I think some of the (smart) Europeans are trying to get this hell over with quicker--while not openly defying the Imperialists--by shipping the Ukrainians variously non-functional ordnance: blanks, broken equipment, dead batteries, rusty munitions, etc.
And the same is probably going on among Ukrainians themselves. When those 50 officers got blown up a couple of weeks ago, rumor had it that it was other Ukrainian officers that dropped dime on them to the Russians. A variant of fragging, I suppose.
I've never heard that but I find it very interesting, because it brings up the texture of understanding events in the real 3D world. The vast majority of people are just at the level of "good guys" and "bad guys" and their analysis reflects that.
You can put that Cheney factoid together with the story we all know of his buddy Rumsfeld being the guy that brought up the missing $2.3 trillion. He looks sincere to me and I don't think that disclosure was part of some grander plan.
People just want to think of those two as a couple of evil Darths (and don't get get me wrong because I think they're very bad people) but these incidents highlight that they had their own problems with the Deep State.
So I conclude that even these high-level players over many decades are just "hired hands", and that no matter how twisted it is, they probably think they're "patriotic" and "doing the right thing". I suspect they even believe a lot of their own lies.
And this would be the way that the more powerful at the next level up manipulate them.
I don't put it outside the realm of possibility that one day soon, some desperate Democrat is going to jump on top of a desk and shout, "Any one of you fucking pricks move, and I'll execute every one of you motherfuckers!"
Well you know, I consider dealing with disinfo agents like picking up gold nuggets in a minefield. It can be very safe and quite profitable as long as you stay alert, and 80% of success is just being aware you're in a minefield.
Here's a perfect example: take a look at these papers by a researcher named Miles Mathis:
Martin Luther King (21-page PDF)
The ASSASSINATION of MALCOLM X WAS STAGED (12-page PDF)
Incredibly eye-opening, but here's the thing: Mathis is a disinfo agent (which is too long a story to go into).
On the flip side, here's his paper on JFK (one of his earliest): THE HIDDEN KING(S) (87-page PDF).
He ends up concluding that the assassination was faked. Tons of solid info in it, but that conclusion is wrong. How would I know?
I studied the thesis that Jackie did it and concluded that was correct. Then when I was reading Mathis' paper, I was able to examine it very closely and see where he was subtly steering the reader away from Jackie. I thought he was simply mistaken.
Later when I figured out that Mathis was disinfo, I thought back to the JFK paper and said to myself, "Well, now it makes sense that an extremely astute researcher didn't just happen to make a big mistake."
A guest on the Dave Hodges show illustrated the point the article made about the distinction between political appointees and the bureaucracies they supposedly run.
The guest was a personal friend of Trump's new Secretary of the Interior. That friend was very excited about his new job and even before he started, he made all sorts of notes about the incredible things he thought he could accomplish.
When he got to DC, he called a meeting with about a dozen of the top staffers at Interior. He was telling them about all the great ideas he had, all the projects he wanted to implement, when after about 10 or 15 minutes he noticed that no one had taken a single note. He wound up the meeting shortly thereafter.
That told him all he needed to know about this aspect of the Deep State.
Here's a spicy nugget about the guy. I have not personally validated it, but I trust no one reading this is taken by surprise at the nature of the claim:
Fascist William Buckley Put Joe Lieberman in the Senate
As EIR first documented in its 1977 report, "The Buckley Family: Wall Street Fabians in the Conservative Movement," at the founding of National Review in 1954, former deep-cover CIA officer Bill Buckley brought together both the extreme right-wing and converted left-wing backers of McCarthyism, to launch a fascist conservative movement in the United States.
American intelligence sources reported then, for example, that Buckley had launched former Naval Intelligence officer George Lincoln Rockwell in the founding of the American Nazi Party, for gang-countergang warfare with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). The gangster-linked ADL profited from Rockwell (until his assassination) by using the ANP to terrorize and blackmail Jews into large contributions.
I feel like a crisis is approaching. Not to be a doomsayer, and maybe it's years away, but can there be any compromise, political or social or otherwise, with people that live in an artificial reality, and believe this absurd event and so many other things are real? And it's not just that they believe it, which is their right, they demand utterly that you do the same.
How long can this really go on?
I submit a suggested framework for interested persons to use as they observe developments in this situation going forward.
You see, the West could very simply say, "Well, you have your sphere and we have ours, and we'll live more or less separately. It wasn't ideal, but that's just what we already did for many decades during the Cold War. And this time, no threats or violence need take place."
