patrick.net

RWSGFY says

Sending bombs to random people is not crazy?

Didn't he send them to agencies that he considered responsible for society's problems? If that's the case, he probably considered any agent of those entities to be as guilty as the next.

Karloff says

RWSGFY says

Sending bombs to random people is not crazy?

Didn't he send them to agencies that he considered responsible for society's problems? If that's the case, he probably considered any agent of those entities to be as guilty as the next.

The very idea that individual randomized terror can achieve any lofty goals is the sign of crazy. Things don't work like that.

He didn't do anything worse than the government does. How many deaths do you think the government is guilty of by incitement? I have a feeling there's going to be even more at some point.

GNL says

He didn't do anything worse than the government does.

But nothing better either.

Eric Holder says

The very idea that individual randomized terror can achieve any lofty goals is the sign of crazy. Things don't work like that.

Crazy is when there's no rhyme or reason to an action. Like when people shoot up a school yet had no beef with the kids, teachers, or school system.

He was a murderous asshole who killed and maimed people that I didn't think deserved it, but I'm not sure that he was actually crazy just because of this. He thought they did deserve it. We're routinely told that small, seemingly inconsequential actions can help achieve lofty goals like changing the world.

Haven't read through this entire thread - but did anyone mention Ted's gender problem?

Dude had alot of mental illness.

https://www.breitbart.com/health/2023/06/12/media-hide-ted-kaczynskis-transgender-claim/

NuttBoxer says

Don't know much about the Unabomber, but have looked a bit into OKC. McVeigh may or may not have had a hand in planting the bombs. He was still likely working for the military. Only thing we need to know about OKC, government killed kids, on purpose, to get their law passed. If you do any research at all, the evidence is overwhelming.

There is actually a fair amount of evidence that McVeigh had help from an Iraqi as payback for Gulf War I. Remember the dark skinned "John Doe #2" that several people claimed to have seen with the bomb truck?

The claim is that Bill Clinton and the Media covered up the Middle East connection so they could focus on white male "militias" and whip up the Democrat base against Republicans and Rush Limbaugh.

https://www.amazon.com/Third-Terrorist-Connection-Oklahoma-Bombing/dp/1595552367

Random violence doesn't work? I beg to differ. BLM and Antifa would disagree as well.

Eric Holder says

The very idea that individual randomized terror can achieve any lofty goals is the sign of crazy. Things don't work like that.

I fully agree.

I went through a thought experiment: If I could kill any 1000 people in the world I wanted, with absolutely no chance of being caught (like I could just wish them dead) - could I make a positive difference in society?

My answer is no. Take out Jamie Dimon, Bill Gates, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Nancy Pelosi - no change.

Maybe if I took out all the people under the Rothschild name, and all the people under Rockefeller name, I might make a small dent for a second.

There's no point in killing people in an attempt to improve society. The only way to improve society is education in my opinion.

GNL says

He didn't do anything worse than the government does. How many deaths do you think the government is guilty of by incitement? I have a feeling there's going to be even more at some point.

Yeah, but he went up against the government.

You can't do that!

Karloff says

Eric Holder says

The very idea that individual randomized terror can achieve any lofty goals is the sign of crazy. Things don't work like that.

Crazy is when there's no rhyme or reason to an action. Like when people shoot up a school yet had no beef with the kids, teachers, or school system.

He was a murderous asshole who killed and maimed people that I didn't think deserved it, but I'm not sure that he was actually crazy just because of this. He thought they did deserve it. We're routinely told that small, seemingly inconsequential actions can help achieve lofty goals like changing the world.

I'm KIND of a fan of Uncle Ted.

He wasn't crazy, he was just wrong, and brilliant.

I know what it's like to know too much. It sucks. Ignorance really is bliss but "I wanted to know", so I know.

I'm sure there are plenty of people think that I'm paranoid here, crazy myself. The WTC bombing in 1996 was helped by the FBI. The US government wanted to make certain the World Trade Centers were hit by planes in 2001 - they made certain it happened. Our government deals drugs, CIA is a vital part of that. Politicians openly sell access to their office, the DOJ and intelligence agencies won't stop them. Biden was CLEARLY selling access, and still is, Hunter is now selling "art" for 1/2 million dollars, that's just a bribe.

I look at this and think "oh my god, these people are evil freaks!" - but maybe I'M the freak. Maybe I'm the antiquated quaint individual that has morality, despite my lack of religion. I've delved into evil a little bit when I was younger, I just don't like it. When I look for it, I see evil everywhere. The banality of evil, people do it without thinking. We all had to wear face masks, and take "vaccines". The vaccines didn't work, and they were likely dangerous - who stood up and said "no"? I think I must be in the very tiny minority.

I can't be the only one that knows, I can't be "super smart". There's got to be 100's of thousands of people who knew these vaccines might be dangerous and worthless for preventing disease. Only a handful spoke up.

And this brings me back to evil again - if this is what people are, if they are so shitty, why NOT abuse them? If I could just abuse the RIGHT people - there's lots of good people too. I don't want to hurt them.

socal2 says

Haven't read through this entire thread - but did anyone mention Ted's gender problem?

I'd take it with a grain of salt. It's a common tactic of our propaganda to vilify people as much as possible.

GNL says

Random violence doesn't work? I beg to differ. BLM and Antifa would disagree as well.

BLM and Antifa aren't random violence. They are government sponsored violence.

Notice they have disappeared into the background - what has changed? Well the president did, what POLICIES have changed? None.

What were they protesting against? They have no idea. They were just a group to create the ILLUSION that there was widespread discontent against Trump. Some people were suckered into believing it as well. I knew a person that was just FURIOUS about what "racist Trump was" - but she could give no actual examples. TV told her how and what to think.

She wasn't a bad person, but also, was she a person?

socal2 says

There is actually a fair amount of evidence that McVeigh had help from an Iraqi as payback for Gulf War I. Remember the dark skinned "John Doe #2" that several people claimed to have seen with the bomb truck?

Didn't see anything to corroborate this, but there was definitely involvement from a German or Eastern European guy, employed by a some European spy agency. The ATF was definitely involved though, not just in the fact that they didn't come to work, but allowing access to plant explosives inside the building. CIA as well.

socal2 says

There is actually a fair amount of evidence that McVeigh had help from an Iraqi as payback for Gulf War I. Remember the dark skinned "John Doe #2" that several people claimed to have seen with the bomb truck?

I remember a 2nd person. I thought he was imprisoned too.

But yeah, I can't find any evidence for it. There was a 2nd person, and I'm hating myself for not being more astute to remember who he was.

Terry Nichols, he never did shit though. There were way more than two people. Explosives were set by a team, some international as I mentioned, with cooperation of ATF, and undoubtedly FBI and CIA.

richwicks says

I remember a 2nd person. I thought he was imprisoned too.

But yeah, I can't find any evidence for it. There was a 2nd person, and I'm hating myself for not being more astute to remember who he was.

That 2nd person could be you for all we know :-/

Nichols was a patsy or stooge. They at least let him live. Maybe they thought it was too risky to kill him as it may get enough people to wake up to the subterfuge.

By being alive Nichols keeps the ruse going long enough, and it ensures his family stays safe and possibly well funded.

richwicks says

I went through a thought experiment: If I could kill any 1000 people in the world I wanted, with absolutely no chance of being caught (like I could just wish them dead) - could I make a positive difference in society?

I came to the same conclusion. As much as you might want some evil SOB to die, it very likely won't make a difference to what's going on in the world. It's public sentiment and values that need to change. Someone else would take their place as they see it as acceptable, unopposed, and profitable. Evil people only have power because the majority allow it. If the public at large had strong morals and integrity, they'd put decent people in power and haul filth out quickly. Positive messages would be portrayed in media and any corporation that put forth otherwise would be vilified and put out of business.

I don't think a societal shift like this will happen until people have experienced misery and suffering for at least a generation. Look at how long people suffered under communism in the Soviet regime. It takes a long time before everyone grasps how awful the system is and wants a real change. Right now, people are still in a decadent phase, living in luxury with more than enough to eat and entertain them. People are worried about nonsense like "equity" and "gender affirmation" rather than basic human needs. Clearly they have so little to worry about that these inconsequential issues can be front and center.

