Question:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -ibshambat2…@hotmail.com wrote: > DrEvilHypnosis wrote: >> His points are droll, and betray a second agenda to blame everything >> that has gone wrong in his life on somebody else > You’re an idiot. I don’t see my life as having been remotely bad. I > see this as part of social war, and one I’ve seen in the lives of > many. >> Shambat clearly DOES have enemies, having annoyed a more than a few >> people he’d've done better to not stir up — however, their agendas >> are reactive, to him, not part of some vast conspiracy. > These people are nothing. I’m talking about the people who created the > social climate of 80s and 90s, who most certainly knew nothing about > me & who made their decisions & beliefs they shoved down people’s > throats & magic they did based on what they believed before I existed. >> Shambat’s fighting delusional impulses of grandure and persecution. > I’m not "fighting" any such impulses. Why should I fight them? > That’s like saying that someone "has trouble adjusting" when adjusting > is the farthest thing from his mind! It’s manipulative phrasing that > makes your goal for the person the person’s goal when it’s not his > goal nor was it ever. > It’s attitudes like this that keep reinforcing what I have observed of > people like you. > Cheers, > Ilya Shambat.
I origonally ran into this post while browsing alt.psychology, I have no idea why its x-posted to ash or hypnosis, but anyhow. I just noticed something. You see? Here is another poast that has to do with manipulation. I run into them daily. Why don’t we all pool our knowledge about the subject? I created the group free.manipulation about a week ago. Most news servers don’t carry the free hierarchy, but you can always ask, and usually they will add a newsgroup if users ask them to. So if you’re interested in talking about manipulation and manipulators etc, ask your news admin to add the group free.manipulation. I was going to make it an alt group, but teh big bad know-it-all’s thought it wouldnt be popular. Manipulation not popular? People do it all the time, why not talk about it, get it out on the table? — There are three magical words that make everyone feel happy… ‘no compilation errors’.
Response:
X-Troll wrote: > I origonally ran into this post while browsing alt.psychology, I have > no idea why its x-posted to ash or hypnosis, but anyhow.
If the Shambat posts to your group, it’s because he has checked out the group and has decided that its members are worthy of communing with his words. You are supposed to feel honored and flattered. > You see? Here is another poast that has to do with manipulation. I run > into them daily. Why don’t we all pool our knowledge about the subject?
Surely "personipulation"? Let’s be politically correct here. > I created the group free.manipulation about a week ago. Most news > servers don’t carry the free hierarchy, but you can always ask, and > usually they will add a newsgroup if users ask them to. So if you’re > interested in talking about manipulation and manipulators etc, ask your > news admin to add the group free.manipulation. > I was going to make it an alt group, but teh big bad know-it-all’s > thought it wouldnt be popular. Manipulation not popular? People do it > all the time, why not talk about it, get it out on the table?
Then I started… well, eating cheese a bit… and then, um, some of the guys… started – squeaking…
Response:
DrEvilHypnosis wrote: > His points are droll, and betray a second agenda to blame everything > that has gone wrong in his life on somebody else
You’re an idiot. I don’t see my life as having been remotely bad. I see this as part of social war, and one I’ve seen in the lives of many. > Shambat clearly DOES have enemies, having annoyed a more than a few > people he’d've done better to not stir up — however, their agendas are > reactive, to him, not part of some vast conspiracy.
These people are nothing. I’m talking about the people who created the social climate of 80s and 90s, who most certainly knew nothing about me & who made their decisions & beliefs they shoved down people’s throats & magic they did based on what they believed before I existed. > Shambat’s fighting delusional impulses of grandure and persecution.
I’m not "fighting" any such impulses. Why should I fight them? That’s like saying that someone "has trouble adjusting" when adjusting is the farthest thing from his mind! It’s manipulative phrasing that makes your goal for the person the person’s goal when it’s not his goal nor was it ever. It’s attitudes like this that keep reinforcing what I have observed of people like you. Cheers, Ilya Shambat.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -OB wrote: > What is this self-esteem anyway when it’s at home? Personally, I like > myself, or at least get along pretty well with myself, find myself > agreeable company, etc, but I don’t think I’ve ever esteemed myself. > "Esteem" would suggest a degree of servile regard which no mere self > really deserves (does it?)… not to mention that the concept as used > in pop psychology appears to be suspiciously vulnerable to Occam’s > razor, i.e. if you get rid of it, nothing has changed, nothing is short > of an explanation, there are no awkward behavioural unknowns in any > equation. Thirdly, where is the scientific consensus on how to measure > it? Whenever amateur psychs want to test "self-esteem", they fumble for > a "questionnaire", which of course is a scientifically inadmissable way > to measure anything, other than maybe the gullibility of Internet > surfers and Cosmo readers. "Self-esteem"? As far as I can see, it’s a > waste of time even talking about it, except to point out that it’s a > waste of time even talking about it (except, &c). > Where I do intersect briefly with young Ilyita here is in finding the > word "needy" (as in, needs more self-esteem, as in needs the > best-selling self-help snake oil salesman’s latest magnum opus, > complete with "witty" title) at least mildly irritating. I wish women > who call certain men "needy" would cut the crap and just say what they > think, whether it be "needs a shave", "needs a better job", "needs > $5,000 of dental work", "needs to look more like Justin Timberlake" or > whatever, which would at least clarify whose need is meant, rather than > pretending that looking as if you might be interested in a shag, or > manifesting a desire to set up residence with a live-in housemaid in > French costume, was some kind of disqualifying factor per se, or was > symptomatic of anything other than a fairly bog-standard combination of > lubricity and Y chromosomes, with a piquant dash of indolence. I can > even remember agonising over how to square the circle of being an > eligible male – you have to want (sine qua non), to pretend not to > want, and at the same time be "honest about your feelings". Huh? > The solution: stop reading people who have old copies of Cosmo in their > downstairs toilet. It’s that simple. > OB > I must stop this agreeing with Ilya. I wouldn’t want it to develop into > a habit.
