Re: Usenet Servers going Anti-Truth/Faith-Based

Once again and again, of each and every time I take a look-see at
whatever turns up with a public search of topics and replies by 'Brad
Guth', and then using the GOOGLE "Sorted by date" function, whereas lo
and behold, there's good old insider Fart Deco's original reply
sticking itself on top of the usenet index stack, of what's clearly
robo/insider usenet functioning as per usual, placing those pesky
ulterior motivations and hidden agendas of others on top of the search
stack, forcing the snookered and easily dumbfounded public and news
media bozos to perceive that only his outdated robo reply is what
matters. Of course, this silly brown-nosed and very Jewish clown
tactic only proves that I'm right, and in far more ways than I've thus
far discovered. Even "Phineas T Puddleduck" offers us another good
example of a usenet rusemaster in action, as having been doing exactly
what I've said from the very get-go, of topic/author stalking and
having added their usual cesspool news group(s) in for good measure.

Besides the likes of mailgate.org being totally news obstructive, as
otherwise being client specific filtered and/or as having so often
excluded most all that rocks their public infomercial spewing boat, as
further proof/evidence of these ulterior motives and hidden agendas
imposed by those in charge of keeping their mainstream status quo lids
on tight, and of that which keeps their grand ruse/sting of the
century in full swing, I offer:

Discussion subject changed to "EVIDENCE: Re: Usenet Servers going Anti-
Truth/Faith-Based" by Art Deco

These mainstream status quo rusemasters also pounced upon "How Did the
Universe Survive the Big Bang?" as having been renamed a dozen times,
and only worse off hijackings imposed upon my topics. See for
yourself how many times an original topic gets hijacked by getting
renamed and/or by way of getting dragged into cesspool groups of
clowns taking an extra bite. Since Usenet insiders/controllers have
intentionally provided this hijacking capability, and having sustained
and even rewarded it usage, as their status quo norm of damage
control, is why there's little chance of honest folks sharing much of
anything that matters to the public that's not willing to filter out
the gauntlet of mainstream flak that's without question far more faith-
based and/or politically motivated then not.

Most topic renaming has been intentionally made so extensive that it
totally obscures and/or skews whatever the original author intended.
This clown tactic is not by any mistake, nor is it being addressed by
those Usenet insiders capable of having prevented such actions by
anyone other than the originating author (if even allowing that much).

I foolishly wish usenet folks (the good, the bad and the downright
ugly) would stop such hijacking by way of their renaming these topics,
as it's bad enough our having been topic/author stalked and bashed
without our having to continually search for the original topic or
otherwise having to deal with their special Usenet cesspool groups
(such as alt.fan.art-bell and alt.usenet.kooks) that have nothing but
ulterior motives and hidden agendas to offer.

These individuals or rather borg collectives of mostly Old Testament
or some other faith-based and/or political skewed mindset continually
claim as being total atheist and otherwise without any political or
big business affiliations, but we all honestly know for a bloody fact
that's a lie, and otherwise we know that these topic/author stalking
folks are more or less official government spooks/moles or having been
working on behalf of such without an honest speck of remorse, whereas
most having been so dishonest that they simply do not exist as real
people (more so as anti-truth and otherwise somewhat sleeper cell or
cult worthy, I'd say).

Notice how your Usenet index of whatever's search/topic that's "Sort
by relevance" (such as a search for: Brad Guth) and otherwise as
"Sorted by date" are usually skewed far away from what's honestly the
case, with typically a full page or more that's offering so much other
orchestrated infomercial crapolla, that sticks no matters what else
gets posted, as their insider stuff stays on top of that search index
stack. In other words, usenet is very much humanly moderated in a
highly biased favor of their having promoted and/or sustained
whatever's their faith-based or political agenda of the day.

As far as I can tell, there's absolutely nothing fair or otherwise
honest or even balanced about usenet, that is unless you're one of
those that happen to think what the Third Reich had going was fair.
If you're thinking or otherwise suggesting MI/NSA isn't a very big
part of usenet, then you're either a bigger fool of a dumbfounded
village idiot, or you're actually one of them.
-
Brad Guth

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: It was fun while it lasted
    ... USENET is to add spaces in the newsgroups header. ... originating from there, right off the top, and then upscoring the ... The spaces breaks the generation of the ...
    (alt.guitar)
  • Re: Looking for a little saw advice
    ... Most of the mountain of SPAM in usenet is ... originating from Google/gmail. ...
    (alt.home.repair)
  • Re: Moon landings were a hoax
    ... address topics related to the moon nor that of Venus because of your ... impose an honest question, and much less contribute by way of an honest ... Since USENET remains under the command and at ... of such having absolute loads of vertical differentials as well ...
    (rec.aviation.military)
  • Usenet Servers going Anti-Truth/Faith-Based
    ... Is it simply because us few honest folks don't happen to like our ... How the hell can the likes of Scott Miller close out and/or banish a ... That "low wit parrot" of a pesky Mafia factor is something deeply rooted ... within Usenet, and it's being run rather nicely as a faith-based black ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Experimental collaboration
    ... I am basically honest and I used the word 'know' in that instance to ... reason why it would be probable. ... criticism, Usenet was not, and never would be, my first choice. ...
    (uk.culture.arts.writing)