AFAIK in Twitter you could create polls.
What if some twitter user with decent amount of followers or with some popular hashtag create a poll with a single question and Yes/No options:
Do you consider WEF a terrorist organisation?
- Yes
- No
Just that, nothing more, without any explanations and other stuff.
It does not matter what the results would be. What matters is openly and clearly throwing out an idea that WEF are terrorist organisation.
You could spend years trying to explain for wide audience that WEF is bad guys, but most will never accept your reasoning, because it is boring to read and you will use wrong language.
Most people minds thorougly adjusted to specific "tags" or "keywords". Even if they don't know what WEF is, don't care or do not agree, that keywords will trigger programmed response in their heads. And every time they will meet abbreviation "WEF", that subconcious association with "terrorism" will automatically pop up.
That poll will be, say, first phase. IDK, may be you have popular twitter account or know somebody who have it, try to do it. It will be perfect if it is some completely unrelated with any politics or conspiracies stuff, just some regular peasant account. Just a peasant ask a random question.
Poll is chosen because it is theoretically completely innocent, poll poster want to know opinion of others, not expressing something, so, theoretically, it will be very complex for them to find a reason for themselves to ban that poll, especially if results will be "in favor" to WEF. But for us, as I said, results does not matter.
May be put similar question on something like quora or something like that. Again, it does not matter what answers will be given, main goal is maximum audience coverage of question itself.
Second phase - all we need is to place "WEF" and "terrorist organisation" together at any occasion. It should not be pushed too hard, but every time you mention "WEF" in some public posts add "terrorists" or "terrorist organisation". Early or later that should began to spread, even through dumb virtue signallers who will remember that some three letters are "terrorists" so they should virtue signal on that three letters.
The idea is to use their programming, their language and their kind of tactic against them.
IMF, WHO and others could be treated in similar way.
Is it a stupid idea or there is something that could really work out in existing social networks swamp?
Hey, did u see this? https://nitter.net/KimDotcom/status/1581031803045163008?t=DOIETPp-UgTGQrlH-n814A&s=09
Was it those famous Russian pranksters?
IDK. As you should understand, if they could fake image and voice of some top person who start a call, they could definitely fake the image and voice of person who they talk with. From the other side, there exists pranks that looks like real, not because of image of person, but because of what person do during prank, how they move their phones falling out of camera view and so on. Hardly that could be done intentionally exactly in that way.
Also, I never heard that even most interesting and revealing answers of western officials in that pranks was used in any propaganda.
So, it is very questional thing. Yes, you definitely could prank top western officials since they are dumb enough to fall into prank. But from the other side, why that pranks was never used as a source of proofs or facts in mass-media.
Whatever, no prank unveiled something what was not known before. So, they does not matter, whether interviewees are real or faked. No new important of critical information - that pranks are useless noise.
This is just the classic standard grift, where the information is prepended with whatever associated context that is desired. It is invocation of basic learning patterns.
The defenses are already laid, by the time such vernacular could be applied they would have moved to a different front line group if necessary.
As we are witnessing now the front lines are changing.
In that case, information will be associated with perfectly correct context. Kind of reversed grift. Stole back from the thief. :)
Oh yea, forsure. I am not saying don't do it. I am just skeptical on the value.
I suppose that this induced, nearly unconscious association "WEF = terrorist organisation" in some small, but noticeable part of peasants will eventually draw attention of TPTB. And they will react somehow. This will be the proof that we could really manipulate them. Or not.
I'm not saying that this will work and there will be some bombshell result and we immidiately win. It is just experiment to check if it is possible to manipulate TPTB from our side. I think that result of that experiment is important information that definitely have some value.
I have personally identified wef as a terrorist organization before most people would have. Basically as soon as I heard their name and looked them up. I know many people also do. It is just a matter of the people that are not clear on what is actually in play that remain.
I think this has been in play for a while, there has been a conscious effort to identify the globalist powers seeking domination since at least the 70's on the global scale.
This was performed mainly by christian propaganda from what I know of it. It became so sever that they began to manufacture it on their own to use it as precursors to information as already discussed.
So I guess I am suggesting that the entire reason the wef group exists is they are likely an extension of the previous attempt, modernized and christened sometime in the late 60's? perhaps sooner. Kick off in the early 70's.
