“?”

I had an interesting discussion this morning that really boiled down to “Who are ‘they’?” and “Why?” As important as it is to establish some “What?’s” in our outlooks before moving on the “Who?” and “Why?”, the questions asked there are the major stumbling blocks to reaching people, or even attaining a coherent world view for myself.

I generally refrain from trying to reach people, and just do my own thing here, letting them come to me. Most criticism I get is knee-jerk and emotional, and that is too bad, as really constructive (and painful) criticism would be useful. I am capable of the mirror experience, and do reflect when called out on legitimate grounds. It is the only reason I’ve been able to move forward in life. If I ever stop and think OK, now I have it figured out, I’ll turn smug, cold, indifferent to the views of others, and will eventually join the circus of yappers of no substance, hard-wired into certain beliefs exclusive of all others, also known as American political discourse.

So the questions who and why, while extremely difficult to understand, much less to communicate, have to be addressed.

Who?

  • “The CIA.”
  • “The oligarchy.”
  • “The trillionaires.”
  • “Intelligence.”
  • “Spooks.”
  • “Lizards.”
  • “The Jews.”
  • “Illuminati.”
  • “Overlords.”

Add your own.

Each of those answers is a “turtles-beneath-turtles are holding up the planet” type of endless non-answer. They are all another way of saying

“?”

“Why” might have a bit of a more substantive answer. For control. To keep us thinking alike. To keep us in a state of fear. To keep us divided among ourselves. To prevent awakening, constructive revolution.

The questions my friend brings up are important. “What?” is fun. Learning that Janis Joplin became Amy Goodman surprised me right out of my chair. It does not get much better! There are only a few ways I can think of to have more fun than that.

“Who?” and “Why?” … much more difficult, less rewarding, and yet, a place that I have to move towards. Otherwise, I am just diddling around, like a drug addict, having a pointless but fun existence.

So readers, please, 1) Have at me. 2) If you can take us beyond the “What?” and into “Who?” and “Why?” even if your own thoughts are as clouded as mine, please do so.

No one ever said it would be easy. Given time and allowance for mistakes, we can figure this thing out.

About Mark Tokarski

Just a man who likes to read, argue, and occasionally be surprised.
This entry was posted in Wilderness. Bookmark the permalink.

26 Responses to “?”

  1. I see in your last thread some commenter mentioned the occult. you should let them know about your refusal to consider the occult, your refusal to read suggested titles, and your general lack of an open mind when your leader, Mathis, says nothing to see here.

    Like

    • You have misunderstood everything you see. I have indeed considered the occult, was ‘spooked’ by it long before you ever brought it up to me. I never thought that there were any non-terrestrial forces at work, just as I do not think that there are any such forces at work in ordinary religions. But I did think that there were some sick, sick people involved doing some horrible things. The only thing that changed was the realization that the horrible things, as with Son of Sam, were not real, so that I then realized that Intelligence was using the occult as a mask for some of its operations.

      You are hard to process on this matter, as I gather that on some level you think the occult is real. Of course there are gullible people who get caught up in stuff like that, but not to the degree you might imagine, and as far as I am concerned, there is nothing extra-terrestrial going on.

      Mathis is, by the way, a nice man, easy going, unassuming, certainly has no desire to be a leader as you imagine him. He is just a magnet for people who think alike.

      Like

      • JC says:

        “He is just a magnet for people who think alike.”

        Ah, the lead thought-cop. Shoulda known. BTW, equating the occult with being “extra-terrestrial” indicates you have no knowledge of the subject. Then again, rejecting your catholic faith must have come easy to you, yet hard on your family. Atheism is as dogmatic as faith. Agnoticism is a much more open-minded place to be. You don’t have to pretend you know all the answers to the universe’s mysteries.

        But I digress as it is no use having a rational discussion with someone who cannot discern that pi=4 is just a dog whistle to people who don’t know how to think for themselves. Mark, is the earth flat, too?

        Have a nice day.

        Like

        • JC! How would you like it if I came to your website and just spilled venom on you and then said “OK, I’m out of here”?

          I know all I need to know about the occult … People get caught up in it and need a dope slap. People tell me it’s important. I got better things to do. I don’t study rug making either. No interest.

          I am not an atheist.

          The point of the paper, which of course you didn’t even think about fucking readding, is that Pi = 3.1415 in a static universe. Pi = 4 in a kinetic one. Both work for their intended purpose. If you use 3.1415 to go to the moon, which I wish you would do, you would miss by a wide margin.

          Go away, stay away. You’re boring.

          Like

    • You might be interested to know that Mathis has no use for and shuns my face splitting technology, but that I am stubborn and have seen too many results to discard it, and will carry forth without my “leader.” People of independent minds often disagree.

      Liked by 1 person

      • JC says:

        “Technology.” As if you new what the word even means.

