.

SECRET INTELLIGENCE SERVICE

.
ROOM No. 15

.
QUESTIONS ON CONSCIENCE

.

terrible

.

Questions on Conscience

“It is such that a principle resides within social protocol, and the instincts which are the chariots of thought and of behaviour seek opportunities and when they come out to race, this being when protocols change, it is this aspect of human character that in fact, never changes.”

(C-I)

“I realise that it’s a grave topic, therefore I will make it more so by stating that; those who kill children die themselves during every subsequent moment. There is something that follows and haunts because those very dead faces are in everything. Those whose responses are not such are central to this discussion on conscience.”

(C-I)

“Those who and via whatever situation, seeped in whatever version of sanctimony, are party to this (the indiscriminate murder of children) are the most obnoxious and despicable examples of humankind. On a course versed entirely in their self-exalted and power mad delusion, they run rampant and one must ask; who is assisting them and why? It is a situation that should mark deeply this supposed advanced era, rather than brandishing satisfaction for something gained from it, something utterly abhorrent and completely meaningless.” 

(C-I)

We have to examine this topic because we are human beings.

The following are questions and display the fact that we are well aware of them.

.

updated 01/02/2017

(C-I) (C-III) (C-V)

(C-I) I shall introduce the following for the debate:

Morality should be a body of standards or principles derived from a code of conduct; derived from a particular philosophy, religion, or culture, or from a standard that a person believes should be universal.

However, morality has no universality, not in any sense and it never has. As a race we commit the most heinous acts of barbarity – both directly and indirectly, consequently without conscience.

Conscience, appealing to reason; should be criticisms, prohibitions and inhibitions, positive aspirations and ideals representing a person or collective’s idealised self-image.

Conscience is a sense of the moral content of a course of action, the intentions that underlie, or the character with regard to a feeling of obligation to do right or to be good. Conscience, usually informed by acculturation and instruction, is thus generally understood to give intuitively authoritative judgments regarding the moral quality of actions.

As a race we have developed nowhere, other than hurtle toward ownership of interests. These interests serving their ideological master, and the hurtle toward obliteration of the entire species.

To redefine courses of action that are immoral by any and all standards, consequently deriving a convincement that the immoral is somehow good, is insanity.

Any conscience brought to bear is from those predefined as the out-group. The in-group is most often the State and whose power wielding machine is all pervasive.

Are all nation states the same in this respect, or are they so in varying degrees of affliction? The answer is both obvious and complex. The obvious is in the support of those who kill women and children with impunity. The reasoning that underlies these courses of action are complex and all are fraught with psycho-pathology.

It is not possible to mirror immorality and expect the immoral to perceive it other than a means with an end, however hypothetical, in sight.

The means and the end are themselves the harbingers of an immutable distortion of any sense of universal morality.

If we arm the killers with all means to kill, then what does that mean for the distance achieved? It means that we are the same. This is not reacting to forces who would annihilate us, if they could, it is self-interests running rampage.

As said above, we have to ask these questions. We cannot just carry on with things unawares.

NOTES : ENHANCED INTERROGATION  (TORTURE)

.

QUESTIONS ON CONSCIENCE

.

(C-I)  This is an extremely difficult topic to discuss, not because it hides or has ever been hidden from view, because it can’t, but because its effect is dealt with in ways that in some, many in fact, is indicative of not caring at all, while at the opposite polarity it haunts the moments with anguish.

(C-V) I agree wholeheartedly, and within this spectrum lives the supposed justification. One has to ask the question; what justification is there for murdering women and their children and evading culpability by using the term ‘collateral damage?’

(C-I) As long as the children belong to someone else.

(C-III) Well, you have to say that it’s an evolutionary facet of human nature, one that has been part of that nature for as long as we know. The present is no different than whenever in this and many related respects, though all things considered, it should be.

(C-V) It’s arguably worse and I say this because this era has brought the capacity to know what, where and how events occur, I mean delivered instantaneously to the masses. Therefore the effects should be widely and very deeply felt, but arguably they are not.

(C-I) Affirmative. Why, when the graphic detail is brought home to roost does it inspire some, would be jihadists, for example, to go and join in? This is not what many at home want to think about because it conflicts. The question arises and is evaded; what’s the difference between collateral damage and any other means of causing dismemberment and death?

(C-V) It is an extremely awkward question to consider. Terrorists are different in their entirety than are we. There are those who condemn acts of terror and yet support killing children via other arguments. The whole thing is absurd. The killing of children is the worst act a human being can perform.

(C-I) I dislike the word ‘justification’. In this respect it stinks of so very many convoluted arguments, of political diatribes that mean nothing. Surreal is the situation whereby children are being killed and doctrinal assertions feed the force and choice of the method and weaponry, while all the time there are the equally smug and self-sure elsewhere in the world telling all and sundry that their take on it all is the only credible one.

Worse it becomes when we have the power to do something about it but choose to look elsewhere because diplomacy and commerce weigh heavily against a stone in the brain of a child or two, or three hundred. The abuses of human rights carried out via justifications written by the irrevocably insane are rife.

The control exerted via adherence to faith is manifestly bad. All it has achieved is a status of the person akin to a nomadic and illiterate peasant.

(C-III)  Wow!

