Yes, KGB likes intellectuals because they are so easily manipulated by
their
own self-importance.


WOW!

I like idiots, but for the same reason ... seems to me, someone is
mistaken ...

No, KGB don't HAVE to manipulate idiots. They manipulate the intellectuals,
who in turn lead the idiots until they all wind up in a ditch. They only
serve purpose to destabilize and demoralize. There is no place for them in
normalization phase because they find they have been duped and become bitter
enemies. It is better they be liquidated first in the normalization phase.

JB wrote:

WOW!

I like idiots, but for the same reason ... seems to me, someone is
mistaken ...

No, KGB don't HAVE to manipulate idiots. They manipulate the intellectuals,
who in turn lead the idiots until they all wind up in a ditch. They only
serve purpose to destabilize and demoralize. There is no place for them in
normalization phase because they find they have been duped and become bitter
enemies. It is better they be liquidated first in the normalization phase.


Yeah, I guess ... whatever he said ...

Regards,
JS

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
JB wrote:

WOW!

I like idiots, but for the same reason ... seems to me, someone is
mistaken ...

No, KGB don't HAVE to manipulate idiots. They manipulate the
intellectuals,
who in turn lead the idiots until they all wind up in a ditch. They
only
serve purpose to destabilize and demoralize. There is no place for them
in
normalization phase because they find they have been duped and become
bitter
enemies. It is better they be liquidated first in the normalization
phase.


Yeah, I guess ... whatever he said ...

Regards,
JS

Here is full explanation from 1985 interview of KGB defector. If accent is
difficult, subtitles are in French.

Although plans may have changed since then, it appears that once plan is put
into motion, it is self-perpetuating since brainwashed idiots become too
deeply ingrained in thinking and entrenched in their positions, continually
indoctrinating others..

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x32cxf_yuri-bezmenov

JB wrote:

...
Here is full explanation from 1985 interview of KGB defector. If accent is
difficult, subtitles are in French.

Although plans may have changed since then, it appears that once plan is put
into motion, it is self-perpetuating since brainwashed idiots become too
deeply ingrained in thinking and entrenched in their positions, continually
indoctrinating others..

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x32cxf_yuri-bezmenov

Your first problem, which seems to negate your entire statement(s), is
the obvious error in your definition of "intellectual." Anyone make
those error in reasoning/thinking is far from an "intellectual",
although very young ones might make those errors.

An exact example of what the error(s) you are making was given with John
Mccain--the IDIOT "intellectuals" called him a war hero!

Now, someone who was ONLY able to become a pilot because his father was
an admiral and exerted his influence, smashed up five planes
(http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjoh...ost_five_u.htm)
and was captured by the enemy and held for five years is NOT a true "war
hero" in the true meaning to the term ...

.... idiots abound, you can know them by the errors in the reasoning,
text and thinking ... idiots can't ... :-(

Regards,
JS

Now, someone who was ONLY able to become a pilot because his father was
an admiral and exerted his influence, smashed up five planes

(http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjoh...ost_five_u.htm)
and was captured by the enemy and held for five years is NOT a true "war
hero" in the true meaning to the term ...

... idiots abound, you can know them by the errors in the reasoning,
text and thinking ... idiots can't ... :-(

The Forrestal disaster was attributed to druggies. The enemy was no doubt
there on board. Many people have yet to figure out about the mechanics of
such disasters. I submit that there will be 2 sides to every story to come
out of the Vietnam war, and that sufficient truth is often left out to allow
that.

I wrecked a few cars before I learned how to drive. Have you ever been
tortured for information? or just for the hell of it? People who sit around
and talk about it over tea aren't fit to judge who a hero is but they are
often left to talk about it. Let's just call him "experienced". I really
don't consider Obama to be the "Black Messiah" either.

I feel that both candidates were potential disasters, showing the idiots had
prevailed before the election. The vote only served as an international
"poll" on how best to proceed to our doom. It seems the election has tried
to set the clock back to what it was before 9/11. Let's see what develops
this time around.

JB wrote:

...
The Forrestal disaster was attributed to druggies. The enemy was no doubt
there on board. Many people have yet to figure out about the mechanics of
such disasters. I submit that there will be 2 sides to every story to come
out of the Vietnam war, and that sufficient truth is often left out to allow
that.