First let it become a habit. Then let it become your destiny. Ha ha ha
Response:
What is this self-esteem anyway when it’s at home? Personally, I like myself, or at least get along pretty well with myself, find myself agreeable company, etc, but I don’t think I’ve ever esteemed myself. "Esteem" would suggest a degree of servile regard which no mere self really deserves (does it?)… not to mention that the concept as used in pop psychology appears to be suspiciously vulnerable to Occam’s razor, i.e. if you get rid of it, nothing has changed, nothing is short of an explanation, there are no awkward behavioural unknowns in any equation. Thirdly, where is the scientific consensus on how to measure it? Whenever amateur psychs want to test "self-esteem", they fumble for a "questionnaire", which of course is a scientifically inadmissable way to measure anything, other than maybe the gullibility of Internet surfers and Cosmo readers. "Self-esteem"? As far as I can see, it’s a waste of time even talking about it, except to point out that it’s a waste of time even talking about it (except, &c). Where I do intersect briefly with young Ilyita here is in finding the word "needy" (as in, needs more self-esteem, as in needs the best-selling self-help snake oil salesman’s latest magnum opus, complete with "witty" title) at least mildly irritating. I wish women who call certain men "needy" would cut the crap and just say what they think, whether it be "needs a shave", "needs a better job", "needs $5,000 of dental work", "needs to look more like Justin Timberlake" or whatever, which would at least clarify whose need is meant, rather than pretending that looking as if you might be interested in a shag, or manifesting a desire to set up residence with a live-in housemaid in French costume, was some kind of disqualifying factor per se, or was symptomatic of anything other than a fairly bog-standard combination of lubricity and Y chromosomes, with a piquant dash of indolence. I can even remember agonising over how to square the circle of being an eligible male – you have to want (sine qua non), to pretend not to want, and at the same time be "honest about your feelings". Huh? The solution: stop reading people who have old copies of Cosmo in their downstairs toilet. It’s that simple. OB I must stop this agreeing with Ilya. I wouldn’t want it to develop into a habit. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Ilya the Bat wrote: > One of the most evil ideas to have come out of psychology has been that > one needs to have good self-esteem in order to have relationships. As > someone who has scored medium on self-esteem test, I am quite qualified > to address this malignancy, without standing to be accused as either > having a low self-esteem or a high one. > The same person can be in a good place or in a bad place depending on > time, situation, social climate, decisions, etc. I’ve been up & down > (as has been my self-esteem) and so have most of the people I know. If > anything, if my experience is to be any guide, it’s when you’re down > that you most need to feel loved. > What is self-esteem? It is how a person feels about himself or herself. > And that of course can be a function of a million variables. The same > people who did well in 1960s did terribly in 1980s. The same character > that does well in one time does badly in another. And the same of > course is true among different geographical locations; professions; > belief structures; and everything else. > Now when I come out and tell the truth on this subject, I get > confronted with grating hypocrisy and malice. If you’re a man, in a bad > place, who badly needs love, then you are needy & need to pull yourself > up by the bootstraps. If you’re a man going with a woman who is in a > bad place, then you are a predator. > It is to be said that if you are a woman going with a man who is in a > bad place – or if you are a woman in a bad place going with a man – you > do not encounter this idiocy, but rather "concern" and "protection" > when of course the above had been utterly missing when the woman > actually needed it. > It is to be said likewise that the above takes place under the pretense > of feminism and its belief in equality between men and women, while in > fact containing some of the most patronizing, most chauvenistic, most > intellectually insulting attitudes that have been expressed in recent > society – a pretense and a belief that can only lead to "protection of > women for their own good" and the ensuing deprivation of them of all > meaningful rights and liberties. > So if you seek for love when you most need it – or seek to offer love > to someone who needs it likewise – you come under attack. > I am of the belief that this meme was created by the predatory > psychologists and distributed through the culture, in order that > millions of dollars pour into the pockets of those who feed on human > misery & prevent people from living for years upon years that they are > under their "care." > Ilya Shambat.
