Reply to topic  [ 149 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ... 15  Next
Edward Snowden 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 10:33 pm
Posts: 4156
Reply with quote
Post Re: Edward Snowden
Zook you just don't get it because you think this is some game. If the preponderance of evidence weighs in one direction you admit your fault and move on. This is not some infantile game in the sandbox on whose right! Your in some bizarre hierarchal game of your own making that no one is playing. You think the enemy is me or chico when the enemy is in you and out there. You are verily verily lost in your labyrinth. I wish I could help you, but my message is tainted by me being a 5th column with poor discernment. :face:

_________________
Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.


Wed Mar 12, 2014 9:37 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 11843
Reply with quote
Post Re: Edward Snowden
magamud wrote:
Zook you just don't get it because you think this is some game. This is not some infantile game in the sandbox...

For the life of me, I don't understand why Zook and Andy haven't already joined forces to multiply the power of their sociopathic game-playing. The only thing I can think of is that their egos won't allow them to admit that they aren't clever enough to "win the game" on their own.

The irony of this forum is truly awe-inspiring, in my view. My focus has long been the study of sociopaths, and I started this forum from scratch after being banned by sociopaths on three different forums. I had hoped to create a forum where sociopaths would be exposed, where censorship would not be tolerated, where the members would run the forum, and where hierarchy would not rear its ugly head. And look what happened. The sociopaths exposed are two of our own senior members! They even hold positions of power and control in the forum, as they have voting privileges for official business, controlling half the votes! And they got there despite my best efforts to set up a workable system that would likely preclude the influential participation of sociopaths!

Mama mia... So now that this situation is exposed, how likely is it that the sociopaths will see the necessary advantage of cooperating to make sure none of them are suspended? My guess is 100%. Even Zook sees it coming and suggests as much with clever, game-playing innuendo:

UncleZook wrote:
We'll probably lose Stasi-Style when Chico's had enough of Andy's forum disruptions and takes unilateral action to protect his forum ... but for those that enjoy master bait theatre, don't toss those free tickets, for we'll always have Fifth Column Foxy and Poor Discernment Doodle Dandy to fill the stage..

Now is it not obvious how the forum world is a microcosm of the global stage, where despite humanity's best efforts, the sociopaths have come to dominate the highest positions of power and control with ease and impunity? They even mock us as they do it, just like in the forum!

The only way things could be more ironic is if I announce that I am a sociopath, that I have deceived and manipulated everyone, that this has been my plan all along, and that it's "game over" for the non-sociopaths. :shock:

Too bad for the sociopaths that this is not the truth. 8-)

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Wed Mar 12, 2014 11:38 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 5:11 pm
Posts: 1400
Reply with quote
Post Re: Edward Snowden
magamud wrote:
Zook you just don't get it because you think this is some game. This is not some infantile game in the sandbox...

For the life of me, I don't understand why Zook and Andy haven't already joined forces to multiply the power of their sociopathic game-playing. The only thing I can think of is that their egos won't allow them to admit that they aren't clever enough to "win the game" on their own.


It's getting tiresome, this delusional lumping of me with the bonafide psychopath/sociopath that you had entertained here for the longest time against my better advice (Andy). My discernment has proven correct about Andy as it has about Assange., Snowden, Appelbaum, Palast, Pilger, Correa, etc. etc. ... and any others that your piss poor discernment has failed to evaluate accurately.

But instead of facing your discernment issues like a man ... you again seek refuge in throwing a burning tire around the head of the ONLY genuine truthseeker remaining on this forum ... the archives will attest that I was the only one who did not play any games here or elsewhere (Heeberts, Jeeberts, and Chicoberts withstanding). The archives will attest that I've told it as I saw it ... and had made the appropriate corrections on the rare occasion where I was found to be in error. Rarer than a snow leopard sighting in Tahiti, well maybe not ... but you get the drift. I've defended my perspective with facts and rational arguments as a first resort whereas your contributions of late have been ad hominems as a first resort, calling anyone that disagrees with you a sociopath ... and anyone who agrees with you, a nonsociopath on the verge of sainthood. I even felt saintly reading some of your posts that supported my perspective.

