IPFS Larken Rose

More About: Military

Deciphering Propaganda

Most people read or watch the news, assuming the information is accurate, and believing whatever they are told. A critical thinker, on the other hand, has a far more complex and difficult task, when faced with the mistakes and dishonesty constantly put out by the mainstream media. We have a fine case study to demonstrate the point.

The average reader, when first faced with a "story," will have no first hand knowledge of the subject of the story. He has a collection of words, written or spoken--which may be truths, partial truths, mistakes, or lies--and he may also have a few images, which may or may not be genuine, and may or may not be relevant. At first, it might seem impossible to determine the truth, if one has nothing but a collection of dubious claims and assertions to work with. But as odd as it may seem, even if you have no idea what the facts really are, or who is telling the truth (or who even knows what the truth is), there are some things that can be learned.

For a study in critical thinking, consider the recent "story" about the supposed "anarchists" who supposedly plotted to kill Obama. While most people start by assuming that if it's on the news, it must be accurate and honest, the critical thinker starts with the exact opposite assumption: everything is in question, every "fact" possibly inaccurate, every opinion possibly misinformed, possibly dishonest. But to build an accurate picture, based solely upon statements of strangers, some or all of whom may be lying or confused, seems like a daunting task. So let's do this meticulously, to see what can be learned WITHOUT accepting anything at face value.

CNN runs a story titled: "'Anarchists' accused of murder; broader plot against government." That, of course, is an assertion, and the average reader would have no first-hand knowledge of any of the relevant facts. The story begins with this line: "This much is clear: Four U.S. Army soldiers based in Georgia are accused of killing two people." Already, without even getting to the accuracy of the alleged facts, a few strange things stand out to the astute observer. First, why isn't the title of the article about "U.S. soldiers" being accused of murder? Second, for those who know what the word "anarchist" means, an obvious question is: How can armed enforcers of the state (soldiers) be anarchists? It's like saying "Today, four atheist priests were accused of..." Huh? Already we start to see hints of an agenda of the writers at CNN.

Then the story admits that there are conflicting explanations from the feds, and a DA in Georgia, who proclaimed that the motive of the four who allegedly murdered two people was the "overthrow of the government." Then there were claims of the four gathering various guns and bombs. However, according to the story, federal agencies involved (the FBI and the ATF) "made scant mention of any alleged assassination plot or government overthrow attempt." A revolution not worth mentioning? A federal official allegedly said it's only a murder case, and no federal charges have been filed. If we accept that CNN was accurately reporting what Georgia and Federal "authorities" said, why don't they match? Then the story gets even more bizarre, saying this:

"On Monday, Pfc. Michael Burnett laid out the elaborate plot, telling a southeast Georgia court that he was part of what prosecutors called 'an anarchist group and militia.'"

Presumably, the job of a "reporter" is to convey facts. This sentence conveys mainly confusion. For example, the soldier said he was what PROSECUTORS called "an anarchist group and militia"? What kind of bizarre statement is that? Presumably, if the guy called himself an anarchist, the story wouldn't have to quote prosecutors calling him that. So he admits the entire plot, but decides to keep quiet about being an anarchist?

Then the soldiers is alleged to have said that another soldier--one of the people murdered--was killed because "he took money from the group and planned to leave." How does that match the Georgia prosecutor saying the purpose of the murders was the "overthrow of the government"? It doesn't, obviously.

Then the soldier talks about one of the others accused introducing the other to "the manuscript," "a book about true patriots." And he described their goal as being "to give the government back to the people." To those who don't know, being an anarchist--by definition--means opposing "government" entirely. Trying to "give the government back to the people" is not what any anarchist wants. The soldier then allegedly stated that the government needed a change, and the four thought they "were the people who would be able to change it." Again, this is obviously not something an anarchist says or thinks.

Yet once again, a Georgia official is quoted as identifying Isaac Aguigui as the leader of the alleged "anarchist group and militia," consisting of active duty and former soldiers. Then the article speaks of the group plotting to do such things as "forcibly taking over the ammo control point of Fort Stewart to take the post, bombing vehicles of local and state judicial and political figureheads and federal representatives to include the local department of homeland security." No mention is made of any assassination plot targeting Obama. In fact, only the title of the story seems to mention anything about that.
Now, just to make things really weird, we jump to a "Business Insider" story, reporting that the main "anarchist" in charge, Isaac Aguigui, was working as a page at the 2008 Republican convention. Once again, for those who don't know this, Republicans are not anarchists.

The main questions worth asking at this point are:
1) What set of possible facts could account for all of the statements reported?
2) What agenda may be changing how and what things are being reported?
What the story literally describes is an attempted military coup, inside the U.S. armed forced, which the feds, for some reason, think is hardly worth mentioning. The repeated use of the obviously inaccurate term "anarchist" throughout both articles shows a separate agenda, either by government officials and/or those in the media, to paint the alleged killers as something they are obviously not: anarchists.
So what are the real facts? Who knows? Who will ever know? Does it stink of another false flag stunt? Maybe, maybe not. Is the actual threat being overblown? Probably. In the story, it's admitted that no one is all that clear on how the group planned on achieving any of their stated goals. But assuming that at least some of the facts and quotes in the stories are accurate, it seems there are two things to be learned:
1) The U.S. "government" has a problem with dissension in the ranks of their own soldiers.
2) Officials are determined to blame this on "anarchists," when obviously it has nothing to do with anarchists.
In short, if the "officials" were honest, the message would be, "Holy crap, our own mercenaries are turning against us!" Instead, they decided to spin it as, "Those darn anarchists are doing bad things!" So there you have it: the truth, and the lie, as deciphered out of the propaganda that passes for "news" in this country.


11 Comments in Response to

Comment by Ana Panot (45223)
Entered on:

I think Larken Rose is in big trouble for abusing [libeling] those "Avengers" he didn’t know are lawyers! I cannot wait for the day they send him back to prison, unless psychopathic hospitals like the Danvers State Insane Asylum or the most notorious Broadmoor Criminal Lunatic Asylum gets him first

Comment by Boston Releigh (45216)
Entered on:

To Larken Rose and to yourself Larken Rose who according to JV and Annonymous75 is deceptively using several names to praise himself and agreeing to himself on whatever he says in this page -- a confirmed schizophrenic who loves his other self …. here is a message for you:

I caution you not to steal my identity by insulting me that I am a different person other than myself Brag, a former military specialist and currently a practicing attorney who is making a comment on your "mental illness" as pointed out.

I agree with Anno75’s comment that you would use many other names for the purpose of making those comments praise yourself and agree to yourself … first, because you are an obvious "split" person [schizophrenic], and secondly, no normal-thinking human being would make any comment praising you how great you are in your insanity, and no normal person would agree with your "strange" position of, quote: "killing people in the government and shooting cops dead after they threw you to prison for being a tax cheat."

I tracked down your devil’s position that unfortunately I found so twisted in the annals of lunacy that I have ever studied in the practice of law [I have represented clients suffering severe neurosis of multiple personalities] when you said in your several arguments published in your book and in cheap videos you circulated that Taxation is Robbery by the Government, Tax is Theft, and that to you "taxation" and "robbery" are interchangeably subjective.

To you, "stealing" means "taxing", and "taxing" means "stealing" your wallet as you said with unquestionable certainty.

I tried to imagine a situation as if I am in the courtroom facing the Judge in front of the Jury where I can demonstrate and make a case out of your severe insanity. I want the Judge, the Jury and the people in the courtroom to imagine that I am one of the passersby in a nearby alley where we heard Larken Rose screaming on top of his voice crying for help. Several of us passersby ran to his succor. When we arrived at the scene, Larken Rose pointed to a couple of thugs making their fast escape. He said, "Help …! They taxed my wallet!" I said did those guys rob you? Another stranger in the scene asked him, did they mug you?

And angrily, Larken Rose growled like a wounded lion. He snapped: What difference would that make, you morons! Taxation and robbery are the same, you idiots!

