Voltaire, Voltaire and again Voltaire.

[M0JFK]

Voltaire... "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it"

A little quote moderators should bare in mind when closing/locking a thread. Especially when it is a thread that is a critique of someone in the alternative media like AJ of PP.

Censorship as no place on PA and more so for the feeble excuse the (Is AJ contelpro) was closed/locked out for.

I have noticed (quite a lot) that where moderators operate (on any website) that censorship often runs hand in glove with them.

Moderators tend to get drunk on their power and go overboard and you find sooner or later that it is the petty actions of the moderator that inevitably kill's the site.

Or is it just me and the bit of Anarchist in me from my old Sex Pistols days?

[ZooLife]

Copy and past, Sierra?

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post966291

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by M0JFK (here)
Voltaire... "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it"

A little quote moderators should bare in mind when closing/locking a thread. Especially when it is a thread that is a critique of someone in the alternative media like AJ of PP.

Censorship as no place on PA and more so for the feeble excuse the (Is AJ contelpro) was closed/locked out for.

I have noticed (quite a lot) that where moderators operate (on any website) that censorship often runs hand in glove with them.

Moderators tend to get drunk on their power and go overboard and you find sooner or later that it is the petty actions of the moderator that inevitably kill's the site.

Or is it just me and the bit of Anarchist in me from my old Sex Pistols days?

Thanks for the quote and the thread! I heartily endorse it... to quite a large extent.

Allow me to expand on that.

Where the lines are drawn are (for me) not about WHAT is said — but HOW it's said.

For instance, I personally consider all views which take the idea of a Flat Earth seriously to be highly flawed. I simply don't participate in those threads (and there are a few here)... I consider them a distraction from many more important issues.

But if one of the scientists among us then were to start waging war on the poor Flat Earther, calling him or her [maybe] stupid, moronic, uneducated, intellectually challenged, or much worse — fill in your own gaps! — then that is NOT okay, and I do NOT defend a person's right to be abusive, arrogant, crass or belittling of honest others.

[Bill Ryan]

------

And, invoking Voltaire, let me explain/share a little more.

Here's part of the forum that no members see.... the applications. All of you reading this will be aware that we do not accept everybody. But would Voltaire insist that we allow everyone into the forum to say whatever they like? (That's a GOOD rhetorical question, by the way.)

Sometimes an applicant member will, with genuinely admirable honesty and transparency, declare why they want to join the forum... and cite that they are a passionate Fundamentalist Christian and we much all know the Truth; or they're a diehard solipsist (someone who believes that everything that exists is a figment of one person's imagination — presumably YOU, the reader (the only one there is!) reading this ); or they are a racist neo-Nazi (we get those, occasionally); or, of course, Flat Earthers who believe that every word that any authority has ever told them is by definition, a lie.

And even one or two people who seem to be literally insane, or whose application is filled with abuse. We get those, too. Members never see any of this. I often think I'd like to share some of them (some of them are as truly moving and inspiring as others are dreadful)... but of course, we cannot.

We do NOT allow those people free access to the forum to say their piece. We gently decline them. That's why the forum membership has the quality it has.

It'd be very nice if the world was different... but at this stage in humanity's journey, sadly, it's the way it is.

Speed the day when no moderators are necessary on a forum except to handle routine administration... or when applications are no longer necessary, because every human being is wise, stable, loving and wonderful. But we're just not there yet.

[darthtoaster]

I recently watched the Tom Campbell interview on Buddha at the Gas Pump thanks to a link here. Thank you BTW to who posted that.

Consciousness decays if entropy increases. Thriving conscious systems must replace entropy with order to maintain or thrive. This would apply with forums just as any other system composed of consciousness. Those who have been in the forum business know this truism. Fighting and unruly conversation in place of ordered, polite discussion are forum killers. Order is a must ... just the way it is.

[Bill Ryan]

------

And even more.

