Say “they” and you’re labeled “them”

Be the 1st to vote.

Using “they” when explaining “those” that control us is dangerous when trying to explain the Nutwork.

They?

This reminds me of the whole “they” argument you get into with people when even the most fundamental conspiracy facts are introduced into a conversation.”There is no ‘they’! What are you talking about? Show me who ‘they’ are!” etc.

So I start trying to explain.

However, if they came back that strong it’s usually a lost cause that time around. Their mind’s made up and I’ve been labelled one of “them” oddly enough…this time “they” meaning a conspiracy nut, a grouping that’s been stamped with public and media approval. Never the controlling cabal. Again, that bitch Miss-Direction. (Need a cartoon of that one..)

“An overruling hierarchy of power mad, ruthless manipulators steering world events? No way!” And so “they” get their way.

Talk about controlled opposition. It’s endemic to the fabric of the entire matrix.

via The Hidden Hand of Controlled Opposition | Zen Gardner.

No tags for this post.

2 thoughts on “Say “they” and you’re labeled “them”

  1. khammad

    Who are ‘they’?

    I think most people agree that those who benefit from crime, are probably the ones who orchestrated it.

    Can we take this idea and generalize it for media hoaxes? Absolutely.

    Every one of these hoaxes has beneficiaries. These are the entities that gain immediate money and power. These hoaxes also have stakeholders, parties who have the most interest and concern, and whose path is much more twisted through the hoaxery.

    Just today, my 26 year-old daughter asked me what was the benefit of faking 911. Odd that Ab should make this entry today. My daughter believes that 911 was a hoax but has a difficult time explaining it to others. The question always seems to come around to who would do such a thing.

    Just like in a crime, those who benefited from the hoax, probably had a hand in making it. Who benefited from 911?

    * Owners of media outlets that had ratings increase on and after 911
    * Owners of multi-million dollar insurance policies that were claimed as a result of 911
    * Individuals put in high positions in the newly formed DHS, TSA, etc.
    * Owners of private security firms hired by the gov after 911
    just to name a few

    We will probably never know the architects of 911, but do we need to? I am satisfied with the culpability of the beneficiaries, because they are willing to go along with the lie.

    So who are ‘they’?

    Who ever benefits from a hoax.

  2. I.D. Kanspier

    Well said. just had this very problem tonite. seems we are supposed to only speak in an altruistic fantasyland format; whereby we could never use general terms like “they.” only zionist, nazi, freemason, illuminati, communist, the demons, knights of malta, etc., are accepted in such debate with people in the infancy of their deoccultation. America is the society where “box labeling” an idea is so pervasive.So, “they” might as well be the stephen king tv movie IT to someone who is unaware and hiding behind the egoistic saferoom. ultimately, the unaware dont want to become one of “them.” thats us. they wanna be bullshitted and die a ripe old age before they ever figure out who “they” are anyway. lol. words are fun.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.