Below-copied by ap first published at comments,
https://mises.org/blog/states-are-re...inst-war-drugs
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Problem is satanism, suckers--OBVIOUSLY, eh?
(Apollonian,
17 May 17)
The best thing about this activity in Vt. (see above link) is the push-back against the satanic hegemons and monopolists. For obviously, the purpose of keeping drugs illegal is to protect the monopoly over the drug market by the satanic "deep-state." And necessary next step for overthrow of this satanist deep-state is the broad, public recognition of the satanist element.
Note then the essence of this satanism is the extreme subjectivism, mind/consciousness creating reality, making one God. This satanism then is exerted and made practical by means of collectivistic "group-think" and then activity--as is always the case in any criminal gang and conspiracy, top criminals now dominating USA and world, the central-bank legalized counterfeiters.
There's only one thing now that really, seriously counters and opposes this nearly blatant satanism, this satanism even symbolized on the Federal Reserve notes in circulation, for goodness sakes. Ayn Rand, for example, presciently called this satanist establishment the "culture of death." Why then does Mises.org SUPPRESS the exposition of this opposing force to this plainly active satanism?--the answer is obvious.
----------------here,
below-copied was one of the responses----------------
jandr0 apollonian •
an hour ago
Satanism .... words words ... satanic hegemons ... verbiage
verbiage ... satanic "deep-state" ... yadda yadda ... essence of the satanism
... waffle waffle ... satanism is then exerted ... blatant satanism ....
satanism repeated ad nauseum.
Frankly, you lost me as an earnest reader
of your comment at your first mention of "satanism" already. And I suspect you
similarly lost many others who simply shook their heads at your comment and
moved on (I also considered that option).
[the answer is
obvious.]
Indeed it is. And the answer is you, not them.
While
there certainly are (and has always been) people conspiring behind closed doors
against other people, and particularly so in bureaucratic institutions of
political power (coveting power is after all a prevalent human trait), your
fixation on "satanism" comes across as mostly a mixture of amusing* / boring. In
fact, you are quite likely the "sucker" you now imply others are**.
May
Xu (also replying to you and commenting on your approach) is very polite. As for
me, I suggest you try and get over your "satanism" thing. You might turn out to
be quite a nice person after all.
*Amusing especially in the sense of
what notions people can convince themselves are true.
**I have
familiarised myself with many conspiracy theories, and while I certainly concur
that people are prone to conspire (to be sure, I have direct encounters with
some examples), there is also a hyperbolic tendency among some people to
proclaim the wildest, implausible conjectures as so-called "truth." In the face
of this, I (and many others) discriminate. And endless repetition of "satanism"
is a clear no-no signal to me.
------------------[Apster had below-copied comment ready
about 10-11 hrs ago, but found I was suddenly banned--talk about censorship and
suppression.]-------------------------
Jandro, buddy, ho ho ho--do u think u "protesteth" a
tad too much?--ho hoh o ho--so we see, right off, we've struck a nerve. U're a
little thick w. the attempted satire, but u make no sense, and it all falls
flat. And what do u actually say here?--anything? First u babble and blather on
the satanism issue, then u move to consp.; next to mentioning May Xu rather
ineptly, and then u say I should get over this "satanism thing," ho ho ho
ho--sorry, sucker, ain't gonna happen, ho ho ho ho. So how to respond: I think I
well defined my basic terms--see my response to ur buddy, "dr. weezil"--and
anyway, WHY does Mises.org so intensively censor and suppress legitimate
discussion?--there's got to be a reason--like why not just discuss it? Ho hoh o
ho
--------------------below-copied by "Dr. Weezil" is another response to above by ap (top)--------------
Dr. Weezil apollonian • an hour ago
Please stop, because
you've clearly reached peak delusion.
No one cares about your "satanism"
nonsense. Your rants read as if you have some kind of mental
problem.
Here's a suggestion: set up your own blog and you can scream
about "TEH SATANISTS" all you want without clogging up these
comments.
------------[Didn't have time to enter below response by ap to "Dr.
Weezil," either.]----------------
Oh, I'm NOT going to stop, sucker, ho ho ho ho--u can
be sure of that. So what then is "peak delusion"?--I defined my terms regarding
Satanism, and we have it being applied and inflicted in general way of United
Nations Agenda-21 and 2030 "population reduction," this actually being enacted
in way of poison vaccines pushed by state (of Cal., for example), poison
prescription drugs, poison GMO foods, etc. And how does a fool like u know about
what "no one cares"?--u're just a pathetic, brainless liar, aren't u?--and
didn't u assert in the other blog article comments section the lie there was no
censorship? "Mental problems"?--u mean like urs?--a liar like u? Ho ho ho ho.