When he became so belligerent and with his fists threatened to throw punches on us, we saw murder in his eyes. I suggested that one of us should dial 911 for an ambulance, not because he was hurt. We all agreed that he should be forcibly carried in a straitjacket on the way to the hospital before he hurts anybody.

We just stumbled on a loony on the loose that might have escaped from a nearby mental asylum. He was robbed, and instead of robbery, he shouted "Taxation! Taxation! Help, those thugs just taxed my wallet!"

In court, I will make a motion for the Judge to accept this demonstration as "circumstantial evidence" to prove Larken Rose is unquestionably insane for calling taxation a robbery.


Comment by Joseph Vanderville (44376)
Entered on:

Annonyous75, Larken Rose is not only a "pathological liar" as you aptly described him, but also a dangerous mentally disturbed public liability. He instinctively ASSASSINATES reputable characters the way how rattlesnakes strike when provoked – attacks vigilant and honest citizens who exposed him as a madcap or who identified him as a hallucinating screwball who argues his insanity idiotically like what he did in court during his trial, as if he was a wild feverish patient trying to get out of his white straitjacket uniform. Running out of patience, the court obviously shut him off and banished him to jail where he could continue the insanity of his argument all alone to himself.

Let me repeat this for clarity: Larken Rose is a notorious character-ASSASSIN. He assassinates the reputation of anyone who discovers and exposes him as a scam artist, a tax evader or a tax felon and a mentally disturbed ex-convict like how I exposed him and warned the public about his insanity to kill government officials and shoot cops dead!

You mentioned Andrew Cook who did the same like what I did -- exposed Larken Rose’s insanity to the American public. Larkin Rose was fuming mad at him, just as his face is turning blue hating me and calling me dirty names. He used only the same pattern of abuse – some of kind of random defense mechanism of rage -- spitting THE SAME words of venom out of his dirty mouth, i.e., throwing out buzz words like, jackboot, fascist, Nazi, liar, dishonest, ignorant, delusional, psychotically obsessed, and also calling his enemies sickos suffering those "profound psychoses of state-worshippers." He is at home with these attack-words of character-assassination which he memorized and ready to use.

This is peculiar because in sum, he calls his critics "insane" to BOUNCE back the exact word that exactly describes who he is, and what his actions of insanity are, which he really loathed for having them permanently kept on the record.

Let me quote what Larken Rose said on November 20, 2011 at 3:45 pm [recorded in my database] when Cook pointed out that he was a loony:

Larken Rose: "Mr. Cook, you’re a strange combination of ignorant, dishonest, delusional, and psychotically obsessed. You obviously have some motivation you’re not admitting."

On record, he called me exactly the same thing. It is a pattern of insuperable anger in a psychopath’s mind. The person or persons who are the object of his ire are in danger.

As a "pathological liar" he is also an "escape artist" in self-denial. He was trapped on what he said, and desperately wanting to escape from it by simply LYING! Here is his lie when he attacked me: "His cowardly aliases say I'm a ‘felon’ convicted of "tax evasion," and that I say I want people to ‘shoot all cops dead.’ He knows [referring to me, JV] that all three are patently false, but he also knows that if you say the same lie over and over again, some will believe it."

Notice carefully how he denies saying that he wanted people to shoot cops. He lied again through his teeth. When he wrote "When Should You Shoot A Cop", I quote hereunder what he said: "I said, more bluntly than many ‘gun rights’ folks do, that I want you, the public, to have the ability [and the courage] to kill government agents, both military and police." http://stopthelie.com/larkens_latest.html. Then he amplified in a rising crescendo of crazy rhetoric, WHEN and HOW one should kill a government official, and shoots a cop.

The phrase "to shoot all cops dead" are mentioned in many exchanges that followed, attributed to his murderous state of mind, which he never denies when he makes a stand that a good cop is a dead cop!

You can deduce murder in his mind when you read the bitterness of his conviction that the people in the government are "thieves" that should be wiped out from the face of the earth. That’s how this loony is burning inside with hatred. To slaughter just one cop or one IRS agent will not probably even wet his appetite for vengeful murder. How his jailhouse trauma adversely affected and destroyed his mind, no doubt needs the intervention of a Psychiatrist.

In his comment below attacking me, Larken Rose also pointed out that I was "lying" when I stated that he is a tax felon and an ex-convict.. He tells the public – and this he did in his comment below without shame or without a guilty conscience that he was neither of those.

Read this proof in the next paragraph, of his conviction as a tax evader, and also as proof of how he covers up his conviction from the public as you read his comment below. It is also my proof that I did not lie [with the status I attained as a ranking member of the Academe for Life, I cannot lie, especially when the record is explicit of the truth of a man’s character on issue].

The following was released by the Department of Justice:




(202) 514-2007

TDD (202) 514-1888 -- NOTORIOUS TAX PROTESTOR SENTENCED TO 15 MONTHS IN PRISON http://www.justice.gov/tax/txdv05626.htm.

He CANNOT wiggle his way out from this recorded brand stamped on his back for life as a "tax felon" and as an "ex-convict".

Even if someday Larken Rose is "cured" of his mental illness the way the National Health Institute describes it, he could no longer live a clean and honorable life even when he decides to turn around and repents for his past bestiality and rottenness.

With his bad record as a tax felon and an ex-convict plastered all over the Internet, the public will look down at Larken Rose and his wife Tessa David as "Bonnie & Clyde", The Barrow Gang in the commission of tax fraud. The Barrow Gang was named after Clyde’s family name "Barrow".

On November 9, 2005, in a separate trial, a jury found Rose’s wife and business partner Tessa David, also guilty of tax fraud [tax evasion]. She was scheduled for sentencing on the following year, February 15, 2006.

For the notorious filling of fraudulent income tax returns in the history of tax compliance, the duo – Larken and Tessa -- could be referenced and referred to as the Red Rose Gang!

Larken Rose accused me of lying when I exposed his very disturbed and dangerous mentality as a threat to public safety … honestly expose him to the public of what he really is, for the reasons that I have already articulated.

Honestly, Larken Rose must know for his own peace of mind that I cannot lie after I already attained a high status of Membership in the Academe for Life.

It is really bad for Larken Rose because he COULD NOT support his retaliatory badmouthing of me – JV who is always the good guy in this exercise -- as the object of his undivided hostile attention. I have an immaculate record of wisdom and intellectual discourse publishers compete to print in the Internet and in the Main Stream Media.

But what I have said about this dangerous character named Larken Rose as I warn the public of a terrorist that he is who is about to kill, are supported by evidence on record, and also by what directly came out from his own mouth.

In this connection, as you know, my colleagues from the Academe always defend me when I am brutally attacked on this page …usually attacks that emanate from the gutter. But you should read this one from a Professor friend of mine in the graduate school …" It is hard to character-assassinate a man of integrity like Prof. Vanderville. The attacker has to lie to soil his image."

Larken Rose just did … badly lied on what he posted about me without shame when he salivated those dirty lies in the Web to tarnish my image.

Anyway, it would be foolish for anyone to expect that I would ascribe to an ex-convict even an iota of integrity and demand an apology on the premise that I am dealing with a reasonable and decent man who probably has just committed an error and has no intention of slandering me.

But here is the bottom line: It may sound rode for me to say this but it is true …no matter what plastic surgery this ex-convict may apply on his face to make himself look desirable even just for a casual company, he is not just that kind of man people like me normally meet in their own environment.

Comment by Bertha Anonimo (45815)
Entered on:

It is more LOGICAL to suspect that all those few comments IN FAVOR of Laken Rose, are comments he himself wrote and posted them here as you read them now, using SEVERAL fictitious names. He has a "home" in this website and it is very much easier for him to do this trickery.

The cogent reason for his apparent forgery to appear suspicious and doubtful is that no one outside of the mental asylum would come forward to venerate or praise a psychotic ex-convict who ON RECORD,wanted to kill government officials and shoot cops dead as a revenge of having been arrested and thrown to jail! You can be sure that not even his mother would trust him as an ex-convict.

