Post: #176

Yeah I read all the sessions. Just from the first, I noticed San Francisco is still fine. Yeah the weather part was way off, forgot to pAy attention to that. It is too convoluted. Too many aliens and densities.
No worship of God and we are all one with God he says, sounds like what the serpent said.
Serious constant negativity towards to the abrahamic God. He is always justifying lucifer. He said it was difficult for them to be negative, if you look at the world; it doesnt seem like so. It sounds like his luciferism plus Gnosticism plus new age.
I think some of it could be true. That family probably has been here long time. It was confusing, til I thought a little. Man, he tried to make it convincing, but but ....

Post: #177

(01-27-2016 12:30 PM)DarkTriad Wrote:  

(01-26-2016 01:24 AM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  ^^^

I was just trying to point out that I can't see paganism as an effective counterweight to militant Islam. Paganism is disorganized, lacks any organized power structure, and has no militant tradition behind it, as does Christianity.

Paganism may be fine for symbolism and beer-hall chats, but militant Islam will run right over it.

To fight force, you need greater force.

Latin Christianity does have a very extensive militant tradition, but without the militant people to fill its ranks, nothing will happen.

Just like ISIS recruits people from around the world, maybe the papacy should stop pussy-footing around and organize militant groups to fight ISIS.

.

"Going to Valhalla" if you die in battle isn't a militant tradition? TIL the Vikings had no militant tradition.

Not to speak for Caesar here, but I think what QC was driving at was that the Norse pagan tradition doesn't have an evangelical arm or a tradition of defending the faith as such. It did have elements of it that acknowledged warfare, just as the Greek and Roman traditions had gods of war ... but you didn't go to Valhalla for dying in battle in Thor's name, you basically went to Valhalla just for dying bravely. It was more of an observation that courage, war, and bloodshed were part of men's lives rather than a specific vocation to defend shrines to Odin and what have you.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #178

(01-27-2016 09:28 AM)emuelle1 Wrote:  

(01-26-2016 09:41 PM)zoom Wrote:  Not specifically related to Hollywood, but here is a 2008 interview with a self-proclaimed member of the Ruling Bloodline Family. I'm not sure if the interview is real, but it's an interesting read to say the least.

http://revolutionizingawareness.com/cons...dden-hand/

Interesting read. I finished the first session, and some things he "predicted" have not yet happened, such as a new currency and San Francisco being uninhabitable.

But like that letter from an insider Roosh posted, some of this wouldn't be hard to fake.

The new currency was Bitcoin. Came out approximately the year (released to public in 2009) after the article was published. In all fairness I havent read the full article so I cannot comment much more than him getting the new currency right.

Post: #179

(01-27-2016 11:20 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(01-27-2016 12:30 PM)DarkTriad Wrote:  

(01-26-2016 01:24 AM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  ^^^

I was just trying to point out that I can't see paganism as an effective counterweight to militant Islam. Paganism is disorganized, lacks any organized power structure, and has no militant tradition behind it, as does Christianity.

Paganism may be fine for symbolism and beer-hall chats, but militant Islam will run right over it.

To fight force, you need greater force.

Latin Christianity does have a very extensive militant tradition, but without the militant people to fill its ranks, nothing will happen.

Just like ISIS recruits people from around the world, maybe the papacy should stop pussy-footing around and organize militant groups to fight ISIS.

.

"Going to Valhalla" if you die in battle isn't a militant tradition? TIL the Vikings had no militant tradition.

Not to speak for Caesar here, but I think what QC was driving at was that the Norse pagan tradition doesn't have an evangelical arm or a tradition of defending the faith as such. It did have elements of it that acknowledged warfare, just as the Greek and Roman traditions had gods of war ... but you didn't go to Valhalla for dying in battle in Thor's name, you basically went to Valhalla just for dying bravely. It was more of an observation that courage, war, and bloodshed were part of men's lives rather than a specific vocation to defend shrines to Odin and what have you.

Actually as far as I'm aware, the ONLY way you could go to Valhalla was to die in battle. Others went to the underworld ruled by Loki - Hel - which is Hell in modern English.

The Vikings therefore had a religion in which the only road to eternal life was to die in battle. This is even more militaristic than Islam, where you can enter paradise through good deeds and such.

