Your logic is often doomed from the initial false premise, which in this case is "We must then choose a path to get out of this state." We need do no such thing. Uncertainty is not a "genuine commitment against the truths". In fact, this is what certainty almost always is. When you are certain your truth is the answer, you dismiss all other truths that are not yours, as if you alone hold the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. But you don't, and you never will, so your certainty is your undoing.


I know. That's another one of your undoings.

You continue to prove my point that the meek are illogical creatures (as a rule). The state is uncertainty. One either stays in this state of uncertainty ... or one chooses a path to get out of this state. One must do one or the other thing. One cannot do both or do neither. The two choices make no claims on certainty ... just claims on moving from (or staying in) uncertainty.

One can still be a truthseeker within the bounds of uncertainty as long as the decision is made to move out of it. Your track record has largely been one of obstructing those who attempt to move out of it. Probability Of Event clouds (e.g. POE clouds) are huge objects in your sky, with radii so large that the event has no identifiable locus and a massive amount of uncertainty attached to it. Preponderance is a rare bird against the same sky.

You really like your sky, its lack of preponderance, and its state of uncertainty. So why should I or anyone think that you might want to leave it?



Your comprehension skills could be better.

I wrote ",,, bringing things into the state of uncertainty, e.g. genuine commitment against the truths ..."

You understood the path (e.g. bringing things into uncertainty) as the state itself (e.g. uncertainty). There is no need to continue further with this if you don't even recognize the fundamental difference between the path and the state.

Fact is ... you tend to bring things into the state of uncertainty even when those things reside outside it and are bodyguarded by the sentries of preponderance and probability.



You are entitled to your delusions, Chico. Ultimately, the quality of our respective discernment will manifest over traveling time and different events (if it already hasn't), and that will be the undoing of credibility for one of us.

I hope you have your passport ready for a trip out of town on a midnight train when the walls of your credibility come a tumbling down and yet another gatek .... veteran forum officer of the corrupted system is exposed without his cloak on and his dagger down.



Pax

You're never going to get it, Zook, with this kind of binary thinking. Yes, the correct thing to do is stay in a state of uncertainty. You will never understand this as long as you see the world in black and white. Uncertainty does not mean paralysis. It doesn't mean working against the truths. It does not mean apathy and nonaction. It means recognizing the ever-shifting limits of your discernment, which is definitely something you need to work on.

Sorry, Zook, but I missed this post of yours somehow. I appreciate you taking the time to give me your perspective of the Universal Spectrum situation. I have been learning a lot about Hitler and WWII myself recently, so I decided to see what the discussion was about at Universal Spectrum regarding Hitler. I have just been looking at this thread, which I am quite enjoying. I've only read the first 3 of 41(!) pages so far, but the posts have been of very good quality. So far, I would have agreed with those arguing against your rigid insistence that Hitler was just a lackey for the banksters. You are once again being too binary, seeing the world in black and white only, and you reflect this by calling all who question your position as faith-holders in opposition to the real truth-seekers, by which I believe you mean yourself (as usual).



Right, "the sole voice of reason" at UP, just like you are the sole truth-seeker at US. Really Zook, isn't that a bit over the top? You didn't even know KingArt2 was GypsyWoman spewing her own personal information here in an attempt to turn the forum against me (because she knew I wouldn't censor it). It was me that figured it out and posted about it -- you didn't have a clue! GW (KingArt2) cleared her own posts to destroy the evidence when she realized I knew, confirming my deductions, and when I explained it all to you much later, you still weren't sure if it was true.


You gotta love Zook's ability to "spin" the truth! It's still just UP, with all of its trials and tribulations on public display, complete and uncensored (except for what GW managed to clear of her KingArt2 posts).

Well, you're welcome to all the rope you can handle and the tallest oak, Chico.

