Peaceful as a rabid rat in rut. . . . Please come CAPTION Head Wreck!!!

[skip fox]

Head Wreck, from deep within the mirror (having passed to the other side ages ago), is saying, "George Soros is the head of the snake, and you know how to kill a snake don't you? . . . Now watch! . . . I'll bet some of those left-wing nuts will say I'm advocating violence again. . . . Geez! What fools!"

[RedCloud]

1. Head titling to the right...powerless to resist.

[fascisthunter]

2. "I think I Poopied My Pants"

[SalmonChantedEvening]

3. Did I just say I'm a Marxist?

[RandomThoughts]

4. He makes a good point.

If you think he is advocating violence, then it might be he is not, and the person listening has a violence filter.

Although he should explain that to people. He might even explain it to people.


Although I disagree with his basic concepts of distribution systems currently used that he supports, if he really does not believe in violence, then he may not be talking about violence, even if some hear violence.


He should be able to explain how that works though. I might suggest that after he says something some might see as violent, that he also speaks about the value of kindness and love, if he believes in those concepts.

If he does not believe in violence, including economic violence, then he should be discussing how the helping of the poor and those with less, if that is what he believes, even if it costs some taxes. Although I do agree with him that Nanny state is bad, Nanny state by corporations or deception is also bad. He believes in control by money distribution systems, no different then the concepts he fights against anyways.

[COLGATE4]

5. WTF are you talking about?

[RandomThoughts]

7. What I have been talking about for years.

It depends on the intent in his heart, and he should explain that if people misinterpret his comments by their own filters.


He is saying he is not talking about violence, only that people see violence by their own filters. If that is true, he should explain that concept, or he is letting people miss interpret him.

That is also why I explain the filter concepts.


What I am talking about is this. Someone says something, and people hear different things depending on what is loaded in them. Their own filters determine what they hear. However if he says something he knows that people will interpret with a certain filter, and does not teach how filters work, then he is allowing the violence to happen, and using the filters in people to do that.

Hence why I explain how filters work while I posts, so people that miss interpret my comments by their own filters, see that is not what I am saying, only what they are hearing.

What I am talking about is people hear different things. And if he or anyone else uses that for plausible deniability, but with the intent of causing those exact things, then they are not innocent. He may explain those things, he may not, I don't watch his show, but it is not hard to figure out.


I also posted that letting someone missinterpret you is a form of deception, posted about that years ago. Hence why I also explain how people hear things based on what is in them, not only what is said.

Although sometimes it is keys to fit locks, so he could be saying violent keys to unlock violence in peoples hearts also.

[skip fox]

6. He actually did say "Soros is the head of the snake." I made up the rest in the spirit

CAPTIONing at DU. ("CAPTION" is used as a verb calling DU to creative activity.) Sometimes we joke, say something ridiculous, but often we try to "channel" the essence of the person, making the caption "truer than true," as it were, since it may give the person's essential views or phobias without the filter of self-consciousness.

In actual fact Beck saying "Soros is the head of the snake," leads one immediately to the old thought of how to kill a snake (cut off its head), and it's an association I believe Beck, deep in his homicidal little heart, knows some viewers will make. Here's the clip on Media Matters in which he says it:

http://mediamatters.org/research/201010160002

Perhaps your comments were directed at Beck's inner beliefs and our difficulty ferreting them out. But when you see such a track record of violent rhetoric, whether he knows it our not, he has a violent temprament, looks to violence for significant difference, praises radical and disruptive change, etc.

[lonestarnot]

8. Just random of course.

:puke: