Posts by Sean Cruz

Sandra Parker3 said:😍

Quincy:

I honestly have no clue. I’ll probably just go out and trust someone again, only to end up screwing myself over, but hey—if you don't take those kinds of risks, what's even the point of living? Right now, I’m just playing it safe and keeping my distance, but that doesn't mean I want to become cold-hearted. I definitely don't want to go down that road, because then I wouldn't feel alive anymore.

So, can we all just agree that the exhaust is basically useless when it's freezing out?😛It’s actually a hair's breadth worse than... what was I saying? 🤔 Is he actually suggesting we just hand over our trust blindly to his opposites—like, without doing any actual due diligence or basic analysis?
And of course, there are consequences to consider, because you've finally realized that this side of things carries its own set of unintended side effects too.
I know you knew what was going on; you were just a little scattered.

Quincy:

The real issue is that I actually enjoy making mistakes. 😁 🤣

Then I don't see what the issue is, so why are you complaining? 🤷 🙄

A bit more than that. I'm with you on everything. I can't talk much tonight, though—my brain is totally fried. 🤣

If there isn't a problem, then I don't see why you're complaining, 🤷 🙄

I'm not complaining, nor am I expressing regret... things happened the way they had to. 😉 I was simply using our chat to weigh different perspectives and viewpoints. 🙂

lonegardener said:Actually, I find the lack of trust intriguing. 😍 Subconsciously, it almost drives me to try and "break through" that skepticism... though my sense of responsibility keeps me from taking too many risks with it. 🤷

It isn't about value; it's about something else entirely. If you're driving a semi-truck, you obviously have a much higher level of responsibility toward others than you do toward yourself—it's different from riding a bicycle, where you mostly just need to look out for your own safety. That doesn't mean the truck driver is worth less than the cyclist, right? 😍

Anyway, we've completely veered off track...

I ride my bike constantly, but now it looks like I'll have to try driving a truck too—just to get the full picture. 🤣 Now I just need to find someone willing to hand me the keys to their rig. 🤔

lonegardener said:Hmm. Actually, I don't mind changing... maybe even making some radical shifts? The issue is that I really *dislike* about 90% of what people claim is the "ideal" way to be.😍 Don't you agree? Even if I were open to self-improvement, there is no way I’d want to morph into someone I currently find unappealing (to put it mildly).

You think one of the four or five people reading this is going to jump on that? LOL.
Besides, I don't have anything particularly valuable for someone to "exploit." If someone wanted to use this against me, it would just be out of pure, mindless malice, and I’m fairly confident I would have noticed that kind of character trait in them by now.😍

Do you mean less informed?🤣

Especially when you’re swimming in murky waters... 😬

If I were to make one radical move, it would be to pack up everything and relocate to finally chase my lifelong dream. But honestly? That path comes with a heavy set of consequences. Trapped by societal expectations, I simply can't afford that kind of upheaval—not for myself, and certainly not for the people I care about. Beyond that, I’m a pretty stagnant person when it comes to other types of change; I tend to resist it quite stubbornly. And don't even get me started on how much I dislike certain things—I have absolutely zero interest in changing my ways just to suit someone else's agenda. 🙄

Quincy:

I bet there are only about four or five people actually reading this, LOL.

I often find myself thinking that very few people actually read what I write, so it comes as quite a surprise when they do...😁 🤣

The point I’m making is simple: I have absolutely nothing of value worth "exploiting."The only possible motive for something like that would be pure, senseless malice—and honestly, I’m pretty sure if someone had a character trait like that, I wouldn't have missed it.

Are you already starting to distance yourself from potential "attacks"? 🤣 You’re quite confident—I used to be exactly the same way.

Sandra Parker3 said:Well, I don't know about you... but I definitely am when it comes to lonegardener, mostly because he's such a cynical pessimist, though he’d probably describe himself differently. 🤷

Quincy:

Why? I guess I have to be more guarded, since it clearly doesn't "pay off" to be honest and open. Then again, I'm not even sure if I want to—or even can—change those parts of myself.