Alas, the boy has cried sociopath so many times, that no one takes the boy seriously anymore, even when teh boy applies it to a genuine sociopath like Andy. Shame really, Chico, your credibility must not be all that important to you. And here again, you shamelessly accuse me of being a sociopath because I dared to see preponderance which your poor discernment prevents you from seeing.

Quote:
The irony of this forum is truly awe-inspiring, in my view. My focus has long been the study of sociopaths, and I started this forum from scratch after being banned by sociopaths on three different forums. I had hoped to create a forum where sociopaths would be exposed, where censorship would not be tolerated, where the members would run the forum, and where hierarchy would not rear its ugly head. And look what happened. The sociopaths exposed are two of our own senior members! They even hold positions of power and control in the forum, as they have voting privileges for official business, controlling half the votes! And they got there despite my best efforts to set up a workable system that would likely preclude the influential participation of sociopaths!


You're even wrong about that.

Andy definitely fits the sociopath's profile, but he's the only one here who actually does.

Mags is a tribal animal and his faults are limited to that affliction, but I wouldn't call it sociopathy.

As I've never participated in polls to ban other people here at United People, you're in a state of denial and delusion when you claim that I hold a position of power and control. But delusions are not necessarily limited to sociopaths. I think in your case, it's more a sign of a feeble mind that punches first in anticipation of being punched. But I'm not going to punch you with an accusation that I cannot prove.

As for me, the very thought of me being a sociopath brings chuckles to the known Universe, I'm sure.

Quote:
Mama mia... So now that this situation is exposed, how likely is it that the sociopaths will see the necessary advantage of cooperating to make sure none of them are suspended? My guess is 100%. Even Zook sees it coming and suggests as much with clever, game-playing innuendo:


Delusions are what they are ... and discernment is what it is. You have too much of the former and too little of the latter. I never partake in United People polls ... because I recognize the absurdity in them. If you want Andy gone, you're going to have to do what you did to the Screech Owl for there are not enough votes on the table to banish The Bahamas other than unilaterally. Of course, if you can no longer handle facts and logic ... or patterns ... and wish to get rid of me, I'm sure Andy will assist you in that regard, for he is a genuine sociopath ... and he loves power and money, cryptocoin or otherwise.

Quote:
UncleZook wrote:
We'll probably lose Stasi-Style when Chico's had enough of Andy's forum disruptions and takes unilateral action to protect his forum ... but for those that enjoy master bait theatre, don't toss those free tickets, for we'll always have Fifth Column Foxy and Poor Discernment Doodle Dandy to fill the stage..

Now is it not obvious how the forum world is a microcosm of the global stage, where despite humanity's best efforts, the sociopaths have come to dominate the highest positions of power and control with ease and impunity? They even mock us as they do it, just like in the forum!


You're either talking to Mags or to a mirror. For Andy's not gonna buy it. And all I see is an empty table and an old man trying to sell some air molecules hovering over it.

(Note to self: Give Chico some purpose and give him an End of Times sign to hold.)

Quote:
The only way things could be more ironic is if I announce that I am a sociopath, that I have deceived and manipulated everyone, that this has been my plan all along, and that it's "game over" for the non-sociopaths. :shock:

Too bad for the sociopaths that this is not the truth. 8-)


Yup, too bad for them. And too bad for the rest of us that the truth lies closer to Chico's deteriorating sanity.

Alas, poor Yorick, I knew him, Horatio ... a fellow of infinite test.


Pax

_________________
Flight that sends into the clouds brings wings to rest upon the boughs. Then further down to the liquid lawn, to serve as sentries for the gliding swan. Curve, a perfect turning of the line between here and Heaven, with extensions into infinitum.


Thu Mar 13, 2014 2:22 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 11843
Reply with quote
Post Re: Edward Snowden
UncleZook wrote:
It's getting tiresome, this delusional lumping of me with the bonafide psychopath/sociopath that you had entertained here for the longest time against my better advice (Andy). My discernment has proven correct about Andy as it has about Assange., Snowden, Appelbaum, Palast, Pilger, Correa, etc. etc. ... and any others that your piss poor discernment has failed to evaluate accurately.

But instead of facing your discernment issues like a man ... you again seek refuge in throwing a burning tire around the head of the ONLY genuine truthseeker remaining on this forum ... the archives will attest that I was the only one who did not play any games here or elsewhere (Heeberts, Jeeberts, and Chicoberts withstanding). The archives will attest that I've told it as I saw it ... and had made the appropriate corrections on the rare occasion where I was found to be in error. Rarer than a snow leopard sighting in Tahiti, well maybe not ... but you get the drift. I've defended my perspective with facts and rational arguments as a first resort whereas your contributions of late have been ad hominems as a first resort, calling anyone that disagrees with you a sociopath ... and anyone who agrees with you, a nonsociopath on the verge of sainthood. I even felt saintly reading some of your posts that supported my perspective.

Trying to shame me while building yourself up, Zook? There is no doubt in my mind that you are a narcissistic sociopath, when you post stuff like this repeatedly with absolute conviction. Gaslighting anyone?

UncleZook wrote:
Alas, the boy has cried sociopath so many times, that no one takes the boy seriously anymore, even when teh boy applies it to a genuine sociopath like Andy. Shame really, Chico, your credibility must not be all that important to you. And here again, you shamelessly accuse me of being a sociopath because I dared to see preponderance which your poor discernment prevents you from seeing.

You're wrong again, Zook. You are a sociopath not because you oppose my views or hold a different opinion than I do. You're a sociopath because of your psychology and the behavior that results from it. You're not a sociopath because I need an avenue to attack you or because I don't like you. On the contrary, I like you a lot and wish I didn't have to confront you so often on your juvenile discernment. The characteristics of a sociopath are well documented, and I have studied them for a long time. You make the grade. It's not what I want, and it causes me some discomfort, but it is the truth! I go with the truth every time. You're right that the perception other people may have of my integrity is not important to me. My integrity is derived from my adherence to the truth. As long as I make a sincere effort to find the truth, I am satisfied with my integrity. What others think, like you and Andy, matters not, which is why your efforts to shame me or guilt-trip me into compliance fall on deaf ears.

UncleZook wrote:
As I've never participated in polls to ban other people here at United People, you're in a state of denial and delusion when you claim that I hold a position of power and control.

Then you would have no objections if I remove you from the group of approved voters, right? If you're not voting in the polls and contributing to the forum governance, you shouldn't have the privilege to participate. Let's leave your place to somebody else. Any objections?

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:09 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 5:11 pm
Posts: 1400
Reply with quote
Post Re: Edward Snowden
UncleZook wrote:
It's getting tiresome, this delusional lumping of me with the bonafide psychopath/sociopath that you had entertained here for the longest time against my better advice (Andy). My discernment has proven correct about Andy as it has about Assange., Snowden, Appelbaum, Palast, Pilger, Correa, etc. etc. ... and any others that your piss poor discernment has failed to evaluate accurately.

But instead of facing your discernment issues like a man ... you again seek refuge in throwing a burning tire around the head of the ONLY genuine truthseeker remaining on this forum ... the archives will attest that I was the only one who did not play any games here or elsewhere (Heeberts, Jeeberts, and Chicoberts withstanding). The archives will attest that I've told it as I saw it ... and had made the appropriate corrections on the rare occasion where I was found to be in error. Rarer than a snow leopard sighting in Tahiti, well maybe not ... but you get the drift. I've defended my perspective with facts and rational arguments as a first resort whereas your contributions of late have been ad hominems as a first resort, calling anyone that disagrees with you a sociopath ... and anyone who agrees with you, a nonsociopath on the verge of sainthood. I even felt saintly reading some of your posts that supported my perspective.

Trying to shame me while building yourself up, Zook? There is no doubt in my mind that you are a narcissistic sociopath, when you post stuff like this repeatedly with absolute conviction. Gaslighting anyone?


Gaslight was a great movie. Ingrid Bergman, Roger Cotton ... and who can forget Charles Boyer. Too bad you can't appreciate the meaning in it. For gaslighting only makes sense in this debate if I'm Cotton and you're Boyer. For you started hurling words like narcissism, ego, sociopath, gatekeeper, etc. against me long ago, with absolutely no warrant to back it up. You were joined then by Andy - who you praised as a great mind ... and of course, your foxy fifth column friend, Mags, who periodically decides who should have speech here and who should not, for he's the one usually drumming for the polls that ban. Check the archives.

Not the first time I've asked the the physician to heal himself. One only asks that when one encounters someone so
hypocritical in their behavior that they project their own shortcomings on others. Your mental state is a sad nation, Chico.

FTR, I did not invent, Heebert. You did. I did not refuse to verify or deny being Heebert (in the interest of truth and to the detriment of gameplaying). You did. You like playing games. So did Charles Boyer in the movie.

I wonder if Joseph Cotton would have reacted the way you do here on the forum. Actually, I don't . When Cotton saw a pattern of behavior he investigated and made the startling discoveries. He didn't prevaricate. He didn't misdirect. He didn't play games with the truth. That was all left to Charles Boyer.

Quote:
UncleZook wrote:
Alas, the boy has cried sociopath so many times, that no one takes the boy seriously anymore, even when teh boy applies it to a genuine sociopath like Andy. Shame really, Chico, your credibility must not be all that important to you. And here again, you shamelessly accuse me of being a sociopath because I dared to see preponderance which your poor discernment prevents you from seeing.

You're wrong again, Zook. You are a sociopath not because you oppose my views or hold a different opinion than I do. You're a sociopath because of your psychology and the behavior that results from it. You're not a sociopath because I need an avenue to attack you or because I don't like you. On the contrary, I like you a lot and wish I didn't have to confront you so often on your juvenile discernment. The characteristics of a sociopath are well documented, and I have studied them for a long time. You make the grade. It's not what I want, and it causes me some discomfort, but it is the truth! I go with the truth every time. You're right that the perception other people may have of my integrity is not important to me. My integrity is derived from my adherence to the truth. As long as I make a sincere effort to find the truth, I am satisfied with my integrity. What others think, like you and Andy, matters not, which is why your efforts to shame me or guilt-trip me into compliance fall on deaf ears.


There is not even a hint of sociopath in me. I do have narcissistic tendencies - like most everyone else. I do have a healthy ego ... like any who wishes to rise above the mob and mediocrity. I do have a reactive temper but only when set upon by proactive tampers ... normal human behavior. I do take pride in my honesty and integrity, as well one should when one lives up to the demands of truthful existence.

Somehow, despite the evidence of my normalcy, you have managed to characterize my healthy amounts of narcissism, ego, emotions ... as self-centricism, self-righteousness, and manipulations, respectively.

Of course, you only get away with it here because the only other regular posters are Andy and Mags .... two stunted individuals and one bonafide Stasi-Style sociopath moonlighting as a banana ... both pursuing truths in different degrees and for different reasons. Andy seeking a fraction of the stuff to mix with all his promoted fictions, e.g. so that his disinformation can get traction. Mags seeking a greater fraction but not enough to upset the system's apple cart. He's more into polemics about freedom, liberty, decency, morality ... than any significant practice thereof.

You claim integrity, Chico. I claim integrity. But only one of us truly lives by it. Wot, Chicobert?

Quote:
UncleZook wrote:
As I've never participated in polls to ban other people here at United People, you're in a state of denial and delusion when you claim that I hold a position of power and control.

Then you would have no objections if I remove you from the group of approved voters, right? If you're not voting in the polls and contributing to the forum governance, you shouldn't have the privilege to participate. Let's leave your place to somebody else. Any objections?


