ROGUE RAP 1

ROGUE RAP 1

DECIPHERING PSYCHOBABBLE

“National security” is code for, “shut up, we don't have to tell you nuthin”.

Hegel’s dialectic is the tool which manipulates us into a frenzied circular pattern of thought and action. Every time we fight for or defend against an ideology we are playing a necessary role in Marx and Engels’ grand design to advance humanity into a dictatorship of the proletariat. The synthetic Hegelian solution to all these conflicts can’t be introduced unless we all take a side that will advance the agenda. The Marxist’s global agenda is moving along at breakneck speed. The only way to completely stop the privacy invasions, expanding domestic police powers, land grabs, insane wars against inanimate objects (and transient verbs), covert actions, and outright assaults on individual liberty, is to step outside the dialectic. This releases us from the limitations of controlled and guided thought.”

Don't try to hide behind some squall of shit.



You can always tell these kinds of guys; the perpetual victim, they will rhetorically frame anything you can possibly say as a 'threat'. The real deep psychola' being their tissue-paper thin, hyper-fragile ego structure. Of course this leads to hyper emotional language, ei; psychobabble.

If you simply call one of these lunatics an asshole, they can't take it--exploding into long harangue barrages, often ending in the 'question', “You want to kill me don't you?” And accusing you of “hating” them. Simply because you said they are an asshole, but certainly are not emotionally connected enough to generate any imagined 'hatred'.

As far as the “reasoning” path they took there...well, that leaves any sane person going, “Wha-th'fuck?”

Then they start to “psychoanalyze” YOU. This guy says to me that I am a “homosexual” for referring to his asshole.
When you have to explain to anyone in this culture that using the Anglo-Saxon vernacular is simply a generic put-down—having no connection to the technical nature of the term...well, then you know you're talking to a real fruitcake.

Or, a disinformation shill.

This psycho-game is also taught as a technique for scattering the flow of blog debates. Under the uber-strategy of FULL SPECTRUM DOMINANCE the front lines of the war of terror is everywhere/anywhere, including MINDWAR.
This psychological warfare is waged in all forms of medium. And it is panoptic.

Some will come forward and call these assertions, 'Conspiracy Theory'. But there is nothing at all 'conspiratorial' about it. The openly proclaimed official military posture of FULL SPECTRUM DOMINANCE is by no acceptable definition a “theory”, and as it is public knowledge, and it cannot be defined as a 'conspiracy' in the common sense of that meaning, “hidden”.

As far as the analysis of this topic being referred to as “theoretical”, this is only true in the scientific meaning of the word; because the actual data and information is NOT theoretical—this information comes from the white papers , position papers, open testimony of officials, etc. The analysis is deep and forensic, relying on the scientific method and therefore adhering to the rules of logic.

Through long and persistent study a conspiracy is indeed revealed. But this cannot be defined as theoretical, as it is a verifiable fact of history and current affairs. It is in fact an “Open Conspiracy” as H.G. Wells propagates in his early work, THE NEW WORLD ORDER, a Fabian Socialist manifesto. This Utopian cheerleader, Wells was tragically disappointed near the end of his life when he realized the inhuman aims of the agenda he had so enthusiastically supported. His appeals against it becoming ever more bitter, until he came to the point of utter hopelessness.

This cynical hopelessness expressed by Wells in his last writings cannot be easily hand waved, for as those who have come to understand this insidious plot, the fruition of this brave New World Order is upon us. Those who fail to grasp this are taking part in their own ruin. This is what it means to be well adjusted in a psychotic society.

Even 'blowback' is a modified limited hangout used as cover for deeper hidden lies.
Those lies covering the fact that the 'blowback” is actually part of the original agenda.
The 'blowback' often being a false flag operation.

This revetment was suggested in the shadows during the 9/11 “investigation”; in that the actions of the accused hijackers were not predicated on “hating our freedoms”, but because of US imperialism in the Middle East. This is just enough mud to obstruct the clearer view, that being al Qaeda is actually a subsidiary of western intelligence.

Free Masonry, has to do with physical building masonry only in an allegorical sense. The materials used in Masonry is psycho-social-political. It has to do with social engineering. It is in the same sense that Jesus was a 'carpenter', it means “master” in that allegorical sense. Jesus was a social engineer in the spiritual sense.
The issue, as always is intent. What is the intent of those who control modern Masonry? What is the intent of those who control the modern “Church”? Well...what are the results? “By their fruits ye shall know them”.

Keep in mind, just because they have confused you, doesn't mean that they are confused. A stage magician isn't baffled by his 'magic'. Do you really believe that those who control the world don't know how to control the world?
As George Orwell wrote; “Those who control the past control the future. Those who control the present control the past”. Put bluntly, those who control the present write the official history—that is control of the past.

Yea...and in the history of the occult placement of DC is the weird situation that the real point of "power" as these mystics wanted was some twenty miles off the eastern seaboard in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. This all has to do with the 'magical' meridians of a global matrix. Deep psychobabbular woo woo...but when you control the reins of power, any weird story you want to believe will work for you. It's essentially, "I'm cool cuz I'm special" in whatever costume you want to put it in.

We must not lampoon an imaginary being? This menu has crassberry jam on cracked actors.
DC, once a swamp always a swamp. The truth of things, places and beings remains obvious.
Corporations are imaginary beings. States are imaginary beings. Humans are flesh and bone beings.

Naiveté is not innocence. It is ignorance.

Going along to get along is fine until you get where they are taking you.

There are no secrets, just things you failed to pay attention to.

Liberty is a discovery of enlightened reason—not an invention of revolution.

A Champion of an Imaginary Being:

Who is Cass Sustein?

Cass Sunstein was born on September 21, 1954 into a Jewish-American family.

In 1981, the first year of the U.S. Presidential administration of Ronald Reagan, Skousen was asked to be a charter member of the conservative think tank, the Council for National Policy, founded by Tim LaHaye, author of the Left Behind series of books. Other early participants included Paul Weyrich; Phyllis Schlafly; Robert Grant; Howard Phillips, a former Republican affiliated with the Constitution Party; Richard Viguerie, the direct-mail specialist; and Morton Blackwell, a Louisiana and Virginia activist who is considered a specialist on the rules of the Republican Party.Skousen's proposals with the group included a plan to convert the Social Security system to private retirement accounts, as well as a plan that he claimed would completely wipe out the national debt.

The interpretation of federal law should be made not by judges but by the beliefs and commitments of the U.S. president and those around him, according to Sunstein. "There is no reason to believe that in the face of statutory ambiguity, the meaning of federal law should be settled by the inclinations and predispositions of federal judges. The outcome should instead depend on the commitments and beliefs of the President and those who operate under him," argued Sunstein

In 2002, at the height of controversy over Bush's creation of military commissions without Congressional approval, Sunstein stepped forward to insist that "under existing law, President George W. Bush has the legal authority to use military commissions" and that "President Bush's choice stands on firm legal ground."
Sunstein co-authored a 2008 paper with Adrian Vermeule, titled Conspiracy Theories, in which they wrote, "The existence of both domestic and foreign conspiracy theories, we suggest, is no trivial matter, posing real risks to the government’s antiterrorism policies, whatever the latter may be." They go on to propose that, "the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups",[22] where they suggest, among other tactics, "Government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action."[22] They refer, several times, to skeptics of the government-promoted narrative of the September 11 attacks as "extremist groups."
Sunstein and Vermeule also analyze the practice of secret government payments to outside commentators, who are then held out as independent experts.
“Because those who hold conspiracy theories typically suffer from a crippled epistemology, in accordance with which it is rational to hold such theories, the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups.”

What an incredible absurdity the assertions of Sustein and Vermeule are. The raw unmitigated fact is that the official story of 9/11 is itself a “conspiracy theory”, and it is thus verifiable that it is Sustein and Vermuele themselves who display for the candid world to see; that it is they who suffer from the crippled epistemology. These people are simply highly decorated jackasses. Typical for this psychotic society.

“Rather than engaging with the conceptual debates, we will proceed in an eclectic fashion...”

It is quite illustrative that Sustein and Vermuele duck engaging in the conceptual debate, for as revealed as we follow their line of “reasoning”, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the actual philosophical, and epistemological validity of conspiracy as a motor in the movement and evolution of society.
Their entire argument is based on an open and blatant appeal to authority. To any sane and rational person, such argumentation fails on the launching pad. The primary failure is that of 'false assumption”.

All are invited to assume that the concept of a conspiracy is on its face an absurd proposition. From this platform the authors then go on to defend a conspiracy theory, in utter abandon of reason and sanity. This is remarkable idiocy, naked and blatant.

One cannot help imagining Orwell chuckling from his celestial cat-perch.

But then for them to 'tacitly' suggest that there is some sort of “common cause” between the designated “terrorists” and the “conspiracy theorist”, is disassociative illogic—a subtle assertion with no basis even offered:
“These theories exist within the United States and, even more virulently,
in foreign countries, especially Muslim countries. The existence of both domestic and
foreign conspiracy theories, we suggest, is no trivial matter, posing real risks...”

What is obvious here is that Sustein and Vermuele's work is merely a continuation of the psychological myth spinning operation begun September 11,2001. This is pathos.

“We bracket the most difficult questions here and suggest more intuitively that a conspiracy theory can generally be counted as such if it is an effort to explain some event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role.”- Sustein and Vermuele

This is an incredibly narrow and spurious definition that the authors have “suggested more intuitively”.

It is verboten “conspiracy theory” only if the “machinations of powerful people” are scrutinized. As we discern from the entire treatise, it is the powerful people and systems under their control which is not to be questioned, for it is 'Conspiracy Theory' with a triple XXX rating.

Service intellectuals instinctively know the bounds of discourse, beyond which the full fury of power’s opinion mill and influence will be aimed against the heretic. --Rancourt

To continue with Sustein and Vermuele:

[1] “A conspiracy theory posits that a
social outcome evidences an underlying intentional order, overlooking the possibility that
the outcome arises from either spontaneous order or random forces. Popper is picking up
on a still more general fact about human psychology, which is that most people do not
like to believe that significant events were caused by bad (or good) luck, and much prefer
simpler causal stories. Note, however, that the domain of Popper’s explanation is quite
limited. Many conspiracy theories, including those involving political assassinations and
the attacks of 9/11, point to events that are indeed the result of intentional action, and the
conspiracy theorists go wrong not by positing intentional actors, but by misidentifying
them.”

{1A}>> And this “misidentifying” is not addressed in specifics; yet one more time we are fed THEORY:

[2] A broader point is that conspiracy theories overestimate the competence and
discretion of officials and bureaucracies, who are assumed to be able to make and carry
out sophisticated secret plans, despite abundant evidence that in *open societies* government action does not usually remain secret for very long.

{2A}>> This assertion that the US is an “open society” is a ludicrous proposition to anyone with the slightest grasp on the nature of the panoptic maximum security state the US has openly become.
This position alone is a death knell to the veracity of these blatant propagandists. Thus far every point in their reasoning is based on false propositional assumptions.

The “abundant evidence” actually available simply refutes the official conspiracy fable in almost every minute detail.

[3] Recall that a distinctive feature of conspiracy theories is that they attribute immense power to the agents of the conspiracy; the attribution is usually implausible but also makes the theories especially
vulnerable to challenge. Consider all the work that must be done to hide and to cover up the government’s role in producing a terrorist attack on its own territory, or in arranging to kill political opponents. In a closed society, secrets are not difficult to keep, and distrust of official accounts makes a great deal of sense. In such societies, conspiracy theories are both more likely to be true and harder to show to be false in light of available information.

{3A}>> The adoption of the grand strategy of Full Spectrum Dominance, as openly espoused by the federal government should leave no doubt as to the “immense power” of the agents of this conspiracy.

“Consider all the work that must be done to hide and to cover up”... Consider all of the systemic networks already in place providing “need to know” nomenclature for concealment. The phrase “national security” has been a virtual mantra of condescending 'spokesmen” of this criminal syndicate posing as 'government' for decades.

This naïve, yea, jejune assertion that the US has open and transparent government is at the core of this spurious argument being propagated—for it is the core of the indictment of those who have deconstructed the system and described it in its naked state; imperial, tyrannical, vicious and evil.