(C-I) Wow what? Persecution, punishment and pain. These conditions have haunted the dignity of civilisation, but if the past is gone, we need not be concerned, har, har. What is indicative of insanity gone rampage does appear to charm the senses of many of this era. Why? Because it’s always been so and always will be. It is what I said at the beginning;

“It is that a principle is such that it resides within social protocol, and the instincts that are the chariots of thought and of behaviour seek opportunities and when they come out to race, this being when protocols change, it is this aspect of human character that in fact never changes.”

How are we supposed to view the young and old alike being executed because some psychotic liar claims divine intervention? Are we somehow supposed to accept other/competing claims to knowledge, such that they are true and others are not? What kind of collective asylum are we defending against? A very severely affected one and which invents differing versions of morality. The notion of conscience becomes a joke.

(C-III) This is absolutely what and who we are defending against, and we do so with everything at our disposal. We cannot allow this in our state of being, and will not ever.

.

beslan

awful

.

(C-I) Appeals to wisdom away from humanity for acts of genocide and war are pathetic examples of human evolved state. By virtue of appealing to supposed ‘higher order beings’ humans are appealing to extra-terrestrial phenomena that encapsulate their concept of perpetuity, encapsulates them. To do this defies sense, is essentially senseless.

Words can be used in any contrive, any conjuration of conjecture, and this is all it can ever be and it produces the pictures, the transient lamentations to which many adhere. Those who, by doing this, prod at the limitation which is human life with the intention of somehow transcending it, are merely victims of their emotions. These emotions constitute the social agreed-upons, which are: PREJUDICE, INTOLERANCE and DELUSION.

(C-III) The means to invent and the invention itself, because it owns its own portrait in the mind, is assumed real? The portrait speaks the same language?

(C-I) The capacity to invent, of convolution and then add to it, is what the human brain is very adept at doing. Whether the capacities so to do have developed far are not the issue, it is what is held as ‘knowledge’, that is the issue. Idealisation – the mind state consisting of the brain’s ability to create circumstances whereby human beings transcend the world has been the case for millennia. Human beings cannot somehow merely be born and live, they have to be immortal too. They have to be able to thrust their limitation toward where they see little to nothing and understand less, and then lay claim to ‘proving’ the conjecture.

Listen to me; I say that you can observe ‘immoral, unjust and infamous things’ and perceive them as human inclination, whereupon dangles appeal and which, is fraud. The latter, if it is an attempt to hold counsel with the non-existent, I refer to the transcendent because human thoughts and actions remain where they are. The ‘immoral, unjust and infamous’ transcends nothing, because nothing is its home, here, and one incompatible with others myriad, wherein whose home is the ‘moral and the just’. One can ask whether the latter becomes less as the days pass because there appears an inevitability that their days will become likewise, stained.

(C-I) Quite. I have to think about that.

(C-V) Me too. But I want to say that we are the United Kingdom, and in the very essence of our being feel interminably for such monstrous wrong. We see it precisely for what it is and react emotionally, because this collective capacity is our state.

(C-III) I second that.

(C-I) Yes, of course. Well said.

.

Donbass 7

Donbass 6

R ISIS

.

(C-I) I realise that it’s a grave topic, therefore I will make it more so by stating that; those who kill children die themselves during every subsequent moment. There is something that follows and haunts because those very dead faces appear in everything. Those whose responses are not such are central to this discussion on conscience.

If you listen to the accounts – though not the only ones, from the war in Vietnam, many who were there fall into the former category (the dead faces remain in everything that is subsequent). For those who it does not, it should. There are other accounts, as I said, from yesterday, today and likewise, will be tomorrow.

(C-III) Do you think the accusation of sentimentality, of being prone to emotion, of some kind of weakness is often leveled?

(C-I) Yes, unfortunately, because the pathological nature of the human being dictates the performing of the act in the first place, and the reacting that follows in its wake. Regarding the latter, what I mean is that propaganda distorts the truth, fuels the already machinated nature of responses. People get along doing what they do. The kids are not theirs. It’s about a ‘foreign war’ bound with notions of supposed unacceptable difference, machismo, patriotism, race, religion…, anything the spin doctors find useful so to hide the truth.

Our remit, the information operation alias the New Mind War is not party to anything of this nature, not now, not ever, regarding what is, without argument to the contrary, the most morally reprehensible of all – the killing of children, and women too of course. We are mentioning this because it happens and it’s not so easy, if at all, to deal with its effect. We have to address because it is the reality of the world of our enemies, so it does enter into ours.

.

Important note regarding the following videos;

Though the following illustrate the objective, which is to examine conscience as a variable, – the extent to which conscience/guilt manifests, it should be noted in addition that the issue of PTSD is discussed in No. XXVI, which is a conversation regarding fear. (C-I)

.

.

.

.

.

.

 

.

.

.

CONSCIENCE 

Conscience is critical inner awareness that bears witness to the norms and values we recognise and apply. The complex of values with which conscience deals includes not only those we own, but the entire range of values to which we are exposed

(C-I)

.

R15LORVI-061115 hg

.

SecretIntelligenceService.london

SecretIntelligenceService.org

SecreIntelligenceService-defence.uk

.

Return to previous page

Contact Unit

.

 

 

Secret Intelligence Service

United Kingdom

Adversitate. Custodi. Per Verum