Islam is also a pagan religion in all but name. If Vikings had been more ethnocentric, they could have created a similar world dominant militaristic culture, but Norse have always assimiliated fully into where they came, so the irony is that the Vikings who became Normanns went on to become the fiercest Christian warriors of the Crusades.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normans#On_crusade

Quote:The legendary religious zeal of the Normans was exercised in religious wars long before the First Crusade carved out a Norman principality in Antioch. They were major foreign participants in the Reconquista in Iberia.

As it was, the Vikings were therefore actually much involved in driving out muslims of Europe.

My guess is that the reason a lot of royal bloodlines in Southern Europe have light hair and eyes is because of Norman intermarriage.

It doesn't seem to matter much for the Norse if their God is Odin or Christ in their willingness to die for the afterlife.

Post: #180

This stuff is really hard to identify. It never looks exactly the way you think it will look, especially since it isn't what we think of as an "official" conspiracy for the most part. A lot of it doesn't really make sense until viewed through the lens of Catholicism, but I'll try and sketch out as much as I can without resorting to metaphysical assertions.

It boils down to two equal and opposite world views. The first follows Christ, the sacrificial lamb who carries a sword, and the second follows Lucifer, the light bringer. Bear with me folks, I'm not trying to lecture you; just imagine these two figures as hypothetical constructs.

Christ is the perfect leader. The man who never made a mistake, who never screwed up, and yet wasn't arrogant; he was humble. He recognizes how imperfect we all are, and decided to teach us how to become better, despite our ingratitude. He doesn't demand our submission or service - rather, he lives in such a way that we're inspired to follow him. When you see him you realize that he is your General, and that you can never be as great as he is, so you step into line and follow; through following you become better, and wind up leading the men beneath you (principle of leadership: to be a good leader, first become a good follower). He calls upon you to eschew the petty vanities of life, and by doing so become the best possible version of yourself.

His Kingdom looks something like this: each man living to his own nature (the blacksmith, the veterinarian, what have you), accommodated in a humble abode which is unique and beautiful for him, with a wife who suits his temperament. Some men wake to their morning coffees and beautiful mountain vistas; others, to a crowded neighbourhood swarming with laughing children. They all have the same shining look of joy on their faces which simultaneously makes them indistinguishable from one another, and yet utterly unique and indispensable, each one.

You serve him not because he demands that you do it - but because he is such a great man that he deserves your service. He is such a great leader, you realize, that he's been serving you all of this time.

The other man - the light bringer - offers you all the excitement and vanities of this world so long as you swear fealty to him. He doesn't care if you mean it or not - sincerity doesn't matter to him - he just wants you to go through the motions and claim that you are in his service. A cheap price to pay, for he will be training you in the secrets of the universe.

He shows you the light; the tricks to manifesting what you will out of reality. Do what thou wilt with them, pursue any hedonism, any excess. Your oath doesn't demand any particular fealty or devotion to his church, but when you begin networking with his other followers it just makes sense to keep everything occult. His mantra could be: "This world is shit - so let's remake it into something better!" He is going to give YOU the tools to turn yourself into his equal - he is going to teach you to become a GOD!

So what does his church look like? Something like a Rock 'n' Roll concert. On stage, his high priestess is being violently fucked by a demon in a manner which no mortal man is capable of. The effeminate male rocker drags a bevy of groupies back to his room for a drug-fuelled orgy. In the audience are thousands of unique individuals, each masturbating furiously to what's happening on stage. They are Nobody, but they dream of becoming the Somebody on stage.

Do what thou wilt... be whatever you want to be... live in whatever reality you choose.

Christ's Church is rooted in Objective reality while reaching towards the ineffable. It has a definite history and distinct rituals. Lucifer's church has no rituals (occasionally it will mimic those of Christ, but this is no more than a sarcastic joke), it has no institutional coherence or history, it's only constancy is the promise to remake this world into whatever you want it to be.

Those who would make Gods out of themselves all wind up coming to Lucifer sooner or later; they all follow his light. Some believe in him outright and offer up blood sacrifices. Others are metaphysically atheist, so instead they're presented with a secular choice, say - spill the blood of Iraqi babies to win over a defense contractor? Ultimately they believe that all rules - moral, metaphysical, legal, even physical - are made to be broken. Only a fool 'obeys' such things.