You're too busy doing the unwarranted uncertainty thing that you overlook the consequences of your mutually contradicting propositions. Just the other day you created a thread called: Hitler in Argentina (http://hm.dinofly.com/UP/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=1172) ... where you actually endorse the high probability that Hitler escaped to Argentina with knowledge and approval from the US shadow government.

beginExcerpt
"It is highly likely that Hitler did not commit suicide in his Berlin bunker on April 30, 1945, but instead escaped to Argentina to live out his life in hiding, with the knowledge and approval of the United States shadow government."
end


So, if Hitler did escape with complicity from the US shadow government (which is effectively owned by the banksters) ... then that's proof that he was working for them all along (e.g. the strongman puppet template). If the Western Allied Powers had Hitler in their grasp on the latter's voyage to Argentina, and then neither killed him outright or bring him to Nuremberg to face justice (even show trial justice) ... then that can only mean he was working for the banksters. The rest of the preponderance (such as his funding sources, the Reichstag fire, the Haavara Agreement, the inexplicable Dunkirk withdrawal, the ill-conceived winter adventure into Russia, etc.) makes it virtually impossible for Hitler to have been his own man, with an own energy, conducting an own fight against the evil bankster empire.

But after this warranted certainty placing Hitler in Argentina (in your own research) ... you are now retreating into the unwarranted uncertainty that keeps Hitler's image as an independent hero alive, an image shared by the thumb-sucking Cupids at Universal who continue to insist that Hitler had an independent fight against the bankster empire.

Are you playing both sides of the coin to nurture drama, Chico? Or to maintain the confusion about Hitler, which can only profit the corrupted bankster system?

Ditto wrt Ghaddafi. You heartily endorse the independent fighter template, but irrationally ignore the strongman-installation template (which was used to install Ghaddafi) and, too, the revolving-door template (which was used to maintain Ghaddafi and spin his image as befits the bankster agenda and occasional need of a bogeyman). Like Saddam, who was manoeuvred into attacking Kuwait (e.g. April Glaspie affair) which ultimately led to his removal; Ghaddafi was manouevred into pursuing a gold currency, so that the fiat currency managers could then claim an economic attack against western citizenry by the mad wolf in Libya and frighten the citizenry (now bloated on fiat economics) into endorsing the removal of Ghaddafi.

The Rothschilds never keep their strongmen in place past the expiry date. And why would they? Scratches appear on the marionette over time, not to mention the weakening of the puppet strings ... so new strongmen puppets are brought in to replace old strongmen puppets just before the latter's strings snap. That sorta thing. It should be noted that Ghaddafi worked with the CIA in their rendition programs (where confessions were extracted using torture). Ignoring Ghaddafi's complicity with evil in order to enjoy the fable of a hero and his independent, righteous fight against the banksters ... exposes either poor research or piss poor discernment (in the best case).

In the worst case, unwarranted uncertainty is the first clue of a gatek ... veteran forum officer.



I make my judgements according to what the evidence holds. If that destroys the credibility of 10 out of 10 who attack the evidence for whatever reason. So be it. My credibility will survive as long as I stay true to the truths. And that's good enough for me. There is nothing binary in the preponderance of evidence; you are welcome to any delusion that suggests otherwise.

Pax

Your narrative is contradicted by the archives, Chico. It was I who noticed Screech Owl's presence on the forum, e.g. when she started posting under an unrecognizable name but with the recognizable pattern of the owner of the Gypsywoman's blog. Go back and read the archives.

That said, the very fact that she had sockpuppets on this forum is proof that you were fooled. The only other possibility is that you knowingly allowed her to have sockpuppets on. Choose your poison, Chico. Were you fooled ... or were you complicit? (Yes, we do indeed have a binary situation here.)


Me, I don't think you were complicit; so it must be that you were fooled. Are you so daft that you are comfortable with self-contradictory propositions?



Like i said before, if I allow you to keep your delusions (about a lot of things, apparently), then I can still use this space for getting the truths out. The truths are an endangered species when there are so many cherubs around wanting to shoot their arrows and stir up things. So be it.

Pax

Don't be so ridiculous, Zook. You oversimplify to the extreme. There's no proof there of anything, not even close. The banksters do not have complete control of everything, and Hitler is not a completely free and independent player. Your binary thinking and the oversimplification it enforces is such a handicap to your thinking processes that you essentially become a madman.


That's all it can mean? Are you mad?


There are lots of other explanations that you conveniently ignore for all of your "preponderance". Your information, like your understanding, is woefully incomplete, but when manipulated by a process of binary thinking and oversimplification, the pieces fall nicely into a picture that you believe is reality. But it is not reality! And your certainty that it is reality is exasperating to the max.


It's a sliding scale, Zook, and during Hitler's lifetime the slider was constantly moving somewhere between the two extremes. At one end of the scale is "Hitler the evil bankster puppet", and at the other end is "Hitler the independent hero". Why can't you wrap your mind around that? It's not black or white, but constantly changing shades of gray.

You always claim that the archives prove your claims and disprove mine, but you never nail down the proof. It's always "Go back and read the archives." I lived those archives, Zook, and I have a good feel for what UP went through. You are always spinning the narrative to suit your ego and your game, and you have been caught numerous times in the act. We have an entire thread about that, should we need to drag it up again.


Everyone was "fooled", Zook. It was a deliberate deception by GW, and there is no way for anyone to know who is hiding behind an avatar in the beginning. Not even you knew.

Perhaps it is you that needs to go back and read the archives. Here are a few posts to get you started. ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 )

All this self-referential bullshit isn't going to impress anyone, Chico, much less me. The links you provide farther below point to your own opinions ... and have little to do with who exposed Screech Owl's presence on the forum, you or me.

Why don't you provide a link to the thread where Srenia herself (can't remember the actual spelling of the name Screech Owl used) indicated that I had outed her out. You may have had backchannel communications with Screech Owl and knew she was on the forum, but I was the one who first outed her out to the rest of the membership because of her idiosyncratic style of attaching images in her post. That's an incontrovertible fact.

I typed "Srenia" in the search function here at UP3 ... but it looks like you sanitized the forum and deleted all of Screech Owl's sockpuppets when you reshaped UP1 to UP2. I won't hold my breath nor am I particularly interested in wasting time entertaining your need for drama, but if you know what happened to that post where Screech Owl directly points at me as being the one who blew her cover, it'll be appreciated. . Thank you.



Like I said, all those links above point to your opinion and character assassination of me ... and has diddly to do with who actually exposed Screech Owl's presence to the membership. I accept that you knew of her presence here on the forum before I became aware of it - because it seems like you invited her here - but it was I who exposed her presence to the REST OF THE MEMBERSHIP, while you were gaming with Screech Owl to hide this fact from the membership.

In any event, the issue here is that you were fooled ... and the proof is in the sockpuppets that you inadvertently allowed in.

Pax

ps: You played a similar game at Universal with your Heebert impersonation. Question needs to be asked, why do you need to go under radar to post. Why can't you engage in honest membership? When Universal no longer accommodated the hard truths and no longer wanted my presence there, I stopped posting. Why would anyone want to post where they're not wanted? But you seem to thrive in that kind of circumstance. Perhaps you should take a long hard look at the mirror.

Dear Zook, those posts are just starting points. I encourage you to read all the posts preceding and following them to get a feel for what was happening here and why your memory of things is always "spun" by you for your own benefit.


More ridiculous spin, Zook. I already told you that nothing has been "sanitized" on this forum. If only you had read the posts I linked to, you would have the names of all the sockpuppets GW used here. But you don't read because you assume you know everything already.


So now the spin is that I was "gaming with Screech Owl to hide this fact from the membership." You just make stuff up as you go, don't you.


Zook, it is you who are making a fool of yourself. Registration at UP was open to all and on auto-pilot back in those days. I didn't have anything to do with "allowing" or disallowing people to join the forum. But then, you should know that, as I recall you created a test sockpuppet of your own here to verify that registration was indeed automatic. Is your memory just dirt poor, or is your spin module on auto-pilot?


Heebert might disagree if Universal Spectrum had not banned him and silenced his voice. Chicodoodoo, on the other hand, was a member at Avalon, Nexus, Atticus1, United People, AskUbuntu, Wikipedia, and the recently deceased Quark forum, always under the name of Chicodoodoo. Note that there is a Chicodoodoo on the Bitcoin forum, but that is Kolin Evans (digitalindustry) impersonating me for purposes of character assassination (what a sociopath he is). Sure, you can always claim I post under other identities on other forums, but I haven't seen you provide any evidence to support your claims. That sounds like just more "spin" to me.


"Mirror, mirror, on the wall" -- I wonder if that wonderful thread still exists at Nexus? No, of course it doesn't. It was sanitized.

I have a penchant for long hard looks in the mirror. I do it to spot hypocrisy, whereas you do it to admire yourself. Obviously, I won't be asking you to take a long hard look in the mirror.