And my pt. remains, Mises.org is clearly, sedulously, intensively CENSORING
(there's no doubt about that fact), and it's doing this at behest of the satanic
"power," such as it
is.
----------------------------------------------
May Xu
apollonian • an hour ago
There are, of course, good conspiracy analysts
and bad conspiracy analysts, just as there are good and bad historians or
practitioners of any discipline.
Our job is to tell the difference, not to
join the demonization mob against those who do not accept official tales. And
not to reject any tool that helps us understand the reality of the vicious
struggle for power over others: politics.
https://mises.org/library/c...
----------------below
is ap's response to above, was able to get it entered, last posting before being
banned----
Well, u say, "[o]ur job is to tell the diff....," so perhaps
u're referring to something in ur previous sentence, eh?--u see, it isn't clear
what u're talking about, is it? I notice u leave a ref., but why should I
consult that when ur own statements are so unclear? Regardless, I think I define
my term, "satanism" quite well enough for basics. And I've had over a dozen
posts deleted, hence censored, the reason being, I say, because Mises.org, in
cowardly fashion cannot discuss the issue of satanism, and now seeks to simply
suppress the issue, "satanism," and its discussion. Hence isn't the obvious
conclusion justified that, in effect, Mises.org is merely supporting the
satanist influence and power?
Bob_Robert apollonian • an hour ago
"I say, because Mises.org, in cowardly fashion cannot discuss the issue
of satanism"
Being insulting might make far more sense as to why you
claim to have had your posts removed.
If you want to discuss satanism, go
to a satanism
forum.
-------------------------------------------------
generalisimo
apollonian • 30 minutes ago
So many good thoughts, just clean up the
language to be more "academic" and you've got yourself some strong
arguments.
Theology does not make a strong case for most, keep it to
economics (utility and morality) without delving into the religion, and you'll
find more are willing to listen.
[wasn't able to get to above, by
"generalissimo," as I was banned at this pt.]
Bob_Robert apollonian •
37 minutes ago
While I agree that government is too big, and too
powerful, and corrupt, there is no requirement for "satanism" to be the
driver.
Simple corruption of power is sufficient.
Remove that
power, and your problem goes away, too.
------------------------here below-copied,
when I tried to enter my response to "Bob Robert," fm just above, I found I was banned, ho ho ho hoh
oho-------------------------
× We are unable to post your comment
because you have been banned by Mises Institute. Find out more.
Note I'm
careful to define this "satanism" (extreme subjectivism, as I note)--and it
un-questionably exists, u've surely hrd about the "pizza-gate" scandal, a real
scandal involving child-trafficking, which surely goes on, and note there's lots
of material and credible reports. If u've hrd about George Webb's work, there's
lately the additional issue of ORGAN-trafficking, as he's detailed fm Haiti and
other places; it all goes together. And when u further consider such as
vote-fraud and the manipulation of the mass-corp. media lies and campaigns, u
soon enough see there's sublime co-ordination to all of these machinations.
Don't forget United Nations' Agenda-21 and -2030 addendum for "pop.-reduction,"
poison vaccines being enforced against people of state of Cal., poison
prescription drugs, poison GMO foods, etc., as I've noted. Notice the top
bankers involved in drug-money laundering barely get prosecuted, if at all? U
say, "there's no requirement for "Satanism"" as "driver." Perhaps this might be
true at first instances, but not after the good while of central-bank
establishment for over a hundred yrs. now, and again, u should too easily
dismiss the great number of reports we have for this Satanism.
Daniel
Campos Bob_Robert • 3 hours ago
Instead of blaming satan, he should
consider blaming people themselves. Only people act. The devil cannot act. Even
God recognizes that by making individuals subject to their own acts (Ezechias
18), and not satan.
--------[Wasn't able to enter this, below-copied,
response to "danny-boy Campos," either.]---------
Dan, u're a moron--how can
anyone be dumb as u?--I didn't blame satan at all, fool. I merely used the name
("satanism") to characterize the philosophy of extreme subjectivism,
consciousness/mind creating reality, making oneself God, but u have to make ur
pious speech, pretending u're an "individual," which no one but urself ever
doubted, sucker.