21 votes

Former House stenographer describes outburst: "I did not lose my mind. Audio was edited and dubbed"



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Please watch

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgCmoVbdYtE

I personally condemn your actions of violence towards your child. Your ineptitude as a parent is frightening. You are teaching your child that violence is an accepted part of life, something that he also can use against someone who he may see as having some authority against, like for example it's future spouse, children. And if not direct violence probably emotional violence.

I cannot stop you from hitting your child but I cannot condone it and I think it is disgusting.

OK, I watched your video on a

OK, I watched your video on a different browser. Both of the two having a debate are on the same side of the issue, which is not a debate. It is an exercise in agreement with one another.

They both disapprove of the utilitarian aspects of spanking, but they do both agree that the NAP does not apply to children and the mentally deficient.

I never said it was a debate,

I never said it was a debate, this is more of an interview. But the video is informational and formulates itself very well. As I said earlier NAP does not apply to anyone except yourself, it is a principle. One that says that you should avoid using violence, the threat of violence or fraud to get your will through.

And as I have said many times, hit your child how ever much you want but the idea that you can hit someone because it is a child and not an adult is moronic and I do not see how you have the right to abuse him

I tried to watch the video

I tried to watch the video but youtube said it is unavailable. I saw that the description was an opinions on how the non-aggression principal applies to children. To believe the non-aggression principal applies fully to children is wrong, they are not grown adults that can make decisions for themselves. They gradually earn their liberty. You don't give a 9 year old a midnight curfew, but you might for a 16 year old.

If a 2 year old picks up a kitchen knife and starts running around the house with it, is it wrong to use force to remove the knife because that child doesn't understand they could fall on it? Aggression is justifiable because a child deserves a nanny state. What is wrong is when you try to apply a nanny state to adults. Have 6 year olds been wrongfully denied their right to vote in elections, and does this make them second class citizens?

There is a big difference between beating on your kid because you had a stressful day and you are a drunk, and discipline. There is a balance and consistency that should be achieved in parenting. Never discipline your kid and they will turn out a mess, abuse your kid and also they will be messed up. I don't ever "hit" my child, only a measured hand swat on the butt, a spank.

I know exactly what abuse is because I was abused as a child, kicked, punched, choked, and more. I am very sensitive to it. Permissive, uncontrolled parenting is destructive to society as well."

Maybe because you were abused

Maybe because you were abused as a child you think it is ok to hit your child-- That's the conclusion I draw from your comment. And your comment about your kid and the running with knife of course it is ok to grab the knife. Grabbing something dangerous from your kid or taking something from your kid that doesn't belong to him, something he is not allowed to have, that does NOT break the NAP. NAP talks about aggressive acts upon another person with the intent to harm him/her. Your kid is a person, striking him, even if it only is on the bottom, does break the NAP. Since you are with force trying to change his behavior.

Honestly I cannot understand how people can be so dumb that they cannot even understand a basic principle and how it is applied to different situations, like for example the custody of a child. You are responsible for him, you do not own him, assuming it is a boy.

Please watch the video your incompetence doesn't absolve you from your responsibility to treat your child with respect and love. Striking him is none of that, and teaches him only bad things.

The parenting that I, and many others, teaches, especially here in Europe(in Sweden striking your child is illegal and you will lose custody), is about communication, respect and teaching your child not to use force to get your will through(like you are doing). And it has worked here in Sweden for many many years, we have not been to war for about 600 years, have the most advance genus equality (not perfect though) in the world, we have one of the most stable economies in Europe, low suicide and mental illness numbers per capita ect ect.. Is this all because we don't strike our children, no. But I believe that it is a part of the equation.

But I know that nothing I can say will change your behavior. And that makes me very sad for your children. I hope that you stop your despicable behavior and find other ways to teach your children the way of true happiness in life. If you don't you might have your child grow up and totally despise you for the rest of his life, and probably abuse his loved ones too.. you taught him that way of life.

With Love /Jonatan "bastu"

Do you have kids bastu?

"Honestly I cannot understand how people can be so dumb that they cannot even understand a basic principle and how it is applied to different situations, like for example the custody of a child. You are responsible for him, you do not own him, assuming it is a boy."

I don't think of my son as property, I think of him as a responsibility too, which is why I need to correct poor behavior. I don't believe in that Swedish collectivist mentality that the State owns my child. No one has a more vested interest in producing a good human than I do. My brother that was also abused (not simply spanked) is in the camp of no spanking, because he confuses a measured spanking with a vicious beating, but he doesn't have kids yet.

There is a difference between abuse and spanking a butt with an open hand, in my opinion, but you see it as the same. Striking a child with a belt across the head, or burning them with cigarettes is very different, it is for sadistic pleasure. I take no pleasure in a spank, but feel duty bound to do so. Spanking a kid doesn't make me feel like a big man, if I wanted that I would find a man my own size to fight.

My son shot his mother in the eye with a foam dart and harmed her, for that I swatted his butt. When you harm another, the harm might be returned. Is that a bad lesson?

What discipline method would you recommend? Standing in a corner? What if they won't comply? Send them to their room? What if they won't stay in it, and they are damaging the door to get out? My son would never stand in a corner because I gave him a stern look and told him to. He would also not stay in his room for a "time out" because I told him to. He would pound on the door and cause damage. Do you have children, if so how do you get them to stop hurting others, with hugs? Children, even ones that are never spanked, have an inclination to hit others. It is natural for some personality types.

But... doesn't God cause

But... doesn't God cause mental illness? Isn't it God's will if someone has it?

If someone is acting weird is

If someone is acting weird is the problem with them adapting to what people perceive as normal, or is the problem with the people that judge and exclude them from society? If God did send a prophet with a message, he would be immediately dismissed as crazy, put in a padded room, and force fed anti-psychotic medication.

If a person is different, which is to be expected with genetic variation, most people are able to find a reason why it is that person's fault if they are homeless. They are lazy, they aren't trying hard enough (to pretend to be someone they are not), or they are a drunk/drug addict. Maybe they drink or do drugs to cope because they are homeless and life sucks for them. Addiction is a disease, and looking down on them is like looking down on someone for having cancer. Most homeless people are "different", or "mentally ill". If a person is unwilling or unable to play the game, they are often dumped on the street and shunned by most "normal, good, hard working people."

But to your point about God giving people mental illness, I think there is a reason for him doing what he does, only we may not have the whole picture. I really don't like the term mental illness, because it right off the bat devalues them, kinda like calling someone a conspiracy theorist, it's a loaded term. I also believe in demonic communications as well. There is good crazy and there is bad crazy.

Can God use a person with a mental deficiency?

Sure He can, just like He used an autistic friend of mine who worked at Walmart with me last year..

I wasn't having a good day then this man (who had the mind of a child at times) started to point to his hands and was rambling (like my friend was known to do), then as he passed me (speaking to himself, I think..) said something like "Jesus died for me.." touching his hands as if thinking about the nails which pierced Christ's hands. My friend was used by God to remind me of the truth.

The truth is that if anyone "has a word" from God to test it against scripture (God will never contradict Himself).

-JS

Jeremy

That would be true if god is

That would be true if god is omnipotent and omniscient, which most Christian claim "he" is.

...

How can they say that what she said at first was different from what she said at the elevator, when they admit that they don't even know what she said? The fact that she said something at the elevator doesn't necessarily mean that she didn't say the same thing earlier.

can I say MKultra?Clearly

can I say MKultra?

Clearly her behavior was very suspicious and the man that she is seen to have some interaction with may be a handler? I don't know, it's all speculation, but if she cannot remember what she said on the floor THAT is really odd. If I got the opportunity to speak in front of all the representatives, like she took it upon herself to do, I would remember probably every single word, or at the very least the meaning of my words.

All this religious bs (my opinion, flame away christ-tards) is just a coping mechanism on her part to fill the void of the MKultra brainwashing that she went through

All this is just my opinion, I am currently listening to the rest of the video but right now it looks like someone wanted to send a clear message, probably "Don't do this shit again"(closing the government).

[edit: It is a lonely road being an agnostic on the DP, at least no flames yet, just polite downvotes =)]

You should see some of the comments I've received. Being

agnostic surely won't get you any worse. :)

Christians should not be warmongers! http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance87.html

Thank you for your comment.

Thank you for your comment. Sometimes I feel so alone here at DP, especially in the later days. I hope you have people in your life that respect your opinion.

