KorbenDallas

Conspiracy theories and Conspiracy theorists

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, ThatGuy said:

Go google "Ready Reserves". Look at Google Maps. Look at the address.
#64



https://twitter.com/JemeleWilliams/status/1244012286882336769?s=20

Michael wrote:

"TG,

I didn't understand this. Too cryptic and I didn't feel in a "Where is Wally?" mood."

Understandable, Michael. Some of this stuff is "some assembly required". Admittedly, a screen shot would have helped, and I'd have posted a screen shot, but I'm out of image space here.

A picture may say a thousand words, but at the risk of 'ruining the joke" by explaining it, or sounding pedantic, I'll explain this one, anyway, for the benefit of those who, like me, may also be new to this,  because it's a good example of how Q works.

If you did't see it, well,  I don't know if you missed a lot...it's not the biggest piece in the puzzle, but it IS interesting, to say the least. Basically, Trump emphasized "Ready Reserves." When you google that phrase, the sidebar shows a map location for Google Maps for a gun store in Texas called "Ready Reserves" on 4639 Corona Dr #64, Corpus Christi, TX 78411.

READY RESERVES. CORONA Drive.

The picture of the store that's featured on Google Maps is a close-up on the door, emphasizing #64. Taking that number as significant, people are going to the QMap site and searching for 64 in the posts, etc. to look for relevance. And so on...(In some ways, this reminds me of THE BIBLE CODE phenomenon of some years ago...)

Maybe it's importance is as a clue for the doubters, or more intended as a secret comm, or it's  nothing. But this example, in itself, is a good demonstration of how Q works, and/or how the people following Q work.  (Pattern recongition, connecting the dots, etc.) Listen to the code words, think outside the box, take nothing at face-value or surface level. Look for the ambiguities, the paradoxes, the contradictions.

(This latter part must be not only frustrating, but MADDENING, for Objectivists and those dedicated to scientific reasoning, who cannot deal with ambiguity. Yes, O'ism says that by the laws of physical reality, contradictions cannot exist, but this is the "man-made", and the imagination can concoct all sorts of puzzles and mind-games. And lest it seem too conspiratorial for some, an easy answer would be to point out the secrets codes used in war throughout history, and the code-breakers employed to figure them out. ENIGMA, anyone? )
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Brant Gaede said:

Atlantis was from the bottom up. The posters. Jimmy came along and tried  to be the top.

Brant,

Peter is hurting from a death in his family that looked like the coronavirus, but was not tested. And his pain is deep. I feel it in between the lines in everything he writes right now.

I have learned a lot about running an online forum, but I have not yet learned what to do when other people refuse to take things like that into account and bicker with him as if he were the enemy. He's not and never will be. A man in his kind of pain acts differently than he does normally. But it's hard to detect this online and even harder to get others to see it.

What to do and what to do? Hell and damnation. How does one keep the fire burning in people's souls, call for exceptions due to context at the same time, and not piss off everybody?

It's not either-or. Both the fire and the exceptions are what make for a healthy environment that will not die, but keeping that balance is a bitch. From what I've seen, an imbalance in this is what killed Atlantis--that is, Wales tried to impose the exceptions from the top and mold people into his vision. The passionate fire people simply left. I bet many thought, "Fuck you," as they left, too.

As I've said several times, when I was in the underworld in São Paulo, they used to have a saying. When one bandit fights with another, you always know who wins: the police win. This is the same on a forum of ideas. When members bicker to the point of driving each other off, the bad guys targeted by the forum win.

On a parallel note, I agree with you that technology will play a key role in the spread of Objectivism and libertarianism. But I don't think they will be as sub rosa as you do. I see these systems of ideas more as tempering agents that will keep the world from turning into a dictatorship by technocrats or a bunch of warring countries that erupt into world wars like last century.

I honestly don't think President Trump could have happened without Objectivism and libertarianism. The penetration of leftism in education and the media was so deep in America, and the thirst for power so acute among the elitists, without a strong ideological wall in the hearts and minds of the people forgotten by the power-mongers, the average people who try to be good and strive on their own for improvement, the US would have gone the way of Russia, China and several other countries around the world. But it didn't. They fell and the US didn't. Why? There was too much moral individualism in the US, whereas in Russia, China, etc., there wasn't.

The bad guys couldn't pull it off in the US especially because the families and friends of the young people they indoctrinated, and the ruling class people they corrupted even more than normal, held ideas that would not go away--ideas like do whatever you want so long as you do not infringe on the rights of others, like every person's life belongs to himself or herself and not to a state or a mob, like wealth can be created and not just confiscated, like how important independent thinking is to one's happiness and self-esteem as opposed to groupthink, like any individual can rise as far as his or her ability and effort can take them, and so on. These ideas come from Objectivism and libertarianism, including the historical and intellectual roots of these systems.

These ideas are kept alive in the culture by stories (especially film, video, novels, songs and so on), but also by public places like OL where ideas can be discussed, examined, bickered about, and used as a draw for gathering people to interact idea-wise with each other.

No indoctrination on earth can fight the individual mind when so many opportunities to cultivate it exist in our culture. And no system of ideology, religion, philosophy, politics, etc., can stifle the individual mind when other systems that prize the individual mind--like Objectivism and libertarianism--keep the flame of liberty burning in the souls of individual hearts and minds.

