 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
I can posit, of course at risk of obvious consequences.
My posited notion concerning the quote above is what I will call the Ostridge syndrome. Unwanted information inspires the Ostridge to not only stick the sensory mechanism into darkness, said Ostridge leaves a warning sign to any similarly constituted Ostridges: stick head in the sand now.
I've been on forums for over 30 years now, and it isn't so much that the general population cannot be all satisfied with the information offered by so many varied perspectives, rather the routine is such that the so-called moderators claim to fill the demand for those fact-based, or potentially fact-based perspectives, while those same so-called moderators are the first to stick their heads in the sand, and insist upon the righteousness of doing so.
The hideousness of worldwide consumption of posterity is hardly more evident in what has now become "human trafficking." Children, extracted from mothers prior to birth, in pieces, well I didn't want that in my head anymore. Children (posterity) brainwashed as slaves from birth to death, nope, don't want that in my head anymore. Children kidnapped and sold for body parts, again not something I want in my head anymore. Children forced into poverty, by obvious, less obvious, and very well hidden mechanisms, and sold into what? Is it righteously called Satanism? I don't want that anywhere near my head anymore. One of the moments that this fake “legalized” consuming of posterity became current events in my head was an obscure (censored) documentary titled The Conspiracy of Silence; an apt title.
I don’t want that in my head anymore.
I'll save the Ostridge gang the trouble of allowing such unwanted information to pierce their sterilized, secure, environment, and for those constituted with some vague duty to know the truth, and provide for it, those exceptions to the rule (non-ostridges) can find the title of the documentary if they so choose.
I suppose that this is again off-topic, daring to move the topic from Jeffery Epstein, and moving the topic to someone named Steve, as Steve offers some names of people who are known associates of Jeffery Epstein, such as:
“Court papers put daughter of Robert Maxwell at centre of ‘sex slave’ claims” That is a title of a “News” Article, with a reference to a Kangaroo Court Case in the Plantation known as Florida.
Of course, that may be as poor a choice for information as is listening to a fictional character named Jack Ryan, but there are so-called (kangaroo) Court documents, for whatever that may be worth to any current or future ostridge.
Everyone is lying or sticking their heads in the sand?
You tell me, please.
In law (a verb) a suspected perpetrator is offered a trial by jury, which is a trial by the country, and 12 randomly selected people who represent the whole country to determine fact, law, guilt or innocence, remedy, restitution, or punishment, attempt to get all the facts in the case, it is their duty in fact.
In a world run by criminals, the plebes know when to stick their heads in the sand.
"Qui non prohibet cum potest, jubet: That man abets an evil, who prevents it not, when it is in his power. Nec caret scrupulo sosietatis occultae qui evidenter facinori definit obviare: nor can he escape the suspicion of being a secret accomplice, who evidently declines the prevention of an atrocious crime."