Very disturbingly, there's another guy that I take to be up to speed on current events, who stated exactly the same time frame a few days ago:
“The Train Has Left the Station and No One Can Stop It”. Europe Will be at War with Russia. Serbia’s President A. Vucic (Global Research 6/13/2024)
"We will have world war in 3-4 months - We're checking our oil, flour, sugar"
It should also be noted, for those not already aware, that Serbia and Finland would presumably be on opposite sides of this conflict, which is to say that we can rule out that this talk is some kind of loony NATO warmongering predictive programming initiative.
These guys are scared that no one is scared. Me too.
I thought I'd take this opportunity to resurface an old, related conspiracy that few seemed to ever know about, no one remembers now, and everyone should know.
There was the crazy idea floating around that Walmarts were going to be turned into FEMA camps or something along those lines. Sam Walton had been a captain in US Army Intelligence, and here's what he did during the war:
Wal Mart Founder Sam Walton Led Prisoner Of War Camps For US Military (8/3/2015)
Well okay, but that doesn't mean the FEMA thing is true, right? Maybe not, but then you have to wonder why the info about the POW camps has been Memory Holed since that article was written.
They link to his wiki page as a source for the camp statement, but you won't find it there now. You have to go to one of the saved versions, which no one will ever do unless they know what they're looking for.
Did they just run out of room on the page and drop that boring fact?
For students of what might be called "deep history"--the idea that the true account of events is something other than anyone is shouting at your face--this incident is a fascinating window.
In general, you have a basic triangle of opposing viewpoints regarding anything to do with the Bible. Those are: (1) it's totally phony, (2) it's basically phony and mostly rewritten to serve a political/social agenda, and (3) it's Holy Scripture meant to glorify God or some such thing. Just this one incident serves to kick all those into the ditch and point us towards another view, one which might eventually guide us to learning what actually happened.
The first issue to note is this: Nearly 200k soldiers getting completely smitten all at once by God would seem to be a prime news story about "the power of God" or "watch your step" or "check out this fairy tale". It isn't. To the credit of the Daily Mail, they cite the verses of this "news story":
Then the angel of the LORD went forth, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians a hundred and fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses.
And it came to pass that night, that the angel of the LORD went out, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses.
Well, these are nearly identical sentences, so in total we get one single sentence about the facts and circumstances regarding something along the lines of (what we are supposed to believe was the nuclear) bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki put together.
Now I ask: does that type of coverage or "historiography" fit well with any of the views popularly held regarding what the Bible is? IOW, is that what someone would have written if the Bible was--as some would have it--complete fiction? Not in my book, not at all, not any of those views.
So what do I think was going on? Long story, of course, but research into deep history appears shows that the time leading up to 600 BC was the final stages of what is greatly misunderstood but is referred to as the "War in Heaven". Surprise, it seems to have taken place mostly on Earth.
But since the entire "world order" was being fought over, it was a time of upheaval and disorder. Out of that chaos, only a few fragments of history survived to make their way down to us and this is one of them. If one researches the topic, "history" itself as we understand it had yet to be invented.
How chaotic was it? I wasn't there but we do have an indication. The siege is said to have taken place in 701 BC. In a coincidence that I believe is no coincidence, this puzzler arose:
Why did all of the Worlds civilizations change their calendars in 701 BC (GLP 4/2/2010, but cited from Velikovsky in "Worlds in Collision")
If, in general, "the truth is stranger than you can believe", then we should always be checking our ability to believe before we entertain and evaluate the evidence.
Once again, this is proof that there is so little racism that it's easier to make it up out of nothing than to locate it.
Of course, bigotry against straight/white/Christian/cis people is rampant but you're not allowed to complain about it. It's defined to be "justice", and who can complain about justice?
Easy one first: QE2 = Queen Elizabeth II.
As for simulating the continuing existence of a person, they use a wide variety of methods, as convenient, to keep the psyop going. We're familiar with the overt ones--masks, body doubles, DeepFakes, Photoshop, etc--but some of them are very subtle indeed.
Take the example of the least effort, most convincing: you'll see an article about an appearance a subject made somewhere, including a picture. Well, that proves it, right?
It would be easy enough to take an old photo, Shop it a bit to make it look like the place they were supposed to have been, and give it a phony caption, but the really funny thing is that I've never seen that. They just use an old stock photo and label it "Stock photo", or they don't label it at all, or they put in a photo without the subject in question, or they do not include a photo at all.
All these things serve to convince the reader the subject is still alive. Of course they are! Their death was never announced, was it? The absolute key is that no one is actually looking, but their subconscious absorbs the "evidence" all the same. I'm not special, I'm just looking.
There are endless variations on this theme, such as someone mentioning their encounter with the subject. The latest iteration on this--and it is absolutely effective--is that the news will "leak" that the subject has done something bad or embarrassing. Conspiracy theorists jump on it like a duck on a junebug, just as they are meant to.
Finally, as much talk as there has been about DeepFake, the voice aspect has been around even longer but somehow, strangely, never gets any play even in conspiracy circles:
After 20 Minutes of Listening, New Adobe Tool Can Make You Say Anything (Vice 11/5/2016)
There's sort of a funny coincidence about the date of the article. That's right at the time of a big election, and a huge controversy at that time and continuing until present is that one of the candidates had "said something on a hot mic" about "grabbing women by the pussy". Yet you will never hear a conspiracy theorist (who isn't me) question the authenticity of that clip.
That really should tell you something about how the human mind works and the state of "conspiracy theory".
EDIT: I take back what I said. There was one time I saw them Photoshop a recent event, and that was Gavin Newsom's 2022 re-election. There used to be a set of these, but they've black-holed them all. The remaining Shopped pic of his "victory speech" is here:
Gavin Newsom and Ron DeSantis victory speeches pushed wildly different views of ‘freedom’ (San Francisco Chronicle 11/9/2022)
The other major paper just went with some kooky random pic, who even knows if it's real:
California voters elect Gov. Gavin Newsom to a second term (Los Angeles Times 11/8/2022)
Bizarre when you actually look, isn't it?
No, she's still dead. If you've seen some of the latest DeepFakes, they're nearly flawless. I am reliably informed that you can look up some celebrity DeepFakes on porn sites to see some of the recent efforts. Quite... uh... sufficient to purpose.
It's becoming commonplace these days for dead people to still be "alive", at least as far as the public is concerned. Hunter and Joe have been dead since before "Biden" was inaugurated. Gavin Newsom has been dead since late 2021. RBG and QE2 were both dead for about a year before it was ever announced. Hillary was executed just before the 2016 election. Putin has had a body double since way back in 2013 (although I do not believe he is dead).
The state of the information war is that you aren't supposed to believe any of this is possible. Shill posts can be easily identified as simply denying the possibility outright without addressing any evidence, or by diverting to another direction of inquiry. In conspiracy circles, such instances rise and fade, but the pattern is that even most conspiracists go back to generally accepting the people as alive.
So it isn't who might have died and when, or if it's even possible to fake their continued existence and how, but the goal now is to gaslight you into rejecting the plausibility entirely. No need for any complicated and troublesome hand-waving in that mode.
The higher-level decode of this is that the Establishment is losing the information war, and losing badly.
They have been reduced to simply calling their opponents things which their remaining audience will recognize as bad words. In another time and place, it would be like shouting, "Look at all these nigger-lovers!" The definition and implications are never defined, but the herd becomes alarmed.
No one who isn't already mentally enthralled to the Establishment is being persuaded by any of this. "They" can only attempt to tighten their grip on those remaining.
Quick note about Mauro:
Sitchin got it right, which is why you see such an incredible amount of shade thrown on him. We're in an information war and that's how They do it. Mauro was hands down the best researcher on the subject since Sitchin passed away.
You could tell in his presentations, though, that Mauro stepped extremely carefully. On one hand, he clearly knew Sitchin was correct but also knew how controversial he was, so he avoided jumping into the middle of a mudfight.
On the other hand, what he had to say about the Bible overturns the vast majority of what is commonly held to be true by religious people. Yes, the Bible is true, just not at all in the way they understand it. Mauro always stuck really closely to the text and analysis of it, rather than moving to the connections and implications and pissing everyone off.
But in a recent development, Mauro has been "turned". This became clear in his interview a couple of years ago by Graham Hancock. Hancock himself is a disinfo agent, and the main subject he is there to divert researchers from is the Anunnaki. So why would he be promoting Biglino?
During the course of the interview, Hancock presses Biglino on the point of the "gods" of the Bible. He forces him to say that these "gods" were simply powerful kings, human beings and not aliens. When you are aware of what's going on, it's painful to watch. This is in direct contradiction to Sitchin's conclusions, and that was the point of the whole interview.
Another excellent researcher was Alan Alford with his book, "Gods of the New Millennium". He was eventually turned just as Biglino was and recanted his own work. Again, we're in an information war and that's how They do it.
Not so quick a note, I suppose!
That's what I'm saying, this not in any way the rational attitude of a reasonable person: "Oh, uh, these people only take half my money or more, control my life and will continue to control that of my children in countless ways, and are bringing civilization itself down around all of us. But they've ceased to amuse me so I don't even pay attention any more." Put succinctly like that, it's absurd.
It's the same as what was found in microcosm with the concept of Homo Economicus, the idea that humans could be treated as rational actors in the study of economics.
About halfway down the page you'll see where Daniel Kahneman curb stomps that concept through simple experimentation. They use a ton of verbiage to obfuscate that destruction. No, humans don't behave in the assumed and expected ways at all.
If you search on "kahneman consciousness", you'll see a lot more of his relevant work. He was way out in front, but he was just scratching the surface. As for me, I thrust my harpoon straight at the heart of the White Whale.
You know what the strangest thing is about the real-time decomposition of "Joe Biden"? It's the reaction of the normies. Actually, it's the near total lack of reaction.
Even just some average Democrat with eyes and ears would very reasonably say, "I voted for Biden before and would vote for him again, but I don't think he's fit for another four years of a very demanding job. Doesn't he have the judgement to figure this out himself? Why don't the Democrats pick a stronger candidate?"
You only hear that "normal" reaction on rare occasion, even in private. Rather, they seem to shut it all out of their minds. I live in a very, very liberal area, and I've seen about two Biden 2024 signs. Subconsciously, they know what's up and aren't going to waste any energy on lunacy.
I think my point here is that when you fail to see actions and reactions you would reasonably expect, that's the sure signal that people operate other than the way you think they do.
I'm reminded of what Woodrow Wilson wrote:
Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.
So, you know, "Hey everybody, it's just an odd simile so calm down. I don't know nothing. And I'm not suicidal!"
As regarding what "morality" really is, as far as I can tell it could be defined as, "conducting one's life in accordance with natural law". Of course, that just brings up the question, "What is natural law?"
Mark Passio has done a very long, extremely thorough presentation on natural law. I would consider it required viewing. Among many other things, you find that the concept supersedes any legislation or norms or moral codes as being corrupt or imperfect. Living in accordance with natural law is what we should all be shooting for.
I would here interject an idea to keep in mind as you watch the presentation, something that Mark hasn't integrated into his worldview. That is, NPCs--comprising perhaps 80% of the population--can't simply be told about natural law, whereafter they will "get it" and start behaving that way. That's not how NPCs function.
NPCs require a relatively clear external system of rewards and (regrettably) punishments. To be blunt, you would never expect a 5yo to act correctly just by going over the behavioral norms with him. This is why organized religion has played such an important role in human history by providing this framework. It's also why the Elites--to the extent They cannot control it--wish to destroy it.
As for the origin of man and it's implications, well, therein lies a book-length tale. If you're not already familiar, this next will sound kookoo bananas but stay around until the end for a surprising new take on an old tale.
First, Zechariah Sitchin was correct, and we were first created by a race of aliens about 270k years ago engineered as a slave species from (probably) homo erectus and their own DNA. Few or no humans at that time were conscious, no more than farm animals are, which is what we were.
Later, perhaps 35k years ago, an improved species was introduced, still not conscious but apparently capable of such. The Garden of Eden story recounts that event, very ancient and very imperfectly perceived that the time but with surprising remnants of the history still intact.
Referring to Adam and Eve, two examples of the improved species, I paraphrase Yahweh when he said, "If they eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, their eyes will be opened and they will become like us, knowing good and evil." As far as I can tell, everything ever said about this passage has been wrong.
Rather, this "fruit" was apparently some technology to elevate human consciousness from NPC to fully awake. What is the absolutely fundamental sign that a person is conscious? That his or her eyes are open, correct? And what is it to know good from evil? It is precisely to possess a moral sense, is it not?
So at one and the same time, Adam and Eve gained both consciousness and a moral sense, which I think you would agree wraps back around to exactly what we've been discussing.
I would just add that as good as my creativity is, I could not possibly make this up... lol
A couple of items, only for the most adventurous and "out there" conspiracy theorists:
-
Hunter is long dead, having OD'ed even before "his father" was inaugurated. So they can run this ring in the circus as long as they like and neither "father" nor "son" is in any jeopardy or will object.
-
Flynn is controlled opposition. There's quite a case to be made for that, but the most interesting item is that the judge in his case, Emmet G. Sullivan, is secretly the father of John Sullivan (aka "Jayden X"), the guy that filmed Ashley Babbitt's assassination.
Hopefully, someone will say that I made all that up. I feel like I do not have that level of creativity, so it would be a nice compliment.
Hey, I'm glad you found the info useful, and thanks very much for your thoughtful reply!
Since you're interested in the subject, let me put a few more pieces on the table and tell you how I've got them arranged. There's a lot of evidence to support those pieces, but rather than detail all that (which I am more than willing to offer if you're interested), I think it's much more constructive if you have the "framework" in mind as you encounter evidence organically in your own studies. Then you see whether it fit or does not. Anyway...
As far as I can tell, there is only one type of human. Well, there may be an exception to that when it comes to "Illuminati bloodlines", but that doesn't play a big part in the analysis of our situation. If They did what They do for love or money or because They're half-alien, there's not much functional difference. Nor is there much evidence in any case, aside from that They clearly like to "keep it in the family".
So the framework seems to be that humans develop naturally through three levels, and the fundamental difference between them is the upper limit. I have no idea how the limit is determined. It does not seem to be hereditary, as one would imagine.
There are very scant indications that development to the highest level can be artificially stimulated, but the technique is baffling because the underlying mechanism in unknown. Development can certainly be halted. For example, Satanists are aware they need to traumatize children before age 7 to arrest them at the lowest level.
All this leads into the subject or morality and moral behavior. I have found that these three levels of consciousness are identical with three type of "morality". That is, a particular faculty of moral reasoning is set by the level of consciousness. So you see why the Satanists are so concerned.
NPCs, at the lowest level, have no in-built moral sense. They are guided simply by external systems of reward and punishment. Don't wan't to go to jail? Don't break the law. Or, don't get caught doing it, see? Want to go to Heaven? Go to church on Sunday and don't cheat on your wife. Oh, and kill the pagans if you're instructed to, the more pagans the better. So morality ends up coming from external authorities.
In the middle state, morality comes from deliberate moral reasoning, comparing facts and circumstances to a moral code adopted along the way. Such reasoning can be very tricky, and the biggest problem is that humans can "rationalize" just about anything. In this scenario, the reasoning most often comes out to be the personally convenient course. Whaddaya know? But it's why, for example, you see Bill Maher say some surprising things from time to time.
At the highest level, a moral sense is in-built, as reliable yet undefinable as knowing up from down. (Okay, yeah, I know it's your inner ear, but if no one had told you that you'd have no idea where to point when asked where that sense resided.) For such people, if Jesus Himself told them murder was okay, it would still not be okay.
Final note on how NPCs connect the murderer in your example to people supporting the Israeli genocide: they all think of themselves as "good" people. You see, for them that's the axiom rather than the conclusion. Their moral reasoning is completely inverted, or more accurately one would say it is moral rationalization.
"Good" people are pro-Israel and send bombs to Israel to slaughter "bad" people, and how could it be otherwise? The key observation here is that slaughter--for any reason--does not seem to bother any of them in the slightest. You can't find a single one of them praying, "Jesus, Lord, have mercy, let it end." At least I haven't heard one yet.
What's notable here is that it is Pelosi herself addressing the issue and that it's on MSNBC. The SOP with such things is for a "journalist" to "interview" a "reporter", who proclaims the new "truth" and--more importantly--how to feel about it.
In this case, we should have heard something along the lines of, "Guess what Russkie/Chink disinfo are trying to falsely claim now without evidence? It's outrageous!"
Things are changing, and "They" are losing. Anyone who cares to make the claim this is part of Their plan and that it indicates They have got us where They want us, please do so. Then we can all laugh at it harder than we're supposed to laugh at all the Q stuff.
You know, the more I've learned out the world, what has gone on and what is going on now, and about the nature of human beings, the less I can identify that which is "religious" from that which is not.
For example, if there are moral truths to be found in the Bible (or any other "religious" work) then are they not true regardless of who wrote them down and when and where? Or at all? Do certain people accept them as moral precepts and adhere to them only because of the medium in which they come?
Well, there are many such issues and many of them have, according to my research, quite specific answers. When you sort through it all, taking things back their foundations and fundamental natures, almost nothing is left of what we now call religion.
All that being said, another conclusion I've reached is that (for the foreseeable future) I would recommend and support anyone choosing to practice any sort of conventional religion. Which seems a funny place to end up, but there is specific reasoning behind it.
There has been essentially no disciplined research on defining and characterizing the "soul". The last I'm aware of was done by the Ancient Egyptians. Thus, it's certainly premature to say that NPCs do not have souls. Many people will have the intuition that all humans most probably do.
That being said, among other evidence, the violent backlash against the concept of NPCs can tell us two things. One is confirmation that it exists. Why fight so hard against something that isn't there? The other is that the Dark Occultists that run the world consider it one of the Big Secrets, as it provides crucial insight into human consciousness and, perhaps, the soul itself.
The closest analogy of which I am aware is to liken NPCs to people who are color-blind. That is, for some reason (which can possibly be traced to a biological origin), certain people lack a capability which other humans possess. In one case it has to do with vision, in the other with the level of consciousness.
In both cases, it's not for "lack or trying" or "stupidity" or "moral failure" or "propaganda" or any similar reason you see offered universally. In both cases, the condition is not readily apparent to others, it cannot be detected through introspection. and a person may remain unaware of it through their entire life.
It turns out that for someone attuned to the correct paradigm, there is actually quite a bit of available evidence pertaining to this condition. What I cannot avoid concluding is that there are also zero people interested in such evidence.
That may sound like a slam, but there's a vital point to be made: for those who one might think would be interested in researching such a subject, they display no consciousness whatsoever that their paradigm regarding it may be in error and should be reconsidered.
NPCs are unable to conceive that there is higher level of consciousness, and so will presumably be forever unable to reach it. So too, at that higher level of consciousness above NPCs which the Gnostics termed "psychics", are in a parallel way unable to conceive that there is a higher level of consciousness above their own. Most are conspiracy theorists of one type or other, and in fact this is the very reason they are conspiracy theorists in the first place.
At a rough guess, the numbers are 80%, 15%, and 5% between hylics, psychics, and pneumatics, respectively. One should also be aware that a person who has a higher capacity but is underdeveloped may simply appear to be a person of lower capacity. Personally, I thought there was nothing at all suspicious about 9/11 until late in 2012.
If you're someone out there reading this and feel like you "get it", rather than are furiously thinking of all the reasons it is incorrect, then you must now realize the difficult tilt of the playing field we're on.
What I have found most enlightening, most informative about the whole event is this: for all the hoaxes and rewritten history and diabolical deceptions that all conspiracy theorists have seen over and over seemingly without end, essentially zero percent of them even consider whether this is yet another hoax. There is no evidence it even enters their consciousness, let alone is entertained as a thesis.
In the unlikely case that anyone is interested in what I learned from this and other similar events, it's that even conspiracy theorists operate primarily on emotional reaction. Yes, they differ from normies in what they react to and how they react, but the dynamic is the same: reaction rather than conscious, deliberate action.
I would further add that I feel certain the Dark Occultists that run this world are fully aware of this dynamic and make use of it to manipulate the public. Why the hell wouldn't They? So if anyone takes offense at what I'm saying, go ahead and take offense. I can guarantee that will only make Them laugh at you even harder.
We get no information about what goes on "on the inside", but you have to start to wonder if there's a growing "Hitler in the bunker" vibe. You know, where everyone is screaming at other about whose fault it is and how they're still going to win.
The "security agreement" was actually a protection racket run by Israel and the US. The Saudis were, of course, willing participants for a long time. They were paying the American bag man so that they were not struck by "Jewish lightning".
MBS wants to break his country free of all that. I suppose he has judged that their lightning protection is now sufficient to the task. Also, the lightning is having tremendous trouble striking anything other than women and children, and the storm may, in fact, soon abate.
There's a subtle revelation here of how naive these people actually are, including Tucker with all his experience. The term of art is "handler". You'd think Tucker would recognize that right away.
It's a laughable as some dude referring to his dope dealer as his "buddy".
I came across a similar thing a couple of weeks ago. The Gateway Pundit published a list (which I imagine originally came from somewhere in the Chosenite Psyop Command) showing 40 young women purportedly still missing. You can see the photos about halfway down the page:
Barbarians: Hamas Admits that Several of the Hostages They Plan to Turn Over to Israel Are Already Dead (TGP 5/7/2024)
"It is not clear how many Hamas is still holding." Uh, didn't anyone ask? Isn't anyone worried enough to follow up on that?
Of course no one asked because the list is phony. Taste varies, but all of the women are well above average in attractiveness. My guess would be these were just harvested from the social media accounts of serving IDF, who were each instructed to keep their fucking mouth shut.
TGP is--it turns out--blindly Christian Zionist, so they never questioned this. Also, some fun Semitic hoax encoding: the number "40" is used colooquially for a large, indeterminate number. That's why you see it recurring so often in the Bible. So this is like a poster in English that says, "Wanted dead or alive for a jillion murders".
An angle on this which I never see mentioned is the simple, straightforward, foundational question: "Are viruses alive?"
I won't answer the question because anyone who considers themselves a critical thinker will have to come to their own conclusion, but I only suggest it as a starting point of investigation for those who ask themselves the question--as I once did--"Just what TF are viruses even supposed to be, anyway?"
This brings up an important point in regard to disinformation. Both normies and conspiracy theorists conceive of disinformation as a program to sell you a lie, or at least an incorrect or incomplete version of the truth. In cases that are simple, unimportant, or crude, this is true.
In cases of any importance and where there is enough evidence available so that one could get to the truth with some work, a more sophisticated approach is taken. The goal is not to sell you a lie, but to keep you away from the truth.
Many different versions of the "truth" are presented to you like magazines on a rack in a bookstore. You are meant to look at the covers, find the one that appeals to you, pick it up and walk out the door. A free choice was made, was it not? Although they will contains bits and pieces of it, certainly none of them are the truth.
So we see this movie as yet another glossy magazine on the rack that you can select if you choose. It joins others on that rack, like this judo flip reversal out of Richard Hoagland, which is here shadow-promoted by the ever reliable Smithsonian:
Yes, the United States Certainly DID Land Humans on the Moon (Smithsonian Magazine 5/16/2019)
Conspiracy theorist Richard Hoagland has asserted for many years that the Apollo program discovered large artificial glass structures on the lunar surface that has been kept from the public. Besides other conventions common in a cover-up, Hoagland made the claim that the astronauts that went to the moon had been hypnotized and any memories of extraterrestrial encounters were removed. Most interestingly, Hoagland has argued that NASA deviously orchestrated the origins of the moon-landing denials as a disinformation campaign to mask the discovery of extra-terrestrial structures on the lunar surface.
Wow! Of course, these days you can also join the FE crowd and choose to believe the Moon is undefined (in some undefined sense). Anything is possible! (See how it works?)
The key observation is that even though these various disinformation programs contradict one another, all the promoters of said disinformation programs never get around to calling out all the others as promoters of disinformation. What, they just never thought it through like I just did, and thought it worth telling you like I just told you? Well, you see, that would give away the game, wouldn't it?
Interesting related trivia: even birds know about the anti-parasitic properties of nicotine.
City birds use cigarette butts to smoke out parasites (Nature 12/5/2012)