Skip to main content

The meaning of Homeland Security and FEMA's 'CLASSIFIED'

Tim: shit!

Jane: OMG!

ed: Haha. Hilarious. Nice trick. One can see right through the actual intention of this speech.

To keep saying 'classified' instead of naming the actual evil gets the masses to start coming up with lots of theories as to what evils they are to be visited by and hence further increase the general sense of fear.

This would not be as much the case if those evils were named as that would actually narrow one's fears, increase the masses' sense of control, and lessen fear amongst the masses. That in turn reduces the masses subservience to the elite.

The control of the people is best effected via the control of their vocabulary. For in the latter, limits are imposed on the attention and understanding of reality, and through it, their susceptibility to control and manipulation.

By the way, we need more discussion, analysis and understanding of situations instead of 'shit' and 'omg' which amounts to nothing other than incredulity. This 'shit' and 'omg' responses can be likened to the Orwellian 'Newspeak' where the reduction of vocabulary and abridging of expression leads to a reduction in thought. The latter just plays into the hands of the elite.  The control of the people is best done so via the control of their vocabulary, for in the latter limits are imposed on the attention and understanding of reality.



  1. Clear evident of how politicians use language to dominate politics and the people. Like you said, instead of calling out what the actual evil is, it allows the people to start conjuring up images of their worst fear and thus making them most vulnerable and susceptible to control.


Post a Comment

The Inquisitive venture is a collaborative one. Let's collaborate.

Ad hominem is fine so long as it is accompanied with an argument, as opposed to being confused for an argument. In the latter case, deletion will follow.

Popular posts from this blog

Is singapore a tyranny, or are people to dumbed down to feel it?

The following is a consideration of the perspective posted at the site, 'article14'. The site, in discussing the so-called 'Black Sunday movement' whose members wear black and congregate at Starbucks - perhaps they have an unstated desire to boost Starbucks sales of overpriced beverages, or perhaps Starbucks is paying for their black garments...silly people - to express their support for the freedom of expression - brought up certain points that seem to be commonly held by the 'singaporeans' of today.

Manifesto Against Same-Sex Marriages and Homo-Promotion

My stand against homosexuality is based on the following.  It is a logical, rather than a personal, decision.

Under the slogan, 'the freedom to love', it in principle justifies incestuous, group, etc, marriages.  All it requires is 'consenting adults', without an inquiry into what it means to be an 'adult' in intelligent, moral, and introspective terms.

This in turn encourages a ‘go with your feel’ tendency, which in itself gives rise a myriad of tendencies that go unquestioned.  Right and wrong ceases to matter, and even if something is illegal, one can still view it as society just having its own bias against it, just as it once had a ‘bias’ against homosexuality.

‘Nothing is natural.  Everything is just a matter of preference.’  That is the basic thrust of this unfortunate situation.  In fact, having a preference is in itself seen as evidence of one’s intelligence.  No attention needs to be paid to intellectuals, thinkers, philosophers, sages, religious te…