"In every age it has been the tyrant, the oppressor and the exploiter who has wrapped himself in the cloak of patriotism, or religion, or both to deceive and overawe the People.” ? Eugene V. Debs, Voices of a People’s History of the United States
Lots of occultist numbers in this latest “big” bust of child porn distributors. I’m not convinced any of this happened as we are told, and am not too convinced of anything the Toronto Police Service has to say.
Child porn bust: Anatomy of an international child pornography investigationStar reporters granted exclusive access as police worldwide make hundreds of arrests in what is known as Project Spade.
John’s post got me thinking about what the purpose of the JFK benevolent president character/actor was. I’m sure he was from and a creation of the elite, and he was no doubt one half of a manufactured Hegalian dialectic. He portrayed everything good, and his foil was LBJ (interesting how they use initials to identify the two), who represented everything harsh and dark. This contrast helps shape the outcome and corresponding public opinion on that outcome, ie. the synthesis.
Understanding that actors in a Hollywool movie aren’t killed should help doubters with the concept that JFK was not killed, just his character.
50 years later, people are still arguing about a movie with endless plot twists.
I would love to know if the script writers for these psyops are well known to the public. Could JFK, the reality movie, have been written by Kubrick or another famous director?
My oh my, how things have changed in America. No American president since President Kennedy would dare say any of the truthful things about the First Amendment and the role of the press and media in maintaining a free, independent, and healthy Republic. President Kennedy’s wise words here echo those of our Founding Fathers, who fully understood the importance of a free press and the role it plays in ensuring human freedom and preventing tyranny.
Here we have an example of the media building its onion, or adding another wall to the truth castle.
Here they created a story that admits fakery in order to mask the very story that itself is fake. There is no doubt in my mind that the whole Benghazi incident on 9/11/2012 was a hoax that probably didn’t even need on site props to perform. Add to it a homosexual ambassador to further the “gay” agenda and you have another toxic psyOp soup to deal with.
The only positive thing in this whole fake on fake story is Lara Logan. Boy she’s easy on the eyes and purrs like a kitten when she talks. Just another layer in the deception (wonder if she fools as many women as men).
So in summary we have a fake controversy of a fake story to hide the main fake story. Is your head spinning yet?
When “60 Minutes” apologized for featuring in its report on Benghazi a security contractor whose story turned out to be a lie,
Armunn wrote a good essay on stories and fakeology.
Stories are the foundation of human behavior. In that, we seem to diverge
completely from the rest of life. This does not necessarily mean that the stories
the human mind needs to function are a negative thing, quite the contrary.
Stories are the signposts that guide thought and we are the most thinking
animals around. Without them, humans wouldn’t exist. Sometimes we may be
lead to believe that it would be best if we didn’t exist… but then who would
acknowledge our inexistence?
Once upon a time, apparently, our stories however seemed to have not been
written, even though writing had been invented. If we had the technology to
store information in a physical state, then why not? To our current way of
thinking this may seem a very imbecile fallacy, as an account that is not
written can easily be subject to alteration. This didn’t seem to bother much our
ancestors, if this archaic assumption is true. In fact, I propose that this made
perfect sense for a different kind of mindset, perhaps the mindset of a different
kind of human animal.
A story works always as a guiding background so that mental concepts that
have already been learned and digested are not required to be thought about
and rediscovered every time they are pertinent to the context. If a certain fruit
is found good for eating, then the background stories will reflect that,
removing the need for a arduous, repetitive and unproductive assessment
every time one finds it. It would seem, to the current mindset, very pertinent
to write these stories, making a more or less permanent record that would
serve as an unaltered reference for future generations. However, an unwritten
story has an ability that surpasses its written counterpart: it is able to evolve.
A written story is stagnant. A written story is therefore prone to become sacred
for the mind and to, with that sacredness, become more important than the
context, as that does not remain fixed in whichever the story was originally
Stories that are not written but that are transmitted verbally have exactly that
ability to adapt to changing contexts without necessarily losing the inherent
knowledge which they were created to preserve. The fruit may now also be
found good to make juice, not just eating. An unwritten story has the ability to
transmute to accommodate this new knowledge without the sacredness of a
cumulative script, allowing for a quick learning process of that new knowledge.
On the other hand, a mind habituated to a certain fixed, sacred, text will find
itself resisting the idea that the fruit can also be used to make juice to drink
and not just for eating – for that is not part of the background reality the story
This is a completely different mindset, one that is now even alien to our
context. We really do require written stories if we are to preserve, at least,
what truth isn’t, from the attack our minds have been under. We need a record
of the lies, for sure. Still, “they” have been writing stories for much longer than
we have. “They” have always dealt with the irrelevance of inadequate or
fictional but sacred texts, that override the importance of the context or the
people whom were supposed to benefit from whatever knowledge it was
supposed to convey. “They” have even learned a long time ago how to write
fiction into the text stories to guide human behavior. We are new at this and we are, I like to think, as pure as those ancestors apparently were, when they
were telling the relevant stories that would evolve alongside their context,
without ever writing them down. We are inexperienced and often gullible at it.
Additionally, there may even come a time when we will have to throw our
records away and face the danger and uncertainty of losing such precious
knowledge, lest it become another sacred text and we become “them”. Now is
not the time at all for that and that is not my point.
“They” have enhanced their written stories to a higher level. These are now
moving pictures with sound: video. These tell us much more than a thousand
words and guide us far quicker and more imposingly. It is, up to current times,
the most effective method for “them” to preserve and divulge written sacred
stories to guide the behavior of ever growing numbers of people. There is no
need now for them to send a missionary to invest years trying to convert a
small tribe or village of people into whichever story was required for their
goals; a simple video clip can do all that in a few minutes or seconds.
Don’t take me wrong, it is not the technology of writing or video-making that
I’m putting at stake here, I am yet putting the question forward of what we, in
the future, should there be one free from insanity, will consider worthy of
storing. What knowledge will we need that will not be subject to context
changes in a natural development of our daily lives together, as we certainly
become a different kind of human animal, less fixed on sacred stories? Will
whatever we store from this mind-war enable the return of the same insanity
we face today?
I have all these questions, but no answer. As I’ve said before:
That’s the true challenge of fakeology – as it is not a mere matter of checking
if media events are staged (if the “priests” are telling the truth), it is a matter
of slicing reality to eliminate as many untruths as possible. That destroys the
cushion-stories. What then? What lies beyond when we have discovered
everything truth is not?
What lies beyond is an unknown, as it should be. Absolute security is a false,
insane, concept. We will not know how the context will change in this
hypothetical sane future… but we might as well reflect upon what we may or
may not want to bring along with us, that may not always be relevant or
adequate for whatever context we will find ourselves in over time.
Helen Bradley held captive by the Centaurians, from the Astounding Stories cover by Howard V. Brown. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)