Absolutely none. Go ahead. I stated as much when I said that I didn't believe in the polling system here at United People. You seem to think voting is some great prize, as opposed to the great burden that it is. I guess, with your mindset, power - even in a grain of dust - glitters like a pound of gold. From my perspective, however, polling is an act of regression to the mob. Face it, you only keep me on as a voting member because I have integrity you can use.

But even before that, please see if you can get some help for that New Jerk state of mind. In all sincerity.


Pax

ps: I was born in the sign of water ... and it's there that I feel my best ... the albatross and the whales and, too, the UP archives, they are are my brothers. Thank you, Little River Band, for rescuing me from the mood of the land.


_________________
Flight that sends into the clouds brings wings to rest upon the boughs. Then further down to the liquid lawn, to serve as sentries for the gliding swan. Curve, a perfect turning of the line between here and Heaven, with extensions into infinitum.


Thu Mar 13, 2014 9:38 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 5:11 pm
Posts: 1400
Reply with quote
Post Re: Edward Snowden
Edward Snowden took part in a conference via the Internet yesterday, and a couple of things reported by the Guardian article struck me as odd. Of course, I am relying on the accuracy of the Guardian article, as I really can't be certain any of the events reported actually took place, as I am well aware that we are living in an artificial Matrix. But let's assume the events happened as reported and that the Guardian is not biased towards a deceitful agenda (but let's not forget we are making some potentially troublesome assumptions). Here are the statements I found odd.

Quote:
The 30-year-old also claimed that by spending so much effort on harvesting communications data en masse, US security agencies were failing to pick up would-be terrorists such as Tamerlan Tsarnaev, one of the brothers alleged to have bombed last year’s Boston Marathon, who had been previously flagged to the US as a cause for concern by Russian authorities.

Snowden also pointed to the case of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the so-called “underwear bomber” who attempted to blow up a plane bound for Detroit on Christmas Day 2009. The US failed to intercept him despite several opportunities, including a warning from his father to US officials in Nigeria.

If the Boston Marathon bombing and the underwear bomber attack were both false-flag intelligence operations, as plenty of evidence suggests, why would Snowden imply that they were legitimate terrorist attacks that the U.S. had failed to intercept?


Because he's not a genuine whistleblower.

There are two choices here. Investigate, find the truth, and comment on what was found. Don't investigate, don't find the truth, and don't comment on what was not found.

Even a cursory investigation points to the Boston Bombings as a state terror operation ... from backpack mismatches; to a captured naked Tsarnaev being taken into police custody without any bruises; to the many actors used; etc.

Snowden should have kept his mouth corked. By uncorking and erroneously adding narrative to the Boston False Flag Bombings, he reveals one of two things (and perhaps a bit of both). He's either an idiot who has no investigative skills and who is being given disinfo to spread about (a patsy, the likely case). Or he's a natural-born liar. Either way, Snowden's integrity is shot.

Of course, it comes as no big surprise that others who likewise have lost integrity ... also continue to support Snowden, e.g. Assange, Appelbaum, Wikileaks, Anonymous, etc. ... and on this forum, Chico, Mags, and Andy (the banana claiming neutrality but his behavior demonstrating otherwise).


Quote:
Is Edward Snowden lying, or is he having difficulty distinguishing the Matrix from reality, just like most everyone else?


Not like most anyone else. People with discernment - even a modicum - can see the easy observables for what they are. Prevaricators and those with fuzzy discernment see something else, of course.


Pax

_________________
Flight that sends into the clouds brings wings to rest upon the boughs. Then further down to the liquid lawn, to serve as sentries for the gliding swan. Curve, a perfect turning of the line between here and Heaven, with extensions into infinitum.


Thu Mar 13, 2014 10:06 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 11843
Reply with quote
Post Re: Edward Snowden
UncleZook wrote:
There are two choices here.
...he reveals one of two things...