Kaczynski or the Unabomber was too dark as far as effects of technology. But yeah smartphones have dumbed down the population, in general.

Just like ChatGPT likely has done so, as far as make life too easy and not dependent on critical thinking and problem solving.

Internet has replaced the bowling league. You do still have some sense of community like with the Kiwanis but those numbers continue to dwindle.

So we'll eventually go down the path of a combination of Asimov and Orwell novel. Its human nature or its soul that is the problem, as technology maybe has a net dark effect on it.

I always hope some monolith like from 2001 Space Odyssey shows up since it is meant to represent a good higher power or being. Park one of those monoliths in front of Rich Wicks house.

.

richwicks says

BLM and Antifa aren't random violence. They are government sponsored violence.

Go read about "AntiFa" groups like Bend the Arc.

They are funded by Soros Foundation.

What is ironic is Bend the Arc is actually named A Jewish Partnership for Justice. But they openly state that they do not get involved with Israeli affairs such as how they treat Palestinians.

I think they actually changed the name Bend the Arc and try to just go by it because they were getting ridiculed by the Free Palestine crowd about their hypocrisy toward Israel.

A lot of what you hear about "activists canvasing for mail in ballots in key districts like Phoenix and Atlanta" are actually AntiFa operatives funded by Bend the Arc.

.

ad says

What is ironic is Bend the Arc is actually named A Jewish Partnership for Justice. But they openly state that they do not get involved with Israeli affairs such as how they treat Palestinians.

Yep!

You can see who is being set up as the scape goat in case the Global Elites fail.

Of course, support for a wide range of causes is the essence of coalition politics. What’s potentially worrying is that, as an institution that claims to speak for American Jewry, according to Bend the Arc spokesperson Logan Smith, the group has no active dues-paying members who participate in the shaping of that agenda. Moreover, according to Bend the Arc’s own financial filings, almost none of their annual revenue is generated from within the Jewish community itself. Rather, their financial backing comes from a small cohort of foundations and wealthy patrons—some of whom otherwise have no active philanthropic role in American Jewry and in some cases seem actively hostile to key points of collective American Jewish identification and interest.
...
What has made Bend the Arc such a singular and attractive investment worth tens of millions of dollars for philanthropic elites who, according to their own financial records, are otherwise unengaged with the well-being of American Jewry?

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/bend-the-arc

Soros never gives any money to pro-Israel or Jewish causes, and is actively anti-Israel and anti-Zionist, funding those causes.

I believe (memory here) that one of the big foundations, like the Rockefeller or Carnegie foundation, only donation to a "Jewish" group is "Bend the Arc".

ooops, it's in the same article:

From 2005 to 2013, Bend the Arc received annual donations totaling $1.5 million from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, for whom support of a Jewish organization is unusual. A review of the $20.3 million spent on domestic programs in 2013—the year preceding Cotler’s appointment as CEO—found that while active in their support with hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations to Asian, black, and other minority community groups, no other Jewish organization received funding.

To put it another way, though the Rockefeller fund’s public records show their sustained support for the arts, education, and elder-care services in other American minority communities—as well as direct funding to groups which focus on politically charged issues like climate change and immigration—>Bend the Arc is the sole Jewish organization to receive support for their political activism, though the fund does engage in the arena of the Israel-Palestine issue, via its support for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement

richwicks says

Yeah, but he went up against the government.

If that were true his victims would be politicians, FBI chiefs and the like. That would be risky, so this nutcase coward exercised his homicidal mania on regular folks.

ad says

richwicks says

I remember a 2nd person. I thought he was imprisoned too.

But yeah, I can't find any evidence for it. There was a 2nd person, and I'm hating myself for not being more astute to remember who he was.

That 2nd person could be you for all we know :-/

No, there is no purpose in terrorism. I wouldn't be surprised if the Oklahoma City bombing was done by our own government. I remember McVeigh's "friend". Terry Nichols. That's who it was.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Nichols

Now isn't that funny, everybody has forgotten, like it's now a CONSPIRACY theory that he existed. Isn't that hilarious, he hasn't been memory holed.

I don't see any point in murder. It doesn't change anything, it just makes it worse, every time.

I remember after 9/11 my cousin and I got together shortly after it, and we are both pretty knowledgeable about US foreign policy in the Middle East. "Finally, the US government will HAVE to talk about what they've actually been doing for the last 40 years in the Middle East". We were both convinced that conversation would happen.

Nope.

"They h8 us 4 R Freedumb".

and then "Saddam Hussein sent anthrax to try to kill people in the United States", then "we can't wait for the final proof to come in the form of a mushroom cloud", then "Saddam Hussein has mobile weapons labs and are developing weapons of mass destruction". Just a stream of obvious propaganda and nonsense, I couldn't believe people bought it. Hmm. "people".

My generation is partially lost, the Boomer generation almost entirely lost. People have no idea what is going on, even if they are intelligent they don't want to know. We're stuck having our government murder people for bullshit reasons, and making us pay for it.

Americans think "it will be worse if we're in a multipolar world", no it won't be. I can't be worse. My nation has no ethics or morals and most people barely register as human to me now. Even when you can convince a person that the result of bombing Libya resulted in slavery markets and civil war, and had NOTHING to do with "preventing a humanitarian crisis" - but instead created one, they're not the least bit bothered. "Well, I'm sure the government had a good reason, WHATEVER it was" - well if they did, they would have provided that reason.

I don't know, maybe people are just naturally evil.

Karloff says

People are worried about nonsense like "equity" and "gender affirmation" rather than basic human needs. Clearly they have so little to worry about that these inconsequential issues can be front and center.

I don't think people are legitimately worried about these "issues".

Remember when "abortion" was the Big Issue? Well, Roe v. Wade was over-turned. Nobody cares. That was "The Big Issue" for a time, nobody really cares about it. Where are the protests and women screaming "my body, my right?"

That's what this transgendered BS is. Yeah, there are innocent kids being hurt, I know. We kill plenty of them in wars, well this is just another fucking war. It's a distraction. VERY few people will go through transgender surgery and I bet MOST of them will regret. Lupron damages individuals severely, that's used to delay puberty - we know what it does because it's been used for quite some time to delay puberty in children that have precocious puberty (i.e. early onset).

So the kid develops early, so what? But with Lupron, you delay it, at the cost of screwing up the kids physical development.

I'm so tired of these "issues" constantly being inserted into society. In 10 years people will be saying "wasn't the 2010's and 20's a CRAZY time? Remember that transgender mania?" and there were be a few 1000 people who are effected Say it's 100,000 (a vast overestimate in my opinion), that's just 0.03% of the population. It's still incredibly rare. Their are FOUR people who transgendered in Hollyweird, Chaz Bono. Eliot Page and the Wachowskis, 5 if you count Bruce Jenner and he's not really Hollyweird.

Even among the nuts it rare. But it's constantly shoved in our face. Transgendered people are sought out to become "stars". Dylan Mulvaney wouldn't exist 20 years ago, it would just be a weirdo on the Internet. Jazz Jennings is ONLY a person you know BECAUSE she is transgender. No different than "Honey Boo-Boo" - remember that WRECK?

All this nonsense is to create unrest. That's it.

I hate all this because it's really a molehill. It's NOT that common. Kids will say stupid shit until they are at least 25. Most people who say they are "transgender" will just grow out of it.

NuttBoxer says

And while I don't agree with his implementation of his ideas, that doesn't in any way detract from their relevance.

Bingo. Felt the same way when I read it two decades ago.

I have no idea why he sent the bombs. It didn't help his arguments in the least.

Trollhole says

I have no idea why he sent the bombs. It didn't help his arguments in the least.

I think he was trying to target people that was bringing this about.

Some people think that Ted wasn't working alone. I mean - how did he afford to live in the woods for years?

Who were the 2 guys that opened fire on the CIA employees right outside the gates at a stop light?

richwicks says

I hate all this because it's really a molehill. It's NOT that common.

I dunno, man. I have worked with TWO people who have kids who "transitioned". I work in small IT groups, so I haven't worked with that many people.

I went to a high school that had between 1500-2000 kids. A few were gay, but not a single one was "trans" at the time. This crap has been pushed so hard that it's become trendy. Kids who feel rejected or depressed will jump onto this bandwagon to get some attention and will likely damage themselves irreversibly.

As a father, this concerns me greatly.

Karloff says

I went to a high school that had between 1500-2000 kids. A few were gay, but not a single one was "trans" at the time. This crap has been pushed so hard that it's become trendy. Kids who feel rejected or depressed will jump onto this bandwagon to get some attention and will likely damage themselves irreversibly.

OK, longer than I expected, but bear with me.

I think the answer is we have ask "why are kids depressed"? I can answer in SOME ways they are.

They are constantly propagandized into thinking they are "destroying the world" and "the world is going to end in just a decade". IF that were true and you believed it, and you were 14, how would you feel? The world is going to end by the time you leave college. What's the point?

That's ONE of the purposes of "global warming". It's to demoralize society particularly kids.

Kids are HIGHLY propagandized. What is depicted as "normal" on television for a kid to be is ANYTHING but normal. If you were hooking up in high school all the time for sex, that was abnormal. Our society never did that before, this happened in "the sexual revolution". Kids might get married at 15, but they got married at 15, they didn't go around and just fuck. IF you did that, some father would have come after you with a shotgun and put a bunch of salt pellets in your ass, and say "stay the hell away from my daughter, next time it will lead". Somebody like that would LITERALLY have been run out of town.

Hookup culture is abnormal. We've never had that either. It started in the 1960's.

There's all this pressure in media to do abnormal things, that are presented as absolutely normal and they aren't. If a typical kid today woke up in 1800 with the attitudes and social mores of THAT time, I think they'd easily adjust to it. First, they would find out they have to do a lot more work, and there's no entertainment except books, and work can be pleasant and enjoyable. I think they will find that a pleasant shock. Second, there wasn't this social conditioning imposed on children where you're constantly pushed to pervert your own human nature.

A large part of society is just brainwashed, and we all were since birth. I've been deprogramming myself ever since I got out high school. Got rid of my television, realized our "news" media was bullshit, tried to figure out what was actually going on (and there's people that know), watched a ton of films because I enjoyed them, realized they were social propaganda quit that because it was screwing me up. Believe me, Hollyweird has a LOT MORE CONTROL than you can possibly imagine - our culture is downstream of media. It's television and movies that determines EVERYTHING from what is socially acceptable to how we should dress, what we should own, how we should act, what wars to support, what people and institutions to support and attack. It's "normal to be non-binary / gay / trans / whatever" according to Nickelodeon, Disney, Sesame Street, and god knows what other bullshit there is out there. "Religious people are stupid and/or crazy", that was a common theme in the 1990's I recall.

It's not just the NEW generation that has been propagandized, my generation (X) was too, so were the Boomers, I think the last generation to largely miss it was the Silent Generation and the so-called "greatest generation". They experienced propaganda, but not social propaganda. They had propaganda for WWII.

I'm telling you, the reason modern man (and kids) are so unhappy is that they are taught to hate themselves, hate learning, hate mankind, do unusual weird stuff at ages they aren't ready for it, all sorts of shit. They're being warped and we were warped too. Everything unnatural because we have constant conditioning. Fucking BF. Skinner, it's his fault. He believed that there was no nature, it was nurture only. Well, we're being put at odds with our actual nature, CONSTANTLY, and that makes people unhappy.

Think of this: remember hearing "single moms are the BRAVEST women!!" - that was drilled into my head. Why? They are selfish women. They can't divide their time between work and child rearing easily, MOST of them end up in poverty, the kid is neglected, it's not a good way to raise a kid, but we were told over and over and over again how BRAVE these women were. No - selfish, short-sighted, all the while thinking they are morally superior, when it's the exact opposite. The reason people sometimes think "oh, the black community has all these ANIMALS in it" - well, I bet almost all of them were raised in single parent households. This is what happens to a neglected kid.

richwicks says

Think of this: remember hearing "single moms are the BRAVEST women!!" - that was drilled into my head. Why? They are selfish women. They can't divide their time between work and child rearing easily, MOST of them end up in poverty, the kid is neglected, it's not a good way to raise a kid, but we were told over and over and over again how BRAVE these women were.

This yet another example of how women are the weak link in any society.

TED talks are the bomb.