victor is like the orator who then takes some ideas from those manuscripts, boils it down to the simplest and most direct form, and delivers it with emotion and verve. He speaks the language that the masses speak; they understand him and I think he understands them.

Having said that, again, I agree that some of his language and rhetoric is on the same level as those he seeks to expose. But I have also heard him be totally cool and rational and marshal his thoughts and points with surgical precision. He is multi-talented; he just oughta listen to Lisa more.

 

[foofighter]

I tend to find myself focusing more on what Lisa says than Victor, mostly due to Victor's style, but that's purely a subjective, personal thing and not meant to mean that there is anything inherently 'wrong' with Victor's style.

Well, same here. Both seem to have very active emotional centers, and that is a good driving force fer shure, but it has to be tempered.

The fact is that over the past year, Lisa and Victor have realized that there are far fewer genuine truth seekers 'out there' than is presented by these CoInTelPro 'alternative media' outlets. It's a hard lesson and one that ensures that those who learn it, learn it the hard way. With any luck, that clear message will sink in for a percentage of their regular listeners - and a few more well-intentioned people will avoid the lies of the controlled alternative media.

Yeah, the amount of so-called leaders of the alt media that have been exposed as CoIntelPro or just egotistical pricks this past year is simply stunning!! It is a very hard lesson, and I am extremely thankful for having the chance to learn it firsthand and in such gory detail. It is very useful in my regular life as well, as spotting liars and poseurs is something that can be quite handy in my professional life as well

While Rickard's network and group points are valid, from our perspective here, I think that from the perspective of their show, that they were simply trying to get across the idea that their listeners should start to think for themselves, and stop following along behind these 'leaders' who have proven themselves to be liars, manipulaters and psychological deviants - and in that singular context it works. I'm not saying that those words can't be used in a much more negative way down the line against groups like ours, but in the context in which they were presented, I understood what they were trying to say, FWIW.

Yup, to clarify that is also how I interpreted what they said. My caution was to ensure that, as you pointed out, it needs to be understood within that particular context and not generalized too far.

I think it was an important show simply because they laid out in an upfront fashion exactly how desperate the situation is with the 'alternative media' - it needed to be said and hopefully their audience will get that point - we shall see.

Yes, we shall see, and I agree, it was a very important show! My comments above are mostly about details that could be improved, as the overall impression was positive! Sometimes it is easy to forget to give credit where credit is due

 

[Laura]

Sometimes it is easy to forget to give credit where credit is due

Ain't that the truth! Like I said, I get a kick out of Victor. Yeah, I know he pulls his punches on Kaminski, but nobody's perfect. And, like I said, he is talking to the same audience, for the most part, that are being defrauded by the so-called 9/11 Truth and alt-media people and they needed to hear every word.

Those who are truly seeking truth come in all shapes and sizes and colors and with all kinds of different backgrounds. It is our variety of ways to seek truth that makes it all so marvelous. That's something that people like Judy Andreas and Marsha McClelland and Kaminski and others give lip service to, but in the end, it is not truth they are after, it is lying consolation of what they WANT to believe because it makes their lives easy.

 

[Lisa Guliani]

I appreciate all the feedback here, and all the constructive criticism.
I think I've said before that we do these shows without any script, and in one take.
I also have said that I cannot control what is going to come out of Thorn's mouth on any show.
He is who he is.
When he was referring to not being a part of a network, we meant THE POSER network.
We're not in that circle, nor part of their network. See?
Perhaps I could have and should have been clearer on that and will make a conscious effort in the future to be more clear.
I also was not deliberately omitting Kaminski's name from this thread, and I did urge everyone to read this thread, and the Bollyn thread as well.
So nobody is going to miss the discussion of Kaminski. But I kick myself for not speaking his name, and you're right. I think of stuff all the time I iwsh I had said on any given show.
I can address it tomorrow, and I will not omit this part.

Thanks for listening and for all the feedback and sharing your thoughts.
Thorn and I are two very different people, with different ideas of how best to communicate.
We do the show and try to get our ideas across as best we can in a single take, and there is always room for improvement.
No doubt.

And one other thing: We've come out against Kaminski before on our show in the past.
And I've come out against his b.s. on this forum, as well as challenged and confronted him directly via numerous emails and multiple times on the phone.
IN FACT, I just challenged Kaminski again a few minutes ago.


Thanks again.

 

[Beau]

FWIW, I just got two off-list emails from Marsha where she rants about being "censored", and provides loooong more-of-the-same explanations of this and that. No point in going through the details though.

Anyone else being contacted too?

Yes, she contacted me off-list as well. It was Standard Operating Procedure Judy from the start. I almost, almost started to feel sorry for her, until I realized that she is misleading a bunch of people :(

 

[henry]

Hi Lisa,

I'll be very interested to see what kind of feedback you get from this show. I expect the disinfo artists to go into a rage on it, but I hope that they'll be some folks whose eyes are opened by the account Victor and you give of the situation facing Americans today. I would expect that the news about today's show will travel fast.

You two have raised so many important questions, and your comparison of the alternative news "movement" to the mainstream news movement, each with their infomercials, is spot on.

Insisting on the excusing of Alex Jones because he gives good information is also spot on.

People need to hear this.

I also find Victor's style sometimes a little over the top, but today, especially when he was discussing the attacks on you, I felt his emotion was entirely warranted and well used to convey the horror of those attacks. The stress on conscience is vital. Hopefully he will be able with that to convey to your listeners the utter seriousness and gravity of the situation. People do need to hear discussions like that with such conviction and emotion -- I just hope it shocks them into stopping and looking at reality.

Keep it up.

Henry