Friday, October 20, 2017

You Lie to Yourself At Your Own Peril

Telling anyone that they lie to themselves at their own peril ought to be obvious to anyone with two brain cells with which to comprehend what will happen when one steps in front of a speeding bus.

So then, why do we do lie to ourselves so often?  I think from observation that herd mentality is far worse than most any of us want to believe.

Despite my constant non suppression of asserting that death cultists must exert great influence in powerful circles, even I have still succumb to the urge to suppress lesser observations that I expect to generate reactions I rather not face. And in the long run, I also suspect that the likely outcome to the lesser observations being left unnoted is that their threats will grow larger and, thus, the downsides then would likely be worse by far.

So I know I've been guilty.

How about you?

Sunday, October 15, 2017

Orwell Was Right -- Again

Many people have attested they have read Orwell's 1984. But how good is the average memory of it or anything else? And even should the memory be good, how many are willing to connect what they remember to what they witness in real time?

I ask about being willing to make connections because there are a number of risks involved in doing so. Chief among these is the fear of being dismissed for jumping to conclusions. As a result, there is a requirement to piece all the evidence together before announcing the conclusion so as to be prepared to answer all outright adversaries, cynics, skeptics or casual scoffers rapidly and as thoroughly as possible.

However -- and this is the game changer -- it now matters not how well prepared we are for debate. Those who resent our abilities to answer them with facts, reason and rationality want us just to shut up, and they will charge us with all the things our well-backed-up arguments -- if permitted a fair hearing -- would belie.

See the world for what it has become and adapt!

We now live in an age where those who control the major outlets of communication, what most people refer to as MSM, but we here at Pascal Fervor refer to as the Soviet-Style Media, SSM, have hired people to spout utter nonsense without a shred of evidence, and are quite willing to slander any whom they wish with baseless charges.

Charges of racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic -- I'm sure I'm forgetting a lot more -- are brandished to the point of meaninglessness. But that does not mean tossing such charges are not still deemed as useful by those who pay for the service. They approve by renewing the contracts of all those who spew such unsupported "stupidity."

I put stupidity in quotes because such evil assertions are more easily deflected by calling them stupid than to take umbrage -- which would require a stronger response. So it's often called stupid by someone not willing to risk the implications on them of drawing the connection of evil intent to those who seek to gain by tarnishing the reputation of their opponents. And besides, such emissions are still food for mindless idiots to repeat to others of their ilk. Idiots will repeat any stupidity that suits them.

So this is written to remind my readers of one of the more unclear notions that Orwell wrote about. It's an attempt to make it easier to pass the understanding along to others how novelist George Orwell (journalist Eric Blair) predicted the sort of repeated gibberish of which we see all the time on SSM, most frequently on CNN and MSNBC, but on every TV news outlet, including Fox, and ever increasingly in the products of the entertainment arm of the SSM.  

Darin at Crusader Rabbit in FFS! #39,528  reacted in the usual way to what appears to be simply the title of the Daniel Greenfield report Dr Seuss is Racist, Thomas the Tank Engine is Sexist
  “Are there even words for this level of stupid?”

Of course he's right on one level, as I laid out above. And the direct answer to Darin's question was provided by Ed Bonderenka with the brilliant double entendre: "utter nonsense."

There's much more to comprehend, and that's why I am looking at it more thoroughly here.

Contend that Orwell predicted what may be called orchestrated stupidity. He gave it the name Duckspeak. He wrote several paragraphs in 1984 explaining the goal of the practice, but did not provide explicit examples.

The best summation of all that Orwell wrote on the topic may be this:
“make articulate speech issue from the larynx without involving the higher brain centres at all.”
I’m guessing he didn’t give us an example because he could see the value in its use but had not yet seen it put to use.

We, unfortunately, have been forced to live with it and have not yet figured out a successful counter-ploy since we individualists and targets of the oppressors don’t command the intrusive and omnipresent stage as the SSM does.

Such a widely staged practice, its contents prevented from being fairly contested on that stage and thus easily employed for inculcating weak and weakened minds, provides material for the jabbering parrots you may hear every hour of every day. Emitting words without involving the higher brain centers at all.

Wait. There's yet more. How did it evolve?

Duckspeak may have begun in this country with the relatively minor behavior of Eleanor Clift on the long running PBS show The McLaughlin Group. It bore the initial appearances of a slightly less formal debate: a panel discussion between various political commentators who worked for establishment outlets. But it was always rigged to Clift's advantage in that she was always granted a hecklers veto. Whenever an argument seemed to expose the failings of some Leftist Sinister policies, those in charge of her microphone permitted her high pitched whine to overwhelm whichever opponent was speaking. It didn't happen all the time, but it proved to be an acceptable and winning format. It went on for over 20 years and until the death of the host.  Suggestive that the resultant disorder that harmed fair discussions could well have been one objective goal of its host is that although the other panelists changed around over the years, only McLaughlin, the host, and Clift were regulars. Clift's behavior was essential in advancing the ability of nonsense to gain any ground on that program and in setting the pattern of what could follow on to undermine ordered discussions in our society.

Following that, CNN advanced the assault on reasoned debate with a show titled Cross-Fire. In that one, the shouting was more pronounced as the title of the show explicitly suggests. In other words, the appearance of decorum was far less often preserved. And given all that CNN has come to represent in its support of all that has become ever more openly sinister to what America once stood for, their advancement of Duckspeak appears to have taken the practice about as far as it can go.

