|
| | | Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168 | Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans?
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 419917
4/20/2008 3:38 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
bump |
| Vincent Bridges
User ID: 420353
4/21/2008 8:53 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
More SnOTT:
So naturally purplehaze reposts my comments to SnOTT, which opens another round of discussion, resulting in these comments by LKJ:
Laura
Administrator
From: France
Registered: 2006-01-18
Posts: 3906
Website
Re: Psychopath Attack on Democratic Underground
purplehaze wrote:
Here's VB's latest "poor me" about us calling him on his psychopathic nonsense:
VB: I don't know which sickens me more, being compared to the real predators cited above by purplehaze or reading LKJ's protestations of innocence. "Well, we tried all those approaches..." Right, in a pig's eye you did... _ [link to www.godlikeproductions.com]
VB: Hey purplehaze, since you post these to Laura's forums, be sure to repost this one...
< As a matter of fact, we spent a couple of days holding off on saying or doing anything regarding Vinnie and his conference while we tried to talk sense into him. >
VB: Nothing was said in the month between my visit and their decision to publicly back out and blast me personally, July 5th to August 5th, 2001. Emails were exchanged concerning details on The Noah Syndrome and my health at that point. But nothing about backing out...
< He just couldn't get it. Then, when we canceled the conference appearance - well over 6 weeks in advance - >
VB: Except that, two weeks before actually backing out, they posted a "disclaimer" on their website. As a follow up to that, they posted this: "The issue is, and I will repeat it again, the sponsorship by Fifth Way and San Graal, and the fact that both are publicly associated with practices and teachings that can be connected to what is perceived as Satanism, and no amount of declaiming that you are not a Satanist will cure that fact."
During that two-week period I tried to accommodate their paranoia as best I could. My contract with the retreat center specified 60 days notice to cancel and get the deposit back. That would have been July 21, 2001; by August 5th, the deposit was definitely unrefundable. So I offered them: "… the conference is all yours. I'll handle the folks who were interested in the other parts of the program, and it will be a weekend with Laura and the cassiopaeans, exclusively. I'm sure the folks from the group who have signed up would prefer that anyway. I'll take care of the zaca lake details for handling your reduced group, and your plane tickets out there. Anything over the expenses you are welcome to keep."
This seemed reasonable as the Cassiopaeanists took up 80% of the conference space. But nope, they wanted to cancel, and do as much damage as they could to me. Since I had the space, I cobbled together a conference with those who still wanted to participate, and that I could afford.
< and he wrote a huge temper tantrum email, sending it out to about 200 people, pretty much saying that we would be responsible for refunding people's money, >
VB: I was at that point on several of her egroups, and when I began to question her attacks, I was banned. So I emailed most of the group directly, expressing my dismay and trying to explain my side of the problem. This is the much-vaunted Temper Tantrum... It said: "For those of you primarily attending the conference to hear Laura and Ark, I am very sorry that this happened. However, I cannot refund your money before the event simply on those grounds. You are welcome to attend the conference anyway, as you have paid for it, and I am sure you will find it fascinating, entertaining and very informative, even without the channelled "wisdom" of the Cassiopaeans.
"I will keep a list of those who have paid but do not attend for the above reasons, and will make every effort to refund your money after the conference.
"I hope you accept, again, my apologies for the situation and realize that it was not of my making."
Sure doesn't sound like a Temper Tantrum, and isn't even close to telling the conference people to get their refunds from Laura and Ark...
< that's when I let people know that he had to refund it by law. There are still a couple of people he did not refund. >
VB: Everyone received a refund, except Barry Tarr, who was living in his car at that point. I sent his check to Laura and Ark along with the dummy of The Noah Syndrome, and the CD with the somewhat unedited transcripts. They refused, several times, to sign for it. And let's not forget Ingrid Tulloch, who got a double refund, and refused to admit it even after the credit card company provided proof.
< Then, he and StormBear launched their relentless attack on the net which we tried to ignore as much as possible. >
VB: Except of course that’s a flat out lie… I didn’t join Matrioska and say anything until October, when all the refunds had gone out. Laura started her campaign back in late July and by August 11, barely six weeks before the conference she was in full attack mode. And where exactly is proof of any “relentless attack” made by Stormy or me during that period? Show me one reference… Of course, you can’t because there isn’t any…
< Oh, we tried to answer some things, trying to find common ground, but there was no talking to those two screaming, kicking babies. And, of course, Andy was like an attack dog; no matter how many times I said "do NOT engage on our behalf" he went out and did it anyway. Now he's "their attack dog." That was one situation where it was definitely true "with friends like that, who needs enemies?" >
VB: These are totally untrue. Not only were they not “trying to find common,” while ignoring nonexistent attacks, Laura was outlining her “strategy” on her inner circle egroup and gloating over it:
“And here we come to the Vincent saga. Once I realized that I was in the grip of a petty tyrant, I put the "strategy" into operation. All of you witnessed it. It involved systematic harassment of Vincent within the confines of the forum of the group. I did not engage with him in private where he would have slammed me viciously. I knew he would not do that in public. I also investigated his weakness thoroughly - his practice and teaching of rituals that are, in the outside world, connected inextricably with Black Magick. He had another weakness: his association with Dan Winter and his criticism of Stan Tenen.
“I spent a day writing the Meru articles on the Perseus page as another "insult" to his ritualistic business because it cuts deep at the heart of the whole kabbalistic foundations of magick.
“The strategy calls for being on the alert for a moment in which the weakness can be used against the tyrant. As it turned out, this article was the inducer of that moment - the attack by the Jewish crowd screaming "anti-semitism," followed by Stan Tenen's attack and impending connection of Satanism to Dan Winter, and by default through long association, with Vincent.
“It was time to act.
“As Don Juan points out, if you are on the alert for the "moment," it always comes.
“So, the cancellation was announced IN PUBLIC. The "slave" (us) did what amounted to "taunting" the tyrant and "making fun" of his work and public persona. It made him look ridiculous, as Don Juan suggests is necessary.
“And, as Don Juan suggests, part of the strategy is the certainty that the
tyrant will retaliate, but in a covert way.
“Vincent began planning his destruction of us. He wrote an email that was supposed to engage the emotions of everyone on the group in his favor - to show how terribly he had been wronged.
“But, I blocked it. (and here I will say that a number of others really wanted to "try to work it out" and "make peace in the family. A series of emails were exchanged begging Vincent to think about what he was doing. That only served to further enrage him. He came after me with all that fury - in his email sent to 150 plus recipients. But his rage had blinded him. He acted in ways that clearly revealed his true nature. By this time, he was unable to control himself because he had been provoked. The subsequent webpage was the final series of interactions that led to the resolution.”
VB: So there you have the whole scam, the strategy of “systematic harassment.” Once they decided that I was a “petty tyrant,” because I knew too much about their scams, and because they no longer needed me, the harassment began and escalated until I reacted. The timing was carefully chosen, as was the timing of the announcement that they were canceling, to do maximum damage. But my response to her calculated attacks was “blocked,” and when I went directly to the people involved, the rest of her egroups, that was taken as proof of my “true nature,” in a “petty tyrant” way of course. Laura planned the whole interaction as a way to attack me and get out of doing the conference.
VB: Note also her deep hypocrisy. This is a woman who channels aliens on a ouiji board and quotes Castenada as backup while attacking me for being too involved in rituals that are connected to Black Magic! Simply astounding… But of course, that’s not the point. She chose these points because she thought she saw a weakness, not out of any belief or knowledge. She wrote an article that garnered some comments about her anti-Semitism, and suddenly it’s my fault? Simply unbelievable, except as a target of opportunity, as Laura notes above…
VB: So why was Laura determined not to go to the conference? Either she knew it was not going to be safe to fly to the west coast in September, a possibility as we have discussed on this thread on page 75 – 78, or she was afraid that a group of real experts on the subject would show her up as the fraud she truly was. Hence the need to attack, not just me, but also the entire group and the very idea itself: “Further, while we are students of scientific ancient gnosis, we are critical of the theories of "galactic alignment…” (From original disclaimer, late July 2001)
<And, of course, we have a full archive of the public discussion board where most of their ranting and raving was going on (Matrioska).>
VB: Great, why don’t you publish those? Please include Ark’s December flame war…
<So, I can prove, with hard data, emails, documents, that we most certainly did try to sort this thing out in a civilized way. Problem is: Vinnie and gang just aren't civilized as Ark quoted above. He was unable to read the cues that were being signaled repeatedly, and he just kept digging himself in deeper and deeper and looking more and more pathological with every word.>
VB: Okay, so where is that data? I was unable to read the cues of your master plan for my destruction as a petty tyrant? So you were able to manipulate me into the reaction you wanted? No one else sees this as insane behavior? Just exactly how is this civilized behavior?
<It's actually humorous to read this:
VB: I don't know which sickens me more, being compared to the real predators cited above by purplehaze or reading LKJ's protestations of innocence. "Well, we tried all those approaches..." Right, in a pig's eye you did... _ [link to www.godlikeproductions.com]
<That's his real problem. He can't see that the two are inextricable, that his being compared to a predator is directly related to his inability to see that we DID "try all those approaches.">
VB: But, as I demonstrated above, she didn’t “try” any approaches, other than blatant manipulation to get the result she wanted through her “systematic harassment.” So if that’s just a lie, then what does that do to comparing me with a predator?
<What he's really upset about is that we didn't shut up permanently and let him just mow us down and never complain about it. How dare we have backbone and refuse to be victimized. Because, of course, that is what he really means when he says "In a pigs eye." We refused to let him get away with his crap.>
VB: However, just recently Laura said this:
“Naively, I thought that I could just slip away unnoticed. We tried the "bifurcation of ways" thing. We cancelled our appearance at his conference and let him know that we would be withdrawing from any publishing arrangements (he hadn't held up his end of the deal anyway, so that was easy). We just wanted to let him go his way, we would go ours, and that would be that. Just a peaceful agreement that our paths were not going in
the same direction…
“But, oh no! That was not allowed. Just as the Eric Pepin trolls would not just go away and do their thing elsewhere, Vincent Bridge's "drive for dominance" dictated that he must either own me and my work, or destroy me and my work…
“And just as in the Bridges case, the unusual persistence of the attack-bots made us curious and it was then that we began to investigate Bridges background. Only after he had been on the attack for several months, did we publish a defense and point out that he was a liar and a thief and a whole host of unsavory things. I published all the email exchanges between us so that people could actually have data.”
VB: This is the exact opposite of what she said above. And it is wrong. The main attack on me was in place by the 8/11/01 update to the article Retreat from Zaca, [link to www.cassiopaea.com] long before anyone else had anything to say. The discussion on Matrioshka didn’t start until October. The cold hard fact is that, as shown by her email quoted above, she planned the whole interaction in order to discredit me, and destroy the conference, and to do so in such a way as to cause the most damage.
VB: Here’s a quote that shows just how twisted Laura’s logic could be:
My contract with Zaca Lake Foundation reads: "Deposit is non-refundable 60 days prior to retreat." Sixty days was July 21. You guys canceled on August 5, barely giving even six weeks notice. [...] Since I am responsible for the conference, my name on the bottom line and all that, I will do what I can to get as much of the deposit returned as possible. And we will of course just eat the loss if we have to and return everyone's money.
*** V: I don¹t see how that could be any clearer. My name is on the contract, and as JWiedner, Director of the Zaca Lake Retreat, says below, the deposit was paid and was, at the point at Laura and Ark withdrew, non-refundable. Again, if they had withdrawn when they put the disclaimer up, none of these problems would have arisen.
[If there had not been an email from V to the attendees (but also to unrelated and unconcerned parties) that the conference was being cancelled, and the reason for it being our "defection," and our "trashing," none of these problems would have arisen.]
VB: So instead of addressing the issue, if you knew you weren’t coming before the deadline for refunds, why wait until after that point unless if was on purpose, part of that “systematic harassment,” everything is blamed on my (unauthorized) email explaining my position. Sounds very much like “pathologicals classicly (sic) go on the attack against ANYONE who figures their game out and speaks truth.”
VB: So, purplehaze, I ask you: What kind of person carefully constructs a plan of “systematic harassment” designed to discredit and manipulate a supposed friend and colleague, and to destroy his conference in the most destructive way possible, while blaming everything on his, calculated and manipulated, reaction? I called them on their “game,” using made up arguments and their own problems as an excuse to attack the conference and me, and they immediately went on the attack. Less than a week after their cancellation, the full attack was in place. All according to the plan, the “systematic harassment” of anyone she doesn’t agree with, or who knows too much, that continues to this day. And you’re helping her get away with it…
VB |
| andersonjihadski
User ID: 419917
4/21/2008 9:49 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
I have to say Vincent that I find almost all Laura's followers barking mad - they simply have not studied the subject of cults, and if they have, they refuse to believe that LKJ is now a bona fide cult leader. There are a few who grok things, of course, but as soon as they do, LKJ's moderators (she has about 8-9 or more on every thread, and they are always on duty, and I mean ALWAYS) jump on the offending saceligious dissenter and the person and post is removed - the dissenter is banned. That is why I posted their banning 'essay' a few days ago.
So we have a typical cult where no dissent whatsoever is allowed. No debate is allowed. No questions of an awkward nature are allowed.
But what really horrifies me the most is that all the sycophantic followers simply absolutely REFUSE to judge Laura at all - they refuse to read into her history, they refuse to belive that Laura has committed multiple felonies and frauds her whole life -
Now exactly WHAT does this say about the MORALS and ETHICS of her brainwashed cult followers?
Not a lot does it?
I find it intensely depressing that this psychopathic woman can get away with her evil lifestyle for year after year - never doing a damned day's real work, living high on the hog rent free in a huge Chateau, plenty of fine wines and booz, good food and adoring servants to do her bidding. It must be so enticing for her, the whole schtick, that she will never, unless forced to by the law and authorities, give up one iota of her power of all these lives worldwide.
Personally I would be ashamed to live on hand outs all my life, live by begging people for their money, and live by stealing people's minds and work - I truly cannot think of a more evil person on this planet other than the outright warmongers like Tony Blair and Dubya and their ilk.
More to come - stay tuned.
We MUST keep the pressure on, as their lies are now infiltrating various movements throughout the net - this is of cpurse all planned by the cult, and I can assure you their actions are not STO in nature. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 420443
4/21/2008 12:13 PM | | Anonymous Coward
User ID: 420443
4/21/2008 12:15 PM | | Anonymous Coward
User ID: 420950
4/22/2008 7:23 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
More SnOTT:
“And just as in the Bridges case, the unusual persistence of the attack-bots made us curious and it was then that we began to investigate Bridges background. Only after he had been on the attack for several months, did we publish a defense and point out that he was a liar and a thief and a whole host of unsavory things. I published all the email exchanges between us so that people could actually have data.”
VB: This is the exact opposite of what she said above. And it is wrong. The main attack on me was in place by the 8/11/01 update to the article Retreat from Zaca, [ link to www.cassiopaea.com]
long before anyone else had anything to say. The discussion on Matrioshka didn’t start until October. The cold hard fact is that, as shown by her email quoted above, she planned the whole interaction in order to discredit me, and destroy the conference, and to do so in such a way as to cause the most damage.
Lost the rest of the paragraph after the link...
VB |
| Vincent Bridges
User ID: 420950
4/22/2008 8:13 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 420443
Don't think so... It looks like the situation is well in hand...
VB |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 308398
4/22/2008 11:13 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Wiley50 (1000+ posts) Fri Apr-11-08 06:00 AM
Response to Original message
11. I recieved the two copies of the book that Laura promised me today
and she included a copy of her 911 book too.
I just left the thread in the dungeon that has been taken over by her attackers. There is no one (no DUers ) posting there except them. And, of course, a couple of Laurs's friends posting enough to keep them busy.
What a fucking hoot! Those idiots haven't caught on that they are just talking to themselves!
I propose we email this link to Laura and ask her to join in. But caution her not to post the link on her blog.
That way those idiots can wear themselves out over there talking to themselves
And we can continue discussing the book as we were before we were so rudely interrupted
They'll never look around and find this thrad. They don't care about our other political stuff.They are simply the kind of RW trolls we've been outsmarting for years.
Good Show, TFC!
"That weren't no coyote. It was a fox!" |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 308398
4/22/2008 11:14 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Laurel Canyon (49 posts) Tue Apr-22-08 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #11
81. What condescension from Non-wiley Coyote!
Edited on Tue Apr-22-08 12:39 PM by Laurel Canyon
I recieved the two copies of the book that Laura promised me today
and she included a copy of her 911 book too.
Then you have successfully just wasted your money. Did Laura perhaps mention in her 911 booklet (it is *that* insubstantial, yes, issued after consultation with her ouija board space alien buddies just after 911 in a huge ***rush*** to ty and make some bucks off the tragedy) that her George-Soros connected recent Polish emigre husband, Ark Jadczyk, was (still is?) an employee of black ops Pentagon-controlled DARPA?
The answer is, no - she did not.
Let me get this right - this woman from vanity publisher Red Pill Press, Laura Knight-Jadczyk, who is successfully poisoning the well all over the internet by her whacko cult's association with the genuine 911 truth movement, is intimately linked with a Pentagon employee? An employee who is big buds with George Soros? With a top secret USA security clearance???
What a laugh, and the joke is on mugs like Coyote who don't do their homework.
I just left the thread in the dungeon that has been taken over by her attackers. There is no one (no DUers ) posting there except them. And, of course, a couple of Laurs's friends (cult followers) posting enough to keep them busy.
You forgot to mention that Laura was posting along with her stooges, some of whom pretended (Koehli for example) that they were not connected with her, when in fact they are 'true believers' and moderators on her SnOTT forums.
So - you just left, huh? I rather doubt that. The thread has been locked for some time, because Laura / DU was threatened with a lawsuit if DU continued to let Laura post libelous and defamatory claims about real living people here on this planet. Laura thinks she can spew her vile crapola all over the net at whim, but that is no longer the case. Lawyers are ready and waiting to take appropriate action against her and the QFS board, as Eic Pepin has already done.
What a fucking hoot! Those idiots haven't caught on that they are just talking to themselves!
The hoot is on you. Why? Because you read it all, and so did most folks on THIS thread. Any more inaccuracies you want to convey? You DO know the thread is locked, don't you? Are you telling porky pies here Coyote? Lies?
I propose we email this link to Laura and ask her to join in. But caution her not to post the link on her blog.
Why not post the link scaredy cat? What are you afraid of? LOL. What a coward you are. Ever hear of free speech? One rule for you, another rule for the rest of us, huh?
That way those idiots can wear themselves out over there talking to themselves
Umm, the thread is locked. Oh but you were just over there, and claim it is unlocked? I see. Who is the lying idiot then?
And we can continue discussing the book as we were before we were so rudely interrupted
You mean you can continue to propagate the spin and lies about Pornerology without any awkward questions being asked about the Soros and DARPA connected chief proponents of this obscene doctrine?
Way to go Coyote!
They'll never look around and find this thrad.
What an idiot.
They don't care about our other political stuff.
I care about free speech. Is that political stuff? Ever hear of it?
They are simply the kind of RW trolls we've been outsmarting for years.
Outsmarting? ROTFLMAO! What a condescending little specimen you are.
Good Show, TFC!
Bad show Coyote! Go read the Constitution and learn something. You disgust me. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 308398
4/23/2008 9:44 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
bump |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 422468
4/24/2008 7:36 PM | | Clarence Darrow
User ID: 308398
4/24/2008 9:31 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
OK I am posting about 7-8 Q and As that are abolutely essential to figuring out what is going on here.
I hope the GLP mods allow me to post 7-8 times in quick succession.
tama (137 posts) Thu Apr-17-08 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #55
60. Yup, science is evil n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Fulcanelli (40 posts) Thu Apr-17-08 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #60
64. science isn't evil
Tama
Why do you think science is evil?
It isn't knowledge that harms people but way that knowledge is used.
Wisdom is the ancient word for this.
I don't think science is evil at all. I think pseudo science is evil though. And pnerology is a pseudo science.
And I will have to say that most people on this thread must agree with me because not one of the supporters of pnerology or Laura Knight Jadczyk has come here to answer the big question:
How do you measure evil? |
| Tama
User ID: 308398
4/24/2008 9:33 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
How "evil cannot be quantified" and "attempt to quantify evil" is (qualitatively?) evil in itself.
