Saturday, July 8, 2017

Terrorism is the War of the Poor and War is the Terrorism of the Rich

This blog was triggered by the video below posted on Facebook.

All religions are poison - in some the poison is stronger than in others -- these words by Alice Miller come to mind: "Children who are told the truth and are not brought up to tolerate lies and cruelty can develop as freely as plant whose roots have not been attacked by pests (in our case, lies)"
James Warren Terrorism is always political and can easily dress up in the cloak of religion. And Islam has gotten a bad break, thanks to those who like to create enemies to get their people all riled up and terrified. Terrorism is the war of the poor and war is the terrorism of the rich.


Sylvie Imelda Shene Totally James! Terrorism is the war of the poor that are too emotionally blind to see the traps the rich sociopaths put in front of them and war is the terrorism of the rich sociopaths that also are too emotionally blind to see that the destructive games they play, in the end, will destroy everyone. When society is too emotionally blind and lets sociopaths win -- everyone loses.

Some comments at YouTube says the translation in the video above is fake, but anyway, either way, all religions are poison. After my experience with the sociopaths at my job of nine and half years; I see very clear how terrorism is the war of the poor and war is the terrorism of the rich. The true terrorists are in boardrooms around the world -- plotting and manipulating the poor to retaliate to their lies and injustices --- so they have a reason to pick up their guns and give the illusion that they have to fight in self-defense and to keep everyone safe from the terrorists and thugs, like they like to call them. These words from the book Staking the Soul: Emotional Abuse and the Erosion of Identity by Marie - France Hirigoven come to mind: "...Physical violence can be testified to be outside evidence: eyewitness, police and medical reports. With emotional abuse, there is no proof. It's a clean violence. Nobody sees anything. 

During the ascendancy of control phase, the emotional abuser essentially acted to inhibit his victim’s powers of reasoning and critical judgment. In the next phase, through a strategic series of commands, he provokes feelings, acts, and reactions.
If the opponent can “outdo” his rival in abusive defense strategies, the battle can only end in the surrender of the less perverse of the two.

The abuser tries to make the victim act against him so he can denounce her as “evil.” What’s crucial is that she seems responsible for what happened. He uses a weakness---a depressive, hysterical, or temperamental tendency--- over-exaggerates this trait, and then leads the victim on to discredit herself. Pushing the other into making mistakes allows the abuser to criticize and tear her down, but even more, reinforces her poor self-image and guilt.

When the victim loses control, the abuser simply injects a small dose of provocation and contempt to obtain a reaction and later reproaches her for it. If, for example, the reaction is anger, he makes sure that everyone sees it. On occasion, an outsider might even feel compelled to call the police. ... It’s easy after that for the abuser to make the victim a mental case.

The victim needs to act, but because she is blocked by the hold over her, she can only find her freedom in an extreme gesture. To an outsider, any impulsive action, especially a violent one, is considered pathological. The person reaction to provocation seems responsible for the crises. Guilt in the eyes of the abuser; she appears like the aggressor to outsiders, who don’t understand that she can no longer live trapped in a horrible situation. Whatever she does, she can’t set herself free: if reacts, she is responsible for starting the conflict and is she doesn’t react, the deadly stalking of her soul continues.

As he drives his victim to destruction, the abuser gets that much more pleasure from pointing out her weakness… …the abuser benefits from the situation, making sure to cast himself as the victim.
Justification becomes impossible when nothing is said and no reproach is made. Desperate to find a solution to this horrifying impasse, the victim may be tempted in turn to use innuendo and manipulation. The relationship then becomes ambiguous: who is the abuser and who the victim.
The ideal outcome for the abuser is to succeed in making the other “evil,” which transforms the evil into something more normal because it is now shared. He wants to inject the other with what is bad in him. To corrupt is the ultimate goal.

His greatest satisfaction lies in driving his target to destructive acts or, in a larger framework, leading several individuals to finish each other off.

All abusers, sexual or emotional, try to drag others into their orbit and distort the rules. Their destructive capability depends on the propaganda they disseminate among victims’ families, friends, and associates, showing to what extent the victims are “evil” and that it is, therefore, normal to blame them. Sometimes they succeed and seduce allies by ridiculing and scorning moral values. Not leading others into a circle of violence means failure for abusers and, therefore, becomes the only way to stop the spread of the abusive process.

...Emotional abusers, in order to prove the victims are bad, will go so far to arouse violent reactions in them, in the movie Passage A L'Acte (1996) by Francis, Girod, a perverse abuser makes his psychiatrist kill him. He has played the game out to its fullest extent. Sometimes the victim turns the violence against himself and commits suicide because it is the only way to get rid of his aggressor.
...Once abuse has taken root, however: the victim departure is the only solution. ..During the separation process, abusers always consider themselves the wronged party and become litigious, taking advantage of the fact the victim, hurrying to end the ordeal, is still ready to make concessions. ... …It's not unusual for victims to be sued in an organizational framework, because they are always considered guilty. Either way, the abuser claims injury, where the victim is the one who loses everything. ...One never wins against an abuser. But one can learn something about oneself.


The temptation is great for victims, in order to defend themselves, to resort to the same devices as their aggressors. Nevertheless, as victim, one is less perverse, and it is difficult to see how the situation could be reversed. One is strongly advised against using the same tactics: basically, legal intervention is the only recourse." But sadly the legal system has a tendency to side with abusers and the true victims rarely ever get justice. The sociopaths at my job of nine and half years were hoping I would become one of them and be able to point the finger at me, making me appear the evil one! They wanted me in jail, dead or in a mental hospital. I lost my job and money, but they didn’t succeed in making me one of them! And when one of them turned out to be a bank robber and kill himself in a police standoff. They all have become silent part of a big cover-up. They treated me like I was the criminal – projecting themselves into me --- in hopes I would become a criminal like them.

Also, read my blog post Experienced Knowledge