An ex-convict is defined [Encarta] as a "former prisoner, somebody who served time in prison." Larken Rose CAN NEVER DENY that he served time in prison therefore he is a CONFIRMED ex-convict.

It is not hard for a reasonable person to see why no one in his right mind would associate himself with an ex-convict, a pathological LIAR and a SCAM that on record Larken Rose is, whose criminal mind does not only rip off the people of their money by selling his "books" in an advertised scam, but has also stolen Federal tax money by cheating in his tax returns, aside from desperately wanting to kill government officials and shoot all cops dead as a form of revenge after serving his sentence in jail.

It is rather ILLOGICAL to believe as Larken Rose wanted the public to believe that good people would NOT associate themselves with JV who exposes a dangerous despicable scoundrel like Larken Rose, by simply posting their comments, PROUDLY using their own names, IN FAVOR of JV and what JV is doing.

The public knew that JV was posting a warning about a psychopath on the loose who – again based on record, let’s not commit a mistake about it, folks -- wanted to do harm to government officials, law enforcement officers and to the general public. Many right-thinking citizens would do exactly what JV is doing, at least by writing down their comments against a threat to society that Larken Rose definitely is, independent of their relations with JV, and whether they like him or not. I am definitely one of them – and there is a lot more of us who will do what JV is doing, specifically for the interest of the public, and generally, for the public good.

Larken Rose lied in the SWAT raid of the Guerena’s home to mislead the public. With his delusional brain burning to fever pitch, he was saying something else like the cops could have barged in to rape his wife or steal his car, etc. … as if he was in a heroine-haze state of mind or in a state of delirium.


His psychotic need to kill cops showed clearly in this Guerena case. This is what he exactly said: "Jose Guerena was trafficking in marijuana as the feds alleged [not just alleged but proven by hard evidence on record that the ex-Marine was a dupe trafficker], and the feds invaded his home … as a result … he [Guerena] had the absolute right to gun down every one of those Nazi bastards, to stop that invasion."

He lied. There was no "Nazi bastards" in the raid. The raid was NOT illegal. The police officers had a warrant to enter his house. The drug-trafficking ex-Marine confronted them when a rifle. The fully armed raiders did not wait for the ex-Marine with a rifle to shoot them first – they gunned him and dropped him to the floor dead like a defiant, low-down dirty skunk that he made out of himself.

Not just JV was warning the public to be wary of Rose’s scam. On October 9, 2011, Andrew Cook run this commentary in the Web WARNING the public of Larken Rose’s scam in selling his "book" which induces and teaches the public how to violate the IRS Code and get away with it. Andrew said the scammer was a salesman selling his book like he was selling snake oil.

"There are many snake oil salesmen that don’t bother me. Larken however doesn’t just make money from his snake oil. People that buy into this scam end up in trouble with the IRS and in prison." Cook.

The problem was Rose did not disclose the truth to the public that "he was unable to do what he was suggesting" in his book. In fact he attempted very hard, and he failed; he was punished by serving time in prison. He just scammed them and also sent the gullible to prison for doing what he did for his income tax returns.

As a pathological liar, Rose neither disclosed to the public the fact that he was also a tax felon, nor warned the public that he was an ex-convict who had served his time in prison for doing exactly what he was suggesting in his book.

In fact many aggrieved parties should bring Larken Rose to court for criminal indictment to remedy the wrong he committed and to compensate the injury his victims had suffered. I am sure this will come and surprise Larken Rose any day from now.

Larken Rose’s additional criminal indictment could be similar to that of Armen Condo of the California-based Your Heritage Protection Association. As the head of the business association, convicted scam artist Condo advertised and mailed information materials and brochures to clients like what Larken Rose did in selling his "tax" book – publicized it on print and on circulated videos. Larken Rose painted an evil picture of the IRS and the Government, urged the public to violate certain provisions of the IRC pertaining to income tax, while on the other hand, the California-based scam artist urged the public to file fraudulent exempt tax returns. Condo swindled a staggering amount of $2 million before he was arrested and convicted in the 1980s of mail and tax fraud among others.

Larken Rose’s loot was not disclosed – yet. It will come when criminal and civil cases are filed against him sooner than later.

Comment by Larken Rose (19393)
Entered on:


A couple other quick things: To kaptkane, if this guy is a PAID troll, the feds must be in serious trouble. Because this guy is not good at it, getting caught in the same lies over and over again, blowing his own cover over and over again--not only using IDENTICAL incorrect terminology, but occasionally responding to one of his OTHER personas, and using the wrong name. It's actually pretty funny, if you've seen some of the exchanges under other articles I've posted on FP.

Incidentally, since the term "anarchist" just means someone who opposes any ruling class, an anarchist CAN be a violent moron. If one was, I wouldn't bother claiming he's not an anarchist. I'd just point out that he's a violent moron, and doesn't advocate what I advocate. In this case, the soldiers own actions and statements--and the fact that they never used the term "anarchist" themselves--shows that the state boneheads and their puppets in the media were following talking points, to push a message they knew was utterly false. (Oddly, the CNN story put "anarchists" in quotes in the title, as if to say, "Well, we know they're not REALLY anarchists--they're freaking U.S. soldiers!--but the people in power want us to use that word, so we did.")

Comment by Larken Rose (19393)
Entered on:

For those who don't know this ... AGAIN ... "Joseph Vanderville" is one of about a dozen screen names that ONE delusional liar and looney uses to post comments on most of the articles I post here. He uses the exact same terminology, the same lies, the same sentence structures, in all his "personas."Check my other posts on Freedoms Phoenix for examples. The guy really does have some screws loose.

For example, all of his cowardly aliases say I'm a "felon" convicted of "tax evasion," and that I say I want people to "shoot all cops dead." He knows that all three are patently false, but he also knows that if you say the same lie over and over again, some will believe it. Now, I could just delete his delusional slander, because it's under my articles, I choose not to, because occasionally he gives fine insights into the profound psychoses of state-worshipers.

Anyway, while others can feel free to give him a well-deserved intellectual thrashing, it won't actually change his mind. He KNOWS he's lying; it's not that he's mistaken. His goal is deception and obfuscation, as demonstrated by how many aliases he uses, PRETENDING to be different people. (There have been some rather amusing examples of him accidentally blundering before, blowing his own cover.) So, bash if you want, or just use him as a study case for the lunacy of statism. But don't let his delusions bother you too much. 



Comment by Don Duncan (19812)
Entered on:
Wow. I really like how Larken took a gov't psyops piece and dissected it for counter-intelligence, i.e., took lies and dug out the truth. The most interesting propaganda sentence was where we read the paraphrase of a confession which turns into an accusation/characterization by the prosecutors. Larken states: "This statement conveys mainly confusion." Yes, IF you stop to think about it. But the writer is betting you won't. Sadly, he will be correct most of the time. And so, the psyops agent will be successful in sneaking a lie past the average person's critical reading ability. He/she earned their pay. But in doing so, exposed the "news report" to be clever propaganda as explained by Larken's keen mind. Sorry, statists, but you need to kick it up a few levels to fool Larken.


Comment by Ed Price (10621)
Entered on:

Notice JV's first sentence in his comment below, "This analysis from a writer who cannot be trusted is bulls." Nobody who is a regular journalist in the United States says "bulls" in this way. What they would say is "bull" - singular rather than plural. This suggests that JV is a foreigner who hasn't completely mastered the colloquialisms of the American English language, yet. What kind of a foreigner is JV? I mean, if he had only done something like this once, it might be a typo. But his comments are full of such kinds of little mistakes. Is JV a writer for an anti-American, Muslim Fundamentalist group, plotting the overthrow of America?

Mr. Rose has a wife. This is not really hearsay as she is listed in some of the court documents in Government's case against Mr. Rose. This means that even the Government knows that Mr. Rose has a wife. When JV calls Mr. Rose a "... writer who cannot be trusted ..." JV is simply referring to his own personal feelings and opinion, and trying to pawn them off as fact on you, the reader, using the same kinds of tactics that the media used regarding the accused soldiers. After all, to have a wife as long as Mr. Rose has had, one who helps him with his writing and video-making, she MUST trust him. This is obvious to anyone who thinks about it.

In reality, there are loads of people who trust Mr. Rose to some extent, because the things he says in virtually all of his writings and videos make a whole lot of sense no matter who says them. This leads us to ask the question: can JV be trusted?... since JV is the one who is constantly trying to tear down the freedom of the American people, as you can see by multitudes of his comments in Freedom's Phoenix.

In JV's second sentence, "Deciphering propaganda from news USING THE WRITER’S OWN BIASED ANARCHIST ASSUMPTIONS is a trash froth with danger," JV does exactly the thing that he accuses Mr. Rose of doing. Rather than read what is stated, and look at the the stated facts, JV attempts to lead the reader of his comment, right from its beginning, to the conclusion that he KNOWS what is in the heart and mind of Mr. Rose, the writer, when he uses the word "ASSUMPTIONS." Oh, oh. JV is using the exact kind of journalistic reporting tactics on Mr. Rose that the media used in the story of the accused soldiers. Maybe JV is a "good" journalist after all.

'Nough said by me. JV's comment is full of loads of this kind of lying trash. Who has time to comment, fully, on JV's anti-Americanism and his anti-American freedom tactics? You can scan the rest of JV's comment yourself to see it... if you want to even waste your time, that is.

The only real danger that JV and his kind might pose, is that they might obscure some reasonable and good comment by their constant blubbering. I mean, who wants to even see JV's kind of crap, and that of his comrades? So, in tuning it out, in skimming past it, one might also accidentally skim past some good comments made by somebody who has something worthwhile to say.

More of us, myself included, need to write our comments in the form of letters to the editor, so that they get the visibility of publication that we had intended for them.

Comment by David McElroy (1027)
Entered on:

Poor Vanderville! He needs some meds from his psychiatrist buddy, and a nice nap. He is foaming at the mouth.  He doesn't play well with others. 

Comment by Kane Bittner (44173)
Entered on:

My, my Mr. Vanderville!
Sure sounds like you have an "agenda" and some "anger issues" to deal with yourself!

I just wonder....are you a "paid" troll or do you do it for the fun of it?

Comment by Joseph Vanderville (44376)
Entered on:

This analysis from a writer who cannot be trusted is bulls. Deciphering propaganda from news USING THE WRITER’S OWN BIASED ANARCHIST ASSUMPTIONS is a trash froth with danger. This crap shows ignorance and at the same times reveals a potential murder in mind that not only I but also the general public should worry and be wary about.

To disabuse any suspicious mind from imagining any kind of motive behind this citizen’s duty to warn the public of an impending danger, I have to make it clear that I have nothing personal against the person who is posting this nonsense. I just happen to believe that anyone who is aware of any person who wants the American public to kill government officials and shoot cops dead, is a violent potential killer, which a citizen has a duty to report to, and warn, the public.

But first for better understanding of this caution for public safety, let me state Larken Rose’s pertinent background. Record shows that he is a tax felon convicted of tax evasion. To evaluate the soundness of his mind, we cannot ignore his record in the police blotter.

He is an anarchist who hated the Government and the State, despised and condemned the people in the Government. He is the same guy who after serving his sentence in jail, published his ANALYSIS [similar to this "analysis" directed against the Military and the Media] how the Government had wronged him, and in his many circulated VIDEOS and published WRITINGS, urged the American public to kill government officials and shoot all cops dead.

Anybody may interpret this grave "threat" coming from a dangerous mind anyway possible, but to me it speaks of an obvious murderous personal revenge and/or violent vendetta after Government authorities and IRS agents/police collared him and brought him to justice.

To this very angry person, the enemy is the State he considered undesirable, so is the Government that he looked down as unnecessary, evil and harmful.

According to the results of studies conducted by the National Institute of Health, anarchists’ intense hatred of the State and Government that manifests in extreme hostilities and in many cases result in violence, is a form of "mental illness" suffered by most if not all anti-State-Government nihilists. Judging from the degree of bitterness this mentally troubled person has shown in many ways, his psychological and mental problem borders between the "treatable" and the "incurable".

Larken Rose showed also his ignorance and the violent tendencies of an angry anarchist when he criticized a story run by CNN where four U.S. soldiers were accused of murder for killing two civilians. CNN titled the story 'Anarchists' accused of murder; broader plot against government". The title exposed "anarchists" as wrongdoers, and as an anarchist himself, obviously he didn’t like it.

This news report states that a military group led by anarchist Isaac Aguigui who without doubt hated the State, the Government and the Military, had plotted to do certain bombings and kill certain government officials after their plan to take control of the ammo depot at Fort Stewart is carried out. The accused had issues against the Establishment similar to what Larken Rose have.

Larken Rose accused CNN of clandestine motive when the Media targeted "Anarchists" in the title of the story. He didn’t understand why the title shouldn’t be just simple, like "U.S. soldiers" accused of murder …

What Larken Rose does not know is that in Journalism, "copywriting" -- which involves the drafting of the headline [title] or banner story -- is a major responsibility of senior editors who decide which angle of the story should be given prominence in the headline in order to catch the reading public’s immediate notice and attention. CNN opted in headlining not just the soldiers accused of murder but the kind of soldiers that they were – "Anarchists" – anarchists described in the body of the story as attempting to carry out a plot to bomb military installations, murder government officials, etc.

Obviously, Larken Rose wanted to hide the danger of violent anarchism in this story that CNN exposed, and as a notorious anarchist, his biased mental attitude becomes doubly dangerous.

He also intruded into the unfamiliar ground of Journalism, i.e., how banner stories are headlined, of which he was in a blanket of ignorance!

A killer’s mind is either bloated with delusion of grandeur, or Lilliputian, narrow and limited, usually only one-dimensional. In this case, this configuration of an afflicted mind manifests at least in four instances of distortions.

For example, this guy Larken Rose argued that Aguigui the accused, was a "page" in the Republican National Convention. The premise of his twisted logic is that the Republicans are not anarchists, and his garbage conclusion was that since Aguigui was a Republican, he cannot be an anarchist, as CNN headlined! Distortion #1.

Soldiers fight anarchists in the streets, since Aguigui was a soldier fighting anarchists, he cannot be the anarchist that CNN reported. Distortion #2.

His blocked out mind was on Republicans and soldiers that cannot be or cannot become anarchists. Distortion #3. He used his biased assumptions to make a crooked, and even dangerous conclusions. Distortion #4.

If you go farther looking at what the science of the mind reveals, these symptoms are common to psychopaths that kill. Their criminal behavior is triggered by a false conclusion based on a very biased assumption of facts and circumstances not only personal but also imagined as prejudicial to them. This feeling is said to be so compelling that the urge to act [in most cases, to kill] against this prejudice becomes irresistible!

In that infamous Fort Hood shooting, Maj. Nidal Hasan [a Muslim with prejudice against whites in an environment with discriminatory Muslims exposure] killed 13 people and wounded 32 others.

For a long, long time until he was about to be deployed to Afghanistan, he was harboring his anarchist bias against the U.S. Government and soldiers he was attending to [he was a military psychiatrist] – to that point where that corked feeling of anti-Muslim biases and prejudices around him exploded … he snapped and ended up in a shooting rampage.

The lesson to learn here is that killers of innocent people could also be their defenders in war. Inversely, it is not an oxymoron or a contradictory occurrence that a soldier, your defender and protector, could also be at the same time your killer.

Predatory sociopaths hiding behind uniforms like Hasan are as terrifying as those violent anarchists are, especially those who aggressively stepped forward to announce their determination to kill government officials and shoot cops dead like what Larken Rose did!

My final advice is just this …be careful to identify immediately any of those mentally deranged predators who appear normal but with a very disturbed mind, and do some evasive or preventive action. Dial 11.

You will encounter them anywhere anytime of the day and night – even in this website where you less expected.