Lisa Guliani
The Living Force
Really good discussion, guys. Loved this show.
Show #20: NSA PRISM - Neither Privacy Nor Security
- Thread starter Niall
- Start date
Joe from Montana lied consciously, so Joe from Montana's contributions are no longer welcome.
Something I want to add is that the NSA, or NASA as I seem to prefer calling them, like all 'intelligence agencies', come out of these 'scandals' smelling like roses. This underlying assumption always goes unchallenged, even when they are being criticised in the mainstream media; that they actually have some useful, productive function in society.
They don't. Their bread-and-butter is drug running, money laundering, protection rackets, child prostitution, blowing people up, starting wars, consciously lying to people, consciously manipulating people, and generally presenting a pretty hefty obstacle in the way of human evolution.
They are, in short, the scum of the earth. The very idea that populations surrogate their intelligence to cliques of psychopaths in power and their military lapdogs is absurd. They're neither intelligent nor are they doing what they do for anyone's benefit other than their own. There's a reason why they need all these super-duper technology aids (that we the people create, by the way) to compete with humanity: they're fundamentally unintelligent.
That's why Marchetti called the CIA the 'Cult of Intelligence'. Intelligence agencies really are cults. While they present an exterior that is sober, militarily-structured, and the perfect picture of 'scientific rationality', what they're really doing with those bottomless black budgets is chasing the black arts, 'communing with the beast', so to speak. We know that because of everything that came out - albeit largely sanitised - about their programs involving PSI, remote viewing, mind control, channeling (yup, though you can guess what entities they are channelling...)
Actor and activist John Cusack says 'Be your own media'. I say be your own intelligence agency. Or better yet, network with your own intel agency, which is pretty much what we have with this network.
Something I want to add is that the NSA, or NASA as I seem to prefer calling them, like all 'intelligence agencies', come out of these 'scandals' smelling like roses. This underlying assumption always goes unchallenged, even when they are being criticised in the mainstream media; that they actually have some useful, productive function in society.
They don't. Their bread-and-butter is drug running, money laundering, protection rackets, child prostitution, blowing people up, starting wars, consciously lying to people, consciously manipulating people, and generally presenting a pretty hefty obstacle in the way of human evolution.
They are, in short, the scum of the earth. The very idea that populations surrogate their intelligence to cliques of psychopaths in power and their military lapdogs is absurd. They're neither intelligent nor are they doing what they do for anyone's benefit other than their own. There's a reason why they need all these super-duper technology aids (that we the people create, by the way) to compete with humanity: they're fundamentally unintelligent.
That's why Marchetti called the CIA the 'Cult of Intelligence'. Intelligence agencies really are cults. While they present an exterior that is sober, militarily-structured, and the perfect picture of 'scientific rationality', what they're really doing with those bottomless black budgets is chasing the black arts, 'communing with the beast', so to speak. We know that because of everything that came out - albeit largely sanitised - about their programs involving PSI, remote viewing, mind control, channeling (yup, though you can guess what entities they are channelling...)
Actor and activist John Cusack says 'Be your own media'. I say be your own intelligence agency. Or better yet, network with your own intel agency, which is pretty much what we have with this network.
Odyssey said:
Yes, the responses to him were excellent, and the closing comments as well. Joe from Montana seems to miss the fact that without the malevolent intent that informs what the NSA is, and how it works, there would be no NSA! Good old tips, investigation, and the following of leads to crimes is what solves crimes as was mentioned on the broadcast.
And yes, many have known about this group for a long time now. The C's once mentioned a book by Texe Marrs called Project L.U.C.I.D. which reveals a lot of what's going on, albeit with a christian gloss. It was originally published in 1996, and Marrs connected a lot of dots in it even then.
Just a thought - PRISM sounds a whole lot like 'Prison'. Wouldn't surprise me one bit to learn that that was intentional.
Btw, did I hear correctly - that RPP books on Amazon have recently seen a jump in sales?
Foxx
The Living Force
The Joe from Montana guy's "hypothetical question" reminded me of an experience I had with a cousin of mine who's a lawyer, trying to involve me in an argument quite some time ago. The entire strategy that my cousin was employing at the time had nothing to do with objective reality and everything to do with trapping me into agreeing to certain premises set forth and to do so in a series so as to paint me in a corner, argumentatively speaking, so that I'd essentially have to contradict myself no matter what I said. I didn't play the game.