        Like

        • A collection of skills and techniques? Gee, JC, not sure what you mean. I give you the means, the photos, and dare you to replicate the results for yourself to see if I cheated. You don’t. You just sit there and yell insults, never an ounce of constructive criticism. If you are not prepared to believe, you won’t. You’re only a shade different than your enemy, Pete Talbot, that being that Pete has not yet figured out Democrats.

          Of course, the most meaningful “skill” i have is my knowledge of Intelligence, the research that I did on the Laurel Canyon deaths, grueling hours spend searching through SSDI, working on a database (supplied by MH), and the realization that there were just too many deaths for such a small population, so that they could not be real, something else was at work.

          I did not know where that knowledge would take me. I only knew to keep moving forward. The first clue was my asking in a blog comment if the death of Bill Hicks did not look suspicious, given that we know now that JFK faked his death. From that a commenter brought back the guy who exposed the Hicks/Alex Jones Zombie act, and from there I realized that pupil distance is a constant, and that I could work with it, having some basic knowledge of statistics and related events. Lining up one facial characteristic means nothing, two, nothing, three, nothing. Seven … we have something. At this point I am aware of camera angles, lens distortion, photo flipping and monkey business, and we can say with some pride that MH and I have gotten pretty good at this stuff.

          I know what technology is, JC. I use it. So stay tuned, as we have so much more in store. Oh, wait. You won’t. You are one who is moved by belief, and not evidence.

          Like

  2. Maarten Rossaert says:

    Mark, you are in a unique position this week, attending Mathis’ Physics Conference, to press him for answers on a couple of questions relevant to today’s post. Mathis has more than once written that there is a “split in Intelligence” (which is his shorthand for the cabal behind it all). Aside from divining the tea leaves of a James Bond movie or the Harry Potter books, how could an average citizen like him possibly know of such a split?

    So please ask him:
    1. What are the two sides of the split he perceives? Military vs. civilian? CIA vs. MI6? FBI vs. CIA?
    2. How is it that he has an awareness of this split?

    Thanks.
    MR

    Like

  3. Tyrone McCloskey says:

    The split, Miles Mathis says, is between older intel like the CIA and the new forms like Homeland Security- I suspect some family alliances behind these alphabet agencies are using them as light sabers against each other-

    Like

  4. Maarten Rossaert says:

    In one place Mathis says it is the “military cartel” against the “banking cartel” (Sandy Hook Conspiracies Debunked? No.). In another place he says it is the “intelligence community” against the “defense community” (The Boston Marathon or The Case of the Four Fences). He suggests DHS is sucking up too much government funding, and the other thug agencies are envious and vengeful. Note that these are all splits within US concerns.

    But DHS was formed in 2002, after 9/11. If, as Mathis suggests, Harry Potter books give a glimpse into the world of the Spooks, there we find allusion to a split in their world (good wizardry vs. Voldemort and his minions), and those books first started getting published in 1997 … and in the UK. So first of all, that would antedate the very existence of DHS. Furthermore, the film he points as evidence for the split (How to Deconstruct a James Bond Film) is also a Brit production. Why would British intelligence have so much to inject into pop culture about a domestic squabble between American agencies?

    The CIA was formed in 1947: the NSA in 1952. Hard to see how the former qualifies as “old intel” vis-à-vis the latter. Somewhere else (maybe not Mathis) I read a conjecture that the split is between the old money families of the aristocracies vs. the new money families of the multi-national corporations.

    So … lots of hypothesized splits out there. None quite seems to line up all the data points presented. But how could anyone possibly sniff any of this out, without being informed by someone from inside the conflict?

    So then, broad categorizations aside: What exactly does Miles Mathis know, and how does he know it? Please find a way to inquire, Mark.

    Like

    • I will simply pass this along.

      Like

    • I owe Mathis a huge debt for pulling me out of the September Clues form of fakery, and taking me one step further into fake OJ trials, fake everything, etc.

      But there are many things I disagree with him on. I don’t think JFK went underground and 8 other families rule the world, I don’t think these banking families are the highest point in the food chain, I think this country was completely corrupted from the moment the Mayflower landed so the whole Nixon vs Congress thing is hooey, I don’t know how every celebrity can be gay if there are so many twins, and a few more things.

      I feel like too often he is guilty of trying to prove himself right, rather than finding the truth.

      I don’t think there is a split in intelligence. I don’t know why they leaked so much Sandy Hook stuff, but I think it is for a reason we haven’t figured out yet. I believe these families have been tight and unified for thousands of years, I don’t see why they would have problems now.

      Like

      • I have an alternate explanation for the division within Intelligence, using Harry Potter as a template, and another movie I saw recently.

        You may remember that in Harry Potter, there were four Houses. Some with healthy rivalries, others with bitter rivalries, as you would expect if we are dealing with hundreds or thousands of years of the same Houses in power. However, no matter how much Griffendorf or Slytherin hate each other, they will never betray themselves to muggles. So there is always a unified cause that comes before the personal hatred. Yankees fans may hate Red Sox fans, but they will always join in support against an MLB lockout, for example.

        In my experience around bored, rich kids, they love to play mind games. A movie I saw recently was called Cry Wolf about a bunch of rich kids in a boarding school who decide to fake murders and convince the school of a serial killer. Seeing as that there is truth in that plot, I took it to mean the plot was written in Langley and there may be more to learn. Well in the movie, the kids start playing more and more elaborate and dangerous pranks on each other until someone is accidentally killed.

        So I thought, maybe that explains the horrible crisis actors and the fake tears. Maybe this isn’t a new split amongst the CIA and NSA, but part of a centuries old rivalry between two Intelligence Houses who love to screw with each other so the other has to clean up the mess. They are so cocky, they don’t mind spilling the beans to a few thousand Americans, because they think it’s funny to see the other House spend time and energy hiring new disinfo agents to sweep everything under the rug. Of course, they would never go TOO far.

        So maybe this has been going on for a long, long time, but we are only noticing now.

        Liked by 1 person

        • I suspect the photograph may coincide with the use of twins in high profile positions. Before that time, people were drawn, perhaps, but mostly only seen in person if ever seen at all.

          Like

          • They were not as common as they are now, and they certainly didn’t have any sort of IVR technology, besides perhaps diets or natural methods to increase the odds of twins. But I can see the benefit in having a major public figure such as a king or pope be a twin.

            One could greet crowds, another could give speeches, another could travel to “meet” heads of states or socialize in courts, etc. There was plenty of use for twins since kings certainly had busy schedules back in the day, whether they were truly kings or not.

            Like

    • JC says:

      Mathis already has admitted that he is a paid agent provocateur. He admitted in his bio that he was a “paid canvasser for Earth First!” First off, Earth First never paid anyone for canvassing, much less paid anybody for anything. and 2) Earth First! would never engage in canvassing — that was for mainstream enviro groups, not radical organizations pushing the envelope of what it could do. So that obviously tells us that somebody paid Mathis to be an agent provocateur. inside EF! You might start investigating him with that line of inquiry.

      Like

      • You are so demeaning and insulting, JC. There are eight of us here. The truth is that all eight of us in the room are bright guys. And there just aren’t that many of us around. So yes, I would travel three hundred miles and spend a week in a Super 8 to meet seven people like these men. Miles himself is witty, laid back, polite. He lives a simple life, paints beautiful portraits (a realist), neither drinks nor does drugs, has two cats and a nice house, paid for I assume. He is pleasant company, just a nice man.

        “ARC hired Miles to attack the left, not realizing that he was the strangest of bedfellows. Had they known that they had hired a former worker for Earth First, a card-carrying member of Greenpeace, an unrepentant Chomskyite, even a supporter of Ward Churchill, they would surely have been kept up nights.

        He did not say “paid canvasser.” You made that up. I think that Foreman and the boys were government or corporate agents, sent in to “blackwash” the environmental movement by associating us with violence. Miles says he still supports Earth First. I am an environmentalist, and think that you might start investigating Earth First with that line of inquiry.

        Like

        • Tyrone McCloskey says:

          Laid back??? He sure doesn’t write like he is- I guess he saves his fury for the keyboard- Getting back to “Who?”, lately I’ve sketched it out as old bloodlines who use their bastards as public faces- JFK, for instance: If Miles is correct that Rose Kennedy had Joe Jr. and quit right there, Joe Junior was the hidden hand of that bloodline and Johnny was the public bastard from who knows which of Joe Senior’s mistresses- That mistress may have also been a noble illegitimate- Bobby and Teddy’s mother(s), too… How one verifies this is another question mark-

          Like

          • Anyone who meets me would be surprised to know I am the guy behind the sometimes ferocious words here. I use the term “cyberdisinhibition” where, when dealing with a computer screen, we are not aware of body language, facial expressions or tone of voice, and so have no inhibitors to letting anger and angst go. In person I am nice, welcoming, and don’t as much as possible ruffle feathers. Miles is like that too. He is careful to be polite and welcoming, and a good listener. Like all of us, he gets pissed.

            It was you who brought up the possibility that the RFK kids were a pack of “orphans,” or products of not just Robert, but fake-dead Kennedy’s, Joe, Kathleen, possibly John’s son Patrick in there too. So I take it you are on board for a ride. All I can tell you is that if we ask the question, we will see answers, or clues, pop up now and then, as our minds are open to the possibility, and so looking as we go about our daily business. It is amazing how this works.

            The question: Who was the mother of John, Robert and Teddy Kennedy if it was not Rose. It was surely an oligarch. However, Miles mentions that they look related, but more like cousins than brothers, so we might be talking about multiple birth canals.

            Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s