Cause I know I’m Right; I got jus’ one life

Part 2: The Comment Section from Part 1
in Pyschology Today re:

Anti-Intellectualism is Killing America by David Noise

(my added comments in red)
 
I’ve purposely left out much of the comments which are unrelated to my comment, and included some unrelated to my issue which I found to be valuable commentary on the article in question. 
what about Bob?
Submitted by thom adams on June 26, 2015 
Oh my Bob. Are you from this planet, or have been living under a rock or something? I’m astounded by your notion of a “free press” because this is the exact fallacy in the article above: It does not recognize the effect of a criminally complicit media with government and their abuse of the word objectivity.
The author makes some good points but fails miserably here. He looks deeper into racism suggesting it is rooted in ignorance. Well said, but not deep enough. Then he looks at gun violence from the surface, without suggesting a root cause or causes.
When the news media is fully aware of government involvement in false flag “gun rampages” designed to dis-arm the citizenry (ala: Sandy Hook elementary shooting), and complicit in the cover-up as well, and continues to report lies instead of truth… then that same media is criminally RESPONSIBLE for the increase in these type of copy cat rampages.
The author here surely cannot be intellectually blind to this truth. This is either ignorance or willful participation in spreading false and inflammable information.
And, if you really want to know the root cause of these or any other problems facing society, it can be summed up in ONE WORD: Economics. PERIOD.
Reply to thom adams
Conspiracies Everywhere
Submitted by Tom Bittman on June 28, 2015
This Thom Adams is an excellent example of the anti-intellectualism discussed in the article. He accepts conspiracy theories spread through the Internet as facts, and builds an entire false, ignorant, angry worldview on top of that B.S. Confirmation bias, the Internet, and anti-intellectualism are creating all kinds of alternate universe worldviews that ultimately damage our society. By the way, I live in Sandy Hook, my kids went to that school, I know the grieving families, and I am disgusted with people like you who somehow believe tens of thousands of people are complicit in a false flag in order to steal your guns. Please join rational society or stay in your hole.
Reply to Tom Bittman
Ouch…lol
Submitted by thom adams on June 28, 2015
Thanks for allowing the world to see your mind-boggling idiocy first hand with the brain fart above that now runs down your leg. I knew you were out there but no one would believe me… till now.
True to anti-intellectual form you spout bullshit which you have ZERO knowledge about and LIE about it to appear sane or garner support from other ignorant trolls. You DID NOT live in Sandy Hook on 12/14/2012, or you are brain damaged, or have been reaping the benefits of being a silent coward.
You’re also a simple-minded pathetic loser who KNOWS NOTHING about being an intellectual, but even less about an event which you have obviously taken on face value from your favorite propaganda outlet and done ZERO research; but has the audacity to insult the intelligence of someone who knows more than you will ever know about ANYTHING.
Wanna try me? Let’s see who is more “rational” you asshat. But you better study up big mouth… or you’ll be wearing your “I escaped Fairfield Hills” T-shirt again soon… Bimbo.
Lemme know when you graduate third grade moron. I’m waitin’…
This writer is fully aware that replies like this are never well-received by those who are simply wanting intellectual facts. But… to me, this was like catching the BIG FISH and making sure he was on the line.
Reply to thom adams
Thom Adams is the PERFECT Example
Submitted by Tom Bittman on June 28, 2015
You’re wrong, wrong, wrong, always wrong. There are 27,000 of us in Newtown (do you think we were all paid off? Really?), I’ve lived here more than 20 years, and you are an irrational, perfect example for the author of this piece. Go ahead and call me names – the more you say, the more it says about you, and the more it describes a sickness in our society. By the way, Neil Armstrong DID walk on the moon.
Reply to Tom Bittman
bonehead strikes back
Submitted by thom adams on June 28, 2015
Who cares if Neil walked on the moon? Michael Jackson is dead, so I guess there’s nothing more to learn there anyway, huh? (moon walking, duh). Why, was Armstrong secretly related to Lance and doing moon performance enhancing drugs? Or was he lying and cheating through several non-profit “support our moon rocks” campaigns or something? Now, that’s a good racket.
Ok, Tom, how about this? Kansas basketball sucks when compared to the BIG BOYS over at Kentucky. Another conspiracy theory, lol? FACT.
That said, since you are involved in IT I suppose you know what SEO means? Yeah. I know WAY MORE than you think I do. And, if you weren’t so damn lazy and had read my other posts you would know that I have never owned a gun and am in fact a pacifist (there’s a difference between pacifist and fascist, Tom).
Now, what were you saying about my issue with gun control? My issue is with LIARS and thieves and those who profit from fake tragedy through 501c-3s and many other surreptitious agendas (you are VERY familiar with some of these), and those who irrationally (yes, you know what I’m talking about Tommy boy, right?) think that the ENDS justifies the MEANS no matter what criminal activities must be fomented and carried out.
You know…
Psuedo-intellectuals whose avarice and greed and perversions of all sorts give them a false illusion that money is god and money is the aphrodisiac of power. And… their little minions who have bought into their unethical immoral idealism and go around pretending they don’t know what people like me are talking about. All so they can have a boat or a modestly expensive house? You know the type don’t you?
I’ve had plenty of money son, more than you have or will have. It ain’t all that, unless you are a shallow minded mean spirited prick that thinks the law of the jungle has something to do with you. That person will get eaten alive you know… but in the meantime he is useful to the cause.