Oh right, you guys really aren't getting it; you're totally checked out... the emphasis was on the word "cold," which I tried my best to explain, even if I am a little scattered. 😍But I wasn't so incoherent that it should have been impossible to understand. 🙄

To put it briefly (ugh, what a word), how much does it actually "pay off" to withhold trust just because someone's blowing smoke in your face?

Regarding that last sentence... you should ask yourself why you don't want to change, there's always a reason.
But yeah, you pretty much answered it yourself below...

Quincy:

We just can't help ourselves, can we? I know I have the right to make mistakes, but I just hate dealing with the fallout. 😁

It's all connected, there's no separating the two, so you decide what you're going to do.
And honestly, it sounds a lot like that old saying, "no regrets after the fact," doesn't it?
You actually enjoy making mistakes; it's that whole process of trading things away without meeting both requirements (two, according to lonegardener).

Hehe, no... I'm plenty informed, I just stick to my guns and deal with the consequences of being open much easier than anyone else does, you know?

It depends on my mood—you know how I am. 😍 Sometimes, people try to convince themselves that things aren't quite as bleak as they seem, but reality usually has a way of shutting that optimism down pretty quickly.

Oh, please. It’s obvious you guys just aren't getting it. You’ve clearly had one too many drinks.

🤣

Quincy:

The emphasis is on the word "cold." I tried to explain that earlier, though I admit I was being a bit scattered 😍—but not so much that it should have been incomprehensible.

I caught your drift, but then something else popped into my head and pulled me away... honestly, I'm even more distracted than you are. 😍
Quincy:

To sum up (what a mouthful), what is the actual "payoff" for refusing to trust someone just because they're playing it safe?

I haven't a clue. I'll probably end up trusting someone again and potentially mess it up, but life wouldn't be worth living without that kind of risk, would it? Right now, I'm leaning toward playing it safe, but that doesn't mean I want to become "cold." I don't want that at all; I wouldn't feel alive anymore.

Quincy:

They are inextricably linked; there's no separation, so you have to decide for yourself and it reminds me of that old saying, "No regrets after the fact," right? You actually enjoy making mistakes; it’s that process of exchange where both conditions aren't met (two, according to AP.).

That's exactly the issue: I love "making mistakes." 😁 🤣

lonegardener said:I wouldn't go so far as to say "how someone should be."

That’s really the million-dollar question, isn't it? The ultimate question: how *should* we be? I honestly have no clue. I know what I like; but whether that's how one "ought" to act—I just don't know.

I'm judging based on my own experience. Since I have zero interest in mystery, I'd probably be the easiest person to fool with some brilliantly acted "honesty."

(It would be easy, sure, but still—not exactly a walk in the park. 😍 )

Ah, were you talking about the past? I didn't realize...

Sure thing, but don't hold your breath. I'm not feeling particularly optimistic about that...

I face the same dilemma; I have no idea who I am supposed to be. Everyone seems to have their own grand theories on how one should conduct themselves, but I simply am who I am. I have no intention of undergoing any radical transformations. 😁
Quincy:

I judge based on my own experience. Since I have no interest in mystery, the easiest way to deceive me would be through a brilliantly performed display of "sincerity." (The easiest way, perhaps, though still quite a challenge. 😍 )

Are you aware that you are posting this publicly? Someone might just take advantage of that. 😍 🤣
Quincy:

Ah, were you referring to the past? I didn't realize...

If it weren't in the past, I wouldn't even be able to write about it—I'd be eating my own heart out.

Quincy:

Certainly, but don't hold your breath. I'm not feeling particularly optimistic about it...

Perhaps Sandra Parker3 will find a solution. She is far more optimistic than we are. 😍

Sandra Parker3 said:I get the difference between a slip of the tongue and doing it on purpose
Actually, I’m not just sticking to the word "secret"—you see how I keep putting it in quotes, so let's expand the idea of hypocrisy... it isn't just about leaking "secrets," it feels a bit silly to say 😁
that you misjudged someone; after all this time, it happens, why wouldn't it? I accept that and don't view it as some massive catastrophe
what interests me more is the reaction that follows that realization
And honestly, this whole idea of building trust over a "long time" is debatable too, because where is that period when everything moves so fast?
But hey, anything is possible
I was just thinking, you know 🤔... I have someone I trust, though I won't claim that trust is absolute. We've established it, so to speak, but it’s not set in stone for me (can anything ever be?) and doubts creep in constantly, so I'd say... the thing is, this person doesn't get "offended," but then there are those who practically blow a whistle the second you even hint at a lack of trust
So now I'm wondering... is it a bigger mistake to withhold trust than it is to give it to the wrong person? 🤷
It’s like with the first one, you never really see the fallout, whereas the second one hits you right in the face and is very tangible, but what about distrust itself and how destructive can it actually be?
(just typing this out quickly...🙄)