The facts of the situations we have witnessed in only the last few years indicate that the effectiveness of Duckspeak has dwindled quite a bit. The most flagrant practitioners may be needing to look for new jobs assuming they survive the extremists who have begun to eat their own. 

The failure of nonsense to win over new parrots to utter the nonsense is why authorities in universoties and skools who are committed to the failing Prog agenda have increasingly resorted to shut-down real debates where students might actually hear clear, reasonable, rational arguments that expose the huge numbers of failures being forced down our throats. And expose Duckspeak for the utter nonsense it is.

That also explains why authorities all around the country, even more deeply committed to the failed Prog agenda, have allowed violent thugs to appear masked and with bludgeons and mostly tied the hands of law enforcement to prevent their unlawful acts.  It explains why the crony-corporate funded SSM invoke invalid apologetics for Antifa's antics and grants those thugs the uncritical use of the label Antifa without once acknowledging incident after incident where Antifa's actions match exactly those of past fascists and other violent organizations such as the Democrat Party's violent auxiliaries in the KKK.

This may be another reason why Orwell didn't explicitly provide examples of Duckspeak. It would have been too stupid to write about convincingly. This is because, once again, truth is stranger than fiction. Who could believe a fiction wherein someone would say that Doctor Seuss is racist and others would repeat it?  Only in the real world!

Face it. Even if it's in decline, as far as Orwell once again proving to be a predictor of the tactics to expect from those seeking absolute power and his understanding of how it would diminish of the ability of the intended subjects to resist, he was right.

Wednesday, October 11, 2017

Weinstein Episode Missing -- Law & Order, SVU

Somehow I suspect that series producer Dick Wolf won't be using this big story for his cannon fodder in any timely fashion -- if at all.

Ace has it:New York City DA Scrambles to Blame NYPD for Not Prosecuting Harvey Weinstein; NYPD Says They're Lying

I'll not highlight any of the details you'll find at the link. Ace deserves the traffic.

The reason I bring this up here is because of the wide scope of the scandal.

Government and entertainment big-wigs / celebs are deeply implicated. And all the rest of what we call the Soviet-Style Media (SSM) will do its usual gymnastics to protect its most graced apparatchiks and try to limit the damage.

The SSM perform the informational equivalent of the Jesuits at the Sorbonne whom Blaise Pascal exposed. If the internet commentators do their job, more of these a$$hats in media will go down with many in the NY DA hierarchy and in Hollywood.

It's our duty in trying to claw back decency in our society!

Sunday, October 08, 2017

Liberal Profs Awaken Too Late for Their Lives

What I want to highlight today is that liberal "intellectuals," having been slammed hard in the chops, can end their piece wondering "Is the modern Antifa fight against fascism actually fighting for fascism without realizing it?" [emphasis in the original]

Let's get on to the lunacy.

Photo provided by the following link

In Mussolini’s Description of Fascism Sounds a Lot Like Antifa  you will read that the intellectuals have discovered among Mussolini's drivel a passage that mimics what they witnessed on their former campus (they've been expelled for not being Left Sinister enough.)

"the modern relativist infers that everybody has the right to create for himself his own ideology and to attempt to enforce it with all the energy of which he is capable.” -- B. Mussolini [emphasis mine.]

Essentially these liberal professors may have finally awakened, realizing the Left Sinister is not liberal but as bad as the fascists the Antifa claim to oppose. Can you imagine that?  Antifa is not only not what they claim to be, but they are what they claim to be against. 

Are these profs yet so naïve that they still can ask 'how is that possible?'   Seems so.

Why next they may awaken to the fact that the overarching group from which the violent Antifa sprang, the Progressives, are really regressive authoritarians, the original masters of disguising themselves and hiding their agenda of gaining power by any means necessary.

But, like their quote of Martin Niemöller, it will be too late for these profs. They will be destroyed by the Progs because they know too much. Or they may be destroyed by the patriots, fighting to reclaim their republic, for remaining useful idiots to the end. (You will notice if you read the whole above link, that they are quoted still rationalizing the role their "good intentions" played in their own undoing.)

This find by a friend, and sent to me, is priceless. I'd never have read this site on my own.

I wish I could say I enjoy the schadenfreude, but I fear too many patriots will have a share of their karma. All who have known better, but wrote off evil too often as mere stupidity, means all earned share.

Now let me answer the link's final wondering question "Is the Antifa fight against fascism actually fighting for fascism without realizing it?" 

Yes. Definitely yes, you dolts.
For sure, there are undoubtedly useful idiots within Antifa who don't know it. They provide cover for the violence the thugs have inflicted and will continue to inflict -- just as you libs with all your alleged good intentions provided reasons and cover for the Left Sinister to incrementally steal power for the last one hundred plus years.  

But the bastards who provide them funds, train their leaders, and see that hardly any are arrested let alone restrained, know full well these are fascists.

And you "intellectuals," because you are only just wondering if they are fascists, are indeed dolts. For even if you are wise as serpents, and are still playing a role trying to convince us you've been fooled, you are still dolts. Because, in the grand scheme of things, you will pay a price, one whose painful extent you are too stupid to see.

Tuesday, October 03, 2017

Put Down the Resentful; Stay Happy

The consequences of resentments are rarely explored. Shakespeare did it once; Othello was a tragedy.