They recognize each other by their cunning, anomie, and mutual hatred. They corrupt one another for blackmail - and thus a friendship formed. This is how you can have a conspiracy with no intentional organization.

***

I wish I could say more about them. I've met many of their bit players - the fools in the audience who haven't learned anything above masturbation - but those idiots are everywhere (the degree of their toxicity will vary, and some of them can be truly destructive, but in the larger scheme they really don't matter). I haven't seen anyone higher, but of course I wouldn't have. Despite all of my flaws it's immediately obvious to them Whose side I'm on.

Their goal is to capture and corrupt the innocent. You can't be a Rock 'n' Roll God without an audience, and they require the slavish devotion of the masses who have no idea what sort of contract they're signing.

As I implied at the beginning, I believe there's a lot more going on than merely a difference of worldviews between these two groups - but the simple difference in worldviews is sufficient, I think, to understand how these groups will come together.

As for the prevalence of Jews amongst this group - I think there's a subconscious understanding (whether they're practicing or atheist) that their Messiah did arrive, and they rejected his Kingdom of Heaven for the Kingdom of the Earth - and I trust you all know who the Prince of the Earth is? Not all Jewish people, certainly - there are many good Jews, just as there are many good Muslims (itself the religion of a man who made his own religion, his own rules, and his own empire - and then demands slavish submission and/or tyranny from all of his followers!) - but there is a viciousness in some of them that I suspect comes from the fact that they know, deep down, that despite their obeisance to rituals, they've rejected God for the pleasures of this Earth.

Post: #181

(01-26-2016 08:24 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  Libertas and BB, I think that both of you -- two intelligent guys -- should reflect on the fact that you took TJ's f'ing hilarious satire post as reported truth.

TJ tried to construct a narrative so laughably over-the-top that not even the most dreadnought fantasist could take it seriously

Pay attention everyone:

- We have a situation where a group of people is discussing the behaviour of the Rich and Powerful, in a way that could possibly generate outrage and reaction.

- Someone 'just happens' to come along to drop in deliberate disinformation into the conversion to exaggerate the discussion into obviously unbelievable territory.

- Anyone who publicly 'fell for it' now is painted as Gullible, so all their previous commentary on the topic can now be dismissed in a similar manner.

- Anyone who privately 'fell for it' now questions everything else they've read, and are too embarrassed to speak up further on the topic due to fear of social shaming.

- The stigmatisation effect then poisons the entire dialogue so even the more grounded parts of the previous discussion are now marked as intellectually-dubious.

- The conversation is now so socially-toxic, the fear of social ridicule means people ignore any of these discussions in the future as the ravings of the gullible and ignorant.

- The Rich and Powerful remain protected.

This is Textbook Subversion 101. Whether it was done out a jealous need to jostle for Social Status, or as deliberate, intentional disinformation*, the end result is the same: a further erosion of my trust in this community, particularly after the doxxing of McQueen.

All that needed to be said to make the same point was "Question everything."

For fuck's sake, if you want to build a strong community, don't troll each other. Every other source the majority of men here interact with is going to sell them falsehoods: the media, the government, the movies, the churches. Shoot at the enemy, not your own ranks.

-----

* The Manosphere and the Alt-Right have now reached a level a threat to the Status Quo, which is why we're seeing mainstream media discussion and stigmatisation; a cultivation of fracturing and infighting amongst members; as well as the ridiculous promotion of an extreme Nazi outgroup into suddenly being the majority ingroup, attacking the original leaders of the movement and telling everyone what is and isn't 'red pill', (all of whom are probably government agents). The Chans in particular are now so full of disinformation I no longer even bother looking, because it's simply impossible to take any statement or image as a depiction of truth, which is a long-term Socialist Goal: the Citizen can no longer tell what is true and what is false and remains isolated, which is the road I'm heading down.

The Manosphere is threatening to crumble exactly like Occupy Wall Street did.

Post: #182

^^ TJ's troll post hasn't changed the facts that were presented beforehand, though I hope his intention was not to humiliate forum members. I don't think it's wrong to put the brakes on collective groupthink that may be happening.