This lollipop veneer the authors of this book attempt is surprisingly shallow. The appeal to authority is a constant subtext by empty assumption.

Let it not be forgotten that these two authors are considered “legal scholars”, even “constitutional scholars”, held in high esteem by this system. They are service intellectuals, apologists for the system that has buttered their bread so lavishly. One does not become prominent in a criminal system by pointing out its criminality.

That these authors can claim a grasp on the Constitution is simply incredible to any sane person who has studied the document and it's history. To pretend to not understand that we are in the state of 'Ultra Vires' lawfully--as supposed 'experts' is absurd.

These authors are presenting disinformation, in the same covert way that they suggest infiltration and government manipulation.

In fact this is a textbook for teaching disinformation. It offers openly fascist models of secret agents posing as “just some other concerned citizen”. This blatant dishonesty is hand-waved as a necessity in a “time of war”, which is the most insidious lie from which the rest squirm like maggots from dead meat.

The 'War on Terror' is a fabrication of social engineering. My assertion is not some 'theoretical'
construct, but historical reality based on empirical actuality, on testimony of those involved in the construction of the scientific dictatorship. From Bernays and Lippmann to the post-modern “think tanks”, the history of socio-psycho technique is covered in minute detail. For “scholars” such as Sustein and Vermuele to plead ignorance on such issues is completely unbelievable. Therefore, they unmask themselves as the Agent Provocateurs they so plainly are.

This nation was founded by conspiracy theorists, and if it is to be saved it will be by conspiracy theorists. The most eloquent conspiracy theory ever penned is The Declaration of Independence. Take my advice, read it someday.

[4] “To think, for example, that U.S. government officials destroyed the
World Trade Center and then covered their tracks requires an ever-widening conspiracy
theory, in which the 9/11 Commission, congressional leaders, the FBI, and the media
were either participants in or dupes of the conspiracy.” --Sustein and Vermuele

{4A}>>“We were set up to fail”--Hamilton and Kean, co-chairs of the 9/11 commission.

"The United States spent millions of dollars to supply Afghan schoolchildren with textbooks filled with violent images and militant Islamic teachings....The primers, which were filled with talk of jihad and featured drawings of guns, bullets, soldiers and mines, have served since then as the Afghan school system's core curriculum. Even the Taliban used the American-produced books,..", (Washington Post, 23 March 2002)

"Advertisements, paid for from CIA funds, were placed in newspapers and newsletters around the world offering inducements and motivations to join the [Islamic] Jihad." (Pervez Hoodbhoy, Peace Research, 1 May 2005)

John Farmer, a former Attorney General of New Jersey who was the Senior Council to the Official 9/11 Commission has written a book and in there he bluntly states that the story and the conclusion of the 9-11 Commission are "entirely and inexplicably untrue." So even the Chief Council for the 9-11 Commission says the story they told us is not true.

General Ahmad, while in Washington, met with CIA Director George Tenet and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. On the morning of 9/11, General Ahmad was in a meeting with the Chairmen of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, Senator Bob Graham and Representative Porter Goss, a former 10-year veteran of CIA clandestine operations. Porter Goss was later put in charge of a joint House-Senate investigation into the Sept. 11 attacks, and later became the CIA director.

Ahmed, the paymaster for the hijackers, was actually in Washington on 9/11, and had a series of pre-9/11 top-level meetings in the White House, the Pentagon, the national security council, and with George Tenet, then head of the CIA, and Marc Grossman, the under-secretary of state for political affairs. When Ahmed was exposed by the Wall Street Journal as having sent the money to the hijackers, he was forced to "retire" by President Pervez Musharraf.--Michael Meacher, former British MP and Blair cabinet member.

So yes, this analysis requires a systemic conspiracy theory, which the facts indicate, and yet Sustein and Vermuele ply their empty “intuitive-based” social theory that willfully dismisses such open sourced facts. It is they who are the obvious example of cognitive dissonance, an illustration of a totally scrambled epistemic construct. It is this very construct that is the architecture of the synthetic paradigm this criminal system has produced--that shills such as Sustein and Vermuele attempt to bracket into place on their wall of crumbling credibility.

William Whitten © 2010