Quincy:

Give it a shot. Because I don't see what kind of 'effect' there could possibly be from sharing secrets. The only effect lies in the act of sharing itself; the person you tell needs to meet just two criteria: you have to care about them (and vice versa), and they have to be reliable. I hear plenty of examples where that isn't the case. 😬

True, the effect is in the act of sharing, which means that's the priority... the sharing... there's satisfaction in that, and those two conditions become secondary
Then again, they say every pleasure comes with a price, so if you set those conditions aside, you pay for it—like choosing to take a risk consciously

And how big is the risk of staying silent? If those two conditions are met

Quincy:

Exactly—be careful who you confide in when you know the information could be used against you. 😍

The point is, there is no specific "topic" that can hurt you.
It’s the act itself that does the damage (once those 😛 conditions are met), if you catch my drift.

To me, the danger lies in that constant state of paranoia.

Quincy:

...And that’s the thing eating at me—how do I actually trust my own judgment again?

Look, you don't need total, blind faith in your own calls, and that's really the answer 👍
you can always mess up.
I honestly think it's more honest to give yourself some breathing room to be wrong rather than constantly second-guessing every single move you make.
Though, personally, I'm struggling to pull that off.😠

Why? Should I become more cautious? It seems being honest and open doesn't exactly pay off. Then again, I'm not sure I want to—or even can—change those traits.

Quincy:

You don't need to have absolute confidence in your own judgments; that's the answer. 👍 You can always mess up. I think it’s actually healthier to be kinder to yourself—giving yourself some breathing room for mistakes, rather than constantly obsessing over being perfect. But honestly, I’m just not good at it. 😠

🤣

We can't help ourselves, can we? I know I have the right to make mistakes, but I hate dealing with the fallout. 😁

Jerry Martinez5 said:But look, there isn't a single soul on this planet who hasn't been burned at some point. Not one.

That’s why every living person eventually has to learn the hard way: how to read people, how to set boundaries, and how to manage expectations.

Everyone trips up sometimes... it’s practically part of the job description. 😁

lonegardener said:Well... logically speaking, honest people are the easiest targets for manipulation.

If someone goes into a situation intending to pull a fast one, they learn to spot sincerity immediately.

It also seems to me that the best strategy for a manipulator is to convincingly act like just as honest a person. They wouldn't, say, try to act mysterious.

Actually, this reminds me of something mentioned in a great movie:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093223/

I don't quite follow that... because the whole problem is that you don't know if they're playing games or not.

Somewhere between "very difficult" and "impossible," I suspect... 😢

It’s quite simple, really. I am—for the most part—an honest person. I don't say much, but when I do, I mean it. My father still insists that being this way is a virtue and how one ought to carry themselves. 🙄
Quincy:

Furthermore, it seems to me that the most effective manipulation strategy is to convincingly play the part of an honest person. Rather than, say, acting mysterious.

😁

What makes you say that?

Quincy:

Now that I think about it, all of this was actually covered in one great movie: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093223/

I haven't seen that one, but I'll look for it. Thanks. 🙂

Quincy:

I don't quite follow... the whole issue is precisely that you can't tell if there are games being played or not.

I'm fairly certain there were games at play. Though, perhaps not. 🤣

Quincy:

Somewhere in between difficult and impossible, I'd wager... 😢

If you figure it out, let me know. It's eating at me, and I can't seem to help myself—at least not right now.

lonegardener said:😲

Quite a lot? What makes you say that?

Personally, I don't think they're that common. And even if someone strikes you as being that type of person, are you 100% certain it isn't just a misunderstanding or a simple breakdown in communication?

Think about it—it’s actually a bit terrifying. If you truly put your full faith in someone and then suddenly feel like they've been two-faced, it creates this overwhelming sense of doubt regarding your own judgment. The first thing I would question in that situation is whether this "new realization" itself isn't just another error in judgment. After all, I already have proof that I can be completely wrong about someone, right?

In short, realizing how deeply you were misled in the past probably means you can never be 100% sure of your intuition ever again.

😍 You’re being a bit too literal sometimes. I wasn't making a mathematical argument; my point was that if you don't trust 99% of people, and then that remaining 1% actually screws you over by even 0.33%, it’s still a massive headache.

Even if someone comes across that way, are you absolutely certain it isn't just a simple misunderstanding or a breakdown in communication?

I can be certain of nothing, not even my own thoughts. Usually, I try to double-check things or just wait for time to reveal whether it was all just a misunderstanding. Mind you, there are days when I know I’m being judgmental and making a mountain out of a molehill. 🤣 I'm working on it, though. I am genuinely trying to shake that trait and learn how to be more patient. 🙄 It’s fascinating, really. I’ve found myself being manipulated on more than one occasion, which leaves me wondering: am I just incredibly naive, or am I actually being foolish? 🤷 I’ve been trying to wrap my head around what exactly it is about my personality that draws them in—and why they ultimately decide I’m an easy target.

Look, listen up, Isn't that a little creepy?If you truly placed your full trust in someone only to realize they were being two-faced, it triggers this overwhelming sense of self-doubt. You start questioning your own judgment across the board. The first thing I’d do if I found myself spiraling into that kind of skepticism is pause and ask: how do I know this "new realization" isn't just another illusion or a mistake? After all, I already have proof that my perception can be fundamentally wrong, don't I?

It’s chilling when you finally realize how certain people actually operate. You’re right—once that realization hits, it just leaves you with a mountain of questions. Was the whole thing a lie? How are you supposed to trust anyone after being played like that? At first, you try to convince yourself it was just some twisted social experiment to see how you'd react, but once you realize it wasn't, you're left wondering if anything they've ever done was genuine. It becomes a loop you can't escape. You can never truly be sure of anything. But honestly, if someone is out there playing games with you, is it even worth the headspace? Not really.

In short, once you realize how completely wrong you were before, you can never again be 100% certain about any future argument.

And that’s exactly where I struggle—how do you actually rebuild trust in your own judgment?

Jerry Martinez5 said:I don't know if they're everywhere, but they definitely exist.

I have a pretty solid tactic for dealing with them. As soon as I notice someone starts hovering around me, I get suspicious right away. Like, where did all this sudden interest in my life come from? What exactly am I offering? If you're, say, popular at a big state university and run with a great crowd, it's obvious some people from the fringes are going to try hard to get in your good graces. But I look at it this way: if some girl is constantly chasing me just so I'll invite her to those parties everyone's talking about, I'm not under any illusion that she's actually fallen for me. She's just looking for an invite. 😁

It's the same deal at work. If you're on good terms with the manager and already hold a decent position, obviously some ambitious new hires are going to scramble for your attention. But those aren't hypocrites! It's your own fault if you misread their intentions.

There are always a dozen reasons why someone wants to hang out with you. The second you see someone "doing everything to win your trust," it's pretty clear they have an ulterior motive.

I am fully aware of what you're saying. I've dealt with my fair share of hypocrites—from high school and college drama to those "friends" who would try to steal your boyfriend, 😁 all the way up to colleagues in the workplace. Usually, my gut instinct kicks in immediately; I can spot those types from a mile away because their patterns are so predictable. However, there are certain people you actually *do* let in. I don't make friends with just anyone, but then a betrayal happens. You realize someone was being calculated, mapping out your vulnerabilities just to exploit them and win you over. People like that aren't everywhere, but they're definitely present. How do you learn to trust again? Honestly, I'm already hard enough on myself as it is. 🤣 I know not everyone is like that—I have real, genuine friends—but once you've been burned, you tend to be wary of even the simplest things, right?

Jerry Martinez5 said:In any situation where those trusted people "stabbed you in the back," I guess you should probably stop and think—what actually happened? Not just from your perspective, but from their side of things too.

I went through this a lot back in the day. I’d expect someone close to me to support me or do one specific thing, and then they wouldn't. Later, when we'd talk about it, my friend would act totally shocked: Wait, I had no idea you wanted that! Why didn't you tell me? Nobody is a mind reader.

No, that's not what I mean. I'm talking about the manipulators—the ones who go out of their way to earn your trust specifically so they can pull the rug out from under you. I'm talking about truly malicious people who enter relationships with the sole intention of causing harm. I used to think they were outliers, but I'm starting to realize they are everywhere.

lonegardener said:🤷 I honestly can't wrap my head around it. To build up that level of trust over such a long period, only to suddenly realize someone was being two-faced the entire time? It’s infuriating. This wasn't some accidental slip of the tongue or a simple "oops" moment—this felt calculated. It feels like they went out of their way to be deceptive, specifically with the intention of causing harm.

Give it a shot. Honestly, I don't see what kind of "effect" there could possibly be from sharing secrets. The only real impact comes from the act itself. For it to actually work, the person you’re talking to just needs to meet two simple criteria: you have to genuinely care about them, and they have to be someone you can trust. I keep hearing examples that suggest the exact opposite. 😬

It’s entirely possible. There’s a massive difference between simply choosing not to share something and being deeply, fundamentally hurt when you eventually do. If you're feeling that level of pain, you can't just brush it off as "minor details I'd rather keep private." It clearly matters. And if it matters that much, you really have to be careful about who you trust. 🤷

Exactly. You have to be incredibly careful about who you trust with information that could potentially be used against you. 😍

Believe it or not, people like that are everywhere. It might be hard to imagine, but there are plenty of folks you pour your trust into, only for them to stab you in the back. In my experience, truly honest and sincere people are actually quite rare. Luckily, the good ones are still out there. 🙂

Olivia Moore51 said:Look, we've had 55 pages over the course of a year, and honestly, this isn't even much of a chat room. 🤷

It’s more like people drifting into off-topic discussions than actually engaging in a continuous conversation.

I think this is a perfectly valid comment made in the right context—an objective one at that. It proves that the chat itself wasn't the issue disrupting the Spirituality forum. The conclusion is pretty straightforward. 😉

I’m not entirely sure what you're getting at with "florine," but if you're looking for a conversation, I'm here. Feel free to clarify. kaže:
There are other PDF threads where the chat isn't active either. Look at the Philosophy section—it went quiet for a while too, and nobody jumped in to revive the discussion; everyone just moved on to the Spirituality subforum instead. You can do the exact same thing here. Honestly, I don't see what the big deal is. 🤷

I honestly don't get what the issue was with the Spirituality chat, or why you actually decided to shut it down. The point wasn't just about the chat itself; it was about what that space meant to the people participating in it and those who were reading along.

Just so we’re clear: you won't achieve anything through threats or coercion. All you're doing is inviting more chaos. If you keep this up, I'll just end up buried in even more petty grievances from the locals, which will only serve to delay my cleanup of the PDFs and the launch of the chat.

What kind of blackmail and coercion are you talking about here? If anyone is playing dirty around here, it’s you. This isn't some "whining" session; it's a straightforward request to have the chat restored. You clearly have things mixed up. All of us use this feature. It’s honestly such a lowbrow, provincial way of thinking. I’m working through the methods while you’re still stuck there. The Viennese school of thought.Sorry, I didn't recognize you. 🙏

I’ve said my piece: There was far too much mindless chatting during the spirituality session. Once we realize that these gatherings aren't the only thing this subforum is about, we'll go ahead and open a dedicated chat thread.

🤔
Hold on a second. You originally said you were closing the chat because participation was too low, but now you’re claiming there was actually too much activity? Make up your mind. 😕 I’m a bit lost here—was there just a low turnout from the community, or was that Spirituality PDF actually released? At risk. Chatting? How could anyone have been at risk if there were only two or three of us in the room? 🙄

Anyway, do you really think spirituality and... Humor is a subtle art. It’s not just about landing a punchline; it’s about timing, nuance, and knowing exactly when to lean into the absurdity of a situation. Some people try too hard, throwing jokes around like confetti, but that usually just falls flat. I’ve always found that the best wit is understated—a dry observation delivered with a straight face. It catches you off guard. Much like that one time I was sitting in a quiet corner of a Starbucks in Chicago, and someone managed to make the entire room erupt just by making eye contact with a particularly grumpy-looking bulldog. It wasn't loud, but it was perfect. Humor should be sharp, not heavy-handed. They don't match?

Barbara said:

We tend to take ourselves far too seriously, often causing unnecessary stress for both ourselves and everyone around us.
Manufacturing unnecessary suffering and creating problems where none exist.
Humor melts the ice, keeps things flowing, and lets everyone see what true beauty looks like.
They say laughter is the best medicine, and honestly, I think they’re right. It really does heal both the soul and the body.

Link to the post

hiddenhound3 said:🤣

Look, let’s not exaggerate here. I didn't say you were the most significant contributor; I said kudos to you. That can be read one way, or it could be interpreted as sarcasm. You chose to take it the way that suits you—completely misinterpreting my context—but I wasn't handing out penalties for exceptions. You were penalized because you ignored my request to stop chatting in a thread that isn't meant for it.

It’s become quite apparent that whenever you present people on Reddit with solid arguments, they immediately start hiding behind linguistic technicalities. 😉 Whether there was irony intended or not is irrelevant; anyone can look back at the controversial threads and see for themselves how much I’ve contributed. Furthermore, this isn't about my ban (we already settled that discussion in the appropriate thread), so getting back to the matter at hand:
The casual chatting—that lighthearted banter I usually shared with the members in the Spirituality section—is part of my spiritual expression. I feel as though you’ve stripped away an emotional and spiritual outlet for me. Anyone can look at the communication history in that section and see there was zero evidence of arguing, provocation, or any other violation of Reddit rules. So, under what specific rule did you unilaterally decide to shut down the chat and stifle our spiritual expression in the PDF file titled "free style"? Do you honestly think we aren't writing well enough? Even if we were, you don't have the right to shutter topics based on your personal biases against certain users. And what exactly is the "quality" of the Spirituality PDF being compromised by? The fact that the chat and the music thread were the most visited proves what people actually want to read—the chat actually had more views than the music thread, despite having fewer participants. 😉 (the chat: 31,057 views—a record for current threads in the Spirituality PDF)

So, you chatters need to cool off and find yourselves a new oasis; sooner or later, the chat will return to Spirituality.

No, I won't "cool off," because you’ve closed off my spiritual sanctuary. We all have our own way of expressing spirituality, don't we? Or do you believe spirituality is only valid if it meets your specific criteria?
By the way, where is the other moderator, Brad? Why hasn't she weighed in to share her thoughts or confirm if she actually agrees with your decision to shut down the chat and the other threads?
You wrote that it takes more than two or three people to justify opening a new chat. As you can see, there are more than two or three of us. It would be incredibly unprofessional and irresponsible for Reddit moderators not to stand by their own stated policies. Any mature adult should be able to own their words rather than acting like a petulant child throwing a tantrum just for the sake of it—for whose sake, exactly?

A question for the administration: Is the Spirituality PDF Brad's personal property to do with as he pleases, or is it a Reddit thread? I understand every moderator has the authority to manage their assigned section as they see fit, but every section includes a space for chat. It’s only natural for people to want to converse casually and share thoughts; that is, after all, the whole point of a forum, isn't it?

I’m submitting this appeal as one of the most active participants in the chat and several of our private threads. For me, Reddit has always been a place to unwind and decompress, and I’ve developed a genuine emotional connection to these discussions—especially the chat. Even Franklin noted my significant contributions to specific topics, so it feels inherently unfair for the entire community to be "punished" because of a few outliers.

Link to post

Furthermore, the Spirituality section has become particularly meaningful to me, both in its archived content and through the people who write there. It only makes sense that I want to continue chatting and exchanging ideas with them.

I truly hope you’ll consider our request and allow us to get back to enjoying the community here on Reddit. 🙂

Drew Morgan said:Look, when you're talking about a twenty-four-year span, this whole situation takes on a whole new level of demonic intensity. Claiming he was abused by his mother doesn't even begin to cover why this dragged on for a quarter of a century!
Now he’s out here acting terrified that some cannibalistic rapist-hater is going to devour him in prison. Give me a break. He's nothing but a pure victim, no question about it.

That 24-year span is exactly the point. I don't buy that childhood trauma is the sole driver behind this level of pure evil.
Still, given how it started, they might actually build him a monument for all the suffering he endured—poor soul. ☕

As for Hannibal Lecter—I've always had a soft spot for him. It would be fascinating to see what happens if he ever got his hands on Josef Fritzl.😁

Rebecca Scott3 said:It isn't even about the lives lost during the Holocaust...
....because people were dying there from all walks of life... Romani people, Slavs.... communists.... Jehovah's Witnesses.... and so many others....
it's really just about finding ways to rack up points for future profits.... to get a grip on someone's neck so they can control and rule them...... it's pure enslavement and looting....
.... no actual nation holds power.... not one single one...... it's run by sneaky con artists... liars and frauds.... it's run by the Jeffrey Dahmers of every race and nation...... cold-blooded, ego-driven sadists.... the kind of people who hate and despise everything around them.... including themselves..... the types who will publicly repent but never truly mean it or feel it in their hearts..... those who see nothing but an opportunity to turn tragedy into profit.....
.... it's always a scam...... because they're trying to con themselves, too.... which is the core of it all..... they have no sense of self.... and they never did.....
Jeffrey Dahmer spat on his mother, his wife, his kids, and himself....... all while lying to himself, pretending he was the master of everyone else....
his eyes have that look of someone who only feels alive when they are attacking and controlling others... that's all he is...... he's only himself when he's lashing out and dominating... like a wild animal
..if you take away his ability to attack and control.......he turns into a terrified, pathetic mess.... like a caged beast
....he'd end up biting his own tongue off if you stripped him of his power to control and strike out.....

I'm inclined to agree—it's nothing more than a raw struggle for power.

.... no nation actually rules....not a single one......instead, we are governed by insidious swindlers...liars, and frauds....we are ruled by the Jeffrey Dahmers of every race and creed...... cold-blooded, egocentric sadists.... those who despise everything around them...including themselves.....those who will offer public repentance without ever truly feeling a shred of remorse.....those who see even an apology as a way to extract profit.....
....they are perpetual deceivers......deceiving even themselves, because that is their fundamental flaw..... they have no sense of self....and never have....
Jeffrey Dahmer spat on his mother, his wife, his children, and himself....... while constantly lying to himself, pretending he was the master of all....
his gaze is that of a man who only feels alive when he is controlling and attacking, because that is his entire essence...he exists only through aggression and dominance...like a predator
..if you strip away his ability to control and attack.......he collapses into a pathetic, terrified wreck....a beast trapped in a tiny cage...
....he would tear his own throat out if he were denied his power and the ability to strike....

I can certainly agree with all of that, though I'd argue he didn't just delude himself into thinking he was in charge—the unfortunate reality is that he actually held total dominion over other people's lives. No punishment could ever be sufficient for someone like that.

Drew Morgan said:It's common knowledge that Israel uses Nazi tactics. Can I even borrow a book on this from the library?

I haven't the slightest clue. It was printed in Ottawa, and I have no idea how many copies actually exist. They probably have some copies in New York, though.

Drew Morgan said:Maybe the Black Cat...? That was a grim depiction of love gone wrong.

I suspect he was actually referring to Edgar Allan Poe's biography and suggesting Poe himself was wired that way, which is why I asked him what he was basing that on. Sure, Poe had his demons, but he wasn't some predator. It honestly irritates me when people jump to conclusions without knowing the facts.

Look, the Holocaust is JUST ONE OF MANY CRIMES, but it gets all the branding. What about the crimes that get swept under the rug or simply tolerated: Hiroshima and Nagasaki, colonialism and genocide globally, the destruction of Dresden, and of course—the occupation of Palestine?

I agree; far too much focus is placed on the Holocaust while other atrocities (which are by no means smaller) are ignored. It’s all just marketing. Read that book I suggested. It was only after reading it that I truly understood the reality of the situation in Palestine.
And I have to admit, there have been moments where I found myself thinking how brilliant Adolf Hitler actually was. 😁

dustyskipper3 said:I believe he did it out of LOVE. 😍 And primarily maternal love—certainly a twisted kind, very much in the vein of Edgar Allan Poe and Hannibal Lecter, I suppose—but any other explanation would just be trivial and, ultimately, incorrect.

The lawyer for Jeffrey Dahmer is right, though I imagine everyone will spit on him because he actually dared to speak the truth. It probably would have been easier if he had just defended Jeffrey Dahmer as a complete psychopath with zero feelings. But, perhaps, he realized that deep within that monstrous soul, there is actually profound suffering.

He felt he had to isolate his daughter from society because, being so caring, he feared they would corrupt her and turn her into just another freak tailored to fit that "Talmudic-Zionist" society—a woman who works, takes on male roles, and possesses her own will. Meanwhile, Jeffrey Dahmer was a sincere and convicted proponent of the macho ideal, or rather, the ideals they had already adopted from Otto Weininger and other ideologues of masculinity. He made sure his daughter embraced those values too, ensuring she wouldn't break away from his parental care; he even provided a substitute for the husband she wouldn't have had anyway (since people like that aren't really born anymore, just some feminized Zionist monstrosities). In his world, we and the society we've built are the freaks, and his monstrous actions were justified by the pursuit of higher ideals for an Aryan family—children, kitchen, church, and all that. It’s been noted that this is almost commonplace in the Arab world, so I guess why wouldn't someone here arrive at a similar idea? 🙂
Besides, he is actually a victim himself—he destroyed both himself and his family, much like how someone else destroyed him through overly successful, extreme upbringing. There is a psychological mechanism that turns a victim into an executioner, which is visible on an international scale (for example, Palestinians and Jews, and then again with us in Canada, etc.).

The problem is just how many more of those Jeffrey Dahmers are living around us, people who subjugate their families and loved ones through purely economic methods of pressure without even needing to go as far as making the basement door rattle. 😱

How exactly would that kind of "love" be considered Poe-esque?

copperpuma2 said:I honestly think Jeffrey Dahmer’s obsession with control crossed the line from a personality flaw into a full-blown psychosis. 👎 I’ve occasionally entertained the idea of doing something similar to my own... actually, no comment there. I’m just glad he’s rotting behind bars, though it’s a depressing reality to face—I’m certain he isn't some unique anomaly. There are plenty of other psychos out there lurking in the shadows of this world. 😈🙂

It honestly sends a chill down my spine to think about how many people like him are actively abusing someone right now without ever being caught—not to mention how many there were in the past who simply slipped through the cracks.

Edward Flores4 said:What are you even talking about?

Palestine used to be secular—it's only recently, after more than sixty years of illegal occupation by Israel, that a radical Islamist party has actually taken power. But honestly, that kind of radicalism is a direct consequence of the occupation itself. It’s even being funded by Israel to create this convenient "justification" for their "no negotiations" military occupation policy.

Just to clear things up here... for most of its history, Palestine leaned toward Catholicism, and even today, there are actually more Catholics in both Palestine and Israel than there are Jews!

Just to add my two cents here: There is this one incredible book that explores Palestinian intellectuals who were Catholic. I highly recommend giving it a read: In Search of Velid Mesud.

rowdyhawk10 said:I suppose Islam and pantheism aren't quite as disconnected as they might seem at first glance. 😁

Essentially, the entire manifest world is somewhat like waves. Everything emanates from God. So, one could argue that nothing truly exists outside of Him. As for how close these two ideas actually are, maybe the film behind the scenes will provide the best explanation. 😉

Back to the topic: regarding Wilders' Fitna, there is a discussion about the movie happening over on the religion subforum. 🙂 Cheers.

I'll check out the film. 🙂

ontopic: regarding Wilders's Sedition, people are discussing the film over on the religion subforum right now. 🙂

Right now, I have so many "pending" replies that I don't have the bandwidth to dive into that thread too. I also have other messages I need to get back to, so feel free to link my previous posts from here if they end up being useful (keeping in mind my analysis is linguistic rather than theological). 🙂