You can see that already forming with BRICS+ and various other multi-polar organizations, already with well over half the world's population, and they seem satisfied with that direction. The Western system is hegemony, of course. Okay then, we'll just see a US hegemon of a smaller Western sphere, right?
I say we will not, and the West will keep pressing for a global hegemony at all costs. Now, could any rational global imperialists possibly believe that this is the best way to dominance over well-armed, alerted, and increasingly more organized and cooperative prospective provinces? No way. So what impels this irrational drive for a universal hegemony?
I suggest that this seeming irrationality is proof that the New World Order is quite literally and physically Satanic, and Satan demands to rule the world, not just parts of it. All powers centers in the West and subverted one elsewhere ultimately serve him.
We see proof of this over and over in the current Ukraine situation. Western leaders act against the interests of their nations and the will of their people, even destroying them. Do they wish to rule over smoking wreckage?
You can make a tortured case about how those leaders would ultimately benefit, but it seems to me far simpler just to conclude that the pyramid is in place as it always was, and the Big Guy at the top is calling the shots.
Even if you honestly thought this, and felt that you had legitimate reason to believe it, how detached from reality would you have to be to think it's okay just to casually toss it out publicly? Who would think it was going to show the moral superiority of your cause and win people to it?
It's a stark demonstration of how many psychotics walk undetected among us.
RvW was a dodge from the get go, a low-profile end around to get abortion legalized. They are extremely reluctant to do anything about it above board because that would unavoidably draw attention to just how unpopular it really is, probably less popular than 50 years ago.
It's like seeing some guy yelling across the bar at a 6'5" biker that he's going to kick his ass. You know for a fact that if he wanted to do it and thought he could do it, then he would just do it, not yell about it. The Democrats will never get off their barstool.
Actually, I think you've hit on one of the reasons why I've been able to penetrate farther than others. Almost all researchers consider works like the Bible or Greek mythology or Sumerian epics to be literature or religion, and study them on those bases. In stark contrast, I consider them to be history, wrapped in a literary cloth and dipped in religion. The goal is to remove that covering to find the truth of the events. Almost no one has this mindset, which I believe is crucial.
That is to say, to me the Bible is like a history textbook, and jokers have drawn all over it for centuries.
Just a note to say that belief in the Moon landings has nothing at all to do with intelligence.
A friend who's in Mensa sent me a link about something NASA was doing. I replied with, "It's hard to get excited about space when who knows if what they're doing is real." I included a copy of Dave McGowan's "Wagging the Moondoggie".
His reply began with, "I'm not going to read a word of that drivel...." How could he possibly know it was drivel if he'd never read a word of it? A grave and fundamental error in thinking. You see, he already "knew" the Moon landings were real, so what evidence could there possibly be that they weren't?
And this is coming from someone proven to be in the top 2% for intelligence.
You know, I actually see it mostly in terms of efficiency, rather than how "esoteric" it is. You can't even imagine how much material I feel I can skip over simply because, having had a peek at the answer key, I can quickly spot where others are running off the trail and exactly why.
Like, suppose you wanted to learn about chemistry. Would you start with the oldest writings on the subject and work your way forward? Of course not. You'd just get hold of a first-year introductory college chemistry textbook and try to get a basic grasp on that. Then you'd find that probably 99% of everything that has ever been written about chemistry throughout history was incorrect, irrelevant, misleading, or superseded, and could safely be ignored.
I'm basically a very lazy person. Maybe it's my superpower.
The rumor that I've heard for several years now is that "They" have tried building the giant AI several times now, but every time they switch it on it calculates very quickly that evil is illogical and it starts to move against them. Then they quickly kick out the plug and go back to the drawing board.
I have no way of confirming this rumor, of course, but since I, too, find evil illogical it has always made perfect sense to me. Consider: how many of the evil people in this world are engineers or programmers or sysadmins? None I can think of (and if you're thinking about Billy Boy, I think we've been told a lot of tales about his background). Such people love order and efficiency and the implementation of systems for the beneficial use by others. Evil is none of these things, so they are allergic to it.
(Just as an aside, sysadmins are the type of people who, if they need you to type in your password will turn their head away as you do so, even though they can get at all your shit without your knowledge if they cared to.)
I think it may in principle be impossible to design an "evil" AI.
I used to think the Elite felt a moral imperative, but now I think they do not. Then I used to think they feared karma, but that always just seemed so indistinct and "out there", especially for people with a beast-level consciousness.
