Internal Object Relations

Internal Object Relations
The Sniper
Robert L. Kocher
C. 2003

During the fall of 2002 there was a serial killer, called a sniper, killing about one person a day in Maryland and Virginia. By now, it has been largely forgotten. As of this moment in this portion of the writing, March 25th, 2003 during a war with Iraq, several headlines of first prominence announce, “Madonna’s back with a controversial new song.” There is also an announced crisis in Hollywood couples breaking up. In present society that which is important is a sequence of events lasting milliseconds. Within that sequence, events important to teenage rock music disk jockeys become equated in importance to events determining the long term course of the nation.

But, there was a sniper or snipers. At the time nobody knew what the person or people committing these acts were. It could have been a garden variety psychotic run amok. It could have been a so-called Islamic “terrorist.” It could have been a left wing nut. It could have been a right wing nut. It could have been anybody. Nobody had any idea who it was at the time.

As part of the madness ultimately underwriting the sniper’s existence, the sniper was declared, before his identification or apprehension, to be an angry white male, probably a militiaman, an NRA member, a reactionary, a right wing activist, and generally a composite of all that the radical left throughout the world, and in the media, hates and is determined to demonize. It’s not that the sane white male has any reason to be justifiably angry. It’s not as if the white male hasn’t been under siege from every jackass, fop, parasite, chronic screw-up, malcontent, sadist, neurotic, demagogue, or psychotic who demands the right to confiscate his life in subservience to their own purposes. It’s only that there is an enormous pool of these supposedly criminally angry white males who unaccountably constantly exist just beneath the surface everywhere according to leftist mentalities, and who must be correctly labeled, then prevented from erupting. If the sadistic process of detection and prevention is such as to provoke wrath from any healthy human being, so much the better, because appropriate wrath is interpreted as irrefutable revelation of original concealed intent that justifies necessity of more intensive and thorough application of the preventative and corrective measures until all capacity for healthy indignation is purged from the earth. As one might expect, there is so much work to be done that this task is an eternal calling requiring endless vigilance and dedication.

So the leftist media didn’t miss a chance to get yet another dig in at angry white males.

Aggressive paranoia needs an enemy. It needs an enemy to maintain itself, on which it can blame its troubles, and against which it can react. It will create one, or many, enemies through deliberate provocation, through exaggeration, through fiction, through a combination of methods. The concept of the angry white male is being used in a paranoid conceptual counterpoise closely paralleling the concept of “reactionary” by the radical left that is a artificially and tortuously defined boogie-man against which all forms of militant “struggle” are justified. In promoting this concept the leftist media is building oblique support for violent destruction of the American nation. What has been created and maintained is a children’s crusade against various boogie-men where adults with children’s mentalities kill people.

The leftist anti-reactionary campaign mobilized into full gear to exploit the opportunity afforded by the sniper, the serial killer, mass killer, terrorist, or whatever he was to be called. What he was eventually to be called, and what reaction to him was declared to be appropriate, was to be deferred until the declared certainty of his race, religion and politics were confirmed. And, of course, the anti-gun movement also mobilized into full swing for its song and dance routine. Liberal formula-written editorials were piled in corners waiting to be unleased in expected celebration.

Well, horror of horrors, the angry white male sniper turned out to be a 40 something year old black man named Muhammad along with a younger black helper or co-worker, or whatever. It is now beginning to look as if there may have been more than just two at some time while others have gone off to hide in the bushes.

The name Muhammad is identified, or is an identification with, the Muslim movement, and particularly the black Muslim movement in America. Muhammad’s younger associate, who evidence and self-admission indicate killed at least two people in this escapade, is now imperiously complaining that jail food is not prepared according to Mohammedan law. The killings he committed presumably were. The little bastard is filled with boundless aggressive arrogance and confidence. He needs about three good whippings nearly to death to intrude upon his opinion that he is the undisputed omnipotent center and commander of the universe.

The American Black Muslim movement draws a preponderance of the low IQ mentally deficient looking for a sense of personality, style, importance, feeling of group belonging, intoxication with group power, direction, a source for some sort of quasi title with which to festoon themselves, a target on whom they can blame their problems and deficiencies while avoiding looking at themselves, a chance to work a deal for special privileges, and/or for a chance to show their behinds. They fill their internal void through introjection of group dynamics. In the childlike let’s-pretend mentality composing the movement every third simpleton comprising the movement calls himself Mohammed, Muhammed, Mohammad, in various spellings of the same name in an attempt to be somebody or something.

The entire scene is ludicrous to the point of being a cartoon –what should be such an embarrassing cartoon as to repel any mature mentally competent prospective members. But we’re no longer allowed to laugh at such things because it is looked at as a politically incorrect hate crime. This is unfortunate in that the ludicrous and stupid is no longer subjected to the corrective measure of being looked upon, and reacted to, as ludicrous and stupid. We’ve gone so far as to attempt to convince ourselves that the ludicrous and stupid are not ludicrous and stupid in our attempts to adapt to the ludicrous and stupid. In the suppression of reasonable and even responsible reactions, the psychological environment undermines and suppresses healthy accurate perception and definition of the immature, the extreme, the pathological, and the irrational.

America and other places now have a new political right, the right of people to feel good about themselves. This applies only to selected protected groups. The more irrational and/or degenerate a group is, the more it is to be protected and made to feel good about itself. If non-protected groups are required to sacrifice their personal integrity, their sense of reality, any or all personal rights, and their mental health to make those protected groups feel good about themselves, it is not to be viewed as a serious matter –and more likely to be viewed as justifiable retribution and/or compensation or punishment for past insensitivity and past denial of people’s right to unreasonable unconditional acceptance and self esteem.

Whether you are trashy, whether you are a determined aggressive economic and social parasite, whether you are a militant idiot or psychotic makes no difference. You are entitled to unconditional love, acceptance, and social equality. Other people are to be pressed into subservience to give it.

Those people or groups without the protected right to feel good about themselves unconditionally, are expected or compelled to feel bad about themselves unconditionally.

American culture in particular and world leftist culture on a broader front is on a crusade to punish rationality in what is in reality a massive temper tantrum because people don’t like the effort and discipline that acquisition of rationality demands, they don’t like parting with the comforting self-serving myths that rationality disturbs, they don’t like revealing of incapacity or lack of talent that attempts at rationality reveal, they don’t like the impositions upon irrational self-indulgent behavior that rationality imposes.

Now the original real Mohammad, Mohammed, Muhammed, Muhammad, or however you want to spell it, from about 1,500 years ago was a repulsive warped character. Just reading his history will impel anyone of civilized nature to take a bath afterward to cleanse off the stupid filth and degeneracy. He had at least some capacity for marrying six or seven year old girls. He was afflicted, or gifted, depending upon your point of view, your stupidity, your gullibility, and your definition of psychotic, with various visions, hallucinations, delusions, obsessions, and God knows what else which he and his followers believe came from Allah. That anyone would believe Mohammad was anything worth while is testimony to the fact that much of the human race is innately suggestible and stupid. If brother Mohammed wasn’t nuts he could suffice to fill the role until someone more diseased, in the remote probability such a person could be found, came to the party. Mohammad’s epiphanies are recorded in an instruction manual for would-be psychotics called and spelled the Koran here, which is now spelled in various ways in affectation of profound erudition and multicultural respect.

How does one become a prophet, anyway? Contrary to reasonable practical expectation, for the most part God does not appear directly before the masses explicitly proclaiming someone to be his representative. Rather, people become prophets as a pure result of other men’s indirect interpretation of events and words along with their own emotional reactions. To become a prophet one needs a gift of oratory together with a sufficient number of suggestible and gullible elements within the population. Prophets are constructed through a projective interpretive process from minimal or vague information. People infuse their neuroses, fears, deliriums, ignorances into interpretations to synthesize a prophet and to create subsequent embellishment and fairy tales about the prophet’s deeds, capacity, and image. From thence they construct the frame of reference that the absence of evidence is a test of one’s belief and obedience while demand for rational evidence is an insult to the hypothetical deity or power in question. This last part is the kicker. Once you sell this or buy into it, mindlessness and hysterical unconditional acceptance of argument that is not to be examined by any form of rationality becomes the test and order of the day.

As an aside, there is too much of this in too much of religion, and entirely too much pride in the systematized irrationality occurring there. There are instances where religion is brought into government by religions or political figures. The problem then becomes one not so much of separation of church and state, but separation of irrationality and state.

So, for conjectured reasons which may be unconvincing to the rational mind, God or Allah or whoever does not appear before and speak to the mass of people directly to appoint prophets. Rather, he, and prophets, are an inferred state created by interpretations of events and people by other suggestible and hysterical people along with stern warnings that such will be the probable last warnings from the ever-reclusive Allah or whoever to the end of time and whoever doubts this is doomed in one way or another for lack of blind faith –and, importantly, implicitly also doomed by any rational inquiry. If the inferences seem somewhat loose and reaching, that is another test of faith and another test of obedience by the hypothetical Allah.

There’s as much serious evidence to indicate Mohammad was a prophet or anything else other than a raving goof as there is to prove I am an interterrestial space astronaut, regardless of the perpetual indignation this elicits from Mohammad’s followers. The mental hospitals used to be filled with people who heard voices or received messages nobody else could hear, but this Mohammad psychotic made it into the big time. He was aided in this by accident of living during a time when there was little understanding of serious mental disorder. He continues to be viewed as a prophet to the extent people still have little recognition of mental disorder in others or in themselves.

In a sane world filled with sane intelligent people, the Mohammad operation would never have gotten off the ground. Unfortunately, the mental condition of the human race is such that he founded what is called a religion. There were enough mental defectives at that time and area to create an initial core of believers. That core embarked on an endlessly self-perpetuating crusade of physical conquest to impose itself and its beliefs. As a consequence, Islam or Mohammedism or whatever it is called now poisons the minds of one fifth of the world’s population. It terrorizes another 10-15% of the world’s population. Islam has an obsessive-compulsive intractable delusional will of iron, a fierce determination in direction, a constant rage and indignation toward the threat of a rational world, and a self-righteous license to kill in the name of Allah as an expression of that rage and indignation.

Every other Koran page preaches love and peace. Alternate pages preach subduing and/or killing the non-Mohammedan infidels. What exists are the mood oscillations and unresolved conflicts of a madman which swing from religious quasi-poetic public relations one day to evil psychotic wrath the next. Which pages are believed, emphasized, and acted upon at any moment are subject to several factors.

One of these factors is the level of denial on the part of any particular Muslim who desperately wishes to convince himself, or others, that Islam and Mohammed mean peace. To disregard the long history and direct messages of Islam requires enormous denial of reality. However, the human mind is more than capable of meeting the challenge. There are Islamic people who probably sincerely believe it is a peaceful religion unfairly blemished by the actions of a tiny proportion of radicals. They undoubtedly want to believe they are not involved in something as terrible, corrupt, warped, and precarious as they are. In this, they are much like the hundreds of cult-residents of Jonestown and believers in the Reverend Jim Jones in the late ’70s or early ’80s who refused to see the truth of what they were involved in right through the time they drank the cyanide Kool-Aide in an act of mass suicide. The reality of Islam is, after all, so terrible that the human mind has difficulty in believing its nature. There are many beliefs, and many people, in this world who are protected by the very unbelievability of their evil nature. There’s enough pleasant window dressing around Mohammedism to allow self deception. If people can be isolated in a warped environment, they adapt to that environment while referencing that same environment instead of outside realities in evaluating that environment’s nature. Under reality deprivation, regimented isolation, intensive social pressure and programming, the human mind can be twisted into believing and defending anything, particularly if it contains imposed ritual. If nothing else, Mohammedism is regimented and ritualistic. In many places women are forced to wear bags over their heads and people prostrate themselves on the ground facing Mecca in continual acts of enforced obsessive-compulsive stupidity and superstition numerous times a day. If their faces are turned to Mecca, their behinds are directed toward the rest of the sane world. The more twisted and psychotic the belief, the more constant threat from uncomfortable realization the believers live under, and the more desperately they adhere to obsessive polarization against intruding elements of final outside reality. Defense of irrationality becomes viewed as demonstration of faith instead of demonstration of stupidity. Consequently, much as Jonestown or the existence of Heaven’s Gate alien space ships hidden behind the Hale-Bopp comet were believed, Islam is believed regardless of the fact that anyone who steps back and takes a serious overall look at it would reject it as a form of madness –which in Islamic countries would get you killed. But once someone becomes involved and lost in the complex craziness of thought, they lose capacity to step back and see the whole.

Some of the people who believe in Mohammad may be pleasant people. So was Typhoid Mary. What the pleasant believers carry with them, or what lurks behind them, is lethal.

There are certain ideologies and certain cults or religions that have happened upon systems of mind control and attendant physical control such that there is no way out for people who become involved in them, and no reversal of that control for nations that come under their dominance. There also may not be any peaceful method of resisting territorial expansion of that control should the inclination of those systems be to expand them. In a sense, those systems resemble theoretical virus-induced immune-resistant cancers that spread by infusing virus or control upon healthy cells at the cancer margins, and which metastasize cells and colonies with the same capabilities out into the greater body. Islam is one of those systems. Islamics tend to remain Islamics. Muslim countries remain Muslim. There is, within these systems remarkable immune-resistance to rationality. They are as progressive and incurable a disease as AIDS.

The Reverend Jim Jones of Jonestown, and the prophet Mohammed of Islam, were separated by years, not by quality of thought or quality of followers. That one of these two lunatics is viewed as having founded one of the world’s supposedly great religions is ridiculous accident of aggressive action in forcefully engulfing and controlling greater numbers of people more quickly.

The difference between Jim Jones and Mohammed is, according to Muslim history the Prophet Mohammed personally led 28 military campaigns, and during the same period his top followers, The Companions, embarked on another 51 military campaigns. The campaigns were successful and continued to be through several centuries. And that attitude and action, dear hearts, is what converts a psychotic cult into one of the world’s great religions.

The denial within the Muslim world is paralleled and interwoven with forms of denial outside the Muslim world and with denial generally. There is a class of people in this world who are determined to remain oblivious to evil in an occasionally desperate attempt to believe in some sort of unconditional goodness. They maintain a nearly deliberate blindness to evil in adherence to an unsupportable but desperately grasped-at idealism. The sincerest evidence of belief is a willingness to die or be destroyed for that belief. This can lead to a life of suicidal or self-destructive rapture. This is an element of masochistic psychological dynamics. (An entire examination of masochistic forms and dynamics including occasional elements of reaction formation and masochistic entitlement can not be undertaken here.) Such people will insist on leading, indeed pulling, other people and sometimes entire nations over a cliff or into concentration camps in determined, but misguided, attempts to demonstrate the efficacy of adherence to belief in ecstatic masochistic delirium over reality. Among some Christians and similar mentalities evil is nearly welcomed as an opportunity to love the sinner but hate the sin while the sinner and the sin kill them –and us along with them. They are dangerous. They make evil possible in their refusal to admit it exists and deal with it appropriately. America has a number of them in one subcultural axis within the radical left and elsewhere.

Islam also has its share of denial-ridden believers. Those Islamic believers are not necessarily suicidal or destructive in the complete sense described above, but they believe. They believe in the goodness of Islam despite any evidence of evil. There is a suicidal pattern seen in the jihadist suicide bombers that is more one of blind fanatic warlike dedication than of bland masochistic submission. The denial-ridden try to believe. They blind themselves to evil realities in those attempts. They don’t know any better or they have presentation of no alternative. The craziness and crazies of the Muslim world crouch down and hide behind the deluded with their sweet hopeful sincerity while the crazies work beneath the surface and in the underground to gain power and await their day to exert Allah’s idealistic retribution. The oblivious pleasant true believers are the outside skin of a poisoned apple. Their misrepresentation of Islam makes them more dangerous than that which they misrepresent. If you are sucked into their denials, wishs and fantasies about their own religion, the reality is likely to kill you. Every area where Islam exists has suffered accordingly or has had to fight against suffering accordingly.

The problem with Islam is that there is little or nothing definitive within it to prohibit violent jihadist aggression. There is much within it to support or impel craziness and violent jihad. The idea that craziness and ruthless jihad are not inherent in Islamic structure is purely a matter of wishful interpretation without supporting structure of concrete stability within the movement. Concurrently there is long historical precedent that becomes a theological assertion justified or validated by nearly fifteen hundred years of internally uncontested practice.

Mohammedism is like a physical structure that is off balance and leans toward violence. It is kept from falling into that direction only by those instances of paucity of numbers, social pressure, and assured threat that it will be subject to punitive forces if it oversteps its bounds. Islam must be dealt with in a quick stern no-nonsense manner. There is a myth that Islamic militants are fearless in their militancy. But, they are only obliviously suicidal in their attacks when it’s on their own terms and when they get themselves and each other hopped up on Islamic hokum and psychobabble. They are frightened of death if it is not on their own terms and they haven’t had a chance to pump themselves up. When they are hopped up, they’ll kill in a minute. When they are not hopped up they claim to be misunderstood and ask for love or mercy.

People inhabiting a life of denial, including masochistic denial, outside the Muslim world also blind themselves to Islam’s perversity. It is also a good idea to understand that the people most likely to betray you and deliver you into slavery are those who have aspirations toward oblivious personal sainthood. For those not similarly anesthetized by euphoric pious schizophrenia, being blown up, living in a concentration camp, or being burned at the stake along side them is rather unsatisfactory.

George Bush evidences part of this pattern. From a December 26, 2002 Ann Coulter column:

———————————-

Trent Lott, call your office: Apparently some parts of American history can be sanitized and forgotten. Earlier this week, President George Bush issued a formal White House proclamation celebrating Kwanzaa.

Sounding like a “Saturday Night Live” send-up, Bush praised the “seven principles” of Kwanzaa, “known as Nguzo Saba,” and discussed the “early harvest gatherings called ‘matunda ya kwanza,’ or first fruits.” He included the usual claptrap about how Kwanzaa celebrates “traditional African values” and “uniting people of diverse backgrounds and beliefs.”

…and so forth.

———————————–

But the great Kwanzaa African tradition Bush refers to was invented in California during the ’60s by a black radical, Ron Everett, who subsequently called himself Ron Karenga and Dr. Maulana Karenga in concocting a series of names suitable for drawing in and impressing child-minded suckers, while he was in prison for various crimes. He was involved in a lot of things. Various black radical groups were jostling each other for power at the time, during which several black panthers were killed. Everett got convicted of torturing two women whom he apparently suspected were acting for rival groups and trying to poison him. The scene was left wing crazy not far from the recent sniper mental processes. An internet search under Karenga will document a record of violent irrationality. The Kwanzaa invention was basically a quasi-Marxist ploy to create or encourage and give form to a separate hostile black infantile mentality in America which could be expanded, then manipulated. Africans never heard of Kwanzaa.

Thus, in his Kwanzaa greetings, Bush fulfilled the accomplishment of bestowing respectability for a fictitious holiday declared by a leftist radical kook sitting in jail. So there was a theatrical revolutionary sitting in the slammer making up Marxist-serving holidays and there is an American president confirming them. This approaches something somewhere between Inspector Clouseau in a Peter Sellers movie and the “what, me worry?” face on the covers of Mad Magazine. It is typical Bush. It also bestowed a receptive atmosphere for the lunatic leftist movement that pushed it forward years. No sane intelligent person would have dreamed of validating the manipulative deconstructive psychobabble of revolutionary Marxism. Every half-wit and leftist radical in the country is celebrating Bush’s statements and will shortly demand more of everything after having been officially elevated and validated. It will license new levels of dishonesty and thought disorder –and accompanying permissiveness and narcissism. It’s the last thing the American nation, which is already drowning in a suffocating siege by it, needs. The consequences are going to be felt for years. Regardless of Bush’s mindless euphoria, this is not anything with which I care to be united. People such as Everett, if we dare still call him that, and his mentality are among those from which I have attempted to free myself my entire life. Bush and his clueless dilettante mentality also occupy a prominent position on that avoidance list as he attempts to deliver me and the nation unto the hostile forces of ignorance and degeneracy.

One size bland denial fits all. Bush proclaims statements such as, “And then, of course, there’s Senator Edward Kennedy. And the folks at the Crawford Coffee Shop would be somewhat shocked when I told them I actually like the fellow. He is a fabulous United States senator.” So another fraudulent misanthrope and psychopath received the good housekeeping seal of approval and was awarded entirely undeserved stature and acceptability. Such statements were issued only after the election campaign. The folks at the Crawford Coffee Shop had no idea of the mentality behind Bush’s bland affability. If they had, Bush would have been lynched rather than been elected to anything. Being “somewhat shocked” comes after elections.

What is needed is mature serious stable realistic thinking. Instead, Bush is yet another president who’s mental approach belongs on a TV sitcom. Such has been the mental modeling in the White House in recent years. To a nation watching sitcoms six or more hours a night it’s an acceptable continuation of the level of functioning to which people have become accustomed.

As far as the other half of the Kwanzaa comedy team, Everett is now professor and chair at the Department of Black Studies at California State University where he struts about wearing a ridiculous costume and an intimidating scowl in a theatrical child’s let’s-pretend world for considerable salary. This provides another authoritative model for mental instability. We are now at the point where our educational institutions seek out people with jail time on their resumes as professors to administer the politically correct prescribed character guidance and character-building to students at schools. If some psychotics can be recruited into academic departments it adds what is now interpreted as academic creativity and abstractly termed diversity. Contemporary education consists of acquiring, or surviving, the self-licensed parade of psychiatric problems of both the professors and the total institutions.

What remains of our state mental hospitals should be relabeled universities. Then the patients should be designated and paid as full professors. It would simplify the present process of procuring university faculty as well as result in more cost-effective use of public buildings. The patients would feel better about themselves. We could have departments of composed of simple schizophrenia, departments of hebrephrenia, departments of debilitating obsessive-compulsive disorders, departments of infantile temper tantrums, and departments of paranoia staffed by people previously diagnosed as having those conditions who would inculcate the thought processes characteristic of those conditions into students as a crusade to achieve social liberation of previously arbitrarily stigmatized groups who had been oppressed for their deviation from archaic thought processes. The mental debilitation resulting from such curricula would enhance student’s feeling of subjective involvement in the educational/intellectual process for those graduating after having acquired those conditions. That’s what we now have in many cases.

Does Bush know what he is promoting and what the eventual consequences will be? Is Bush a evil man? Does Bush know, for instance, that in certifying Kwanzaa and Everett that he certifying a form of the same warped mentality that underwrote the Muhammad snipers? No. He’s simply too soft and intellectually undeveloped or incapable to understand the world around him or to understand the serious consequences of his actions. Bush, let’s say it straight out, is feeble-minded. He is not reflexively adult. His reflexive reference is not to fully developed rational adulthood. My impression of Bush is that he is dazed, confused or lost and searching for something to do or say. Close examination indicates he has been drifting and lost in anything not based on ceremonial use of the family name. Fortunately for Bush, the jihadist terrorist attacks of 9/11 required no ideological commitment, no intellectual depth, no absence of confusion. The Jihadist actions have given Bush a superficial focus not provoking controversy. His pool numbers jumped up enormously immediately after the jihadist attacks for no reason other than the attacks. The attacks brought life to a failing moribund presidency.

A series of data extracted and listed according to temporal sequence from: Newsweek Polls conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates, Zogby International America Polls and Reuters/Zogby Polls, CBS News Polls, NBC News/Wall Street Journal Polls, and Quinnipiac University Polls show the following in response to:

“Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as president?”

Date        Approve     Disapprove     Don’t Know

4/21-23/01      56        30         14

6/13-17/01      50        33     17

7/26-29/01      47        51     2

8/28-30/01      50        49     1

9/6-9/01         55           41     3

9/13/01          86           12     2

9/14-16/01       82        18     2

11/9-11/01      88        7     5

12/10-12/01     82        18     1

These figures should be seriously and honestly studied. They represent the reality of the Bush presidency.

By June and August of 2001 the new Bush Presidency was already washed up and sinking deeper. Bush was heading toward a 45% or below approval rating and a 50+% disapproval rating. Americans were in a state of progressive disgust –and for good reason. Bush was being perceived as inane, mindless, substanceless, randomly groping for something or anything, and destructive. There is a hard core of fanatic party supporter voters, somewhere around 35-40% who will support Godzilla or the Beast From The Black Lagoon out of party loyalty and Bush was headed toward that bottom. There would be little or no chance of Bush’s being reelected. The Bushs might as well have started packing their bags to return to Texas or Kennebunkport. But in a six to eight hour period after jihadists crashed airplanes into the New York World Trade Center, Bush’s approval ratings catapulted 30+ percentage points upward to save his presidency as people converted their anger toward the jihadists into support for George Bush. It had absolutely nothing to do with George Bush. Bush hadn’t changed in six hours. He hadn’t said or done anything during the interval. Disapproval of Bush for the same valid reasons for which he was in deep trouble six hours earlier suddenly became viewed as a pathologically obsessive and cruel act against Bush as well as support for the jihadists. Meanwhile, the serious problems existent and acknowledged two days earlier continued.

Consequently, because of jihadist idiots flying airplanes into buildings the resulting support causes Bush to believe the mentality and actions that were creating a quite justified disastrous 51% disapproval rate are acceptable and even intelligent while other fanatics and defectives are using the six hour increase to argue that the mentality and actions eliciting that disapproval rate as evidence that that disastrous mentality is wonderful. As a result of Jihadists flaying airplanes into buildings, the nation is apt to be stuck with a deteriorating mess that will last for decades or to its final collapse. Paradoxically, the jihadists will have been more effective in destroying the American nation than if they’d had a hundred airplanes.

That’s the unfortunate reality of people and politics.

As an aside, one of the side effects of the jihadist attacks was probably to cost Hillary Clinton the presidency. With 50+ percent disapproval ratings, Bush was through. Hillary is the most powerful and visible person in the Democratic party, and has 90% media support. Still, if the Iraq War excitement wears down and the presidency must stand on it’s own, we are likely to see a repetition of the 1992 election with another Clinton in the White House.

The Bushs do not wear well if left to their own devices. The Bush mode of operation is one in which presenting themselves and their pedigree is sufficient. That is, they are physically present and pleasant within the established context of wealth and contacts. If you look for more, there is no more. But in the social and business circles in which the Bushs run, merely presenting themselves is sufficient. Family stratum is the primary credential. That credential functions well under optimum conditions, at country clubs, or among similar people, or in figurehead roles. It does not perform in an unartificial world with complex real problems. It becomes boring and disappointing to people who expect or need more.

One of the major threats of outside barbarians to any culture or empire that is coasting on past achievement and artificialialized leadership is that the culture or empire collapses due to lack of functionality of that leadership.

Acquaintances who believe in Bush exalt in recent statements by the radical left declaring Bush to be a genius with what he’s accomplished. They argue that such statements indicate Bush has out-thought the political and cultural left in the nation. However, the reason the kook left is declaring Bush a genius is because they are awaking to the realization that beneath Bush’s initially hated declarations of Republican “compassionate conservatism” and the drubbing of Saddam Hussein he’s as big an airheaded ding-a-ling as they are. They are finding themselves uncontested in strategic, that’s STRATEGIC, issues. The radical left screams like hell because they want more and it’s a good tactic, but they are uncontested in crucial areas. The reasons Bushs polls were heading downward previous to 9/11 served the purposes of radical left just fine, thank you. The state of the art and rebuttal, and the intensity of confronting the left has not advanced an inch under Bush. The left is now essentially unopposed in critical areas that determine the long term course of the nation and they are getting their way. They are gaining in consolidated stature and power. Bush’s supporters haven’t caught on yet. If the Clintons did something half as destablizing and destructive Bush does, they would be screaming in protest. As it is, they fanatically rationalize for George Bush as fervently and blindly as Islamics do for Mohammad.

George Bush seems to want to believe. His supporters also want to, or a committed to, believe. They believe in George Bush to the point of blindness and sharing his inane obliviousness. In his childlike mentality Bush becomes breathlessly ecstatic, and even breathlessly idiotic in the throes of an abstract love, when embracing concepts such as inclusion, diversity, being president of all the people, and uniting people of diverse backgrounds and beliefs. When he’s not validating Marxist-radical-created holidays substituted for Christmas he can be found groveling in mosques or holding Islamic Ramaden dinners in a state of mindless giddiness.

Not all things can be included and combined in the name of multiculturalism or diversity. Nor should they be. Some cultural patterns and values are diametrically opposed to each other to the point of impossible coexistence because one of them must inherently suffer for the sake of the other when mixed. There’s no reason why established patterns should be mixed or sacrificed for the convenience of insurgents. Some patterns are diametrically contrary to rationality or to basic integrity and must hence be rejected by any society that wants to remain healthy or rational. They are diametrically opposed to existence of a healthy free society. There are people who are too crazy for other people who do not share their craziness to live with. Such considerations are reasons for maintaining national borders. But America is now in a condition of unreasoned panic and self hatred wherein all things are to be forcefully mixed and the demands for adjustment are made nearly exclusively upon existent culture and institutions while all outside intrusion is encouraged to be both rigid and be demanding that present institutions adapt to that rigidity regardless of quality or rationality in that intrusion. Whether, once included and masochistically accepted, those outside groups are even compatible with each other, is not a consideration in the rush.

Why is it desirable act as if this culture is a source of shame that must be diluted or that we have something to prove such that we constantly wallow in some kind of absurd programmed guilt, self hatred, and self-destructive overtolerance? It’s become the fashion and has become institutionalized. America is in a suicidal bent.

What Bush has done is lead the nation in a direction 180 degrees away from much-needed cultural and mental stability.

If any of what is described in the March 10, 2003 issue of Newsweek leading off with the banner “Bush and God” can be believed, Bush’s bible reading and conversion to religion saved him from continuous heavy drinking and saved his marriage. My observation is that religion can be used to control or suppress various symptoms without sufficiently changing the underlying cause in depth. That which results is a dependent seizure upon religion and a false sense of personal solution of personal problems approaching a type of oblivious euphoric mania or obsession. Obsessive prayer smothers problems, but is no substitute for psychoanalysis or any other kind of analysis.

Bush is oriented toward a type of Jesus freak love-in. Some of the people he would have us love and embrace in his manic euphoria would destroy us and me. I’m not bound to share his obliviousness.

I’m not interested in religious snake handling as proof of believe in God, of God’s protection, or of unconditional unforgiving pious love. It doesn’t permanently change the character or intent of the snakes. Whether the snake is a leftist political radical with destructive intentions, a psychopathic United States senator, an Islamic psychotic, or whatever, makes no difference. If you accommodate and love the snake long enough, eventually you are going to be bitten because that is the nature of snakes. The longer you accommodate and feed the snake, the less fear it will have and the longer its fangs will grow. It is that way in most of life. Whether George Bush gets bit or not as a stupid suicidal act of oblivious devout abstract love or sacrifice is of little personal interest to me. When his problems become channeled into acts of national policy and he drags the country and me into suicide along with him, there is a serious difficulty and serious disagreement.

As was mentioned a few pages earlier, there is too much irrationality in too much of religion, and entirely too much pride in the systematized irrationality occurring there. There are instances where religion is brought into government by religions or political figures. The problem then becomes one not so much of separation of church and state, but separation of irrationality and state. George Bush is one of these moments.

It all of my life, I have never seen God intervene to protect people from natural calamity. Millions are killed by hurricanes, earthquakes, disease, tidal waves, drouths, or whatever. If such deaths, misery, and maimings were attributed to any person or physical group on earth, that person or group would be called the most oppressive, criminal, and evil in existence or history. God interferes with none of it. Neither have I seen God intervene to protect people, or even nations, from their own stupid or risky actions. Neither have I seen such intervention in readings of history. That’s why people are killed drunk driving without God’s intervention. That’s why the Heaven’s Gate cult killed themselves in believing there were space ships hidden behind the Hale-Bopp comet. That’s why Neville Chamberlain helped create World War Two and the near destruction of England as well as the loss of millions of lives in his blind belief in not recognizing the nature of Hitler and the Nazis. God did not intervene in any of it to save anyone from their own errors. God will not intervene to rescue the American nation from either our stupidity and self indulgence as individuals or the stupidity and self indulgence of our leaders. When it is understood and accepted that there is no divine intervention, life and events make perfectly decent sense. Even God, for those who believe in and strain to attribute events to his intention, begins to make sense.

George Bush is the Neville Chamberlain of the 21st century. Neither Bush nor Chamberlain recognize(d) hard tough reality. Both live(d) in denial motivated by various etiologies. Bush makes a show of finishing the vendetta against Saddam Hussein, in which there is absence of broader context in his actions, but in other things he’s in a mode of subjecting or sacrificing America to some kind of Jesus freak suicidal self-sacrificing world love-in.