Hence by a short leap of fuzzy qualitative logic , pure quantitative scientific thinking (science defined as measuring) - without balancing it with qualitative thinking and sensing to put calculations and measurements into their appropriate contexts - is qualitative evil.
In other words, if "ethics" (empathy, sympathy, conscience etc.) is basically a feeling and a sense of some whole (holy?) that is not a reducible object, ie. not a sum of its parts and analyzable by scientific thought, then science should be subject to ethics and not vice versa; and to demand that ethics should be subject to science is indeed "evil".
There is an escape, though, to save science: giving up the extremely narrow definition of science as nothing but measuring. And with quantum physics and all (that is basically very wierd math or "a general theory of measuring") that should have been done ages ago, and based on strong empirical data aka measuring itself, to say the least! |
| Clarence Darrow
User ID: 308398
4/24/2008 9:34 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
I agree Tama.
I think this is essentially a spiritual problem, one that cannot be measured. On its face ponerology seems like a good idea. But when it gets down to the brass tacks it simply dissolves into nothingness. There is no way to measure evil so the idea that we could set up a committee of psychologists who arbitrarily decide who is evil and who is not, who is a psychopath and who is not, who is cointelpro and who is not, is absolutely ridiculous and eventually will lead to concentration camps for the evil ones - whomever they may be.
If we could trust the people who are telling us that there is a science of evil, that evil can be measured - then that would be different. But as with all emerging philosophies whether it be communism or nazism or ponerology we must examine the people who would propagate that philosophy. Do they have a past that would lead us to believe that they can be trusted? Have they ever done anything in their past that might be construed as 'evil' or pathological?
Do we really want Dick Cheney heading a committee to decide who is a psychopath and who is not?
That is why I say that ponerology is essentially a fascist dogma wrapped up in scientific clothing.
Unless we change the way we measure things - and I don't see how that will happen - ponerology is destined for the dustbin of history.
The fact that this pseudo-science emerged from behind the iron curtain where psychologists frequently used their profession to jail protesters should give us all a pause for concern. The fact that the person who wrote the introduction and who published the book has a long history of attacking innocent people, saying that this person or that is a psychopath without offering a shred of evidence for this assertion and that she has appointed herself as the final arbiter on who is a cointelpro agent and who is not is an even greater cause for concern.
But the biggest concern is that this idea, this pseudo science is actually being taken seriously by the progressive community is the most disturbing thing that has occurred in a long, long time. |
| Tama
User ID: 308398
4/24/2008 9:35 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
You still cling to the definition of science as measuring; but that applies (more or less) only to the so called "exact sciences"; whereas humanistic fields such as psychology, sociology etc. utilize many other methodologies besides exact measuring, including even introspective methods, when formulating theories. The definition of science as measuring and nothing else, is in itself "fascist", as it claims that humanistic fields, philosophy, ethics, etc. have nothing to do with science but are all "pseudoscience".
One problem is the dual meaning of 'science' in English, meaning in strict sense only exact natural sciences (physics etc.) and more broadly all academic fields of study, which causes lot of misunderstanding and empty rhetoric. |
| Clarence Darrow
User ID: 308398
4/24/2008 9:36 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Many scientists, like Richard Dawkins, insist that psychology and psychiatry are not really a science because science is only about measuring and one cannot measure in psychology or psychiatry. That is why they are the most abused of modern "scientific" modalities.
How many people are thrown into mental institutions unfairly? A psychiatrist can place you in a mental hospital for years without a trial and without due process. That is Dawkins point also.
Psychologists thought that Gays were psychopaths 20 years ago. Now they don't. Talk about sloppy! How many gays were sent to mental institutions because their psychiatrists thought that being gay was proof of psychopathic behavior?
I am not against psychology and psychiatry and i think they have a place in this world. But let us not give those people much authority over us or we will pay forever.
The book on ponerology insists that it is a science. Okay fine. Now it is up to those who propagate such a theory to prove their point. What is the thing that is being measured?
How can evil be quantified?
And if it cannot be quantified then it is a theory but it should never be allowed into the body politic.
Some psychopath would just use the idea to attempt to destroy their enemies.
And that is EXACTLY what is happening here. |
| Tama
User ID: 308398
4/24/2008 9:36 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
It's worthwhile to remember Hume's guillotine "No should from is"; ie. no ethical theory (e.g measuring "good" and "evil" by utilitarian calculus) cannot be logically deduced from ontological theory (e.g standard physics).
On the other hand, the corner stone of any critical theory (e.g social, but also quantum physics is critical in the same sense) is that it is participatory and dynamic, it acknowledges that by it's predictions and other effects it influences both the object of study and the theorizing subject.
Hence the other way around "No is from should" does not apply, choises between ontological theories, e.g. when they are empirically equivalent but differ in other aspects (as any unfalsified theory where empirical proof of falsification is still inconclusive is), can and should be made according to ethical criteria, if there are found ethical axioms that can be agreed upon.
So let's suppose we have two ontological sociopsychological theories to choose from: 1) all men are evil greedy bastards because of original sin, 2) all men have great potential to act like evil greedy bastards when affected by certain social situations (e.g. in a political system that makes them elect as leaders and role models mainly sick sociopaths who were maltreated as children), and neither theory can be falcified by empirical proof - but produce different result when applied to practice, then the choise between the theories can be made according to ethical criteria based on ethical axioms - if there are axioms that can be agreed upon. |
| Clarence Darrow
User ID: 308398
4/24/2008 9:37 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
There is no way to agree on what is evil and what is not. It really depends on the situation. Possibly there was a good reason for Laura Knight Jadczyk to take the $250,000 in the fake House Raffle in 2003.
If there is she should take a minute and explain it to us.
Not every overt act that appears to be "evil" is evil. Many times it is in the eyes of the beholder. A corporate president will believe, with all of his heart, that NAFTA protesters are "evil". He has an agenda and he sees these protesters as opposing his agenda.
Is he wrong? Yes! Is he "evil"? Not necessarily. He just may be working for his own interest instead of the public good.
So the answer lies in education. Not in declaring that this person or that person is a psychopath, or a cointelpro agent or anything else. That is why this subject deserves our utmost examination. Who is it that propagates this idea that there is a quantity called "evil" that lies inside human beings that can be measured? Whomever this person may be deserves our absolute scrutiny.
How does one measure "evil"?
What is "evil"?
Indeed, is it possible that the one yelling the loudest about "evil" just might be the person we had all better be watching! |
| Tama
User ID: 308398
4/24/2008 9:38 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Nature is neither evil nor good, it just is. We as a part of nature are beings that give meanings and valuations, such as evil and good. So I have my own ethical axioms, namely that all life is beautifull and pleases God, and even more that life as variety is beautifull and pleases God, including human life in all its variety and difference. Therefore homogenizing expansionist culture such as European culture (especially Anglo-Saxon culture!) that seeks and clings to universal dominance, and commits great number of horrible ethnocides through various means and engages in monoculturizing mental colonialism over the whole globe, is in fact evil. And in many cases, consciously evil. Look at psychopathic Cheney for example, in his pride he even cherishes his evil image!!!
But let's be carefull here, when I say that European culture is evil, I don't mean it as a universal eternal truth, God's judgment, because God does not judge - only humans do. I mean it as a local "relativistic" truth, from viewpoint of victims of European universalism. Western peoples in their heart IMHO are not only guilty and collectively responsible for their crimes, but also victims at the same time, victims of their own evil culture and greed and political institutions that encouridge their worst aspects. And I'm aware that many good people born into Western culture are doing all they can to change the way their culture behaves, starting the change from themselves. |
| Clarence Darrow
User ID: 308398
4/24/2008 9:39 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
No we can't say that an entire culture is "evil" but we can say that is has been wrong.
That is the problem with western culture from the beginning. The culture that brought us colonization and conquest believed that those people, black and brown alike, were not human. They thought that they did not have souls. They even thought that the people of the Americas and Africa were crazy - and if the word had been around - they thought that the people of those lands were psychopathic.
Fascists always try to describe their enemies as soulless because it makes it easier to kill them. Give the Indians blankets covered with small pox, it's allright - they don't have souls!
The woman who published the book on Ponerology, besides channeling aliens from cassiopaea, also believes that there are huge amounts of people here on earth that are soulless - she actually thinks that they don't have souls!
Laura Knight Jadczyk calls these people "organic portals" (ugh!).
It is because of this idea of organic portals that I believe that Laura Knight Jadczyk and her friends, the aliens from Cassiopaea, are actually fascists.
Like the Nazi's and the Fascists before her, she is searching for a reason to attack or possibly get rid of her enemies. First by classifying them as soulless and secondly advocating a political system that has them rounded up as "psychopaths".
That is why she thinks that Jeff Rense, Vincent Bridges, Alex Constantine, Jay Weidner, Noam Chomsky, Christopher Bollyn, Eric Pepin and many others are "psychopaths" and "cointelrpo" agents.
She is preaching an essentially fascist dogma, wrapped up in pseudo scientific clothing and all of it is being transmitted to her via an oiuja board by aliens from cassiopaea. |
| Clarence Darrow
User ID: 308398
4/24/2008 9:40 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
A perfect example of this is the person who wrote the introduction to the book Ms. Laura Knight Jadczyk.
On an individual level she attacks people like Eric Pepin who has no political ambitions at all. Laura Knight Jadczyk simply doesn't like him. Maybe she has a hang up for gay guys like Mr. Pepin, I really don't know. She has attacked a lot of people by insinuating that they are gay. Sometimes it appears as if she thinks that gays might be psychopaths.
But she also dishes out the dirt on a political level also. She has a blog, she has a news service in which she tries to influence the body politic.
That is why she must be examined in exacting detail.
What are her motivations?
What is her agenda?
When she placed herself into the public forum, when she placed herself in the glare of the public spotlight, she also invited the deepest scrutiny.
So she was examined. That is when it was discovered that she had stolen $250,000 in fake house raffle.
The ironic part of this story is that it is very likely that the money she used to publish the book on ponereology was financed through the money that she stole from innocent ticket buyers! Talk about psychopathic behavior!!!
And now we are treating this woman and her book like it is a revelation?