I wrecked a few cars before I learned how to drive. Have you ever been
tortured for information? or just for the hell of it? People who sit around
and talk about it over tea aren't fit to judge who a hero is but they are
often left to talk about it. Let's just call him "experienced". I really
don't consider Obama to be the "Black Messiah" either.

I feel that both candidates were potential disasters, showing the idiots had
prevailed before the election. The vote only served as an international
"poll" on how best to proceed to our doom. It seems the election has tried
to set the clock back to what it was before 9/11. Let's see what develops
this time around.

Along the way, though college, it is pointed out to you that any great
story (or, at least a believable one) has a protagonist and an
antagonist (sometimes more of them, sometimes less of them); i.e. a
"good guy" and a "bad guy." It is based on a storyline where great
adversity is found, great sacrifice and energy extended and exerted, and
finally the defeat of the enemy is had ... funny, but we will fall for
this same line though uncounted books by uncounted authors. Read any
great Greek tragedies/novels/plays, Shakespeare knew this and you find
it in his offerings. (Or, turn on Rush, "... bad democrats, good
republicans ...", this is simply recited over-and-over again to keep
idiots in line and massage the weak minds into the hypnotic/religious
lies which got us here ... some still have futures which hinge on
keeping the insanity alive. Indeed, real change will bring collapse ...)

Such is also how our political system is arranged, good guy vs. bad guy
(and, you just pick who is good and who is bad, or toss a coin. Or have
you allegiances bought and paid for ...) And, so is our foreign policy
applied, we are the good guy, they are the bad guy and these are our
friends who help us in our great adventure ... fear gets the whole ball
rolling, even unjustified fear(s) will work ...

Someday, all will see the truth, become ashamed of living such a shallow
"truth(s)", and be shamed into higher standards and goals ... until that
time, a few can control the minds of many ... and ultimately the world.

Regards,
JS

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
JB wrote:

...
The Forrestal disaster was attributed to druggies. The enemy was no
doubt
there on board. Many people have yet to figure out about the mechanics
of
such disasters. I submit that there will be 2 sides to every story to
come
out of the Vietnam war, and that sufficient truth is often left out to
allow
that.

I wrecked a few cars before I learned how to drive. Have you ever been
tortured for information? or just for the hell of it? People who sit
around
and talk about it over tea aren't fit to judge who a hero is but they
are
often left to talk about it. Let's just call him "experienced". I
really
don't consider Obama to be the "Black Messiah" either.

I feel that both candidates were potential disasters, showing the idiots
had
prevailed before the election. The vote only served as an international
"poll" on how best to proceed to our doom. It seems the election has
tried
to set the clock back to what it was before 9/11. Let's see what
develops
this time around.

Along the way, though college, it is pointed out to you that any great
story (or, at least a believable one) has a protagonist and an
antagonist (sometimes more of them, sometimes less of them); i.e. a
"good guy" and a "bad guy." It is based on a storyline where great
adversity is found, great sacrifice and energy extended and exerted, and
finally the defeat of the enemy is had ... funny, but we will fall for
this same line though uncounted books by uncounted authors. Read any
great Greek tragedies/novels/plays, Shakespeare knew this and you find
it in his offerings. (Or, turn on Rush, "... bad democrats, good
republicans ...", this is simply recited over-and-over again to keep
idiots in line and massage the weak minds into the hypnotic/religious
lies which got us here ... some still have futures which hinge on
keeping the insanity alive. Indeed, real change will bring collapse ...)

Such is also how our political system is arranged, good guy vs. bad guy
(and, you just pick who is good and who is bad, or toss a coin. Or have
you allegiances bought and paid for ...) And, so is our foreign policy
applied, we are the good guy, they are the bad guy and these are our
friends who help us in our great adventure ... fear gets the whole ball
rolling, even unjustified fear(s) will work ...

Someday, all will see the truth, become ashamed of living such a shallow
"truth(s)", and be shamed into higher standards and goals ... until that
time, a few can control the minds of many ... and ultimately the world.

Regards,
JS


I had considered the "good cop", "bad cop" routine, but I really think it
goes back to the "demoralization" and "destabilization" process that you
yourself (and myself) admit to in lost faith, but healthy distrust along
with a sense of reality is vital, but not to the point of being crippled.