That flame of individual independence is our job--at least as I see it. Keeping it alive is what we do. That's what we are supposed to do. We are custodians of the flame in our part of the world, whether virtual or physical. That means we don't need to be an epic tale where we impose a philosophy on the whole world and transform it into a utopia according to the vision of Rand or Jesus or the Founding Fathers or anyone else. We don't need to be a world-changing movement in order to keep the world right. Hell, even President Trump's rise was not a movement to forge the planet into a utopia. His rise was a reaction to a deadly attack on a massive number of peaceful individuals by the ruling class. His rise was made by individuals who said, "Enough!" And he said, "You're right!" Don't think he doesn't know it.

If no one believes that, imagine what would happen if President Trump turned into a typical ruling class asshole. Imagine what would happen to him personally. Not good...

So I say we don't need to be molders of a new world. Not on a discussion forum. Leave that for the stories and storytellers. Epic stories are like the horizon, anyway. You use them as guides, but you never reach the horizon. You can only reach specific destinations and you can only experience that as an individual. That's just the way the world exists. It's a reality thing.

But we can strive and there is great virtue in the striving. That's organic and it's growth. What's more, the transmutation of epic stories into reality where individual freedom is a core value can only be done by individuals to the extent they are able to. I am not John Galt. I am Michael Stuart Kelly. Ditto for you. You are Brant Gaede, not Galt. Even Ayn Rand was not Galt. She was Alisa Zinovyevna Rosenbaum, maker supreme of epic stories and horizon painter. Maker of Galt, for that matter. But she was still an individual, not a collective, and not a god.

We don't create epic stories on OL, although I hope we can at some point. Our job at present is different by its nature. As individuals and as a discussion forum, all we need to do out here in reality is be a warm tavern on a stormy night for any traveler who wants to get out of the rain. We can do that because that fits our size. Just knowing taverns like this exist keeps many travelers going on their individual journeys or stopping to stay awhile--and that, more than anything else on earth, thwarts the authoritarians. 

OL can grow bigger or smaller, but keeping a flame alive in a warm fireplace for individuals when it's cold outside is one of the things we can do in practice. It's what we should do. It's our importance.

We--and people like us--matter more than anyone in the mainstream ever talks about.

We are the keepers of the flame, not just in story, but in reality.

But there is one other thing we have to do. We have to keep from burning down the goddam tavern.

:)

Michael

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

We don't create epic stories on OL, although I hope we can at some point. Our job at present is different by its nature. As individuals and as a discussion forum, all we need to do out here in reality is be a warm tavern on a stormy night for any traveler who wants to get out of the rain. We can do that because that fits our size. Just knowing taverns like this exist keeps many travelers going on their individual journeys or stopping to stay awhile--and that, more than anything else on earth, thwarts the authoritarians. 

OL can grow bigger or smaller, but keeping a flame alive in a warm fireplace for individuals when it's cold outside is one of the things we can do in practice. It's what we should do. It's our importance.

We--and people like us--matter more than anyone in the mainstream ever talks about.

We are the keepers of the flame, not just in story, but in reality.

But there is one other thing we have to do. We have to keep from burning down the goddam tavern.

:)

Michael

This has a nice CANTERBURY TALES ring to it. And if not the place for epics, at least a few stories to tell around the fire...
And my condolences to Peter. And understood.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, ThatGuy said:

This has a nice CANTERBURY TALES ring to it. And if not the place for epics, at least a few stories to tell around the fire...

TG,

Friends for life.

:)

btw - I got the nicest email about that post from a person who reads OL but doesn't participate in public. I copied my post to a file I am making of my best stuff from OL. Maybe see where that goes. Damn, there's a lot of stuff here...

Michael

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/13/2019 at 2:00 AM, Ellen Stuttle said:

If Candace Owens goes on the way she's going, I'd love to see her as President.

Ellen,

How does this look as part of the path?

I think it looks awfully good.

This is the way interviews between opposites should unfold.

Anti-hatred, at least on the idea level.

To be honest, I have never liked Marc Lamont Hill before. And I have seen him a lot since he has been a regular on cable news sites for years. He always came off as arrogant and true-believer-ish to me.

The person I saw in this interview looked a lot different and talked a lot different. I could even grasp a few of his ideas to mull them over without feeling I was looking at a power-hungry manipulator or defend myself against an attack.

I still think he's out to lunch intellectually, but I no longer believe he's stupid (or brain-blind) when it comes to the trigger issues he favors, nor do I think he's a hate-filled asshole.

I do think he approached Candace with extra-caution, though. He knows he's talking to one of the top conservative influencers in America who is having a real impact on the black community (meaning individual blacks), and if he brushed her off or belittled her, he would lose relevance to a crapload of them and even many other blacks. 

What's more, this is earned. Candace is as formidable as all hell in her approach. She calls out bullshit in a blink of an eye without any rancor and throws hard facts down on the table--and where those facts came from--to back it up.

Candace is 31 at this point in time. Look at how she handles someone who pals around with those who claim she doesn't deserve to be black (a female Uncle Tom and so on). With her, it's all respect and clarity without backing down. Imagine her negotiating. I honestly do see a future president in the making.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Candace is 31 at this point in time. Look at how she handles someone who pals around with those who claim she doesn't deserve to be black (a female Uncle Tom and so on). With her, it's all respect and clarity without backing down. Imagine her negotiating. I honestly do see a future president in the making.

Me, too. And such an attractive one, along with all the rest.  (I think she looks just lovely in the vid screen you posted.)

Ellen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...