Sometimes, the moderators act when the agenda/ interest/ drum-a-member-wants-to-beat makes its appearance AFTER the application has been accepted... and we accepted them based on missing or misleading information. Then, we invoke the Retrospective Rule — one I invented myself, and encourage all the rest of the team to adopt as an aid to decision-making.

The Retrospective Rule asks: if we'd known [such-and-such] about this member when they submitted their application, would we have accepted them?If the answer is No, then we may ask them to leave. In other words... retrospectively decline their application, even though they are already a member.

[ZooLife]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
Where the lines are drawn are (for me) not about WHAT is said — but HOW it's said.

I get what you are saying and understand the reasoning.

Is that why either one of the recent threads were close? How it was said and not so much the content of information?

If that is the case I must have not read every word that lead to the locking of the thread(s).

[Troy Martin]

You know, god is the source of karma/soul damage. It's the way a temporal being parents a temporal being. Karma slows down or stops people when they are unethical, unloving, or untruthful. Its a way of being responsible for your creation of a space and in god's case, the universe. So if we create or manage a space, it is a sense of responsibility and act of love to do the same as god and restrict unethical, unloving or untruthful actions and in a place like a forum things like social engineering can happen and that is a power and force that need not be. So I would not call this censorship but rather an act of ethical social responsibility.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by M0JFK (here)
Voltaire... "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it"

A little quote moderators should bare in mind when closing/locking a thread. Especially when it is a thread that is a critique of someone in the alternative media like AJ of PP.

Censorship as no place on PA and more so for the feeble excuse the (Is AJ contelpro) was closed/locked out for.

Posted by ZooLife (here)
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post966291

Censorship is a frequent criticism of moderations on this forum, and I suppose on other moderated forums.

I am beginning to form a different view of such criticisms and such moderations.

Sometimes we (any of us) have clear and perceptive awareness of something; sometimes we don't. Sometimes we accept our limited awareness of something that we'd rather understand better and sometimes we endeavor to change or to deny our inadequate awareness. Much of life (mine anyway) seems energized by a search for better understanding, whether of one little line of computer code or of cosmic awareness, and much in between. So far, so good ... or at least so human.

The denials become more "risky". If we deny by shutting out, ignoring, paying no mind to, something we're not choosing to understand better for now, that's a potentially more confined response (though avoiding understanding why one's marriage or parenting isn't working well effects others too.) Not quite so good, but perhaps at least of limited harm to the "rest of us".

Mahatma Gandhi's famous quote applies here in an odd way: 'First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, and then you win.' In the present case that I am considering here, at first we ignore that which we don't understand, then we ridicule it, then we fight it, and then we understand.

It's the fighting stage that presents the more obvious risks to others. Sometimes the fighting turns inward on one's self - overwhelming thoughts of one's own worthlessness and failings can be deadly. Sometimes the fighting turns outward, commonly as projections onto others. That which we adamantly refuse to see within ourselves we sometimes project onto others, angrily or nastily rejecting (what we see as) their failings. That can become dangerous, though not always. A three year old's temper tantrum likely presents little physical risk to a strong and healthy parent (though a lamp might get broken.) Some raging projections are more dangerous, potentially deadly or dispiriting to those around one. But if simply that, many of us can protect ourselves, and chuckle with amused awareness that Alex Jones is off on one of his rants again, acknowledging that there might be some truth, and some confusion, deception or oversimplification, to his words.

In the world of words, whether spoken in person or written on a forum or elsewhere (words come in many forms), one of the more serious dangers occurs when the words are shaped so as to covertly draw in others to the confusion, hostility and projected denial . Words can become like the improvised explosive devices (IED roadside bombs) that have killed and wounded so many in the Empire's so many foreign wars. Their actual potential for damage can be hidden in innocuous phrasing, drawing in the listener unawares to their confusion, hostility and projected denial.

That is the common role of neuro-linguistic-programming (NLP - see the link above to Sierra's words in my quote from ZooLife.)

