I don't want to take away from Chic's philanthropy on tracking you Zook, but do you even remember what your arguing about?

You make me laugh! Thanks for that.

That scene from The Matrix, and the movie itself, is pure genius. Once you understand the multi-layered message, which may even be deeper than what the Wachowski brothers consciously intended, it is like glimpsing Nirvana. The sociopaths fire their dreaded bullets at us, controlling us first by deception and manipulation, and if that fails, then by force. But once we see through their behavior, once we understand their makeup and mindset, they can do us no harm, and we can block their blows as if it is child's play. And suddenly, they go from having absolute power over us, to having no power at all. We change from slaves to free individuals, and we finally have the power to reach our potential as a species and determine our own proper destiny.

That is exactly what needs to happen in the "real" world. This change in consciousness that humanity badly needs to undergo is the act of becoming conscious of where human evil really comes from, and how we can manage it instead of letting it manage us. Evil comes from sociopaths. That is not to say that everything sociopaths do is evil, or that they can do no good, or that they consciously pursue evil. It is to say that without sufficient empathy, people will inevitably go wrong and harm others, which is the essence of evil.

Great work Chic.

I salute you...

I'm the only one who apparently does.

At this point I have to turn the question to you, Mags ... do you know what gaslighting is?

It appears you can't discern Chico's gaslighting ... you know, whenever he claims one is a sociopath if one dares disagree with him beyond a certain point, or present superior arguments to him. Other terms he is fond of exercising: binary thinker, oversimplifying thinker, overconfident thinker, arrogant thinker, narcissist. You know ... the gaslighter uses the whole arsenal of suggestive remarks, so he can entrap unsuspecting victims into believing that they suffer from various afflictions.

Anyways, I realize you have a mission to play here at United Keep-the-rinds-and-toss-the-crescents. And you certainly enjoy enabling and disabling people ... passive aggressives usually do.

Still, if you have anything valuable to contribute about Snowden, please do. I'm one of the curious types who prefers the crescents to the rinds, and will listen to a good argument.


Pax

Gaslighting is an analogy of the mind of a liar. More specifically how fast a con can happen by just nudging narrative. Nudging using assumed empathic understandings. Its comparable to how a parasite can shut down the hosts survival instincts.


I would look how intelligence and wisdom differ. Intelligence without wisdom is detrimental, self incriminating and obvious.



I thought this too, back in the Nexus2012 days. I have come to realize, that confronting sociopathy is the most valuable commodity in the human struggle.


These are great terms to help identify sociopathy. Our society is just learning the depth of deception and we need to develop language to communicate the mental threat.



He is exhibiting the dynamics of sociopathy and searching for recognition. He is not entrapping you, he is laying out landscape for you to associate with.


My passiveness is really tying to be polite and my aggression would be out of rebuke.



You have to do this yourself Zook. Do you see how you are led? Try this. Remove the identity that is Snowden and just analyze the narrative. Then find the value in what he is saying about the human race. Godspeed...

It's one thing to do these things with the intent to deceive and manipulate. That's when it is gaslighting. It's another thing entirely to do these things in the process of describing reality. That's when it is truth-seeking. You and Andy can't tell the difference, because with your psychology, all you are familiar with is the intent to deceive and manipulate, so that is what you project onto the actions of others.

Gaslighting derives from the movie Gaslight (or stage play). As such, it describes the manipulations of the gaslights by Charles Boyer ... in order to create psychosis in Ingrid Bergman. Deceptions are central to Boyer's scheme to drive Bergman out of her mind. Good, you understand. Perhaps you can relay your understanding to Chico. He seems to think I'm trying to manipulate the gaslights. Of course, the irony is that Chico's behavior does indeed fit the description of a gaslighter. His constant unfounded charges of sociopathy against me, and against others who've had the displeasure of his targeted character assassination, is highly manipulative. Granted, I agree with his assessment of Andy. The evidence supports Andy's sociopathy. I realized that from that first toxic PM he sent me almost two years ago. Chico - with his discernment - only now has managed to identify Andy.

So we have Chico not being able to identify a genuine sociopath in Andy for about two years ... at the same time he has hurled that charge against me for the last year without any evidence to back it up other than that I disagree with his philosophies of uncertainty and sociopathy. If you recall, he once made a post of my different avatars at different forums (over a long period of time) ... and tried to fabricate an argument that I was a narcissist. That's his standard of input before he decides to label you with something. I'm beginning to wonder if it's just an issue of his poor discernment ... or if he is indeed a highly manipulative person. I won't call him a sociopath just yet, because that word is overused and underfunded.



That didn't answer my question.



Bigger minds than yours or mine have tried confronting sociopathy. Bigger memes than yours or mine have addressed it. And they will continue to confront it for millennia to come. Sociopathy is not well-understood in either memetic and genetic senses. Negative spirits and vampire energies have coexisted with positive spirits and angel energies since the dawn of time. This battle requires eternal vigilance. But we don't have an eternity to stop the bankster empire and full spectrum dominance. Totalitarianism is an immediate threat and deferring it to a discussion of sociopathy is not going to resolve that threat. That threat can only be countered in kind by the masses getting informed about the profile of the empire's organization. Critical mass of awareness (CMA).

And not CMA about sociopathy ... we already have surpassed critical mass in that respect. The vast majority of us realize that cutthroats have taken over the world. Nay, it will take CMA about the specific organization and specific dastradly acts of the bankster empire. 9/11/2001 was a specific act that continues to drive us forward towards the required CMA. By contrast, CMA of sociopathy has taken us nowhere for millennia, and will take us nowhere for millennia to come.




We have millennia to study sociopathy. We don't have many years to stop totalitairanism. Understanding sociopathy has never been able to stop totalitarianism. Certainly in the past 250 years, sociopathy had been well understood, but no one has been able to stop the bankster empire from erecting.



Nope. He's barking out "Sociopath!" at most everything and anything that disagrees with him ... I'm guessing that his own shadow is cussed at whenever it startles him.



Revisit Proactive tamper and reactive temper ... you'll be charmed by the similarities of the above statement with my own approach to things. Funny that Chico has not called you a sociopath for your approach. Give him time, you'll disagree with him a tad too much one day soon ... and be converted into a sociopath with a flick of the magic stick. Right now, you co-sponsor his philosophy of sociopathy, so you're his best friend.



I've already made my expositions of Snowden. To me, the given narrative without Snowden is a false one. One cannot separate the messenger from the message without losing important information. If the messenger is compromised, then the message is effectively worthless.

That said, I agree ... we need to steer things back to the thread topic. But you'll have to talk it over with the proactive tamper, Chico, about the nonsensical stuff and mindless labelling. I'm just the reactive temper, changing my mind won't stop Chico's gaming.


Pax

Like I have said before, we have to keep you around just for entertainment purposes! Your infamous ability to "twist and shout" often causes me to chuckle heartily.


Sorry, Sherlock, but it takes much more than a toxic PM to diagnose a sociopath. As you will recall, only sociopaths appear to have an innate ability to recognize other sociopaths in short order. Like I said, the more you talk, the more you expose yourself (just as Andy did).


That's utter nonsense at best, or typical sociopathic deception and manipulation at worst. Look how long it took me to label Bill Ryan as a sociopath, despite our disagreements. I needed a lot of evidence to make that call. Same story with you. Just as with Bill Ryan, I admired you in the beginning and had absolutely no clue concerning your psychology. Same with Andy. In fact, if Andy had not dropped his mask, I would never have recognized his true nature, despite my familiarity with the psychology of sociopaths.


Spoken like a true sociopath, Zook. Despite disagreements between Magamud and me, I've never had reason to even suspect Mags of being a sociopath. It's the same with the majority of people I disagree with. Disagreements have nothing to do with it. Mags is not my "best friend" because he might agree with me, either. You're thinking like a sociopath again. No surprise there. Neither Mags nor I become "best friends" with anyone on these forums. My guess is that we both realize, through our extensive forum experience, the degree of deception and manipulation that occurs in this milieu because of the sociopathic members the forum world attracts. Like Bill Ryan, Atticus, Ilie, Dennis, Paul, GypsyWoman, 9eagle9, Richard, Andy, Zook, and so many others.

Getting back to Snowden, it is important to examine all sides of the story, including John Rappoport's suspicions, which are echoed here:


What is the truth? I don't know. Beware of those who claim they do know, especially when they are sure of it. The Matrix we live in is complicated, sophisticated, and pervasive. Accurate information is incomplete, disinformation is abundant, necessary information is classified, and propaganda is the mainstay of the media, even on the Internet now.

What a mess.

I don't know where the exact locus of truth resides, either. I only know the probability clouds that contain the locus. What's more, I never claimed otherwise. The probability cloud has characteristics that inform us.
From that information we can separate those that belong to the cloud and those that don't. That's the essence of truthseeking ... not finding the exact locus, but finding the probability cloud and reducing its radius.

Beware of those that demand exact locii. For they will dismiss a lot of the probability cloud if it doesn't yield the exact position. Needles in haystacks is what they seek ... and the banskters understand this and the probability of finding needles in haystacks. Time-wasting by those paving with good intentions; by those with huge but inefficient brains, by those with time to waste ... is part of the calculations they had made in their push for full spectrum dominance.

Pax