I've been a flawed man all my life; and now I can add old and worn-out to my excuses for imperfection. Be there anyone who ought to thank God for the happiness He has graced me with, it is I. Consequently I fret that I fail to show adequate thanks and faith when I don't speak out, as at least one of my acquaintances demurs, because of those dear held hostage by the more powerful. Anyone who justifies their silence about wrongs they see as being "for the children" is drowning his conscience for short-term gains -- even where not delusional -- at the cost of tossing away liberty and justice to secure the long-term.

If what follows is less than a thorough examination of the resentful and those driven by resentment, it is far better that I try to convince you poorly that this is a matter of grave importance than for me to throw up my hands in frustration and stay silent.

Resentful people at all levels of society, but particularly at its highest levels, have gotten away with murder for far too long. What they murder is peace. Peacefulness allows for the pursuit of happiness by the widest number of people. Happiness, as I'm inferring, is the thing that the unhappy resent the most.

Most all translations of the Ten Commandments have errors in them. Most common among them is the way the 6th is often presented. The correct translation is don't murder, not don't kill.  After seeing so much damage brought on by covetousness, I'm almost certain the 10th commandment's listing of only material items not to covet is in error. On the other hand most translations end with "thou shalt not covet anything that is thy neighbors." Thus intangible things your neighbor may own, such as momentary happiness, appear to be included. (I only wish it was among the tangible things that were listed so that it was clearer.)

It seems to me that perhaps the single most important thing never to covet is happiness. Perhaps the biggest reason for this is that there are as many causes for happiness as there are individuals. Unless one is completely deranged, one who aims to destroy of the happiness of another gains nothing. And the problem I'm highlighting is that there seems to be a lot of derangement being nurtured by the even more despicable.

And this brings me to why I am writing this screed. Social Justice is a lie designed to reverse what are justly held possessions and steal portions under cover of smarmy words, claiming the intent to give them to those who have less. These perpetrators claim to be contemporary Robin Hoods, but they are doing to today's legal owners what scoundrel medieval English nobility had done so that Robin Hood had to steal it back to give it to the rightful owners.

Today, as things become ever more unpleasant by interjecting politics into every aspect of life, the rogues and their ever increasing numbers of henchmen plus the usual large number of useful idiots begin to have an ever worse impact on everyone's happiness. They have made it their goal to not let anyone enjoy anything as long as someone somewhere may not be content. Lots of people see it as madness. That's become the common and cavalier way of refusing to acknowledge the evil content of most any threat. Rather than fight evil, they willingly judge the perpetrator(s) as simply mad much as our courts do when deciding not to indict for trial someone deemed insane. It's hard to discern when it is cowardice or laziness that accounts for this. It is certainly not a responsible response. 

Echoing what Jordan Peterson said in the video central to my post of last week, those who claim to be seeking social justice for all the best of reasons are effectively lying thieves. It only makes matters worse when they have permitted themselves to believe the lie. So many useful idiots, so few gallows.

For an awful example of a believer in "social justice": those who expressed satisfaction that the targets of the Las Vegas mass killer two days ago were country-music concert goers -- and thus likely "Repugnics" -- are the type who only wish for unhappiness on others to equal their own. Equality seeking at its most low.

Add to that that so few on the Left Sinister raised a voice in protest to such gross and truly repugnant public statements, and it drives home my point. The most virulent of the Social Justice Cretins (SJCs -- I refuse to call them warriors) are evil, exhibiting the most extreme meaning of the word sinister with which all the Left are rightfully tinged.

The most reprehensible, of course, are the one who get the ball rolling with the propaganda networks. They stoke dissatisfaction, always for their own sinister purposes. A formerly happy person can be made unhappy when they have reason to fear destruction of their happiness. And that makes the Sinister happy.

Iago did that to Othello. Out of resentment for being passed over he sought revenge by fabrications intended to make Othello jealous that his wife was having an affair with the lieutenant whose promotion initiated Iago's scheming for revenge.

The well-healed in our society are quite well aware of the kind of resentment and the bad consequences portrayed in that particular play. Iago even turns to the audience to explicitly guide the less than bright on how to implement such a scheme. Thus they know how to do it, and full well see the kind of tragedy that can befall a society that is constantly encouraged to covetousness and the envy and jealousies that follow. In my opinion the risk is too great that they must intend for it to be.

I have struggled to write this well enough that more will be convinced that the danger is too high that I am right. I hope it helps the rising generation punish as never before those who either seek to gain temporary happiness at the expense of others, or when unsuccessful, attempt to ruin the happiness of everyone else out of spiteful jealousy.  But the most important thing for this generation -- or any other for that matter -- is to always be skeptical enough to be wary of people who peddle dissatisfaction. Thus gladly enjoy your happiness to spite their worst attempts to ruin it.

Oh they may promise you Utopia if you but heed their siren calls. But remember this about Sir Thomas More when he wrote his novel. He knew it was a lie, and hence the translation of Utopia is "no place." My favorite proof that Utopia is allegedly the place where everyone is happy. But if that were so, where would the misanthropes and practical jokers be? Their little secret is that the practical jokers convince large numbers to go there, and only after there do they discover that the misanthropes are running the place.

On the bright side, there seems to be a meme on resentment making the rounds. Since I published Vengeance of the Power Elites Pleases Satan, I stumbled across emissions at two other blogs, Declination and  Liberty's Torch, who wrote about the resentful and resentments of the kind needing to be battled much more severely. I spotted a third too, but lost it.