Such covert projection of hostile denial of understanding is harmful to this forum, to our purpose here, and to those of us here who and when we get caught up in such. We, this forum's moderators, endeavor to remove such, like weeding a garden. If a particular member persists in such, we moderators too will persist, however far necessary.

Just as keeping toxins and poisons out of the food we share is not trying to starve people, similarly keeping persistent misunderstanding that is projected using harmful and covert means is not trying to censor people.

If you want to consume glyphosate, fluoride, heavy metals, or a vast array of other toxins, that's essentially your problem. But if you persist in trying to sneak large quantities of such toxins into the food eaten by myself or (as in this case) others about me, I'll do what I have to to stop you. If I managed a restaurant, and you persisted in poisoning the food we served, I'd not allow you in the kitchen; if I moderated a forum and you persisted in toxic posts after being asked to stop, I'd not allow you to post.

This is so regardless of the positions you took, even if (as in this case with Alex Jones) I happened to agree with a substantial portion of what you (or some former member) were (was) saying.

[Flash]

“Men use thought only as authority for their injustice, and employ speech only to conceal their thoughts.”
― Voltaire

Here it tells you what Voltaire really thought.

Your quote "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it"

is not Voltaire's but Hall's and you quoted it wrong too:

In The Friends of Voltaire Hall wrote the phrase: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"[4] (which is often misattributed to Voltaire himself) as an illustration of Voltaire's beliefs.[5][6] Hall's quotation is often cited to describe the principle of freedom of speech.

Voltaire is our Sheakespeare for French people. He is very nuanced. He has to be quoted within context but mostly, rightly quoted.

I like this one from Voltaire yet better, in the context of this thead

Les opinions ont plus causé de maux sur ce petit globe que la peste et les tremblements de terre.

Opinions have caused more ills than the plague or earthquakes on this little globe of ours.

Letter to Élie Bertrand (5 January 1759).

[Lancet]

self moderation and self censorship is often the best form of forum censorship.
even if one has to get a point of view across, one need not be crude.
that is why we have english and literature, proses, quips and quotes- to get the message across elegantly.
i think most forumers will understand if you have a beef with a particular issue, you can express it and give your reasoning/conclusions.

there is also an "edit" button... if you have typed something wrongly in a fit of anger.....

JT

[Agape]

Posted by ZooLife (here)
Copy and past, Sierra?

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post966291

Posted by A.D. (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
Would the world be a better place if Alex didn't exist? My answer is no... he's woken up literally millions of people. If his style isn't to one's liking, then there are plenty of others to listen to. Tuning in to his show is not compulsory.

1. It's side stepping
2. merely suggest
3. It's pretty clear that myself, and the others here
4. not address the facts
5. merely saying
6. same sad, dismissive
7. merely a way
8. dismiss any actual, valid
9. just shrug off
10. just as dismissive
11. completely disregards
12. in no way addresses
13. those of us
14. manipulation
15. very obvious tactics
16. We are doing something
17. We are attempting
18. rest of the herd
19. We are attempting
20. obvious deception
21. sold to masses
22. We are digging
23. those psychological tactics
24. in fact, Bill,
25. even based
26. clearly designed
27. anger and hostility
28. you dodged
29. At no point
30. the clear psychological
31. the tactics used
32. steer and manipulate
33. beyond easy to fool
34. psychology of the masses
35. beyond easy to control
36. understand how to exploit
37. control society
38. really bad
39. ridiculously over-emoting, disingenuous, painfully bad
40. I find it alarming
41. obvious corruption and deception
42. so easily deceived
43. same exact tactics
44. I find it alarming
45. so easily swayed
46. clearly not
47. poisoned

There are other French poets whose art paraphrases slogans and what you call NLP these days ( and ... I have very little taste for them personally ...). Similar to Alex Jones , I don't think that it is how language should be used , especially not in public media that serve to educate and 'enlighten' masses .