Rush noticed that what's "good" for the Country is "bad" for the democrats
and what's "bad" for the Country is "good" for the democrats. It isn't lost
on me that "when it bleeds it leads". Who for example is responsible for
those who apply psychological pressure to "known" gun owners to induce them
to random mass murder? Who would that benefit? There are many cynical
people out there with a sick sense of humor. Your assertion that real
change would bring collapse is too cynical and I wouldn't set myself up to
be wrong unless there is a complete failure. That just gives us the wrong
goal. Seek God. I know you hate "religion" but rather than seeking as a
blind follower, seek as a researcher. Set those things aside that you don't
immediately understand but don't entirely dismiss them. That is simply
arrogance. The intellectual is a fathead who completely dismisses that
which he doesn't understand or what is related to him by the unschooled.
Those who do that operate contrary to the scientific method. Even a failed
experiment shouldn't be thrown out, but learned from. Or saved until the
failure is understood.

In light of that, "The Interview" link I posted earlier, the true threat is
the cynicism that developed that whole school of thought. It is a process
of destruction. Not only that, but of unchecked destruction.

JB wrote:

...
Here is full explanation from 1985 interview of KGB defector. If accent is
difficult, subtitles are in French.

Although plans may have changed since then, it appears that once plan is put
into motion, it is self-perpetuating since brainwashed idiots become too
deeply ingrained in thinking and entrenched in their positions, continually
indoctrinating others..

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x32cxf_yuri-bezmenov

Your first problem, which seems to negate your entire statement(s), is
the obvious error in your definition of "intellectual." Anyone making
those errors in reasoning/thinking is far from an "intellectual",
although very young ones might make those errors.

An exact example of what the error(s) you are making was given with John
Mccain--the IDIOT "intellectuals" called him a war hero!

Now, someone who was ONLY able to become a pilot because his father was
an admiral and exerted his influence, smashed up five planes
(http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjoh...ost_five_u.htm)

and was captured by the enemy and held for five years is NOT a true "war
hero" in the true meaning to the term ...

.... idiots abound, you can know them by the errors in the reasoning,
text and speech ... idiots can't ... :-(

Regards,
JS

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
JB wrote:

...
Here is full explanation from 1985 interview of KGB defector. If accent
is
difficult, subtitles are in French.

Although plans may have changed since then, it appears that once plan is
put
into motion, it is self-perpetuating since brainwashed idiots become too
deeply ingrained in thinking and entrenched in their positions,
continually
indoctrinating others..

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x32cxf_yuri-bezmenov

Your first problem, which seems to negate your entire statement(s), is
the obvious error in your definition of "intellectual." Anyone making
those errors in reasoning/thinking is far from an "intellectual",
although very young ones might make those errors.

An exact example of what the error(s) you are making was given with John
Mccain--the IDIOT "intellectuals" called him a war hero!

Now, someone who was ONLY able to become a pilot because his father was
an admiral and exerted his influence, smashed up five planes

(http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjoh...ost_five_u.htm)

and was captured by the enemy and held for five years is NOT a true "war
hero" in the true meaning to the term ...

... idiots abound, you can know them by the errors in the reasoning,
text and speech ... idiots can't ... :-(

Regards,
JS

You must be an intellectual. Help me to reason this then.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Headlines/...aspx?id=336456

JB wrote:

...
You must be an intellectual. Help me to reason this then.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Headlines/...aspx?id=336456


I am intellectual enough to recognize something I have never taken an
interest in. I am intellectual enough to recognize something I have
never read on, engaged in discussion upon, and things which invoke and
evoke emotions to cloud the participants into a "religious fervor",
willing to guard and defend their own political beliefs.

And, finally, I am intellectual to recognize something which I have no
intellectual interest in ...

Now, all that said, it would surprise me if one had ALL the facts, data
and knowledge of the evil done, that the KGB should appear any more evil
than the CIA or other related and/or secret arms of their and/or our
governments ... my blind belief that men in power would honor their
duties and responsibilities to the American people has been destroyed.

The time when our nation stood on infallible principals, morals, ethics,
honors and commitments has slowly disappeared until such territories are
loath to intellectuals--other than to demand a return to sanity, truth
in government and the publics right to know, and a fair and just system.

Idiots will see little problem jumping into this quagmire.

P.S. Any of the following, and all, definitions of quagmire will do:

1. an area of miry or boggy ground whose surface yields under the tread;
a bog.
2. a situation from which extrication is very difficult: a quagmire of
financial indebtedness.
3. anything soft or flabby.

Or, intellectuals can tell when an argument or discussion is worth
having; for the rest, there is always Rush Limbaugh.

Regards,
JS