0 votes

Who Was Granger? And Why Does She Hate Michael Nystrom?

Her personal message from her account.

"Personal Statement
I am ashamed to have associated with Michael Nystrom and his HATE blog, Daily Paul, because they hate and blame Israel for everything. I LOVE ISRAEL and stand with Israel."

http://www.dailypaul.com/user/408

All I can say, is if she is real I hope she finds peace. But peace doesn't come without respecting the truth.

God Bless you Granger, I wish you well.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Michael Nystrom's picture

Yeah, no kidding

you could make an analogy to yourself apologizing for Newsletters that I actually wrote for a publication with your name on it and not be far off.

I'm painfully aware of this, except this isn't the Daily Michael Nystrom.

- - - -

And


The sad truth is, the person that is perceived as the one in charge, regardless of how much control that actually entails, will get blamed for the conduct of others within your sphere of influence.

This is why the president always either gets the credit, or takes the blame for the economy. And why the presidential election is always about the economy.

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

But just look what YOU STARTED with this RON PAUL stuff

You are the to be blamed for it all! You alone awoke millions world wide to ideas that had never even been conceived until your appearance.

And it was YOU that backed that Ted Cruz guy, because of your banking relationship with his wife. He's going to be our next Leader Michael, All because of YOU!

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Where did Granger fit into Peace, Gold, and Love?

But it doesn't matter, she made 20,000 posts. And left without telling anyone THIS TIME. I didn't even know she was a 'She' or read ANY of her posts until her plea to leave.

I didn't have her blocked or ignored, I still had my own mind and knew it was bullshit and just scrolled past.

But Granger drew me in. And she was honest, she said she was NEVER a part of the Liberty Movement.

And I don't think she's part of the Israel movement either.

Think about it Michael, but not too much. At least at any one time ;)

God Bless

I think Patrick Henry was onto something.

This is why the president always either gets the credit, or takes the blame for the economy. And why the presidential election is always about the economy.

True enough, I've always thought that Patrick Henry's famed "I smell a rat" quote was a warning about how a singular chief executive would eventually be seen as a monarch of some sort. The implication of blaming or crediting a president on the health of a nation's economy is, logically speaking, insane. Nevertheless, mankind has a tendency to deify rulers if history teaches us anything, and the results are always disastrous.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

You must remember also that with the level of mental illness she

suffered from, there never had to be a reason to lay blame, only the fact that the owner (Michael) did not force everyone to agree with her. I thought this was where she was headed, with her almost incoherent rants which always resulted in a massive amount of down votes. She was not trying to convert anyone, she demanded people believed the way she did, and anything else was unacceptable. The hate she spewed to anyone that was not in compliance wit her views was vicious and always ugly, yet she thought she held the moral high ground, but the very bible she claimed to support did not support her actions or attitude against anyone that dared question her motives, ideals, or anything outside of her line of thinking.

I think in this case Michael was collateral damage, and I certainly hope she gets the mental help needed to recover from whatever had her filled with so much hate and rage, and perhaps one day return when balanced and ready to share her thoughts as opposed to force them on others.

Always remember:
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." ~ Samuel Adams
If they hate us for our freedom, they must LOVE us now....

Stay IRATE, remain TIRELESS, an

Interesting.

I've only been a poster on this site since around the tail end of 2011 (I was mostly on Ron Paul Forums going back to 2007 and networking on Myspace before that), but I've been keeping tabs on this website for the better part of 5 years and don't recall seeing most of what you are alluding to. Granger didn't really strike me as very interesting on a political level, but I've always had a very strong dislike for trustees of American Fundamentalism, and particularly Dispensationalists who constantly push all this end times rubbish and tying it into giving Israel a license to do anything it wants to as a nation, either to its neighbors or even to supposed allies like us.

I can be very rough in a debate (the Irish temper I inherited from my paternal grandfather) but I can't help but feel some sympathy given the possibility of her having mental issues. Unfortunately, a lot of sinister churches usually mop up the weak willed and the lost, otherwise Benny Hinn might have a respectable job.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

All I know is I hope she/he/it .....

...finally got their wish, and moved to Israel.....Permanently.

"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." -- James Madison

I miss Mr. Granger

I really do. Whenever The Granger said something stupid I read the best responses from you good folks here. 1988 vote had some especially good links, as did many others. And I would've never heard "word salad", as accurately described by Mayor Nystrom!

And whatever happened to The Grange's good friend Andrew Jetton?

"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere".
--Voltaire

It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown

beautiful song

Thanks.

that account you listed, user #408 to this site,

if that was granger, named is now "i love israel". last post was 9.14. just did a search for posts by granger, they contain the user name "i love israel" as well. So guess the dp implements the username change to posts made even before it was changed`

Yes, I can confirm that:

I have changed my tagline about 3 times, and the most recent change appears on all of my posts, not just the most recent ones.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

The Granger flew too close to

The Granger flew too close to the Sun on wings of Christian Zionism.

Michael Nystrom's picture

Hmmph. Beats me

People are weird. Especially on the internet.

I used to take shit like this personally, but these days, I just don't know what to think.

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

NSA's stored info from the Internet will make a fascinating

trove of material for psychologists to mine for decades. Especially the anonymous posts (where the mask is off). Human psychology (or psychopathy) laid bare.

Leges sine moribus vanae

very Zen Mayor Ny,

very zen.

frankly, it's the best personal position TO take, IMO.

we're all intimate virtual strangers here, who say things from the sublime to the weird, and oft thought provoking.

funny how mere re-compositioning alphabets can communicate such varied emotions. then you realize, even when you read your favorite author's works, frankly all the love, joy, horrors, fear, invoked in you, you did it all by yourself: the author's words merely gave you 'permission' to invoke those emotions.

so, in the end, we live, love, and die all within our minds, no?

now, if y'all can answer where consciousness truly comes from, and why it is that I've personally come to a point where I can distinguish my intentional imagination, vs. those 'channeled' into me (as anyone who's ever pursued creative endeavors can attest), then... then... well, you get brownie points for being a...one smart cookie.D

Predictions in due Time...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDisyWkIBM

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

Michael Nystrom's picture

Yeah

There is a lot in there, man.

funny how mere re-compositioning alphabets can communicate such varied emotions

Yeah, and it is all going on inside the head. Yup.

Which means you have control over it, or theoretically should have control over it. To get pissed off, or to let it go.

There are yogis in India that can put a knife through their arm without a single drop of blood, then pull it out like nothing. Talk about control.

- - - - -

One last thing, AnCap. There is a little article in the book What We Believe But Cannot Prove talking about consciousness. I still forget the guy's name. But what he says in essence is this:

Neuroscientists believe that through reductionism, and by studying the brain, they'll eventually find the source of consciousness. And this guy says no - they've got it all wrong. They're barking up the wrong tree. Consciousness doesn't come from the brain. The brain arises from consciousness! Consciousness is the substrate of being.

I have the book right here. Found it. pp. 91-94. Donald D. Hoffman. In part:

If we assume that consciousness is fundamental, then the mind-body problem changes from an attempt to bootstrap consciousness from matter into an attempt to bootstrap matter from consciousness.

Whoa! Put that in your pipe and smoke it for a while.

In other words, we live in a conscious universe.

Over and out (for now).

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

What is Consciousness?