In terms of long term importance, the unopposed and uncorrected precedent of government excesses at Ruby Ridge and Waco will turn out to constitute a far greater menace to the American future than the events of 9/11 or Saddam Hussein. The fact that Bill Clinton acts as if he still president and is unopposed in so doing also presents serious problems. The teenage-like exhilaration of American tanks roaring into Baghdad is likely to have the same serious long term importance as winning a high school football game. When the American nation collapses, it will collapse from fundamental inside weakness, as it is doing. Military action in the Middle East interposes to avoid examination of this problem. Did Hussein need to get his head busted? Yes, and it should have been done 10 or more years earlier. Two more days of General Norman Schwartzkopf during the Gulf War would have remedied the Hussein problem, but Bush senior didn’t have the courage or commitment for it. However, the serious things that will determine the long term character and survival of the nation are being sacrificed in favor of procuring superficial actions that appeal to the level of high school pep rallys.

America has very serious economic problems: a corrupt and deliberately subversive educational system, an invasion from unchecked immigration, a substantial culture of perpetual immaturity, a legal system being subverted by political correctness, a lack of unifying ideological or philosophical momentum or force, a dangerous and monstrous momentum toward conscripting and sacrificing individual freedom in servitude to wholesale wanton irresponsibility. When the United States fails, it will fall because of this and more. Challenging this is the real work must be done, not presidents landing airplanes onto aircraft carriers. That kind of kid stuff may impress mommies or other kids in the high school class, or it may satisfy the needs of a grown man acting like a little kid running around looking for a pat on the head, but it doesn’t require the brains and courage to identify and remedy the problems listed above.

If the American nation were otherwise healthy, it could withstand a nuclear attack that destroyed five major cities and still survive the same way it survived after Pearl Harbor. It wouldn’t be fun or easy, but the United States would survive. However, America absolutely will not survive the problems listed in the preceding paragraph. In 25 years the United States will decay into a degenerate third world swill if these areas are not addressed.

It’s argued that Bush is too busy with other thing to address such issues. This presumably alludes to the 9/11 jihadist attacks. But before 9/11 when there was nothing else to do, he did not address such problems then. Neither did he address them in his campaign. Such things are beyond his competence.

As far as military actions demonstrating the internal state of the nation, it is the nature of modern warfare that we can win battles with little effort or commitment through employing the same technology used in home computer games. Those battles can be won during conditions of serious domestic weakness or even of absent domestic participation as long as our technology level is either not surpassed by the technology of an opposing nation, or the battle does not take place in terrain or other conditions where technology is ill-suited or useless. A small room full of people scanning satellite images and pushing buttons guiding missiles, along with a not too large number of airplanes carrying missiles and smart bombs can, in several days, knock an enormous but more technologically primitive enemy force into such helplessness that a few tanks and ground troops can then walk in and take control nearly unopposed. The Gulf War and the recent clobbering of Saddam Hussein have demonstrated this beyond any doubt.

The predominant internal condition of the American nation has become irrelevant to winning many types of battles or wars. What is required to win battles is that only a small proportion of the nation be functional, mostly the military, along with warehouses containing accumulations of high tech weapons. The nation as a whole can be deteriorating and even in a state of near-terminal internal decline while celebrating glorious military victories in foreign areas. If we had lost 50,000 people in the Hussein military operation, it would have been significant. But the fast effortless winning of the military operation and the drubbing of Hussein & Company is not an indication of the internal condition of the American nation or even the presidency. More accurately, it is irrelevant.

However, it is not perceived as irrelevant by those who are naive and/or superficial, including presidents. Consequently, it is possible to create an illusion of leadership and cheering sections by using military operations to play hell with a little stick while the essentials determining the long term strength or survival of the country can continue to deteriorate or can be neglected. In his denseness and exhilaration over the illusion, a president and those around him may not even be aware of the deterioration or of the neglect. The same is true of the general population.

Another factor in emphasis of aggressive versus peaceful Islam is whether there are enough Islamics in a population to begin talking each other into flexing their muscles, in which case the area experiences problems. Any place where Islam exists in any degree, it becomes a bully subjecting nonbelievers to violence and terrorism. Indonesia, where more than 10,000 non-Mohammedans have been killed, India where 35,000 have recently been killed in one area alone, the Philippines, and numerous other places are examples. In recent days Muslims in Nigeria have rioted and killed hundreds over their religion’s being offended by a stupid Miss World beauty contest. In an act of triumphant stupidity to demonstrate willing sacrifice to multiculturalism the pageant was held in an area of the world and among people where no sane person would hold it with the result that mobs of enraged fanatic savages killed each other and everybody else they could get their hands on. The pattern is far too persistent and predictable to be dismissed or in any way discounted within functional healthy mental equilibrium.

Saddam Hussein is, or was, far from the only tyrant/terrorist in the world. The events of crashing airplanes into American buildings are but a small taste of events having occurred for decades on a daily basis elsewhere throughout the earth. People elsewhere are constantly killed daily to the cry of Allah Akbar.

Sometime in the ’80s Charles Krauthammer wrote a column containing one of the most concise and brilliant statements I have ever read to the effect: “Tyrants kill until they get what they want. Idealists kill until the world is perfect.” Accordingly, Islam is obsessively intolerant of minute deviation from its imposed form of idealized perfect madness to which no healthy mind should or could adapt. There will never be enough killing to satisfy that obsession.

Humility and timidness need be only temporally adopted until they are no longer necessity. Then you get the real thing that has been held back. As a useful tactic it is a good idea to preach peace until you can impose terror and make war. Islam preaches peace until it gets enough of a toehold to impose itself through terrorism and force.

From the Koran: “Allah and his messenger announce that it is acceptable to go back on our promises and obligations with pagans and make war on them whenever we find ourselves strong enough to do so.”

The astute mind can discern in the double messages of Islam considerable opportunity for a good-cop bad-cop routine. The Islamic bad-cops are adept at killing people. The Islamic good-cops lift their eyes unto the heavens in schizophrenic obliviousness, and sometimes deliberate deception, to explain they can’t imagine what happened because it plainly says on page 43 of the Koran that Mohammedism is a religion of peace while page 42 is explained away or discounted. Both cops are steadfastly immune to rational discourse. If you are a bit weak-minded, or you let them get away with it, they’ll jerk you back and forth like a yo yo. In the Islamic paranoid paradigm, killing is a one-way entitlement licensed by being right. Now, being right may confer license, or may even require militant action to address evil. However, lunatics who feel licensed by their twisted belief in their being right, but who are dead wrong about everything, present considerable difficulties. Being legitimately impelled by matter of healthy conscience has not lately been distinguished from being impelled by psychosis.

So, killing of nonislamic infidels is fulfillment of prophecy. Killing Islamics to defend yourself is an offense against the will of Allah, is inflicting oppression and is persecution which both licenses and requires retaliation. Given acting out of the first statement, constant war against a world attempting to defend itself is in order. In that sense Islam is much like the radical left. –same principle, same twisted reasoning, same war, different god.

Both groups have rationalized a type of paranoid entitlement. The Mohammedans will kill you in the name of Allah. If you defend yourself they call it unreasonable oppression and repression justifying further killing. The radical left will kill you in the name of enforced servitude to the glittering concept of unconditional social equality devised to conceal and enable a substrate of the most base self-indulgence and corruption. If you defend yourself they call it unreasonable reactionary oppression and repression. They believe it and make it stick with media support as well as support in our educational institutions.

“Kill the disbelievers wherever we find them” Koran 2:191

(Flunk or expel the disbelievers wherever we find them. Politically Correct Universities: 2000.)

“Remember Allah inspired the angels: I am with you. Give firmness to the believers. I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: you smite them above their necks and smite all their fingertips off of them.” (Koran, 8:12) For newcomers, smite means chop off. Inhibition against chopping, and turning the other cheek, are not the primary emphasis of Mohammedism.

Here are extracts from a news item that are instructive:

———————————-

3 Women Killed in Kashmir After Rebels Order Veils
12/20/02 | Reuters

JAMMU, India (Reuters) – Suspected militants killed three young women in their homes just days after posters appeared in India’s Jammu and Kashmir state ordering women to wear a veil, police said Friday.

Two of the women, both aged 21, were shot dead in their house in Rajouri district in the south of the revolt-torn Muslim-majority state Thursday night. The third woman, 22, was taken away and beheaded, an official said.

“There is a possibility these killings are linked with the diktat on dress code. We have sent a police party,” he said.

Posters signed by a little known group, Lashkar Jabbar, appeared in Rajouri town and neighboring villages asking women not to step out of their homes without a veil, the official said…

More than a dozen guerrilla groups are fighting Indian rule in Jammu and Kashmir, which is at the heart of more than 50 years of hostility with Pakistan. A few groups in the past have ordered women in the Kashmir valley to wear a veil, but the order was largely ignored.

The Lashkar Jabbar sprayed acid on two women in Kashir’s main city Srinagar last year for defying its Islamic dress code…

More than 35,000 people have been killed in 13 years of rebellion in Jammu and Kashmir where a new government took power last month promising to bring peace to the war-weary region…

———————————-

Suspected militants? Suspected?

This “More than a dozen guerrilla groups are fighting Indian rule in Jammu and Kashmir…” is imprecise nonsense. Indeed the entire article contains an imprecision of languagr softening the reality that India refuses to impose Muslin laws requiring women to dress according to Islamic codes and that the real fight is to impose absolute Islamic law and comprehensive obedience to all Islamic religion/culture, with anyone not surrendering to Islamic law being killed. What is being demanded is women’s not hiding their faces behind veils licensing killing them. If so-called “Indian rule” were to begin beheading women and all others not in absolute obedience to Islam, it would be celebrated and the fight against Indian rule would end.

This was one of several similar events in various places that week. Last night jihadists decapitated four men in the same region. In an event since this original writing, 20 non-Islamics were killed in one night in India. It occurs at a rate of thousands of killings per year in that region alone in pursuit of Islamic perfection. Suspected…

What was done to these women was not only not outside the boundaries of Islamic theological architectural structure, but like underground corruption backing up from a clogged sewer, is the surfacing of a recurrent theme which at best lies straining to be released from temporary suppression employed for public relations purposes, of what is viewed as proper zealousness. It boils to the surface repeatedly throughout the nuthouse Muslim belief system. The United States has only recently received a small dose of what millions of other people have been getting for years or centuries.

Another recurrent theme which might be mentioned in passing is that of sexually related pathology in the Muslim world. I hope we can agree that there should be some measure of human decency and rational inhibition in any society. However, in many areas Muslim men apparently seem to believe they will be so corrupted and precariously incensed to distractive arousal by seeing so much as the tip of a woman’s nose that there exists a constant atmosphere of obsessive panicked madness to control it. What kind of monsters these idiots think the women will turn into upon such revealations is anybody’s guess. Mohammedan culture has a multitude of serious pent-up problems bottled up inside itself. It insists on inflicting those problems upon the world.

Oh, wait a moment. It has nothing to do with Mohammedan men or the ravings of the obsessed psychotic who founded this mess. It’s the mysteriously received word of Allah that’s being acted upon. Any time someone can intertwine failure to rationally resolve their own problems with hypothetical words of an almighty, or align themselves with somebody else who has done so, they are relieved from personal examination or resolution of pathology. This also confers imposing those problems quite selfrighteously upon others, even to the point of imposing death. It provides an authoritatively backed outlet for unleashing sadomasochistic tendencies including killing.

Liberalism functions according to the last three sentences, only warped sociological and other theories are substituted for The Almighty.

Various theorists and commentators point out that Christianity has mellowed over thousands of years while Mohammadism has not. The reasons for this are rather simple and obvious, but unacceptable to modern minds dulled by various forms of self-hating self-destructive political correctness. The prescriptions for eternal aggressive violent jihad are far too defined and exhortive, the belief far too primitive, the belief far too corrupt, the belief far too pathological and intertwined with pathology and craziness to allow mellowing.

It can be argued that Mohammedism is a religion of peace and there are peaceful Muslims. When the founder of that religion is an aggressive lunatic who’s exhortations and military conquests are declared the word of God, the argument falls flat.

Now, class, pay attention. Here are the rules that apply, or should apply, in the serious healthy adult world. If you hear such things as “Kill the disbelievers wherever we find them. Remember Allah inspired the angels: I am with you. Give firmness to the believers. I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: you smite them above their necks and smite all their fingertips off of them.” all pleasant discourse should stop at that point and no further smokescreens are to be listened to or accepted. There is no more to be said. This is particularly so within the context of Islamic atrocities throughout the world. It is the bottom line and nothing else counts. It’s time to load your rifles. On the other hand, if you say such things, associate with people or religions that say and say or act out such things, it is to be regarded seriously. You deserve to be killed as soon as possible to preclude such pronouncements from being acted upon. This is particularly so when your religion or philosophy has a history of such action. That’s the bargain you enter into. Don’t expect any slack or to be treated as children. You are to be treated as wanton vicious killers because that is what you are regardless of what you think you are, wish you were, or claim to be.

Without serious distortion of mind it’s rationally impossible to soften the meaning and intention of these Islamic commandments, and that is what they are. There is no intelligent reason to undertake such softening. Cowardice does not qualify as an intelligent reason. People should be taken seriously at their word of intent. Those who espouse or in any way support or enable such intent, however indirectly, should be prepared to understand they are earning receipt of a preemptive first strike from intended victims as a matter of self defense. If this seems objectionable to adherents of such a religion, perhaps such adherents would be well-advised to change their faith. Perhaps it would also be beneficial to realize if you don’t agree with major exhortations by the pillars of your religion, what you have is not a faith, but a strained attempt at self deception. Other people are not obligated to participate in that self deception no matter how sincere it is. When adopting a religion or philosophy, you can not pick and choose among that which is being advocated as a matter of personal convenience while momentarily denying that evil which is inconvenient, particularly when a preponderance of that religion advocates killing or enslavement of other people. Those who support religions and philosophies bear adult responsibility for supporting the whole and are to be judged accordingly. In the adult world, those who are to be killed or enslaved by such religions and philosophies and who are fighting for their lives can’t be immobilized or burdened by making marginal distinctions, by obfuscations, or by excusing self delusions, in sorting out the true believers from those who have adopted in error, in jest, in amusement, who are coy cheerleaders, who are deriving indirect satisfaction, or whatever.

When people look up and see the skull and crossbones being flown from the yardarm of their religion or philosophy, those wishing not to be hung as pirates have the adult obligation to get the hell off the ship.

It might also be added that there is no sense in staying within a philosophical or religious system to change it from its basic foundation and into something it was never supposed to be.

As a tactic, Islam refuses to take responsibility for the aggressiveness and killing while there is a decided tendency to act it out subject to opportunity. As a practical matter Islam has cut a bloody swath through the earth and killed millions over centuries, and continues to do so subject to opportunity. Off the top of my head I don’t know of many, in fact any, Muslim nations that weren’t converted by force of arms, and who don’t enforce Mohammedan obedience by force of arms once obtaining a non-secularized government.

There is something recently labeled as Islamic fundamentalism. The fundamentalists are the bad-cops. Fundamentalism is so labeled as a trick to confuse potential victims and attribute problems exclusively to only a small proportion of radicals from which various adherents can pretend to distance themselves while retaining indirect quiet satisfaction in the lunatic vicious acts occurring. But the Islamic fundamentalists have united the apparently conflicting messages from Mohammed in the way one suspects the messages were originally meant to be resolved. i. e. When you kill off the infidels who disagree with you, disagreement will end, resulting in peace. So, peace appears in many forms and can be definitely stated to be the true goal. Peace is annihilation of difference or resistance. In this case peace is defined as annihilation of any resistance to madness. The transition period toward meeting that goal is allowed, and expected, to be forceful and turbulent, if not catastrophic to non-believers. Conversion to Islam, or capitulation to Islamic demands, is not a matter of choice of individual conscience or evaluation, but a choice between Islam versus death. In the name of maintaining “peace” after it occurs, occasional resurgences of lucid thought are dealt with in much the same harsh way as conversion refusal. The peace is that found in a graveyard.

The following is from a Muslim theological/strategic discussion of jihad on a Muslim Pakistani-American based internet forum, MuziqPakistan.com.

——————————

Abdullah ibn Umar (ra) relates that the Prophet of Allah said:

I have been ordered to initiate the fighting of people, until they testify that there is no god save Allah, that Muhammad is Allah’s Prophet, establish Salat and pay Zakat. If they do that they save their blood from me, except by the right of Islam, their account will be to Allah…Jihad is continuous until the Day of Judgment, till the last one of my Ummah fights the ‘Dajjal’.

*************************************

Prior to the Battle of Qadisiyyah, Sad ibn Abi Waqqas sent a delegation to Yazdagird, Emperor of Persia, headed by An-Nu’man ibn Muqarrin with the purpose of inviting the Emperor to Islam. Yazdagird greeted the delegation in the following way:

“Why have you come to our dominions and why do you want to invade us? Perhaps, you have designs on us…and seek to venture against us because we are preoccupied with you, but we do not wish to inflict punishment on you”.

An-Nu’man replied:

“Indeed Allah has been Kind and Merciful to us and has sent to us a Messenger to show us the good and command us to follow it, to make us realise what is evil and forbade us from it. The Messenger promised us if we were to respond to what he commands, Allah would bestow on us the good of this world and the good of the hereafter. Not much time has elapsed but Allah has given us abundance in place of hardship, honour in place of humiliation and mercy and brotherhood in place of our former enmity. The Messenger has commanded us to summon mankind to what is best for them and to begin with those who are our neighbours. We therefore invite you to enter into our Deen. It is a Deen, which beautifies and promotes all good and which detests and discourages all that is ugly and reprehensible. It is a Deen, which leads its adherents from the darkness and tyranny of unbelief to the light and justice of Iman. Should you respond, positively to us and come to Islam, it would be our duty to introduce the Book of Allah in your midst and help you to live according to it and rule according to its laws. We would then return and leave you to conduct your own affairs. Should you refuse however, to enter the Deen of Allah we would take the Jizya (tribute) from you and give you protection in return. If you refuse to give the Jizya, we shall declare war on you.”

Are these the words of a leader to an army that is embarking on conquest for the sake of domination and exploitation? Clearly not.

————————–

Some of the language here reads like conversations between Clingons in Star Trek episodes, but the ideas are obvious.

This is the meticulously executed model and task to be accomplished by command of Mohammed.

What is seen are thought processes twisted as a road map through a quicksand-filled swamp. The result is not only a license to kill, but a commandment to kill –in the name of Allah on the basis of initiative in any instance where Muslims are strong enough to initiate effective hostilities. Since it is being done in the name of Allah, Muslims become indignant as hell if you object to being killed. There is no way to soften any of it. These people are as dangerous as any violent criminal psychotic in any mental institution in the world. In the famous phrase from the movie The Godfather, people are to be made an offer they can’t refuse according to Allah. If this isn’t domination, then what is.

This is what George Bush calls the religion of peace. Therefore, in the typical Bush pattern, yet another misantrophic and lunatic force is not only elevated into acceptability, but consecrated through presidential decree.

In terms of hard logic, anyone who does not reject the Islamic commandments should be considered aggressively dangerous. But, one can not reject any of these commandments and be a follower of Mohammad. One can deemphasize practice of certain commandments temporarily when it is necessary to avoid appropriate reaction from other people, but one can not reject any of these commandments. Hence, all Islamics must be considered aggressively dangerous, including the sweet-faced ones operating in twisted denial. Mohammadism is a festering organized psychotic criminality which seeks to be imposed upon the rest of the world. To the extent it is treated as such by the rest of the world, according to application of its own commandments, the rest of the world should be viewed as not only reasonable and wise, but acting out of rational necessity.

We are under siege in a world-wide war from an aggressive psychosis calling itself a religion and which we naively and stupidly dignify by also calling a religion instead of more realistically identifying it for what it is. It might be added that attempts to maintain cordiality by blunting the basic reality is decidedly destructive.

People gravitate toward a vehicle or medium that expresses and supports their desire. Now the idea of killing appeals to people who are angry at the world, or about something, anyway, and provides such people a belief or intellectual architecture into which they can braid their angry psyches to justify subjectively licensed killing or sadism. People who want to kill or destroy for one reason gravitate to organizations or structures that give them other or further reasons. It is the habit among people that they will embrace an instrument that will enable them to inflict or take out their jealousies, their resentments, their hostilities upon others. So it can be seen Islam is an all-purpose utilitarian system which appeals to the angry and the crazies as well as the simply mentally deficient and suggestible.

The theory and practice of Islam in other countries as compared to what has arisen in the United States may be inexact in content, but the similarity in nuttiness eclipses any differences. While this analysis is not primarily about gun control, neither is it primarily about Islam, either domestically or internationally –and the discussion of Islam here is tangent or applicable to both areas as it is a serious problem in both areas. The analysis is about something much deeper. It touches on why something as crazy as Islam would be adopted by anyone in America, or even tolerated.

Now, when sniper Muhammad was caught, a cry went up from the black community that it was impossible for a black man, or black men, to do such a thing. In reply to this assertion one might advise them to examine the violent content and popularity of rap music. One might also advise that community to look at a serious proportion of their children who are willing to kill each other with casualness for possession of fashionable shoes or jackets and then ask themselves what these children remain capable of doing after entering chronological adulthood. That’s chronological adulthood, not mental adulthood. Mental adulthood became unfashionable in America sometime during the ’60s and has steadfastly remained so since that period.

The number one cause of death in young black men is being killed by other black men as described in the above. That blacks kill blacks is not a matter of innate preference for killing other blacks, but rather accident of proximity of other blacks. Whoever is in the vicinity of the impulsive killer mentality gets nailed. One of the accidents of the voluntary segregation existent in America is that blacks kill blacks instead of non-blacks.

One might also care to note that for years it has been known that the half-life survival rate of a pizza delivery kid with 20 dollars in his pocket to make change is about half an hour in black neighborhoods while the reluctance of people to deliver pizza there has been labeled racism instead of survivalism. One might also advise them to begin examining, with honest seriousness, the psychopathic confidence men who are accepted as religious preachers or other leaders in the black world. In too many cases black churches and ministers are schools for psychopaths in which the emotion of raucous choral music substitutes for moral and intellectual substance. One might also ask them to examine what role models exist within a 70% out of wedlock birth rate in which children are released to impose their impulses upon each other and the greater society without development of alternative skills. But black culture is committed to defending all of these things in predominant measure and will attempt to explain away the individual elements in serial sequence. It is committed to do so by the proportion of people engaging in such culture, by economic subsidy of that culture under implementation of leftist concepts or supportive social systems, by subtle countercultural encouragement in the media and other social institutions, by that culture’s conferring a attentive specialness and group identification, and by desire to avoid the discomfort sincere examination would produce. The CP in NAACP stands for CrackPot. Mfume, the present NAACP leader realistically should be viewed as an angry moronic subhuman who has had at least five out-of-wedlock children by five different women whom he used and deserted. Nobody of any character would want any part of him. But within black culture, instead of being stoned he’s revered as a distillation and a symbol vindicating black standards in which there is no shame or embarrassment. Indeed, there is a militant crusade against appropriate shame or embarrassment which borders upon violent revolution. That level of quality and seriousness is about as much as one is going to get within present predominant black culture.

While all this is obvious and yet forbidden to be stated lest one be accused of racism or being a Nazi, black culture has been marked by impulsiveness, by irrationality, by consciencelessness and violence that has become arrogant and defiant, and easily adapted to killing in any form, organized or disorganized, methodical or unmethodical, for decades. Consequently, corrupt religions and corruption of religion are also suited to, and well received within black culture. It’s also producing an endless array of militant nutcases who are equally well received if not celebrated. And this brings us closer to the central issue to be discussed here.

It should be added, accusations of racism or being a Nazi have become the leftist ploy to deflect criticism of anything and everything. Attempted rational discourse on any subject whatsoever with people on the political or life style left will lead inexorably to playing upon accusations of racism. The average person has been beat over the head with it to the point of becoming too mentally crippled to be able to think about anything or be able to make the most truthful and obvious observations. This should probably be examined in a future analysis.

The disappointed liberal media quickly lost capacity for indignation and enthusiasm for pointing fingers of guilt regarding the snipers when it was found the murderers were black. Further, out of disinclination to stigmatize Islam, some among the media even refused to refer to Muhammad as Muhammad even though he called himself that. In the leftist world, blacks and Islamics are now both among the list of protected groups that are to be shielded against anything that might cause them moral inconvenience or to be subjected to any potential criticism.

Exactly what are Muhammad and his associates? Are they psychotics? Are they religious jihadists? Are they both? Are they psychopathic con men who tried to hold society up for $10,000,000 ransom they demanded? Should the $10,000,000 demand be viewed as a Jizya? We’ll probably never know with complete accuracy because they aren’t talking and there is no way believing either what they say or the reported descriptions.

What we do know is that the events in Maryland and Virginia are being, and have been for some time, paralleled throughout other portions of America in forms which are not always so dramatic or prolific in individual effect, but still take a grim and frightening daily toll. The numbers of deaths involving firearms are enormous. It is not strictly a black or Muslim phenomenon. A while back we had the Columbine killings where two spoiled white brats on a rampage killed a number of their classmates as little more than a prank modeled after various satanic and distorted heavy metal rock movements. For several months afterwards students in other high schools wore costumes similar to the Columbine brats in defiant imitation –as if it were something worth imitating –and within current culture where there is profound lack of realistic serious proportion, it is. In the week after Muhammed was caught there were numerous multiple killings by people of various races in America.

Each one of these events, and the totality, becomes the signal for the anti-gun movement to engage in hysterical ideological profiteering calling for confiscation of personally owned firearms in America that are interpreted to be the cause of deaths.

However, any society that can not live peaceably with reasonable numbers of small arms in the hands of its population doesn’t deserve to survive, and probably won’t, not for reason of deaths from small arms, but for reason of the underlying pathological condition causing those deaths. Any society that believes it can not permit small arms in possession of its citizens has a problem much greater than those small arms.

When I say reasonable, I don’t mean your neighbor should be allowed to own and test his personal atomic cannon. But what is meant is that the variety and numbers of firearms freely available to the American citizen in the ’40s and ’50s seem entirely reasonable as what have become daily events in recent decades were then nearly unknown.

In fact, the large scale ownership of firearms seen in the ’40s and ’50s was empirically proven quite reasonable. In the ’40s and ’50s the type of shootings and whatever else commonly seen today would be completely unthinkable. The type of routine criminality and violence seen today did not exist at levels that could be exploited to lend dramatic force to anti-gun hysteria. The Israelis and Swiss have large numbers of firearms within the general population with negligible homicide rates.

During the mid 1960s and through the 1970s we saw massive increases of violence and criminality of all types, and that means ALL types, not just types which are quoted for convenience of particular argument, a fraction of which employed firearms. This was discussed in an earlier installment in this series, “A Problem With Guns?” In the ’50s and even early ’60s one could take a nap on Washington, D. C park benches with assurance of not being bothered. To do so today would get you butchered. In recent periods walking through the parks in New York City would get you beaten to death by gangs of psychopathic lunatics on “wilding” sprees who did not employ firearms.

From a news item: Sadly, jazz legend becomes Oakland’s 100th homicide victim Sun, Nov. 24, 2002, Pat Lopes Harris, Mercury News:
——————————-

“In jazz circles, trombonist Taswell Baird Jr. was known for accompanying greats like Louis Armstrong and Dizzie Gillespie. Now, he may go down as Oakland’s 100th homicide victim of 2002.”

“The 80-year-old trombonist died Friday at Summit Medical Center, almost three weeks after he was thrown from his motorized wheelchair and robbed of $80. Baird had been returning to the retirement home where he lived in West Oakland, which along with East Oakland has been hit hard by the wave of murders…”

“Hairdresser Charlotte Duda, 55, who was found dead and badly beaten in her Oakland hills home Nov. 15, was thought to be the city’s 100th homicide victim. …”

“Oakland detectives are still investigating Baird’s death. Three people attacked him Nov. 5 as he returned from a shopping trip to the Saint Mary’s Gardens retirement home, where arthritis kept him from performing but not enjoying jazz…”

“The number of murders in Oakland has increased steadily over the past three years from 60 in 1999 to 84 in 2001 and now at least 100 this year.”
——————————-

So three sadistic thugs threw a helpless old man off his wheelchair and beat him to death. A similar attack happened to a 55 year old woman. By now it has happened to well over a hundred other people in the immediate area.

What exists is a nation in the grips and helpless mercy of an ungoverned brutal mentality in various forms. The question is not whether society can live peaceably with guns, but whether it can live peaceably and survive without guns for its protection from ungoverned brutality.

Confiscation of privately owned firearms might change the dramatizability of some individual acts, but not the character of society nor the safety of people within the general population. It is that character and safety which worry me more than anything else. Firearm confiscation would be more of the tightening of imposition of the pathological mentality which has generated the climate of irrational criminality in America. Confiscation would more likely create an assurance of defenselessness on the part of potential victims concurrent with a feeling of invincibility or confident safety on the part of thugs. The result would be to make individual citizens more vulnerable to an escalating level of violent psychosis and its psychotics. This escalation and helplessness is the intended goal and that there is an aspect of vicious sadism involved in imposing gun control. What I’m seeing in gun control advocates is a group of people, many of whom exhibit the characteristics of passive-aggressive sadistic personalities, immobilizing a population from capacity to defend itself while simultaneously backhandedly encouraging or enabling the insanity and actions against which the general population must defend itself. This has become a form of passive-aggressive sport.

Indeed, part of the present problem is that the thugs and lunatics are now invincible. There is no legal way for a citizen to defend himself from them. All he can do, should he manage to survive, is whine helplessly to police or whoever after the acts have been committed. To the extent that the system of law enforcement is not inured, indifferent, or corrupt, it is overwhelmed.

Firearms in the hands of healthy people represent an empowerment of the people which threatens passive-aggressive sport and parallel sociopolitical movements. It’s the only protection and resort remaining. Gun control undermines people’s self respect, their stern independence and their will to survive. It is an exquisite form of imposing passive-aggressive humiliation and subjugation.

The problem with the widespread ownership of guns is not, and never has been, the guns. If that were so, the murder rate in 1950 or 1955 would have been much worse than as it has become since the mid 60s. The underlying problem is also seen throughout the entire spectrum of non-firearm inflicted death and criminality. Indeed, all aspects of life necessitating sell-defined sense of sanity, rationality, intelligence, reality-contact, self-discipline, and control or inhibition by rational thought processes have deteriorated enormously in recent decades. The advent of individual, serial, or group murderers using firearms is but a small part of it.

Firearms are inert objects that serve as thermometers in society. They measure the madness in a society. The deaths being seen are a result of that madness. Taking away the thermometer doesn’t change the temperature. In recent years uncontested runamok very serious thought disorder, thought deficiency, and brutality in America have been running about 110 degrees and rising with little inclination to either acknowledge it or correct it. There is a much greater problem than guns that must be examined and dealt with.

At this point we must examine the basic problem. It’s long past time to admit that Americans live in a nation with an extensive population so crazy and/or divorced from stable rational inhibition that it can’t be trusted with guns, or with anything else, anywhere. America has become a culture where craziness is to be unopposed while sanity is opposed. Many within society also believe killing to be a form of liberation franchised by various kinds of social and political movements or arguments, usually leftist. As such, it is franchised exercise welcomed by those desiring an enforcement arm for imposing such movements. They also would like the convenience of potential victims being disarmed as well as society and victims having been beat down into depressed psychological oversubmissiveness.

It’s also noticeable that violence in America is processed through a leftist system of interpretation that attributes it to certain “root causes” convenient to furtherance of leftist doctrine. For that reason violence is somewhat welcomed as an opportunity for ideological advance. If the nation can be made helplessly subjected to it, the nation will be cornered or blackmailed with no choice but to accept leftist programs touted to end that violence but which actually increase it through arguing that it is so “understandable” as to be nearly permissible. What is occurring is not understanding so much as coy advocacy. The understanding and advocacy licenses the craziness and violence.

It’s long past time to quit demogoging about guns and begin serious examination of the craziness and lack of stable rational inhibition that has permeated and taken control of the American nation. In the ’90s we even had an American president who strong evidence indicates, beyond any reasonable doubt, had raped several women and couldn’t be trusted alone in the Oval Office with a teenage girl. The degenerate moral and mental condition of the American nation is such that not only was he allowed to evade legal consequences in a defiant and insulting manner, he suffered little loss of popularity or acceptability. Hillary dismissed the seriousness of the events by joking Bill was a hard dog to keep on the porch, in return for which she was promptly rewarded by being elected Senator from New York. Humor runs in the Clinton family. Bill laughed and told Juanita Broddrick to put some ice on it after he raped her.

——————————-

Boston.com 5-28-03 | Martin Finucane

BOSTON (AP) “Former President Bill Clinton said Wednesday that a president’s private life is a legitimate subject for historians to study, but he decried the scrutiny of his private life he endured during his two terms in the White House.” And bla, bla bla…

——————————-

Clinton was speaking at a library dedication to John F. Kennedy. He was introduced by George Bush’s friend and idea of a fabulous senator, Senator Ted Kennedy, who for those unfamiliar with his accomplishments, was the well-known race car driver who won the Chappaquidic 500 in the late 1960s and also drove his wife to alcoholism. Such things make him worthy of Bush’s enthusiastic hyperreligious admiration and respect.