Quit lying to your self. Look in the mirror and face up. I seriously doubt if that is TRULY who you are Tom. It’s easy to fall prey.
Peace.
BTW, you started the name calling you bag of shit. I simply returned volley. That’s my credo… eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth. And, to ease your mind I’m not one of your little “conspiracy theorists”.
One day you may get to find out that I don’t play that. But rest assured I know what I’m talking about when I speak. Now, do your homework but it won’t help you unless you come to Jesus (that’s a euphemism).
This conversation is now closed.
Reply to thom adams
Conspiracy Theorist
Submitted by Tom Bittman on June 28, 2015 – 2:06pm
You called the mass murder in my town a false flag. You think that people profited in some way from this. That makes you an irrational conspiracy theorist unable to think critically. That’s all I commented on. I don’t care about your politics or religion or wealth or basketball team. Maybe one day your town will be hurt as badly as ours, and nutcases will come out of the woodwork claiming your town is full of liars. Just maybe. An eye for an eye? We’ll see if the conspiracy nuts who keep attacking victims get a comeuppance. The author is still right, and you are still the best example in his comments. Congrats, Thom Adams!
Dear reader of my blog.
 
Mr. Tom Bittman DOES NOT, NEVER HAS LIVED where he claims, although he’s quite active in the Sandy Hook Shooting money bonanza he helped create immediately (literally one hour) after the event. The non-profit he helped start spent almost $500,000 (per their 990’s) on a $999 canned website, and has very little content. It’s OK, they raked in about $5 million the first year. To be fair, they occasionally sponsor someone to speak on gun control at small town halls, libraries, etc. This is only one of many non-profits for the victims and their families and nowhere near the largest, and some started their websites long before 12/14/2012. The money trail is a twisted trail to follow (if) you can get FOI act data, which is nearly impossible in many cases. Yet, there are numerous examples directly on the internet, including photos (unmanipulated) of high school students wearing support The Sandy Hook Victims days BEFORE the event supposedly took place.
 
Bittman’s children are grown, never were Sandy Hook students. It was  a run down dump on the wrong end of town folks. Not to mention that it was closed in 2008. They would not attend a shit hole like SHE on his worst day, as he makes close to a million dollars a year at Gartner, Inc. His other employer besides Gartner is a very intimidating agency who is very secretive about their operatives, uh… workers/assets/stooges. What his ultimate role is for this organization is anyone’s guess unless it is to troll websites for truthers and pretend to be someome he IS NOT and NEVER HAS BEEN.
 
You can take that to the bank cause I ain’t that stupid, not to find out who I’m dealing with here. But, let me NOT make the same mistake Dick Cheney made outing folks (he’s got a tad more clout than me). Do some of your own ciphering, like Jethro.
Peace out.
Reply to Tom Bittman
This conversation is now closed!
Submitted by Linda on July 2, 2015 – 7:35am
So sayeth the great and idiotic Thom Adams, who must have exceeded his foul word quota for the day! Gotta refill his shit pile to mine for more nuggets! How dare you continue to comment, Tom Bittman! Actually, the real question is, why bother? Thom Adams is BEYOND hope. What a nutbag.
Reply to Linda
The article definitely
Submitted by Ned Clark on July 3, 2015 – 12:04pm
The article definitely brought out the very people it was written about. Amazing. I can’t even read any further..but what I did read makes perfect sense. The crazy is real. Technology is inhibiting our ability to think and not give “kneejerk” reactions and say things behind a keyboard that we never would if face to face with each other. Wishing it was 1987 again.
Reply to Ned Clark
Well said!
Submitted by MarieKert on July 16, 2015 – 5:03pm
After reading the article and most of the comments, yours is the only one that really said what’s really going on! I’d like to see all of these people in the same room, it would likely be the quietest place on the planet! **crickets and tumbleweeds**
Ahhh, I wish for 1986.
Reply to Homer
Today’s Destructive Pysch.
Submitted by OU812 on July 19, 2015 – 10:33am
Thom,
So you just became the victim. Step back and take a deep breath. You can be intellegent and fail to miss the point. I think that may have happened here.
Reply to OU812
victim? Moi?
Submitted by thom adams on October 15, 2015 – 3:50am
Seriously, I appreciate the comment, but I don’t see myself as a victim here. I can see where others might as the paid trolls are not obvious to everyone.
But I have a secret… I know who they are and who they work for and I know the game they play with people’s heads. But not mine.
“I know what’s right… I got just one life…”
(Here comes another, “I think I’m better than everyone” comment, sure to put a Narcissist like me in his place). No, “fully self-actualized” does not include Narcissism.
Your next-to-last sentence was intriguing if that’s really what you meant. “Fail to miss the point?” Did you mean that literally or was it a fau paux? If you meant it, very cool.
>You can be intelligent(sp) and fail to miss the point.<
(As in… failing to miss the point is hitting the point; nail directly on head?)
Reply to thom adams
Contradict Much?
Submitted by Jason Mcgyver on July 25, 2015 – 10:43am
Mr. Adams,
You may very well be brilliant and possibly do know infinitely more about EVRYTHING than I do. But I do have one question for you. How do you claim to be a pacifist and in the exact same post turn around and say your credo is: eye for an eye tooth for a tooth?
Reply to Jason Mcgyver
eye-for-an-eye
Submitted by thom adams on October 15, 2015 – 1:30am
Jason, I understand your confusion as on the surface the two do seem incompatible. But, one must realize that pacifism does not mean lawlessness, nor does it mean that crimes ought go unpunished.
Notice that it also implies an effect precipitated by a cause (e.g. cause and effect, or every action causes an equal and opposite reaction). It in no way violates being a pacifist since I don’t go around poking folks eye out and reaping the punishment I suggest. If I did, I certainly couldn’t claim to be a pacifist, could I?
Reply to thom adams
anti-intellectualism–or anti-intelligent
Submitted by Joris on June 28, 2015 – 8:50pm
Thom Adams: I assume you are a professional writer. You did a superb job of illustrating the article here. I have to admire the flawless consistency of one, the use of so many excellent examples of anti-intelligent discourse, and I certainly hope that when teachers, psychologists and politicians want to use you fine work as an unparalleled illustration of ranting emotionalism to hide any genuine thinking they will pay you for this. It is really worthy of payment. Thank you.
Reply to Joris
anti-hidden agenda more precisely
Submitted by thom adams on June 29, 2015 – 1:29am
Joris. No, I am not a professional writer. I am an extremely intelligent, very well read, highly informed student of all things everything. I am a subjective/objectivist who speaks only from facts and interpretations of same which are voraciously gleaned from numerous sources. I am also highly evolved, fully self-actualized, and confident that I speak truth vs, lies, fact vs, fiction, rational vs. fairy tale.
I am not always right (but in this case I am) except I ALWAYS do plenty of homework before I assert opinions, ideas, or offer suggestions. I am confident in my abilities, comfortable with my understanding of simple and complex subjects, and believe it or not am considered to be an extremely likeable individual in many social circles. I am a good listener, thankful, appreciative, charming, and intuitive. And you?
Small minded people and frauds generally immediately take a dislike to me likely because they must apparently sense that I see more than they see of themselves or are willing to admit to themselves or present to the world.
Many times someone’s initial reaction to me changes favorably over time as they realize I do not come from arrogance as it first appears, merely blatant unaudulterated honesty, and time typically bears out my position… one which they weren’t willing to consider originally.
Making assumptions about me as you have done usually ends up being a narrow-minded predjudice based exercise in futility, based on false premises or failure to use “critical thought” as our author suggests.
I prefer to think wisdom emanates from seeing multiple perspectives, varying veiwpoints, and from numerous perches before reaching conclusions of substantive fact. Facts based reality is of tremendous value, no matter how disconcerting.
BTW, I believe this article is well-thought out and presented, and the author pretty well versed on the issues… with one caveat which I was kind enough to point out as something one ought consider before hiring a posse. You never want to hang the wrong root cause without even suspecting the real killer.
To deny that certain “tragic’ events (like the FAKE shooting rampage at Sandy Hook elementary) are NOT intentionally orchestrated to achieve some ulterior end(s) is to suggest one’s own stupefying ignorance of the OVERWHELMING evidence, the MOMENTOUS data, and their own basic common sense, and/or possibly belie an evil intent to deceive the public or oneself.
The previous commenter had shown himself untrustworthy by lying and being a first class hypocrite (which you may not know that I’m fully aware of). Thus, my ire.
Cognitive dissonance can make even the most intellectual individual question their reality. Fortunately, I’m long over that. And you?
To wit, the author David Noise nails much of the issue he is tackling here with a deft hand:
“… for corporate domination of American society is another result of a public that is not thinking critically. Americans have allowed their democracy to slip away, their culture overtaken by enormous corporations that effectively control both the governmental apparatus and the media, thus shaping life around materialism and consumption.
 
Indeed, these corporate interests encourage anti-intellectualism, conditioning Americans into conformity and passive acceptance of institutional dominance. They are the ones who stand to gain from the excessive fear and nationalism that result in militaristic foreign policy and absurdly high levels of military spending (link is external). They are the ones who stand to gain from consumers who spend money they don’t have on goods and services they don’t need. They are the ones who want a public that is largely uninformed and distracted, thus allowing government policy to be crafted by corporate lawyers and lobbyists. They are the ones who stand to gain from unregulated securities markets. And they are the ones who stand to gain from a prison-industrial complex that generates the highest rates of incarceration in the developed world.”
I think this is right. And it’s even worse, but i suggest the author is aware of this but decides not to wade into this Shark infested water (Sharks have tiny brains and all they know how to do is deceive and attack).
Of course, I understood the risk of sounding like the aggressor, but a re-visit to my comments will suggest that I was attacked first, and merely served up my own dish in defense. What you don’t know is what I do know about the specific poster who attacked me. For now I will keep it to myself awaiting his move, but rest assured this is NOT a joke.
So… while I appreciate your right to comment and formulate your own opinions, I suggest an open mind might better serve you before starting the crucifixion. You just might be glad you did; that is if you aren’t another self-serving schill with an ax to grind.
Reply to thom adams
my admiration for your skill
Submitted by Joris on June 29, 2015 – 7:12am
Thom Adams: I cannot stop my astonishment at your skill in faking what a real anti-intelligent person would write, someone gullible and proud, someone using name-calling and hubris, someone so skillful at illustrating that small but powerful voice of the anti-thinking crowd. Amazing! I hope to see you in other venues, as your skill will surely show up if you continue. The tone of disdain for others is perfect; the worship of self so well done. As I have said before, I hope someone pays you for your excellent writing.
Reply to Joris
just in the playbook (the ole double-negative… accuse the accuser of what he’s accusing)
Submitted by jack on September 1, 2015 – 8:41pm
There really is nothing new about TA and his malodorous kin. It’s in the playbook for the new “smart” idiot genre that seems to exist to disrupt forums and comment sections in service of … disrupting, I suppose– because they can and it gives them kicks. Some, I believe, think that it’s a conspiracy by the right, paying pseudo intellectuals to propagate misinformation on the internet…. I used to think that maybe the “hijackers” worked for some of the ultra-whacked conservative groups, but now I’m rethinking this. In many cases I don’t believe they even believe the stuff they’re saying. It’s just that you oppose it and they want to believe it. However, I don’t think it’s likely that they would all use such similar tactics as they seem to. Even with the best planning the right could muster, I don’t think they would pull it off. To me, it seems a convergent evolution that we, as somewhat reasonable forum members and commenter’s, have created. These forum hijackers, using this “I am humble and I am brave, but I am smarter and better than you are at everything” approach. As I said, I don’t think there’s belief really; it’s just the game of targeting those who believe something to be right as well as valid. They hate those that aren’t apologetic for their beliefs in the facts as they are represented. We interefere with their ability to float the lie in their heads. The hijackers don’t all believe the same thing, or obstruct the same groups, but you could almost replace the nouns in one of their posts with nouns from another one’s and see that the arguments are almost identical. First state obviously opposing viewpoints (that have been dis proven and used before) as facts that we just don’t understand. Then attack our sources as arms of the establishment (scientists, the government, etc.) designed only to misinform and mislead. Now, they throw in how responsible they are, as either a scientist (physicist often) who rides bikes to work so to protect the rainforest –or they’re “pacifists,” or “atheists,” etc.; and add in how they could just as well be one of “us” who are so irrationally disagreeing with them. Move to stage three and up the ante. Start peppering those that continue to disagree with off-color names and disparaging comments, especially comments that suggest the opposing commenters are lacking intelligence or laughably uninformed. They start dropping terms like “Occam’s razor” or “ad hominem,” etc to show how really intelligent they are –because they used those words before we did. Finally, add some off the wall crazy shit proof to show how broad and deep the “conspiracy” is (in this case mass shootings are hokum created for whatever reason) and how we’ve just been proven inadequate to the task of understanding anything about this problem, at all. The “False Flag” gambit is a really common one. Our lack of knowledge of their whacko and unsupported proof(s) is further testament that we really just don’t know anything about what we’re talking about. Then, repeat, until you’ve satisfied your tiny ego or cleaned out the entire thread. Forum hijacking 101. So predictable.
So, I used to think there must be a training forum, book, website out there with the details and examples of how to punk any honest, decent thread about a politically hot topic. Either that, or we have here the most clear example of convergent evolution of social meme’s that’s ever been seen. I’m honestly not sure which. To think the first would put me in the ranks of the conspiracy theorists, myself. Ouch. So, I tend to think it’s the latter. Something about the way most of us respond to attacks such as this is causing the approaches from disparate individuals to converge to a common mechanism. I wonder how we could be different and disrupt this pattern? I wonder how they would respond then?
Reply to jack
ramble-a-thon winner for 2015
Submitted by thom adams on October 15, 2015 – 1:37am
Lemme’ put it this way. I know Jack Shit. And, which agency he works for. Some people simply have no conscience, do they?
Reply to thom adams
Adams and Delusion
Submitted by Tom Bittman on June 29, 2015 – 12:48pm
Thom Adams shows an amazing ability to love himself and hate others, without a bit of critical thinking. Your losses and life challenges are no excuse for the evil that you post – without a single shred of evidence – against families whose children were murdered, and an entire community dealing with extended PTSD. It’s certain that there is a mental health element, but that doesn’t excuse the accusations you make against victims, and your lack of intellectual self-review. As a test of your sanity, would you be willing to post the most critical piece of evidence you have that 27,000 people are lying? Just one. I’m certain it’s easily rebutted. I’m certain it will show how gullible you are to people who feed off sheeple like you (Alex Jones, for example). They’re guilty of greed and moral depravity. You’re guilty of gullibility – combined with self-love. Sick.
Reply to Tom Bittman
Thom Adams
Submitted by Joris on June 29, 2015 – 12:59pm
Thom Adams shows an amazing ability to love himself and hate others, without a bit of critical thinking. Your losses and life challenges are no excuse for the evil that you post – without a single shred of evidence – against families whose children were murdered, and an entire community dealing with extended PTSD. It’s certain that there is a mental health element, but that doesn’t excuse the accusations you make against victims, and your lack of intellectual self-review. As a test of your sanity, would you be willing to post the most critical piece of evidence you have that 27,000 people are lying? Just one. I’m certain it’s easily rebutted. I’m certain it will show how gullible you are to people who feed off sheeple like you (Alex Jones, for example). They’re guilty of greed and moral depravity. You’re guilty of gullibility – combined with self-love. Sick.
I appreciate your efforts to communicate with “Thom Adams” but just today, in my religious blog, I noted that Jesus told someone, “Let the dead bury the dead,” and I always wondered what that meant till I met such “dead souls” as this guy–impervious to reason, absolutely self-centered and proud of it, incredibly lacking in both reflection and compassion–and I realized that I can enjoy him or shout back…and I choose to enjoy. He is a poster child–and child is the apt word–for such indecently blind, deaf and “dead” people. You can point out his flaws till the cows come home–or, as I have, just enjoy his amazingly alien lifestyle–and fear a little of his fear and anger. Your comments, perhaps, are nicer than mine in the end.
Reply to Joris
Thom Adams Types
Submitted by Tom Bittman on June 29, 2015 – 4:17pm
Joris, I agree. However, I’m not a dispassionate observer in this. It hurts. And just today, a friend of mine whose daughter was murdered on 12/14 got an unsolicited Facebook message from a conspiracy/religious nut (every paragraph ended “God Bless” – very passive aggressive) claiming a bunch of nonsense, and declaring that her daughter wasn’t real. Can you imagine the pain of that? Also, posts like this are public, and can be forever. I know a few people who lost loved ones who can’t help themselves – they search for this stuff, and then they can’t sleep, etc. But, in the end, all you can do is ignore the silly ones, and report the bad ones to the authorities. I do find it interesting, by the way, that a person like Adams, with obvious psychological issues, is posting on “Psychology Today.” Was that his choice? Did a friend send him the link, suggestively? Interesting. But really, best ignored…
Reply to Tom Bittman
Frustration and Grief
Submitted by E. Kramer on July 22, 2015 – 2:15pm
It is most difficult to dissuade those who have made up their minds about conspiracy theories. I place my hope in speaking out when one sees one with fact and rationality because this sort of anti-intellectualism can be rather like a virus, and spread. You may not be able to cure the carrier, but you can vaccinate others who might be exposed.
I have had month long arguments on 9-11. This is not because I expected to convince the conspiracy theorist, as this is impossible. It has been so as to debunk the crazy for others who might be watching and start to wonder.
I lost a dear childhood friend on that day. I didn’t find out until he was not at a Christmas party at my cousin’s. There is a terrible feeling of having to do SOMETHING when this kind of thing occurs. What I did was write about it professionally. If nothing else, the months of research (now years laughs) have allowed me to speak with some knowledge. I am from New York and pretty much everyone I know was in some way involved with those buildings and/or this tragedy. It’s truly horrid when internet rumor is presumed over actual first hand knowledge. Condolences on your town’s pain.
Reply to Lucienne
Liar? Hypocrite?
Submitted by Tom Bittman on June 29, 2015 – 1:10pm
And what is that about? Lied about what, exactly? Hypocrite about what? I realize that talking to a delusional person is a waste of time – but let me appeal to your vanity – show us your amazing intellectual ability. What facts led you to your delusion – er, I mean, brilliant analysis about the mass shooting in my town? If you are so smart and handsome, please wow us. This is how this works – you will ignore the question entirely (an intellectual coward), or provide some evidence that is easily refuted and ignore that entirely (also a coward). Instead of just talking about your intellectual prowess, show us! Or run away.
Reply to Tom Bittman
Submitted by Smoke on June 30, 2015 – 5:39pm
You are foolish to believe language is an accurate representation of knowledge. I have seen DD’s that have more skill than you.
Reply to Smoke
lying hypocrisy? Not tommy-boy
Submitted by thom adams on October 15, 2015 – 4:01am
Sir:
Please stop before I embarrass you with some lurid (but secret) facts of which WE BOTH well know are now (leaked) public knowledge, and prove every point I have made to date about you, who you are, and your ilk. So, just STFU, OK?
Reply to thom adams
(perhaps the reader will notice that Mr. Bittman makes NO MORE COMMENTS after this little ditty. Why? Well… read it and weep tommy boy)
Anti-everything
Submitted by Jaz on June 30, 2015 – 4:35pm
Thanks Tom Adams for being such a good sport and clearly showing the rest of us readers what anti-intellectualism sounds/reads like.
Reply to Jaz from thom adams
Joris, Jaz, Smoke, and Mirrors
Submitted by thom adams on July 1, 2015 – 2:34am
At least Bittman isn’t afraid of using his real name. Until you can man-up and do the same don’t expect me to regard anything you have to say as any more than diarrhea of the mouth.
And to those interested in how I know SH was staged, I’m not going to do your homework for you. All you need to do is a little bit of research and I’m confident you will know too.
Reply to thom adams
Emotional maturity makes one intellectual
Submitted by Nii on July 1, 2015 – 4:48am
Mr Adams as I told u earlier and you refuted it out of hand you are being emotional. A true intellectual eɔchibits emotional maturity. Your inability to empathise, sympathise and respect others freezes your ability to think logically. I think a therapist will help you deal with such tendencies so contact one. As I heard internet trolling is a symptom of needing help.
Reply to Nii
And there’s the crowning piece
Submitted by estproph on July 1, 2015 – 2:35pm
“And to those interested in how I know SH was staged, I’m not going to do your homework for you.”
So you hide away this little morsel of “information” that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are correct, so that you never have to have it pointed out to you how laughably, stupidly, pathetically wrong it is. And you do it under the cover of encouraging “homework”. How convenient for you.
Reply to estproph
response to immaturity
Submitted by alexa on July 8, 2015 – 12:40am
This is the problem right here. I’d say juvenile name calling is at the heart of anti-intellectualism. Its what one does when they allow their egos to flair, and when they have nothing but passion and rhetoric to back their beliefs. This doesn’t help, it certainly doesn’t support your argument, as it makes you look childish, and asserting that you know more than someone you have never met and have the most extremely limited experience with it just plain dumb. It makes you look foolish. If you wish to be taken seriously be true intellectuals, I’d rethink your tactics. Also, since it seems to be a sticky point with you, let me just tell you my IQ puts me in the top .00005% of the population of the world. The chances that I am miles ahead of you in the intelligence area are extremely great.
Reply to alexa
you’re a genius
Submitted by thom adams on July 9, 2015 – 10:11am
It seems your spell checker is working fine. But you might want to work on grammar, semantics, and case before your next Buzzfeed IQ test.
 
You said:
>>let me just tell you my IQ puts me in the top .00005% of the population of the world<<
So… here’s a quick tip Alexa. Try “percentile”. Much cleaner.
Reply to thom adams
Reinforcements at last last, well-known researcher Peter Klein chimes in on his take of the situation.
Bittman isn’t ignorant of the hoax
Submitted by Peter Klein on July 8, 2015 – 4:08pm
No. He isn’t ignorant of the hoax, having fallen prey to the media’s lock-step reporting of the Sandy Hook narrative. Yet he’ll tell you otherwise. I could consider the possibility he had been fooled if it weren’t for his claim that his kids went to SHE. Boy, some people really go all in and implicate themselves willfully.
What Bittman may not be considering is that he likely miscalculated how reliable their assurances of his immunity were. Not to mention they’ve also lied about where the operation is going. He may already see signs of this. Ultimately, when a legal proceeding or tribunal gets underway every single remote detail of his online communications will be studied in shockingly microscopic detail. Pleas will not prevent this, as the purpose will be to populate the historical record.
Throughout history and in every system of law in place at the time, there’s a consistent view that no standing immunity terms preceding a crime may shield the perpetrator from accountability. All deals are shown to be paper tigers. But, as people respect authority to an inordinate degree the authorities still give these worthless assurances. Usually, any crimes committed never wind up in court so these deals don’t come under scrutiny.
I recall that Bittman was one of the first staunch defenders of Sandy Hook and quite vocal before suddenly backing off for some reason. Seeing him after 2 years, still making similar claims could be viewed by some as a kind of resolve and an indication that he believes what he says. But, then we have to assume he’s learned nothing from his numerous exchanges with people like you or me. If he had, then he wouldn’t be describing us as having all these shortcomings to our personality. He wouldn’t claim to suspect we could benefit from psychological treatment or counseling. Certainly he wouldn’t be claiming we’re motivated by our bleak world view, to inflate our egos or that it’s simply a fetish.
Personally, the motivation is very simple and doesn’t require terms like Illuminati, false-flag or conspiracy theory. I view this as a series of unsolved crimes involving fraud, racketeering, misappropriation, torture, malfeasance and murder. The fact that Bittman doesn’t view it this way is understandable, given the tone of friendly, justifiable, dutiful and even philanthropic that was used when they cooked up and executed the scheme.
Reply to Peter Klein
pft
Submitted by Pft on July 17, 2015 – 3:57pm
Thanks for allowing the world to see your mind-boggling idiocy first hand with the brain fart above that now runs down your leg. I knew you were out there but no one would believe me… till now. True to anti-intellectual form you spout bullshit which you have ZERO knowledge about and LIE about it to appear sane or garner support from other ignorant trolls. You DID NOT live in Sandy Hook on 12/14/2012 or you are brain damaged or have been reaping the benefits of being a silent coward. You’re also a simple-minded pathetic loser who KNOWS NOTHING about being an intellectual, but even less about an event which you have obviously taken on face value from your favorite propaganda outlet and done ZERO research; but has the audacity to insult the intelligence of someone who knows more than you will ever know about ANYTHING. Wanna try me? Let’s see who is more “rational” you asshat. But you better study up big mouth… or you’ll be wearing your “I escaped Fairfield Hills” T-shirt again soon… Bimbo. Lemme know when you graduate third grade moron. I’m waitin’…
Ah, the name-calling of a 4-year-old, aka the ad hominem attack, the last resort of someone who knows they are wrong and can’t otherwise back up their point with facts and evidence.
Reply to Pft
Huh!
Submitted by Rick Whittle on October 11, 2015 – 11:22am
I think you have confused intellectualism with narcissism. Stop looking in the mirror and re-educate your self on logic and reason. Your article is a hate piece on religion and America. Nothing more and definitely not intelligent.
And another supporter?
Reply to Tom Bittman
Conspiracies Everywhere
Submitted by Serge on July 15, 2015 – 12:07pm
Something tells me you lie about living there.
And an ad-hoc supporter as explanation for the fraud?
