Warning: Jackchit threatens Gravy!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not Potsie

Ralph Malph

This loose change situation has reached a critical point:


Time to fire up the railcars to take Dylan and his friends to those large camps that we have been setting up in the remote corners of the nation.

Everyone, remember:

XB Calico 42 Creek

Meet at the usual place and remember

Tubal Cane
 
Well, this has been an interesting read. Thanks for your support, all.
 
Ironically, I was threatened on a forum the other day by a twoofer. He actually told me my, "days are numbered." I reported him, and let him know that I did. Of course, he then back peddled and said that the globalists I support are the ones whose days are numbered, or some such nonsense. It was a really strange experience. I realize that the, "internet buffer" allows many (including myself, at times) to be smarmy and down right rude in some instances, but I have never become so frustrated that I considered threatening someones life. But to even go as far as to actually say something in public about it... It's completely beyond me.

As I was reading this thread I really couldn't help but further entertain a notion that occurred to me some time ago. This isn't about truth for twoofers. This has become a sojourn to be right. Are we, as skeptics of the conspiracy theory, to blame? Have we provided twoofers with a tangible enemy for them to fight, since the faceless NWO is so out of reach? I can't help but think that yes, in a sense, that could be the case. I've been called a "shill", a "disinfo agent", even a "murderer." Seeing this pathetic display of yet more passive aggressive posturing by twoofers really has solidified this notion for me.

As others have suggested, the guy is obviously all talk, but to see the support that he has, and to see them all fall into line and condone said threat in the form of advice and placation... wow... I'm at a loss.

The "truth" movement is a Cult.
 
Gravy said:
Well, this has been an interesting read. Thanks for your support, all.
Click to expand...

I really don't know how you maintain such patience with these people, Mark. I guess that's what makes you such a great ambassador for the truth.

This whole situation really does present a great bit of irony:

The twoofers claim to be bravely fighting against a massive, evil, government that is willing to murder its own citizens in order to silence dissent and introduce a police state....and yet who is the target of death threats? Those who challenge the brave truthseekers of course!
 
munki? said:
Ironically, I was threatened on a forum the other day by a twoofer. He actually told me my, "days are numbered." I reported him, and let him know that I did. Of course, he then back peddled and said that the globalists I support are the ones whose days are numbered, or some such nonsense. It was a really strange experience. I realize that the, "internet buffer" allows many (including myself, at times) to be smarmy and down right rude in some instances, but I have never become so frustrated that I considered threatening someones life. But to even go as far as to actually say something in public about it... It's completely beyond me.

As I was reading this thread I really couldn't help but further entertain a notion that occurred to me some time ago. This isn't about truth for twoofers. This has become a sojourn to be right. Are we, as skeptics of the conspiracy theory, to blame? Have we provided twoofers with a tangible enemy for them to fight, since the faceless NWO is so out of reach? I can't help but think that yes, in a sense, that could be the case. I've been called a "shill", a "disinfo agent", even a "murderer." Seeing this pathetic display of yet more passive aggressive posturing by twoofers really has solidified this notion for me.

As others have suggested, the guy is obviously all talk, but to see the support that he has, and to see them all fall into line and condone said threat in the form of advice and placation... wow... I'm at a loss.

The "truth" movement is a Cult.
Click to expand...

I agree with you here. The creepiest thing for me was not the threat in itself - as you and many have pointed out, these are quite common on teh internetz. The thing that bothered me the most was how there was little objection from anyone on LCF, most notably Dylan, rejecting this course of action. It finally took some random moderator to close down the freakshow before it got even more horrendous.
 
John Blonn said:
I agree with you here. The creepiest thing for me was not the threat in itself - as you and many have pointed out, these are quite common on teh internetz. The thing that bothered me the most was how there was little objection from anyone on LCF, most notably Dylan, rejecting this course of action. It finally took some random moderator to close down the freakshow before it got even more horrendous.
Click to expand...
Indeed. Avery and Quest both posted there.

