ubiety reply to: "Re: ubiety's Response to Ass Backwards" - Whoof whoof - 1.22.17
http://inteldinarchronicles.blogspot.com/2017/01/re-ubietys-response-to-ass-backwards.html
To Ww,
I will take your post, generally, in reverse order.
First I will note that you failed or refused to address the substance of my words associated with the history of continuous and calculated deception, and the relevance of those failures to the value of everything which the character "yosef" has to say or opine. That's a shame. Anything beyond the highly disingenuous notion of "yosef's" failed predictions being merely not to "my liking" could have been interesting.
Secondly, I am willing to ignore your remark about my being considered "troll like". I have commented openly, candidly, and directly on known but utterly disregarded facts. I have done so with unassailable logic and rational thinking. This is not arrogant because I don't have the slightest interest in amplifying my position in dinarland. This very reply is at your request. My posts are not remotely "troll like".
Indeed, I don't, and never have, had "intel". But then, since "yosef" has never had anything beyond fantasies and storytelling, your question is out of place to ask of me what "yosef" never supplied. You, not so subtly, challenge me to "do a better job than yosef". My response to that is simple: I have grandchildren with more integrity and who could more honorably serve dinarland than the liar and a deceiver, "yosef". Doing a "better job" would be utterly simple. The tactic would be to be honest, not manipulate, not deceive, and avoid political hate and creatively deceptive storytelling as if truth, at all costs. Of course, this means the creative drivel and politically driven stories and defamation would never be heard. Also never heard would be the fabricated nonsense about 800 numbers, benevolent Chinese elders yearning to make the world wealthy, 11,200 (or some number) of fully staffed "exchange centers" on "lock down", confused presidential outcomes and turnovers, hopeful guessing or fantasies about "president Dunford", scores of predictions of massive and sudden revaluation of the world's currencies, and so many of the swampy, disproved, non-occurring, and frankly idiotic things distributed over the last year to dinarland by "yosef".
My approach, for your hypothetical suggestion that I do a "better job" than "yosef", would be to not set myself up for failure by systematic lies and deceptions. I would not make up happy stories for "situation reports" in order to keep my readers ginned up and excited enough to come back for my next post. I would not invoke God's name or authority to declare "chosen" status for people I've never met. And, among many other things I would do differently, I wouldn't push childish fantasies about aliens and multidimensional life.
The fact is, and I think you know, is that I have stated my views and opinions - both here and many times before. I think clearly, firmly ask the same of others, and require honest facts to adopt any proposed concept. These traits are simply not within the character "yosef", as evidenced repeatedly over a year. Since I read your post to which I now reply, I read yet another slurry of sewage posted by "yosef" which spent a score of paragraphs expressing his hateful political fantasies and wishlist as though they were fact. Candidly, that's deeply disgusting. And, do I need to say this... it is not leadership. You may highly disagree with me, but not because I have lied or misrepresented historic facts or current events.
In the middle of your post, you stated I am, "critical of Yosef postings but that is the easy road." So true!! Both counts! "yosef" has been so dishonest, deceptive, misleading, manipulative, dishonorable - and all of these, without a question. You didn't speak to this. You chose to challenge the editorial writer who points it out. Which is the greater evil? To which do you give your time and energy?
I like to read the posts on IDC in order to follow the basic course taken by those most vocal on the site. It certainly is not my only interaction or information source. It's interesting to read the perspective of some posts even though I usually find there is very little, if any, fact offered for "intel" posts. It is deeply troubling, however, to read the cancerous and desperate lies and deceptions which still come from this man and infect the community of readers here. It's a bitter and awful shame he devotes his intellect and time to spread his libelous and ridiculous storytelling as fact.
Finally, you ask for proofs of negative facts. You propose that I prove something doesn't or didn't exist. Perhaps you're new to this logic, but that is not possible. For every point of factual proof, you could (and I suspect would) offer a fact which has not been negated, ad infinitum. Perhaps you have heard the rather self-explanatory axiom, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". Thus, from both sides of that question, we could be going round and round pointlessly. The rational and superior questions are:
1. Do you have any proof, besides pure meanspiritied antagonism, that Melania Trump is transgender, or that Barron Trump is not her biological son?
2. What actual proof (not anecdotes or rumors) exists that there is a Chinese family benevolently wishing to make the world's population wealthy with generational wealth this family has amassed over hundreds of years?
3. Since the "return power to the people" and similar catch phrases of the Trump campaign and inauguration speech are solidly historic concepts and not tied to "restoration of the Republic", and reflecting on the several notable and unsurprisingly failed "yosef" predictions about the presidential election and supposed turnovers, what proof exists outside of conspiracy theorists' dreams that the "Republic WAS restored at the inauguration with Trump" [emphasis added]?
Ww, the burden is on you and the other followers of these notions. No, you do not "owe me" an explanation or proof, but when you challenge me on the point of these outrageous and absurd dinarland fantasies, the burden of proof is squarely on you. Tell me there are wise extra terrestrials planning to offer vast and wonderful health and other technologies to humanity, the burden of proof falls on you.
The same burden of proof applies when the dinarland fantasy litany is marched out as if, as one writer says, "
"where are we and what is true", followed by a list of wonderfully hope-inspiring but completely proofless. E.g., zorra (really??), gold-backed currencies and GCR language in the Paris Agreement (dare you to find it), uncountably massive quantities of gold held by one or more benevolent Chinese families desiring to distribute it to the world population, "GESARA" (a bastardized renaming of NESARA, a failed economic recovery/restoration whitepaper created in the 1990s by an engineering PhD), and on and on and on. When you start with proofless fantasies as your foundational "truths", especially if the conversation is with a "true believer" of this nonsense, the conversation can be awfully short.
For all of the sacred dinarland presumed truths, the logical fallacies for them being "truth" include arguments from ignorance (I haven't disproved them so they must be true), argument from repetition (actually, the "Hitlerian lie"), shifting the burden of proof (your post asking for proofs of a negative), argument from incredulity (it's so fantastic and wonderful, it has to be true), appeal to false authority (conspiracy theorists to support the existence of the "restored republic"), and many many other instances of bizarrely fallacious thinking and arguments. The most frequent argument when these issues are heard is "I don't owe you an explanation". Not particularly clever.
As you said, it's a very easy road to roundly criticize "yosef". He offered himself up on a platter by a year of lies, failures, deliberate deceptions, and a confession neither washes away the lies, nor diminishes the certainty of him continuing the same. It hasn't helped that "yosef" has continued to be just as wrong in his continuously failed predictions, even since his "apology".
As to my pen name.... I didn't choose an onomatopoeic for dog sounds. My pen name is much less catchy. ubiety is a noun, simply meaning the condition of being in a definite place. Thus, I am who I am, and I'm right here.
Being and staying "grounded", according to Merriam-Webster, means "mentally and emotionally stable; admirably sensible, realistic, and unpretentious." Measure yourself against this standard and be brutally honest.
ubiety