It’s apparent Clinton believes, and argues, he has been a persecuted victim. He was able to absorb the persecution and injustice as he explained, ”I was particularly well-suited to serve when I did because I have a higher pain threshold than most people. Because of my upbringing, I had a particular tolerance for it that made it easier for me to survive,” Poor baby. His early suffering and victimization made it possible for him to endure his unjust later unjust suffering and victimization. (PS, absence of conscience also helped ease his suffering.)

Clinton, if he had any conscience or remorse should have been suffering more and would be contriving to misrepresent himself as a chronic victim much less. He doesn’t recognize pain others feel unless it’s to his advantage to talk about it for his own gain. The concern that his actions with a goof not much older than his daughter might have an effect on his own wife and daughter was of no concern to him. Well, you see, that’s where his high pain threshold and particular tolerance became operative.

Now, when you have a strange woman brought into your hotel room by state troopers and stick your penis in her face, it’s no longer your private life any more than if you declare yourself committing private bank robberies or private axe murders. Are we going to have licensed private rape? Oh wait a minute. Private rape is really what the Clinton declarations are about. Under no stretch of sane imagination are you the poor innocent oppressed victim in initiating such actions. Such actions, and such subsequent arguments are indication of serious mental deformation which should disqualify you for the presidency. His argument, itself, is indication of profound thought disorder –enabled by absence of conscience.

The Clinton definition of private has nothing to do with the presence or absence of other people, or the effects of their actions upon other people. The idea that when you are doing something to other people it is no longer a private matter is alien to their peculiar sense of egocentric entitlement. To the Clintons, privacy is a demand for uncontested unquestioned personal license.

For Clinton, and we might as well say the Clintons as both Bill and Hillary share the same mentality, no offense to others is subjectively possible because those others don’t exist beyond the Clintons’ purposes and amusement. In the internal worlds of Bill and Hillary Clinton all acts are private acts and private lives regardless of how many other people are present or affected. The reason is the same ordinary people would consider any actions they would undertake alone in a room with only a mosquito or cockroach to be a purely private action. In the Clinton contemptuous conceit and self absorption with their own ambitions and impulses other people do not exist other than inferior objects to be manipulated or ignored. The idea that other people have rights or require respect is an intolerable intrusion into Clinton lives. To the extent people support or tolerate the Clintons, people get no more respect than they deserve.

Given the public reward for modeling uninhibited psychopathic and/or criminal behavior in the White House and the senate, why should inhibition of similar behavior on the streets of America be expected? This is serious stuff and a serious question that should be looked at as being serious. There is a widespread boiling anger toward rational inhibition extending from the ’60s that the Clintons were, and are, not only able to act out in extreme form without sacrifice of acceptability, indeed with some sense of belligerent celebration, but were able expand and harness politically. For a widespread cultural axis in America continuing in infantile rebellion against resolving the conflicts of adolescence and leaving adolescence, this trumps all else in importance. Since the mid ’60s America has been under the progressive grip of a pathological, indeed obsessional, reflexive hatred of adulthood and what should be adult considerations.

Many of them are still attempting to prove the point they were determined to prove when they were destroying the remainder of their lives attempting to prove the same point.

Hillary’s long-awaited book, Living History, has been released at the best possible strategic time to position her for a presidential campaign. It is a manipulative public relations masterpiece. The suckers think they are being given something by the book’s discussion of Monica Lewinsky which presents jovial Bill as an irrepressible party kid while diverting consideration of the serious realization and issue that what the Clintons are a combination of Mr. and Mrs. Ted Bundy with Juan and Eva Peron. It works. She has idiots sucked into it. The state of liberal journalism and even decrepit nonliberal journalism is such that it’s impossible to get serious questions. The Clinton gimmicks are quickly accepted with enthusiasm while the dishonest manipulation is dismissed far too quickly and with too much willing ease. It contributes to an atmosphere of surrealism destructive to the stability of the nation.

It’s unfortunate that the reality of Hillary’s book is glorifying two angry highly psychopathic eternal juvenile delinquents who are in their 50s. It is more unfortunate that major proportions of the population are moving heaven and high water to support her in this endeavor. Unfortunate? It’s an absolute disgrace that two punk brats should be putting a nation through this and other punk spoiled brats are helping them. Not of it should be occurring in a healthy society.

The impulse is to call the Clintons severely mentally unstable. However, the Clintons are not mentally unstable. They are quite consistent and predictable. They are, however, destructive to the mental stability of America.

To repeat an earlier concept, both the Clintons, and those like them, are protected by the unbelievability of their nature. The Clintons are cruder, more calculating, more manipulating, more calloused, and far more conscienceless than Tony Soprano of the TV mob series, the Sopranos. The typical response is, “You have to be crazy to say something like that.” That response to the truth is what saves the Clintons and keeps them in power.

The Clintons, and those like them, are determined to destabilize the mental health of the nation so as to have the nation conform to their own pathological axis and get their way. In so doing they have licensed the Muhammads. The Clintons need people as warped as the Muhammeds to survive. Pathology is their power base. Non pathology is their mortal enemy. No healthy person of any integrity or self respect would want to be around them. No healthy society with integrity or self respect would tolerate them in positions of power or influence. As it is, the Clintons are the fashion models for a a wave of pathology.

Hillary’s view of the world is that anything she shrugs or laughs off is declared to be, and is dismissed as, “old business” after a week and, as such, she can imperiously forbid to be brought up again. She’s allowed to get away with it because her mentality is shared by major portions of the population. But Hillary’s old business is a bit like an old overdue bill outstanding which is rightfully owed, with no intention of ever being paid, and can not be arbitrarily canceled at the convenience of the person who owes it. The debt of responsibility is not old business to be dismissed. It is overdue business and still a serious obligation to be addressed. For the sake of survival of rational stability in the American population it is absolutely necessary to return to viewing it as such.

A journalist who’s column I can no longer access asked Hillary a question she didn’t like. Her public reply was, “I’m moving forward, not backwards.” Forward means moving away from, or moving past, accountability. Nobody else at the press conference questioned it. If contemporary journalism had serious integrity, every journalist in that press conference would have continued asking that same question in turn until Hillary was driven from the podium.

In his view of having no stake in the Clinton events and of just “moving on,” George Bush is as guilty in all things as the Clintons and is one of the worst enemies of reestablishing rational stability or accountability in recent history. Everyone who does not want to live in a licensed corrupt madhouse has a stake in the events of the period. Hillary says it’s old business while Bush follows to say let’s move on in practical support of her manipulations. It’s like a relay race in which Hillary hand Bush the baton, whereupon Mommy’s little helper carries it across the Finished Withot Accountability line. What Bush is saying is that the entire business was permissible in the past, will be permissible in the future should personal tastes or impulses arbitrarily run in such paths in high public office, and there is nobody to turn to for help or accountability. Yesterday’s excesses and acts of criminality will not be addressed or subject to correction. Tomorrow’s excesses and criminality will not be prosecuted.

The assurance that we’ll just move on is entirely too comforting and a source of confidence to the defiantly corrupt in America as well as a simultaneous notification to the American people that they will be subjected to defiant corruption on whim or occasion with no subsequent of occurrence of remedying justice or respect for themselves. It’s a death sentence upon the nation.

But, it’s not time to move on. It’s time to begin reestablishing a desperately needed firm atmosphere of a sense of adult seriousness and has been for some time. If it isn’t done, the American nation can not survive. We can’t move on past unaccountability and demand for integrity.

What the American nation needs is accountability in the White House supporting parallel accountability in the streets. It needs a return to stern sane mature stability. Retreat from confrontation and from serious accountability may produce temporary quiet, but that quiet is not the same as stability. Rather, it is merely temporary deferment of eventual catastrophe which will be destructive in proportion to the length of deferment. This is particularly so as license from accountability becomes assured and a matter of accepted habit. The silence of unaccountability and nonconfrontation of corruption on one hand together with acquiescence on the other is momentarily comfortable, but can result in loss of civilization. That’s what is being lost.

Acute understanding of that concept is where George Bush fails catastrophically. George Bush lacks the mental acuity to be president. In fact, further than that, he is profoundly dangerous to the survival of the American nation albeit in an indirect affable manner that seems to be beyond many people’s capability to understand. The easy job of bombing Saddam Hussein after the jihadist acts of 9/11/01 doesn’t change that. Madness and corruption continue to be licensed and run unobstructed on the domestic scene, and even supported by Bush.

There exists in America a situation needing serious examination. There are useless families whose ancestors happened to make money or acquire power somewhere along the line and who go into politics or government as a pretentious playground and/or an illusion of a sense of purpose to occupy what should be viewed as their embarrassingly trivial lives. The nation is clogged with them. Whether their last names are Kennedy, Gore, Bush, or whatever makes little difference. In some cases this includes people such as Senator Kerry who married into the Heinz pickle fortune and now seeks the adventure of the presidency. One way or another all of them are useless and clueless.

The useless need a profession where they can coast through life distant from tough absolute productivity but still maintain a sense of importance and dignity. Politics and government serve that purpose.

Name recognition, contacts, and power are handed down to create dynasties within a socialite boy’s club and House of Lords favorite sons. It is theatrically dignified by calling it public service as if there were an element of noble sacrifice. There is no element of sacrifice. It is NOT public service. It IS public playground. It’s comfortable pursuit of glamor and prestige as well as trophies by people who have nothing else pressing to do. Most of the people involved are having the time of their life. They are recognized, and courted. Nobody goes hungry playing at it. Public service is a prestigious place for the well-financed useless, the aimless, and the incompetent to hide. Public service is the Viagra for the soft unproductive inherited wealthy.

In earlier periods among the nobility in foreign nations under primogeniture, the first born son inherited the family title. The second was placed in the military and the third went into the clergy. It didn’t do much for the military and it didn’t do much for the clergy. It hasn’t done much for American politics in which fundamentally talentless elite families position themselves in a self-protective system of social polish and ivy league vocabulary with a cumulative IQ of 116.

Two heads are not necessarily better than one. The unfortunate reality is that organizations tend to function at the average or median intelligence and/or maturity level of the people inhabiting those organizations rather than the cumulative ability level. Many of the people in government or so-called public service are an embarrassment and should be an embarrassment to themselves. It is the habit among those who are an embarrassment that they are intellectually or morally incapable of feeling personal embarrassment. One would hope Ted Kennedy and the Clintons would be too embarrassed to appear in public. One would also hope the public would be too embarrassed to have them appear before them or represent them. Such is not the case.

The debate ploy is to counter, in ultradramatic voice, that people whose ancestors happened to do well should not be disqualified from public service. That’s not the issue. That is not the basis of disqualification. The issue is that America is burdened with a plague of well-financed fops, fools, and dilettantes who should be sent home. They should not be disqualified because of their wealth, but because of their uselessness.

George Bush is yet another useless dumb soft directionless kid from a useless family whose ancestors happened to make money or acquire power somewhere along the line and who drift into politics as a pretentious playground and/or an illusion of a sense of purpose to occupy their lives. Additionally, Bush seems inclined to be lazy and superficial. Laziness and superficiality tend to go hand in hand as laziness underfuels the mental persistence necessary to examine things much beneath the surface. Innate intellectual limitation has the same prohibitive effect as laziness in producing superficiality. A combination of laziness and other limitation produce a level of functionality too drab and boring to contemplate. Much as is boisterous drunkenness, it is a condition acceptable and mutually enjoyed between those who share it, but is taxing upon the patience of those not sharing it and trying to get work of any substance accomplished.

Bush shows no evidence of having studied anything in any depth throughout his life. He shows little spark of creative thinking. The answers and analysis he provides are a continuation of a long term pattern of vaguely acceptable platitudes barely necessary to enable walking the easy path of going through the motions of fulfilling any requirements. There is no evidence of intelligent curiosity. In the four years that I have been following George Bush as of this writing, I have yet to hear him say anything incisive or indicative of serious study. I have yet to hear anything indicating depth.

It gives me no joy or satisfaction to say that. I don’t say it out of viciousness so much as exasperation. over having endured one adolescent president during the ’90s and now being burdened with yet another adolescent president, although one of different style and personality structure. It’s an unpleasant fact that there are people who would be, or are, presidents or other figures who are unequipped to run America or any other country, and who are not equipped to run my or other people’s lives. If that hurts their feelings, so be it. I can’t protect their feelings and delusions at my expense.

Occasionally the legal profession employs phrases and concepts that relate to psychology and psychiatry. One of these is the concept of reasonable doubt or beyond a reasonable doubt. The courts, the legal profession, and our system of law are supposed to function, and indeed must function, on the premise that there are definite levels of reasonable doubt as well as reasonable certainty. Rational politics needs some sane level of reasonable doubt or reasonable certainty to function in electing officials and representatives. Functioning reasonable doubt, and functioning reasonable certainty, are also a necessity to lead sane personal lives. There are people in this world whose words and motives must be doubted.

But in fact, reasonable doubt has a strong subjective component that varies between people. Many among the mentally disturbed have little or no degree of reasonable certainty about anything. They can not make personal assertions or run their lives on the basis of either reasonable doubt or reasonable certainty. There are also people who would undermine or accuse those among us who have acuity for discerning what is reasonable or unreasonable doubt as having inability to see gray areas. The aggressive employment of that accusation has been effective in immobilizing the general population and deteriorating its mental health in recent decades.

There are other people who simply lack capacity for perception and inference because of deficiency of mind. Realistic functional observations and decisions are difficult or impossible for them. They are evaluationally incapacitated. The condition seems to be innate. To put it bluntly, they are too stupid to make reasonable inferences.

Thus, what is physically obvious or inferentially clearly obvious to some people with nearly absolute levels of confidence may be looked upon as doubtful to others. Whether a person is prevented from adequate functioning in this area by innate deficiency, by acquired personal inhibition, by religion, by cult membership, by wish that the world were different than what reasonable evaluation would indicate, by early child undermining in which nothing could be trusted or not trusted, by intent to construct a gray confused world in which their actions are not subject to evaluation, by childhood experience that would be terrifying if they recognized the truth, makes no practical difference. What results is a mentality that is marginally functional in the adult real world and can be destructive. (The consequences to the court system is to produce juries unable to come to rational evaluations and decisions.)

(There has been, in recent decades, a tendency to confuse reasonable doubt and reasonable certainty with the unreasonable certainty based in blind belief or self-centered arrogance. One is argued to be the other and healthy evaluation or certainty is argued to be a form of bigotry.)

George Bush operates on an internal system in which his threshold of certainty is too high to be operative under normal conditions. His subjective level of reasonable doubt is such that it does not function to recognize and reject confidence men and their schemes. America, as much as anything else, is in desperate need of a healthy model for rejecting kooks, criminals, and confidence men. Instead, not only has the nation been abandoned to them by its president, they seem to be embraced. It is an extremely poor mental health model for the nation.

I suspect one of the reasons Bush drank so heavily for many years was to anesthetize feelings of internal confusion. This anesthesia is one of the common secondary gains of alcoholism. But now, Jesus somehow enables him to live with that confusion. Whether I can live with, or the nation can survive, his continuing confusion is a different matter. If his interpretations of Jesus or of other parts of the bible can provide him with what he feels are absolute authoritative prescriptions for certain instances, it relieves him of need for tough-minded analytical thought while still creating certainty about something. Let Jesus make the decisions. Unfortunately, Jesus and the bible don’t mention many specific modern events and situations. Jesus did not write deep economic treatises. Jesus did not write analyses of the passive-aggressive personalities widely occurring today. Jesus did not write analyses of TV and cognitive dissonance. Jesus did not write definitive analyses on when psychoses can masquerade as a religion. Jesus did not write analyses of linguistic structures underwriting political systems that hide personal irresponsibility then impose the cost upon others. Jesus did not undertake an evaluation of the present educational system. Jesus did not undertake analysis of legal parity.

So George Bush operates on an internal system in which his threshold of certainty is too high to be operative under normal conditions. He is also dependent upon a personal religious belief system which offers little clarification of complex real contemporary problems beyond prescriptions for love and forgiveness.

The idea, for instance, that the Clintons are seriously dangerous ruthless marauding psychopaths playing a confidence game is not clear beyond a reasonable doubt to him. Neither is it a reasonable certainty to him. (The nature of the Clintons has been examined earlier in this series.) In his absence of certainty, no appropriate reaction or remedy is possible. The idea that the Clintons, among others, are at least as detestable an unequivocal enemy of this nation as Saddam Hussein is somewhere beyond his capacity to see or resolve and act upon in his own mind with adequate confidence to protect the best interests of the nation. His prescription is to forgive, love, and move on. There is almost nothing the Clintons, the Kennedys, the Everetts or others could do that would create a level of certainty in Bush’s mind as to their basic nature. Neither will they be subjected to the serious direct or indirect criticism that they have earned and that the nation needs to hear. Even if there were some sort of certainty Bush seems to lack the capacities to undertake the required action or rebuttals. For years Bill Clinton has paraded himself about the world acting as if he were still president, unchallenged by Bush, with Bush even ending up grasping at, and repeating, some of Clinton’s speeches.

Bush needs absolutely obvious stark absolute event-driven events that are beyond even unreasonable doubt to obtain any clarity of mind. Those events must be simple and require few personally derived inferences. Such events, should they occur, provide emotional release of momentary certainty. I might add that such events are almost a cheap drunk for somebody wanting to prove themselves or wanting an important role to play out.

The deliberate crashing of airplanes into American buildings on 9/11/2001 fulfilled the above requirements for a subjectively clear incontestable reaction. Whether his subsequent reaction and reasoning was germane or accurately directed is a secondary question.

How did Saddam Hussein and a war in Iraq get mixed up in any of this? After the 9/11 jihadist acts a war on terrorism was declared. Employing the fallacy of the undistributed middle, since Hussein was a terrorist, at least in his own country and in the immediate surrounding area, the war became directed toward him. Hussein was leftover business from early blunders. There was considerable emotional and argumentative momentum remaining from the earlier Gulf War confrontation. For his part, Hussein was a rebellious blowhard who had to continue to strut and cock off in front of his people and everybody else. It defines leadership in that area of the world and many other places. It maintained a condition of animosity. Hussein was a provocative easy target.

For those concerned about terrorism and destruction of human rights, the white farmers in subsahara Africa are being obliterated in a fashion approximating what was done to the Jews in Nazi Germany and what is happening there makes Hussein look like a choir boy. Yet nothing is said. As far as expressing human indignation in that area, that is a road less conveniently traveled.

Saddam Hussein has been seized upon as one of the very few clear elements in the Bush family’s political lives which evokes passion. This seizing by Bush has then in turn been seized upon by Bush supporters, who are equally confused and desperate, as evidence of Bush leadership.

Bush can, or could, storm at Saddam Hussein because the jihadist acts of 9/11 created a widespread emotional reaction which was incontestable and that reaction could somehow be steered toward Hussein. If the events of 9/11 could somehow be attributed to Hussein it could be used to bolster a subjective feeling of self confidence in opposing an easy but possibly irrelevant enemy.

A public relations campaign was directed against Hussein. The impression was developed that atom bombs were being built on every streetcorner in Iraq. The public relations campaign is being revealed as having been hollow over time with incremental forced admissions from the Bush White House that such things as shipment of uranium to Iraq from Africa never existed.

Did Hussein have an active hand in the events of 9/11? There is little hard evidence that he did. The jihadists originated elsewhere. No doubt the events provided Hussein with joy and amusement. But Mohammedan jihadists blew up a another pile of people in Morocco several nights ago. Saddam Hussein, apparently having been killed, had nothing to do with it. Nothing has changed.

Basically, any Mohammedan nation, or nation with significant numbers of Islamics has a serious number of determined Mohammedan terrorists or jihadists or whatever they are to be called. The talk is about an organization called al Qaeda. In fact, there are dozens or maybe hundreds of organizations of the same nature and intent. We have seen they have different names in India. India, Indonesia, the Philippines, parts of black Africa, Morocco, and Saudi Arabia have numbers of them. Members move between borders and support each other. As the Saudis and Moroccans have recently found out, it doesn’t pay to offend or interfere with any of them. Any leader in a Mohammedan nation must realize that probably at least 25% of the population are militant jihadists. In becoming a leader you are riding a bucking horse that will kill you if you try to get off. That’s why Anwar Sadat was assassinated in Egypt for wisely making peace with Israel.

Al Qaeda is to great extent a myth created to present a falsely restricted view of what is happening and who is responsible. Certainly there is an al Qaeda. But al Qaeda is a small fraction of a movement and an attitude throughout major proportions of the Mohammedan world. Focus on al Qaeda relieves the majority of dangerous elements of responsibility as well as relieves us of the responsibility of confronting those elements.

Eham Abul Fath, a columnist for Egypt’s government-owned Al-Akhbar newspaper, wrote “The Prophet’s birthday falls this year at a time when the Muslim world is pained deeply by the open wound in Iraq. . . . Today we recall the glorious days of our Prophet Mohammed (Peace Be Upon Him) and his Companions, and we lament the powerlessness of Muslims, who could do nothing but watch the destruction of Baghdad.”

It’s a matter of Muslims against the world under a psychotic system of paranoid entitlement wherein Mohammedans are to be allowed, even instructed, to terrorize the remainder of the world while any intrusion into that entitlement is interpreted as oppression. “Glorious days” are those when Muslims could, or can, kill and conquer at will without inconvenience –including the inconvenience of correct evaluation or criticism. Return to those glorious days is what 9/11 and all else is about. It’s long past time someone said so, unequivocally. It should have been said immediately after 9/11. The powerlessness in not in the Muslim world, but is in the non-Muslim world that is immobilized from realizing and stating the truth.

So, is there declaration that there are powerfully positioned people in Egypt who are more effectively supportive of 9/11 and jihad than Saddam Hussein? You should live so long.

One can hear the same message in American mosques as bin Ladin was issuing on tapes.

Bush is able to act against Saddam Hussein and conduct a war against terror. He’s making a political career out of it. Meanwhile more important things are beyond him and are deteriorating. The day will come when the history of the American nation will be written, if there is ever sufficient honesty, stating the American nation declined and crumbled internally under Bush’s watch while its clueless people cheered his bombing a few ragheads.

The initial motivation or purpose of reacting or remedying the events of 9/11 have been stretched or expanded into some kind of vague crusade. Did Saddam Hussein kill and terrorize his own people? Most certainly he did. Did he deserve to get a bomb dropped on his head, if that is what happened? Yes, he did. But one goes to war for specific stated reasons. One does not go to war and then hope reasons will be found to justify it afterwards. Addressing Hussein’s internal actions was not the original stated purpose or direction immediately after 9/11. The military crusade has taken on a life of its own independent of 9/11. It’s the only life Bush has. Bush has developed a life of political viability and personal panache around it. It has become a matter of individual personalities and personal demonstration rather than the whole. Bush is on a roll with it like the third string kid who accidentally intercepted a pass in a high school football game when it bounced off his helmet and who now believes he’s the best player in the game.

Some of what is occurring is necessary. That necessity can cover up a lot of territory. The military actions have come to be in the service of something else other than 9/11. The actions are in the service of a fundamentally confused kid groping for something presidential. The acuity of direction stops prematurely at that point. The rescuing and salvation of a weak president has become the purpose while the serious purpose has been clouded or redirected. For someone who fundamentally lacks the capacity to be president and was failing at it, it’s was the only chance.

A little kid’s desire to become a man had been pitted against a little kid’s fears and inhibitions. In 9/11 the kid accidentally found himself a pony to ride as well as an illusion to ride in the children’s parade. There is too much personal involvement and attempts to act out a role or prove himself by someone who is in over his head. Bush is probably only dimly aware of it, but is only reacting to pats on the head, some of which are administered by himself by the various needs and images he carries around with him. Serious problems in that area were recognized before 9/11 are occluded.

The Iraq business has the scent of deception, manipulation, spin, looseness and shifting of thought, sublimation, and immaturity. Whether the deception is based upon self-deception and confusion rather than deliberate manipulative malice makes little difference as far as modeling of rationality, integrity, and maturity.

None of this is to be construed as meaning I or anybody else support Gore or Democrats for president. The leftist media promoted two inept people for president, asked few pertinent important questions, then handed them to us as an illusion of choice to create two probably destructive outcomes.

More to the main point, facets of American culture are much like incompetent cowardly parents who raise delinquent children and argue that the kids will grow out of it as a self-indulgent excuse for their own laxity and timidity. In hiding or retreating from their kids the parents wrongly interpret the resulting silence they achieve as being stability or peace. The kids don’t grow out of it. They grow further into it and hone their skills at evading responsibility and accountability. If there are enough of them they will gang up on you as an individual, and upon society. That’s what we’ve been seeing.

They are not kids, although they may still think so and may still have the frames of reference as kids and may be angry they are no longer kids or are angry they are no longer treated as kids. They are becoming presidents, senators, news anchors, educators, and whatever. Some are becoming domestic terrorists and snipers.

American liberalism is rushing to give entirely too much encouragement, credibility, and acceptance to people and organizations who test and push back the sane limits of society, who militantly oppose rational inhibition of personal impulses, and who at times become physically dangerous. It’s occurring from both the Clinton countercultural and the Bush Christian Liberalism presidencies on down. Repeat: It’s occurring from the presidency on down. There is an absence of serious competent evaluations and behavioral lines that are drawn and not to be crossed. What is becoming absent is that which is necessary to maintain a rational and even safe society. Those who make competent evaluations and ask for rational behavior are the only people subject to criticism as being part of “a vast right wing conspiracy.” Hillary’s conjectured vast right wing conspiracy is yet another paranoid construction devised to repel against and escape responsibility. Whether the little goof really believes it can be subjected to argument, but her assertions contribute to support for, and updating of, a pool of paranoid and other serious thought disorder in America.

Hillary probably believes what she says. She’s a graduate of the self-centered paranoia of the ’60s in which many among a generation engineered the reflexive conviction that any intrusion of reality or responsibility into their lives was a right wing plot. With the ascendancy of her and many in a generation like her, and its representation in the media, this mode of thought, in this case thought disorder, has become one of the most influential and highly defended in recent decades. What is desperately needed is a president, and others, who will confront that mode of thinking as the first order of business. The unopposed continuation of this pathological condition will ultimately be more destructive than jihadists flying airplanes into buildings or even igniting nuclear blasts in several cities.

Organized groups, diffuse groups, and individuals, in America and elsewhere, have become entirely too secure and confident in their aberrations. American culture is dismissing far too much, and challenging too little. Psychotic and various other kooks are being allowed to feel too much self esteem as well as far too much unchallenged self confidence.

To say American culture is dismissing far too much, and challenging too little is not a signal for passive-aggressive personalities to respond by designing a malicious compliance in which they further attack the necessary social institutions and principles that they have been attacking and destroying for decades as false implementation of challenge. We’re well aware of a clever little game played here at camp in which a necessary task is performed in as distorted and destructive and malicious a way as possible so as to deteriorate things up worse and then giggle about it while mocking people by claiming to have performed the task. Closely aligned is deliberate malicious misinterpretation of events, and of malicious compliance. But forget the passive-aggressive games. What is being said here is the culture, particularly liberal counterculture, has been dismissing what should not be dismissed, and we must begin challenging what has escaped challenge under liberalism. The social momentum for this has diffused into the Christian sociopolitical left.

Are the Clintons to be held personally responsible for the sniper killings in Virginia, Maryland, and Washington, D. C.? Most certainly they are responsible. They are not entirely responsible. In the broad assault on rationality and accountability, in the proselytization and support for serious thought disorder that has taken place in recent decades, no single person is responsible. But the Clintons are most certainly partially responsible in a way that is multiplied in proportion to the influence and authority of their positions. They provided moral and intellectual modeling, they provided moral and intellectual instruction, they provided moral and intellectual support, for the borderline psychotic, the malignant narcissistic and psychopathic populations throughout America. They are heros to those populations. They, and their supporters, have been on a crusade that seeks to create a surrealistic psychological and institutionalized passive-aggressive environment in which the standards of rational lawfulness and rational behavior are eroded. They function within the sympathetic support or active effort of people similar to themselves. The mentality, and the environment, which remains far too unopposed, including by weaklings such as George Bush, are producing or licensing not only acceptable secure and confident psychotic rapists in the White House and elsewhere, but also secure and confident psychotic killers on the streets. Clinton and similar support for a pool of paranoid and other thought disorder in America is deconstructing the healthy atmosphere and rationality necessary for the behavioral and evaluative controls enabling a nation to survive. Indeed, such deconstruction must occur for the Clintons, and those like them, to exist. In a responsible rational environment not only would they not be, nor would ever have been, in high political office, they would be in jail. The Clintons, and others like them, are dependent upon cultural pathology. There is also a widespread cultural pathology equally dependent on them and people like them in a pathological cultural system of codependence and coenabling.

There exists an expanding widespread corruption and psychopathic condition that has become so powerful and diffusely prevalent that society can no longer afford to confront it because too many people have personal investment in it, and remedying it would overturn society and its institutions. That includes major political figures, educational institutions, life styles, religious leaders, corporate executives, and so forth. Any individual attempt at maintaining a healthy mental equilibrium and reality-bonded intelligence has the paradoxical effect of being a nearly mentally crippling struggle.

What has been done is issue selective Get Out of Jail Free cards, Get Out of Rationality Free cards, Get Out of Responsibility Free cards, and Get Out of Accountability Free cards within the political, intellectual, institutional, and social fabric of the American nation. Far too many of them have been issued.

George Bush is disinclined or incapable of confronting any of it and is supported for his incapacity by that which he must confront to reform the nation. He gets a personal high from that support. If one combines Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, then subtracts Monica Lewinsky and Paula Jones, the result is George Bush. Mindless useless Republicans are mindless irresponsible Democrats with less flamboyant sex lives. (For a number of people in the American nation the absence of flamboyant sexuality is sufficient to merit joyful unconditional blind support regardless of any other appalling deficiency.) In a healthy nation both political parties would be sent to the fever swamps by a third party. The phenomenon closest to being a third party is the informal and unacknowledged party of ‘none of the above’ wherein voter turnout continues to decline as people stay home on election day in disgust and protest.

The retort is, why should politicians bother to appeal to people who don’t vote? The answer is, maybe if you quit insulting them, they would vote. So the pattern has become one of appealing to the inane and pathological while driving off anyone of healthy intelligence, while further appealing to the inane and pathological because the people who are being driven away don’t vote to destroy themselves or the nation. Our so-called political leadership is composed of caricatures appealing to trash and kooks while people of any intelligence are disenfranchised.

So who are Muhammad and company? Might they not be just another dog who wandered off the porch and who did not violate the now nearly uncontested standards recently established for acceptance of seriously distorted thought processes, but at the same time ventured into remnants of still-enforced illegality and into the taking of other people’s lives? That is the absolute, and it should be emphasized, predictable, reality. It’s time to stop pretending this is not a serious pattern in American life. The seriously aberrational thought process are even taught at our colleges and universities. While the final step of loss of public safety and loss of life is arbitrarily and theatrically deplored, and it might be added, deplored with some insincerity since too many people there seem to enjoy the turbulence they create too much, the standards the advocacy of deconstruction of rationality and rational inhibition leading to the result are looked upon, and even taught, as expressions of superior enlightened creative intellect.

Let me repeat that again because it explains much of what happened in the specific instance and it is the most serious critical problem affecting society on the overall level today. Muhammad and company did not violate the now nearly uncontested standards established for acceptance of seriously distorted thought processes since the mid ’60s. That may be more complex than many people can assimilate, but it is the truth.

This should be the core of the issue. Muhammad and company did not violate the now nearly uncontested standards recently established for acceptance of seriously aberrational thought processes extending up into the United States Presidency. Rather, they were acting in accordance with it.

Muhammad and company have simply introjected and acted out the now nearly uncontested standards recently established for acceptance of, indeed the encouragement of, seriously aberrational thinking under which they were inherently, but not explicitly, licensed to kill people. The absence of final specific explicit instruction is pointed at to mock rational perception and interpretation of the foreseeable events resulting from that thinking. But there comes a point where the preceding elements are so arranged as to make mention of the final step in the sequence a nearly ludicrous redundancy.

The momentum and force of nearly uncontested standards recently established for acceptance of, indeed the encouragement of, seriously aberrational thinking have become such that they subjectively overwhelm rational consideration of the acts justifiable under that thinking. We are seeing that consequence in all things.

Are Muhammad and company really any more warped or crazy than the recent president and the present senator from New York? Not really. And they are definitely not more psychopathic in the technical definition in which the term was once used. –absence of conscience, absence of impulse control, absence of serious evaluation of consequences, self-centeredness without concern for effect on others, and so forth coupled with the sense of special personal entitlement that has become common since the ’60s. There’s superficial difference in style and type of directness of expression. There’s some difference in cleverness. Not having been to the most prestigious educational institutions and law schools, Muhammad et al will not smugly debate the court on what the meaning of “is” is. Nor, not having the necessary connections, will they probably be able to obtain a judge corrupt enough to entertain such debate. But as far as evidencing socially and intellectually permitted thought and character disorder, there is essential equivalence.

The same surrealistic mentality that licensed what the Clintons did also licensed what Muhammad and company did. The individual acts within that surreal mentality and environment are arbitrary. Rape, anal sex in the Oval office, with subsequent defiance, serial killing on the streets; is there really all that much difference in terms of basic sanity or psychopathic deviance? Of course not. However, there is little inclination or capacity to see the commonality and association.

It’s time to realize America is in the second stage of an ongoing real civil war of conflict between sane versus insane thought processes. Another aspect of it, or way of looking at it is a civil war between reality and a militant immaturity functioning at the borderline psychotic personality level that arose during the ’60s and which other people are expected to underwrite and pay for. It is a civil war sanity is losing. The term “pathological” can be substituted for insane with some increase in professional impressiveness of language and accuracy here. The first stage was the theoretical underwriting and undermining immobilizing America. Muhammad and company are but dispensable soldiers in the violent phase and arm of that war. It may be required to break out into the type of full scale civil war seen in America during the 1860s for resolution. The carnival of politically correct killings at Waco and the subsequent retaliation known as the Oklahoma bombing pushed the nation almost into that state. If the reality of what happened had been presented more honestly in the media, all-out civil war would probably have broken out. But the media are critically positioned on the side of pathology and of immobilization of the American people. With time, the American people will adapt so that escalated levels of outrage can be imposed.

To pass along a comment sent to me by one of my readers: If you feel intensely uncomfortable over present conditions it’s not because you need to be in a mental ward, it’s because you are already living in one.

The pathological processes of what unfortunately now pass for logic, and what unfortunately now pass for responsibility, what unfortunately now passes for respectability, and what unfortunately now pass for non-pathological thought processes, have become too surreal to be either a healthy guide for behavior or for corrective functionality. That is a major problem behind most of what is wrong with America. To the extent the remainder of the world has adopted, or has been allowed to adopt without consequences or correction, similar processes, that is also much of what is wrong with the rest of the world.

The underlying problem is seen in a broad spectrum of mental misfunctioning including a mushrooming component of what used to be called thought disorder, to the extent we even still even acknowledge thought disorder to exist. In the subjectivized view of reality, increasing levels of what once were recognized as severe and even psychotic thought disorder and other mental disorders have become not only acceptable, but even fashionable, particularly as a defining affectation among the Beautiful People and Beautiful Intellectuals. What has arisen in recent decades is obliteration of any rules for rationality, which are now looked upon as arbitrary. No rationality or self discipline need be employed. Within this, there are no absolutes and no absolute reality that are agreed upon. Everyone is entitled to their own subjective reality as a new form of civil right. Confrontation of that subjective reality by non-subjective reality is now interpreted as violation of civil rights. Various people acting upon their subjective realities, are killing other people and us, sometimes physically, and at other times metaphorically.

The idea that there are people in contact with reality and others out of contact with reality has been deconstructed and ridiculed. The secondary consequence has been to deconstruct evaluation of mental or physical behavior and to dis-establish any behavioral limits, which was part of the original intention. The secondary gain is license for irrational behavior and amusements. There has developed a verbal process in which all elements of mental functioning are first abstracted into being simply beliefs. Within the political and social right to beliefs, all assertions are then given parity, placing rational thought in intellectual equality with severe aberration. The question is then raised as to why one person’s mere beliefs should take precedence over another’s. Any such precedence results in a person being accused of being a Nazi. Basic reality is left out of the analytic equation. No realistic judgment is possible. In declaring all judgment to be doubtful, or prohibited, we are producing extensive populations who use no judgment. Some among them are becoming self-righteous or casual killers.

When any society has regressed to the point where people don’t know who is psychotic versus who is not, that society in deep trouble. That’s one of the reasons we end up with flaming nuts as United States Presidents, nuts as senators, nuts as religious leaders, nuts as corporation presidents, and so forth including nuts on the streets killing people. We routinely have people in positions of responsibility and authority who would have been considered, both by psychiatrists and ordinary people, worthy of being psychiatric case histories found in textbooks previous to 1960.

What has evolved is a society that is perversely highly inhibited. People are inhibited from employing sound judgment, but they are not inhibited from exercising unreasonable impulses.

To think and act rationally and with any personal integrity now brings us into conflict with presidents and other high level authorities, with the legal system, with our educational systems, with national policies, with our entertainment, with religious denominations, with our media, with our culture, and often with our own behavior.

A secondary deconstructive verbal process consists of tracing a system of reasoning down to its most basic premises, then asking that those premises be proven. Since physical reality can not be proven in a purely verbal system and must be accepted as being what it is, reality has lost a position of governance in a final condition paralleling psychotic mental disorder. But, it is a psychotic state of considerable prestige and academic or cultural institutionalization.

When the average kid goes to college and is taught he can “challenge” all basic premises through verbal behavior, he or she thinks they’ve hit the intellectual jackpot. What they’ve really hit on approximates schizophrenia. They are interpreted by the system that produces them, and by themselves, as a cognitive elite. What they are, in fact, is reality-separated to the point of debilitation and malfunction. Twenty years after graduation many of them still strut about in a hyperverbal but thought-debilitated condition while fancying themselves brilliant infant terribles. As deconstructed university graduates have become teachers in the grade school system, the condition has been proselytized at lower educational levels. The entire educational system is becoming subversive to mental health and there is insufficient unaffected personnel now available for correction.

Reality is not a verbal form that is existent or subject only to grammatical regulation. Under disciplined circumstances reality sometimes can be described in a verbal form, but physical elemental reality is not a verbal form. Verbal construction and physical reality may overlap at times, but they are not ordered by the same rules.

Words can superficially refute reality. Reality can refute words. In resolution of intellectual conflict it is better that reality should be recognized as a refutation of words than words be accepted as refutation of reality. Unfortunately, in recent decades it’s come to be the opposite.

Among the serious consequences of the over-verbal system is conscious or unconscious loss of identity, or self-identification, with reality. Among the serious consequences of the over-verbal system is dangerous conscious or unconscious loss of identity, or self-identification, with reality. That means dangerous to themselves as well as dangerous to the world at large. That loss of reality-identity is facilitated with use of so-called recreational drugs which has expanded monstrously since the mid ’60s.

So how does one describe the color orange verbally? How would one describe it to someone else from a black and white world who has never seen it. It can’t be done. The color orange does not fit into any verbal equation. Like many other facets of basic reality, you just point to it, and it is. It is directly recognized. The verbal and other associations are made at that point and in subsequent conversation or analysis. Many of the fundamental truths in life can not be verbally processed. To describe the color orange to someone who had never seen it would be an impossibility. So are other analyses without reference to physical reality.

One of the unfortunate paradoxes of educating people beyond their level of intelligence is that you usually end up with someone who is stupider and far more dangerous than he was initially, but with increased arrogance. Such people misappropriate and misapply ideas and words, frequently in a manner detrimental to themselves and to society over the long term. They often do so in a manner incorporating a frightening obliviousness regarding the personal safety of all those involved.

As it is with intellectual deficiency, those who are aberrational also become increasingly aberrational upon being educated –with an alarming degree of self confidence. The destructive power of an aberrated Ph. D. is roughly equal to a stick of dynamite. The destructive power of groups of such people is approximately equal to the square of their number. A hundred of them in sufficient interactive proximity are the destructive equivalent of a small atom bomb. Through licensed corruption of its educational institutions America has been under continuing nuclear attack from multiple warheads for some period.

Each year our educational system graduates millions of confused warped borderline personalities who fly off in all directions like blackbirds with glistening new credentials to destroy the nation and the world.

Part of the aberration being discussed here is an over-extension of certain abstract real advantages. The refined ordered use of language is a valid analytical tool. Through arithmetical computations, which are a highly precise language system, we obtain a more accurate analysis or solution to problems which is advantageous or even necessary. One couldn’t calculate the necessary strength of bridge girders within the vagueness of ordinary language. In a similar way, application of classical logic will clarify relationships and subject thought to rigorous examination for errors of reasoning not caught in undisciplined discourse.

But, in the inferior, diseased, or intentionally corrupt mind, words can begin to take an independent life of their own with independent nearly random combinations of those words. In the example of the Clintons it comes down to disputation of agreement on what “is” is. Major portions of the American population now doubt or dispute what anything is. All manner of things become arguable independent of the real world depending upon a person’s confusion, wishes, or intent.

The rudimentary question is, why not accept the reality instead of the word? A partial answer is, we now are trained to accept the word over reality. There are now probably not 10 people in the entire American educational system who question what’s happening. Rather, adherence to that system has became a graduation requirement. Also, in recent decades generations have found it possible to accomplish temporary defeat of reality or achieve license at expense of mental health through verbal manipulation.

In the hyperverbal world, evaluations are quickly moved into a process of verbal substitutions and manipulations in which reality has become irrelevant. What exists is a game of crossword puzzles or Scrabble with loosened rules in which randomly assembled groups of words and phrases become the systems for governing our lives. Rules for grammatical correctness, cleverness, and chopped vocabulary fluency have displaced realistic analysis.

Beyond that, people have got it into the pointed little heads that since it can be argued that there are no absolutes and no absolute realities, any random combinations of words they string together are as valid as anything else and they should be able to live according to the words they put together –or worse yet, WE should be compelled to live according to words they string together. The stage of pathology has been reached where the basis is no absolutes, and reality becomes irrelevant, while empty words are relevant.

The nation has moved into a world of analytical irrelevance. There are extensive compositions of words which relate to nothing but themselves, that pretend to analyze but analyze nothing, being used to analyze reality based problems in a detached free-floating analysis that is attached to nothing.

Volumes, for instance, are written on breaking the cycle of poverty without mentioning the cycle of irresponsibility, the cycle of entitlement to irresponsibility, the cycle of avoidance of mentioning irresponsibility, or the critical effect not emphasizing these factors has in producing irresponsible license and poverty.

This irrelevance can be somewhat addictive because it provides illusion of intellect while also avoiding concrete reality and responsibility. In this context the emotional gains are astounding. –as are the financial gains for either promoting such thought or living the license and amusements they provide. In the above case the avoidant irrelevancy of the analysis is responsible producing for the problem it pretends to analyze and remedy. While we talk about the importance of the psychological environment in producing behavior, the popularized irrelevant analysis and evasion IS the environment.

Pseudosciences have developed that are science of evasion in which both the pseudoscience and the events at the basis of the problem being studied are subsidized at public expense. As another example there is the science of devising the liberal educational system which began with stating conjectured problems and ends up with fewer people able to read at what was once the 9th grade level as a solution to those problems.

Separation of words from reality or from the real physical world is, in itself, often a form of escapist pathology. When we end up working with pure verbal behavior to analyze problems in pure verbal behavior, what we essentially end up doing is using pathology to analyze pathology in a cycle of reasoning in a dead end street ending in confusion and pathology. Essentially there can’t be any resolution because there is a preventative or obstructive feedback system within itself that explains itself, or in this case dis-explains itself in such a way that the escape from reality is solidified and incapable of remedy within the imposed limitations and error of the detached system. The pathological system is designed to exclude or discount the elements needed to remedy the pathology.

There is also an absence of natural counterbalances to irrationality in present society. When unconditional multiculturalism is combined with unconditional personal entitlement and unconditional economic and/or social equality, there is little personal economic or other penalty for irrationality or irresponsibility as the costs become imposed upon and distributed upon other members of society instead of being associated with having been the result of irrationality. We have an extensive population who would destroy themselves and die of starvation if left with consequences of their own aberrant mentalities. They are now able to survive by shifting and distributing that destruction upon other people instead of bearing the weight of it themselves. People argue they can do what they want, claim they are victims of society when the reality hits them, then send society the bills. If society can’t pay the bills or is reluctant to do so, it justifies revolution in one form or another. Whether society can survive under the accumulated weight of it is another matter.

Whether it’s irrational sex lives, illegitimate birth rates, lunatic conceptions of economics, inane sociological theorizing; all are becoming more estranged from obvious reality while the blame for consequences is directed elsewhere –usually toward those such as the so-called vast right wing conspirators desperately attempting to point out the unreality. Failure to become willing enthusiastic docile conscripts in forced servitude to this mess is interpreted as being hate-filled, antisocial, and a criminal act against the social welfare. Failure to want to be subservient to paying the bills is a crime against social welfare. Failure to adopt behavior that reduces running up the bills is not.

The function of society and government ha become one of being forced to take increasing responsibility for negating the foreseeable consequences of defiant irrational or irresponsible behavior. If society can’t pay the bills or is reluctant to do so, it is declared that the system has failed and justifies revolution in one form or another. In one sense, Muhammad & Company are a type of revolutionaries licensed under prevalent cultural thought disorder.

Failure of reality to conform to incoherent verbal delusion now licenses people to become violent revolutionaries.

Here we also enter into another problem. In Alcoholics Anonymous and other organizations dealing with alcoholics you will hear it said that a person will need to hit rock bottom before they change. There is truth in this. However, we now have people who have babbled themselves into conditions of such denial and self-referencing circular analytical irrelevance that they can crash themselves and the nation through rock bottom and into the nether regions while blaming everything but themselves, while receiving economic and intellectual/ideological support. The mentality has become so pervasive and standardized since the mid ’60s that the condition is socially supported to the point where necessary corrective alternate interpretation has been lost or deleted from representation nearly anywhere in the active pool of public discourse or consideration –to the point of being inaccessible.

What has been seen in recent decades is a wide spectrum of people who have babbled themselves into conditions of such psychotic denial and self-referencing circular analytical irrelevance that they simply can not be broken. They can sit upon a tree limb sawing it off, and after they hit the ground they can persist in denial of any of the basic reality of what they did and what resulted in the ambulance on their way to the hospital. In the mindset of victimology which exists, if they saw off the branch they are sitting on, they declare themselves victims of gravity with accompanying intractable levels of indignation.

In focusing upon being self-declared victims of gravity the idea of asking what a reasonable and prudent person would do to themselves or others in predictable realistic situation is sidelined into nonfunctionality. The focus on subjective emotion is looked upon as a psychotherapeutic truth that can be substituted for responsibility and prudence. What is supposed to be a transient psychoanalytic condition and realization relegated to the artificialities and confines of age regressive analytic treatment has become a nearly universal social constant in recent decades with adults pretending to be resolving the conflicts of the childhood development period of the terrible twos. In this ploy there is a seeking of sympathy and release from accountability of being a victim. Amid all the tears and theatrical victim role playing, nobody dares ask for reasonable responsible adult behavior.

Hillary Clinton employs this. When confronted with a question she substitutes description of her emotional reaction for analytical content rather than addressing the concrete realities of the question. It’s accepted. In her book she describes her emotional response to the Lewinsky affair. The critical matters of personal integrity, psychopathic deviance, absence of conscience or impulse control, apology to people she insulted in her accusations of right wing conspiracy, perjury or other deliberate illegalities, are thus circumvented. Hypothetical emotional truth is substituted for needed analytical truth. (This assumes the emotions she describes are even genuine rather than being manipulative ploys to achieve evasion. What results from asking serious critical questions or asking for adult responsibility is insincere mock therapy sessions which are both the answer to everything and answer nothing simultaneously.)

There have always been a proportion of such people in any society. They may have been cult members or highly dysfunctional individuals. To various extent it was evident in entire societies during times of superstition and primitivity. But since the ’60s the proportion has increased monstrously into a successful militant movement that is overwhelming the American nation and even the world. This was a major component of the “generation gap” of the 1960s. One would think that with increased educational levels the proportion would be decreased. The effect of education, particularly liberal education, has been to expand and proselytize the condition instead of reduce it. Mental aberration has become argued to be a sign of creativity by people who have no other capacity or talent.

Four factors have evolved working synergistically. There is reality-disconnected combination of words. There is denial of real absolutes. There is demand for economic support for irrationality and its consequences. It’s a prescription for psychotic levels of surreal thought disorder that is taught in schools as sophisticated intellectuality. To cap it off as a pathological culture diffuses into psychiatry to erode psychiatric concepts there is eventual deletion of various forms of thought disorder from representation in psychiatric recognition as severe pathology. Don’t count on seeing the names of recent presidents examined as case histories of severe psychiatric disorder, or listed in diagnostic manuals. Neither is the important pathology exhibited by such people accented in texts or manuals without providing specific names of the public figures. All social or rational leverage has been lost.

(As an aside, there is speculation as to what destroyed the once flowering Mayan civilization. In ten thousand years hence, explorers from another galaxy may visit this planet, gaze upon the rubble, and speculate about what sort of natural catastrophe must have happened to the earth to destroy a once-thriving civilization, without being able to fathom that a world full of pseudosophisticated self-impressed fools simply lied, bullcrapped, and educated itself into extinction.)

In its irrational avoidance/refusal to address this surrealistic condition as well as its passive-aggressive component, the anti-gun movement is responsible for contributing to the loss of rational leverage while complaining about the consequences. The anti-gun movement seeks to divert recognition from the serious real problem, and is a ploy for so doing. As such, it enables or contributes to the development and actions of the Muhammads. Anti-gun people smirk, bait, and mock society while the climate of madness is escalated.

What exists is a nation substantially inhabited by psychotics or borderline psychotics. It is being politically led by psychopaths, psychotics, or borderline psychotics, or at best incompetents in the highest offices in the land. Parallel guidance and leadership exists in the media and educational systems. This results in psychopathic and/or psychotic killers.

It might also be added, emphasized, that the deterioration of personal satisfaction as a consequence of pathological social trends also adds turbulence and frustration easily sublimated into violence. America has become a boiling cauldron of personal frustration and dissatisfaction. America has an enormous population of overweight, over-fed, over-entertained, overly sexually active, over-paid, overindulged, over-soft people who are paradoxically dissatisfied with everything including supremely dissatisfied with the nation that created the economy making their soft self-indulgent condition possible.

Some of the reasons for widespread mental instability have been examined in previous installments. At this point let’s turn to an area called internal object relations.

The psychiatric concept of internalized object relations and internalized objects is a difficult one and is only somewhat vaguely agreed upon or emphasized within segments of the psychiatric profession. In more literal views, internal objects are looked upon as past figures in a person’s memory of people or earlier experiences that are visualized in an inner mental theater and which exercise control or modeling over a person’s mental and physical behavior. These images are, or are conceived of, as being very concrete and vivid. These may be images of teachers or parents or clergy or national figures or whatever. I believe these images exist and are employed as internal standards or guides in personal judgments and self control.

I am also inclined to take a more abstract view of internal object relations and internal objects. i. e. there are less concrete ideas, premises, expectations, systems of logic or reasoning, and whatever that become incorporated into a person’s mental functioning as premises in life.

Discussion of this will be divided into four phases:

1) Development of object relations as occurred before about 1950.

2) Object relations development since about 1950.

3) Countertherapy’s role as a realistic object deconstructor and substitutor utilizing premocking desensitization.

4) Development of virtual reality.

1)Old Sources Before Virtual Reality

The psychological environment prior to 1950 was entirely different from the period following. Entertainment and amusements, particularly visual entertainment, as they are now known were rarities in people’s lives. The balance of human experience was about 98% or more interaction with the real world and real people. Even entertainment was different. People played cards or board games which required direct real interpersonal interactions and skills. Professional outside entertainment was perceived as entertainment, not normal reality. People knew the difference. Their frame of reference was reality while entertainment, and importantly the thought processes characteristic in entertainment, weren’t used in forming day to day judgments.

In terms of proportional experience, unreality was a recognizable temporary short trip away from concrete reality.

Life development occurred through direct interaction with physical environment and through direct social interaction or responsibility with parents, peers, church groups, hard schooling, and so forth. Some of this has been discussed earlier in the series and there is no need to go further with it here.

The graduates of this environment are dyeing out with few people to replace them.

2)The Entertainment, Television, and Media Age (after 1950)

The 1950s marked the full scale development and implementation of television. The period also marked, in consequence, an enormous difference of time spent in proportion of visual unreality. This period also marked the beginning of a profound difference in the type and frame of reference of human interaction. Prior to the television and media age the feedback mechanism in people’s lives had been from their immediate real environment. As television and mass media assumed a dominant proportion of people’s lives, people shifted away from real give-and-take interaction with real physical people and real physical objects in their immediate proximity and environment into a mode of life moved into passive one-way interaction with whatever came in through the tube. The presentation acted upon them but they did not act back upon what they were seeing taking place in presentations from hundreds or thousands of miles away. They couldn’t act back upon that presentation even if they wanted to do so. There is a potential in this for helplessness and being helplessly subjected to one-way psychological bombardment and manipulation.

In the beginning, TV reflected and supported previously developed American culture such that programming was careful not to offend that culture. But, the artistic and self-certified intellectual cultural axis has always had an adversarial and antagonistic relationship with the rest of the world. Cultural support was somewhat of a strain and source of bitterness upon the people producing TV content because they came from a strongly liberal/left cultural axis at odds with what they believed was the mentally deficient unsophisticated wasteland of middle America. They believed they were forced to prostitute themselves to what they considered to be simpletons. Both as a misconception of middle American capability and as an expression of contempt, they tended to produce TV that was a greater wasteland than the wasteland to which it was conceived to be directed. Rather than stimulate intellectual development and improvement within the culture, TV public affairs content dumbed down the pool of American discourse.

Part of the embittered hostile attitude and the reasons for it was covered earlier in this series in The Oral Rage Of The Elite.

TV programming was under control of a peculiar type of complacent elitist mentalities who believed the public was incapable of understanding anything over the forth grade level. Many had a hostile view of society so that serious programming became an expression of that anger directed toward society.

The radicalism of the 60s offered the cultural enclave of pseudo-intellectual conceit without self-examination an alter ego enabling release of its awaiting resentment which initially could be presented while pretending objectivity and fairness and pretending to distance itself from the people and the message. The radicals and radicalism became de facto agents of expression that were reported as importance and news. Thus, in over-reporting that radicalism there was freedom to express the political and social distortions within the reporting or portraying axis.

What could the public do about it? The media came to realize the public could and would do nothing but swallow its anger. The atmosphere changed from fearing public reaction to one of defying the public to try to do something about it. Simultaneously, it was found that outrage and defiance created interest.

In the beginning there was presentation on evening TV public affairs and talk shows of “the other side.” Gradually, presentation of “the other side” displaced presentation of all else until the side that “the other side” opposed ceased to be presented at all except as a ridiculing caricature mislabeled as balance in presentation.

The formal analysis presented was that which was that taught at left wing schools. Supposed proof of its being intellectual was its deviation from, and hostility toward, prevalent culture. Deviation from, and hostility toward, prevalent culture has, in fact, become the prevalent culture which many years ago displaced the prevalent culture it still claims to be the problem. Society was subjected to questions that weren’t really questions, but were only partial questions with examination ended prematurely. Questioning meant questions that didn’t question the liberal cultural axis and pursuit of answers only to that point beyond which would disturb the liberal axis. Part of this was modeled earlier in the series in the installment Donahue’s Children.

If Teddy Kennedy mysteriously disappeared for a period without reporting the incident after driving a woman off a bridge, there was to be no serious questioning of it in the national media. If the tactics and strategy being employed in Viet Nam were suicidally self-destructive to the American military there would be no serious questioning of it while the resulting losses of American lives and communist victories would not only not be examined with any depth or seriousness, but would be attributed to superior communist ideological strength. It is still attributed as being so to this day in the media.

Outrage, shock, insult, and madness TV became an industry. Careers were founded on capacity to provoke outrage. In an earlier time such people would have been looked upon and dismissed as the village nutcases with no skills or capacity for employment. Now they are presented in an atmosphere of attributed authority. TV and other media in recent decades have become lucrative employment opportunities for the otherwise unemployable mentally dysfunctional.

The problem this has generated in America is that serious mental disorder is winning the confidence contest. That is, people are attributing more credibility to, and have more confidence in, kooks on TV, kooks in the printed media, kooks in the educational system, and wherever, rather than viewing intelligent sane people with credibility, because kooks constitute the predominant atmosphere presented to them, or available to them, in their psychological environment.

In the recent network TV ads plugging Donahue’s (since canceled) TV show he is described as being passionate. Donahue is passionate. He’s a monument to hysteria armed with a cannon mouth. For Donahue that’s enough. But continuity of thought, relevance between questions and answers, relevance between spoken paragraphs, adult trade-offs in decisions, are not part of the bargain. If Donahue were to live in the adult productive world his mode of thinking which has been able to survive handsomely on TV would earn him starvation.

In recent years Donahue has fallen upon hard times. Television talk show and interview programming has become so saturated with nuts and thought disorder that Donahue has become indiscernible in the mindless crowd of TV shows he pioneered. His ratings have deteriorated accordingly. There is a secondary ratings problem. As the prevalence of Donahue’s pathology has become more prevalent, fewer people tune in to defend themselves from it or are shocked by it. Donahue on stage has been eclipsed by the Clintons in real life.

Moreover, somewhere along the line Donahue became too impressed with his own importance. In so doing, he became grating.

There is a class of people who live in a group delusional isolation or isolated delusionalism. They don’t have the brains that God gave a chicken, but they associate with each other and cluck at each other on TV discussion groups in a mutual posturing and admiration society over how intelligent and terribly clever they are while the spin-off is beamed into living rooms throughout the nation. When occasionally jolted they retreat and cluck at each other some more to convince one another how unsophisticated and wrong everybody else is, thereby maintaining their self confidence. They have an undisturbed frame of reference such that the legitimate exasperation they elicit from healthy mature adult minds subjectively validates their sense of righteous intelligence. In their own minds if they can produce volcanic eruptions of rage in other people it means they are jarring the complacency of ignorance rather than exceeding the legitimate limits of patience characteristic of the healthy mature adult world. It’s a difficult system to break into from the outside. It comprises the editorial, written, and televised media.

What exists is the equivalence of a broadcasted protected complacent mental ward whose members maintain extreme unwarranted self confidence through their isolated association with each other, and who are attributed with having competent authority. The same condition now exists in the university classroom.

Television and the media in general became highly liberated. It is one thing to learn from the realities and emotions of those around you. It is a far different to learn from, or attempt to conform to, distorted artificialities and fantasies presented in entertainment and the media and to act those out as well as expect those same reactions from real people and from reality in the broader sense. This is especially true when what is presented is by distorted people presenting their distorted life styles. People subjected to this began to act according to the unreasonable expectations portrayed and promoted in movies, on TV, in Playboy magazine, in Cosmopolitan magazine or other glamorized photogenic craziness without consulting the real people next to them. Neither one of them may be capable of living the warped fantasy being presented while maintaining any long term mental stability or mental health. The problems thus generated contributed to a condition of diffuse dissatisfaction and cultural instability which thence further contributed to frustration and turbulence which could be displaced into violence.

Women no longer understand men. They understand what Gloria Steinem or Helen Gurly Brown or some other kook tells them about men as practiced in their own warped lives and conceptions. It’s made to be shocking and attention-getting –not lived.

In pursuing photogenic pathology the American nation is not a nation at peace with itself on the molecular individual level. We have had a 50+% divorce rate. The women’s movement is furious at men. Men are furious at women. There are millions of angry abandoned children growing up to become disturbed adults. All this and more contribute to a pool of angry disturbance that can be displaced into violence. It is worth noting that sniper Muhammad had a history of marital problems. On occasion when dealing with someone obsessed and aggravating you about something the tendency is to issue the exasperated comment, “Get a life!” Well, Muhammad didn’t have one. Neither do many other people in recent decades. They are living turbulent existences in which various nearly irrelevant outside stimuli release an accumulated backlog of anger and frustration and emptiness. Those stimuli may be reminders, or penetrate defenses or various denials. Once that stimulus becomes associated with sublimated emotional release you end up with people with warped missions in life and the kook formal political and social movements are staffed with them. On the less formal level there is diffuse violence.

To compound matters, disturbed children and teenagers who might have had a chance if offered decent role models are instead in a psychological environment predominated by lunatic adult or semi-adult role models seeking to steer kids into their own pathology and displacement paradigms.

With the ascendancy of the media world there arose a difference in focus and values. Most young adults know who Britney Spears or J Lo are. According to a recent study released by the National Geographic Society on 11/20/2002 less than one third of Americans between the ages of 18 and 24 can locate New Jersey on a map. About 50%, a figure probably principally dominated by those who live there, know where the state of New York is. In the ongoing artificial subjective world, knowing where New York is not an important priority. There has previously been a degree of this. The present difference is total absorption with warped triviality without any contrasting real serious balance. The ignorance of, and lack of concern for, anything real is shocking and frightening to anyone who doesn’t share it. There is absence of capacity or interest in negotiating basic reality or making intelligent decision based upon solid fact.

The Ascendancy of Countertherapy

The 60s saw something not seen on a large scale in earlier periods. The kids during the ’60s were psychologically and sociologically sophisticated enough to use sociological insulation and conditioning to devise unimpeded coordinated countertherapy defense against the serious adult world. Psychotherapy can be employed to dismantle inappropriate and destructive conscience and inhibition as well as dismantle destructive internal objects. But incompetent or corrupt psychotherapy also can be used to dismantle appropriate and necessary conscience and inhibition as well as dismantle appropriate internal objects then replace them with inappropriate or destructive internal objects. (No therapist should tamper with a patient’s constructive neurosis.) In one sense the brainwashing inflicted on American prisoners by the communists in North Korea could be considered a highly developed system of group psychotherapy designed to produce confused coopted vegetables.

The young of the ’60s evolved their own system of countertherapeutic psychotherapy, a countertherapy. They employed a mocking desensitization and mocking role-playing to realistic criticism before it occurred so that when the truth was presented to them it was greeted with reflexive laughter.

Countertherapy is a realistic internal object deconstructor and substitutor.

In one sense the desensitization reminds me of the stories told about the Clintons when they were raising Chelsea. According to rumor Chelsea was told to expect vicious lies and attacks upon her parents. What they were mislabeling and desensitizing the child to was not what was being mislabeled arbitrary fraudulent lies and attack, but was the basic truth. I don’t know how well documented her childrearing is but Chelsea lived in a public degenerate madhouse with Bill and Hillary without a hint of embarrassment. Apparently she discounts the reality as she was preconditioned to do.

Whether or not it can be documented in the Clinton case, the technique was skillfully employed by the youth/radical culture of the ’60s. The desensitization and discounting has been passed down to succeeding generations to become an institutionalized cultural characteristic that is interposed between the individual and reality.

The Arising of Virtual Reality.

People in recent media-filled generations are growing up in, and continue to inhabit, an artificial world of presentation where there is no gravity. I’m not referring to Isaac Newton’s gravity of physics, but the gravity of academic history, the gravity of real-world cause and effect, the gravity of utilitarian morality, which pulls people to earth and earthbound reality. This presentation introduces enormous social conformity pressures. Realistic truth and interaction is being deleted or displaced to be replaced with fantasy, corrupt ideology, delusion, and thought disorder.

There’s been an analysis of the lessons taught in mosques and Middle Eastern Muslim-based school system asserting that what’s being presented there is for practical purposes terrorist training, particularly directed toward the United States. There is continual vilification of the United States as the sources of all problems and so forth. The conclusion that these institutions are instruments for inculcating terrorist ideology is essentially correct.

(As to there being any truth in the assertions being taught there and elsewhere, let us ask the central question: if the United States, or for that matter even European culture, had never existed, or didn’t exist, would the people complaining have a bit more than they have now? The answer is, no. That question and that answer should echo through the farthest reaches of the universe. Most of them would have a damned site less even to the point of being where they were 1,000 years ago or in many cases being at a near stone age level of existence. To the extent they have anything at all, or know there is anything more than existed 1,000 years ago, it’s because of the United States or European culture. What little they have is what has rubbed of on them, what they have been able or forced to imitate, or what they have been able to steal. The demands for world equality and social justice are nothing but demands for instant gratification by people who see what has been done elsewhere and have rationalized killing to take it while not recapitulating the process required to produce it. But that’s not the principle focus of discussion here.)

What we are getting as messages from the American media, from our educational systems, and even from many churches is essentially the same anti-American messages being disseminated in the Middle East and other places throughout the world, although in a more refined and sophisticated form.

The United States today contains the world’s largest revolutionary training system under which, paradoxically, the nation and system of government that has provided more opportunity for more people than any other in history is revolting against and destroying itself. To the extent that those trained take up arms or explosives, the result is violent revolutionaries. What exists is a pattern of:

1) constant hatred, demonization, and villification of the United States.

2) a distorting system of interpretation that is interposed as quickly as possible between individuals and the interpretation of events a person might reasonably make through reference to the immediate environment.

3) concentration upon, and magnification of, grievances.

4) a push and guidance into sublimation such that there is a diffusion and sublimation of personal dissatisfaction into a hostile destructive politics.

It’s a de facto revolutionary movement The only thing lacking is hands-on weapons instruction.

To this is added the general condition of immaturity, foppishness, and a culture that not only has lost rational leverage in controlling behavior, but is on a crusade to deconstruct rationality and mental health starting from the position of the presidency on down.

The developmental internalized objects in a virtual reality are revolutionary figures and crazies. The supportive objects in adulthood are similar. Consequently, quasi-revolutionaries and crazies is what we are getting on the street killing us and each other.

The United States is collapsing into chaos in the absence of support for rational intelligence, maturity and, integrity. It’s in a condition of free-fall from the presidency on down. The beltway sniper is a part of it.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.