The entire premise of the question is both pointless and stupid, in terms of better understanding and dealing with objective reality, essentially boiling down to "if the entire world were different, would you have a different opinion on wholesale privacy violations?". Well yeah, maybe, because the entire world would be different, but it's not that hypothetical way even remotely, so why form a decision based on a premise that's so far removed from reality? And how would discussing or debating such a hypothetical situation help us to better understand and deal with the reality with which we're actually faced? It wouldn't, as far as I can see.
Can't say that I'll miss "Joe from Montana"!
And great show everyone!
The entire premise of the question is both pointless and stupid, in terms of better understanding and dealing with objective reality, essentially boiling down to "if the entire world were different, would you have a different opinion on wholesale privacy violations?". Well yeah, maybe, because the entire world would be different, but it's not that hypothetical way even remotely, so why form a decision based on a premise that's so far removed from reality? And how would discussing or debating such a hypothetical situation help us to better understand and deal with the reality with which we're actually faced? It wouldn't, as far as I can see.
Can't say that I'll miss "Joe from Montana"!
And great show everyone!
James Henry
Jedi
Joe from Montana was definitely trying to be sly and manipulative. His 'hypothetical question' was a trap, as pointed out by one of the hosts (Joe Q?), to bait, confuse and contradict the premise of the show. He was trying to plant doubt with the listeners and get the hosts to provide a publicly stated hypocritical soundbite.
Agreed. His question implied a premise of 'wishful thinking' (the government could bring swifter justice) instead of a premise of probability (the government was some how the cause--based on past events). OSIT
Foxx said:
Agreed. His question implied a premise of 'wishful thinking' (the government could bring swifter justice) instead of a premise of probability (the government was some how the cause--based on past events). OSIT
Kniall said:
Yes, orgs like NRO/NSA/CIA/etc are not about serving the people or societies/cultures in general. In part, they are about maintaining a "front" of credibility/concern in the classic problem/reaction/solution methodology of molding the collective "reality" and perceptions. They are funding outlets which marry/nurture large public sector corporations to the causes of the "front" as well as deeper evils obscured by the "front".
This "front" is pure fiction and lies - and professes itself to be reality-unquestioned. The surface-level purpose/basis (read lie) of the "front" is to counter "man's inhumanity to man" - in reality, its basis is to promote it (ie hide the psychopathic element from view).
The vast majority of the employees of these orgs exist to serve the "front" and are an important part of the interface to the at-large population. They are heavily indoctrinated to the "front's" surface-level purpose and serve it well by refusal to see how/why they are being used when the ugliness sits right next to them. Only a tiny portion of these folks come to question anything.
If you can peal back layers of the security onion associated with these orgs, there is the distinct opportunity to sense the blackness/evil of the core and its real purposes. IMO, this core is what the Cs call Consortium. Many of the "front" employees of these orgs have this opportunity, but they block this sense in a mass of self-interest, camaraderie, and speshulness - these three being carefully nurtured in them by the "front".
Paragon
Jedi Council Member
Another fantastic show guys!
I am always amazed at the depth of intelligence on display between everyone on the show, it's really quite a breath of fresh air and inspiring! Cutting through all the morose and contradictory information out there, helping us stay 'grounded' in objective reality :)
Yeah, that Joe guy was definitely manipulative. I think he was one of these self important 'intelligent' types that think they are 'above' others and who have a tendency to show off their 'intellectual prowess' to validate their own being and sense of control over reality. He was also not very clear about what he was actually talking about. My impression was that he liked his own voice. Your collective response to that was great and your replies to callers always help me to look at how I deal with the world in terms of external consideration etc, so thank you.
I am always amazed at the depth of intelligence on display between everyone on the show, it's really quite a breath of fresh air and inspiring! Cutting through all the morose and contradictory information out there, helping us stay 'grounded' in objective reality :)
Yeah, that Joe guy was definitely manipulative. I think he was one of these self important 'intelligent' types that think they are 'above' others and who have a tendency to show off their 'intellectual prowess' to validate their own being and sense of control over reality. He was also not very clear about what he was actually talking about. My impression was that he liked his own voice. Your collective response to that was great and your replies to callers always help me to look at how I deal with the world in terms of external consideration etc, so thank you.