No way.
The book is pseudo science, the woman is a fraud and the entire thing was financed with stolen money. |
| Clarence Darrow
User ID: 308398
4/24/2008 9:41 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Milgram proved this some time ago, that Americans could be just as "evil" as the Nazis if given the authority to do so. And many Americans are finding good excuses today to assault the Bill of Rights.
THE MILGRAM EXPERIMENT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Fulcanelli (40 posts) Fri Apr-18-08 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #70
71. Sadism lies in wait for a good excuse
I agree. In fact it is when someone is given authority that we can usually tell if they are a psychopath or not.
Do they use their authority to heal and to create equality and justice? Or do they use their authority to attack and attempt to destroy those they perceive as their enemies?
That's why I like Obama so much. The crazies in the press, Fox News, Hilary all try to attack him and he just stays cool. He won't respond in kind, he won't call them names even as they call him names, he won't place them into boxes even as they try to put him in a box. The guy is teaching us how to deal with these people. And it is working!
But we need to expose them still. A guy like Obama can stand tall but we still need to know the motives of those who attack him.
And we need to know the motives of people like Laura Knight Jadczyk who attack others unfairly claiming that this person or that person is a psychopath without offering a shred of evidence. Laura Knight Jadczyk throws the word around until you begin to suspect that everyone except her is a psychopath.
It is sort of like the guy who has been divorced four times and blames all of his problems on women. Maybe ... just maybe, the problem is him!
I say that we cannot allow this kind of poison into our lives. We cannot allow a person to declare, based on some dubious authority, that this person is a psychopath or that person is a cointelpro agent. Who the hell is she to say these things? Where does she get her authority? Why did she appoint herself to write the intro to a book that was published by her own vanity press?
Why don't we hold her to the fire?
What proof does she show for her many assertions?
Why won't she answer the questions about the $250,000 fake house raffle rip-off?
Why does she lie when she says that she never channelled aliens from the constellation of cassiopaea through a ouija board?
Ponerology is a pseudo science. It was conceived and it is propagated by those who would use this mental disorder to achieve their own political and social ends.
We owe it to ourselves and to our children to make sure that this kind of nonsense is completely revealed for the BS that it is.
And if she doesn't like to be exposed to this kind of scrutiny then she should go away.
But if she is going to self-publish pseudo science, if she is going to have a news service that is asking for money from us to keep going, if she is not going to answer the many questions that have come up about her own pathology - then I ask you all:
Why should we believe anything that she says?
Why should we believe anything that is in this silly book? |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 422429
4/24/2008 9:42 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Evil is a Man
His Son is OK now |
| Clarence Darrow
User ID: 308398
4/24/2008 9:43 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
As famine rages across Africa many men are attacking women and killing them. These men say that these women are 'witches' and are casting spells that are causing the famine.
In some African villages witches are considered 'evil' and apparently all women are considered possible "witches" and therefore possibly "guilty".
In times of stress we look for scapegoats that we can blame all of our troubles on. Just like those people in Africa we are guilty of the same thing in the west.
Is it “evil” or is it “psychopathic” to say that someone is a "witch" or a “cointelpro agent” without providing any evidence? That is the real question here.
If it turns out that we agree that this is “evil” or “psychopathic” and if it turns out that Laura Knight Jadczyk is doing just that then it can only mean that Laura is “evil” and Laura is “psychopathic”. Is this true?
We shall examine this evidence soon and see if this is the case. However is should be noted that using the term “psychopath” is really should only be reserved to those who are qualified to make such pronouncements. Many here have questioned my sanity for bringing up these subjects and applying them to Ms. Jadczyk. But is Laura Knight Jadczyk qualified to say who is a “psychopath” and who isn’t?
Just because she wrote the preface for a book on psychopaths is not very good evidence – especially when one considers that the book is published by her own publishing company, kind of convenient almost that she allowed herself to write the preface, isn’t it?
What are Laura Knight Jadczyk’s qualifications? By her own admission Ms. Jadczyk has had no college education at all. She had to drop out of High School to defend herself in the Attempted Murder charge. So Laura Knight Jadczyk has no degree in anything. She has no medical training; she has no training in psychiatry or psychology. The only training that she seems to have acquired is that she has the ability to be an Exorcist. Yes, according to the newspapers in St. Petersburg Florida and reporter Tom French, Laura Knight Jadczyk is well known in the Florida area for two things. One is exorcising demons from people and the other is channeling aliens from the constellation of Cassiopaea.
Now down south, exorcising demons is a common practice so I hope you don’t snicker. Laura grew up in a trailer park and everyone was exorcising demons in her neighborhood. What is strange is that, after years of bragging about the Tom French’s article found here: [link to www.sptimes.com] . And talking endlessly about the incredible information that she has received from the aliens from Cassiopaea she suddenly now does not want any of you to find out about any of this. But that is okay. Because I will prove to you that she is lying. She says this above:
No, I don't "channel aliens."
Yes, I have (and do) experiment with superluminal communication in company with my husband, a physicist, and other scientists and researchers. For that part of my work, you can read my more esoteric website: [link to www.cassiopaea.org] /
I never "made my name" doing any of that. It was, in fact, rather private until Vincent Bridges and his gang painted me all over the internet as someone "channeling aliens"! And of course, that only began after I had pretty much turned my attention from that sort of research (which was interesting, but not all that important in the grander scheme of things) to the problem of pathology in human populations.”
Much like St. Peter denying that he knew Jesus, Laura is saying that she didn’t “channel aliens” and that she didn’t “make her name” doing this. Interesting because she agreed to be interviewed for the Tom French article. It certainly looks like this is how she was making her name. Please note how she obfuscates the language. But a quick read of the article we can see that Laura was not interested in politics or progressive ideals or in psychopaths. She was making her name exorcising demons and channeling aliens from cassiopaea.
I think that she now wants to be taken seriously, especially by the progressive culture, and she knows that this would not go down well with you guys.
If she thinks that won’t go down well wait until you guys hear the rest.
You will come to see why she does not answer my questions. For any attempt to answer my questions posted above will reveal the truth. And that truth is that Laura Knight Jadczyk is everything that she says that she is against. Don’t believe me. Stick around and you may see the light.
Years ago, in Salem Massachusetts, two girls went around the village claiming that this person or that person was a witch. When asked why they thought this; the two girls replied that they could ‘see the devil walking with those people’.
As many of you know, many people were killed and murdered and tortured because of the claims of these two girls. We now know that there were no witches, there was no devil walking with people and we also know that the people who were accused of these things were innocent. The events is Salem, all those years ago is instructive to this current discussion.
And this goes back to the original question I asked at the beginning of this ramble: Is it “evil” or is it “psychopathic” to say that someone is a “cointelpro agent” or ‘psychopathic’ without providing any evidence?
From the Salem Witch Trial story we can see that saying that someone is this or that without providing accurate evidence to this effect can cause a lot of damage. People can get killed when this kind of thing gets out of hand.
Now I am sure that the two girls who did this were not evil. They grew up in a culture where it was easily accepted that the devil walked around next to people. They grew up in a culture where it was easily accepted that there were “demons” that got inside people and had to be removed or exorcised. The fact that Laura Knight Jadczyk spent her early life exorcising demons is proof that she comes from a culture very similar to the girls from Salem who caused so much damage. I am not judging this culture I am merely pointing out similarities between the culture that started the Salem Witch Craze and the culture from which Laura emerged.
Now Laura has placed herself in a position where she is no longer exorcising demons from people but she is exorcising psychopaths from society. This sounds very noble but again what criteria is she using. Is she qualified to make such judgments? And what if she is wrong? What should happen if it is shown, even once, that Laura has unfairly called someone a ‘psychopath” or a “cointelpro” agent? Can we safely assume that her judgment is clear enough and precise enough o make such judgments?
We would first have to examine her past to see if she is fully sane herself. If we can find any incident where her own - possibly psychopathic - behavior is exhibited then that might call into question her abilities to make such sweeping judgments, does it not? That is exactly why her past is so important.
We have already seen that she has no university degree in anything, she has no training in psychology or psychiatry.
We can see that she was famous for being an exorcist. This last aspect is where we discover her true qualifications. She is an exorcist who has switched from demons to psychopaths. One wonders if she sees any difference between the two? To be able to so easily switch from being an ‘exorcist’ to a judge making pronouncements concerning who is a psychopath and who isn’t, making judgments as to who is “cointelpro” and who isn’t is breath-taking.
In my own opinion I think that making a false accusation against someone is probably not right. If I have made such a false accusation against anyone, please accept my apologies. But if it were shown that the person who is sitting in judgment about who is a psychopath and who isn’t has a criminal background, has no qualifications, and is in fact lying then I think that would go a long way in clearing up this matter.
By the way the two girls in Salem were finally stopped by a local farmer who made such reasonable arguments as to why the two girls were living out a fantasy, a fantasy that cost hundreds of lives, that he stopped the entire Salem Witch Trial madness with his arguments.
I don’t contend to be that good with words but I am attempting to make a reasonable argument here that Laura Knight Jadczyk is a very dangerous person. I am making the argument here that she has no right to pass judgments on anyone until we are clear about her and her intentions.
That is why I have asked those questions that she refuses to answer.
Here is her answer as to whether she stole $250,000 in a house raffle scam in 2003:
“I am amused at the claim that I am wanted by the law for stealing varying amounts of money (why can't those guys ever get the sum the same? Is it 100K, 200K, 250K, or what?) It never occurs to them that if I had any problems with the U.S. legal system that treaties with France, where I am a legal resident, would mandate an immediate arrest and return. That this has not happened speaks for itself.
This sentence baffles me: "My guess is that she cannot afford to come to the USA to stand trial for the charges against her because she will be arrested on the spot. Therefore she will escape one more time."
Can anybody else make any sense out of it? I mean, if I'm supposed to be going to the US to stand trial for something that I'm supposed to be arrested for, why would I be worried about getting arrested for going to stand trial??? Most confusing! (And amusing.)”
Instead of saying “no I did not do it” she says anything but that answer. It cannot have happened because she would have been arrested? Huh?
Did you have a House Raffle in 2003? Did you name a winner? Did you sell the house? She cannot answer any of the questions because she did steal the money. She tries to say that the figures are all wrong so we don’t know what we are talking about. But there are only two figures given by anyone and a close examination shows that the two different figures make sense depending on how you add them up.