The first of these was inspired by a comment Dystopic received, so that makes 3 people in a short time span. What caused me to notice the first blog piece was that the commenter could have been quoting what Jordan Peterson said in the video published only a couple of weeks ago (Sept 12, 2017), but didn't credit him. All innocent enough because it could simply be that Professor Peterson himself had not started the ball rolling. He simply rang a bell that resonated well with a lot of thoughtful people, and many more heard it because of his renown had risen in great part due to him having been a publicized target of the SJWCs.

So I consider it good that the dangerous emotion known as resentment is getting more attention today. But the attention given it so far doesn't appear to do to much more than provide one more reason to distrust those in power and those seeking it. And that's an old distrust, at least to the political Right of this contemporary world.

What I'm advocating -- and this is different from the others who've dealt with the resentment meme -- is an offensive move in behalf of righteousness for the sake for happiness itself, and not solely to protecting material gains and property (true justice in law) as the SJC would have the world believe.

Those who are unhappy for any reason should not be permitted to destroy, without comeuppance, whatever happiness us poor souls can enjoy. It's long past time for such an offensive to be mounted against them and the rulers and would-be rulers who gain by their demands. The value you place on life hangs in the balance.

Friday, September 29, 2017

Vengeance of the Power Elites Pleases Satan

My attention was drawn to the following video "Jordan Peterson - Political Correctness and Postmodernism" by a fan of Professor Jordan Peterson. He's the prof who's been castigated by Leftist Sinister critics for being politically incorrect in his warnings of threats to free speech and thought by proposed Canadian legislation before it was passed.

What Professor Peterson concludes may better provide my readers with a way to covey the premise of which I have long warned: that the haters of humanity ally themselves with casuists (true believers) because the latter provide both cover for haters' misanthropy and free labor in carrying it out.  

Beginning at about 16 minutes in, he extracts some quotes from Nietzsche's Will to Power.
The following paragraph is a summary of Prof. Peterson's quotes of Nietzsche leading up to a series of exacting money quotes out of a chapter in Zarathustra.

The nihilistic doctrines that would emerge in the aftermath associated with the collapse of the moral underpinnings of the West would produce a form of political catastrophe (associated with communism) that would kill 10s to 100s of millions of people in the 20th Century. (Peterson, noting that Nietzsche was right, then quotes Nietzsche informing us that the elite would ignite the flames deliberately, out of spite).
"'What justice means to us [the power elite, anticipating the popular rejection of them] is precisely that the world will be filled with the storms of our revenge.' Thus they speak to each other, 'We shall wreak vengeance and abuse on all whose equals we are not.'...  You preachers of equality ... your most secret ambition is to be tyrants [who] shroud yourselves in words of virtue."-- The Tarantulas

Peterson asks "why this emphasis on [seeking] power above all else?" He answers "It's resentment [of being less revered for their intentions (all which failed) than those out in the real world who've succeeded] disguising itself most reprehensibly as compassion."

I compressed the above paragraph because it helps the reader understand quickly what he was trying to say. I recommend listening to that segment in full so you have more of the evidence he presented to sustain his conclusions.

Peterson ends with "It's time for the mask of that to be removed and set straight before we walk further down the path that leads to no good [worse than we've already been misled]."

He appears to have arrived at that point of realization for which, in my opinion, the 10th Commandment was written. Every day it ought to become ever more clear to the wavering faithful what a too often underappreciated gift that commandment was to us from our Loving Maker.
"Thou shalt not covet [for it may lead to the ultimate unhappiness for both he who covets and for those he resents and provoke casual violations of all Commandments.]"

The supplanting of the Judeo-Christian moral code with a Satanic one appears to be complete in those whom Professor Peterson asks us to unmask for the sake of us and our posterity.

Sunday, September 24, 2017

Obamacare Deadline Lie

Pass a bill for Prez to sign: Extend the Obamacare deadline for majority rule.

What Congress created with a majority, Congress can extend with one.

Of course, when John McCain, mercifully, finally dies, the GOPe will find another no vote.

But at least this farce -- or lie I'm thinking -- of needing to pass any ugly bill before a deadline created by the Congress of 2010 that can't be rewritten by the Congress of 2017, will have a spike put through its black heart.

Congress and President Trump: You can pass a continuing resolution every damned 90 days forever for your spending, but you can't pass one for Obamacare?


Tuesday, August 22, 2017

Erasing the Concept that Human Life is Sacred -- A Recap

After republishing Malevolent Misleadership yesterday, it would be a good idea to recap some other essays that will help readers who want to understand why the Progs believe they are doing good -- at the core of their religion -- as they actively set up conditions for unprecedentedly deadly conflicts worldwide.

The first of these was a republication of another 2006 essay which explains why Judeochristian ethics need to be destroyed. It laid out how civilization only began to grow when ethics began to eliminate human sacrifice as a state sponsored religion.  The last paragraphs read as follows.