I don't think that A.D. was referring or answer Bill in his post , he was clearly paraphrasing Alex Jones . Anyone who has listened to Alex for 5 minutes at least would find out .

But that's unless this is how 'you talk' . It may be about 'your mass entertainment' that is not my mass entertainment .
I actually have issues with this times to times , disability to tolerate people who are being too loud or too rude . It's almost rule of thumb that many of them have hearing disability in early old age or diagnosed with some kind of organic abnormality in their brain they had to live with for most life ,
something that is literally pushing on their brain stem and makes them 'perform' , instinctively , sometimes it's a gift other times curse .
There had probably been many other great artists in this category .

It's fairly hard for more sophisticated people accustomed to gentle kind of education to listen to Alex without feeling offended or disgusted at the same time .
Even if you're not one of the 'bastards' he refers to you don't want to address problems in the same manner .

Or maybe you do and that's what pumps your adrenaline and ultimately , does lead to fights even if you swear you're all for peace and non-violence .

Alex is certainly an artist - if not an actor - and his performing style looks quite more prominent way to me on how to gain 'trust' of the 'hearty' underprivileged class of people who are also genuinely fed up with the system .

In the times of old communist regimes in Europe and when they collapsed like apple eaten by worms from inside , it came to peoples knowledge how some of the most prominent public entertainers and speakers were actually 'payed shills' .
Funny as it sounds, the old generation would still continue to listen to them ..

I was too young to be told but later I understood why some of these 'painted entertainers' gave me a goose bumps and would do so now as well .
The point seems to be .. they pretend to be on 'peoples side' and may be governments best means on how to recognise and tag 'dissent' .

There's just no way to find out really ... until it's 'all over' . Btw , many if not all of these people , heavily involved with media and entertainment industry , exposed to electronics and strong EM fields everyday , alcohol parties and whatever makes the world of art 'real' ended up with cancers or other sudden and strange diseases in their old age . The system safely disposed of them , simple as that .

I'm sorry if someone would find this disconcerting and I'm not debating moderator actions . I think that A.D. clearly referred to Alex , not Bill , in his post .

[Flash]

Yes AD refered to Alex in his post, it is clear to me too Agape.

As for Alex style, have you listened to Fox News which is not about news? The style is pretty much the same in terms or screaming, loud voice, etc, although the content is different.

Alex may be paid shill, but I doubt it truly. He has this loud American style. I have seen it in hôtels with American tourists, while waiting in the lobby for their bus to the airport, I have seen it on the beach, I have seen it in their homes. It is an American style of talking/behaving. This is self centered at times, but efficient in America. It is culturally based. (sorry Americans, loud behavior is a no no no in many cultures). I think we may have to understand Americans in order to understand Alex.

It is funny because there is a British, the taxi driver, who swear like a dog and has a loud style too. But to me, this guy is gross, only because he is British and in England, this is not the usual style, in my views, yet it is quite similar to Alex. I have been culturally programmed

[Agape]

Culturally programmed ... Flash ... no , I don't think it's exactly that way and from what I've experienced since tiny childhood , I'm sure I had a choice ,
and of course ... I'm thankful for having any such a choice ... and there were probably times in my life when I made entirely wrong decisions
but my inner compulsion towards gentleness is not something I can deceive easily .
And I have pretty good nose for authenticity ( and shills , = not necessarily all of them are 'payed ' or 'government' ) too .

I have hard times ( but adventurous ones ) in life descending to the lows , to touch the ground because I believe it's only right and necessary lesson about the biological and psychological nature of humanity ..
but can't say I'd have been 'of them' at the first place . I have no story of 'sheep' being couched by anyone and turned to easter lamb or butterfly ,
and if there are some , anyone around ( I'm sure there aren't ) who would think that they could have a 'way' with me thus ,
I think .. they'd have to deploy the head of CIA to make me do something .

I used to show these 'gents' out of the door as a kid even , including my own dad when he used 'rude word' .


It's simply the way how some of us experience ourselves from within, peace seeking, harmony and beauty loving creatures . I love maths for the same reason.
Beauty has to do with symmetry a lot in my opinion .

Yes I listened to the Fox News and know what you mean and well, I probably don't dream of Alex Jones but there are still about 299 million Americans out there ..some of whom are quite like us Flash


Happy Birthday

[M0JFK]

You can always tell the genuine by their very nature. Examples to all are Bill Ryan, Former Sergeant Major Robert Dean and Jordan Maxwell. I am always glued to the laptop when I listen to the above...genunie people with no ego to feed.

[M0JFK]

Posted by Flash (here)

“Men use thought only as authority for their injustice, and employ speech only to conceal their thoughts.”
― Voltaire

Here it tells you what Voltaire really thought.

Your quote "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it"

is not Voltaire's but Hall's and you quoted it wrong too:

In The Friends of Voltaire Hall wrote the phrase: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"[4] (which is often misattributed to Voltaire himself) as an illustration of Voltaire's beliefs.[5][6] Hall's quotation is often cited to describe the principle of freedom of speech.

Voltaire is our Sheakespeare for French people. He is very nuanced. He has to be quoted within context but mostly, rightly quoted.

I like this one from Voltaire yet better, in the context of this thead

Les opinions ont plus causé de maux sur ce petit globe que la peste et les tremblements de terre.

Opinions have caused more ills than the plague or earthquakes on this little globe of ours.

Letter to Élie Bertrand (5 January 1759).

Dot the I's and cross the T's if you must...but people got the drift Flash.

[M0JFK]

Posted by Agape (here)

Posted by ZooLife (here)
Copy and past, Sierra?

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post966291

Posted by A.D. (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
Would the world be a better place if Alex didn't exist? My answer is no... he's woken up literally millions of people. If his style isn't to one's liking, then there are plenty of others to listen to. Tuning in to his show is not compulsory.

1. It's side stepping
2. merely suggest
3. It's pretty clear that myself, and the others here
4. not address the facts
5. merely saying
6. same sad, dismissive
7. merely a way
8. dismiss any actual, valid
9. just shrug off
10. just as dismissive
11. completely disregards
12. in no way addresses
13. those of us
14. manipulation
15. very obvious tactics
16. We are doing something
17. We are attempting
18. rest of the herd
19. We are attempting
20. obvious deception
21. sold to masses
22. We are digging
23. those psychological tactics
24. in fact, Bill,
25. even based
26. clearly designed
27. anger and hostility
28. you dodged
29. At no point
30. the clear psychological
31. the tactics used
32. steer and manipulate
33. beyond easy to fool
34. psychology of the masses
35. beyond easy to control
36. understand how to exploit
37. control society
38. really bad
39. ridiculously over-emoting, disingenuous, painfully bad
40. I find it alarming
41. obvious corruption and deception
42. so easily deceived
43. same exact tactics
44. I find it alarming
45. so easily swayed
46. clearly not
47. poisoned

There are other French poets whose art paraphrases slogans and what you call NLP these days ( and ... I have very little taste for them personally ...). Similar to Alex Jones , I don't think that it is how language should be used , especially not in public media that serve to educate and 'enlighten' masses .

I don't think that A.D. was referring or answer Bill in his post , he was clearly paraphrasing Alex Jones . Anyone who has listened to Alex for 5 minutes at least would find out .

But that's unless this is how 'you talk' . It may be about 'your mass entertainment' that is not my mass entertainment .
I actually have issues with this times to times , disability to tolerate people who are being too loud or too rude . It's almost rule of thumb that many of them have hearing disability in early old age or diagnosed with some kind of organic abnormality in their brain they had to live with for most life ,
something that is literally pushing on their brain stem and makes them 'perform' , instinctively , sometimes it's a gift other times curse .
There had probably been many other great artists in this category .

It's fairly hard for more sophisticated people accustomed to gentle kind of education to listen to Alex without feeling offended or disgusted at the same time .
Even if you're not one of the 'bastards' he refers to you don't want to address problems in the same manner .

Or maybe you do and that's what pumps your adrenaline and ultimately , does lead to fights even if you swear you're all for peace and non-violence .

Alex is certainly an artist - if not an actor - and his performing style looks quite more prominent way to me on how to gain 'trust' of the 'hearty' underprivileged class of people who are also genuinely fed up with the system .

In the times of old communist regimes in Europe and when they collapsed like apple eaten by worms from inside , it came to peoples knowledge how some of the most prominent public entertainers and speakers were actually 'payed shills' .
Funny as it sounds, the old generation would still continue to listen to them ..

I was too young to be told but later I understood why some of these 'painted entertainers' gave me a goose bumps and would do so now as well .
The point seems to be .. they pretend to be on 'peoples side' and may be governments best means on how to recognise and tag 'dissent' .

There's just no way to find out really ... until it's 'all over' . Btw , many if not all of these people , heavily involved with media and entertainment industry , exposed to electronics and strong EM fields everyday , alcohol parties and whatever makes the world of art 'real' ended up with cancers or other sudden and strange diseases in their old age . The system safely disposed of them , simple as that .

I'm sorry if someone would find this disconcerting and I'm not debating moderator actions . I think that A.D. clearly referred to Alex , not Bill , in his post .

Exactly Agape...my only dislike of Alex is his interviewing techniques. He often interupts his guest and often puts words into their mouths if they are not saying what he wants them to say. Apart from that Alex does good work. On the other side if you look into his background and who funds his radio show you do tend to ask yourself if AJ can be a trusted truther.

[M0JFK]

One guy I did like was Mr Bill Cooper...God he was blunt and never would suffer fools. And even he too got it wrong at times but had the heart to admit it and correct himself with a sincere apology. And a very good example too of somone who gets bumped off for revealing to much truth. If his death was not engineered that day I will show my rear end on the tower of London.

[Carmody]

Violent, pugilistic,and purposely confused/mirrored/manipulated communications are not communications, they are attempts to dominate an exchange so that the one given side can hope to project their thoughts and desires into others.

It is not a form of communication. It is a form of violent injection of self into other.

The vast majority of the people out here and everywhere..are not of this type, and can be overwhelmed and/or driven off and away form the given communication forum or venue.

Fixing the world involves cutting off and cutting down those who attempt to dominate either people, locations, or, in this case....even something as simple as forum conversations.

One recognizes it, and they cut it off (with extreme prejudice) (no, that does not mean emotion), so that the given forum does not disintegrate into a mosh pit of external control by animalism disguised as conversation.

People are not required to rise up into a war like condition ----people who can do it, are required to recognize war mongers and cut them down.

To say otherwise, to get people to rise up, is to ask the world, in the minute and global inclusive...to be a war machine. Which is the very thing we are trying not to mirror into existence. That has been the plague of humanity for the history of humanity, the very thing that kills us, so..in essence..no. No pugilistic communications on the forum, it is totally contrary to the evolution and erudition of humanity.

Only in very specific and unusual circumstances would beating a human into confusion be capable of bringing enlightenment. That is not the norm. it is the extreme exception. So it cannot be the norm on a functioning forum. And if it is allowed to be... it, by force, by being the bull in a china shop, it overreaches and steps on everything and becomes the norm.... and the war machine the injected 'control by enabling confusion machine', the contrarian rises -in violence, and we are back to where we started. Injected confusion as a form of control of thought and conversation, which becomes societal control.

Thank ye, but no.

[Cardillac]

Voltaire was very aware person and stated a lot of very insightful things; like start with: "in order to find out who rules over you just find out who you are not allowed to criticize"- then enter Israel...

ohh, forget it...

Larry