I agree completely with the basic premise of Hoffman's article that "consciousness is fundamental" if consciousness means 'experience'. Hoffman seems to say that consciousness="conscious experience". (p. 92) I would say that the experience as the experience of the world is fundamental. But the experience of the world is not equal with "the world of our daily experience" (p. 91)as 'the world of daily experience' is one dimension of the experience of the world.
The difficult thing is the talk about consciousness and its "contents" (p. 91). Were I disagree with Hoffman, if I have understood him right, is what are the 'contents of consciousness' or the contents of experience. But this disagreement basicly falls into the mysterious question of 'what is consciousness?' or 'what is experience?' I agree with Hoffman that there is so called 'contents of consciousness', but there is also the structure of consciousness which is a Gestalt-structure of object-horizon. Hoffman writes: "Spacetime, matter, and fields...have always been humbler contents of consciousness, dependent on it for their very being." (p. 91) All these concepts of 'spacetime', 'matter' and 'fields' are highly ambiguous and their meaning depends on the context, that is, the field or atmosphere of where they are used. If one uses these concepts in the meaning they have in "physicalist ontology" (p.92) then they are "contents of consciousness" within the context of 'consciousness is fundamental' paradigm. But if these concepts are not understood as concept of 'physicalist ontology', but as concepts of another kind of ontology, that is, the ontology of lived experience, then 'spacetime' and 'field' are not contents of consciousness, but dimensions of consciousness in a sense that 'their very being' is not dependent of consciousness. If they are dependent on consciousness, then consciousness is somehow separate from 'spacetime', 'matter' and 'field(s)'. I would argue that the consciousness in its fundamental sense is the field, that is, the field of all the other fields. This means that it is not outside of fields, but in the sense a heart or a core which opens the possibility of all the other fields. Field is always a spatial and in this sense it is not that consciousness is somehow outside of space. It is true that it is not IN space like an object or a thing as it is not a thing, that is, it is no-thing and for this reason it is sometimes called nothing which then can have a connection to the Buddhist context of 'nothingness' and 'emptiness'. But as it is not in space, this does not mean that it is not spatial as I would say that consciousness is the fundamental dimension of space. Similarly it is not outside of time, but indeed it is not IN time. Consciousness can be said to be the opening of time as the horizon or the field of time in which anything which happens in time can be understood. Also the question concerning 'matter' is very complex as there are so many different kinds of concepts of matter. Perhaps we shouldn't try to "bootstrap consciousness from matter" or "matter from consciousness", but understand that the living matter of bodily being in the world is consciousness of the world. Merleau-Ponty calls this 'living matter' the Flesh. This so called 'living matter' of the body is not a concept of 'physicalist ontology', but neither is it a concept of Cartesian dualism nor some religious form of thinking. This concept does not grow out of any science, religion or psychology, but of the fundamental premise 'we are experience' or 'we are consciousness' or 'we are being-in-the-world' or 'we are spatio-temporal field of living matter'.

"Air is the very substance of our freedom, the substance of superhuman joy....aerial joy is freedom."--Gaston Bachelard--

indeed:

yup, precisely the point!

you so 'get' it, Mayor Ny! Brownie Points! .D

There are yogis in India that can put a knife through their arm without a single drop of blood, then pull it out like nothing. Talk about control.

My undying hope is that one day, ALL humans can learn to do that; I figure if it's possible for even just one human to be able to do that, then that 100% proves that it is physically possible for a human to do so, on this physical plane.

So then, it becomes a matter of what that wo/man did, for however long, how has s/he cultivated her/his mind, her/his psyche, or even her/his soul, to BE able to do that? If all that can be answered? Well...then, once known, it's teachable.

Now, wonder if we can dodge bullets. Or,...no Neo, when you're ready, you won't have to. Ohm... .D

I too lean against reductionism in regards to the nature of consciousness:

Neuroscientists believe that through reductionism, and by studying the brain, they'll eventually find the source of consciousness. And this guy says no - they've got it all wrong. They're barking up the wrong tree. Consciousness doesn't come from the brain. The brain arises from consciousness! Consciousness is the substrate of being.

Plus, for one to accept the reductionist absurdum, they would first have to prove that they can first identify WHAT a "thought" is, bio-physically define it, then whether they're able to pinpoint, from the point of departure/inception for the origin of a given thought A, vs. thought B, even within the currently accepted paradigm that both thoughts A & B 'must have' originated within the 8lbs wonder.

They would also have to be able distinguish which one of the two thoughts originated first. Because, what the human mind/mouth articulates/testifies to be the initial thought, doesn't necessarily mean that is/was the one that 'came to the mind' first:


http://youtu.be/PB2OegI6wvI

If they can't even do that, then it's utterly arrogant for them to assert, let alone assume, what, and/or where consciousness originated from, let alone what we've labeled 'thought' originated from.

Also, I always found the assumption that they equate a bodily and/or even neurological/psychological function merely by the virtue of observing 'which area of your brain lights up,' on your screen, to be absurd. That all already assumes that your brain, like some animal, would respond ONLY to a known given set of stimuli which PRE-experiment they presume that the brain would 'reply' by
'pulsing/pinging' an electron.

The only honest observation one can make is that 'it' lit up, but not why.

Dr. Norman Doidge's experiments and evidenced observations have long proven that those who lost particular motor functions due to physical brain damages, their brains actually compensated by 'developing' other parts of the brain not formerly associated with those particular motor-functions: neuroplasticity.

It's like, what else didn't we know about that marvel?

It's like: 'Man, can we be 'shipped' into this world with an 'Owner's Operating Manual' for a change?'

LOL

The more I find out about the world, the more it seems that I myself and everyone else that I've met, to the Ruling Class and their dutiful sycophants all operate from varying degrees of willful, conscious and unconscious series upon series upon series of assumptions, upon a-priori presumptions upon assumptions.

Story of Humans, I suppose.

Yeah, the more you research it, the more it becomes apparent that the white-robed occultists, who've unfortunately become nothing more than grant-whoredom in 'modern'-era, have been mostly wrong about the nature of consciousness, not to mention, as it often seems: everything else? lol.

I'm not sure if people realize that the description and explanation of 'how the world works' has always been the purview and dictates of, first, the colorfully draped shamans of various tribes in the past, to the black-robed priesthood, then the Vatican's red robes, and now, the white-robed ones: ie, EM forces, gravity, nuclear physics, nano-cosm, genetics, etc.

With the modern phenomenon of secluded 'profession'-labels, inevitably came the "Well, are you a ____? Then what makes you think you're qualified?"

Well, unless one's brains are physically damaged to the point of utter learning disability, wonder if it ever dawned on most people that the only difference between you, and a professional is that, beyond high school, that person CHOSE to spend 4~12 yrs of their years pursuing a particular field of study; unless you're physically unteachable, ANYONE can spend that equal amount of time and learn to wear that banner.

Now, of course humans all have varying degrees of native to extremely developed skills. So if one truly truly excels in their given profession, it seems like art.

But like any fields, there are the Mozarts, and the Salieris.

Most of us are Salieris, but that still doesn't mean that you have to be a Mozart to be able to appreciate the nuances of their talents.

Or, as I often put it, just because you can tune a piano, doesn't mean you can play music. But that still doesn't mean the tuner cannot recognize the sublime talents of a pianist keying away on his newly tuned Steinway.

I always find it dismaying that the world seems so disjointed, hierarchic, and classicist-categorical, when all it is, is just someone more talented, or someone who merely spent more time doing one thing over another, then talking/doing something about/with it.

I always find it amusing that even among libertarians to voluntaryists, fully knowing how absurdly corporatist most university R&D departments factually are, yet willfully fail to scrutinize them like any other political entity who gets corporatist govt funding, with an agenda.

I've literally never seen a field more political than 'science.' They may as well just call it what it is: art and advertising with corporatist govt backing. Or, as I like to more simply call it: "Grant-Whoredom."

Then again, humans, as inherently subjective creatures that we are, I never think anything humans do is "objective." So I can be wholly wrong about that 'objective' observation. xD

As with everything, all I know is that I know what I know, and everything beyond that, I know nothing.0)

Predictions in due Time...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDisyWkIBM

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

I was reluctant to post it, but it is information.

But she was such a figure here with myself an others mostly trying to help her. Hell I was a bit envious about her chickens/lifestyle attitude.

One thing I will share, is that the very FIRST meeting of the first RP meetup I went to contained a wonderful couple that was as excited as everyone else.

Many bonds were formed and that couple was a part of every step through a county convention where the husband was thrown out by the police.

They were a part of EVERYTHING, including lawsuits filed to get illegal records and being present while they were tabulated.

They only were exposed (better said, we FINALLY WOKE UP) as evidence was proceeding to a trial, actually many trials that eventually lead up to the Texas Supreme Court. Their ugly came out big time during that event.

I'm sure one of many stories during the 2008 campaign.

Your site, and sites like yours are invaluable in spreading information.

+++++++++++++++++

That all said. If Granger is/was a troll, she is part of the deception that seeks to continue to divide people by labels. My studies suggest that the people in Israel are no better defined by their government than Americans are by theirs.

Michael Nystrom's picture

Yeah, I understand

I appreciate the info.

Sad to see her go, in a way.

She was big on RP at the beginning.

Like I said before, everything passes... everything changes... Just do what you think you should do.

- - - - -

Yesterday I was thinking me hanging around here is like being old and watching all your friends die. She was user 408. That was early. Lots of people have passed through here, then one day they either freak out like this and flame out, or silently just stop coming.

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts
DakotaKid's picture

eh, not all bad.

I still have my Michael Nystrom autographed postcard in between my two autographed Ron Paul books.

lol...

I still have my postcard too. :)

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

To call the daily paul a

To call the daily paul a 'hate site' is just flat out hilarious. The Granger obviously saw the world in some weird skewed way if they spent all that time here and came to that conclusion.