There have been loads of chans and chan style sites, many been and gone, and there are still new ones being made. Most are blocked on search engines. I've only discovered obscure ones after seeing them mentioned on 4chan. You seriously do not want to visit most of them. 4chan /pol/ is like sunday school compared to some I've seen, and not in a remotely good way.
8chan was becoming a solid alternative until the New Zealander Tarrant posted there just before the ChristChurch happening, which pretty much ended the site.. It's replacement is 8kun but it's not very busy and apparently gets flooded with child porn from time to time so it's not really worth it.
I did notice this funny new one though, dedicated specifically to new meme generation:
An angle I hadn't considered. I wonder are blood donors now offered the vaxx?
There is no straight-forward option to add more yet. These were all added with custom code by one user, u/Evspra, who has since deleted their account. I can see the code that was added, and maybe I'll try and see if I can copy it and add new ones, but it will be a bit time consuming and I might end up breakings things so I can't promise anything.
I removed the broken ones for now. I don't know if or when that would get fixed.
No hard fast rules because it could change in the future (and hopefully will). As it stands now:
You can only embed a video or image as a solo submission, not as a comment or within a text submission
Videos sites that will embed: youtube, bitchute and an mp4 uploaded to catbox.moe also embeds. A webm uploaded to catbox wont embed here, you'd have to convert it to mp4.
There may be other sites that embed images/videos as submissions, but I haven't noticed. Forgot to say twitter also embeds.
Images uploaded to catbox.moe will also embed as a submission post I think.
Rumble, brandnewtube, Odysee, gab etc don't embed at all, though maybe the function will come eventually. I think that lack of functionality is actually coming from those websites and not from communities.win refusing to embed them.
Embedding videos or images in comment or text boxes would be nice, and I presume it's coming at some point, but when I've asked about it I got no reply; so they're not committing themselves. I believe the issue for them is security - the way they want to do it is for the user to upload the image to a website they trust or control rather than allowing embedding content hosted on outside websites.
I presume you mean you've watched videos of explosions online? Good work genius.
So you've never looked into it obviously.
Nukes are fake tho
The idea for the EU is generally attributed to Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi, conceived of in his book "Pan Europa" of 1923
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_von_Coudenhove-Kalergi
Does this book deal with that I wonder? And how? Anyone read it seen a good review of it?
The second account seems to be re-posting the same posts from the first account, but in different communities from the first. They probably created the second to post in communities where their first account is banned. User Yeeeeeboiiiii is not banned here.
It's an interesting topic. My thoughts: 1st, I wouldn't say RFK Jr. Is "going against the covid hoax" - he believes the virus is real, just not a big deal. From his book he tries not to take a side, but delivers the side of the story that's been censored.
As to his family - it's Grandpa Kennedy that has the worst rep - depending on your point of view. He openly thought Hitler was a great man even during WW2, so now he's considered a controversial figure, although many in elite and military circles somewhat agreed with him at least before WW2.
It is said he imbued his sons with his own "antisemitism" - and JFK got accused of that a lot. Israel is likely the main instigator in his and his brother's assassinations, although no Kennedy has come out and said that. RFK Jr. ascribes blame for both murders to the CIA.
He does however say that Sirhan Sirhan was not his father's murderer, but Eugene Thane Cesar, the bodyguard behind RFK at the time. This, and his views on vaccines developed later in life, have made him a pariah within his own family, with siblings and relatives publicly denouncing him in specially written articles.
I find it interesting that the Kennedy family are not from the same stock as the majority of so-called elite. They are not WASPs or Jews. They're Catholic, so it sets them out a bit. Traditionally WASPs would hate Catholics, and Jews would obviously hate all Christians but tend to get along and share power with the WASPs.
So how did they become "elites"? I'm not to clear on that and there may be something interesting. But having said that we are all seeing controlled opposition in almost everyone who openly speaks up to some degree against the current bio-security state stuff... even if suspicious, "our side" would be in a much worse off place without these people speaking up.
Personally I've never seen any major criticisms stick or evidence of being a controlled-op stand up against RFK Jr. The most anyone has on him are just things he has said himself, or about himself, in the past, which are hardly any big gothchas. The guy is a relative normie Democrat after all, despite the vaccine thing. I still see him refer to climate change casually like it's a big thing. He appears to have flown on Epstein's plane at least once. But since Epstein was a major democrat donor I don't even think this is the gotcha some believe it to be.
I don't know any outspoken, well-known activist of Kennedy's ilk who is correct on every aspect of every major conspiracy as I have come to understand them. Most usually they are only onto the truth of one major thing and reveal that they are completely blue pilled about almost everything else. Gets pretty fucking tiresome.
Some say the Dark Knight is just debris, but that would also be interesting, since looking at microscopy images of the inside of a drop of comirnaty all the shit floating around in there could be debris or contaminants also:
The is the "You can stick your new world order up you arse" guy.
It's certainly a major upset to the narrative that would need to be explained, and new evidence would need to be demonstrated for that narrative to retain any credibility.
Aside from the fake images though, there are many other issues with the missions that people have identified over the years. Some researchers don't even spend much time on the images at all, choosing to pick apart the narrative based on all the improbabilities and impossibilities that are part of the official mission technical documentation. Aulis.com is an excellent website that collects much of that work.
Most of the people involved in Apollo were not in on the hoax end of things, their participation is not evidence the missions were successful, nor that it couldn't have been hoaxed. The recent satellite images of the landing sites are strangely far off, pixelated shots despite NASA's (and other space agency's) ability to obtain closer and higher resolution images of those sites. It has also been demonstrated (at aulis.com) that those images do not agree with the official post mission technical documentation that NASA has on record. Distances are incorrect, there are scaling issues, and in one image it's the wrong lander at that particular landing site.
He had some interesting takes alright. I wonder did he believe the moon landings were real, suspect the fakery? - or maybe went to his grave believing a plasma moon had been disproved by them.
The films and videos were NASA's evidence that they went. Since they are fake, what evidence is there?
There's definitely differing qualities of front projection, but you may also be referring to back projection, which was the lower quality precursor to front projection. Back was low quality process and more limited - it could only be used on a relatively small screen background - and was still unconvincing. Front projection is more complicated and finicky a process. The technique was made possible by the new-at-the-time invention of scotchlite reflective fabric. It produced far higher quality results than back projection and could be used with a very large screen and hence display bigger backgrounds.
couple that with: many of these still shots were likely done with scale models rather than live actors (at about 1/8th scale), so then the front projection background will have an even higher focus/resolution/quality since the image can be projected onto a smaller screen.
Those are the articles of a Russian cinematographer and film school teacher explaining in detail how all the faked moon photos and films could be done - it's a fantastic series of articles, here's the home page:
The line between the stage set / floor and the front projection screen. Dubbed by some as the "Kubrick horizontal", since Kubrick perfected front projection for his film 2001 (and also for NASA?). You can see Kubrick horizontals in the majority of Apollo astronaut moon surface photos,
Why make 1 left turn when you can make 3 right turns and triple your chance of hitting a pedestrian... and be happy
Cool I'll keep an eye out for some new ones and give it a try.