Our secular world has been indoctrinating the whole globe with the notion that the world is endangered by it being burdened by too many people. It does not see that human intelligence is our greatest resource. It sees greater and lesser lights. It decides who is better and who is worse. Its influence has redirected society's concerns: from discouraging people from harming themselves and others into encouraging the human to explore wherever he feels inclined; it tries to belittle or obscure histories that warn of consequences from poor or risky choices. It shrugs at NAMBLA and is angered by the Boy Scouts. It decides who should be saved and who should not be. It decides whom to come to the aid of and whom should be abandoned. [The question of] who is innocent and who is not becomes one of being deemed so by those who play god, not by anything nonthreatening the subjugated creature chooses to do or not do. Those who believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob [and thus Jesus Christ] clearly pose an obstacle to those who don't believe that such a God exists. “Since no such God exists, who will do the providing? No. NO. Stand aside. Let us brilliant ones, unencumbered by an outdated morality, take on the role of God. Someone must!”

These two messages are incompatible.

There will be conflict over this. It has already begun. [emphasis altered Aug 2017]

  As usual with their commandeering the meanings of words, the "Progressives" are really Regressives. Read the whole thing to gain a grasp of why the religions which are not dangerous have been made the target while the religions that are dangerous have been embraced by the Progs. There are a couple of follow-on links published a number of years after 2006 that helped tie in new developments.

The second old essay is from 2013. It provides a personal warning of the dangers once Sustainability becomes an unofficial state religion. The following excerpt is emphasized where two important aspects of what the common man faces were written.
Thomas Malthus' theories arose about 50 years after Pascal's death. The Age of Reason was beginning to undermine the Ancien Régimes. Many rulers saw and welcomed the benefits of liberty. But two kinds [of rulers], both powerful, hated it. Those who hate the common man, and those who love concentrated power. Sometimes they're the same, and sometimes not. Malthus provided a "moral" cloak to hide both the explicit and implicit hatred of humanity -- even from themselves. By being able to convince even themselves that their vision is righteous, they can remain calm and seemingly benign as they convince large numbers

"Leave it to us boys. We know what needs be done. Really."

(The ancient Sophists understood power and how to get and keep it. One of their chief ways of keeping it was through fostering ideas that attract casuists -- men who sought the moral path based on studying cases of conduct -- and let them do the heavy lifting, often with little expense or risk to the Sophists' masters, spurred by a few demagogues, and fueled considerably by the zeal of the useful idiots. Eric Hoffer, by popularizing the more easily understood term of "true believer,"  did us a disservice by disconnecting the Greek designation for them, and thus their historically implied connection to the power seeking schemers. The humanity haters may believe they now have sufficient armies of those who are enthralled by the indirect means  to achieving a new (old) religion (see below). It is one that will provide them moral authority to achieve their goals. The real powers only have to support the activists when things get tough. Mostly they have historically chosen to be silent partners. Today -- not so silent.)
What this exposes is that only some of the rulers are themselves religious zealots. This provides the patriot with the possibility that the ones who want only power could be persuaded to turn against their current allies.

But it's the second kind, the seemingly benign but odd casuist, the common man type zealot who poses the most danger to the common man. Because they are the natural local double agent to aid global authorities who, with every passing day, gain ever more ability to track who poses danger to its hegemony.

What this last essay lays out for you is what the first essay only only hinted at: how the globalist has the means by which to find and persecute all who still abide even a little to Judeochristian ethics. It has the latest ethics and it thinks it is in total control. Hence my repeated request that you pray. A lot.

BTW, this situation is what the antiabortionists warned about from the start. Back then the pro-abortionists had to argue that the baby, renamed fetus, was not yet human, so not entitled to protection.

Now that we've gone well past that -- the "prevention" of over 50 million new Americans from reaching the human stage -- the idea of human of worth and worth how much is now the next hurdle. Hardly a hurdle at all when the body parts of recently "departed" have a value that exceeds the perceived value of the whole human.  My advice -- become an avid smoker. Take your chances with death from cigarettes versus being bumped off because of the value of your smoke-free liver.

Monday, August 21, 2017

Malevolent Misleadership -- Republished

Dear Readers.

I'm no Nostradamus. Furthermore, in my opinion, there was so much evidence available back in 2006 that many others should have easily arrived at the same conclusions.

It greatly upset me that nobody else with a wider audience alerted their readers to the many dangers that were then building. That loneliness contributed greatly to my reduced posts.

As my bright readers will know after reading this, each and every shameful act listed is now much worse. And the list wasn't even exhaustive. Perhaps the only real value reading this today is so you know that it is not you that has gone mad and that you are not alone.

See, there are so many around us who have been lured -- misled -- into aberrant behavior in which they now feel they have every right to engage, that those still preferring what is now scorned as decency won't feel at ease confiding in anyone.

You may indeed be surrounded by cannibals who have no idea that that is what they've become.

This leaves the battle to the ruthless and Heaven's forces alone. So pray often.

I will re-post all of the original below. For a more readable white paper format, retrieve it from the archives:  Malevolent Misleadership.

Sunday, April 16, 2006.

Malevolent Misleadership

By Pascal Fervor

“We used to say live and let live.... [Now we] say live and let die.” -- Paul McCartney

In a world perceived to be overpopulated, what would one expect to find? How would it differ from the one before such a notion were widely accepted? It is my opinion that little could unflinchingly be accepted to be what it claims to be.

Individuals want to be treated as individuals, and they generally value their own life. Who hasn't stopped to consider what life would be like if there only wasn't so much crowding or traffic or whatever. How few of us have the power to actually accomplish the depopulating feat? Who will be upfront about implementing such a program? Quite a few actually. They have conferences and are well attended. Yet those people most of us tend to consider as oddities and think no further on the subject. Unfortunately for many, they are not only oddities. Whom may you trust?