You're hopeless, Zook. With your oversimplified binary logic ("It's either A or B"), you reason yourself right into nonsense. You are the definition of a simpleton. I don't even want to try to straighten you out. I apologize for having reached the limits of my patience.

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Fri Mar 14, 2014 6:30 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 11843
Reply with quote
Post Re: Edward Snowden
UncleZook wrote:
For gaslighting only makes sense in this debate if I'm Cotton and you're Boyer.

:face:

You don't have a clue, Zook. It's not about the movie. It's about the specific behavior rooted in deviant psychology. Did you even click the link and read the psychological article on gaslighting that Magamud provided? Obviously not. I'm wasting my time on you.

UncleZook wrote:
There is not even a hint of sociopath in me.

:face:

Suit yourself, bud. That's what sociopaths do.

UncleZook wrote:
You claim integrity, Chico. I claim integrity. But only one of us truly lives by it.

Sorry, my ridiculous friend, but I make no claim to having integrity. I've already explained why I won't. Those that have to claim they have integrity most assuredly do not.

UncleZook wrote:
Face it, you only keep me on as a voting member because I have integrity you can use.

You are such a fool. You are also a hypocrite, professing to believe in the wisdom of high-consensus democracy and then refusing to support it in your personal behavior. I accept you resignation from the voting members of this forum. I regret having ever placed any faith in your so-called discernment. You certainly fooled me and a lot of other people in the forum world with your carefully constructed mask of intellectual bravado. It was all window dressing, the camouflage of a master game-player whose intent to deceive and manipulate knows no bounds. No, there is not even a hint of sociopath in you, is there.

It is truly mind-boggling behavior, from both you and Andy, when I can see right through you and you still attempt to create a convincing window display to restore your camouflage, as if that's all it will take to restore your "integrity". It's sickening and pitiful at the same time. And it is an extremely ugly truth. No wonder most non-sociopaths prefer not to see it.

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Fri Mar 14, 2014 7:12 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 5:11 pm
Posts: 1400
Reply with quote
Post Re: Edward Snowden
UncleZook wrote:
For gaslighting only makes sense in this debate if I'm Cotton and you're Boyer.

:face:

You don't have a clue, Zook. It's not about the movie. It's about the specific behavior rooted in deviant psychology. Did you even click the link and read the psychological article on gaslighting that Magamud provided? Obviously not. I'm wasting my time on you.


As a person who has seen the movie more than a half-dozen times, the term obviously applies to Boyer's treatment of Bergman ... to drive her into thinking she was gong crazy by playing with the gaslight. The sly attempt at shifting discussion is ridiculous even from a prevaricating fox like yourself. Right now, I'll leave it at your increasingly delusional state of mind.

Quote:
UncleZook wrote:
There is not even a hint of sociopath in me.

:face:

Suit yourself, bud. That's what sociopaths do.


Perhaps. But a lot more nonsociopaths make the same statement. In fact, the rule of nonsociopaths is to declare themselves nonsociopathic because they know who and what they are, and they don't seek profit form such a statement.

Good character assassination requires a hint of reality to support it. Your attempts against Andy is laudable ... but the same attempts against me are laughable. Difference? The reality of Andy and the reality of me and, indeed, the reality of you, Chico. Or should I say, Chicobert ... a man with such great integrity that he cloaks himself in forums that had rejected him on grounds of his true identity.

Quote:
UncleZook wrote:
You claim integrity, Chico. I claim integrity. But only one of us truly lives by it.

Sorry, my ridiculous friend, but I make no claim to having integrity. I've already explained why I won't. Those that have to claim they have integrity most assuredly do not.


You can't make a claim on integrity unless you have it. You don't, which explains why you can't make the claim. I do, so I can stake my claim. It's like owning a gold mine, friend. You either own it or you don't. Issues of vanity have no bearing on one's integrity though I understand that the mob has been socially engineered to cow under the decrees of the charlatans of etiquette.


Quote:
UncleZook wrote:
Face it, you only keep me on as a voting member because I have integrity you can use.

You are such a fool. You are also a hypocrite, professing to believe in the wisdom of high-consensus democracy and then refusing to support it in your personal behavior.


What are you babbling about? I stated from the get-go that the polls here are a sham. I don't participate in shams. You added my name to the voting quad despite that knowledge. I never exercised that privileged position - and that's what it is - because I don't care for the power. Never did.

Quote:
I accept you resignation from the voting members of this forum. I regret having ever placed any faith in your so-called discernment. You certainly fooled me and a lot of other people in the forum world with your carefully constructed mask of intellectual bravado. It was all window dressing, the camouflage of a master game-player whose intent to deceive and manipulate knows no bounds. No, there is not even a hint of sociopath in you, is there.


You can try that act with Andy, Chico ... but you don't have enough integrity to pull off your legerdemains with me. The archives is the great emancipator of truths. Your distortions here can only survive on the indifference of people to check the archives.

Again, there's no hint of sociopathy in myself. I say that with a clear conscience and with extreme confidence.
You get Zook the way he is ... no cloaks, no masquerades. I wish I could say the same about you, Chicobert.


Quote:
It is truly mind-boggling behavior, from both you and Andy, when I can see right through you and you still attempt to create a convincing window display to restore your camouflage, as if that's all it will take to restore your "integrity". It's sickening and pitiful at the same time. And it is an extremely ugly truth. No wonder most non-sociopaths prefer not to see it.


I have integrity. I have no camouflages. And you're clearly projecting your own behaviors on me. Get some professional help for your condition. I say that without hesitation and without gaslights.


Pax

_________________
Flight that sends into the clouds brings wings to rest upon the boughs. Then further down to the liquid lawn, to serve as sentries for the gliding swan. Curve, a perfect turning of the line between here and Heaven, with extensions into infinitum.


Fri Mar 14, 2014 2:15 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 11843
Reply with quote
Post Re: Edward Snowden
UncleZook wrote:
As a person who has seen the movie more than a half-dozen times...

:face: You still don't have a clue! The movie is Hollywood distortion, no matter how many times you've seen it. The real psychological technique of deception and manipulation is what we are focusing on here with respect to your behavior.

UncleZook wrote:
Or should I say, Chicobert ... a man with such great integrity that he cloaks himself in forums that had rejected him on grounds of his true identity.

Gaslighting again! You are unbelievable.

Quote:
Bringing up historical facts that seem largely accurate but contain minute, hard-to-prove distortions and using them to “prove” the correctness of one’s position is another method. -- source


UncleZook wrote:
You can't make a claim on integrity unless you have it. You don't, which explains why you can't make the claim. I do, so I can stake my claim. It's like owning a gold mine, friend. You either own it or you don't.

Gaslighting again with your flawed logical legerdemain via binary thinking and oversimplification. I can see right through you, Zook. You can't imagine how transparent you've become. It reminds me of the scene in "Matrix" when Neo sees the three agents as computer code and suddenly has complete mastery over them.



UncleZook wrote:
What are you babbling about? I stated from the get-go that the polls here are a sham. I don't participate in shams. You added my name to the voting quad despite that knowledge. I never exercised that privileged position - and that's what it is - because I don't care for the power. Never did.

More gaslighting. It's like you were born to be the perfect display model for this kind of behavior.
UncleZook wrote:
You can try that act with Andy, Chico ... but you don't have enough integrity to pull off your legerdemains with me. The archives is the great emancipator of truths. Your distortions here can only survive on the indifference of people to check the archives.

Again, there's no hint of sociopathy in myself. I say that with a clear conscience and with extreme confidence.
You get Zook the way he is ... no cloaks, no masquerades. I wish I could say the same about you, Chicobert.

Great gaslighting performance, Zook! Superb!

UncleZook wrote:
I have integrity. I have no camouflages. And you're clearly projecting your own behaviors on me. Get some professional help for your condition. I say that without hesitation and without gaslights.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Fri Mar 14, 2014 7:33 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 149 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ... 15  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.