Post: #183

So it looks like Will Smith has sacrificed his kids to Hollywood to advance the transsexual agenda. Here they are talking about how gender is meaningless. It's getting hard to tell which one is male and which one is female. The boy is acting more feminine than the girl.

Fast forward to 1:35:

Post: #184

^ No, groupthink always polarises the group to an extreme viewpoint, which is probably what all this stupid, transparent '1488' subversion of the Alt-Right is about. Polarise it into irrelevance.

That's why I said "Question everything" would suffice.

Post: #185

(01-28-2016 04:14 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  ^ No, groupthink always polarises the group to an extreme viewpoint, which is probably what all this stupid, transparent '1488' subversion of the Alt-Right is about. Polarise it into irrelevance.

That's why I said "Question everything" would suffice.

Keep in mind that the 1488 crowd has been trying to infiltrate the Manosphere through the comment sections for years now; I also suspect they did the same thing to Libertarianism back in the 90s (ergo, Ron Paul's "racist" news letter). They're just desperate and hungry for power, at any cost; no different than the leftoids.

Post: #186

Aurini, great post; I saved that to Evernote.

Several of the books and talks I've read on the Occult talk about a religious system where Lucifer is considered the "good god" and the Biblical God is considered evil for hiding enlightenment from mankind. Lucifer, the "light bringer" brings man enlightenment which Yahweh hid. Of course, this is only revealed at the higher levels of the organization after people are too far inside and have too many skeletons in their closets to leave.

Post: #187

A quick note: this is why I say that feminists, the GLBT, Marxists, Muslims, Globalists, et cetera, all worship the same god. This is why, despite the obvious conflicts between their agendas, they all strangely work in unison. Each group is denying reality and demanding that their own version of the truth reign supreme.

It's almost enough to make one believe int he supernatural.

Post: #188

(01-28-2016 04:42 PM)emuelle1 Wrote:  Several of the books and talks I've read on the Occult talk about a religious system where Lucifer is considered the "good god" and the Biblical God is considered evil for hiding enlightenment from mankind. Lucifer, the "light bringer" brings man enlightenment which Yahweh hid. Of course, this is only revealed at the higher levels of the organization after people are too far inside and have too many skeletons in their closets to leave.

I find it the height of irony that satanists claim that Yahweh hid enlightenment from man, while they [satanists] hide every aspect about who and what they are until its too late to turn back. A tree is known for its fruit.

Post: #189

(01-28-2016 04:11 PM)Roosh Wrote:  So it looks like Will Smith has sacrificed his kids to Hollywood to advance the transsexual agenda. Here they are talking about how gender is meaningless. It's getting hard to tell which one is male and which one is female. The boy is acting more feminine than the girl.

Fast forward to 1:35:

Not surprising, Will Smith and his wife are beards for each other in a sham Scientologist marriage.

Post: #190

I was never able to confirm is Smith was a practicing Scientologist, or sort of an orbiter. But considering it's the predominant fad "religion" in un-holy-wood, I assumed he was in it.

Post: #191

(01-28-2016 08:00 PM)thoughtgypsy Wrote:  

(01-28-2016 04:42 PM)emuelle1 Wrote:  Several of the books and talks I've read on the Occult talk about a religious system where Lucifer is considered the "good god" and the Biblical God is considered evil for hiding enlightenment from mankind. Lucifer, the "light bringer" brings man enlightenment which Yahweh hid. Of course, this is only revealed at the higher levels of the organization after people are too far inside and have too many skeletons in their closets to leave.

I find it the height of irony that satanists claim that Yahweh hid enlightenment from man, while they [satanists] hide every aspect about who and what they are until its too late to turn back. A tree is known for its fruit.

That's pretty much what occult means: to hide something. From the Latin word that we get occular from.

Post: #192

AB,

You may not have read my post very carefully, but I did not bring up the UVa rape hoax by accident. There is a real analogy there.

The lefties, SJWs and Jezebel crowd have their own idea of the "rich and powerful": the evil and essentially inhuman "frat bros", all male, all white, all from "genteel" American families. These are the monsters who supposedly "gang rape" girls at will, and then chug beers and shots and slap each other on the back as they reminisce about the gang rapes. They've been doing it for generations already, and are as evil as their fathers, grandfathers, and slaveholder ancestors. In fact, you can't even become a member of one of these fraternities without being part of a gang rape, it's one of the initiation rites you see. It's always hushed up because their families have too much influence, and the "survivors" know no one will believe them anyway. People have been whispering about it on campuses like UVa for decades, and everyone has heard the stories, but no one has the courage to come forward. Until this one incredibly brave girl, a "Jackie" -- her last name a sacred unmentionable -- ventured forward and spilled the beans to a tenacious and fearless reporter.

That is the SJW fairy tale. It's all bullshit, just demented fantasies of people so besotted by their loser ideology that they've willingly lost all touch with reality. But they had pretty much convinced themselves of this idiocy; and they turned on anyone who dared to laugh at Rolling Stone's laughable rape porn; you could "question" it they said, but to LAUGH at something so solemn and so serious was the real crime.

Here's what I think. You claim to care about the "manosphere" and about this "community" and so on. I only ever speak for myself, for one man's mind and beliefs. But I feel that the last thing this or any community needs is an exact mirror image of the SJW fairy tale -- a story about generations of the evil "rich and powerful" who run a bad place called Hollywood where they "pass around" countless "children" for their depraved ceremonies and then smirk about it and even taunt us, knowing that they have the power to get away with it.

This idea of the inhuman -- not even recognizable as human -- evil and mysterious "elites" is in fact the precise mirror image of the SJW construction of the "frat bro", down to their own supposed signs, ancient letters, sinister "initiation ceremonies" and so on. It's all the exact same bullshit, and I will always feel free to laugh at it for the simple reason that I am a sane man who thinks for himself and see the world as it is.

No one has made more posts in that UVa thread than me -- count 'em -- because I love the truth and I hate lies and absurdist nonsense. I have no taste for fighting with men I love and respect; and because we -- unlike the SJWs -- do not wield power in the real world, the fairy tales and lunacies guys here may believe in do not carry the same consequences. But if I feel like calling them out I'll feel free to do so, and if that's supposed to be "subversive" then I plead guilty as charged.

Post: #193

(01-28-2016 11:41 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  AB,

You may not have read my post very carefully, but I did not bring up the UVa rape hoax by accident. There is a real analogy there.

The lefties, SJWs and Jezebel crowd have their own idea of the "rich and powerful": the evil and essentially inhuman "frat bros", all male, all white, all from "genteel" American families. These are the monsters who supposedly "gang rape" girls at will, and then chug beers and shots and slap each other on the back as they reminisce about the gang rapes. They've been doing it for generations already, and are as evil as their fathers, grandfathers, and slaveholder ancestors. In fact, you can't even become a member of one of these fraternities without being part of a gang rape, it's one of the initiation rites you see. It's always hushed up because their families have too much influence, and the "survivors" know no one will believe them anyway. People have been whispering about it on campuses like UVa for decades, and everyone has heard the stories, but no one has the courage to come forward. Until this one incredibly brave girl, a "Jackie" -- her last name a sacred unmentionable -- ventured forward and spilled the beans to a tenacious and fearless reporter.

That is the SJW fairy tale. It's all bullshit, just demented fantasies of people so besotted by their loser ideology that they've willingly lost all touch with reality. But they had pretty much convinced themselves of this idiocy; and they turned on anyone who dared to laugh at Rolling Stone's laughable rape porn; you could "question" it they said, but to LAUGH at something so solemn and so serious was the real crime.

Here's what I think. You claim to care about the "manosphere" and about this "community" and so on. I only ever speak for myself, for one man's mind and beliefs. But I feel that the last thing this or any community needs is an exact mirror image of the SJW fairy tale -- a story about generations of the evil "rich and powerful" who run a bad place called Hollywood where they "pass around" countless "children" for their depraved ceremonies and then smirk about it and even taunt us, knowing that they have the power to get away with it.

This idea of the inhuman -- not even recognizable as human -- evil and mysterious "elites" is in fact the precise mirror image of the SJW construction of the "frat bro", down to their own supposed signs, ancient letters, sinister "initiation ceremonies" and so on. It's all the exact same bullshit, and I will always feel free to laugh at it for the simple reason that I am a sane man who thinks for himself and see the world as it is.