Likely an extension of the entire khazarian plot as is related to the broadcasting of the 'holocaust'
I think they are losing all the time, continually as history shows and this is no different. Incorrect assumptions lead to plan failure over and over. There are points where they seem to be in control (tptb) such as now, but even as you look closely you can see the people are not subjugated as deep as they need, so this alone will lead to the continuation of their current failures.
a) what if suggested information (fiction) was stolen from perceivable inspiration (reality)?
b) what if perceivable inspiration is freely available to each perceiving one within?
c) what if consenting to suggested allows those suggesting to steal it from those who consent to want it?
Sleight of hand...the joker (suggesting) and the thief (consenting to suggested) in the night (ignorance of perceivable)... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3afXXsJwYZo
a) the line (inception towards death) represents constant change for those (living) within.
b) front and back are suggested to tempt one to ignore being the center (perceiving) of everything (perceivable).
c) FRONT, noun [Latin frons, frontis; Greek; the nose.]...oy vey.
a) TER'ROR, noun [Latin terror from terreo, to frighten.]...all fears are outcome oriented. The few suggest outcomes so that the many consent to be afraid about them. In other words...consenting to suggested -ism fuels the terror.
b) OR'GAN, noun [Latin organum.] - "instrument of action"...living represents the instrumental reaction within the enacting process of dying. The few suggest organizations to tempt the many to ignore reacting as an organ (living) to their origin (process of dying).
c) organizing self; while resisting suggested -ism makes suggested terrorist organizations impotent.
...tempts the consenting many to quest for suggested answers; while ignoring the perceivable solution (process of dying) for every problem (living).
IDE'A, noun [Latin video; Greek; to see]...that implies perceivable inspiration; while your attempt to "throw out" represents the temptation to ignore perceivable inspiration for suggested information.
Reality already is open (to free will of choice) and clear (perceivable)...it's those within who willingly choose to ignore it for the suggestions by others.
a) suggested (information) over perceivable (inspiration) represents the program the few running within the memory of the many; through consent of the many to the suggestions of the few.
b) consent to the suggested word over perceivable sound allows the few to define; redefine and contradict all languages the many are using for miscommunication (reasoning against each other).
c) TAC'TICS, noun - "to appoint"...life isn't appointed; it represents inline (from inception towards death), hence within momentum. Put your finger into sand and you have a point; add motion to it and it becomes a line...life is always being moved from inception towards death.
d) choice exist within balance (need/want coexistence). Consenting to suggestions causes imbalance (want vs not want conflict). The conflict (reason) exists only within ones mind; put there by ones consent to suggestions by others.
The consent by each one of the many to suggested collectivism (togetherness) represents the ignorance of apartheid (being partial within whole). This ignorance causes the many vs few divide. The few represent the parasitic reaction to the ignorance of the many (living) towards their host (process of dying). Instead of resisting the perceivable host; the many consent to the suggesting parasites aka the happy merchants of temptation.
One (living) cannot destroy a controlled environment (process of dying) from within. The ignorance of the many about that is what allows the few to lure them into a suggested controlled environment (world wide web). Both for (want) vs against (not want) reactions only spend resistance towards suggested instead of growing it within perceivable. This is how controlled environments are used to farm the resistance of the consenting cattle.
Grow comprehension about being inline; while resisting the temptation of suggested online. Being on the line implies being carried towards outcome (death); while being inline implies being resistance (living) within temptation (process of dying). That's the struggle one needs to fight...for the sustenance of self; not against others.
What's more likely...being attacked by a jew or hurting yourself by consenting to what a jew suggests you to hurt yourself with? What if jew (kabbalistic phonetic for you) are doing it to yourself, which tempts others to exploit it?
If you're willing to stoop to their level, then you might as well just join them.
This isn't that. We aren't ever going to even make a dent in their armor if we aren't allowed to use the same tactics they use against us against them. I don't know if its possible for you or i to beat Magic Johnson in a game of basketball, but i can be sure it can't be done of we are using the rules of baseball.
Not to stoop to their level, i.e. fuck the brains of world population to stump in some idea. Just use the shit they already did to people against them.
IDK, if there was some way to use stupidity of those who weared masks during coronahoax against those who forced people to wear masks to free all people from masks - will it be stooping to their level? I don't think so. Just some trick to mirror the bullet aimed at you back to them.