Response:
In article <1121925470.390089.270…@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, DrEvilHypno…@gmail.com says… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Your Name Here=Harvey wrote: >> In article <1121915619.001096.311…@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, >> DrEvilHypno…@gmail.com says… >> >Your Name Here=Harvey wrote: >> >> In article <1121910733.891640.229…@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, >> >> ibshambat2…@hotmail.com says… >> >> >Your Name Here=Harvey wrote: >> >> >> How do you know something is truthful and correct? >> >> >Because it resonates with that inside which is truthful and correct. >> >> No doubt a suicide bomber feels that way as he/she pushes the >> >> donate button and all hell breaks loose. >> >No, no, no! There’s NO doubt at all! >> >That’s EXACTLY the way a sucide bomber feels! >> >It’s also the exact same way that Rumsfield felt, when he OK’ed the >> >tortures in Iraq and Guantanimo. >> >Congratulations, Shambat! >> >You’ve joined their creed and kith. Excited about that? >> >Birds of a feather share philosophies together, eh, what? >> >> There must be laws that everyone can agree to, and it does resonate >> >> in each one of us, no matter how diverse our belief systems may be… >> >> Harvey >> >Yeah … like the Geneva Convention. >> >Such laws already exist. >> >It’s only a matter of enforcing them. >> whoops, bad typo on my part – detonate button, not donate – >> strange how my mind overlooks such an obvious error. >> With ‘laws’ I was thinking of — laws of conduct and of nicety, >> not silly laws of war. War simply means there are no rules. >> When you are killing people and destroying peoples’ lives – is there >> any convention that is observable under those conditions? >If there isn’t, then we truely are NOT any better than the Nazis … >and, indeed, we never were. However, you are correct. The full >achievement of Law is the end of all War. If mankind cannot rise above >his instincts to war, then he has never been anything more than a >clever animal. >The Great Beast, indeed! >> To have an atom bomb and then say – oh, we’re not going to use it on you, >> we just going to threaten you with it! Is the silliest kind of >> argument. >> And – Welcome to the atomic bomb club, you know not to use it, don’t you??? >" An interesting game, Dr. Falcon. >It appears the only way to win is not to play. " > – War Games >Well said. Never better. >> And to use one – will simply show how silly humankind is. >> Totally stupid. Stupidier still, to have working bombs ready to go off, >> at a moment’s notice, just so to destroy them (the enemy) too…. >A political policy called "Mutually Assured Destruction" … notice the >acronym? " M.A.D. "? Mad, as in "insane." >Unquestionably so. >> Which goes to show how stupid this world really is. >> That at the highest level, mankind is insanely stupid. >> Harvey >I look at history, and see that throughout all human civilization, >slavery was not only permitted, but was thought to be vital to its >support. Not even Jesus had the COURAGE to stand up and say "slavery >is wrong." But 2,000 years later, men of bravery and wise in spirit, >moved to eradicate this evil. Slavery is not gone, but now it crawls >in the dark and lies about its presence, for not even the most >backwards government DARES to admit that filthy breed crawls in its >bed. >If we came this close to defeating slavery … war can be next. >If we have the courage. >We live on the cusp of a great decision: with mankind’s next few >steps, we shall either climb forever onward through the heavens night, >to the eternal stars, or plunge through hell of our own design, into >extinction. Just another failed lifeform, like the dodo. >Let’s look to the Angels within us to bridle the Beast we know so well. >"Know ye not that we shall judge angels? >how much more things that pertain to this life?" > – I Corinthians 6:3 >"The most disadvantageous peace is better than the most just war." > – Desiderius Erasmus >"There was never a just war or a bad peace." > – Benjamin Franklin
I don’t know what ’slavery’ you are referring to? If it’s the master and servant slavery – that is supposedly long gone, only to be replaced by slavery to established ‘norms’ in life – slave to a job, so as to provide income, so as to purchase the stuff you need to live, all to be slaves to a so-called free society – which is all a fascade. I personally think the key issue is always ‘truth’ – the real truth. And that ‘it’ has been kept from us. Take for instance the Jesus story, that christianity pushes onto us. I don’t think it is 100% truthful and accurate. Christianity changed the story to suit it’s own ends. Namely resurrection was added, which did not happen. Jesus was a prophet and not a saviour. The teachings of Jesus were not encouraged at all. A new version was paraded before the public, which would enslave christians to the christian church. Another truth is the UFO story – it has great reprocussions upon us, and will enable mankind to grow up. All truths will do that – free our minds towards a greater perception of the reality around us. Another truth is the understanding about death and dying. That it is a natural process and not to be feared, because it is inevitable, whether it is sooner or later. Christianity, Judaism and Islam don’t give us a good understanding about death and dying – they are not accurate nor truthful about it. Harvey
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Your Name Here=Harvey wrote: > In article <1121915619.001096.311…@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, > DrEvilHypno…@gmail.com says… > >Your Name Here=Harvey wrote: > >> In article <1121910733.891640.229…@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > >> ibshambat2…@hotmail.com says… > >> >Your Name Here=Harvey wrote: > >> >> How do you know something is truthful and correct? > >> >Because it resonates with that inside which is truthful and correct. > >> No doubt a suicide bomber feels that way as he/she pushes the > >> donate button and all hell breaks loose. > >No, no, no! There’s NO doubt at all! > >That’s EXACTLY the way a sucide bomber feels! > >It’s also the exact same way that Rumsfield felt, when he OK’ed the > >tortures in Iraq and Guantanimo. > >Congratulations, Shambat! > >You’ve joined their creed and kith. Excited about that? > >Birds of a feather share philosophies together, eh, what? > >> There must be laws that everyone can agree to, and it does resonate > >> in each one of us, no matter how diverse our belief systems may be… > >> Harvey > >Yeah … like the Geneva Convention. > >Such laws already exist. > >It’s only a matter of enforcing them. > whoops, bad typo on my part – detonate button, not donate – > strange how my mind overlooks such an obvious error. > With ‘laws’ I was thinking of — laws of conduct and of nicety, > not silly laws of war. War simply means there are no rules. > When you are killing people and destroying peoples’ lives – is there > any convention that is observable under those conditions?
If there isn’t, then we truely are NOT any better than the Nazis … and, indeed, we never were. However, you are correct. The full achievement of Law is the end of all War. If mankind cannot rise above his instincts to war, then he has never been anything more than a clever animal. The Great Beast, indeed! > To have an atom bomb and then say – oh, we’re not going to use it on you, > we just going to threaten you with it! Is the silliest kind of > argument. > And – Welcome to the atomic bomb club, you know not to use it, don’t you???
" An interesting game, Dr. Falcon. It appears the only way to win is not to play. " — War Games Well said. Never better. > And to use one – will simply show how silly humankind is. > Totally stupid. Stupidier still, to have working bombs ready to go off, > at a moment’s notice, just so to destroy them (the enemy) too….
A political policy called "Mutually Assured Destruction" … notice the acronym? " M.A.D. "? Mad, as in "insane." Unquestionably so. > Which goes to show how stupid this world really is. > That at the highest level, mankind is insanely stupid. > Harvey
I look at history, and see that throughout all human civilization, slavery was not only permitted, but was thought to be vital to its support. Not even Jesus had the COURAGE to stand up and say "slavery is wrong." But 2,000 years later, men of bravery and wise in spirit, moved to eradicate this evil. Slavery is not gone, but now it crawls in the dark and lies about its presence, for not even the most backwards government DARES to admit that filthy breed crawls in its bed. If we came this close to defeating slavery … war can be next. If we have the courage. We live on the cusp of a great decision: with mankind’s next few steps, we shall either climb forever onward through the heavens night, to the eternal stars, or plunge through hell of our own design, into extinction. Just another failed lifeform, like the dodo. Let’s look to the Angels within us to bridle the Beast we know so well. "Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?" — I Corinthians 6:3 "The most disadvantageous peace is better than the most just war." — Desiderius Erasmus "There was never a just war or a bad peace." — Benjamin Franklin
Response:
In article <1121910733.891640.229…@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, ibshambat2…@hotmail.com says… >Your Name Here=Harvey wrote: >> How do you know something is truthful and correct? >Because it resonates with that inside which is truthful and correct.
No doubt a suicide bomber feels that way as he/she pushes the donate button and all hell breaks loose. There must be laws that everyone can agree to, and it does resonate in each one of us, no matter how diverse our belief systems may be… Harvey
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -X-Troll wrote: > "Your Name Here=Harvey" <k…@ing.notin.aus> wrote in message > news:dbhpc0$asv$4@lust.ihug.co.nz… > [snip] > > There are a lot of things that are fed to the public, that are unfair > and > > downright ‘lies’ – and we have to put up with it. > > But living with such a mess of illogic and confusion can make life > and living > > so much harder here when people cannot tell right from wrong and are > > purposefully confused. > > How do you know something is truthful and correct? > > Harvey > Quite correct, Harvey. It seems the origonator of this thread is > confused a little, but also right on a few points. At least he/she is > aware of bullship going on. Yes lies are shoveled into us daily, thats > why people get confused and debate to no end about what is really > happening, and why. In a healthy society, we wouldnt need to debate > about what is really happening, because we would KNOW what the fluck > was going on. But there is too much damn noise being thrown at us from > all directions. > Anyways, sorry, but self-esteem is important in all things in life, not > limited to or excluded from relationships. By self-esteem I am > referring to a healthy positive attitude regarding yourself, in all the > ways that can manifest. If you don’t believe in yourself, or dislike > yourself, there is a problem which will cause other problems.
However, his point was not that. His point was that there is some kind of evil conspiracy among psychologists to covertly attack the self-esteem of otherwise healthy people, in order to create a false need, and support their buisnesses. Certainly, there are bad shrinks, just as there are bad cops, bad presidents and bad poets. The Sun also comes up in the East, and the Tides come in and out with the Moon. Whaddya gonna do about it? His points are droll, and betray a second agenda to blame everything that has gone wrong in his life on somebody else, instead of accepting either a valid medical condition disabling him, or a bad attitude leading to stupid decisions in life, leading to the same outcome, in effect. Shambat clearly DOES have enemies, having annoyed a more than a few people he’d've done better to not stir up — however, their agendas are reactive, to him, not part of some vast conspiracy. Shambat’s fighting delusional impulses of grandure and persecution. This is fairly common among people who simply CANNOT understand or accept the true nature of their problems. I wish him the best of luck in his struggles, but if they include paranoia and "the world owes shambat a living" attitudes, then his failure is as certain (and as "inexcusable") as Gordon Roy "Internet Legend" Parker.
Response:
Your Name Here=Harvey wrote: > In article <1121910733.891640.229…@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > ibshambat2…@hotmail.com says… > >Your Name Here=Harvey wrote: > >> How do you know something is truthful and correct? > >Because it resonates with that inside which is truthful and correct. > No doubt a suicide bomber feels that way as he/she pushes the > donate button and all hell breaks loose.
No, no, no! There’s NO doubt at all! That’s EXACTLY the way a sucide bomber feels! It’s also the exact same way that Rumsfield felt, when he OK’ed the tortures in Iraq and Guantanimo. Congratulations, Shambat! You’ve joined their creed and kith. Excited about that? Birds of a feather share philosophies together, eh, what? > There must be laws that everyone can agree to, and it does resonate > in each one of us, no matter how diverse our belief systems may be… > Harvey
Yeah … like the Geneva Convention. Such laws already exist. It’s only a matter of enforcing them.
Response:
In article <1121915619.001096.311…@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, DrEvilHypno…@gmail.com says… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Your Name Here=Harvey wrote: >> In article <1121910733.891640.229…@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, >> ibshambat2…@hotmail.com says… >> >Your Name Here=Harvey wrote: >> >> How do you know something is truthful and correct? >> >Because it resonates with that inside which is truthful and correct. >> No doubt a suicide bomber feels that way as he/she pushes the >> donate button and all hell breaks loose. >No, no, no! There’s NO doubt at all! >That’s EXACTLY the way a sucide bomber feels! >It’s also the exact same way that Rumsfield felt, when he OK’ed the >tortures in Iraq and Guantanimo. >Congratulations, Shambat! >You’ve joined their creed and kith. Excited about that? >Birds of a feather share philosophies together, eh, what? >> There must be laws that everyone can agree to, and it does resonate >> in each one of us, no matter how diverse our belief systems may be… >> Harvey >Yeah … like the Geneva Convention. >Such laws already exist. >It’s only a matter of enforcing them.
whoops, bad typo on my part – detonate button, not donate – strange how my mind overlooks such an obvious error. With ‘laws’ I was thinking of — laws of conduct and of nicety, not silly laws of war. War simply means there are no rules. When you are killing people and destroying peoples’ lives – is there any convention that is observable under those conditions? To have an atom bomb and then say – oh, we’re not going to use it on you, we just going to threaten you with it! Is the silliest kind of argument. And – Welcome to the atomic bomb club, you know not to use it, don’t you??? And to use one – will simply show how silly humankind is. Totally stupid. Stupidier still, to have working bombs ready to go off, at a moment’s notice, just so to destroy them (the enemy) too…. Which goes to show how stupid this world really is. That at the highest level, mankind is insanely stupid. Harvey
Response:
Your Name Here=Harvey wrote: > How do you know something is truthful and correct?
Because it resonates with that inside which is truthful and correct.
Response:
"Your Name Here=Harvey" <k…@ing.notin.aus> wrote in message news:dbhpc0$asv$4@lust.ihug.co.nz… [snip] > There are a lot of things that are fed to the public, that are unfair and > downright ‘lies’ – and we have to put up with it. > But living with such a mess of illogic and confusion can make life and living > so much harder here when people cannot tell right from wrong and are > purposefully confused. > How do you know something is truthful and correct? > Harvey
Quite correct, Harvey. It seems the origonator of this thread is confused a little, but also right on a few points. At least he/she is aware of bullship going on. Yes lies are shoveled into us daily, thats why people get confused and debate to no end about what is really happening, and why. In a healthy society, we wouldnt need to debate about what is really happening, because we would KNOW what the fluck was going on. But there is too much damn noise being thrown at us from all directions. Anyways, sorry, but self-esteem is important in all things in life, not limited to or excluded from relationships. By self-esteem I am referring to a healthy positive attitude regarding yourself, in all the ways that can manifest. If you don’t believe in yourself, or dislike yourself, there is a problem which will cause other problems.
