New Info on David Geftakys

[skeptic]

Maybe we can cut a deal with Edna and get some of our money back.

Margaret, Great that you wrote.  Hope the message gets through to Edna.

Marcia
Dave S. and TomM

Recently I was with a group of people and a couple of us were conversing with a brother about his Mum's poor health.  Another person entered the room and asked "Wow, what kind of flowers are those?" or something like that.  That killed the conversation and started another about the beautiful flowers.  I was very ticked off because I really did not care how beautiful the flowers were, I was more interested in listening to the brother tell us about his mother.  I did not show my anger at the time, but if I had, it would have been pathetic if I got exhorted for getting angry rather than exhort the person who had been rude.

Tom, sorry to have to say this, but it has been happening for a while now.  We have a discussion going on, and you remain offline.  Then all of a sudden you don't just enter in, but rather you tend to butt in with some sort of related comment to educate or exhort us.  The discussion goes off on a side track, which is very frustrating, and we are all supposed to keep our cool and be impressed with your wisdom.  Then one loses it, and the one who loses it gets exhorted for losing it.  IMO your behaviour is more GG-like than the one who loses it is.  This all reminds me of how the local LBs deal with 'issues'.  Maybe there is some of the LB mentality still residing deep within.  Something to consider anyway.

Respectfully,
Marcia

aha!  You're wearing your properly contructed AFDB I see!! 

So, in order to clarify what you said above, do you mean the following?

Brent brought to everyone's attention that David G. had publicly stated that he was in the process of getting a Fillipina bride.

Skeptic said that we should wait to find out if it was legit or not, and not to worry too much about Edna, as she probably had other men better suited to her purposes.  (Finding an American husabnd)

Tom stepped in and changed the subject by saying,  "Unless you know more than the rest of US, this is slander."  Tom was analogous to the one who changed the topic to flowers.

Skeptic got ticked off and then, instead of Tom being taken to task for changing the subject arbitrarily, skeptic was exhorted for what he said.

Is this right? <Dave, ignore the clear attempt at communication here.  You have nothing to learn, but much to teach others>

Does the AFDB help, or what!!

[M2]

aha!  You're wearing your properly contructed AFDB I see!! 

So, in order to clarify what you said above, do you mean the following?

Brent brought to everyone's attention that David G. had publicly stated that he was in the process of getting a Fillipina bride.

Skeptic said that we should wait to find out if it was legit or not, and not to worry too much about Edna, as she probably had other men better suited to her purposes.  (Finding an American husabnd)

Tom stepped in and changed the subject by saying,  "Unless you know more than the rest of US, this is slander."  Tom was analogous to the one who changed the topic to flowers.

Skeptic got ticked off and then, instead of Tom being taken to task for changing the subject arbitrarily, skeptic was exhorted for what he said.

Is this right? <Dave, ignore the clear attempt at communication here.  You have nothing to learn, but much to teach others>

Does the AFDB help, or what!!

To quote from "My Fair lady"
By jove, s/he's got it!!

Lady Edna might be good for DavidG.  A new kind of bondage where someone else controls him and his resources for the benefit of Edna's family.

"I want to live in America."

Got to go.
Marcia

[vernecarty]

Maybe we can cut a deal with Edna and get some of our money back.

I think this has real possibilities! 

Tom, sorry to have to say this, but it has been happening for a while now.  We have a discussion going on, and you remain offline.  Then all of a sudden you don't just enter in, but rather you tend to butt in with some sort of related comment to educate or exhort us.  The discussion goes off on a side track, which is very frustrating, and we are all supposed to keep our cool and be impressed with your wisdom.  Then one loses it, and the one who loses it gets exhorted for losing it.  IMO your behaviour is more GG-like than the one who loses it is.  This all reminds me of how the local LBs deal with 'issues'.  Maybe there is some of the LB mentality still residing deep within.  Something to consider anyway.

Respectfully,
Marcia

I think it is safe to say that many of us who were in any way influenced by George Geftakys developed the unhealthy and ungracious habit of looking down our noses at others, particularly other Christians.
It has been one of the hardest things for me to deal with. I have learned, that even when I think I may be better instructed than others on some particular topic, it may well be far more gracious to keep my mouth shut. This is certainly one of the more valuable lessons of my BB participation. 
Verne

[outdeep]

Dave S. and TomM

Recently I was with a group of people and a couple of us were conversing with a brother about his Mum's poor health.  Another person entered the room and asked "Wow, what kind of flowers are those?" or something like that.  That killed the conversation and started another about the beautiful flowers.  I was very ticked off because I really did not care how beautiful the flowers were, I was more interested in listening to the brother tell us about his mother.  I did not show my anger at the time, but if I had, it would have been pathetic if I got exhorted for getting angry rather than exhort the person who had been rude.