No one has made more posts in that UVa thread than me -- count 'em -- because I love the truth and I hate lies and absurdist nonsense. I have no taste for fighting with men I love and respect; and because we -- unlike the SJWs -- do not wield power in the real world, the fairy tales and lunacies guys here may believe in do not carry the same consequences. But if I feel like calling them out I'll feel free to do so, and if that's supposed to be "subversive" then I plead guilty as charged.

This little piece of writing is one of the most brilliant observations on this entire forum. The SJW Marxists have a lot of people preaching for them on autopilot, with their constant, rote, knee jerk statements about the elite and their secret plans.

Now I have to finish writing my upcoming post which I will call There Is No They.

Post: #194

(01-28-2016 02:17 PM)Aurini Wrote:  As for the prevalence of Jews amongst this group - I think there's a subconscious understanding (whether they're practicing or atheist) that their Messiah did arrive, and they rejected his Kingdom of Heaven for the Kingdom of the Earth - and I trust you all know who the Prince of the Earth is? Not all Jewish people, certainly - there are many good Jews, just as there are many good Muslims (itself the religion of a man who made his own religion, his own rules, and his own empire - and then demands slavish submission and/or tyranny from all of his followers!) - but there is a viciousness in some of them that I suspect comes from the fact that they know, deep down, that despite their obeisance to rituals, they've rejected God for the pleasures of this Earth.

I think the reason Jews reject Christ as the Messiah is because they, THEY, where promised the kingdom of god. From the very beginning they made a pact where they where to obey him and he would take them, and them only, as his people. It is and always have been a "us vs. them" religion.

Then comes this hippie nazarene and tells everyone that hes throwing a party at his dad mansion in the sky and that everyone is invited. It kind of ruins it all.

(01-28-2016 04:10 PM)Roosh Wrote:  I don't think it's wrong to put the brakes on collective groupthink that may be happening.

Groupthink? You mean here on the forum?

Post: #195

(01-27-2016 06:56 PM)Roosh Wrote:  Fuck it, I still believe!!!!

You be the judge...

Beyond All Seas

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Kipling

Post: #196

(01-28-2016 04:23 PM)Aurini Wrote:  

(01-28-2016 04:14 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  ^ No, groupthink always polarises the group to an extreme viewpoint, which is probably what all this stupid, transparent '1488' subversion of the Alt-Right is about. Polarise it into irrelevance.

That's why I said "Question everything" would suffice.

Keep in mind that the 1488 crowd has been trying to infiltrate the Manosphere through the comment sections for years now; I also suspect they did the same thing to Libertarianism back in the 90s (ergo, Ron Paul's "racist" news letter). They're just desperate and hungry for power, at any cost; no different than the leftoids.

The 1488 crowd is actively trying to take over the roosh meetups. I wouldn't be surprised if a tenth of meetup leaders were white nationalists with an agenda.

Post: #197

(01-29-2016 05:11 AM)Sooth Wrote:  

(01-28-2016 04:23 PM)Aurini Wrote:  

(01-28-2016 04:14 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  ^ No, groupthink always polarises the group to an extreme viewpoint, which is probably what all this stupid, transparent '1488' subversion of the Alt-Right is about. Polarise it into irrelevance.

That's why I said "Question everything" would suffice.

Keep in mind that the 1488 crowd has been trying to infiltrate the Manosphere through the comment sections for years now; I also suspect they did the same thing to Libertarianism back in the 90s (ergo, Ron Paul's "racist" news letter). They're just desperate and hungry for power, at any cost; no different than the leftoids.

The 1488 crowd is actively trying to take over the roosh meetups. I wouldn't be surprised if a tenth of meetup leaders were white nationalists with an agenda.

Any proof of this? Where have you seen or heard anything of the matter?

I wouldn't be shocked, but I'd like to see the talk and possible cities.

Post: #198

(01-28-2016 11:41 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  AB,

You may not have read my post very carefully, but I did not bring up the UVa rape hoax by accident. There is a real analogy there.