Response:
In article <dbilm3$gs…@theodyn.ncf.ca>, bc…@FreeNet.Carleton.CA says… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Your Name Here=Harvey (k…@ing.notin.aus) writes: >> In article <1121630883.192710.69…@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, >> ibshambat2…@hotmail.com says… >>>One of the most evil ideas to have come out of psychology has been that >>>one needs to have good self-esteem in order to have relationships. As >>>someone who has scored medium on self-esteem test, I am quite qualified >>>to address this malignancy, without standing to be accused as either >>>having a low self-esteem or a high one. >>>The same person can be in a good place or in a bad place depending on >>>time, situation, social climate, decisions, etc. I’ve been up & down >>>(as has been my self-esteem) and so have most of the people I know. If >>>anything, if my experience is to be any guide, it’s when you’re down >>>that you most need to feel loved. >>>What is self-esteem? It is how a person feels about himself or herself. >>>And that of course can be a function of a million variables. The same >>>people who did well in 1960s did terribly in 1980s. The same character >>>that does well in one time does badly in another. And the same of >>>course is true among different geographical locations; professions; >>>belief structures; and everything else. >>>Now when I come out and tell the truth on this subject, I get >>>confronted with grating hypocrisy and malice. If you’re a man, in a bad >>>place, who badly needs love, then you are needy & need to pull yourself >>>up by the bootstraps. If you’re a man going with a woman who is in a >>>bad place, then you are a predator. >>>It is to be said that if you are a woman going with a man who is in a >>>bad place – or if you are a woman in a bad place going with a man – you >>>do not encounter this idiocy, but rather "concern" and "protection" >>>when of course the above had been utterly missing when the woman >>>actually needed it. >>>It is to be said likewise that the above takes place under the pretense >>>of feminism and its belief in equality between men and women, while in >>>fact containing some of the most patronizing, most chauvenistic, most >>>intellectually insulting attitudes that have been expressed in recent >>>society – a pretense and a belief that can only lead to "protection of >>>women for their own good" and the ensuing deprivation of them of all >>>meaningful rights and liberties. >>>So if you seek for love when you most need it – or seek to offer love >>>to someone who needs it likewise – you come under attack. >>>I am of the belief that this meme was created by the predatory >>>psychologists and distributed through the culture, in order that >>>millions of dollars pour into the pockets of those who feed on human >>>misery & prevent people from living for years upon years that they are >>>under their "care." >>>Ilya Shambat. >> There are a lot of things that are fed to the public, that are unfair and >> downright ‘lies’ – and we have to put up with it. >> But living with such a mess of illogic and confusion can make life and living >> so much harder here when people cannot tell right from wrong and are >> purposefully confused. >> How do you know something is truthful and correct? >> Harvey >Beware if the paranormal writers you read ask this question and answer it >for you, by that preparing you to take all they say as thruthful and >correct, for giving their own definition of trtfhful and correct before >hand, and the reader gobbling it without answering the question him/herself. >Id not be surprised that you’d answer this paraphrasing what you read and >gobbled without reflection nor analysis, swallowing what another one does >for money for the truth cause they write "nobling" their deeds to better >polish their gold bricks. >That is a truth, and a well known and documented one. >It might be of benefit to you to read books specialized on >sectarian/manipulation thinking/techniques, so as to be more enlighted when >you read on the paranormal, and so as to spot the manipulative >dishonest techniques at a glance and >from there, spot the lie(s) in the next lines that some unfortunate readers >are manipulated into believing is the truth. >There are tons of unexplained things in this world. >Charlatans are not one of them;-)
I assure you that I constantly weight up matters all the time, in everything. I do not like to have just one source of information, but others that colloborate. There is one truth – made up of fundamental truths. The fundamental truths support and verify each other. Sadly these fundamental truths are usually ’secrets’ kept from the public. ie. the great mysteries, so to speak. Death – there is no death, the spirit lives on, irrespective of what belief system you hold. UFOs – they exist, they’re real. But there are hoaxes, misidentifications and purposeful hoaxes (eg. designed to give aliens a bad name). Of course, they are of all kinds – good, bad and indifferent as to intent. ie. ETs exist, ie. aliens, ie. angels. God does not exist – the origin of God and gods, lies with ETs/aliens/angels. Earth history – our own history is kept from us, purposefully. Our history would read like some Star Wars saga, sound like some combination of fantasy and science fiction. Truly. Anything in this world is possible, but we are all conditioned to think within a box of ‘conventional reality’ in which only established ‘truths’ and information is censored for us. This is so to control the public – witness our dependence on fossile fuels – surely the brilliant engineering and scientific minds on this earth can find viable and practical alternative energy solutions for us, but there is the controlling power of political power over all that… And politics stinks! Harvey
Response:
Your Name Here=Harvey (k…@ing.notin.aus) writes: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> In article <1121630883.192710.69…@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > ibshambat2…@hotmail.com says… >>One of the most evil ideas to have come out of psychology has been that >>one needs to have good self-esteem in order to have relationships. As >>someone who has scored medium on self-esteem test, I am quite qualified >>to address this malignancy, without standing to be accused as either >>having a low self-esteem or a high one. >>The same person can be in a good place or in a bad place depending on >>time, situation, social climate, decisions, etc. I’ve been up & down >>(as has been my self-esteem) and so have most of the people I know. If >>anything, if my experience is to be any guide, it’s when you’re down >>that you most need to feel loved. >>What is self-esteem? It is how a person feels about himself or herself. >>And that of course can be a function of a million variables. The same >>people who did well in 1960s did terribly in 1980s. The same character >>that does well in one time does badly in another. And the same of >>course is true