You're very welcome. And while I do have a few people that

respect my opinion, my main concern is that God is pleased with me. Sometimes one must stand all alone on this earth, and yes, it is a painful hard road.

Christians should not be warmongers! http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance87.html

Sadly, some Christians will take umbridge with your blather.

And get angry, perhaps even correctly so.
And my dear fellow, if you can not learn to communicate effectively you are not a worthy ally in any endeavor, let alone one so mighty as restoring freedom. Specifically , I'm taking you to task for your lack of good manners: treat others as you expect to be treated and life will be better for you I guarantee it.

As a Christian, and not a " nominal " Christian I assure you I will NEVER force my faith upon you, nor will I vilify you for what you believe upon, and trust me you DO have a belief system that you serve. What I will do is LOVE you, I will help you, I will stand up for your right to be as wrong as you choose to be as long as you are willing to accept the consequences of your own actions. I will DIE for youif need be. I will be your brother, a mentor, an ear when you need to vent, I will cry when you morn, and laugh with your joy, if you abuse me I will bless you, I am not now, nor have I ever been your enemy : Jesus is my life, and my highest aspiration is to live my life exactly as He examples.
I'm heart broken that you choose to wound yourself and others with your rage and anger.

If we are to succeed in this thing called freedom, then we should strive to put away all malice from amongst us. Surely we shall not agree upon all things, but let us at least agree to disagree without animus?

God bless
Stēkō Pharrēsia Iēsous

Drew, by the very grace of GOD through the blood of Christ Jesus.
"there shall come after us men whom shall garner great wealth using our system, and having done so shall seek to slam the door of prosperity behind them." George Washington

First, I am not angry, I am

First, I am not angry, I am rarely angry except when talking about politicians and people taking advantage of a political system.

I did write a rather inflammatory comment, I probably took it one step too far. I just don't suffer fools, (http://youtu.be/mvtDHH_IfP8?t=1m28s). And I see many of fools here. People who obviously haven't been following this situation for as long and with the same amount of effort as I and many others have. And people taking advantage of a situation to further their own single minded agendas. I am no saint, I curse, I piss people off, I make people uncomfortable, I don't censure myself. Why do I do these things, especially here at the DP? Because I don't have to follow some moral compass that someone else wrote the rules for, and I should never have to in the future here at the DP. We are all individuals and should respect peoples rights, especially rights to speech.

What I will do though is stand up for your RIGHT to believe anything you want, and say anything you want. Heck as long as you don't break the NAP and property rights you can do basically anything. I just wont condone it and "let things slide". Religion and religious dogmas are DANGEROUS to liberty because it is a group mentality. Groups form into followers and leaders, something I, as a Libertarian, despise and see as the MOST dangerous kind of social structure.

Christianity like many religions are based upon this leader-structure, and not questioning authority. Your little book even has that as one of it's 10 rules. And this stupid shit on paper even tells you not to question political authority (Romans 13:1-2). Any Libertarian with gray matter should have seen this and forsaken his or her religious past, even forsaken your family if they forced this bs on you when you were to young to understand the implications of the teachings they stuffed down your throat.

Therefor I will speak with my "nasty mouth" against some issues, don't like it? DON'T READ IT! block me or something, watch me care.

Just telling it like I see it
With Love /Jonatan "Bastu"

Thanks for your reply Justin, I liked it, a lot .

I used to curse in seven languages, and I'm not one to not hear what I say to others.

So your a bit course, I get it, at least your straight forward and that is much like I am. I just prefer to use much bigger words to confuse my adversary when situations require their utter astonishment.

And believe it or not, I've only blocked one person here, and they are one of " those Christians ". Ironic huh?

And I won't go against secular authority untill they violate Gods law, which in case your interested they've already accomplished. But I use 2 Peter as the guide in this, as he's much more concise and clear on the matter than Paul was.

Oh, Gods law is written to prevent us from hurting ourselves. And was not written to withhold anything " good " from us. And it's impossible to keep them unless you truly live Gid, then you just discover yourself actually keeping them without any forethought to doing so.

Stēkō

We'll get along I'll wager, without much effort.

Drew, by the very grace of GOD through the blood of Christ Jesus.
"there shall come after us men whom shall garner great wealth using our system, and having done so shall seek to slam the door of prosperity behind them." George Washington

too bad you stopped replying

too bad you stopped replying I was very much looking forward to your answers on the whole concept of picking and choosing what books or texts are correct. I guess it became difficult to answer those questions without being forced to admit that the idea of religious dogmas are asinine

A man convinced against his will is of

The same opinion still.

I surmised that no matter how much love I poured into our conversation, that you are set in your ways.

Mind you, that's fine with me, I'm not about forcing anything onto anyone, that would be counter to being self governing as well as freedom loving now wouldn't it?

But I'm also not into wasting my time either, and since my purpose isn't to debate semantics, but bring you to knowledge of the Love of God that He has for you, and there's not much of a chance you'd receive it, I'm off to more fertile fields without any hard feelings or animosity towards you. Hopefully you can relate.

God bless
Stēkō

Drew, by the very grace of GOD through the blood of Christ Jesus.
"there shall come after us men whom shall garner great wealth using our system, and having done so shall seek to slam the door of prosperity behind them." George Washington

Fine not going to force you

Fine not going to force you to think for yourself. Go ahead and rely on your religion and dogmas all you want. Watch me care. I just have never gotten the answer for how people choose what is correct and what is not correct when talking about religion. People, you too, seem to pick and choose from what is correct at the time, no principle, no thought process, no nothing... Which is exactly what religion is, nothing.

No hard feelings towards you here either.. I don't hate individuals. But I honestly just wanted your opinion on the matter. Even if that was "whatever works to get my will through"... Cause that is how I see it. You abuse peoples weaknesses by choosing to follow one thing at one time and another at another time.

If you have done anything you have only convinced me more that religion is group-think and a method of power, authority and conformity... I want none of that.. In fact i take a huge dump on it.

Love /Bastu

Who's Justin? I guess you

Who's Justin? I guess you just misread my name or something, no biggie. No I don't see it as ironic that you blocked a christian, actually that's somewhat of my point. God is supposed to be an all knowing and timeless entity. This means that any action that he made from the very beginning and the implications of these actions are well known to "him". Therefor if the writers were inspired by god "he" purposefully put in a lot of misconceptions, different ways to interpret "his" words, many MANY contradictions and many other oddities if this was the word of god. Especially if you take into consideration the formation of the Catholic church and the way they handled the creation of the end result that was what you call the bible.

To me this makes no sense what so ever, unless god is a malicious god. Playing with mankind like some snotty short-bus kid playing with ants and a loupe. And if he is malicious I will NOT bow down, and I will not care what "he" wants, fuck'im.

So back to the point that you block someone who is christian makes perfect sense. "He" wants you to be fighting amongst yourselves, at least that is my interpretation.

Just to be clear, would you call yourself an Libertarian, anarcho-capitalist or something similar? If you don't like labels that is also fine, that I understand with all my heart. (That is the same group-think that I think we should evolve away from, I know I called myself Libertarian and I shouldn't make it that easy for you, truth is I am just me)

But yes, I think you are right. We will get along just fine. I would like a little bit more thoughts from you about the whole Romans thing. I am not much of a religious scholar though I find it interesting and have researched it quite a bit. Especially I would like to know how you pick and choose from what parts of your holy book that you see as "right". Why is one book worth more then the next if they are all inspired by god? Or am I making assumptions right now and they are not all worth the same? And if so who made you king of the universe and gave you the "right"(bad word) to make those decisions?

Question for you Barracuda:

Why hasn't anyone else that witnessed the woman's rant come forward with the actual message if her voice was dubbed over from the elevator part?

"I don't know what I said" is what she says in this video because "God has given me messages like this [...] before."

If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

My observation...

It was pandemonium as she was led out and also in the hall waiting for the elevator.

I don't think most people were focused on her exact words because;
a) she was taken away from the mic so she lost broadcast ability.
b) people were surprised, panicking and taken off guard.

I posted this video just as a general follow-up.

And the only thing that was true to my eyes is that the sound of her voice never lost volume as she was taken off the podium and escorted out. That's solid evidence that it was edited. She had no mic in chambers as she stepped away.

the speakers microphone was

the speakers microphone was not on and the audio from the elevators was from a journalist that was in the right place just a little bit too late.

So I would say that anyone who comes out with some kind of transcript of her "speech" I would take with a huge grain of salt since there would probably be some kind of agenda behind that person coming out with what she said.

Bottom line, we will never know what she said.