Mike Lyvers, a psychologist, is an American working in Australia who is an Israeli lobbyist and apologist. He suffers from extreme paranoia, a condition related to his Islamaphobia and hatred of all things Islamic. Not unsurprisingly he is also an extreme right-wing Zionist. He also has problems with ‘psychological projection’ wherein a person, in this case Lyvers, ‘projects’ the undesirable traits he recognises he has as his own on to others. Of course, as a psychologist himself Lyvers would have more insight about this condition than most. He is nonetheless unable to conceal it and, being an intelligent person, is able to dream up some impressively worded ‘projections’ that in reality simply describe in an inverted sort of way exactly what he is himself.
Let’s analyse this recent outburst for example:
“I see that the ultra-right wing racist homophobe neo-Nazi Islamofascist sympathiser known as Dhimmian Lataanazi has again accused others of being "right wing." This is a guy who thinks that Islam, an ultra-conservative patriarchal system that would hang all gays and blasphemers from cranes and would imprison all rape victims for life, isn't "right wing". Can't get much farther to the right than that! But maybe Dhimmian is so far right that even Islam is to his left.
There are liars, there are deceivers, then there are liars AND deceivers. And one Dhimmian Lataanazi is clearly both!”
As far as ‘projection’ is concerned there is actually nothing here that is anywhere near subtle; it’s fairly blatant and quite obvious. But while it clearly says a lot about what I am not – one need only read the opposite to what Lyvers has projected – we need to interpret what it says about Lyvers.
Lyvers sees me as a “neo-Nazi Islamofascist sympathiser” because he is himself an extreme right-wing Zionist who supports the Nazi-like actions of the Israeli Zionists as they go about their ethnic-cleansing in Palestine, just as the Nazis did throughout Europe during the war as they ‘ethnically cleansed’, using the term in its broadest sense, Gypsies, Slavs, homosexuals, Jews, Jehovah’s Witnesses, communists, etc., from Europe. Most of those things that he thinks I am, he is, in fact, himself only within the context of being a Zionist rather than an Islamist.
As it happens I do not support the ideology of Islam, particularly when that ideology causes people, their own or others, to suffer. However, I believe that that is a problem that they have to sort out for themselves. To force ‘western values’ on to cultures that are not understood is the height of arrogance and the cause of much of the trouble in this world – particularly when the values that are being forced on to others are in many instances worse than the ones being replaced.
While I do not support any aspect of Islamic ideology that is detrimental to the lifestyle of individuals, I support even less those who lie and cheat to start wars in order to steal land and resources and who murder the inhabitants of those lands as the US and Israel have done.
People like Mike Lyvers make outrageous claims about those that expose them in order to cover their own right-wing extremism.
Because right-wing extremism is associated with Nazism and Fascism, the very ideologies that once threatened their own existence, right-wing Zionists go into denial about their own ideology of ethnic-cleansing, expansionism and Islamaphobia and even launch into ‘projection’ in order to camouflage their right-wing extremism. In Lyvers case, he calls anyone who is anti right-wing Zionist anti-Semites and therefore neo-Nazis and, by extension, “Islamofascist sympathisers”. Into the bargain they then insist that they themselves are ‘leftish’ and represent the ’norm’ and, because they’ve been caught out lying and deceiving themselves, call everyone else that doesn’t go along with their ideology, ‘liars and deceivers’.
Lyvers should write a paper on himself.
AUSTRALIANS AT WAR
THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY is a compelling factual history of neoconservatism and its influence on US Foreign Policy in the Middle East during the first decade of the twenty-first century. Click on image above for details.
4 comments:
It seems that the ideological stablemates of the likes of Lyvers, Pahoff et al. had a bit of a shindig in Washington a few weeks back.
You can view some video of the event here if you have the stomach for it.
Pretty gross stuff. To think that these people want the world to be like them.
I wonder if Lyvers, Pahoff, Will Howard, Kaonstandinitis, et al, were there?
People who aren't psychologists often attribute more deference to the profession than it deserves.
Psychologists, depending on which school they subscribe to, are a divided lot and some of them peddle views and opinions which are distorted and self-serving.
Take what they say with a degree of skepticism I say.
Cheers!
Post a Comment