Reply to Serge
Fascism in America
Submitted by Ruben Cardoso on July 20, 2015 – 11:38pm
You fail to recognize the obvious: America is heading to become a fascist society, the signs are everywhere. Anti-intelectualism is rampant, and an ignorant society is easily manipulated by a small group of people who only want power, not to help or guide the rest of citizens, but to become masters of them. You only need to read recent history to recognize the steps that a dictator takes to grab absolut power, and the first one, the most important, is to have a mass of people who love ignorance and who want to remain as such. Adolph Hitler was able to rise to power because of democracy, only to become the greatest mass murderer in history. And this happened in one of the most educated countries in the world. You think this could never happen in thos country? So the germans thought in the beginning of the rise of Nazism, they laughed at Hitler´s speeches, they ridiculed him and his followers, only to be destroyed by them and their actions, due to their own passivity. It is extremely easy to manipulate people, any kind of people, but the uneducated more so. You should probably read about the experiments of Stanley Milgram, Phillip Zimbardo and what happened in Abu Ghraib. What the Nazis needed to do was to create an enemy, to blame for all the ills of “the German People” (caused in reality by their rampant millitarism) and they did, first the comunists, then the Jews. Still don´t believe it? The Reichstag was burned (by the nazis, obviously) in order to freighten people and they gave them absolut mandate. What´s in store for us?
Reply to Ruben Cardoso
And, to prove the author’s point…
Submitted by estproph on July 1, 2015 – 2:25pm
“When the news media is fully aware of government involvement in false flag “gun rampages” designed to dis-arm the citizenry (ala: Sandy Hook elementary shooting)”
You don’t even know that the article is about you, do you?
 
(ooops, key sock-puppet #42738498567)
Reply to estproph
sock puppets
Submitted by thom adams on July 1, 2015 – 10:14pm
You are all not only retards, you’re abysmally, ignorant little boys who haven’t a clue what you’re talking about. SANDY HOOK WAS NOT A MASSACRE you f&uc*king BIMBOS. If you had a shred of intelligence you would know this like the majority of fact seeking Americans already know.
Each one of you are puny, small minded, lemmings following your fraudulent leader off the cliff to nowhere. Whatever you may think you ARE NOT important to your masters and you will find out soon enough how little respect they have for you.
What goes around comes around and Karma has its way of finding you cowards, lame brains, and fools and evening the score for the harm you did to the great and worthy honest citizens of this country whom you played for their empathy and sympathy and money.
You are weak followers whose only interest is self-interest using a FAKE tragedy to further your own pocketbooks or cause or both. The MOUNTAIN of EVIDENCE is STAGGERING, and you little morons act like you know nothing. You are the epitome of the sock puppet and/or the shill out to protect your little piece of the scam.
PERIOD.
Reply to thom adams
Seriously?!
Submitted by Mark :. on July 4, 2015 – 10:47am
Oh my Bob. Are you from this planet, or have been living under a rock or something? I’m astounded by your notion of a “free press” because this is the exact fallacy in the article above: It does not recognize the effect of a criminally complicit media with government and their abuse of the word objectivity. The author makes some good points but fails miserably here. He looks deeper into racism suggesting it is rooted in ignorance. Well said. Then he looks at gun violence from the surface without suggesting a root cause or causes. When the news media is fully aware of government involvement in false flag “gun rampages” designed to dis-arm the citizenry (ala: Sandy Hook elementary shooting), and complicit in the cover-up as well, and continues to report lies instead of truth… then that same media is criminally RESPONSIBLE for the increase in these type of copy cat rampages. The author here surely cannot be intellectually blind to this truth. This is either ignorance or willful participation in spreading false and inflammable information. And, if you really want to know the root cause of these or any other problem facing society, it can be summed up in ONE WORD: Economics. PERIOD.
That alone is an example of why this nation is lacking in intelligence and critical thought: Citing the likes of Glenn Beck and Alex Jones and calling school shootings like Sandy Hook “conspiracies designed to take away the peoples’ guns.” About as credible as Michael Savage borrowing from the writings of Goebbels to declare liberalism a “mental disorder.”
 
(apparently, sock puppets cannot read)
Reply to Mark
Won’t Back Down – Tom Petty
Submitted by thom adams on July 7, 2015 – 4:53am
Mark, you’re off it just a little. I mean, the mark. Either you cannot read or are willfully deceitful when you say that I cite “the likes of Glenn Beck and Alex Jones”. In fact, I do not trust either for facts and thus pay them no attention.
But, if you must know whom I hold as icons to media truth, you could try George Seldes and I. F. Stone. Oh, I’m certain you intellectuals know to whom I’m referring? But then… I’m just an old country bumpkin with a mental issue, right?
But hey, since you cite Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda, here’s a little ditty of his that I know you must love:
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Joseph Goebbells
And to those brainiards who think self-love is bad and/or indicative of mental instability, this quote from Ayn Rand sums up my own self-love:
“The virtue of Pride can best be described by the term: “moral ambitiousness.” It means that one must earn the right to hold oneself as one’s own highest value by achieving one’s own moral perfection—which one achieves by never accepting any code of irrational virtues impossible to practice and by never failing to practice the virtues one knows to be rational—by never accepting an unearned guilt and never earning any, or, if one has earned it, never leaving it uncorrected—by never resigning oneself passively to any flaws in one’s character—by never placing any concern, wish, fear or mood of the moment above the reality of one’s own self-esteem. And, above all, it means one’s rejection of the role of a sacrificial animal, the rejection of any doctrine that preaches self-immolation as a moral virtue or duty.” Ayn Rand
1. Was Ayn Rand insane, mentally disturbed, psychologically impaired in some way? A champion of the individual virtue of remaining true to one’s virtuous moral dogma even in the face criticism and ridicule from either the ignorant and uninformed, or those maintaining deceitful appearances in order to operate immorally while being considered upstanding by the majority of society, Ayn was the ULTIMATE capitalist idealist.
2. Accordingly, the uneducated and unexamined comments aimed at my views about Sandy Hook Elementary above are the EPITOME of anti-intellectualism, and fact fall hopelessly into the realm of stupidity.
My disdain is particularly aimed at the leaders and participants of this false flag event (i.e. Tom Bittman), who use their professional position to further promote the scam and denounce those whom he fully understands know the truth. I find Tom Bittman’s and other posters’ remarks about my “mental state” to be both harmful and slanderous.
I suggest you cease and desist with such rhetoric since I can easily produce professional mental evaluations that discredit any suggestion of mental instability, and instead reveal unusually high scores in E-IQ, IQ, Reasoning Skills, Empathy, and more.
BTW, as far as SHE… there IS a smoking gun, and in fact it might be referred to facetiously as a smoking arsenal. Ba-Boom.
Regardless, to date NO ONE has provided ANY evidence of a shooting rampage by the brother of Ryan Lanza, while there is a PREPONDERANCE of evidence suggesting beyond a reasonable doubt that it was a STAGED EVENT utilizing a number of government agencies and local politicians, citizens, and support personnel. Beyond mere conjecture, there also exists evidentary proof of an attempt to cover-up the lie before and immediately after the event came under question.
FWIW these intimations about my mental health or mental state are a well known tactic and expected diversion, used by perpetrators of these kind of psy-ops when opposing arguments are seen to be coming too close to exposing truth to the masses, or exposing some “sacred cow” to a wide audience. They know and understand the nature of “confirmation bias” (Tom Bittman’s favorite term), and how the majority of Americans fooled by these nasty tricks DO NOT want this kind of ugliness to have a shred of truth.
Much like strong religious adherents would rather “believe” than investigate the origins and history of their chosen faith, many law-abiding citizens choose not to hear views that challenge the narratives they are spoon fed by the media. The resulting cognitive dissonance may endanger their careers, lifestyle, relationships, and future… and they are rightfully afraid of knowing the truth.
I personally was sickened by the extent of media complicity after 9-11, even though I had for many years reaped the benefits of winning the American consumerist game (top 1% income) by purposefully ignoring and forgetting our true history, and instead endorsed the sanitized version. Since the events of 2001 and beyond.. I’ve had a “coming to Jesus” (a euphemism, since I don’t believe in his historicity).
Go ahead, insult away. I’m not shaken, I ain’t scared, and you CANNOT intimidate me. GOT IT?
Cause I won’t back down…
Reply to thom adams
Thou dost protest too much Thom
Submitted by hhua on July 19, 2015 – 1:58am
And quoting Ayn Rand as illustration of your moral compass? Count me not surprised.
But please do continue… It is quite entertaining to read the ever increasingly hyperbolic rantings of the smartest, richest, most intuitive, most well read, most likeable person to ever have graced an Internet forum (forgive me as I’m certain to have missed several of your fine qualities) and yes of course, “unshakable”.
I don’t suppose delusions of grandeur have been considered? But then I suppose one can’t be delusional while aware of said delusions could they?
Well carry on… we could not have asked for a more perfect illustration of the author’s point… Brilliant truly!
Out of the Blue, comes an objective reader….
Reply to hhua
this is tremendously interesting
Submitted by playswithengines on July 19, 2015 – 2:48am
Hello all, I just happened to come across this article while researching another subject.. after reading all the comments and what not, I’d like to say that I (for some reason) cant help but want to believe and respect Thom Adams. He does not appear to be ill or insane at all. I’d enjoy a nice conversation with someone like that
Reply to playswithengines
Does not appear to be I’ll or insane…Submitted by hhua on July 19, 2015 – 4:20pm
Personality disorders do not make someone “I’ll or insane”…just incapable of relating to others and the world around us the way most of us do. Hence the off the rails self admiration, as if this alone were somehow justification for believing an even more “off the rails” conspiracy theory.
Wether or not Thom is “insane”, who can say? Spouting off a bunch of words and long guotes (however seemingly coherant) does not prove or disprove his mental state.
What is most interesting about Thom is the utter predictability of his line of reasoning with each successive comment. It’s truly fascinating to witness a textbook example of abnormal psych in action, especially given the irony of this particular forum. Even more so, that he claims to have written proof of mental stability… Who among us carries “proof” of our mental state?? Unless of course there was reason to question it in the first place (he did himself no favors sharing that tidbit).
So while I agree, this has certainly been interesting to watch as a form of spectacle. I’m not sure you would find a personal conversation with such an individual enjoyable, unless you were to pander to his sense of self grandiosity, in which case, yes, I’m sure he can be quite “nice”.
Reply to hhua
hua? hhua? Bwahahahahaha
Submitted by thom adams on August 17, 2015 – 11:35am
Nice name. You so wise. You liven my days… hhua hhua hhua hahahahahabwahaha. Snicker. You so funny. hhua.
Kinda…. you know… Petty?
 
thanks
Submitted by thom adams on August 17, 2015 – 11:25am
There are a few real people out there, and “playwithengines” happens to be one of them. It seems that most of the rest of the commentors here on this thread have de-valued Psychology today enough that it no longer can be respected as anything other than tripe.
(see Cosmopolitan)
To the haters, thank you for all the negative comments as those who have shown their true ilk. I thrive off of your puny smoke and mirrors… you help me realize I’m on the right track.
The article:
 
and you know who you are … cause you can’t go far… baybeee!
Advertisements