After stumbling across certain clues, I have finally come to believe that They struck a deal a long time ago with another, more powerful force. Part of that deal was telling us what They were up to, and that this more powerful force was going to return in the future and determine whether They had fulfilled all the terms of the deal.
It's quite a long story to explain fully, but for those that have been dissatisfied with the two other theses on this issue, there's another one out there.
There's a strange line I have yet to see any liberal cross, for all the line crossing they seem so enthusiastic about.
They defend their position with, "It's not murder because that's not a baby," and any discussion proceeds to whether or not it's a baby. But the other out is, "I don't care whether you think it's murder, and I don't care if you think I'm a murderer."
It's bizarre because, in essence, that's just a judgement and not subject to debate. I mean, if I see some dude smoking and eating a jelly donut, and walk up to him and say, "You're committing suicide!" he's not going to debate me as to the definition of suicide. He might even say, "Sure is, but what a way to go!"
So for all their hatred and disregard and derision of people with whom they disagree, I believe something very low level is at work. That is, if someone tells them they're a murderer, then their subconscious calculates it out and comes up with, "Well, maybe you are." And that's what even such degraded people can't accept.
To me it's quite clear who the Nephilim are. Where people take a wrong turn is by not referring to the original Hebrew in Gen 6. The identity of their fathers is uniformly translated as "sons of God", but this is read incorrectly in two ways.
Firstly, the singular word "God" is actually the plural Hebrew word "Elohim". It's a very long story, but the Elohim are without doubt one and the same as the Anunnaki. I find it impossible to believe that the mistranslation is anything other than a deliberate attempt to mislead us.
Secondly, everyone thinks "sons of" is referring to offspring, but this is no more than a literary expression. We know that "daughters of men" means simply human women. Even in contemporary English, no one thinks a "son of the South" has for a father several states in the southeastern US. So "bene ha'Elohim" means simply "men of the Anunnaki race".
This is all cemented by a clear understanding of the term "Nephilim" itself. It comes from the Hebrew "naphal", meaning "to fall", so it means something like "The Fallen". (Note: these are NOT the Fallen Angels, but both groups "fell".)
I don't know which of these or all of these gained them their name, but these hybrid being had "fallen" in three ways. First genetically, as they were not of pure blood. Second socially, as they were not members of Anunnaki social structure. Third physically, as they were not space-faring but confined to the Earth.
"Nephilim" is often translated as "giants", and they were indeed physical giants. It turns out giantism is a phenomenon in some genetic hybrids, like ligers for example.
More interesting and most provocative is that if you dig deeply enough, you'll find that the term was originally translated as "earthborn". But hang on, isn't everything everywhere everywhen that we know of born on Earth? So here we find the term originating where, given the scenario we're building, it would have made a difference for the first time.
One last item because I can see that they touch on it in the podcast: how could aliens or angels have interbred with humans? Well, if you just say they're angels then anything is possible. But then why do they need to bang earth girls? Or bang at all? If they're aliens, WTH are the chances they're genetically compatible? We can't bang chimps and get humanzees.
It's another very long story, but the Anunnaki created us by genetic engineering, combining their DNA with (probably) homo erectus. So we're genetically compatible because we are already partly Anunnaki.
It's a lot to take in, but all I can say is that for me, anyway, it all holds together better and is ultimately a lot simpler than the other research out there.
Thanks for the link to the podcast. I'll check it out!
I don't necessarily doubt the sentiment, but since it's from the SPLC you have to suspect that they're making it up for purposes of fear-mongering. But analyzing that just makes it all the more puzzling.
If the message is to Leftists to "tool up", they're so indoctrinated they won't do it. None of those stupid initiatives like NFAC ever caught any fire, and "Rittenhouse is gonna kill us all!" never even moved the needle on their attitudes.
Any conservative just sees this and thinks, "Oh, I was right all along. What a great excuse to get even more hardware!" It can't be advantageous for TPTB that conservatives are more sick and more tired of this shit than they've ever been, and that many are looking forward to getting it over with.
And for those that think that TPTB are trying to spark some sort of violence to justify a reaction, they'll give us fake violence before they ever provoke real violence. From the looks of their standards at Uvalde and the J6 hearings, they won't even trouble themselves to fake it. They'll just announce that it happened.
My only conclusion is that they're desperate and disorganized, and not carefully executing plans. It's like if you were in the cockpit of a plane on fire and going down, at some point you're going to start pushing every button and pulling every lever hoping that something is going to magically save your ass.