I'll reiterate my hypothesis that this entire "legal action" was as phony as the original event, and is more evidence good old BH--err, I mean "AJ"--is controlled opposition.
The intent is to chill discussion of SH or any other hoax, so that the gullible think, "Oh man, better not post that to r/conspiracy. It'd take forever to pay off a $kajillion from my job at GameStop!"
For reference, any such legal action would have failed to satisfy element #1 in: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress as a Cause of Action in Connecticut.
Could AJ be said to have intentionally inflicted distress when his claim was that the child said to have been brutally murdered did not actually die? Takes some pretty perverse reasoning to make that claim, and no real judge or jury would buy it.
I don't recall he looked into it any further. It turns out that Nest Thermostats include both proximity and motion sensors: Sensors in Google Nest devices.
I doubt one in 100 people with these devices realize that fact, and far fewer than that know it's all "phoned home". I suspect it's a bare handful are consciously aware that: "Google knows if you're home, and is watching and listening to you right now." Even if you don't consider it dangerous in any way, it's creepy as hell.
You know what's bizarre? I saw one post a couple of days ago and one today on r/conspiracy where they've still got shills deflecting from Tiffany Dover being killed by the vaxx. What difference, at this point, does it make? Why don't they just announce that she died suddenly of winter vagina and put and end to it?
All I can figure is that these shills are like Japanese soldiers fighting WW2 on deserted islands that just never got the word to hang it up and go home. If so, it shows how out of control things are.
Just a few random thoughts on this:
-
They're given a different set of lies than we're given. An easy one would be: "Yes, the whack-zeens are going to kill some people outright, but we have to save the world, don't we? If we told the dumb sheeple the truth they'd all panic, so we have to lie to them. Just make sure you get the J&J, okay? <wink!>"
-
As Yuri Bezmenov mentions, if the time comes when the idealists realize they've been duped and used, and turn on the State in their outrage, they'll be the first put up against a wall.
-
The Dark Occultists that run the world despise these people, and refer to them as their "dogs", which they will have no problem putting down if need be. Why do they despise them? Precisely because they have turned on their own kind and simply cannot be trusted.
I, personally, am shocked that any of this gets out through MSNBC. And I, personally, take this as more evidence that there has been a turn in the tide that can no longer be stopped.
I mean, if I had been forced to bet money, it would have been on MSNBC recapping the interview by saying, "John Fetterman is going to make a wonderful Senator!"
A few years back, Adam Curry on the No Agenda Show was messing around with a Raspberry Pi-hole. He happened to notice that every time someone just walked in front of his Nest thermostat, he could see the burst of traffic trying to make it's way back to SkyNet.
Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters; they have forsaken the LORD, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward.
Isaiah 1:4
There's a minor bizarre situation going on with these suicide drones.
First I read that Iran was selling a bunch of drones to Russia, then later I saw a bunch of battlefield footage both of launch and strikes, which I have no reason to suspect was not legitimate. So far, so good, and I thought everyone knew this.
Recently I read that Iran firmly denies arming either side and calls for an immediate ceasefire. The strange part is that neither Ukraine nor the US nor anyone else is calling them out on this.
All I can figure is that no one in Western media wants to make anyone mindful of the fact that governments can and will blatantly lie to their own people even about something as serious as war. If they say, "Iran is lying to everyone about this!", I'm guessing they fear it will conjure the thought in too many normies, "Oh yeah? I wonder if anyone else is lying about anything?"
There is something you can learn from this situation, but it involves noticing things that aren't there. That is, something that should be there but is missing. If you can do that, you're probably not a liberal.
Looking at Byrne's long and detailed writeup, there's no way anyone could be aware of everything in it right off the top of their head, let alone have researched it all thoroughly and "deboonked " it. I would be completely shocked if Reich responded with anything that began, "Yes, Patrick, there were a couple of things in there of which I was not aware, and...." But as an academic and intellectual engaged in--and who in this instance initiated--a public debate he certainly should, right? So why not?
Well, you can say he's just (((dishonest))), but I would argue it goes deeper than that. The liberal mentality exhibits a seemingly complete lack of self-awareness, of the capability for critical introspection. They speak, but they don't actually listen to what they themselves say.
