That's your Ego talking, wanting to win an argument, but I don't care who wins. I'm not concerned with matters of Ego.


But you certainly act like one with your black and white pronouncements, like the "gatekeeper" list.

Binary thinking is perfectly applicable to binary situations. Computers use transistors that only have two states, on and off. Binary thinking is the only thinking that works well there. The universe, however, is broad-spectrum analog. If you think about it in a binary manner, you will miss almost all of its richness.


Between the zero of "I don't know" and the absolute certainty of 1 and -1, there are decimal numbers. There are an infinite number of them. Our understanding lies on that sliding scale, rarely seeing the extreme ends, if we're thinking correctly. Because we live in a world of propaganda, deception, and ignorance, there should be a feedback loop that keeps the slider in constant motion as we question everything and dismiss nothing. That motion could be fairly broad, or it could be narrow, but if the feedback loop is working, there will always be motion.

When your slider is pegged at one extreme or the other and doesn't move, you are very likely suffering from a closed mind. I speak from experience.

Gatekeepers are people who claim the truth when they are ignorant of it.

They are those who claim reason and virtue but evade its hard application.

The Revolution is a premeditated hollocaust with a driving narrative and its actors to play the part.

This is in equal proportion to Empire building which people appear to know.

Then I suggest that we are all gatekeepers, and the term therefore loses all meaning.


There again, you describe us all. We only vary in the degree to which we do this. It's very much relative.


Perhaps that is the intent of the planners, but are they infallible? Or do they make mistakes? Can they juggle the complexity of even this single world without dropping a ball?


Some know, but most do not. Even those that know do not know as much as they imagine.

Yes in the purest sense, but we are trying to use this application to the patsy revolution going on.


The idea of Ron Paul not identifying 911 or the abandonment of our infrastructure, the poisoning of our system, the sad state of our system etc...
You cannot partially represent the truth when its relative.


You dont have to be infallible when you are carpet bombing or you have control of the media. This is horseshoe and hand grenades not precision. Your insight shows no understanding of what im pointing too.


What does this have to do with knowing how revolution is co opted?

That is exactly what we all do.


Yes you do, if you expect to circumvent the inevitable change that will depose your power and control.


I can only agree to your picture on a surface level (the "nutshell" level) because it is so oversimplified. That oversimplification is what I'm trying to point to.


You yourself tied knowing the revolution to knowing the empire building. Have you already forgotten? Here is your quote:


Did I misunderstand your meaning?

There is nothing that will change their power and control. You are underestimating their control over our species. They have us from both sides, no matter where we go they use it against us. Do you see?


Your over complexing the situation and therefore not going to see the whole part. I am taking a picture of it for you and you are focused on the pixels of it.


My point I am trying to get through is this. If you dont understand how the Revolution is contrived you will fall for it. As you seem to be backing these revolutionary hit men. Its fine to talk about how they bring about revolution, but you have to know in your mind how they can be used to further the empire coming from it.

Order out of Chaos.

So why all the hard work on their part?


Could it be that is exactly how they want you to think? Is that in their interest? Could it be that you have been brainwashed?


Examining the pixels tells you if the picture has been Photoshopped.


You are assuming that the revolution that results will be the one contrived to serve the controllers. I agree that there is a good chance it will be. But revolution is a tricky thing. A subtle and unanticipated tipping point can change it into one that hurts the controllers. And wherever there is complexity, as in revolution, there is the unanticipated. Whereas you may be deceived and manipulated into thinking the controllers are an unstoppable force, the truth may lie elsewhere.

Winning arguments is what it's all about, Chico. Lost arguments don't gain the truth. Won arguments at least have a chance at the truth. The matter of ego is incidental, though I can understand why some would prefer framing it as an entire matter of ego. It's how their minds have been conditioned to think, i.e. blame it on the ego and let mob etiquette overrun won and winning arguments.



But that's not binary thinking ... that's just the final/intermediate output which is a binary result. Path function vs state function. You're all hung up on states and ignore the paths that have arrived the states. Morrisdancing is what they call it in some places, Chico.



I understand that stuff as easily as you do, and arguably better, because you appear not to understand the difference between path and state ... between the thought that anaylzes and the analytic output.



Yes. Path vs state. Again, I'm way ahead of you on this, Chico. Perhaps you think you're debating with a simp like Andy, the Earl of Wight. I assure you, the path takes care of the decimal numbers. As it were. Some require centimals; still others, millimals ... and others pursue even smaller differentials ... those are the reductionists. They will reduce everything and anything to nothing, given milk and cookies and enough recess time ... and then, still unsatisfied, they will attempt to reduce nothing to its elemental parts.


To wit, they cannot be counted on delivering us from evil; or any meaningful change, for that matter. Navels were probably made specifically for them.



Projecting again, Chico? Again, you sure do push things into the state meme quite often, as if the path meme had not been considered in any degree by those you target for a push. I bet you slay many dragons and rescue sundry damsels from distress - even against their desire to be eaten when they hear your sword swinging nearby.



Pax Puff Magi

Its possibly like this. You set up a manufacturing plant. Its a lot of work in the beginning but once production is going the owners just sit back and let it process.


Sure and they exploit this point with super technology and ominpotent ideologies. Either way you continue to fight oppression, but you educate the Revolutionairy on the depth of control on our planet.
If I can figure out how revolution is the Ace in the hole of controlling our species, it is fair to assume the Banksters have.

All countries have the same dynamic of Tyranny.
All revolutions have created better Tyranny.





Lets first get this idea of a Contrived Revolution the prior in evil to sink into your analyzing. Then use that knowledge and apply it to our leaders of the Revolution. You will see not many speak from this position. That is because they think the Revolution is free or partially not controlled.

Change in perspective yes?

The controllers are not unstoppable but first we need to get over their hurdles. Much like you did with the US political system. The NGO and UN phillanthropy, etc.. this issue is in the same league.

Get to work Soilder!

No. It's about seeking truth. Arguments have been won that obfuscate the truth, and arguments have been lost that reveal the truth. Stay focused on the goal, Zook, which is truth.


Good God, Zook, do you ever quit with your public wordurbation? Sure, it's a great tool for obfuscation, and it makes for a lovely and satisfying path, but the final state is one of error and falsehood. You revel in constructing a dolled-up argument, or path, with no regard to where you end up. And then you refuse to admit your faulty destination, or state, because it would require throwing away that beautifully dressed argument into which you put so much time, effort, and love.

Granted that you are skilled at denigrating others (attacking the messenger), a game I will not partake in, and can damage the public perception of any given individual, like Assange, Andy, or me, but is that where the truth lies? Are you really a truth-seeker? Or are you an unwitting gatekeeper?