The lefties, SJWs and Jezebel crowd have their own idea of the "rich and powerful": the evil and essentially inhuman "frat bros", all male, all white, all from "genteel" American families. These are the monsters who supposedly "gang rape" girls at will, and then chug beers and shots and slap each other on the back as they reminisce about the gang rapes. They've been doing it for generations already, and are as evil as their fathers, grandfathers, and slaveholder ancestors. In fact, you can't even become a member of one of these fraternities without being part of a gang rape, it's one of the initiation rites you see. It's always hushed up because their families have too much influence, and the "survivors" know no one will believe them anyway. People have been whispering about it on campuses like UVa for decades, and everyone has heard the stories, but no one has the courage to come forward. Until this one incredibly brave girl, a "Jackie" -- her last name a sacred unmentionable -- ventured forward and spilled the beans to a tenacious and fearless reporter.

That is the SJW fairy tale. It's all bullshit, just demented fantasies of people so besotted by their loser ideology that they've willingly lost all touch with reality. But they had pretty much convinced themselves of this idiocy; and they turned on anyone who dared to laugh at Rolling Stone's laughable rape porn; you could "question" it they said, but to LAUGH at something so solemn and so serious was the real crime.

Here's what I think. You claim to care about the "manosphere" and about this "community" and so on. I only ever speak for myself, for one man's mind and beliefs. But I feel that the last thing this or any community needs is an exact mirror image of the SJW fairy tale -- a story about generations of the evil "rich and powerful" who run a bad place called Hollywood where they "pass around" countless "children" for their depraved ceremonies and then smirk about it and even taunt us, knowing that they have the power to get away with it.

This idea of the inhuman -- not even recognizable as human -- evil and mysterious "elites" is in fact the precise mirror image of the SJW construction of the "frat bro", down to their own supposed signs, ancient letters, sinister "initiation ceremonies" and so on. It's all the exact same bullshit, and I will always feel free to laugh at it for the simple reason that I am a sane man who thinks for himself and see the world as it is.

No one has made more posts in that UVa thread than me -- count 'em -- because I love the truth and I hate lies and absurdist nonsense. I have no taste for fighting with men I love and respect; and because we -- unlike the SJWs -- do not wield power in the real world, the fairy tales and lunacies guys here may believe in do not carry the same consequences. But if I feel like calling them out I'll feel free to do so, and if that's supposed to be "subversive" then I plead guilty as charged.

Best post in this thread by far, and part of me wonders whether some of this conspiracy stuff is in some way a subversion tactic like AB pointed out. It's just a bad road to go down. The real conspiracy buffs you notice never agree with each other on anything because there's always some kind of further conspiracy. The end result is nothing gets done, and their movement has no momentum, and the elite they claim to despise goes in effect, unchallenged.

Though in my defense, AB, I did try to question what TJ put down, as my gut was telling me that it was simply too over the top to be true and wanted proof. In the context of this thread, with some of the outlandish claims have been put forward by everyone, there's almost no normality to weigh it against, so the lines are blurred. Whatever the outcome, at the end of the day, I learned a lesson about trolling and subversion tactics, so I can take this temporary defeat and turn it into something valuable.

Tokyo Joe definitely had no malicious intentions though. He was just fucking around. If you have met him in person, you'd know this.

As for the 1488 crowd, I wouldn't be surprised if most of them were SPLC shills. The rest are probably keyboard warriors. Several of our European compatriots have pointed out that this is a distinctly American thing, and if you listen to guys like ramzpaul who have spent some time in Eastern Europe for example, you'd hear the same.

Nevertheless, ROK and other outlets may need to get more strict in the comment sections. The "alt right" or whatever you want to call it should at this point take a strong stand against the 1488 crowd (wherever they come from) and any inkling of white knighting, which is strong with them. Mike mentioned what we all know again yesterday, that if you aren't decisively anti-SJW, you will be subverted by SJW's.

As right wing politics is now realigning and the conservative movement is crumbling, I think that the same will hold true. If you don't take a stand against the 1488 crowd or whatever you want to call them and their accompanying white women-white knighting, you will be subverted by them.

Post: #199

I've met Tokyo Joe as well, the dude has that schoolboy prankster vibe, he meant no harm with that post. Sometimes a reality check is good anyways.

That said, I wasn't sure if it was true or not (I almost felt like it could be but I was awaiting further evidence) but I still needed to set the record straight about the old Hollywood stars.

Post: #200

(01-28-2016 11:41 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  -snip-

Lizard,

Your analogy is a bad one, and you're missing the point entirely. You've derailed discussion so that the merits of the what's being discussed won't be addressed further. I've seen this strategy before. It goes:

1) Ignore, don't let the topic gain much attention, but if it does
2) Discredit, as much as possible, the person/people/message
3) Sanction the person or medium disseminating the message

It escalates from there, but my point is, you're not addressing the merits of the discussion. It would be like me saying bright light therapy is a bunch of BS, and that its the same as other medical quackery like snake oil tonics and magnetic field detoxing.

What if I were to point out that the lobbying system between large, powerful companies and government suggests a conspiracy of crony capitalism. You can suggest that it's simply a conspiracy theory because most businesses are small businesses, there's no boundaries to entry for most people, etc. You can do this with nearly any topic to sew doubt. But it doesn't get to heart of the matter, which in this analogy is the existence of crony capitalism.

The differences between fraternity false rape accusations and what we have been discussing are night and day.

- Have fraternities been proven to subject hundreds of people to suffering over decades for the purpose of medical observation?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_s...experiment

- Have fraternities been proven to conduct mind control experiments, including physical torture and sexual abuse? Has this behavior been brushed off as conspiracy theory, only to be later proven correct through congressional committee and freedom of information act requests?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltra

- Have fraternities been proven to have conducted false flag attacks that were originally brushed off as conspiracy theory, only to be revealed as true?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_incident

- Do fraternities seal the record for 100 years of an incident that permanently transforms the civil rights of a country?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre

- Have fraternities been proven to cover up the rape of thousands of children for over a decade, and continue to delay and derail any investigation into said exploitation?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_...on_scandal

- Do the fraternities have multi billion dollar media companies that can control the hearts and minds of millions, if not billions of people? Do they set the standards of fashion, pop culture, and the very worldview that greater society will adopt?

- Do the fraternities hold tremendous economic, cultural, and political power over a metro area of 13 million people?

- Do they have decades of repeated, strange, esoteric signaling while broadcasting increasingly depraved messaging that happens often enough that it can't be explained away as mere coincidence?

Obviously, the answer to all these questions is no. In fact, your analogy highlights the opposite of what you were trying to say. In the case of fraternities, we have a repeated and consistent pattern of behavior where they are subjected to outlandish false accusations, and even in a cultural environment that is overwhelmingly antagonistic to them, they are later exonerated.

On the other hand, the rich and powerful have a repeated pattern of behavior where they will deny something as conspiracy theory, then later be proven as liars when reports are declassified. This shows a repeated pattern where the falsely accused fraternities are exonerated, while the false accusers and the disproven powerful organizations are shown to be liars. The false accusers and powerful organizations are the ones who share similar patterns of behavior, and they are the ones whose motives should always be questioned.

Now, you may say that I'm being too broad and that hollywood is different from some of the examples I've listed above. But that's also missing the point. Those who run hollywood exert tremendous cultural, political, and economic power. They rub shoulders with those who control the money supply, run law enforcement, and operate the global intelligence agencies. A cursory study of history will show that those who pull the strings of power will go to extreme lengths to control what information reaches the wider public, especially if it portrays them in a negative light. They wield tremendous power and possess tremendous resources to cover up less than savory aspects of their actions. Their track record proves it. Fraternities exert very little cultural and economic power. They don't even control the damn university paper.

You have to look at the motives of the players, their history of behavior, and whether the current environment aligns with the motives. As an homage to your name, the wizard doesn't want you to look behind the curtain.

You may be tempted to respond with something to the effect of all of this being ridiculous, and that you're trying to help us avoid irrational paranoia. I would agree that we should keep things in perspective and stay as rational as possible, but I think I've demonstrated that there's enough solid, unassailable proof of "conspiracy theories" later being revealed as true to warrant further intellectual discussion and examination. Hell, most people will think the idea that society is anti-male is complete BS and that anyone who says otherwise is overreacting. Does that mean we shouldn't discuss it because it's controversial? If you do not wish to participate in the discussion in a constructive manner, I would ask that you not try to derail the discussion.