I would go so far as to suggest that--to put cause and effect in the correct relation--this lack is in fact what causes one to be a liberal. To put an even finer point on it, there may be a fundamental difference in their makeup as a human being. One may think of colorblindness for an analogy. And if you've known someone who is colorblind, it's almost impossible to casually notice.
Obviously, Russia knows this and probably has ample concrete evidence of it. To my knowledge, they haven't even hinted at this publicly. It should be noted that this demonstrates Russia is seeking to avoid a direct military confrontation with the US and NATO.
Not that that wasn't clear before to anyone paying attention, but you can add it to the pile.
All these modern systems have been deeply, deeply penetrated. Some lowlights:
- Intel Management Engine, a processor overseeing the rest of your system
- All cars since the 2005 model year come with 3G connections
- All hard drives come from the factory with subverted microcode in the boot sector
- Jim stone recently reported that he now believes phone batteries themselves are penetrated for use as a vector
I concluded long ago that this struggle can no longer be thought of in terms of just "defending yourself".
A couple of quick notes in reference to points made in the posts:
-
After Weinstein was sentenced, he was "transferred between prisons" at some point. There are pictures of him getting off a private plane without handcuffs. He's probably never spent a night in jail and the whole thing was a limited hangout.
-
Donald and Ivana were close to Michael Jackson back in the day, and Ivana never believed the accusations. The Anon says he thought like a:teenager, and Ivana said:
He was a child himself in a man’s body, tender, sweet and gentle … there’s no way he could have hurt anyone.
I'll put this out there because I think many of us have seen enough at this point not to rule anything out:
There's a theory that Medvedev is a descendant (or clone!) of Tsar Nicholas II, to whom he bears more than a striking resemblance. These are very strong words coming from him, a man who until recently has been so mild as to make the conservative Putin look like a firebrand in comparison. He's also a Russian statesman, who play their cards very close to the vest. Are the Romanovs looking for payback a century later in a very, very deep game?
What counter-evidence do we really have, besides arguments from personal incredulity?
Monkey Werx gave his analysis of the flight path of the P-8 and a description of the suspected weapon in this video (starting just after 10 min)::
SITREP 10.3.22 - The HAAWC Missile System - If it looks like a duck!
Just a very, very little. Not because it's not important, but because I got the information for the answers I sought before having to look there. I figured Enoch would just fill out a lot of detail and I'm already so overloaded with detail you wouldn't believe it.
For yourself or for anyone reading it, though, I have an important tip to pass on. The Book of Enoch centers around "The Watchers", and everyone assumes this is because those entities have some sort of role in the oversight of humans. This is not correct and comes from a misunderstanding/mistranslation of the story from the original Sumerian.
The word that gets translated as "watchers" is "I.GI.GI" in the original Sumerian. I was watching some mainstream academic talking about some subject I don't even remember when he offhandedly mentioned that yes, "GI" means "eye" and "I.GI.GI" thus means "watchers", but the word can also be interpreted numerically as 600. That was key.
So when you hear about 200 Fallen Angels, and a third of the stars being swept from Heaven in Revelation, and various other references, the base number being referred to is 600.
That's how I determined that the number in the Anunnaki expedition to Earth was 600, and the Watchers, the Igigi, and the Anunnaki were all one and the same.
Interestingly, the Sumerians had vital things to say on both these agriculture and cities. As for agriculture, we find:
An analysis of Akkadian Seal VA/243:
It’s one of the most ancient cylinder seals that have been found. It shows the god Enlil granting the plow — the knowledge of agriculture — to humankind.
And as for cities, Sumerians were the first to build them, suddenly out of nowhere, with no evidence of any ramp up in development. Quite a mystery! (Or is it?)
(Technically speaking, yes, there were structures built before that time like Gobekli Tepi, and cities like Nan Medol and Gunung Padang. The problem, however, is that we have basically zero information about builders and their civilizations. The Great Flood did a helluva job scraping the planet clean, and TPTB have wiped away the rest in the time since.)
Thanks for posting. I had no idea these quotes existed, besides one sentence of the Patton quote. No wonder he had to "die in a car accident".
Dave Hodges of The Common Sense show has related a story about his mother. (Don't hold me to the details of this, but it was something like....) She was a small girl in a Catholic orphanage in France when the Germans showed up.
She was really too small to recognize if anything was going on there, but she remembers one of the German officers telling her, "Don't worry, they won't be able to hurt you now."
The Garden of Eden incident is without doubt the most misinterpreted story of the Bible. After having studied it quite closely, I'm always shocked to realize what people are ignorant of in the text and--worse--what they will invent that is simply not there.
Very, very long story short, what is called "the Fall" (which terminology is not in the text) is the first instance of consciousness being given to ordinary human beings. The story was, of course, not well understood at the time and has become somewhat distorted over the 35-40K years since it took place. It must be read with extreme care and a wide background of knowledge.
Part of that knowledge is where I get that dating from. A few students of the Bible know that there were two creations of Man, but did you realize that mainstream anthropologists also recognize this, albeit in their own way?
Imagine you asked an anthropologist something like, "If I had a time machine, how far back would I have to go to see the first human?" He would surprisingly reply, "You'll have to be more specific."
Pressed further, he would say, "To see someone that looks indistinguishable from your next door neighbor, you'd have to go back 200-300K years. But if you wanted to kidnap that person back to 2022 and give them a haircut and a job, it wouldn't work. These were only 'anatomically modern humans' and otherwise behaved like other primates. You could go back no further than 35-40K years to find the first 'behaviorally modern humans'. That's when they started to act like humans do today."
There are various textual clues within the story itself to explain this further, and well as a body of contextual information to go along with it, but again, it's a very long story.
IDK if it's a utopia, and this is pretty weak to go on, but I've been watching a lot of Korean content on Netflix lately. A couple of series took place partially in NK, and one of them featured a DPRK military officer as the hero and love interest.
The point is, the South Koreans don't really portray anything negative about the Northerners. No one is scared of invasion or sabotage or kidnapping. It's pictured as underdeveloped and somewhat impoverished, and the "authoritarianism" is a bit of a joke (think "Hogan's Heroes").
That would seem to be the opposite bias than one would expect, so I provisionally take it as more or less accurate.
They are, in fact, dire threats to democracy. When analyzed clearly, the answer comes from an almost mathematical proof.
The author actually mentions the original source of the problem when he quotes JFK's words on "secret oaths". All public officials and members of the military and law enforcement take public oaths, to which they are not only morally but legally accountable. If not, what is the point?
If such a person has also taken a secret oath, it is implausible that the time will never come when the duties demanded by one are in conflict with those demanded by the other. If that person chooses to violate their secret oath and suffer the consequences, I don't think anyone outside the group would care in the least. But what about a violation of their public oath?
It would depend on the nature and severity of the violation, but I would say such violation could rise to the level of treason. The purpose of the public oath is to declare your loyalty to your country and your country alone, at all times and in all respects.
At the end of a tremendous article, the author misses the mark with this:
... but as it stands there are no laws on the books that prevent people – even those who say they represent us – from meeting together in private.
Of course not, but that isn't the problem. Conspiracy and action in violation of any public oath is, and is punishable up to and including death.
All that being said, US political and military oaths currently use the phrase "bear true faith and allegiance". Can one be said to bear true faith and allegiance when one has sworn a secret oath to another power?
Want to know how deeply embedded the "popular idea" of slavery is?
I listen to the Skeptiko podcast with Alex Tsakiris. He had on a guest who mentioned that slavery in the US was not at all common, with perhaps 5% owning slaves. Alex disagreed.
So did Alex ask him for his source, or quote a figure from his own sources, or pause the interview to do his own quick research? Nope, he kicked the guy off the show. Nothing at all like that had ever happened in over 500 episodes. Oh, and he has never mentioned it since, so I would conclude he never did any research on it himself after that.
Alex is liberal-leaning but not an NPC either, as far as I can tell. But the programming runs very deep, right down to the bone.
MBS is a reformer and does not want to go along with the NWO. That's why he's continuously portrayed in Western media as a brutal dictator.
It's dangerous to cross the NWO, as he is doing here. Obviously there's a problem with a lot of the crypto-Jew royal family and the government has been thoroughly infiltrated over the decades, just like in the West. He doesn't want Saudi Arabia to suddenly have a "color revolution" or--worse--experience a rebirth of Freedom(tm) and Democracy(tm).