An insider who saw the False House Raffle reported that Laura and her husband Ark stole $150,000 worth of tickets. That is where the first figure of $150,000 comes from. We then later learned that Laura had sold the house for $100,000. In my book that comes out a $250,000 rip off.
So yes, she only stole $150,000 worth of cash with the fake house raffle in 2003. But she illegally sold the house and took that money also.
So she stole $250,000 in the house raffle and that is why she gives the above answer and why she refuses to answer any of my very good questions.
Later I will present you with Laura’s statements concerning the house raffle and we will see that not only did she do it but that she still believes that it is okay to steal $250,000 from innocent people.
Is this “psychopathic” behavior being exhibited by Laura? I don’t know because I am not qualified to make a judgment like that. But it is certainly suspicious.
Okay now we know that Laura made a name for herself by exorcising demons in Florida, we now know that she will not answer the questions concerning the house raffle because the accusations, by me, are true. We can also see that Laura is lying when she says that she did not channel aliens from Cassiopaea.
If it can be shown that Laura is lying about all of this – then I think that makes ANYTHING she says as being suspect. Don’t you?
Okay so here is an excerpt from an article written by Ms. Jadczyk. It is called “How to Spot Cointelpro agents” and can be found here:
[link to www.bibliotecapleyades.net]
Excerpt:
“LKJ: Well, Rense is a cipher to me, too. I only recently learned that he is a close pal of Jay Weidner and that he and Jay and Vincent Bridges used to be members of Ray Flowers group. The C’s pretty clearly indicated Flowers as a COINTELPRO handler. From my point of view, after a long period of observation, Rense is out there pushing the alien noise agenda in a big way.”
Here she is saying that Jeff Rense and Jay Weidner were members of Ray Flowers ‘group’. I don’t know what that means but she also says that ‘The C’s pretty clearly indicated Ray Flowers as a COINTELPRO handler.”
I wrote to Jeff Rense and he told me that he did not even know a Ray Flowers and had never been in his group. I wrote to Ray Flowers and asked him if Jeff Rense had ever been in his group. Mr. Flowers says that Jeff Rense was never a part of anything that Ray Flowers had anything to do with.
Okay so Laura Knight Jadczyk is dead wrong here.
But how does she know that Ray Flowers is a cointelpro agent?
She tells us: “The C’s pretty clearly indicated Ray Flowers as a COINTELPRO handler.”
So she is getting the information on who is and who isn’t a cointelpro handler from some mysterious group she refers to as “The C’s”.
Who are these mysterious C’s? How do they know all of this?
Are the C’s the Communists?
Are the C’s the Catholics?
No, the C’s are the Cassiopaeans.
And who are the Cassiopaeans?
They are the aliens from the constellation Cassiopaea that Laura and Fred Irland were channeling through an ouija board.
So the vital information on who is and who is not a cointelpro agent is coming from otherworldly beings that speak directly to Laura through an ouija board and inform her on who is and who isn’t a cointelpro agent and who and who is not a psychopath.
The fact that she does not tell you this is a very serious problem.
Never mind that she trashed people and tried to destroy their reputation – that is bad enough – but that she does not have any evidence, outside of her channeled entities, tells us everything that there is to know about her. The fact that she trashes a selfless patriot like Jeff Rense based on channeled information is unforgivable.
But is it evil? That is the question here. Is it psychopathic to make such a judgment based on such dubious sources?
In my opinion it could be evil and it could be proof that the real psychopath is Laura Knight Jadczyk.
I asked Laura in the above questions what evidence she has to say that Eric Pepin is a cointelpro agent. Mr. Pepin is suing Laura for saying this and she must show the reasons and the evidence for this claim in her upcoming slander trial.
Will she say that the information came from the Cassiopaeans? Is that why she is not answering the questions? She has certainly NOT presented any evidence that Mr. Pepin running a cointelpro operation on her site. Where does she get this information?
Is this the criteria that we in the progressive movement wish to use to figure out who is our enemy and who isn’t. Is it right to let a person with a very clear and dubious background, a woman who made her name exorcising demons ala The Exorcist, a woman who very likely stole $250,000 in a fake house raffle, a woman who admits (sometimes) that she has received her information from a group of mysterious beings called the Cassiopaeans to sit in judgment of anyone or anything?
Laura Knight Jadczyk is like those two girls in Salem all those hundreds of years ago. She is driven by inner demons to attack and defame anyone who questions her.
At any time she could retract her hurtful statements and judgments. But it appears that it is impossible for Laura Knight Jadczyk to empathize, or to place herself in someone else’s shoes.
This lack of ability to empathize is a leading qualification for defining a psychopath.
There are many others that Laura has called cointelpro agents and psychopaths. As we go on here with this examination of this woman I will point out other people that she has attacked. I will show you that there is NEVER ever any evidence ever presented to back up her claims.
Apparently it is all coming from the C’s.
When one considers that her husband Ark Jadczyk was once an employee of DARPA and the Pentagon this becomes ominous.
DARPA is the agency within the Pentagon that created devices that can be implanted into people’s heads to make them think that they are receiving messages from outside.
I know this is scary stuff. But there is a lot of evidence pointing in this direction. I would be more than happy to send some of this information along to those who are interested.
Is this what is happening to Laura? Is she a dupe for DARPA?
What would be the purpose of such an experiment?
Maybe it would be to cause chaos and confusion amongst the people who are fighting the establishment?
What if DARPA set up a person to appear to be some kind of authority and then have that person attack and tell everyone that this person or that person is a cointelpro agent or a psychopath?
That certainly would be useful in spreading chaos and confusion wouldn’t it?
And that, my friends, is exactly the description of the old style cointelpro operations perfected by the FBI.
Their entire purpose was to spread confusion and chaos amongst the progressive organizations of the 1960’s.
One of the chief ways that this was done was by the false labeling of someone as an ‘agent’. It has been discovered by many researchers that the ones in the 1960’s who were calling people ‘agents’ and ‘spies’ almost all were actually FBI cointelpro agents and their job was to destroy everything good that these groups were doing. like stopping the Vietnam war and fighting for civil rights.
I don’t know if Laura Knight Jadczyk is doing this. That is why it is so important to find out what evidence she is using to make her judgments.
If she is saying it – then it is up to her to provide us with a clear evidence for such a claim.
Exceptional claims require exceptional evidence to quote Carl Sagan.
And I am sorry but voices in the head are not good enough evidence.
So is it evil to say that someone is a cointelpro agent or a psychopath without providing evidence for such a claim?
I don’t know. But I do know that it is unfair. And I know that if she is wrong in even one instance she will be causing much turmoil and confusion.
Let us be careful when we say something about someone. Let us ask questions first. If the answers are not forthcoming – well that tells us a lot, doesn’t it?
More is coming so stay tuned. |
| Clarence Darrow
User ID: 308398
4/24/2008 9:46 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Beauty of a post!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Fulcanelli (40 posts) Tue Apr-22-08 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #80
84. Beauty of a post
Thanks. And I want to thank the many people who have contacted me from DU wanting in-depth info on Laura Knight Jadczyk and her pseudo science called ponerology.
Many people believe Laura Knight Jadczyk when she says that there never was a House Rafflee in 2002 and 2003. She has done a very good job of wiping out everything from her web site about the House Raffle but unfortunately for her many people copied the ad from her site in 2002.
The following is the advertisement that Laura Knight Jadczyk put up on her cassiopaea.com web site in 2003.
The Perseus Foundation is announcing The Six Bedroom House Giveaway
Entry deadline is January 1st, 2003 - Drawing date: January 16, 2003.
ONLY 6,000 TICKETS ARE AVAILABLE and they will go fast!
This increases your chances of winning, but only if you make your entry in time!
For only a $50.00, tax deductible donation, you could WIN a house!
Make your donation and get YOUR ticket TODAY!
One lucky ticket holder will win the approximately 3,000 sq. ft, 6-bedroom, 2-bath, 2 living room, double lot (100X 150 feet) home located in the quiet, picturesque, small town of New Port Richey, Florida. The home's market value is $200,000. You may obtain more than one ticket, however, a limit of 6,000 are available.
New Port Richey is a bedroom community for the greater Tampa-St. Petersburg area. Located just a mile or two from the Gulf of Mexico, graced by a small-town atmosphere with admirable services, quiet neighborhoods, excellent police and fire protection, up-to-date hospitals, parks and recreation areas, there are few places in the US that can compare for charm and convenience. A lovely river meanders through the center of town, its banks graced with lovely homes, a park, and jogging paths.
During the 12 years that Laura Jadczyk has lived in the home, many improvements have been made, and 80% of the planned renovations have been completed. This includes new electrical wiring throughout, insulation, new walls and ceilings, complete ductwork for AC/Heat pump, vinyl siding, new windows, new roof, a new 40 X 12 terrace, landscaping, tool shed, pool, and other features too numerous too mention. Care has been taken to preserve the character of the 1925 Cracker Style Florida home, which includes a small celler - unusual for Florida homes.
Click photo for a tour of the house
Ark and Laura will make their house available to the Perseus Foundation, Inc, a Florida not-for-profit corporation qualified under Sec. 501c(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and the Foundation will award the house to some lucky winner who can then do whatever he or she likes with it - live in it, use it as a vacation home, income property, or sell it.
Make your donations before January 1st, 2003 - in order to receive your raffle tickets! Drawing date: January 16, 2003.
This raffle ticket is offered for a Fifty and 00/100 Dollar ($50.00) donation to the Perseus Foundation, Inc., a Florida not-for-profit corporation qualified under Sec. 501c(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. No purchase is necessary in order to participate. Upon receipt of a voluntary donation either by cash, cleared check made payable to Perseus Foundation, or funds credited Perseus Foundation via Paypal, Perseus Foundation will will enter the stub on the face of a raffle ticket inscribed with the name of the donor into a drawing, to be held at approximately 5:30 p.m. on January 16, 2003 at the offices of Perseus Foundation, Inc., located in New Port Richey, Pasco County, FL.