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

More GOPe Destructive Footdragging Aiding Their Democratic Buddies

For you who still believe electing any person with an (R) next to their name and obtaining a Republican majority means that the Right is in control, I've more evidence to demonstrate how that is not so. Indeed, you can see that their recalcitrance in the following story would inevitably lead to Democratic wins in coming elections because the Republican Party in power didn't fix what they were elected to fix.

And the reason it didn't fix those things is because the GOPe keeps finding excuses. I have to keep this short. Let me just leave you a prime example: the Obamacare "reform" battle.

Conservative Senators Take Aim at Primary GOPe Excuse for Insistence on Passing Obamacare Repeal that Doesn't Repeal the Most Damaging Parts

Saturday, May 13, 2017

Witnessing When the GOPe Role is Most Essential to Continued Statism

I find this link

Of the four names being interviewed for FBI director, the one I recognize is Sen John Cornyn — a GOPe of the highest order. He’s the current Senate Whip (AKA leg breaker to assure enough votes tailored to McConnell’s orders).

Without my providing all the evidence that supports the following: The job of the GOPe when the Right seems to be in power is to demand policies that placate the Left despite the Left having done nothing of the sort while it was in power. Such as just now putting a revised Obamacare on a tax basis that sustains the power of government over healthcare rather than returning healthcare to the free market.

If Cornyn is the sort of the other choices, or of the choices to come, and the final pick is much closer to a Lindsay Graham type rather than a Ted Cruz type, then we know Trump is just another frontman for the oligarchs.

Remember, there is no nominee who can be filibustered thanks to Harry Reid, so no nominee can be too far right while the GOP holds the senate. And the only way a nominee can be voted down is if Cornyn can’t whip the votes to get the nominee passed (wink, wink). Damned GOPe will be outed but don’t expect most talk-show hosts to make an issue of the exposure. You heard it hear first.

Going on — we will know we’ve been had in style and we can expect more of the same. We will get Leftism but on a paying basis — aka Statism — in a manner similar to what Nixon pulled off.

I’ve seen it all done before, so I’m not just pulling this out of my ass. My number one understanding of Progs is that the current generation has no genius amongst them, so they always do whatever has worked before. They are the quintessential throwbacks and their goal is enslavement of the entire globe. Feudalism 2.0.

Anyway, watch who is chosen for FBI director. If it's a GOPe (AKA as SKUNC on this blog) or an unknown rather than a staunch constitutionalist, then not only may we expect far more disappointments ahead, but many of the people the FBI targets will NOT be radical Leftists or dangerous aliens, and far more will be what the bureau labels as "wingers."

Wednesday, March 22, 2017

Universal Filter

Here is a filter with which to identify leaders and followers who no longer abide the Judeo-Christian moral code of, essentially, "live and let live."
Wherever rulers foster Malthusian, Utilitarian, Green and Islamistophilic nutcases, there the ruled are at grave risk.
I pray this needs no further explanation. Nevertheless, in comments I will try to answer any questions you may have.

Monday, October 31, 2016

Smartest Clinton Cronies Employing Risk Management

Rank and file Democrats are most inclined to see the following as extremely random speculation. But the evidence that has arisen demonstrates how it is a well-considered surmise. Democrats, especially those currently planning to employ all means necessary to elect Hillary on November 8, would be well advised to consider it too.

My thinking that the smartest high placed Democrats have clearly seen the danger to themselves  began here before FBI director James Comey came out with his Friday morning announcement that the Clinton case was being reopened.

Then a few days after me, but before Friday, Fran Porretto published Political Hatred and Its Potential Consequences, which helps sustain the point I was making.

Yesterday, Saturday, Ed Bonderenka asked some questions about the Comey announcement and concluded "I believe Comey has seen something so damning that he IS actively trying to throw the election."


I actually watched the video interview of Julian Assange included in that click bait. Let me be clear. Mr. Assange was careful not to say he thought Hillary's camp had ordered the murder of Seth Rich. Nor did he agree when asked if Rich had been an informant of his. He responded that he protects the identity of his sources. However, in my opinion, he left it to be inferred quite a bit along the lines of that headline when he said with a very slow-paced delivery:
"Our sources face serious risks. That is why they come to us."
"A variety of WikiLeaks sources are concerned when that sort of thing [Seth Rich] happens." 
Indeed, Director Comey may very well know all that Assange does, and as Ed opines, maybe even more and worse and with certainty.

We live after the history of the soviet union has been disclosed. A large number of Stalin's closest associates met a gruesome and untimely end. Even minor apparatchiks wound up there, some believing to the very end that their circumstance was somehow all a mistake: 'If Stalin only knew.' Thank you Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.

It is quite possible, given the varied reports that have turned up in the emails, that many of Hillary's closest associates have indeed seen behavior that troubles them. Could any of them have discreetly set things in motion that reduces their risks while not being seen as doing so? Wouldn't some of you?

Anyone who refuses to consider that these are dangerous times is engaging in -- how should I put this? -- "fear management." As one person told me "it's not that I have my head in the sand, it's just that I don't want to know" without displaying a glimmer of realization how contradictory that was.

Indeed, the simplest way to phrase this seems to be
Those close to Hillary who've carefully leaked what we've been provided could be said to be engaging in risk management.

Those who can't bear to consider the far-reaching implications of what Assange said in the link's interview are likely engaging in fear management. 
The fearful ones are laying low because the scheming brain required to protect themselves and not get caught is outside their capabilities. They are the among the latter while the brainier comprise the former. 

Should the clever ones succeed, their actions will wind up protecting the ones who have not realized the danger heading towards them. And they will wind up saving the nation even if that is not the first or even fifth order of interest to them.  

To my way of thinking, Trump is a risk. But Hillary is the greater risk, and that appears to be the opinion of some of those most close to her -- and they are banking their lives on it.  

Here's hoping that before election day enough of the lower echelon apparatchiks of the Democratic Part machine come to understand the risk to themselves too. That goes too for many lame-brains in the GOP who clearly don't know which way is safest and have been backing Hillary.

Monday, October 24, 2016

For All Those Who are With Her

This is your candidate as it appears on my smartphone's wallpaper. She will go after your enemies like you have never before seen in American politics.

Source for photo thanks to Matt Drudge.

You may think you know who your enemies are. But I really hope you know who her enemies are. You never know who is actually on that list.

As for the rest of you who can't stomach the thought of voting this time or are registering a protest vote for a 3rd party:

Do you understand risks and the ways to reduce them or not?

Thursday, September 29, 2016

Ruling Elite Gloating

Here you will see a very well laid out chronicle of the Clinton lie technique.

It is so well done that one ought to wonder why nothing of consequence has come of it. The SSM does what it is told to do and the alleged opposition party members bluster a bit, then they do nothing about it. The Comey testimony was simply a formal announcement that DOJ would do nil. But the political leaders of the GOP still stand by the old Prog slogan 'no enemies to the left.' So, instead, they battle every person to their Right. You not on the left are their enemy you see.

Thus, everything you just saw can be put away as just another "See how bad we are, and there is nothing you little people will do about it." It is gloating. Pure and simple. Just another instance where our rulers have permitted us to be informed as to what they think of our opinion. Get used to your inferior station "citizen." Kind of shows how much a useful idiot is Bill Whittle? Could be.

When I first saw this I did a slow burn and then simply put it away. But I'm gonna share with all two of you readers. It's not fair to burn alone.

It's not just national, but local too.


Saturday, September 17, 2016


The first time I read the word misled, mizzled was the way I said it in my mind. It was only from the context of the thread that I recognized my error. I was misled by the very nature of the word.

So I have on occasion had cause to say I was mizzled when the apparent pleasant nature of something misled me into accepting it before I learned that there could be unpleasant consequences in accepting it. As in "a wolf in sheep's clothing." Or "the devil will approach in pleasing disguise."

This blog has been silent for six months. The cause was the videos exposing how Planned Parenthood was selling the body parts of aborted babies.  I was struck by how mizzled our nation has become. Worse, I have learned that many insist on staying that way. What nearly everybody thought was a godsend in medical advancement was having the cloak over its seedy side removed, and hardly anybody did more than blink for a few weeks. PP had its defenders working overtime whilst the whistleblowers got harrassed -- and their harassment is far from over. It was because I felt both fear and inadequacy in trying to address the wider public callousness, and overwhelmed by a sense of futility, that I stayed silent, trying frequently to resume, but not progressing.

However about an hour ago I read this from Fran Porretto. I cannot tell you how relieved I am that somebody finally addressed the wider consequences that those PP videos should have awakened in the people of this once great nation. An expansion on the comment I left at his site -- about a nation of cannibals -- will be [should have been*] the subject of my next post. I expect it will be met by hostility because I've already experienced it when discussing it with a friend last month.  I hope you few readers are not among them. But it won't be pretty. And you may be guilty too.

[*A very difficult subject that it seems nobody wants to hear. I pray for encouragement.]

Thursday, March 10, 2016

Fighting the Establishment of an American State Religion -- Part 3

I wrote the text below the break on September 25, 2014 but I did not publish it. I was waiting for more developments to evolve that would help make it abundantly clear how dangerous it is not to fight such developments before they are fully formed. When climate guru RFK Jr. stated he wished there was a law he could punish his opponents with, I observed that it was good he could only wish.

However developments have moved on rapidly to erase that sense of security.

Today, on episode 4 of, viewers heard this:
This clip ends with these words:
"To use our laws to criminalize politics, to use our laws to compel a belief system, is as tyrannical as is possibly imaginable."
It is of supreme importance that people know that a religion -- a belief system -- need not center on worship of a god.
Religion: a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.
Mr. Levin almost got to the point where he sees what I see. It sounds like he's edging to fight increasingly heavy-handed government efforts to protect Climate Change belief in a way that is in violation of the 1st Amendment. That Amendment bans the establishment of a state religion. This essay is written in hopes that the constitutional lawyer in him will latch on to the idea.

For easy reference, here are links to part 1 and part 2.

Monday, March 07, 2016

Throwing the Election Part II

While smaller blogs may have speculated that the two previous elections were thrown so the Left, and even spoke of it like it should be obvious to everyone,  it really wasn't discussed by the bigger blogs. Most certainly it was never discussed seriously by the highly visible radio talkers who preferred instead to let Michael Medved deride the idea on his regularly scheduled "Conspiracy Day."

1. But beginning with the day after the 2014 elections, when McConnell immediately reversed all his campaign pledges, then many more people got pissed off. It was quite clear that the establishment was insisting that "The Opposition Party" drop all real opposition. And so GOPe has become the label to signify all the traitors of the country class' war against the ruling class.

2. And since the beginning of 2015, the GOPe has thrown so many fights by refusing to even discuss let alone force compromise with Obama, that it is hard to think of one exception.

3. Since the GOPe has proven itself complicit in agreeing with every Obama advance on destroying individual protections from expanding government, it is fair to ask "what else are they willing to throw?" and  "what else have they thrown already about which they have been left us in the dark?"

4. For those who instinctively dismiss the idea that McCain and Romney threw the last two presidential elections, they have to also dismiss the smoking guns laying all over the place. It's telling when it's hard to think of an issue that the GOPe has not thrown the fight. They and their backers, who are almost unmistakably the same as the Democrats', must WANT what Obama has "gifted" us with. This is what soft fascism looks like. And they've loads of following threatening hard fascism -- such as death for denying AGW, or lawfare attacks for saying things critical of members of the ruling class.

5. So backing up to the last two elections, the preponderance of evidence leads the reasonable man to conclude that the GOPe threw those elections.

6. Ergo they have made such a shambles of the current primary system -- including the insane choice of the Dem stronghold of Cleveland for the GOP convention -- that they have been arranging to throw the current election. No, not to Hillary. Maybe to Trump. Maybe to Cruz. Maybe to Biden. Whatever, there is hardly any chance that the ruling class does not have many options at its disposal to get the puppet to rule ala Plato's Republic cave analogy.

I know. You haven't heard anyone else tell you that Hillary won't be the Dem candidate. So does that mean I must be wrong?

So let me remind you why I say it. I wrote last year that Hillary will not serve. I even provided photographic evidence, that should greatly help you agree with me.

Primarily your reason to agree with me is how Obama has wounded her. All the State Dept leaks tied to her remain in the news and are getting stronger. Yet he could have suppressed all or most of it. Look how he suppressed all the memos tying IRS commissioner Lois Lerner to all her high crimes. You know he could for Hill, yet he didn't. So Obama dares not let her win the Presidency.

Kings and would-be kings long ago learned the hard lesson that a wounded king must be finished off.  That is even without the widespread knowledge of so many dead close Clinton associates. Vince Foster, Webb Hubbell, Jim McDougal.  When considering who to nominate, now is the time to spread this thought seriously when considering Hillary's chances of being President, and hence not even the likely Dem nominee -- you may not hear it anywhere else.

I don't know how else to say it that now is the time to back Cruz even if I retain doubts that he is really an anti-Establishment candidate -- and that is how most Americans feel even if they are unclear as to who is the Establishment. Just about all the machinations have been to keep Americans in the dark about Ted Cruz. I'm forced to conclude it is because he HAS the record of fighting all in DC. In the end I'm fighting them too. So sure of him or not, I'm stuck with him.

Friday, March 04, 2016

Throwing the Election to the Prog Advancers

[The following was revised on late on March 5, 2016 to improve clarity.]
(When you finish below, here is Part II.)
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles."-- Sun Tzu

John McCain and Mitt Romney could have won the presidency. But neither man railed against the past of Barack Obama. And Romney also failed to rail against Obama's 4 year record,  a sure loser of a strategy given that it was Obama's record which cost the Democratic party control of the House of Representatives in the elections of 2010.

So half the voters never heard word one from the opposition candidates about the downside and risks of electing and reelecting Obama president. The majority of voters were left not knowing important details about the man who would wreak havoc on them by waging legal, economic and regulatory war on them. The larger majority were left uninformed by the very men they expected to inform them, and so they did not know their enemy.

And so America (as an idea in an historic sense) lost the last two political battles waged to fundamentally change her.

But did Americans really know themselves? More to the point, did Americans really know the character and intentions of her leaders selected to waging war against the fundamental transformers? Who would have chosen either McCain or Romney in their respective primaries knowing the kind of campaigns they would later run? Knowing more about either candidate might have better informed primary voters so that better candidates could have been considered.

I say "might have" because it's not all that clear even today that either men or the Establishment they represent really (given how that establishment has behaved these last 7 years) wanted them to do anything differently.

IOW, just as prize fighters have been known to throw fights, why not political leaders? Especially now that it well known that both party establishments work pretty much with the same lobbyists.

Furthermore, the 2014 elections that increased the GOP control of the House and won control of the Senate on the promise that "THEN WE CAN AFFECT CHANGE" has nevertheless -- disappointingly -- affected nothing in the advancement of the Prog (builders of the ruling class) agenda.  Borders more porous than ever. Obamacare funded via continuing resolutions despite promises not to. No resistance to the nomination of the radical Loretta Lynch to be AG. The list of thrown fights is endless.

Because of this Americans have come to recognize how much the GOP is hardly the opposition party we had expected it to be. Subsequently the acronym, GOPe -- GOPe(stablishment) -- has become the most common of pejorative words that express our disappointment with how the opposition isn't.

And I'm saying, if the GOPe has proven to throw fights on individual issues, why not conclude that they've been throwing the fights for the top job?

Now here is the most important graf of this short post. The GOPe still controls the banner under which Americans wage political war against her internal enemy.

So America. How much do you know yourself and know who is claiming to be your leader in the battle coming in November?

View My Stats