among different geographical locations; professions; >>belief structures; and everything else. >>Now when I come out and tell the truth on this subject, I get >>confronted with grating hypocrisy and malice. If you’re a man, in a bad >>place, who badly needs love, then you are needy & need to pull yourself >>up by the bootstraps. If you’re a man going with a woman who is in a >>bad place, then you are a predator. >>It is to be said that if you are a woman going with a man who is in a >>bad place – or if you are a woman in a bad place going with a man – you >>do not encounter this idiocy, but rather "concern" and "protection" >>when of course the above had been utterly missing when the woman >>actually needed it. >>It is to be said likewise that the above takes place under the pretense >>of feminism and its belief in equality between men and women, while in >>fact containing some of the most patronizing, most chauvenistic, most >>intellectually insulting attitudes that have been expressed in recent >>society – a pretense and a belief that can only lead to "protection of >>women for their own good" and the ensuing deprivation of them of all >>meaningful rights and liberties. >>So if you seek for love when you most need it – or seek to offer love >>to someone who needs it likewise – you come under attack. >>I am of the belief that this meme was created by the predatory >>psychologists and distributed through the culture, in order that >>millions of dollars pour into the pockets of those who feed on human >>misery & prevent people from living for years upon years that they are >>under their "care." >>Ilya Shambat. > There are a lot of things that are fed to the public, that are unfair and > downright ‘lies’ – and we have to put up with it. > But living with such a mess of illogic and confusion can make life and living > so much harder here when people cannot tell right from wrong and are > purposefully confused. > How do you know something is truthful and correct? > Harvey
Beware if the paranormal writers you read ask this question and answer it for you, by that preparing you to take all they say as thruthful and correct, for giving their own definition of trtfhful and correct before hand, and the reader gobbling it without answering the question him/herself. Id not be surprised that you’d answer this paraphrasing what you read and gobbled without reflection nor analysis, swallowing what another one does for money for the truth cause they write "nobling" their deeds to better polish their gold bricks. That is a truth, and a well known and documented one. It might be of benefit to you to read books specialized on sectarian/manipulation thinking/techniques, so as to be more enlighted when you read on the paranormal, and so as to spot the manipulative dishonest techniques at a glance and from there, spot the lie(s) in the next lines that some unfortunate readers are manipulated into believing is the truth. There are tons of unexplained things in this world. Charlatans are not one of them;-) —
Response:
On 17 Jul 2005 13:08:03 -0700, "Ilya the Bat" <ibshambat2…@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Lately your lack of self-esteem is just good sense."
Response:
Are you a scientologist? ———————————— DONT CLICK HERE http://urlsnip.com/025027
Response:
arethusa wrote: > On 17 Jul 2005 13:08:03 -0700, "Ilya the Bat" > <ibshambat2…@hotmail.com> wrote: > "Lately your lack of self-esteem is just good sense."
Whose lack? Sense according to whom?
Response:
Iilya May I ask a few questions? First of all what does any of this have to do with hypnosis? And second of all it seems as if you believe that all mental illness is the fault of outside forces that we cannot control. What do you say to a person like me, who has a mental health condition that is due to a serious chemical imbalance. Who do you blame in this case? my mother for giving birth to me while smoking? Society because they allowed her to? Not everything under the sun can be blamed on other people. I am responding well to medication and therapy and hope to learn how to deal with my problem without the medicine soon. Untill then who do I blame? Lori
Response:
Lori L. Koonce wrote: > Iilya > May I ask a few questions? > First of all what does any of this have to do with hypnosis? > And second of all it seems as if you believe that all mental illness is > the fault of outside forces that we cannot control.
I’m not talking about "mental illness." I’m talking about how a concept from psychology has been misused for evil ends. > What do you say to a person like me, who has a mental health condition > that is due to a serious chemical imbalance.
Take your meds. > Who do you blame in this case?
Who talked about blaming anyone? > Not everything under the sun can be blamed on other people.
What yanked your chain, lady? Read what I wrote before hanging on me such stereotypes.
Response:
On 18 Jul 2005 07:14:51 -0700, ilya_shambat2…@yahoo.com wrote: >arethusa wrote: >> On 17 Jul 2005 13:08:03 -0700, "Ilya the Bat" >> <ibshambat2…@hotmail.com> wrote: >> "Lately your lack of self-esteem is just good sense." >Whose lack? >Sense according to whom?
dude, relax. it was just a line from a movie i liked. don’t take life so seriously, Ilya. it’s too long and hard to be taken so seriously all the time. denise
Response:
In article <1121696707.576176.176…@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, purplelyn…@excite.com says… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Iilya >May I ask a few questions? >First of all what does any of this have to do with hypnosis? >And second of all it seems as if you believe that all mental illness is >the fault of outside forces that we cannot control. >What do you say to a person like me, who has a mental health condition >that is due to a serious chemical imbalance. Who do you blame in this >case? my mother for giving birth to me while smoking? Society because >they allowed her to? >Not everything under the sun can be blamed on other people. I am >responding well to medication and therapy and hope to learn how to deal >with my problem without the medicine soon. >Untill then who do I blame? >Lori
Blaming is looking at things in the immediate environment. Looking at it from further afield, yields a different perspective. Some people do live very hard and difficult lives (that is unfair and sometimes all too cruel) – perhaps ‘blaming’ someone/something for lifes’ unfairness is to still carry a chip with you, with an altogether unfair burden already – whereas looking at the situation spiritually – that with a difficult life, important spiritual and divine lessons are learnt, that of forgiveness and patience – and to connect with the divine and spiritual within yourself, which allows oneself to somehow overcome the terrible burden of living here. Harvey
Response:
In article <1121630883.192710.69…@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, ibshambat2…@hotmail.com says… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->One of the most evil ideas to have come out of psychology has been that >one needs to have good self-esteem in order to have relationships. As >someone who has scored medium on self-esteem test, I am quite qualified >to address this malignancy, without standing to be accused as either >having a low self-esteem or a high one. >The same person can be in a good place or in a bad place depending on >time, situation, social climate, decisions, etc. I’ve been up & down >(as has been my self-esteem) and so have most of the people I know. If >anything, if my experience is to be any guide, it’s when you’re down >that you most need to feel loved. >What is self-esteem? It is how a person feels about himself or herself. >And that of course can be a function of a million variables. The same >people who did well in 1960s did terribly in 1980s. The same character >that does well in one time does badly in another. And the same of >course is true among different geographical locations; professions; >belief structures; and everything else. >Now when I come out and tell the truth on this subject, I get >confronted with grating hypocrisy and malice. If you’re a man, in a bad >place, who badly needs love, then you are needy & need to pull yourself >up by the bootstraps. If you’re a man going with a woman who is in a >bad place, then you are a predator. >It is to be said that if you are a woman going with a man who is in a >bad place – or if you are a woman in a bad place going with a man – you >do not encounter this idiocy, but rather "concern" and "protection" >when of course the above had been utterly missing when the woman >actually needed it. >It is to be said likewise that the above takes place under the pretense >of feminism and its belief in equality between men and women, while in >fact containing some of the most patronizing, most chauvenistic, most >intellectually insulting attitudes that have been expressed in recent >society – a pretense and a belief that can only lead to "protection of >women for their own good" and the ensuing deprivation of them of all >meaningful rights and liberties. >So if you seek for love when you most need it – or seek to offer love >to someone who needs it likewise – you come under attack. >I am of the belief that this meme was created by the predatory >psychologists and distributed through the culture, in order that >millions of dollars pour into the pockets of those who feed on human >misery & prevent people from living for years upon years that they are >under their "care." >Ilya Shambat.
There are a lot of things that are fed to the public, that are unfair and downright ‘lies’ – and we have to put up with it. But living with such a mess of illogic and confusion can make life and living so much harder here when people cannot tell right from wrong and are purposefully confused. How do you know something is truthful and correct? Harvey
Response:
ibshambat2…@hotmail.com wrote: > Lori L. Koonce wrote: > > Iilya > > May I ask a few questions? > > First of all what does any of this have to do with hypnosis?
Nothing. He just thinks that everything he says sounds profound. Too much alcohol will also bring this state on. > > And second of all it seems as if you believe that all mental illness is > > the fault of outside forces that we cannot control. > I’m not talking about "mental illness." I’m talking about how a concept > from psychology has been misused for evil ends.
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by sheer stupidity. > > What do you say to a person like me, who has a mental health condition > > that is due to a serious chemical imbalance. > Take your meds.
What a cruel man you are, Shambat! How do you face yourself in the mirror without puking? Clearly, yours are the words of a man with NO self esteem. > > Who do you blame in this case? > Who talked about blaming anyone?
You apparently haven’t been reading what you write. Too much alcohol will also bring THAT mental state about. > > Not everything under the sun can be blamed on other people. > What yanked your chain, lady?
See? I already told you the same thing! This isn’t about people having their chains yanked – it’s about the inappropriate concusions you reach being questioned. I fully understand why you feel THREATENED by that. Too bad – it is, after all, YOUR misconceptions, causing this. > Read what I wrote before hanging on me > such stereotypes.
But you’re EASY to stereotype, Shambat! So EASY! Who can resist?
Response:
One of the most evil ideas to have come out of psychology has been that one needs to have good self-esteem in order to have relationships. As someone who has scored medium on self-esteem test, I am quite qualified to address this malignancy, without standing to be accused as either having a low self-esteem or a high one. The same person can be in a good place or in a bad place depending on time, situation, social climate, decisions, etc. I’ve been up & down (as has been my self-esteem) and so have most of the people I know. If anything, if my experience is to be any guide, it’s when you’re down that you most need to feel loved. What is self-esteem? It is how a person feels about himself or herself. And that of course can be a function of a million variables. The same people who did well in 1960s did terribly in 1980s. The same character that does well in one time does badly in another. And the same of course is true among different geographical locations; professions; belief structures; and everything else. Now when I come out and tell the truth on this subject, I get confronted with grating hypocrisy and malice. If you’re a man, in a bad place, who badly needs love, then you are needy & need to pull yourself up by the bootstraps. If you’re a man going with a woman who is in a bad place, then you are a predator. It is to be said that if you are a woman going with a man who is in a bad place – or if you are a woman in a bad place going with a man – you do not encounter this idiocy, but rather "concern" and "protection" when of course the above had been utterly missing when the woman actually needed it. It is to be said likewise that the above takes place under the pretense of feminism and its belief in equality between men and women, while in fact containing some of the most patronizing, most chauvenistic, most intellectually insulting attitudes that have been expressed in recent society – a pretense and a belief that can only lead to "protection of women for their own good" and the ensuing deprivation of them of all meaningful rights and liberties. So if you seek for love when you most need it – or seek to offer love to someone who needs it likewise – you come under attack. I am of the belief that this meme was created by the predatory psychologists and distributed through the culture, in order that millions of dollars pour into the pockets of those who feed on human misery & prevent people from living for years upon years that they are under their "care." Ilya Shambat.
Response: