TTruthseeker (African History, New Phone, Gaddafi, Pike)

TTruthseeker: Real African History


At 12:34 , Andrea Murrhteyn said...

FROM: J-MC Patriot Alert Task Force (jmc.pa.tf@gmail.com)
TO: endingstereotypes@gmail.com
DATE: Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 7:31 PM
SUBJECT: Ending Stereotypes for America

Mr. Six,

CC: Timothy Truthseeker

Hi, had a look at your http://endingstereotypesforamerica.org/ website. Think you are doing a good job. Just one little thing, when you intentionally or not, exclude certain factors which contribute to perceptions and behaviour as a direct causal factor, ignoring it, then it's in my view a form of intellectual hypocrisy.

To be blunt, perhaps you may wish to think about including population policy, and high hateful procreaiton policies into your perspectives as to how the consequences of facsism and racism occur, as a result of exponential population increases colliding with scarce or depleting resources.

Bluntly:

Thomas Ferguson, the Latin American case officer for the State Department’s Office of Population Affairs under Kissinger, was speaking bluntly yet honestly when he said: “Population is a political problem. Once population is out of control it requires authoritarian government, even fascism, to reduce it.”

When 'whites' whether liberals or conservatives, pretend to care about racial equality issues, but refrain from honestly confronting blacks with certain behaviours of theirs -- we rob them of the opportunity of honest feedback to help those who do care about their fellow brothers, to do anything about the issues.

As Martin Luther King said:

“Unlike plagues of the dark ages or contemporary diseases which we do not yet understand, the modern plague of overpopulation is soluble by means we have discovered and with resources we possess. What is lacking is not sufficient knowledge of the solution, but universal consciousness of the gravity of the problem and the education of the billions who are it’s victims”
Anyway, not sure if that feedback was welcome or not.
Lara Johnstone
--
Exponential Fx of Sex & War:
'HUMINT' or 'Crimen Inuria'
crimeninuria.blogspot.com


At 16:18 , Timothy said...

I knew you would respond in that fashion. Many people are hypocrites and that is an accurate statement. Yet, this link is primarily about history not paranoia about hypocrispy at all. Thomas wasn't speaking honestly. He promotes the lie of overpopulation and works for a criminal like Henry Kissinger. Also, no one denies honest feedback on racial matters. Yet, silly stereotypes and lies about people of color isn't part of a true feedback. It's apart of deception and shill tactics. If Dr. King really believed in overpopulation then he is wrong on that issue. Many whites (blacks and others) do care about racial equality and have frank discussions about racial topics for decades (before you were ever born).

No, I will never deny real African History at all. I don't care if you constantly respond to issues like this. Real history will be shown in this blog.


At 16:19 , Timothy said...

These are views indeed.


At 16:20 , Timothy said...

Overpopulation lies are tactics done by the new world order crowd to deny real solutions in helping the Third World. The Third World needs modernization and other solutions not the Nazi tactic of depopulation at all.


At 16:23 , Timothy said...

Links refuting the overpopulation lie:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=19076


http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000972.php

http://www.jefflindsay.com/Overpop.shtml


http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=12418


http://www.lifenews.com/int816.html


http://www.abortiontv.com/Lies%20&%20Myths/OverpopulationLie.htm


http://www.demographicwinter.com/index.html


At 16:48 , Andrea Murrhteyn said...

My darling Timothy,

If you attempting to insult me, you gonna have to try harder than that! ;-)

Seriously; I know we disagree on the issue of 'over'population; or at least if we don't agree; you do one hell of an exceptional job of pretending you disagree with me on overpopulation.

But I shall give you the benefit of the doubt that you are sincere.

And I can give you a very simple perhaps stupid example for why it is that those who say there is no overpopulation problem, got to provide me with some really good evidence therefore, before I belive them.

In early '90's I travelled to China, I spent a couple of days on a third class train from Shanghai to Ghuanghdou. The train car was packed like sardines. If I had been the only person in the traincar, Id have been able to lie down, walk around, talk to myself; I wasn't able to hardly move. When I went to the toilet, I had to stand in a long line, and then the toilet was a hole in the ground, that unfortunately got full, so the shit became a small little mountain (you culdn't really 'bend down' you'd stick your ass in shit!).

I have yet to meet any PhD population 'guru' liberal or conservative, 'over'population ain't a problem' 'population growth is beautiful' who has lived in a black ghetto; spent some time in a highly populated prison cell; or a couple of days in a third class Chinese train.

So, one day when I meet such an indivdual who has experienced the consequences of overpopulation -- IN THEIR FACE -- and had the brains to recognize it as such; then perhaps we can have an EXPERIENTIAL CONVERSATION; as opposed to all the INTELLECTUAL BULLSHIT, THAT PASSES FOR 'CONVERSATION' ABOUT 'POPULATION'.

But too many sitting in their fancy low populated ivory towers, benefitting from masses of slaves and cannon fodder bred to massive population capacity; who got a vested interest in keeping a large amount of proles ignorant slaves and cannon fodder.

Anyway, those were my thoughts.

Lara
PS: Don't mean I love you any less, but can you tell me you'd be able to spend the same amount of time with me, if you had 20 wives, or I had 20 husbands? What if when we go on our honeymoon, I want to take 19 husbands along, for our wedding night? Would that qualify as a bit of 'overpopulation honeymoon voyeurism'? ;-)


At 17:15 , Timothy said...

I'm not trying to insult you.

Really, I'm just showing my views and the truth about this issue.

I don't pretend to disagree with on the overpopulation myth. I do actually disagree you on the overpopulation myth completely. We will have to agree to disagree on that subject as human beings. Also, these links provide all the evidence you need to refute the overpopulation myth. I don't know why you keep on denying that evidence from those links.

So, you don't need to be repetitive with you claim that you haven't seen evidence to the contrary (when you can use those links as having plenty of evidence). Also, your experiences in CHina have nothing do with overpopulation. It has to do with crowding issues in China. NOt to mention that the fact remains that all humans can fit in the state of Texas given 1,000 sq. ft. each. China and other places need modernization and high technology not Malthusian propaganda to solve much of their problems.


Also, Phds disagree with your fantasies of overpopulation. Many places have sanitary issues and overcrowding issues. That doesn't mean that the Earth is overpopulation since most of the Earth is still rural whether you agree with that or not. Not to mention that the UN even admits that population growth will level and decline by 2050.


At 17:18 , Timothy said...

Instead of utilizing quaint, tired profanity, you should look at many points of view of the population issues. Underpopulation is an epidemic in SOuth Korea, W. Europe, Russia, Japan, and other nations globally. Also, you deny the possibility of improvement for all humans.

Just because someone lives in a poor condition, doesn't means that they should remain there. There is always that possibility to improve the world. That is why organizations exist to help those suffering. Not to mention that most people of the world don't have over 19 spouses. You use exaggeration to try to validate your argument. Yet, exaggeration is never a true key to deciphering what really going on.


At 17:18 , Timothy said...

These are my thoughts indeed.


At 17:37 , Timothy said...

YOu know I can respond swiftly when I want to. That's just me.


At 17:39 , Andrea Murrhteyn said...

Sorry, thought at some point you were being stubborn, to tease me by irritating me. But if I was wrong about that; sorry.

Okay... I am okay with agreeing to disagree; until if either one of us finds the others information or evidence compelling enough to change our mind.

Perhaps if I had spent my entire prison experience in a single cell at Terre Haute, et al; instead of overcrowded dormitory African prison cells; I may be more inclined to change my mind, just based on intellectual information. My experience however shows me that the greater number of people you place in a smaller confined aread, with limited resources, the number of people in the area, and their cultural paradigm have a direct expoential correlation to the level of violence.

But very few people, if any have the slightest interest in listening to what I have to say on the issue; and that's okay. I just ain't about to change my view, because of some intellectual theory from someone who ain't experienced IN YOUR FACE OVERPOPULATION like I have.

Those poeple who want to listen to Ph.D's who believe the crap they are taught at universities about falling demographics, are welcome to do so; until they choose not to.

So anyway, that appears to be where we stand on the issue and that's okay; don't love you any less.

Lara


At 17:42 , Andrea Murrhteyn said...

YOu know I can respond swiftly when I want to. That's just me.

Yes I know when you want to! ;-) Love you 'just like you wanna be'.


At 04:57 , Timothy said...

Your deception has been refuted before.


At 12:41 , Andrea Muhrrteyn said...

When have I ever deceived you?