Tom, sorry to have to say this, but it has been happening for a while now.  We have a discussion going on, and you remain offline.  Then all of a sudden you don't just enter in, but rather you tend to butt in with some sort of related comment to educate or exhort us.  The discussion goes off on a side track, which is very frustrating, and we are all supposed to keep our cool and be impressed with your wisdom.  Then one loses it, and the one who loses it gets exhorted for losing it.  IMO your behaviour is more GG-like than the one who loses it is.  This all reminds me of how the local LBs deal with 'issues'.  Maybe there is some of the LB mentality still residing deep within.  Something to consider anyway.

Respectfully,
Marcia

You forgot the part where you turned to the woman who changed the subject and said, "You are the stupidest person in this room.  You should wear a colander on your head to get some brain cells working."  I wish you just said, "yes, the flowers are nice, but getting back to mum . . ."

[Mark C.]

  To Marcia and Skeptic:

   I would like to offer a testimonial, of sorts, as regards the use of of the metal helmet; and just to show how well it is working, I will not jump into this conversation via my former "malady" of moderating without sufficient knowledge.

   I am a little concerned about wearing the helmet, however, as we have had some lightning strikes in the area and wonder if it might not be dangerous?

  Folks have looked at me funny out in public, but I continue secure in the knowledge that the mind controlling rays are not getting through!

  I took the helmet off for a moment (how else can I wash my hair?) and when I did an ol' Country Western song by Tex Ritter came back to mind, "My Fillipino Baby", but when I put the helmet back on I knew that the BB would not be the place to share the lyrics!

                                           God Bless,  Mark C.

   

[M2]

You forgot the part where you turned to the woman who changed the subject and said, "You are the stupidest person in this room.  You should wear a colander on your head to get some brain cells working."  I wish you just said, "yes, the flowers are nice, but getting back to mum . . ."

This is exactly the problem Dave.  You have this superior attitude hence you cannot relate to us mere fallibles.

We all have a history on this BB Dave.  Do you think that I would not have taken that route had it been possible?  When does something get frustrating?  Clue, think back to your assembly days.  A 'reaction' is usually because of history.

Consider even the Biblical method.  First you attempt to talk to the individual.  Then take 2 or 3 witnesses.  Then...   The approach is based on the past history of how things have gone before.

Dave, you are so serious.  You make something that could be funny sound so terrible.  Lighten up and laugh a bit.

Marcia

  To Marcia and Skeptic:

   I would like to offer a testimonial, of sorts, as regards the use of of the metal helmet; and just to show how well it is working, I will not jump into this conversation via my former "malady" of moderating without sufficient knowledge.

   I am a little concerned about wearing the helmet, however, as we have had some lightning strikes in the area and wonder if it might not be dangerous?

  Folks have looked at me funny out in public, but I continue secure in the knowledge that the mind controlling rays are not getting through!

  I took the helmet off for a moment (how else can I wash my hair?) and when I did an ol' Country Western song by Tex Ritter came back to mind, "My Fillipino Baby", but when I put the helmet back on I knew that the BB would not be the place to share the lyrics!

                                           God Bless,  Mark C.

Mark,

In a previous post I only used you to illustrate a point.  I honestly feel that you make a good effort to be up to date as much as it is possible for you to be.

Now that you have a beanie, all you need is a set of alumeyes and you can change the tune to "I can see clearly now".

Have fun.

Blessings,
Marcia

[skeptic]

To Marcia and Skeptic:

 I would like to offer a testimonial, of sorts, as regards the use of of the metal helmet; and just to show how well it is working, I will not jump into this conversation via my former "malady" of moderating without sufficient knowledge.

 I am a little concerned about wearing the helmet, however, as we have had some lightning strikes in the area and wonder if it might not be dangerous?

 Folks have looked at me funny out in public, but I continue secure in the knowledge that the mind controlling rays are not getting through!

 I took the helmet off for a moment (how else can I wash my hair?) and when I did an ol' Country Western song by Tex Ritter came back to mind, "My Fillipino Baby", but when I put the helmet back on I knew that the BB would not be the place to share the lyrics!

 God Bless, Mark C.

Good points Mark,

Lightning:
Are AFDBs dangerous to wear during lightning storms? The risk of being struck by lightning has more to do with where you are than what you are wearing. An AFDB -- or any metallic object in your immediate possession -- may increase your chances of being hit, but that increase is negligible compared to the increase chance due to being in a area at high lightning strike risk. In other words, if you are standing on a hill in a lightning storm you're in danger no matter what you are wearing. AFDB bedecked people in lightning-safe areas are at no more immediate, measurable risk than their mind control-addled neighbors. In fact, people without AFDBs during lightning storms are at higher long-term risk for the following reasons:

Any psychotronic signals that they are receiving may be altered by the electrical fields of the storm causing them to behave erratically -- possibly violently -- putting themselves at risk for personal injury.
A mind control agent could issue them commands that cause them to step into the storm, putting themselves at risk of lightning strike.
If the lightning storm is very destructive, FEMA agents may arrive on the scene (with portable psychotrons in tow) to assess damage and psychotronically inculcate dependency and submission to the Federal Father in any unAFDBed victims.

[Mark C.]

Dear SS!

 (note: the use of this abbrev. in no way is meant to send a hidden controlled beta vibe suggesting Sceptic is a Nazi.)


   Your clear thinking skills and grip on the technicals surrounding the phenomena of mind control have been a great blessing to me.

   Since I seem to be getting such great answers on all my questions re. this from you (your explanation on "the danger of lightning strikes" was a great relief to me).

1.)   Could you please elaborate a little on the "serious lightning strike" issue where "FEMA" appears on site in the role of a Father?
  I understood it perfectly, but I'm sure there are those who might have been confused and need some history in order to understand the proper context of your comments.

2.)  I heard you mention to Dave that while wearing the helmet we should also be drinking some "warm prune juice."

    I put my thinking cap on (literally) and the thought came to mind that this is intended to purge out from the body any remnants of mind controlling substances, but am wondering how this helps one's thinking.

3.) Marcia mentioned wearing the aluminum piece over the eyes, but I have great difficulty while driving (I'm a truck driver) with these.  I received some strange looks from the cops at the Chicken coops (weigh stations), but as they are used to seeing strange things they only shook their heads. (what do they know!)

   Well, I guess I'll leave it at three questions, because 2 aren't enough and 4 are too many.

                   God bless you and your ministry,   Mark C.

[outdeep]

Dave, you are so serious.  You make something that could be funny sound so terrible.  Lighten up and laugh a bit.

Marcia

OK, OK.  I do indeed see the humor in the worn-out aluminum beanie joke.  Maybe for next time the better thing to say would be, "Hey, Tom and Dave.  Lighten up.  We're only joking around.  We understand that Tom just read the post wrong" instead of continuing to heap insults, screwing around with my profile, and attempting to blame Tom for the ruckus even though he hasn't even participated in the discussion since his original post.

[skeptic]

Dear SS!

 (note: the use of this abbrev. in no way is meant to send a hidden controlled beta vibe suggesting Sceptic is a Nazi.)


 Your clear thinking skills and grip on the technicals surrounding the phenomena of mind control have been a great blessing to me.

 Since I seem to be getting such great answers on all my questions re. this from you (your explanation on "the danger of lightning strikes" was a great relief to me).

1.) Could you please elaborate a little on the "serious lightning strike" issue where "FEMA" appears on site in the role of a Father?
 I understood it perfectly, but I'm sure there are those who might have been confused and need some history in order to understand the proper context of your comments.

2.) I heard you mention to Dave that while wearing the helmet we should also be drinking some "warm prune juice."

 I put my thinking cap on (literally) and the thought came to mind that this is intended to purge out from the body any remnants of mind controlling substances, but am wondering how this helps one's thinking.

3.) Marcia mentioned wearing the aluminum piece over the eyes, but I have great difficulty while driving (I'm a truck driver) with these. I received some strange looks from the cops at the Chicken coops (weigh stations), but as they are used to seeing strange things they only shook their heads. (what do they know!)

 Well, I guess I'll leave it at three questions, because 2 aren't enough and 4 are too many.

 God bless you and your ministry, Mark C.

Clear thinking Mark,

A couple of hints:

Protection for eyes, ears, etc.  Really, this one is a "no-brainer."  The eyes and ears are gateways to the mind, and by covering them, we can insure that no outside influence can enter our minds.  Of course, they may be uncovered for short periods, as necessary, but should remain covered when not in use.

Coins.  Many coins are actually amplifiers for Psychotronic signals, with the exception of Canadian coins. Modern paper currency, with the "stip" imbedded, are also  Psychotronic signal enhancers.  Try to get paid in all copper, or old paper money, whenever possible.

FEMA.  Please note that they don't come on the scene in the role of father, but as AGENTS OF FEDERAL FATHER.  They pump out psychotronic commands in order to get everyone more dependent after the disaster.  We see right through them, however.

Prune juice.  Plenty of people would make a strong argument that this one should be number 2.  Nevertheless, many psychotronic commands are seemingly harmless...or are they?  Ever wonder why diet soda is popular?  Slim Jim's?  Starburst?   Many of the commands are simply to get the unshielded people to eat junk food.....that is laced with silicon dioxide....that enhances susceptibility to psychotronic mind control.  This creates grumpy, stodgy, people, and darn near guarantees they will remain oblivious to the effects of PMC, even with a beanie on.  The mind may be secure, but the body continues to receive PBC (Psychotronic Body Control)  A person who has consumed the government approved food, drank the government approved water, carried the government minted coins.....well, they don't stand a chance.

However, if such a person  wears a beanie, and purges the body of Psychotronic enhancing residue....they stand a good chance at being able to see the Big Picture.  (BP)

All of this serves very well to explain why people behave in the ways that they do, especially one's who can't see themselves as they really are.

S'sS

[skeptic]

OK, OK. I do indeed see the humor in the worn-out aluminum beanie joke. Maybe for next time the better thing to say would be, "Hey, Tom and Dave. Lighten up. We're only joking around. We understand that Tom just read the post wrong" instead of continuing to heap insults, screwing around with my profile, and attempting to blame Tom for the ruckus even though he hasn't even participated in the discussion since his original post.

Dave, if you're using a worn out beanie, it may not be fully shielding you, although I can see that it is helping.  Use the prune juice as well, and really think about contructing a new beanie, or buying one on Ebay.

Just to set the record straight, Tom hasn't participated in the thread, so I was attempting to blame the person who had been.....you.   You may not remember, due to the PMC.

Again, just to refresh your memory, you stated that I implied that a certain woman was a slut, entertaining multilple boyfriends.  That's pretty rude, especially in light of the fact that I did no such thing.  You read that into my post, <this halfway admission is good enough, do not, under any circumstances issue a real apology>    in a manner that can only be explained by the fact that you are reading the PHTML code, and obeying it's commands.

Here's my testimony:

I used to see myself as a handsome guy, wearing a blue hat, with a really nice mustache.  It turns out that I was actually a raving lunatic, hard-wired with Geftakys installed psychotronic hardware, and merely perceived myself as the dapper fellow!  You can see both versions of the OLD me in my avatar.
S'sS

[M2]

OK, OK.  I do indeed see the humor in the worn-out aluminum beanie joke.  Maybe for next time the better thing to say would be, "Hey, Tom and Dave.  Lighten up.  We're only joking around.  We understand that Tom just read the post wrong" instead of continuing to heap insults, screwing around with my profile, and attempting to blame Tom for the ruckus even though he hasn't even participated in the discussion since his original post.

Re. "Maybe for next time the better thing to say would be,..."
Chances are that we'll end up doing it our individual way and not your way, so I hope you won't be disappointed.

Re. "attempting to blame Tom for the ruckus even though he hasn't even participated in the discussion since his original post."
IMO you present quite a twisted perspective of the events.  The fact that Tom's involvement was minimal in this discussion does not change the fact of the effect of his comment that started this, and the effect that comments by him, and some others, have in sidetracking a perfectly good discussion.


There is another matter.  This is a list of the top ten posters:

Brent T  1620
VerneCarty  1536
al Hartman, aka Weird al  1280
Marcia  1064
Tom Maddux  1034
Joe Sperling  805
Arthur  801
Mark C.  771
David Mauldin  651
Dave Sable  575

There are a couple in the list that never apologize, or at least I cannot remember that they have, could be oldstimers.  Most of us fallibles make mistakes and offend and misunderstand others and then we apologize, but some just don't.  The BB, and life in general, is an opportunity for learning and growing don't you think?  Local LBs (my broken record ) are like that, in that they'll preach about forgive and forget rather than apologize and admit that they have made an error in judgement.

Marcia

[skeptic]

Re. "Maybe for next time the better thing to say would be,..."
Chances are that we'll end up doing it our individual way and not your way, so I hope you won't be disappointed.

Re. "attempting to blame Tom for the ruckus even though he hasn't even participated in the discussion since his original post."
IMO you present quite a twisted perspective of the events.  The fact that Tom's involvement was minimal in this discussion does not change the fact of the effect of his comment that started this, and the effect that comments by him, and some others, have in sidetracking a perfectly good discussion.


There is another matter.  This is a list of the top ten posters:

Brent T  1620
VerneCarty  1536
al Hartman, aka Weird al  1280
Marcia  1064
Tom Maddux  1034
Joe Sperling  805
Arthur  801
Mark C.  771
David Mauldin  651
Dave Sable  575

There are a couple in the list that never apologize, or at least I cannot remember that they have, could be oldstimers.  Most of us fallibles make mistakes and offend and misunderstand others and then we apologize, but some just don't.  The BB, and life in general, is an opportunity for learning and growing don't you think?  Local LBs (my broken record ) are like that, in that they'll preach about forgive and forget before they apologize and admit that they have made an error in judgement.

Marcia

Marcia,

You wrote:

There are a couple in the list that never apologize, or at least I cannot remember that they have, could be oldstimers. 

To an unshielded person it looks like this:  (due to PHTML)

There are a couple in the list  <I am not one of those, in fact I'm not even on the list.  This doesn't apply to me.>  that never apologize, or at least I cannot remember that they have, could be oldstimers. 

[Oscar]

Marcia,

You said,

IMO your behaviour is more GG-like than the one who loses it is.  This all reminds me of how the local LBs deal with 'issues'.  Maybe there is some of the LB mentality still residing deep within.  Something to consider anyway.

Respectfully,
Marcia

Our anonymous "Skeptic's Skeptic" made a comment this young woman "servicing" other men.

Without going into detail, most folks with my background would understand that to mean that he/she/it was calling her a whore.

That, admittedly, could be the case.  However, many of these girls are victims of a hideously evil system.  They have been brutalized by a culture in which little girls are sold to whoremongers who then rent their bodies to perverts who travel all the way to places like Thailand and the Philippines to have sex with children.  Edna might well be a victim of this system.

She also could be an opportunistic girl who, like thousands of others, is willing to trade her services as a "wife" to some wealthy American for a few years in exchange for a chance to live in the USA, and perhaps to also bring family members over as well.

For some of these girls, this is the only opportunity they see.  Their physical attractiveness to men is their only "asset".  They lack education or family connections, and see this as a way out of a dirt floor existence.  

As sad as this is, it hardly amounts to being a whore.

Finally, the way I was brought up, decent folks just don't go around calling girls whores.  If thinking that way means I have residual leading brotherism....then I guess just about all the people I have ever known have it too.

Thomas Maddux

[M2]

Tom, that is why I mentioned "information overload" as being a possible reason for your misunderstanding.  I did not see it that way when I read skeptic's post.  I know someone who got himself a Philippino wife; it was simply done via a Philipino dating service like any other dating service.  Yes, it also means a better life in Canada for the wife.

You said this in response to skeptic's post:

Skeptic,
....
Unless you know more than the rest of us, this is nothing more than slander.  In fact, we cannot be certain that this whole thing isn't a hoax.  If it is legit, we still don't know anything about this girl.

Thomas Maddux

....
Tom, sorry to have to say this, but it has been happening for a while now.  We have a discussion going on, and you remain offline.  Then all of a sudden you don't just enter in, but rather you tend to butt in with some sort of related comment to educate or exhort us.  The discussion goes off on a side track, which is very frustrating, and we are all supposed to keep our cool and be impressed with your wisdom.  Then one loses it, and the one who loses it gets exhorted for losing it.  IMO your behaviour is more GG-like than the one who loses it is.  This all reminds me of how the local LBs deal with 'issues'.  Maybe there is some of the LB mentality still residing deep within.  Something to consider anyway.

Respectfully,
Marcia

Residual LBism was more in context of sidetracking and which leads to frustration.

Marcia