The winner will be selected at random from eligible entries and will be notified by certified mail to the address given on the stub. The winner must present the winning ticket and identification to claim the prize and has until 5:00 p.m. on the fifth business day beginning with the business day after the postmark of the mailed notice to do so. If the prize is not claimed by the deadline, the next drawn ticket may be awarded the prize, subject to presentation of that ticket and identification by 5:00 p.m. on the fifth business day beginning with the business day after the postmark of the mailed notice to such party.
You may make your donation by mail. Mail donations must be postmarked no later than December 31, 2002 and received prior to drawing while tickets last. After January 16, 2003, to receive the number of the winning ticket please send a self-addressed, stamped envelope to Perseus Foundation, Inc., P.O. Box 2068, New Port Richey, FL 34656-2068 with your request.
By entering the raffle the winner agrees to have his/her name and ticket number publicized.
The prize to be awarded the winner is title to the home. Said prize shall be acquired by Perseus Foundation, Inc. from proceeds of this fund raising drive, i.e. donations made to Perseus Foundation. The remaining proceeds will be used to establish a Quantum Future School center that will function as the focal point for Perseus Foundation activities. The maximum number of tickets issued is 6,000. The number of entries received will determine the odds of winning. A Notary Public will be present to certify the drawing. The donor need not be present to win. In the event of any challenge or dispute, the winner to be awarded the prize will be selected by Perseus Foundation's President and Executive Director, whose decision will be final. Copies of these rules may be obtained by mailing a stamped self-addressed return envelope along with a request for such a copy to Perseus Foundation, Inc., P.O. Box 2068, New Port Richey, FL 34656-2068.
Entrants must be at least 18 years of age.
The Perseus Foundation's Board of Directors and members of their households are not eligible to enter. The winner is responsible for all applicable taxes. Void where prohibited by law.
Donate $100.00
Click the button at left to make your $100.00 donation and receive two tickets to win The Cassiopaea House! Click button at right to donate $50.00 and receive one ticket to win The Six Bedroom House!
Be sure to enter your name and address in the paypal form options. Remember, only 6,000 entries will be accepted! This increases your chances of winning, but only if you make your entry in time! You may also enter by mail: Send your entry request and donation to:
Perseus Foundation, Inc.
P.O. Box 2068
New Port Richey, FL 34656-2068
Donate $50.00
So that is the ad that ran on Laura's site for almost a year in 2002 and 2003.
Now this is where it gets really good.
Here is Laura’s response to the charges that she did not name a winner in the raffle and took the $250,000 to France during her escape from the USA> :
Serious barriers seemed to have been put in the way of the winner taking possession of the house. There were taxes that had to be paid based on the value of the house and instead of helping this person to take care of that, (which could have been done), our representatives apparently made it an insuperable obstacle and that meant that the winner had to be disqualified. Then the situation seems to have been a battle between the atty and the neighbor for possession of the house. Keep in mind that both of them had our contact details but neither of them contacted us about this asking what should they do and they, themselves, did nothing except try to outwait the other so that the house would go into foreclosure and one of them could pick it up at auction for 10 cents on the dollar.??We were, by this time, settling in France and thinking that everything was all sorted out. By the time we learned what was going on, it was already a disaster and we could do absolutely nothing about it. We had already had to pay double to get our household goods delivered after they were held-hostage by a Jewish moving company so we were broke.??In the middle of all this, a woman called me from Florida one night and said she wanted the house and even needed it badly. I told her the situation and explained that if she wanted it she would have to get an attorney and fight for it, that whatever she proposed I would agree to.??So, she put her attorney on the problem, came up with a plan and went in, made an offer with her attorney behind her, and the crooked jerk we left with our POA had no choice but to transfer the house to her because I was agreeing to everything she wanted - including a price that was half the value of the house. At this point, it was necessary because the checks we had left to pay off the note were now no longer valid since it was past 90 days.??So, basically, we lost our shirts in more ways than one, and between the people we left to handle this simple transaction and the movers who held up all our goods for two months, we ended up looking like we had deliberately pulled a "fast one" when nothing could have been further from the truth. I'm pretty sure that any reasonable person can see why I simply chose not to discuss it any further because, by this time, there were innocent people involved (the people who got the house) as well as not-so-innocent people that I could do nothing about whatsoever. They covered their tracks well. {/end quote}
"The raffle was a huge failure since we didn't even get half of the money to?pay off the mortgage (it wasn't a very big one either!) So, we borrowed on?our credit cards to make up the difference, our readers and discussion group?members pooled enough cash to help us move, we picked a winner, left the?checks and power of attorney with a local attorney and our neighbor to?handle the transfer of the house (that was the mistake part) and left."??Now, since you have perused the public records, you must have noted that the mortgage on the house was only 70 K. The raffle plainly stated that tickets were a gift in exchange for a DONATION - and that is an important legal distinction. Our attorney was careful to point out to us that we very well might not make enough money on the raffle to pay off the house and insisted on that wording. And, he was right. The raffle brought in less than 30 K, that is, less than half of what was required to pay off the mortgage. That is why we borrowed on our credit cards to make up the difference and needed help from our friends and group members to move. And that was because we wished to fulfill the offer of the raffle.??Here are some additional facts for you to consider:??The raffle tickets were a FREE gift. We were required by law to give them away to anyone who either made a donation or simply requested one and fulfilled simple requirements, i.e. sending in a request by mail. What this means is that MOST of the tickets given away were given to people who sent in mail requests for them, i.e., they were free and no donation whatsoever was received. Some people sent up to 50 such mail requests.??Due to this problem, we found it necessary to increase the number of tickets that would be issued twice since nearly all the designated tickets were given away and no donations received.??Nearly all of the donations came from friends, discussion group members, and regular readers of the site. There were very few donations from non-group members. As noted, most tickets went to people who simply mailed in a request for them.??All requests were recorded with ticket number and how the ticket was obtained, i.e., whether a donation was made or whether it was by mail request. All records are still in our keeping, right down to every single envelope and mail request received.??Our records are complete, both financial and legal - that includes all bank records, paypal records, and legal documentation. Your twisting and distortion of the facts and your accusations of illegal activity are illegal in themselves in the U.S.??As for your "Sophie," I have several records of faked letters and emails you and your friends (Vincent and Jay) have published in an effort to defame me which can be proven as fraudulent in a court of law because certain details are so false as to be laughable.??Since you are in UK, you know that you can get away with libelous accusations against people in the U.S. I suspect that is why Mr. Weidner sent you in to say all the things he knew he could not legally get away with saying because they are libelous (that is, LIES and legally actionable as such.) Just keep in mind that you are not as legally immune as you think.??In the UK, the following applies:??(begin quote)?Defamation is any published material that damages the reputation of an individual or an organisation. This covers material on the internet as well as radio and television broadcasts - so even drama and fiction can be defamatory if they damage someone's reputation. You can only publish defamatory material if it comes within one of the recognised legal defences. If it doesn't, the publication will amount to libel and you may have to pay substantial damages.??Internet sites are not exempt from any libel laws. If you are publishing on the internet you are bound by the same libel laws as print publishers.??In the UK, internet service providers are coming under increasing pressure to close sites containing defamatory allegations. You also have to be careful about the comments others post on your site. There have been cases where individuals have sued online publishers for libel over customer book reviews published on their sites.??Libel law protects individuals or organisations from unwarranted, mistaken or untruthful attacks on their reputation. A person is libelled if a publication:??* Exposes them to hatred, ridicule or contempt??* Causes them to be shunned or avoided??* Discredits them in their trade, business or profession??* Generally lowers them in the eyes of right thinking members of society??The most important point is to make absolutely sure that what you are printing or writing is true. Do not make claims or accusations that you cannot prove. Even if you think you can do this, be cautious. Proving things in court can be very difficult.??And the test of what the words mean is what a reasonable reader is likely to take as their natural and ordinary meaning, in their full context - what you intended as the author or publisher is irrelevant.??If you write something that cannot be substantiated the credibility of your site, organisation or cause may be questioned. It can also land you with an expensive lawsuit and there is no legal aid for libel cases.??The burden of proof lies with the defendant?Almost uniquely in English law, in libel cases the burden of proof lies with the author / publisher and not the complainant. In other words, you have to prove that what you write is true. The person you've targeted does not have to prove that you're wrong.??It is inadvisable to repeat a defamatory rumour unless you are in a position to prove it's true. Even if you are contradicting the rumour you should not repeat it. And adding `allegedly' is not enough to get you out of libel difficulties.??If you publish defamatory remarks about people or organisations made by other people you will be just as liable to be sued as they are. So if you can't prove the truth of their statements, don't repeat them.??It is a common mistake to draw unverifiable conclusions from the basic facts. For example, if Mr Brown is seen going into a hotel room with a call-girl, this does not necessarily mean he enjoyed a `night of passion', and will certainly not prove that he did.??The UK is notorious as a claimant-friendly jurisdiction for bringing libel proceedings. In other words, you should be careful what you write (or allow others to write) on your website.??The law of defamation is all about reputation, and the protection of reputation. Slander is concerned with the spoken word, libel with the written word. Note that the law of defamation protects both individuals and companies.??A related cause of action, malicious falsehood, protects individuals and companies against false, malicious statements which cause them loss.??Any disparaging statement made by one person about another, which is communicated or "published," may well be a defamatory statement and can give rise to an action for either libel or slander in English law.??Under English law, the remedies are different for libel and slander. In the case of libel (the recorded statement), the victim can win damages even if he has not suffered financial loss as a result of the statement.?(end quotes)??These lies and attacks against innocent people have gone far enough.
-- |
| Clarence Darrow
User ID: 308398
4/24/2008 9:47 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Laura and the House Raffle Part 2
Now here is Vincent Bridges brilliant analysis of Laura Knight Jadczyk’s onfuscated statements from above. :
Serious barriers seemed to have been put in the way of the winner taking possession of the house. There were taxes that had to be paid based on the value of the house and instead of helping this person to take care of that, (which could have been done), our representatives apparently made it an insuperable obstacle and that meant that the winner had to be disqualified.
V: There was no winner because there was no raffle to chose one. Since the non-profit wasn't legal, and the real property had not been vested in escrow, the whole thing was nothing but a flat out fraud, as no raffle was even considered.
Then the situation seems to have been a battle between the atty and the neighbor for possession of the house. Keep in mind that both of them had our contact details but neither of them contacted us about this asking what should they do and they, themselves, did nothing except try to outwait the other so that the house would go into foreclosure and one of them could pick it up at auction for 10 cents on the dollar.??
V: Major lie number one. How could the house go into foreclosure if it was, as the law said it must be for a raffle, paid off and the deed held in escrow? No raffle, that is very clear from this comment. They simply left with their taxes and their mortgage unpaid.
We were, by this time, settling in France and thinking that everything was all sorted out. By the time we learned what was going on, it was already a disaster and we could do absolutely nothing about it. We had already had to pay double to get our household goods delivered after they were held-hostage by a Jewish moving company so we were broke.
V: So they spent all the illegally solicited money from the fake raffle in moving, with everything still unpaid back in Florida...
In the middle of all this, a woman called me from Florida one night and said she wanted the house and even needed it badly. I told her the situation and explained that if she wanted it she would have to get an attorney and fight for it, that whatever she proposed I would agree to.
V: Why would anyone have to fight for it? Because it was in or about to be in foreclosure. That's logical since apparently no payments were made since the L'Arks fled the nest back in February.
So, she put her attorney on the problem, came up with a plan and went in, made an offer with her attorney behind her, and the crooked jerk we left with our POA had no choice but to transfer the house to her because I was agreeing to everything she wanted - including a price that was half the value of the house. At this point, it was necessary because the checks we had left to pay off the note were now no longer valid since it was past 90 days.
V: Went into the bank? Again foreclosure... The lies mount up with the check business, if they had the money, why not pay the house off back in February? Blame the un-named crooked jerk...
So, basically, we lost our shirts in more ways than one, and between the people we left to handle this simple transaction and the movers who held up all our goods for two months, we ended up looking like we had deliberately pulled a "fast one" when nothing could have been further from the truth. I'm pretty sure that any reasonable person can see why I simply chose not to discuss it any further because, by this time, there were innocent people involved (the people who got the house) as well as not-so-innocent people that I could do nothing about whatsoever. They covered their tracks well. {/end quote}
V: So even Laura sees that the story isn't very good, and makes no sense... But she's stuck with it...
"The raffle was a huge failure since we didn't even get half of the money to?pay off the mortgage (it wasn't a very big one either!) So, we borrowed on?our credit cards to make up the difference, our readers and discussion group?members pooled enough cash to help us move, we picked a winner, left the?checks and power of attorney with a local attorney and our neighbor to?handle the transfer of the house (that was the mistake part) and left."??Now, since you have perused the public records, you must have noted that the mortgage on the house was only 70 K. The raffle plainly stated that tickets were a gift in exchange for a DONATION - and that is an important legal distinction. Our attorney was careful to point out to us that we very well might not make enough money on the raffle to pay off the house and insisted on that wording. And, he was right. The raffle brought in less than 30 K, that is, less than half of what was required to pay off the mortgage. That is why we borrowed on our credit cards to make up the difference and needed help from our friends and group members to move. And that was because we wished to fulfill the offer of the raffle.
V: So where did the money to move to France come from? More donations? So did where the money from the raffle go? keep in mind that even a donation is not actually a cover from a blatantly fraudulent raffle scam. Particularly if the non-profit is not quite legal...
Here are some additional facts for you to consider:??The raffle tickets were a FREE gift. We were required by law to give them away to anyone who either made a donation or simply requested one and fulfilled simple requirements, i.e. sending in a request by mail. What this means is that MOST of the tickets given away were given to people who sent in mail requests for them, i.e., they were free and no donation whatsoever was received. Some people sent up to 50 such mail requests.??Due to this problem, we found it necessary to increase the number of tickets that would be issued twice since nearly all the designated tickets were given away and no donations received.??Nearly all of the donations came from friends, discussion group members, and regular readers of the site. There were very few donations from non-group members. As noted, most tickets went to people who simply mailed in a request for them.??All requests were recorded with ticket number and how the ticket was obtained, i.e., whether a donation was made or whether it was by mail request. All records are still in our keeping, right down to every single envelope and mail request received.??Our records are complete, both financial and legal - that includes all bank records, paypal records, and legal documentation.
V; So it should be easy to give the answers needed to make all of this moot. Just post your letter of authorization on your 501-c-3, tell us who the winner of the raffle actually was, explain why the law regarding raffles in Florida wasn't followed, tell us exactly what happened to the money, and of course, how you ended up selling the house and making a profit? Easy right?
VB |
| Clarence Darrow
User ID: 308398
4/24/2008 9:48 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Laura and the House Raffle Part 3
Please read the above with all of your attention. This is where we can see who the psychopath really, truly is. One of the definitions of psychopath is that they don't really know the difference between right and wrong. We can see from Laura's extremely faulty explanation for the Fake House Raffle that she truly does not know the difference. All she really has to do is say that she is sorry and give the money back. But Laura does not think that stealing $250,000 is wrong. In fact she acts as if she deserves the money she obtained by fraud, lies and deceit.
I have waited to show this statement because i want all of us to really think about what is going on here.
We have a woman who channels aliens through a ouija board, who exorcises demons from people in trailer parks in Florida and now she is running a web "news service" that is really just designed to suck people into joining her cult. People like Time for change and Larry Og. Once into her cult they appear to lose their ability to know right from wrong and they defend her actions. Even when they are asked if it is okay to call someone a psychopath or a cointelpro agent without offering a shred of evidence, they still support her. they still write glowing emails and posts to her cassiopaea web site praising her like she is the next Moses or something.
When confronted with her statements concerning the Fake House Raffle they don't even blink. Apparently they think that is is allright to steal $250,000.
Instead they attack those like me who would be courageous enough to bring you this important information about a total crook.
And now she is asking you for money to help her in her defense against an innocent man named Eric Pepin who did absolutely nothing to Laura Knight Jadczyk. She called him a pervert simply because he is gay. She called him a cointelpro agent without offering a shred of evidence.
Don't be like Time For Change and Larry Og. Don't fall for her line of BS. Examine the evidence and make up your own minds about this person - Laura Knight Jadczyk.
That is all that I ask. |
| Clarence Darrow
User ID: 308398
4/24/2008 9:49 PM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Time for change and Larry Ogg are cult members
he Laura Knight Jadczyk Scams.
A Brief History in Four Parts.
by
Tom Delsavio
SCAM NUMBER ONE
The Channelling Scam
There were many scams before this scam in Laura's checkered career but for simplicity's sake we will concentrate on the four main scams starting with this one.
The original channeler Freddie might have been in touch with serious spirits, but because of Laura's meddling we will never know. Laura instantly recognized what Freddie was doing and how she could turn it into a scam, so she joined in. Eventually she stole all of the channelled work from Freddie and copyrighted it while simultaneously attempting to destroy Freddie's reputation in the process. This is the scam from which all other scams came from. Once Freddie left the spirits left also. There were no spirits, Jinns or anything else after that , it was just Laura scamming. Unfortunately with Freddie departed the channelling scam was also collapsing. Like all scammers Laura had to find other scams to keep the interest and the money flowing.
SCAM NUMBER TWO
The Fulcanelli Scam
Laura met Vincent and she recognized that the research he was involved with could help her continue her scams. Reversing what she did with Freddie, where she took the material and then tried to destroy Freddie, with Vincent she did the opposite. She first attempted to destroy Vincent and then steal the work. This scam, like scam number one, continues to this day. The Fulcanelli Scam is not as sexy as The Channelling Scam nor does it bring in the money that The Channelling Scam brought in. But she was desperate and what choice did she have? She prodded Vincent for all that he was worth and then betrayed him just like she had done earlier with Freddie. Moving to France and creating the Quantum Future School are direct results of The Fulcanelli Scam. This scam is frequently unintentionally hilarious as with Laura's claim that she is the reincarnation of Fulcanelli. But what is a scammer supposed to do? Everyone believed that she was channelling aliens from Cassiopaea so why wouldn't the fools believe that she is the reincarnation of Fulcanelli?
SCAM NUMBER THREE
The House Raffle Scam.
Once Freddie left there was a danger that the money and the interest would soon wane. The Fulcanelli Scam was not taking off as quickly as she hoped and Ark couldn't find a job. Debts were piling up and the credit cards were maxed out. Laura and Ark created The House Raffle Scam to get all that they could from the cult followers that had gathered around them because of Scam Number One. This had to be done quickly because the channelling scam had essentially ended with Freddie's departure. How long could she keep this scam going? Not long. Therefore she had to pull of Scam Number Three as quickly as possible. The reason that they escaped to France was to continue with Scam Number Two. Since The Fulcanelli Scam was intimately related to the country of France, this became the country of choice.
SCAM NUMBER FOUR
The Political Scam
Many criminals and scam artists end their careers performing this scam. Once they are cornered by the truth they need The Political Scam to cover up their past scams and to be able to offset the authorities. Huey Newton of the Black Panthers, Cinque, or Donald DeFreeze, of the SLA, Jim Jones of the People's Temple, Charlie Manson of The Family all had checkered criminal pasts BEFORE they became political animals. In all of these cases the politics was just a clever cover for more sophisticated criminal operations. When these people were investigated by the authorities for their CRIMINAL activities they all claimed that they are being harassed by the government for their POLITICAL activities. In this way they create an aura of being a victim as well as helping to undermine the political movements that they claim to be a part of.
One of the aspects of this that is interesting, and troubling, is that many of these people mentioned above eventually became informants for the government in order to stop further criminal investigations from occurring. This way they get their cake and eat it too. The POLITICAL movement that they made themselves a part of is then destroyed by them AND they are able to forestall the government from sending them to prison for their CRIMINAL activities. Jim Jones, Huey Newton, Charlie Manson, Donald DeFreeze etc. were all scam artists and criminals long before they found politics. One of the most interesting things that these people share with Laura Knight Jadczyk, besides being scam artists who became political dissidents, is that they all ended their POLITICAL careers in a maze of self-created paranoia. ALL of them claimed that they were being harassed by government agents, infiltrators and cointelpro. ALL of them ended their lives tragically, either dead or in prison for life. It could even be successfully argued that these same people created cults to protect them from their criminal past. In a way their cults walked hand in hand with their political cover stories. |
| Vincent Bridges
User ID: 422603
4/25/2008 1:01 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
My post to the DU forum:
[link to www.democraticunderground.com]
Vincent Bridges (9 posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr-25-08 12:56 AM
Response to Original message
88. Okay, even if I agree with the basic premise...
that Bush and company are acting as if they had a variety of mental illnesses, it surely does more harm than good to back up the argument with references to a work of crank pseudo-science such as Ponerology and Lobaczewski.
