HGL's F.B. writings : With TM, an Atheist Fanatic · New blog on the kid : Before You Call Someone (For Instance Me) a Mind Control Victim ...
From a post on a debate blog, the following debate on the subject of mind control can be extracted:
- People that need God are dangerous!
- Marxist clap trap, and Marxists are documentedly dangerous, sorry, that is an insult to dangerous, they are vicious.
Look up Wurmbrandt's Tortured for Christ to see what Marxists did in Romania, and stop equating Theists with Islamic State.
- Man is dangerous & more so when they have a "God"
- Man is dangerous, because Adam fell.
Having a false "God" - including yours, the absence of God - makes him more dangerous.
- All religions involve judgement & punishment they are all mind control
- There is not anything like a mind without any kind of judgement or punishment or influence by others, which could with a stretch be considered mind control.
You show some of these.
- No your mind is controlled that is why you need a God & a government!
- Sounds like yours is fanatic.
- I' not a fanatic you American Taliban are the fanatics I'm a scientist
- "you X are the fanatics, I/we am/are scientist-s" is a very fanatic statement. I did not call you fanatic due to your beliefs, but due to how you deal with such believing what you don't - as seen in previous exchanges in this debate.
- You cannot reason with religous people otherwise they won't be religious!
- You mean Atheists can't reason with religious people over recruting them for atheism, right?
IMPORTANT NOTE : this is not one subthread, but straddling some, and many of above statements are truncated to include only subjects like:
- mind controlled
- can't reason with
Two last here are also given outside the order they were in original debate, for that one, with subthreads correctly numbered, see:
HGL's F.B. writings : With TM, an Atheist Fanatic
I think the important thing to note is, whether someone has gone through anything like mind control attempts or not, is a question about his individual personal history, not about which positions he takes.
Also, a history of attempted mind control may well backfire on those trying to mind control someone - on SSHL, I was cut off from my Christian mother, Catholic students were not allowed to talk too much to me, especially about religion (I think), and I was under constant fire from Atheists and Anticlericals and Antichristians. When deciding to become Catholic, I was not very successful in contacting the Catholic Church at first, and part of the reasons the diocese pushed for "waiting" may have been that people from the school pushed against receiving me at all, or at least doing so rapidly. While they did not get what they wanted, as far as my religious affiliation is concerned, this left scars. Not totally different from those I would have if a mind control attempt had been successful.
If people seeing these scars conclude I was, in my individual history, subjected to mind control, the worst thing they can do - from a care perspective - is to attack my Catholicism as imposed by Catholic mind controllers. They are, in such a case, doing exactly what the people did who attempted to mind control me out of Christianity overall, and they are doing so from fairly similar motives, in the case of Atheists and Anticlericals. As to Protestants attacking Catholicism, they are what my mother protected me largely from - in that respect, even if on other issues joining their worship.
But I did not go to St. Thomas Aquinas or Catholic tradition, because a Catholic attacked the Bible or because a Catholic attacked Dale and Elaine Rhooton's Can We Know? or because a Catholic attacked Wurmbrandt or Edgar Andrews. I went to them because all this was under attack from Atheists, and I found the Catholic history the best support for Christianity - including Creationism (though I took a break from it after converting), including Anticommunism. And as to the kind of broad minded Protestantism which is Evolutionist, Marxist, un-Biblical and proud of it ... I met that to my surprise in the Swedish Church, perhaps saw more if it than there was, because C. S. Lewis had alerted me to it about Anglicanism, but there still was some. I didn't go to the Swedish Church for that. I never liked Modernism than, nor do I now.
What I need in my life is not more opportunities to get away from Catholicism (not the modernist version which more and more dominates the Vatican II Sect), or meet more and more non-Christians to broaden my mind : all such measures impoverish my opportunities to actually work with what I have, to actually earn money on expressing my convictions. Same with meeting Catholics in Modernist parishes, who are then not allowed to follow up with me.
I need to work with people I agree with and who agree with me. Not with people who agree with TM. On intellectual business, I can't work with them. They are not likely to help me print and sell Creationist stuff. On non-intellectual works, apart from my earning too little to pay the study loan, their presence would be a burden on the coffee breaks. Kunta Kinte was (according to novel, Toby Waller may have been a different matter) an Atlantic ocean away from Juffure and under the British and later US law a slave - two obstacles which should not be stopping me - and in Spotsylvania county he had only few Blacks equally interested in freedom from slavery, most being scared of trying. Fiddler told Kunta, he had seen five or six like him in a long life.
In a city like Paris or a region like Île de France, 2 million or 12 million, there should be at least about 1000 Catholics highly critical of modernism and willing to consider young earth creationism and geocentrism. At least 1 % of them should be in such positions in their lives that they'd be interested in working with me as writer or as one of the writers. Are they ALL manipulated by rumours about me? Are they ALL convinced earthly society needs the oppressions that I oppose, as in school compulsion, psychiatry, child welfare, as in heavy police control of the homeless? Are they all convinced forbidding abortion and gay marriage can be done without allowing something else, like for instance younger marriages and less attention at school, namely leaving only what is voluntary on part of parents and pupils?
Or are there shrinks who tell them, I am some kind of madman or drunkard, while themselves trying to treat me as a mind controlled person who on their theory needs even more mind control to "get well" or "adjust" or whatever they like to label the "cure"? If so, they are dealing behind my back.
Or are all of these obviously young people (people my age usually don't go around looking for a living on intellectual business, and I am only half an exception, since I started working - unpaid - 17 years ago, so they are young) ordered by parents or teachers or parsons to shun me?
Hans Georg Lundahl