If provided such evidence; I have no problem apologizing. As far as I am aware in ten years I have NEVER LIED TO YOU. NOT ONCE. EVEN WHEN I KNEW IT MAY HURT LIKE SHIT; I NEVER LIED.

So, tell me when you say I lied to you.



__________________


TTruthseeker: New Phone

At 18:43 , Andrea Muhrrteyn said...

So tell me: I am still waiting for you to answer my question about when I ever lied to you; in the past ten years?

Secondly: Tell me; when you clearly demonstrate you do not appreciate me interpreting your communication by giving you speaker the highest and noblest honourable intention; shall I conclude you want me to interpret all you say as if you are a lying deceiving two-faced kaffir?

Its not my preference to interpret any individuals communications as originating from a two faced lying deceiving kaffir; I always give everyone the benefit of the doubt that their itnentions are honourable; until they prove otherwise. Once it is clear they want to be considered as a kaffir; there is sweet fuck all I have left to say to them; or to consider whatever the fuck they have to say as worthy of serious consideration.

If so, there is no more need for us to communicate. You can use your new phone to call any of the billions of women on this planet who shall be happy to treat you like a sperm donor walking wallet, who probably won't even know how to spell honour, let alone practice it in her interpretations of your statements to her.

So, when did I lie to you?


________________________


TTruthseeker: OWS, events, etc

At 05:45 , Andrea Muhrrteyn said...

The reason is that they want the myth of true rugged individualism (or if you want a job, get it or you’re lazy, etc. That lie).

That may be your interpretation of what I said, but why the fuck don't you ask: This is my interpretation of what you are saying; is this what you mean?

Instead you prefer to call me a liar.

In a local or regional ecosystem where there is a truely impartial justice system; and everyone, whether the richest or poorest person in town has access to In Your Face justice; then the statement that anyone who wants a job should be able to get a job, and only the lazy are the ones without jobs.

In an ecosystem where the justice system is manipulated or corrupt; such a justice system is used to manipulate the system to provide employment for their tribe, whether it is their mafia, their race, their ethnicity, their religion, etc. In such a case where the system deliberately excludes someone who wishes to work, who has the skills and whose skills are greater than those who are in the job; then such a person clearly is being deliberately excluded from the job.

In an ecosystem where the justice system is manipulated or corrupt; such a justice system is used to manipulate the education system to provide employment for the particular elite's ideological profits and those who are obedient to the corrupt educational and justice system. In such a case where the system deliberately excludes someone who wishes to work, who has the skills and whose skills are greater than those who are in the job; then such a person clearly is being deliberately excluded from the job.

Why do you think Law Societies and Media corporations and doctors want to regulate themselves?

Why are they incapable of implementing a simple impartial regulation system that exterminates the corrupt among them; and thereby keeps their profession honourable and credible?

Because they are pretend-problem solver parasites.

It is easy to implement a totally impartial system to regulate media, journalits, or lawyers, or doctors, or politicians; but none of htem want such a truly impartial system, that is not capable of being manipulated by the corrupt elements among them.

At least I have not come across any yet.


At 05:56 , Andrea Muhrrteyn said...

Most Buddhists -- particularly their leader the Dalai Lama -- are passive aggressive two faced kaffirs. Their 'religion' is nothing but a tribe they chose to join, cause their mama or papa was one, and they have such fragile ego's that they stay therein, in order to find some sort of 'i belong' solace. Its fucking pathetic. The never ending story of religions and cultures and ideologies that are more interested in a bunch of ignorant moron imbeciles to join them, so they can all passive aggressively massage their fragile ego's; while not being committed to any of the alleged doctrines, not admitting to themselves their fragile ego attachment to their religious or cultural tribe. They live in illusions, they deceive htemselves for hteir entire fucking lives, and are too monumentally fucking stupid to even cognitively enquire into why htey do, or believe the shit they do.

I have yet to meet a pure Buddhist who is interested in a brutal honest conversation.

They say they are pacifist, but do fuck all about the root population policy causes of violence.

Sure if you end up in a prison cell amongst buddhists, there will be much less violence than if you end up in a prison cell amongst african kaffirs.

But nevertheless, the internal violence they practice on themselves, by suppressing and denying their honest thoughts and opinions, results in a different from of violence upon thier psyche's.

Thats my working hypothesis. There are many good lessons to consider from Buddhism, just as their are from Christianity, etc; but organized Buddhism is -- from what I can gather -- massively corrupt.

Why anyone would want to become a Buddhist, when they have a leader such as the Dalai Lama, a two faced passive aggressive schmuck; I have no idea. Supposedly a pacifist, but does fuck all about overpopulation colliding with scarce resources. He is just another two faced kaffir; I have not come across anything he said, worthy of serious consideration.

______________________

TTruthseeker: Gaddafi's Death

At 07:22 , Andrea Muhrrteyn said...

Mandela and Tutu Hypocrites. Long as Gaddafi was giving them money, they covered themselves in his shit.

Tutu and Mandela have no problem endorsing the covert mass murder of millions of hteir own kaffir followers; but when it comes to Gaddafi publicly killing his own people, then Tutu pretends to object. Where the fuck were Tutu and Mandela when Gaddafi told the truth about AIDS origins?

Norwegian Vikings must be shuddering in their graves; to see what gutless fucking cowards their descendants as exemplified by the NOrwegian Nobel Committee are!

And frankly, I don't believe Gaddafi is dead. I suspect he made a deal to fake his death, so he can get a new identity. He may be able to get his sweet revenge in secret, from all those he supported, who stabbed him in the back, when it suited them. I wouldn't put it past him.

__________________________

TTruthseeker: Pike:


At 12:38 , Andrea Muhrrteyn said...

Such an alleged genius and yet such a fragile ego fear of transparency.

It amazes me how people think they can join an organisation that practices secrecy, and then be amazed when they find it is corrupt. Don't they have any brains?

I refuse to join any organisation that practices secrecy. Any individual who wants to practice secrecy, must keep their secrets to themselves; if they don't have the courage to be honest honourable people and be who they really are; and stand for values of honour and accountability.

But don't expect me to include the word 'trust' in any relationship with any individual who wants to keep their secrets, so as to practice dirty trickery and deception.

If Michael Martin -- an assassin -- has the courage to be honest, to my face; and tell me what he has done, how many people he killed, how and why, I don't see why I should consider the shit anyone wants to say, who is not willing to practice transparency.

So, I think Masonry is one fuck up. It may have had good intentions, and many join with good intentions; but when they find out the corruption, most just want to make sure they are beneficiaries thereof, instead of exposing it.

There are not many instances, if any that I can recall, that justify secrecy in the long term. In the short term maybe, such as when we have a radical honesty workshop, we provide the individuals participating a safe space wherein they get used to being fully transparent. But by the time they end the workshop, they fully have no problems with sharing their experiences in the workshop. That kind of thing.

Of course there are also people who have such fucked up fragile shallow pathetic lives, that all they want to do is, put their noses into other people's business. That is just a bunch of crap. Sort of like the sex lives of famous people. I don't give a shit about that crap. If its a politician, or official person, then of course its relevant if it affects their duties; but if not. I don't care about such stuff, about other people's private sex lives.

Long term. I ain't heard any arguments therefore. There may be, but I don't know of any, that I consider worthy of long term secrecy. But thats just me.


At 12:42 , Andrea Muhrrteyn said...

I was amazed at his ability to read and write 16 languages. Wow. Really amazing. I also think that its possible the different time period may have contributed towards such individuals attachment to secrecy. They lived in an extremely ignorant fascistic period of time, prior to such concepts as 'freedom of speech' and so on.

For example: In South Africa, I dont use the k word to someone direclty, cause the SA goverment demands that the K word be a secret, in someones head. They don't want anyone who may be a K, to hear the word, and to be told it; cause they are K-secrecy obsessed. So if I think anyone is a K, then the goverment demands that I keep that a secret to myself. Stupid, but that is what fragile ego goverments and lawyer parasites do.


At 12:47 , Andrea Muhrrteyn said...

For example: If someone in SA tells me, they respect my culture of Radical Honesty and want me to be 100% honest with them. Then I practice 100% honesty with them.

Most hate me and can't stand me, so I keep my opinions about them to myself; but its not a 'secret'. I have no problem telling them my honest opinion about what I think of them, and why; but they just don't like hearing honest opinions. They prefer public relations two faced arsekissing crap. So a conversation with such people is fucking pointless. They are not giving you honest sincere feedback.