Ponerology has no data, just rambling and sweeping pronouncements that ascribe the world's ills to another group out there, the psychopaths and their followers. This is simply psychological racism of a very insidious sort. Sort of like what the Stalinists tried, in fact. Label "dissent" as pathological and hospitalize the "dissenters." Label those who don't agree with you as "psychopaths" and hospitalize them for re-education. Could Lobaczewski be feeling guilty for his work in such a system? It would help if he elaborately proved that the people who "made" him do it, and paid his salary for it, were in fact evil psychopaths...
However, all we have for any of it is Laura Knight-Jadczyk's word... In the only somewhat independent review I could fine [link to www.moonshineink.com]
I found this interesting comment:
"Initially, I resisted a book by an academic, but his writing style is not so technical so as to cause complete disengagement; however, it requires focused attention and thought. The editor’s superb preface and footnotes assist with needed explanations..."
In other words, without Laura Knight-Jadczyk's explanation, Ponerology is almost incomprehensible. As LKJ is also the foremost proponent of Ponerology, her own pathology becomes a key component in evaluating Ponerology. Take the following quote from [link to www.ponerology.com]
“ are hypersensitive and distrustful, while, at the same time, pay little attention to the feelings of others. They tend to assume extreme positions, and are eager to retaliate for minor offenses. Sometimes they are eccentric and odd. Their poor sense of psychological situation and reality leads them to superimpose erroneous, pejorative interpretations upon other people’s intentions. They easily become involved in activities which are ostensibly moral, but which actually inflict damage upon themselves and others. Their impoverished psychological worldview makes them typically pessimistic regarding human nature.” (Lobaczewski, 123-4)
Okay, "hypersensitive and distrustfull:" LKJ attacks and labels people as psychopaths and cointelpro agents simply because someone gets on their forum and suggests that they have had a good experience with something other than the C-Cult.
Extreme positions and eager to retaliate for minor offenses: The extreme position is the Organic Portal theory, and retaliating for minor offenses is SOP. Again, Mr. Pepin's friends didn't attack LKJ or disrupt the conversation, they just offered a contrary opinion, for which they were branded psychopaths and cointelpro agents.
Eccentric and Odd: Okay, ouiji board alien channeling, exorcisms and divorce based on alien reptoid replicants is decidedly odd and eccentric.
I think you can see where this is going... If you look at these characteristics offered by the guru of psychopaths himself, then a disturbing trend appears; LKJ seems to share and exhibit most of these character traits. The same can be said of this checklist:
Glib and Superficial.
Egocentric and Grandiose.
Lack of empathy.
Deceitful and Manipulative.
Shallow Emotions.
Impulsive.
Poor behavioral controls.
Need for excitement.
Lack of responsibility.
Early behavior problems and adult antisocial behavior.
Lack of remorse of guilt. (Quoted by Hare, 69-70)
Let's look at just one of these: Deceitful and Manipulative...
At [link to www.godlikeproductions.com]
we can see how Laura's deceit and manipulation work together. On the SnOTT forum, she posted a reply, which was simply a tissue of lies. In my reply above, I quoted an email to her inner circle egroup from the time in question. Here's a snippet:
“And here we come to the Vincent saga. Once I realized that I was in the grip of a petty tyrant, I put the "strategy" into operation. All of you witnessed it. It involved systematic harassment of Vincent within the confines of the forum of the group. I did not engage with him in private where he would have slammed me viciously. I knew he would not do that in public. I also investigated his weakness thoroughly - his practice and teaching of rituals that are, in the outside world, connected inextricably with Black Magick. He had another weakness: his association with Dan Winter and his criticism of Stan Tenen.
“I spent a day writing the Meru articles on the Perseus page as another "insult" to his ritualistic business because it cuts deep at the heart of the whole kabbalistic foundations of magick.
“The strategy calls for being on the alert for a moment in which the weakness can be used against the tyrant. As it turned out, this article was the inducer of that moment - the attack by the Jewish crowd screaming "anti-semitism," followed by Stan Tenen's attack and impending connection of Satanism to Dan Winter, and by default through long association, with Vincent.
“It was time to act.
“As Don Juan points out, if you are on the alert for the "moment," it always comes.
“So, the cancellation was announced IN PUBLIC. The "slave" (us) did what amounted to "taunting" the tyrant and "making fun" of his work and public persona. It made him look ridiculous, as Don Juan suggests is necessary.
“And, as Don Juan suggests, part of the strategy is the certainty that the
tyrant will retaliate, but in a covert way.
“Vincent began planning his destruction of us. He wrote an email that was supposed to engage the emotions of everyone on the group in his favor - to show how terribly he had been wronged.
“But, I blocked it. (and here I will say that a number of others really wanted to "try to work it out" and "make peace in the family. A series of emails were exchanged begging Vincent to think about what he was doing. That only served to further enrage him. He came after me with all that fury - in his email sent to 150 plus recipients. But his rage had blinded him. He acted in ways that clearly revealed his true nature. By this time, he was unable to control himself because he had been provoked. The subsequent webpage was the final series of interactions that led to the resolution.”
So there you have it, the whole idea of systematic harassment is based on deceit and manipulation. What kind of person carefully constructs a plan of “systematic harassment” designed to discredit and manipulate a supposed friend and colleague, and to destroy his conference in the most destructive way possible, while blaming everything on his, calculated and manipulated, reaction?
Now the last time I posted to a DU forum in response to LKJ's lies, one of her followers put me up on his predator website. No comments or dissenting views, just a link to LKJ's "exposes." The fellow, calling hmself purplehaze, then went on LKJ's SnOTT forum and sucked up to the group. Here's a few comments:
"2008-04-14 00:02:56
purplehaze
Padawan Learner
Registered: 2008-03-10
Posts: 60
Re: Psychopath Attack on Democratic Underground
Miss Isness - we understand your compassion in trying to help Laura get away from this nonsense - but not answering him is just as bad. Bridges, as a full blown psychopath - will take the silence as yet another green light for further attacks and abuse.
As this post says [link to cyberpaths.blogspot.com] / … s-say.html - we are all entitled to take the high road by standing up for the truth. You can't go head to head with these nutjobs - so all you can do is put the truth out there for all to see. (and of course, they will attack more because the one thing a psychopath DOESN'T WANT out there - is the truth)
Last edited by purplehaze (2008-04-14 00:03:52)
2008-04-15 23:49:31
purplehaze
Padawan Learner
Registered: 2008-03-10
Posts: 60
Re: Psychopath Attack on Democratic Underground
The four of us who run EOPC have been through it before. We've all had pathological parents, or friends, or coworkers, or lovers or bosses. Mostly a combo of all of it. Enough to make you "crazy."
But usually you hit the wall somewhere along the line and say STOP. And you show everyone there's just a man behind the curtain and they aren't the "great and powerful Oz." They're a grown up screaming baby and schoolyard bully who got BUSTED. They aren't mature or sane enough to apologize or even take responsibility -
and remember MUD STICKS BEST TO A CLEAN SPOT - so they will smear the best of us in a heartbeat.
Bridges is on our site now and he's not coming down. His little outburst just comfirmed a permanent place on our list of the Exposed.
Last edited by purplehaze (2008-04-15 23:50:12)
VB: Note the complete lack of objectivity on that last one... Basically, if you ask inconvenient questions or bring up things that Laura would rather not address, you are labeled a psychopath with a permanent spot on a predator website. My "little outburst" was a very polite note, belittled on the SnOTT forum, which merely asked that links to the GLP thread and Cassiopaeacult.com be adding to that page on me. See [link to www.sott.net]
Dear Site owner/Webmaster,
With all due respect, I do not think you have done your own dilligence on this one. You have linked to Laura Knight-Jadczyk's "expose" pages on me without comment and without a shred of rebuttle, although there is plenty of that available with a simple google search. Given that Ms. Knight-Jadczyk is being sued for libel and defamation over the same sort of accusations, I wonder at your motive is publishing her obviously biased attack articles concerning me.
LKJ presents stacks of "files" that she says support her claims. In fact, they present the clear and obvious evidence of her and the C-Cult's on-going campaign of libel and cyber-harassment against me. In all that pile of crap, they can present not a single shred, not ONE, of evidence of any kind of counter intelligence activity, or even any connection at all to any intelligence agency or group, no matter how remote. Three PI's working on the case and all they can find is a decade old traffic ticket? However, rather than admit that they were wrong, the fact was spun into the idea that I had been sheep dipped, whatever that means, and somehow that implies that the fact that there is no evidence, not one single shred, is in fact proof that I am an agent…
At the very least, I would ask that you include the following links:
http:/www.cassiopaeacult.com
and _ [link to www.godlikeproductions.com]
Where you can see the evidence that she launched her photographic assault in response to revelations concerning the counter-intelligence background of her husband.
Thank you,
Vincent Bridges
Now before we start buying into a belief system that leads to Stalinist purges of "psychopaths" with Bladerunner style interogations to determine who is and who isn't a psychopath, we should look carefully at the background of the theory's main proponent, Laura Knight-Jadczyk. When we do that, we find many troubling pathologies, from outright theft and fraud, the house raffle scam, to extremes of deceit and manipulation and cultic behavior.
There are better ways to explain and deal with the problem of evil in our society than falling for the old evil of irrational scapegoating...
VB |
| Vincent Bridges
User ID: 422603
4/25/2008 1:10 AM | | Re: Ok, enough about Nancy and the Zetas. What do you all know about Laura and the Cassiopaeans? | Quote |
Well, it's been three days since I posted my response to Laura's lie filled version of how she came to be on the attack. Purplehaze, who has been reposting and commenting on my posts in almost real time at SnOTT, has now decided not to repost my reply, or, more likely, he tried to and it was rejected by the moderators.
Can't have the truth out there in front of them where they might have to give a straight answer...
VB |
| | Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168 | |
|