If I had a nickel for every time a Looser said he was going to meet me at Ground Zero, I'd have...several nickels.

Mr. Holmes (Jackchit), if you are in fact traveling to New York City in the next few months, I would very much like to talk to you in person. Email me first, because I am seldom at Ground Zero these days. You have my email address.
 
Since the entire jref forum membership has been threatened, jref itself might have legal standing to request that Invisionfree take action against LC.
 
boloboffin said:
There. Fixed that for you.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree with you, boloboffin. It wasn't a matter of "busybodies", nor a matter of "unintended consequences", nor a matter of Rawkarma engaging in "self-serving conscience salv[ing]." It appears from your posts in this thread that you have presumed facts not in evidence, that you have accepted unsubstantiated assumptions as facts, and that you have leapt to conclusions without any basis in fact, even while you have purported to chastise others for committing the same (or lesser) errors. I suspect that you'll recognize that when you think about it.

As for the question of whether jackchit's posts are "threats" against Mark in the legal sense, yes, they are. There is very little question about that, frankly.

But I suspect that Mark will deal with that and will deal with the likes of the lunatic "jackchit" on his own terms and I suspect that he is not the least bit intimidated by the crackpot loser at issue ("jackchit"). That is not to say that he ought not or does not take personal threats by troofers seriously - he should. Particularly given the cult mentality of some troofers and the blind adherence to the cult that many of them portray.
 
Last edited:
Kopji said:
Since the entire jref forum membership has been threatened, jref itself might have legal standing to request that Invisionfree take action against LC.
Click to expand...

In a word, no.
 
Metullus said:
Originally Posted by Donnie Most@LC
I bought a gun nearly a year ago, and haven't been able to use it outside the shooting range. If you or Jack Chit aren't merely making cowardly, empty keyboard threats, PM for my address.
Click to expand...
WTF?
Click to expand...

:(

the reason that 911truthers are more dangerous than other CTers is because their delusions have profound implications on the expectations of their very futures. these are folk that, if sucked into the CT completely, honestly believe in the NWO and illuminati stealing their rights and ways of life. anyone that actually believes that such will occur is dangerous, because this predicted future is certainly something worth fighting against.

and that's why religious fanatics are amazingly dangerous. they are taking orders from god. who cares what goes on here compared to the duty to god? it's a scary mindset, and the threats that these folks make are very real, and sometimes acted upon.

i don't suspect that any of the 911 truthers are going to actually shoot anyone, but i'd certainly feel much better had the threat come from someone whose membership wasn't to a CT that necessarily exacts such serious implications on their preceived future.

did anyone here initially report this fellow to SS? i don't like the idea of reporting anyone to SS, but i must admit i'm torn on the issue. this fellow's previous rants do come across as ****ing crazy as all ****ing hell-- especially the "god removing obsticles" part.

regardless, if someone here did report him to the SS, i think they should acknowledge such. i'd also suggest apologizing, and attempting to explain to JC that the reporting was due to serious concerns, and not simply some attempt to **** with a 911truther. JC has assumed nefarious intent, and i don't blame him for being pissed, but perhaps a serious conversation could help him to, at the very least, understand why the SS arguably should have been called. most of us are completely anonymous to the truthers anyways, so if any of us did report him to the SS, i doubt we'd have to worry about anyone knocking on our doors.

while i think 911truthers are delusional, i don't think we should encourage this sort of situation. i think this seriously ups the risk of otherwise stable folk falling off the deep end. this could be interpreted as a "line in the sand", so-to-speak, for some otherwise rational folk, that may eventually have come to their senses.

for the sake of those that have simply bought into the lies perpetuated by those that ought to know better, as well as for the sake of gravy, i think-- IF anyone here reported JC to SS-- an acknowledgement ought to be made, followed by a sincere apology/explaination. and again, i wouldn't blame any of you for reporting JC... i was/am torn on the issue myself.

i'll go first: not it!
 
Kopji said:
Since the entire jref forum membership has been threatened, jref itself might have legal standing to request that Invisionfree take action against LC.
Click to expand...

that would just piss them off more.

some of those folk are never going to change their minds, but many may. i know my goals have always been to present counter argument so that otherwise rational folk don't wander down an empty road.

i'd suggest we ignore/make fun of the loons, but continue to do our best to point out LC's lies for the sake of the "on the fence" folk that keep joining up.
 
OMGturt1es said:
:(
....
IF anyone here reported JC to SS-- an acknowledgement ought to be made, followed by a sincere apology/explaination. and again, i wouldn't blame any of you for reporting JC... i was/am torn on the issue myself.

i'll go first: not it!
Click to expand...

Wasn't me. I was against the whole thing from the start.

I for one welcome JackChit's enlightened reign of terror over all who seek to protect children from loonies and Gravy in particular who sets a very poor role model for spiritual leaders everywhere.

(the above post is sarcasm. You can't be too careful these days)
 
OMGturt1es said:
for the sake of those that have simply bought into the lies perpetuated by those that ought to know better, as well as for the sake of gravy, i think-- IF anyone here reported JC to SS-- an acknowledgement ought to be made, followed by a sincere apology/explaination. and again, i wouldn't blame any of you for reporting JC... i was/am torn on the issue myself.
Click to expand...

Don't confuse the issue.

If JackChit or whatever his name is thinks whatever happened to him (supposing it really did, and he's not just reacting to the mere mention of social services) was illegal, treacherous, or just plain rude, he can take recourse in a mature fashion.

What we're discussing here is that he issued a credible and unambiguous death threat against a single, easily identified individual. That's it. He's responsible for his actions. All this other stuff is irrelevant.

As we expect him to conduct himself in a mature fashion, we should endeavor to do the same. But this is just common courtesy and civilized behavior. It has nothing to do with his actions.
 
R.Mackey said:
As we expect him to conduct himself in a mature fashion, we should endeavor to do the same. But this is just common courtesy and civilized behavior. It has nothing to do with his actions.
Click to expand...

I totally agree.

As for Jackchit, he's just a **** ******* ***** with a ****** small ***** *** which should be *** *** painted with a green stripe and rammed **** ***** sideways ****** volvo axel grease ***** while singing the National ********* Anthem and eating **** ****** with a chocolate ***** so that he never ****** ****** again, even **** ****** with a flower in his ****.

I feel better now. :D
 
uk_dave said:
I totally agree.

As for Jackchit, he's just a **** ******* ***** with a ****** small ***** *** which should be *** *** painted with a green stripe and rammed **** ***** sideways ****** volvo axel grease ***** while singing the National ********* Anthem and eating **** ****** with a chocolate ***** so that he never ****** ****** again, even **** ****** with a flower in his ****.

I feel better now. :D
Click to expand...

I was hoping, as I read your tirade, that you would include volvo axle grease. I'm quite glad to see that you did.
 
OMGturt1es said:
for the sake of those that have simply bought into the lies perpetuated by those that ought to know better, as well as for the sake of gravy, i think-- IF anyone here reported JC to SS-- an acknowledgement ought to be made, followed by a sincere apology/explaination. and again, i wouldn't blame any of you for reporting JC... i was/am torn on the issue myself.

i'll go first: not it!
Click to expand...
No. If someone here actually did it, they should not "out" themselves, nor should they try to provide explanation, justification or apologication (couldn't help myself). It would not help the situation (if there is one apart from the discussion) in any way, and if the guy is truly nutty enough to get violent it would only provide confirmation that the evil JREFers are responsible. It was made apparent during the thread on LCF that these people don't care whether or not Gravy is the one who made the supposed report - they like the idea of violence against him based simply on his effective opposition to their theories.

Jackchit provides a perfect example for why anonymous tips should remain anonymous. If he is serious then he'd go after anyone he feels is "against" him, whether they took real action or not. Giving such a nutbar the person who actually took action (assuming there is one, of course) could only inflame him further.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom