A thought struck me when I saw this: We first hear this insightful commentary from a shirtless guy speaking a foreign language talking from a bunker located in an active front line combat area. That is, no media--mainstream or alternative--brought these insights to us.
Maybe the lesson here is that we all severely overestimate the capability of whatever media we choose to follow to bring us an accurate picture of the world.
I'm going to guess that they didn't include this in the film, but it has been thoroughly documented that...
American Military Leaders Urge President Truman not to Drop the Atomic Bomb
In official internal military interviews, diaries and other private as well as public materials, literally every top U.S. military leader involved subsequently stated that the use of the bomb was not dictated by military necessity.
You'd think they would teach this in schools. (<-- haha, that's a joke)
And if anyone is wondering, yes, I know it was faked. But the point is, I doubt any of these guy were aware of that when they made their comments.
IMO, the simple function of the movie is to just resell the old bullshit narrative: that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were hit with atomic bombs, and that it was a terrible act that "had to be done".
In "honor" of Oppenheimer, and to provide some additional context for analyzing the movie, here is Miles Mathis' paper exposing the Trinity test as a fake:
The Nuclear Hoax (1/24/2016 16-page PDF)
For anyone who thinks the world is only as complicated as they now firmly believe it is, you should probably excuse yourself now and leave with that worldview intact. For the rest, the story takes a strange turn....
Miles Mathis, as a few will know, is a very high-level disinformation agent. We can see one of the early signs here, in that paper from seven years ago:
I suspect all tests and events were and are faked.
That's a pretty tall claim, to say the least. Does he back it up? No. He offered this Trinity paper, one on the Bikini Atoll tests, and a bit about Enewetok, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. I agree that all these were faked, based on the specific evidence concerning them.
But indeed subtle manipulation is at work. The name of the paper is "The Nuclear Hoax", but we're rounding up from 5 to get to a hundred, or a thousand. Is that really reasonable?
Maybe even more importantly, Mathis promotes himself as primarily a mathematician and physicist. Does he have anything--anything at all--to say about the physics of nuclear weapons to show their impossibility or impracticality? No, not a word. Did he just never think about whether all the fakery was necessary because they simply could not be constructed as we are told? Pretty big idea to fail to consider, for such a thoughtful guy.
My point is that this is an early hint at the building theme for Mathis' work: "Everything is fake". That's bad, of course, as bad as believing everything the mainstream tells you is real. The only path is the middle one, where we must exercise critical thought and judgement to discern that which is real from that which is fake.
Bonus: I stumbled across a very deeply hidden link between the Trinity, Hiroshima, and Bikini Atoll events, indicating the same hand behind all the fakery. Actually, the same link includes the Roswell Incident, which was also a big giant hoax.
I don't want to give away the surprise, and anyone can stumble across it just like I did, but I did want to just hammer a bit more on Mathis. I believe one of his functions is to hide these deeper links that, when seen, tend to make the whole Jenga tower fall apart.
You know what's sad?
I used to get so excited reading about solar-power satellites. These structures were going to be miles and miles across. Cheap, plentiful, clean energy for the 21st Century. Amazing human achievements! And these SPS's were just one type of project among a great many, limited only by the human imagination. What a future awaited us all!
Fast-forward and I find out the fuckers never even fucking went to the motherfucking Moon. Seriously, can you imagine the disappointment?
It's been a number of years, and I've never even seen anyone else mention it.I can almost guarantee no scientist concerned about his future career would ever study it.
I've concluded that it must work by altering blood pH, and that's probably why I saw it originally recommended for gout. The method of action is very, very quick.
My habit is that if my allergies are really bothering me, I'll take another dose telling myself I'll give it a few minutes to see if I need more. (I said half a teaspoon but I don't really know since I never measure.) Almost always, I've forgotten about the issue by the time a few minutes passes.
They say gout is a form of inflammation, and inflammation is caused by acidic blood. In the eight or so years I've been doing this, I can tell I avoided a number of gout attacks. That is, it felt like I stubbed my toe or rolled my ankle a little, rather than pain that you would not wish on your worst enemy. In fact, that's what I thought I must have doe before I figured out what was really going on. And I've never noticed a single negative side effect.
So given today's "modern medial system" and that a box of baking soda lasts me six months and costs 80 cents., no one in hell is going to study this, right?
I suffered from terrible allergies all my life. I had Benadryl, nasal spray and Kleenex on me at all times, year-round.
Because I heard it alleviated gout, I started taking baking soda. Just a tiny amount, half a teaspoon dissolved in water once a day. After a month or so I noticed my allergies had all but disappeared. Completely unexpected.
It was an effect I'd never looked for or even heard existed, but it changed my life.
The mainstream media should be all over this as good news for People of Color(tm) and the clear systemic racism of the War on Drugs(tm). I mean, if the cops can't find someone to arrest over this, there's no way they're going to find someone in any other case, right?
A note which is only tenuously connected, but I wanted to get it out there:
I've noticed it mentioned a time or two recently about schemes to put solar power satellites in orbit, which would then beam the power down to Earth using microwaves. Some conspiracy theorists then immediately flipped out (of course) and claimed this was all a scheme to put the zap on us.
Well, as a circumspect thinker, I can't claim to know that they do not want to put the zap on us from space, but all I want to point out is that they've been talking about this for half a century: Space-based solar power
Various SBSP proposals have been researched since the early 1970s,
In any case, my only point is that it may be a Bond-villain plot by Gates and Schwab to kill us all, but it's not a new plot.
There's an important phenomenon in advancing one's knowledge that no one ever talks about. Maybe that's because not that many make it far enough, or maybe the ones that do are not very self-reflective.
Suppose you start out fairly "fresh", just breaking away from the mainstream official narrative worldview. If you follow the No Agenda Show or r/conspiracy or Tin Foil Hat or anything else like that, you start off being blown away by all this new and startling information coming your way. It can really be a lot to take on board, and challenging to accept that you were this wrong about so many things for so long. That's a crucial phase to get through.
Time goes on and you build your own knowledge and expertise. In a certain process of "maturity" with all these sources, you begin to see what they miss, spot where they have accepted lies, realize they have misinterpreted because they don't have the correct context, etc. This is another vital phase: to develop the basis and confidence to disagree with "authorities" you have followed in the past.
After this process continues to fullness, if you have self-awareness you look around and realize that--at least to some degree--almost everyone gets almost everything wrong almost all the time. All the gods have fallen and there's no one to follow any more. Ninety-eight percent of what you come across is erroneous, irrelevant, or disinfo. All the sources become a best effort at finding news filters, hoping for nuggets here and there you can follow up on.
But even that dim situation can be turned around, because I use the "spare cycles" for meta-analysis: to examine how other people's minds operate, how they see the world and process information. This is an incredibly important issue to understand. If you look at my other comment, you'll see it was not about what John and Adam said, but about how they think.
I've listened to every episode of NA and I would have to say I don't think so. And you'd have to take my word for it, but at this point I feel like I have strong allergy to disinfo agents and their dupes.
My reservation--or maybe disappointment--concerning Adam is this: many years ago I could see him traveling down the same path I was eventually to travel. You know, the one that leads you to see the abyss filled with pedophiles and Satanists and war-mongers and occultists and even demons. He was right on the edge, peering into that darkness.
Then John reeled him back with the attitude of, "We've got a show to do, okay?" John was and is never going to see any of it, stuck thinking that the entire world ultimately revolves around money. You can choose either the truth, or a show with a version of the truth, and Adam chose the latter.
With his recent conversion, one wonders if he'll ever be led back around to confronting the darkness. But looking at the state of Christians and Christianity, probably not.
It is extremely unpromising. This was eight years ago and I'm certain it's worse now than ever:
How a teenager’s viral campaign to prove her citizenship is inspiring a new Texas bill (WaPo 3/12/2015)
I'm sure the WaPo headline today would be: "White supremacists breeding 'ghost' army of domestic terrorists: Experts say the only possible use is for 'final solution'".
When I first came across this article, I realized how far the (Satanic) inversion had come. Instead of being a unique spirit manifested into the Universe with certain attributes like a body and a date of birth attached to that material existence, if you didn't have the right government paperwork then you could not prove you had the privilege to exist at all.
Just a little related personal story to show that our emails can be tampered with:
In about March 2022, when I first heard about Mark Brzezinski being appointed ambassador to Poland, I emailed Adam Curry about it right away. I never heard back from him nor heard it mentioned in the show. I had previously emailed back and forth with him several times before, so that wasn't the problem.
Point is, "They" will snip these connections when they feel they need to and without drawing too much attention.
EDIT: When Adam mentioned this on the last show, he said, "How could we have missed this? Is this something we knew about before?" John said, "Yes, I think so." That was not correct. After I (failed to) email Adam, I listened very carefully to see how long--if ever--it would take them to catch up to this.
For those that already "get" what's going on with this, I would recommend that you look a layer deeper.
That is, for those "good" and "virtuous" people that are in thrall to the Establishment and take their marching orders from their televisions, neither this nor anything even more blatant will be enough evidence to convince them they were on the wrong side.
The conclusion is that they are not evaluating the evidence at all. That's not how they make decisions, if they can be said to make decisions at all. Wise people should stop thinking that it's somehow a matter of enough evidence about what's going on piling up before everyone else "gets" it.
"They" must be experiencing that same sinking feeling as a farmer who walks out to the sheep pen one morning to discover that, during the night, a bunch of sheep have wandered out because as dim as their sheep minds may be, they finally realized that the pen sucks and the gate was never locked to begin with.
Not to take anything anyway, but I recall evidence that he did not die at the scene.
In fact, he was alive and talking for 90 minutes at the scene after the police arrived, even seen to be walking. That seems crazy, but apparently the survival rate for gunshot victims is something like 90%+ if they receive prompt medical care.
What I was reading went on to present evidence that after some time in the hospital, the decision was made and then he was put to death in cold blood.
I would recall to everyone that Wen was also appointed president of Planned Parenthood. I know--shocking, right? But authentically and not sarcastically shocking was that they booted her out in less than a year:
Planned Parenthood ousts president amid organizational turmoil (CBS News 7/16/2019)
I also faintly remember that after that, she made some certain comments (about he vaxx?) that actually made some sense. Maybe she fell from the "purer faith".
FWIW in this tangled web of history, RFK Jr. has a somewhat more personal connection to Operation Mockingbird.
His uncle JFK was a friend of Ben Bradlee, best known as the editor of the Washington Post. Their relationship is described a little in this article. Bradlee's brother-in-law (the husband of his wife's sister) was Cord Meyer III. He was the guy that ran Mockingbird for the CIA.
JFK also had a somewhat more mysterious relationship with Meyer's wife, Mary Pinchot Meyer. She also ended up shot dead in a mysterious crime unsolved to this day.
Dice also mentions an article about the CIA and the media written by Carl Bernstein. He and journalist/spook Bob Woodward famously broke the (staged) Watergate story, supervised by their editor Ben Bradlee.
I said it was a tangled web, didn't I?
Something extremely strange, a unique event in human history, took place around 600 BC: the Axial Age.
As you read through the wiki, you'll see that they're trying very, very hard to convince you it isn't a "thing" and you should just move on. But look all the way through at the evidence they list and it's beyond stunning, moreso because it took place all over the world in places with no connection to each other.
You'd have to take my word for it temporarily, but there's much more evidence beyond what they list. Fore example, Herodotus, known as the "Father of History" was born right on the heels of this time in 484 BC. Does that even begin to make sense, that he was the first guy ever to think of writing down things that happened? But yet he was. As you're doing any research, just keep that 600 BC date in your mind and you'll start seeing more evidence yourself.
So it's like the human race "woke up", isn't it? Well, there's much more to the context but that's what happened. Everyone but a handful was an NPC before that. After, through some mechanism I don't know, a fraction of us were granted partial or full consciousness.
Before that, as I mentioned, it was only kings, chief priests, and prophets. Speaking of which, here's one of them, King Ashurbanipal II
You can find better pictures of this carving, but that's a "god" standing out of frame on the right. He's got something in his hand that looks suspiciously like a pinecone and it's pointed right at--you got it--Ashurbanipal's pineal gland. I don't believe for a second this is merely a coincidental appearance. (Also, you'll can see his other hand is holding one of those very odd "handbags of the gods".)
I hope you can see a picture building up that seems to begin pointing towards things the Elites would not want us knowing about, which is probably why you never heard this in school or on the Discovery Channel.
Right, you see this on occasion. But "science" just tends to nibble around the edges and bounce off. Part of the reason is that the results are almost always disadvantageous for the Establishment.
Like in the article you linked, I have the feeling that if the results had been reversed, we would have heard a lot about how "conservatives are filthy animals who don't even get grossed out by disgusting things". I suspect it would have become yet another article of faith for the leftists, of course leading to no further research.
As I've put it together, underlying political leanings is that NPCs adhere strongly to those they accept as "authorities", which would have largely to do with their enculturation. Thus you'll find NPCs scattered around all spectra: political, religious, etc.
Given that, you end up finding strange anomalies that no one notices because no one is looking for them. A good example would be the vaxx. Leftist NPCs are commanded to get the vaxx by their authorities and they treat it like a sacrament. We've all seen that.
On the right, contrarily, even though Trump--supposedly a right-wing dictator--said to get vaxxed, I doubt a single person did it for that reason alone, or that it even affected their sentiments on the matter. What a stark contrast, eh? I would say the subtle reason is that Trump has never presented himself as an "authority" and never been accepted as such. (The alternative is that there are no NPCs on the right, but I think we all know plenty of conservatives who have a "blind faith" in their religion.)
Well, you can see it's all a pretty tangled web, and one wonders if it will ever be unsnarled.
Long story how I came to these conclusions, and as much as it may sound like outlandish fantasy there's a lot of compelling evidence to back it up.
It looks like everyone was an NPC, except for kings and chief priests, up to 600 BC. As it looks now--and I have no evidence to suspect it was otherwise at any time along the line--about 80% of the population are NPCs, 15% are "in-between", and 5% are fully conscious.
I've never come across any evidence regarding differences due to geography, culture, or environment. It also does not seem to be hereditary.
There are the slightest hints it can be affected or altered technologically. Crossing over into some informed speculation, I think everyone has the capability for full consciousness inherent genetically, but it is only activated in some people. To throw some buzzwords out, I suspect it's encoded in junk DNA and is enabled epigenetically. It also clearly seems to involve the pineal gland.
But as I mentioned, it's extremely difficult to come by information regarding all this because it's like the blind men examining an elephant. And also the Big Boss comes by to give them a beating when they get too close to the elephant.
If you "tune" your eye to it, you can clearly see the sharp horizontal line where the set ends and the backdrop begins. There's a slight but discernable difference in color.